| Literature DB >> 35627687 |
Ran Yu1,2, Yan Qin1, Yuting Xu3, Xiaowei Chuai4.
Abstract
The spatial layout of the "Production-Living-Ecological" (PLE) function and the spatial optimization of the "Urban-Agricultural-Ecological" (UAE) pattern are the key points and difficulties in territorial space planning. This paper analyzes their spatial concepts and holds that PLE space is a functional space, while UAE space belongs to a regional space. The optimization of the UAE pattern should be guided by the improvement of the PLE function. Therefore, taking Hefei City, China, as an example, this paper analyzes the evolution of the present UAE pattern, evaluates the PLE function under carbon constraint and then determines the improvement direction of the PLE function and finally simulates the future UAE pattern of territory space. The conclusions are as follows: ① From 2011 to 2019, the urban space increased incrementally, while the agricultural space and ecological space decreased continuously, and the urban space expansion squeezed the agricultural and ecological spaces greatly; ② The PLE functions of four districts in the main city are higher than that of five other counties. After the carbon constraint conditions are included, the PLE functions of the main city were reduced due to the relatively strong capacity of carbon source, while the counties' increased due to a stronger carbon sink capacity; ③ According to the normalized revealed comparative advantage (NRCA) index, it was determined that the functional improvement direction of each district and county are Yaohai District and Shushan District have comprehensive function as a priority, Luyang District and Baohe District give priority to living-ecological function, Changfeng County, Feidong County, Feixi County and Chaohu County give priority to production-ecological function, and Lujiang County gives priority to ecological function; ④ The simulation results show that 2025 is an important node for the evolution of the UAE pattern. The urban spatial expansion during the "14th Five-Year Plan" period will still bring great pressure on agriculture and ecological spaces, and then, the UAE pattern will continue to be optimized and balanced.Entities:
Keywords: FLUS model; NRCA index; PLE function; UAE pattern; carbon constraint
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35627687 PMCID: PMC9140887 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19106149
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Conceptual framework.
Figure 2Geographical location of Hefei.
Evolution of scale of land use structure.
| Land Use Type | 2011 | 2015 | 2019 | 2011–2019 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area/ha | Proportion/% | Area/ha | Proportion/% | Area/ha | Proportion/% | Change Value | Amplitude of Variation/% | |
| Cultivated land | 561,796.27 | 49.09 | 560,457.18 | 48.97 | 558,840.00 | 48.83 | −2956.27 | −0.26 |
| Forest land | 113,574.21 | 9.92 | 113,248.66 | 9.89 | 112,381.12 | 9.82 | −1193.09 | −0.10 |
| Grassland | 6855.75 | 0.60 | 6460.29 | 0.56 | 6344.24 | 0.55 | −511.51 | −0.05 |
| Water area | 238,074.63 | 20.80 | 234,523.50 | 20.49 | 225,450.00 | 19.70 | −12,624.63 | −1.10 |
| Construction land | 203,126.54 | 17.75 | 208,636.83 | 18.23 | 220,865.00 | 19.30 | 17,738.46 | 1.55 |
| Unused land | 21,078.83 | 1.84 | 21,179.77 | 1.85 | 20,625.87 | 1.80 | −452.96 | −0.04 |
Figure 3Spatial evolution of land use structure.
Evolution of scale of UAE pattern.
| Transferred from 2011 to 2015/ha | Transferred from 2015 to 2019/ha | Transferred from 2011 to 2019/ha | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Urban Space | Agricultural Space | Ecological Space | Subtotal | Urban Space | Agricultural Space | Ecological Space | Subtotal | Urban Space | Agricultural Space | Ecological Space | Total | |
| Urban space | 0 | 3176.47 | 1308.58 | 4485.05 | 0 | 4993.25 | 2382.77 | 7376.02 | 0 | 8169.72 | 3691.35 | 11,861.07 |
| Agricultural space | 9328.41 | 0 | 12,804.5 | 22,132.91 | 5559.01 | 0 | 11,918.98 | 17,477.99 | 14,887.42 | 0 | 24,723.48 | 39,610.90 |
| Ecological space | 1564.29 | 3236.95 | 0 | 4801.24 | 2766.87 | 6853.74 | 0 | 9620.61 | 4331.16 | 10,090.69 | 0 | 14,421.85 |
Figure 4Spatial evolution of UAE pattern.
