| Literature DB >> 25973960 |
Fei Wang1, Shu Li2, Xin-Wen Bai3, Xiao-Peng Ren3, Li-Lin Rao3, Jin-Zhen Li3, Huan Liu4, Hong-Zhi Liu3, Bin Wu3, Rui Zheng3.
Abstract
Understanding urbanization and evaluating its impact are vital for formulating global sustainable development. The results obtained from evaluating the impact of urbanization, however, depend on the kind of measurement used. With the goal of increasing our understanding of the impact of urbanization, we developed direct and indirect subjective indicators to measure how people assess their living situation. The survey revealed that the projected endorsements and perceived social ambiance of people toward living in different types of settlements did not improve along with the urbanization level in China. The assessment scores from the city dwellers were not significantly different from those from the country areas and, more surprisingly, both were significantly higher than the assessment scores of the town dwellers, which we had expected to fall between the assessment scores of the country and city dwellers. Instead their scores were the lowest. We dubbed this V-shaped relationship the "town dislocation effect." When searching for a potential explanation for this effect, we found additional town dislocation effects in social support, loss aversion, and receptivity toward genetically modified food. Further analysis showed that only social support mediated the relationship between the three tiers of settlements (cities, country areas, and towns) and the subjective indicator. The projected endorsements yielded significant subjective assessments that could enhance our understanding of Chinese urbanization. Towns posed specific problems that require special attention.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25973960 PMCID: PMC4431860 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125821
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Demographic data in the two rounds of surveys.
| Percentage (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| City | Town | Country | |||
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
| Male | 48.8 | 46.8 | 46.8 |
| Female | 51.2 | 53.2 | 53.2 | ||
|
| Under 19 | 2.4 | 5.1 | 5.3 | |
| 20–29 | 21.8 | 24.9 | 18.7 | ||
| 30–39 | 25.7 | 25.3 | 23.9 | ||
| 40–49 | 27.8 | 22.8 | 25.3 | ||
| 50–59 | 20.8 | 19.5 | 23.5 | ||
| Over 60 | 1.3 | 1.9 | 2.2 | ||
| Unknown | 0.3 | 0.4 | 1.1 | ||
|
| Below senior high school | 25.7 | 54.3 | 75.6 | |
| Senior high school and above | 74.2 | 45.0 | 22.5 | ||
| Unknown | 0.1 | 0.8 | 1.9 | ||
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
| Male | 44.9 | 47.1 | 49.5 |
| Female | 55.1 | 52.9 | 50.5 | ||
|
| Under 19 | 3.1 | 10.0 | 1.7 | |
| 20–29 | 21.4 | 34.8 | 15.5 | ||
| 30–39 | 28.3 | 26.8 | 28.3 | ||
| 40–49 | 24.6 | 16.0 | 26.1 | ||
| 50–59 | 20.7 | 11.3 | 26.3 | ||
| Over 60 | 1.9 | 1.0 | 2.2 | ||
|
| Below senior high school | 32.1 | 34.1 | 88.6 | |
| Senior high school and above | 67.9 | 65.9 | 11.4 | ||
Fig 1Data from the assessment of the effect of urbanization in Study 1.
Panels A and B indicate the mean scores of the inhabitants’ projected endorsements and their ratings of social ambiance across the three tiers of settlements. A higher score indicates a more positive assessment of the effect of urbanization. Panels C, D and E indicate “the monthly household income per capita” (on a 13-interval scale, ranging from “under ¥500” to “¥5500+”), “the illiteracy rate for those aged 15 and over” and “the under-five mortality rate” (2006.11.1–2007.10.31, per 1000 births) across the three tiers of settlements. Bar heights indicate mean values. Error bars indicate standard errors. Note: The reported monthly household income per capita in Panel C improved significantly with the urbanization level in China (F (2, 3408) = 614.93, MSE = 7.83, p < 0.001, and η2 = 0.27, by ANCOVA). A post hoc analysis revealed significant differences between each settlement tier (ps < 0.05).
Fig 2Data from the assessment of the effect of urbanization in Study 2.
Panels A and B indicate the mean scores of the inhabitants’ projected endorsements and their ratings of social ambiance across the three tiers of settlements. A higher score indicates a more positive assessment of the effect of urbanization. Bar heights indicate mean values. Error bars indicate standard error.
Fig 3Data from the assessment of the effect of urbanization in Study 2.
Panels A, B and C indicate the mean scores for social support, receptivity toward GM foods, and the loss aversion coefficient across the three settlement tiers. A higher score in Panel A indicates a more positive level of social support. A higher score in Panel B indicates a more positive receptivity toward GM foods. A lower score in Panel C indicates less sensitivity to the possibility of losing money than to the possibility of winning money. Bar heights indicate mean values. Error bars indicate standard error.