| Literature DB >> 35897388 |
Dongmin Zhang1, Libo Zhu1, Xiuying Ma1, Zuoming Liu2, Hongwei Cui3.
Abstract
Under the restriction of the national "double carbon" goal, how to realize the coordination between urbanization and low-carbon development in the Yellow River Basin is a problem worthy of attention. In this paper, a new urbanization and ecological carrying capacity evaluation index system is established to evaluate the new urbanization level and ecological carrying capacity of the Yellow River Basin. On this basis, the uncoordinated coupling level of new urbanization and ecological carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin is measured by using the improved uncoordinated coupling model, and its temporal and spatial characteristics and internal impact mechanism are analyzed. The study shows that the new urbanization and ecological carrying capacity of the Yellow River Basin has a benign development trend as a whole. Shandong province belongs to the low-level uncoordinated coupling type; Gansu Province and Qinghai Province belong to the running-in uncoordinated type; and Shanxi Province, the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Shaanxi Province, and the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region belong to the antagonistic uncoordinated coupling type. The uncoordinated coupling degree between new urbanization and ecological carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin has a spatial interaction effect. It presents a low-level cluster centered on Shaanxi Province and Shandong Province and a high-level cluster centered on Gansu Province, Qinghai Province, and the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region. From the perspective of the internal main impact mechanism, water resources have a two-way impact on the development of the two systems of new urbanization and ecological carrying capacity; the number of permanent residents and the level of scientific and technological investment have a one-way impact on the process of new urbanization; and the green coverage rate of built-up areas has a one-way impact on the development of ecological carrying capacity. The main contributions of this paper are as follows. First, the evaluation index system of new urbanization and ecological carrying capacity has been improved in combination with the new development concept. The evaluation of new urbanization by this index system is more in line with the current national requirements for high-quality development. Second, the impact of potential resources and human regulation has been added to the traditional ecological carrying capacity evaluation index system, and the evaluation of ecological carrying capacity by this index system is more in line with reality. Thirdly, taking the time effect into account, an improved uncoordinated coupling method is proposed. Using this method to evaluate the relationship between systems is conducive to bringing the dynamic relationship within the system into the evaluation system, which is more in line with the reality of system changes. Fourth, from the perspective of problem diagnosis, research on the relationship between new urbanization and ecological carrying capacity will help to find the internal mechanism that affects the coordinated development of new urbanization and ecological carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin. This method is universal for exploring the internal influence mechanism of the relationship between systems.Entities:
Keywords: Yellow River Basin; ecological carrying capacity; new urbanization; non-coordinated coupling
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35897388 PMCID: PMC9331390 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19159016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Indicator system of new urbanization.
| Target Layer | Criteria Layer | Index Layer | Index Attribute | Index of the Unit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A new type of | Population development level | Permanent population | + | People |
| Population density | - | People/square kilometers | ||
| Urbanization rate | + | % | ||
| Level of economic development | Investment in fixed assets per capita (excluding rural households) | + | RMB/person | |
| Proportion of employees in secondary and tertiary industries | + | % | ||
| Per capita local fiscal revenue | + | RMB/person | ||
| Retail consumption per capita | + | RMB/person | ||
| Disposable income of urban residents | + | RMB | ||
| GDP per capita | + | RMB | ||
| Ratio of added value of secondary and tertiary industries in GDP | + | % | ||
| Level of public administration | Volume of books in the library per 100 people | + | Copies of books | |
| Number of hospital and health hospital beds per 1000 people | + | Beds | ||
| Mobile phones per 10,000 people | + | set | ||
| Teachers per 10,000 people | + | People | ||
| Level of spatial development | Per capita road area | + | m2/person | |
| Water resources per capita | + | Cubic meters per person | ||
| Per capita built-up area | + | m2/person | ||
| Investment level of science and technology | RD personnel of industrial enterprises above designated size is equivalent to full-time equivalent | + | People/year | |
| RD expenditure of industrial enterprises above designated size | + | Ten thousand RMB |
Index system of ecological carrying capacity.