Evaluation index system of PLE function under carbon constraint.
| Level I Index | First-Order Weight | Secondary Indexes | Unit | Direction | Secondary Weight | Three-Level Weight | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Production function | 0.2667 | Gross output value of agriculture, forestry and fishery | CNY one hundred million | + | 0.0767 | 0.0205 | 0.0181 |
| Grain yield per unit area | t/ha | + | 0.0436 | 0.0116 | 0.0150 | ||
| Meat output per capita | Kg/person | + | 0.0885 | 0.0236 | 0.0197 | ||
| Industrial added value | CNY one hundred million | + | 0.0496 | 0.0132 | 0.0208 | ||
| Total profits of enterprises above designated size | CNY one hundred million | + | 0.1107 | 0.0295 | 0.0253 | ||
| Floor space of buildings completed | m2 | + | 0.0559 | 0.0149 | 0.0170 | ||
| Post and telecommunications business income | CNY one hundred million | + | 0.0456 | 0.0122 | 0.0225 | ||
| fixed-asset investment | CNY one hundred million | + | 0.0607 | 0.0162 | 0.0190 | ||
| Economic density | Ten thousand CNY/km2 | + | 0.1141 | 0.0304 | 0.0266 | ||
| Value of import and export | USD one hundred million | + | 0.1760 | 0.0469 | 0.0397 | ||
| Amount of foreign capital utilized | USD one hundred million | + | 0.1786 | 0.0476 | 0.0431 | ||
| living function | 0.2667 | Population urbanization rate | % | + | 0.1629 | 0.0434 | 0.0423 |
| Per capita GDP | CNY/person | + | 0.1056 | 0.0282 | 0.0255 | ||
| Total retail sales of social consumer goods per capita | CNY/person | + | 0.1807 | 0.0482 | 0.0461 | ||
| Average wage of employees on the job | CNY | + | 0.1027 | 0.0274 | 0.0303 | ||
| Per capita savings deposit balance | Ten thousand CNY/person | + | 0.2035 | 0.0543 | 0.0549 | ||
| Education expenditure ratio | % | + | 0.0390 | 0.0104 | 0.0171 | ||
| Per capita residential land area | m2/person | + | 0.0634 | 0.0169 | 0.0197 | ||
| Number of beds in health Institutions owned by 10,000 people | Zhang/10,000 people | + | 0.1423 | 0.0380 | 0.0307 | ||
| ecological function | 0.2667 | Per capita park and green areas | m2/person | + | 0.0943 | 0.0251 | 0.0289 |
| Ground average discharge of industrial wastewater | t/m2 | - | 0.0993 | 0.0265 | 0.0255 | ||
| Ground average emission of industrial SO2 | t/m2 | - | 0.1101 | 0.0294 | 0.0197 | ||
| Ground average amount of chemical fertilizer | t/km2 | - | 0.1548 | 0.0413 | 0.0346 | ||
| Comprehensive utilization rate of industrial waste | % | - | 0.1231 | 0.0328 | 0.0541 | ||
| Per capita water resources | m3/person | - | 0.4184 | 0.1116 | 0.1038 | ||
| carbon constraint | 0.1999 | Per capita carbon emission | tC/a | - | 0.1024 | 0.0205 | 0.0195 |
| Ground average intensity of carbon emission | tC/ha | - | 0.0800 | 0.0160 | 0.0156 | ||
| Energy consumption per unit of GDP | kg/CNY ten thousand | - | 0.0924 | 0.0185 | 0.0211 | ||
| Proportion of carbon sinks in terrestrial ecosystems | % | + | 0.5744 | 0.1149 | 0.1073 | ||
| Carbon sink land ratio | % | + | 0.1508 | 0.0302 | 0.0366 |
Overall evaluation results of PLE function in all districts and counties.
| Districts or Counties | 2011 | 2015 | 2019 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Yaohai District | 0.6574 | 0.4148 | 0.3296 | 0.6615 | 0.4125 | 0.3279 | 0.6440 | 0.4151 | 0.3308 |
| Luyang District | 0.3824 | 0.3310 | 0.2948 | 0.3611 | 0.2754 | 0.2554 | 0.3444 | 0.2896 | 0.2667 |
| Shushan District | 0.2759 | 0.4979 | 0.4335 | 0.2709 | 0.4873 | 0.4261 | 0.2704 | 0.5002 | 0.4363 |
| Baohe District | 0.3840 | 0.3669 | 0.3206 | 0.3591 | 0.2985 | 0.2725 | 0.3776 | 0.2887 | 0.2644 |
| Changfeng County | 0.3540 | 0.1892 | 0.1920 | 0.3533 | 0.2072 | 0.2053 | 0.2848 | 0.1972 | 0.1978 |
| Feidong County | 0.3850 | 0.1998 | 0.1998 | 0.3751 | 0.2181 | 0.2132 | 0.3063 | 0.1914 | 0.1934 |
| Feixi County | 0.3894 | 0.2190 | 0.2137 | 0.4048 | 0.2300 | 0.2214 | 0.3814 | 0.2296 | 0.2214 |
| Lujiang County | 0.3845 | 0.1395 | 0.1563 | 0.3506 | 0.1540 | 0.1660 | 0.3502 | 0.1334 | 0.1507 |
| Chaohu County | 0.6636 | 0.1892 | 0.1935 | 0.7364 | 0.1809 | 0.1890 | 0.4234 | 0.1730 | 0.1811 |
Figure 5Production function evaluation results of districts and counties under carbon constraint.
