求英译汉,不要直译!Equally the funding may be public or private （often on a ‘charitable basis’）or a combination of both where there is free access.Today many public facilities exist not because they are provide by the public authoritie

求英译汉,不要直译!Equally the funding may be public or private （often on a ‘charitable basis’）or a combination of both where there is free access.Today many public facilities exist not because they are provide by the public authoritie
求英译汉,不要直译!
Equally the funding may be public or private （often on a ‘charitable basis’）or a combination of both where there is free access.Today many public facilities exist not because they are provide by the public authorities,nor indeed because of any notion of public spritedness on the part of the provided by the public authorities,nor indeed because of any notion of public spriitedness on the part of the private sector,but rather as part of a bargaining process whereby the public authorities extract economic rent from land-use and other developers in the form of the latter providing citizens with a range of facilities that they would not provide if standard commercially criteria were applied.For example,a land-use developer may feel it commercially desirable to leave some open spaces and provide parks to increase the value of the properties that are being developed；the planning authorities ,taking a wider social perspective,may insist,however,on more open space and landscaped parks at the expenses of fewer houses or offices.The private sector is thus encouraged to found public facilities because of the external benefits conferred,but at the expense of rent maximization.
Since there are few reasons on public goods grounds to think that many public facilities would not be provided by the private sector,a more fruitful approach is to consider the demand side.Public facilities offers large and pervasive external social benefits that markets do not adequate capture.Perhaps a more useful economic approach to public facilities is,therefore,though the notion of ‘need’.the authorities,for a variety of criteria that are often only partially articulated,fell that there is a social need for many types of public facilities.This ‘need’to keep the violent tendencies of citizens appeased by having‘games’in public stadiums,a function perhaps of modern soccer grounds that get public planning permission and often funding.State religion,and the desire to meet the spiritual‘needs’of individuals,led to the planning of religious buildings and ceremonies within and around them..
Many of today’s ‘needs’are perhaps somewhat different..In some cases there is seen to be an economic‘need’to protect natural resources or provide public spaces or facilities such as museums and art galleries to sustain tourism in an area and meet the employment demands for a city or region.There are also distributional aspects to‘need’.For social reasons there is seen to be a ‘need’for basic Law and order,for adequate education,for leisure facilities,and for health services irrespective of income.Public facilities are in effect often being provided as a transfer of resources from the wealthier parts of society to meet the needs of the poorer；seen in the work of Bigman and ReVelle amongst others,trade-offs between efficiency and equity are major concerns when planning public facilities.
不要软件直译，或者在线翻译的那种！

求英译汉,不要直译!Equally the funding may be public or private （often on a ‘charitable basis’）or a combination of both where there is free access.Today many public facilities exist not because they are provide by the public authoritie
Equally the funding may be public or private （often on a ‘charitable basis’）or a combination of both where there is free access. Today many public facilities exist not because they are provided by the public authorities, nor indeed because of any notion of public spiritedness on the part of the private sector,but rather as part of a bargaining process whereby the public authorities extract economic rent from land-use and other developers in the form of the latter providing citizens with a range of facilities that they would not provide if standard commercially criteria were applied.
相等的,资金也许来自公家或私人（通常以慈善方式）或对于免费进入的,两者兼有.现今许多公共设施的存在不是政府当局所提供的,也不是来自于私营部门的任何公益意识,而是政府部门与使用土地及其他的开发商交易过程的一部分,前者要求后者为公民提供一系列的设施取代前者收取的租金,而这些设施按标准商业考虑是不会提供的.
For example,a land-use developer may feel it commercially desirable to leave some open spaces and provide parks to increase the value of the properties that are being developed；the planning authorities ,taking a wider social perspective,may insist,however,on more open space and landscaped parks at the expenses of fewer houses or offices. The private sector is thus encouraged to fund public facilities because of the external benefits conferred,but at the expense of rent maximization. Since there are few reasons on public goods grounds to think that many public facilities would not be provided by the private sector,a more fruitful approach is to consider the demand side.
例如：一个土地开发商可能觉得按商业利益有必要留出一块空地作为公园以提升正在开发的房地产价值；然而,规划当局从更广阔的社会角度,可能坚持减少房屋或办公室数量以便获得更多的空地及美化的公园.鉴于外在利益的授予,私营机构被鼓励为公共设施提供经费,但却要牺牲租金的最大化.既然基于公共物品的角度,没有太多理由相信私营机构会提供许多公共设施,对需求方面多加考虑是较有成果的方法.
Public facilities offers large and pervasive external social benefits that markets do not adequate capture.Perhaps a more useful economic approach to public facilities is,therefore,through the notion of ‘need’. The authorities,for a variety of criteria that are often only partially articulated,feel that there is a social need for many types of public facilities. This ‘need’ to keep the violent tendencies of citizens appeased by having ‘games’ in public stadiums,a function perhaps of modern soccer grounds that get public planning permission and often funding. State religion,and the desire to meet the spiritual ‘needs’ of individuals,led to the planning of religious buildings and ceremonies within and around them..
公共设施所提供的巨大及遍布的外在社会效益,市场尚未充分的捕捉.因此,通过利用‘需求’的观念也许是对公共设施更有用的经济方案.根据当局只部分表达的各式各样的判断尺度,他们觉得多种公共设施有社会的需求.这种‘需求’,像在体育场举办‘比赛’以安抚平息公民的暴力倾向,也许一个现代化足球场的作用能获得公共规划的许可,通常还能得到资金.国家宗教想要满足个人的精神‘需求’而导致宗教建筑的规划,以及在里面与周边举行的仪式.
Many of today’s ‘needs’are perhaps somewhat different..In some cases there is seen to be an economic‘need’to protect natural resources or provide public spaces or facilities such as museums and art galleries to sustain tourism in an area and meet the employment demands for a city or region. There are also distributional aspects to‘need’.For social reasons there is seen to be a ‘need’for basic Law and order,for adequate education,for leisure facilities,and for health services irrespective of income.
现今的许多‘需求’也许有所不同.在某些情况,有人会认为保护天然资源是因为经济的‘需求’,或提供公共场所或设施如博物馆及美术馆来维护一个地区的旅游业,以及满足一个城市或区域的就业要求.‘需求’也有涉及分配方面的；从社会视角,被看作有‘需求’的是治安、足够的教育、休闲设施及医疗服务,无论人民的收入是多少.
Public facilities are in effect often being provided as a transfer of resources from the wealthier parts of society to meet the needs of the poorer；seen in the work of Bigman and ReVelle amongst others,trade-offs between efficiency and equity are major concerns when planning public facilities.
实际上,公共设施的提供通常是从社会较富有的部分将资源转移以满足较贫穷部分的需求；从Bigman与ReVelle 的研究来看,规划公共设施时的主要关注点,是效率与效益之间的折衷.