| Target Layer | Criteria Layer | Index Layer | Index Attribute | Index of the Unit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ecological carrying capacity | Resource utilization | Water carrying capacity | + | - |
| Spatial carrying capacity of urban construction | - | - | ||
| Per capita local government spending on agriculture, forestry, and water conservancy | + | RMB/person | ||
| Per capita sown area of grain crops | + | Hectare/person | ||
| Energy consumption | Natural gas consumption per capita | - | Cubic meter/person | |
| Per capita coal consumption | - | Tons/person | ||
| Per capita gasoline consumption | - | Tons/person | ||
| Per capita electricity consumption | - | Ten thousand kilowatt hours per person | ||
| Per capita water consumption | - | m3/person | ||
| Government regulation | Per capita soil erosion control area | + | Hectare/person | |
| Completed investment of waste gas treatment project | + | Million RMB | ||
| Completed investment of waste water treatment project | + | Million RMB | ||
| Per capita local government spending on environmental protection | + | RMB/person | ||
| Completed investment of industrial pollution control | + | Million RMB | ||
| Area of artificial afforestation in the current year | + | Thousands of hectares | ||
| Proportion of investment in environmental protection in GDP | + | % | ||
| Per capita soil erosion control area | + | Hectare/person | ||
| Personnel employed in urban units in the management of water conservancy, environment, and public facilities | + | Ten thousand people | ||
| Ecological pressure | Per capita output of industrial solid waste | - | Million tons/person | |
| Per capita smoke (dust) emissions | - | Million tons/person | ||
| Sulfur dioxide emissions per capita | - | Million tons/person | ||
| Wastewater discharge per capita | - | Million tons/person | ||
| Engel’s coefficient for urban residents | - | % | ||
| Ecological elasticity | Sewage treatment rate | + | % | |
| Per capita green park area | + | Cubic meter/person | ||
| Green coverage rate in built-up areas | + | % | ||
| Household garbage harmless disposal rate | + | % | ||
| Comprehensive utilization rate of industrial solid waste | + | % |
New urbanization and ecological carrying capacity weight system.
| Information | Indicators | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| New urbanization | Permanent population | 0.079 |
| Population density | 0.030 | |
| Urbanization rate | 0.019 | |
| Investment in fixed assets per capita (excluding rural households) | 0.030 | |
| Proportion of employees in secondary and tertiary industries | 0.024 | |
| Per capita local fiscal revenue | 0.028 | |
| Retail consumption per capita | 0.038 | |
| Disposable income of urban residents | 0.026 | |
| GDP per capita | 0.027 | |
| Ratio of added value of secondary and tertiary industries in GDP | 0.020 | |
| Volume of books in the library per 100 people | 0.034 | |
| Number of hospital and health hospital beds per 1000 people | 0.017 | |
| Mobile phones per 10,000 people | 0.014 | |
| Teachers per 10,000 people | 0.036 | |
| Per capita road area | 0.055 | |
| Water resources per capita | 0.199 | |
| Per capita built-up area | 0.058 | |
| RD personnel of industrial enterprises above designated size is equivalent to full-time equivalent | 0.116 | |
| RD expenditure of industrial enterprises above designated size | 0.150 | |
| Ecological carrying capacity | Water carrying capacity | 0.075 |
| Spatial carrying capacity of urban construction | 0.043 | |
| Per capita local government spending on agriculture, forestry, and water conservancy | 0.015 | |
| Per capita sown area of grain crops | 0.032 | |
| Natural gas consumption per capita | 0.027 | |
| Per capita coal consumption | 0.012 | |
| Per capita gasoline consumption | 0.028 | |
| Per capita electricity consumption | 0.025 | |
| Per capita water consumption | 0.027 | |
| Per capita soil erosion control area | 0.022 | |
| Completed investment of waste gas treatment project | 0.018 | |
| Completed investment of waste water treatment project | 0.022 | |
| Per capita local government spending on environmental protection | 0.021 | |
| Personnel employed in urban units in the management of water conservancy, environment, and public facilities | 0.020 | |
| Completed investment of industrial pollution control | 0.015 | |
| Area of artificial afforestation in the current year | 0.026 | |
| Proportion of investment in environmental protection in GDP | 0.017 | |
| Per capita soil erosion control area | 0.016 | |
| Per capita output of industrial solid waste | 0.059 | |
| Per capita smoke (dust) emissions | 0.079 | |
| Sulfur dioxide emissions per capita | 0.075 | |
| Wastewater discharge per capita | 0.059 | |
| Engel’s coefficient for urban residents | 0.052 | |
| Sewage treatment rate | 0.058 | |
| Per capita green park area | 0.049 | |
| Green coverage rate in built-up areas | 0.060 | |
| Household garbage harmless disposal rate | 0.033 | |
| Comprehensive utilization rate of industrial solid waste | 0.015 |
Phase division of uncoordinated coupling.