Figure 6Living function evaluation results of districts and counties under carbon constraint.
Figure 7Ecological function evaluation results of districts and counties under carbon constraint.
Discrimination of PLE functional advantages in all districts and counties.
| Districts or Counties | 2011 | 2015 | 2019 | Advantage function | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NRCA | NRCA | NRCA | NRCA | NRCA | NRCA | NRCA | NRCA | NRCA | ||
| Yaohai District | −0.0118 | 0.0070 | 0.0048 | −0.0104 | 0.0008 | 0.0096 | −0.0147 | 0.0082 | 0.0066 | comprehensive |
| Luyang District | −0.0157 | 0.0399 | −0.0242 | −0.0117 | 0.0333 | −0.0215 | −0.0162 | 0.0383 | −0.0222 | living |
| Shushan District | 0.0238 | 0.0003 | −0.0241 | 0.0325 | −0.0101 | −0.0225 | 0.0279 | 0.0041 | −0.0320 | comprehensive |
| Baohe District | −0.0087 | 0.0209 | −0.0122 | −0.0125 | 0.0241 | −0.0116 | −0.0122 | 0.0261 | −0.0138 | living |
| Changfeng County | 0.0037 | −0.0128 | 0.0090 | 0.0036 | −0.0094 | 0.0058 | 0.0039 | −0.0127 | 0.0089 | production–ecological |
| Feidong County | 0.0048 | −0.0170 | 0.0122 | 0.0005 | −0.0097 | 0.0093 | 0.0056 | −0.0204 | 0.0148 | production–ecological |
| Feixi County | 0.0038 | −0.0180 | 0.0142 | 0.0044 | −0.0146 | 0.0101 | 0.0086 | −0.0199 | 0.0113 | production–ecological |
| Lujiang County | −0.0004 | −0.0112 | 0.0116 | −0.0017 | −0.0074 | 0.0091 | −0.0004 | −0.0117 | 0.0121 | ecological |
| Chaohu County | 0.0005 | −0.0092 | 0.0087 | −0.0046 | −0.0069 | 0.0116 | −0.0025 | −0.0120 | 0.0145 | production–ecological |
Note: NRCA, NRCA and NRCA represent the NRCA index of production, living and ecological function, respectively.
Assignment of neighborhood effect parameters.
| Land Use Type | Cultivated Land | Forest Land | Grassland | Water | Construction Land | Unused Land |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.12 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.50 | 1 | 0.02 |
Conversion cost matrixes under different scenarios.
| Comprehensive Function | Living–Ecological Function | Production–Ecological Function | Ecological Function | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | b | c | d | e | f | a | b | c | d | e | f | a | b | c | d | e | f | a | b | c | d | e | f | |
| a | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| b | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| c | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| d | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| e | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| f | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Note: a, b, c, d, e and f represent cultivated land, forest land, grassland, water area, construction land and unused land, respectively; 1 means it can be converted, and 0 means it cannot be converted.
Simulation results of scale evolution of UAE patterns.
| UAE | Land Use Type | 2025 | 2030 | 2035 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area/ha | Proportion/% | Area/ha | Proportion/% | Area/ha | Proportion/% | ||
| Urban space | Construction land | 242,691.63 | 21.20 | 244,269.96 | 21.34 | 244,858.33 | 21.39 |
| Agricultural space | Cultivated land | 553,766.02 | 48.38 | 548,050.97 | 47.89 | 546,776.11 | 47.77 |
| Ecological space | Forest land | 105,658.18 | 9.23 | 107,500.56 | 9.39 | 107,977.83 | 9.43 |
| Grassland | 5154.18 | 0.45 | 5328.20 | 0.47 | 5267.65 | 0.46 | |
| Water area | 218,895.48 | 19.13 | 220,150.83 | 19.24 | 220,307.68 | 19.25 | |
| Unused land | 18,340.74 | 1.60 | 19,205.71 | 1.68 | 19,318.64 | 1.69 | |
Figure 8Simulation results of spatial evolution of UAE pattern.
Figure 9Scale and proportion of UAE from 2011 to 2035.