| Non-Coordinated Coupling Degree (ND) | Type | Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| (0.0, 0.1) | Mild non-coordinated coupling | Development between systems tends to be benign interaction, and the positive influence is obvious. |
| (0.1, 0.2) | Low non-coordinated coupling | |
| (0.2, 0.5) | Antagonistic non-coordinated coupling | There is a partial imbalance between the systems, and the overall development is relatively complex. |
| (0.5, 0.8) | Abrasive non-coordinated coupling | |
| (0.8, 0.9) | High non-coordinated coupling | System is completely out of balance, the development is unbalanced, and the negative impact is obvious. |
| (0.9, 1.0) | Heavy non-coordinated coupling |
Values of uncoordinated coupling degree.
| Administrative Areas | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shanxi | 0.576 | 0.531 | 0.483 | 0.424 | 0.425 | 0.415 | 0.362 | 0.331 |
| Inner Mongolia | 0.479 | 0.402 | 0.354 | 0.242 | 0.227 | 0.213 | 0.189 | 0.172 |
| Shandong | 0.315 | 0.221 | 0.187 | 0.147 | 0.082 | 0.092 | 0.035 | 0.015 |
| Henan | 0.513 | 0.494 | 0.469 | 0.435 | 0.367 | 0.364 | 0.291 | 0.239 |
| Shaanxi | 0.498 | 0.423 | 0.415 | 0.416 | 0.389 | 0.360 | 0.339 | 0.290 |
| Gansu | 0.781 | 0.687 | 0.611 | 0.583 | 0.545 | 0.504 | 0.454 | 0.426 |
| Qinghai | 0.786 | 0.647 | 0.527 | 0.626 | 0.552 | 0.506 | 0.451 | 0.384 |
| Ningxia | 0.610 | 0.595 | 0.521 | 0.541 | 0.440 | 0.409 | 0.335 | 0.329 |
Figure 1Radar chart of uncoordinated coupling degree between new-type urbanization and ecological carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin.
Spatial clustering results.
| Provinces | Type |
|---|---|
| Shandong | Low non-coordinated coupling |
| Shanxi, Inner Mongolia, Henan, Shaanxi, Ningxia | Antagonistic non-coordinated coupling |
| Gansu, Qinghai | Abrasive non-coordinated coupling |
Global autocorrelation Moran’s I index.
| Indicators | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moran’s I index | 0.279 | 0.237 | 0.149 | 0.249 | 0.186 | 0.160 | 0.134 | 0.155 |
| P | 0.002 | 0.006 | 0.015 | 0.002 | 0.008 | 0.021 | 0.023 | 0.015 |
| Z | 3.625 | 3.329 | 2.77 | 3.403 | 3.006 | 2.772 | 2.633 | 2.789 |
Figure 2Local correlation diagram of uncoordinated coupling degree in the Yellow River Basin. Note: This map was made based on the standard map (GS(2020)4634) downloaded from the standard map service website of the National Administration of Surveying, Mapping, and Geographic Information. The base map has not been modified.