Spatiotemporal differentiation and driving factors of multi-functionality of land use in county scale in poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin

SUN Piling1 XU Yueqing 1 LIU Qingguo2 LIU Chao1 HUANG An1

(1.College of Resource and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China 100193)
(2.Qianjiang Xinhua Middle School, Chongqing, China 409000)

【Abstract】Multi-functionality of land use is of great significance to promoting regional sustainable development, which has become an important research topic in the field of land resources. In order to explore the spatiotemporal differentiation characteristics of multi-functionality of land use and its influencing factors, poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin was taken as the study area in this paper. Three land use functions at county level (i.e., production function, living function, and ecological function) were identified and calculated quantitatively. Based on the concept of multi-functionality of land use, an indicator system was established, which was used to evaluate multi-functionality of land use in poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin in 2000 and 2014 through the method of mean-squared deviation weight decision. The multi-functionality of land use was divided into five levels with natural break jenks, namely, the highest, higher, moderate, lower and lowest. Then, the characteristics of spatiotemporal differentiation of counties (districts) in the study area with different multi-functionality levels were determined. Meanwhile, spatial econometric models were used to identify the key factors that drove spatiotemporal differentiation of multi-functionality of land use. The results showed that 1) the value of multi-functionality of land use in poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin was between 0.208 and 0.564 in 2000 and 2014. There was significant spatial polarization in the multi-functionality of land use. Generally, the multi-functionality of land use in poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin gradually emerged in a descending trend from west to east. The spatial patterns of multi-functionality of land use in the study area changed markedly from 2000 to 2014. The counties (districts) with higher multi-functionality of land use level expanded to Bashang Plateau and mountain areas on the edge of the plateau during 2000–2014. The counties (districts) with moderate level shrunk dramatically and moved toward the east, while the lower and lowest levels tended to be agglomerated in city border-regions. 2) The value of production function of land use ranged from 0.063 to 0.184 in 2000 and 2014 in poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin. From 2000 to 2014, the spatial pattern of land use production function changed significantly in poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin. The counties (districts) with the highest level of land use production function mainly spread from the administrative districts to their surrounding regions of Zhangjiakou City. The counties (districts) with higher level moved from the south to the north. The counties (districts) with moderate level moved towards the east, which were mainly distributed in Chengde City. Besides, the lower and lowest levels tended to be agglomerated in city border-regions. The spatial patterns of land use living function and ecological function in 2000 were basically in consistent with the spatial patterns in 2014. Some changes mainly took place in the administrative districts of Chengde City and the regions around the administrative districts of Zhangjiakou City. 3) According to the results of the spatial lag model (SLM), the influencing factors of spatial differentiation of multi-functionality of land use tended to be diversified during 2000–2014. The spatiotemporal differentiation of multi-functionality of land use was influenced by national geographical environment, natural resource endowment, socio-economic factors and policy factors. Generally speaking, the spatial pattern of multi-functionality of land use was dominated by national geographical environment and natural resource endowment, which was also driven by socio-economic factors and policy factors. Finally, this study can provide scientific references for the sustainable use of land resources and the decision of land management in the future in the poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin.

【Keywords】 land use; models; evaluation; multi-functionality evaluation; spatiotemporal differentiation; influencing factor; poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin;

【DOI】

Download this article

    References

    [1] Verburg P H, Van De Steeg J, Veldkamp A, et al. From land cover change to land function dynamics: A major challenge to improve land characterization [J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2009, 90 (3): 1327–1335.

    [2] Li Guangdong, Fang Chuanglin. Quantitative function identification and analysis of urban ecological–production–living spaces [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2016, 71 (1): 49–65 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [3] Pérez-Soba M, Petit S, Jones L, et al. Land use functions: Amulti-functionality approach to assess the impact of land use changes on land use sustainability [C] //Helming K, Pérez-Soba M, Tabbush P. Sustainability impact assessment of land use changes. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2008: 375–404.

    [4] Paracchini M L, Pacini C, Jones M L M, et al. An aggregation framework to link indicators associated with multifunctional land use to the stakeholder evaluation of policy options [J]. Ecological Indicators, 2011, 11 (1): 71–80.

    [5] Hong Huikun, Liao Heping, Li Tao, et al. Analysis of spatio-temporal patterns of rural space function based on entropy value method and Dagum Gini coefficient [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering (Transactions of the CSAE), 2016, 32 (10): 240–248 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [6] Abler D. Multifunctionality, agricultural policy and environmental policy [J]. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 2004, 33 (1): 8–17.

    [7] Helming K, Diehl K, Bach M, et al. Ex ante impact assessment of policies affecting land use. Part A: Analytical framework [J]. Ecology and Society, 2011, 16 (1): 1–17.

    [8] Schößer B, Helming K, Wiggering H. Assessing land use change impacts—a comparison of the SENSOR land use function approach with other frameworks [J]. Journal of Land Use Science, 2010, 5 (2): 159–178.

    [9] Helming K, Diehl K, Kuhlman T, et al. Ex ante impact assessment of policies affecting land use. Part B: Application of the analytical framework [J]. Ecology and Society, 2011, 16 (1): 1–23.

    [10] Reidsma P, König H, Feng S, et al. Methods and tools for integrated assessment of land use policies on sustainable development in developing countries [J]. Land Use Policy, 2011, 28 (3): 604–617.

    [11] Zhen Lin, Wei Yunjie, Xie Gaodi, et al. Regional analysis of dynamic land use functions in China [J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30 (24): 6749–6761 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [12] Zhang Lulu, Zheng Xinqi, Yuan Zhiyuan, et al. Assessment on multi-functionality of land use based on the entire-arraypolygon indictor method in Tangshan [J]. China Land Sciences, 2016, 30 (6): 23–32 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [13] Xie G D, Zhen L, Zhang C X, et al. Assessing the multifunctionalities of land use in China [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2010, 1 (4): 311–318.

    [14] Chen Ruishan, Cai Yunlong, Yan Xiang, et al. The functions of land system and its sustainability assessment [J]. China Land Sciences, 2011, 25 (1): 8–15 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [15] Zhang Xiaoping, Zhu Daolin, Xu Zuxue. Assessment on multifunctionality of land use in Tibet [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering (Transactions of the CSAE), 2014, 30 (6): 185–194 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [16] Li Deyi, Zhang Shuwen, LüXuejun, et al. Changing detection method of land use functions based on geographical grid [J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2011, 26 (8): 1297–1305 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [17] Yang Xue, Tan Minghong. Changes and relationships of arab land functions in Beijing in recent years [J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2014, 29 (5): 733–743 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [18] Peng Jian, Zhao Shiquan, Tian Lu, et al. The dynamics of multi-functionality of urban agriculture: A case study of Beijing City [J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2016, 37 (5): 152–158 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [19] Wang Feng, Dong Yuxiang. Spatial differences and influencing factors of land use function in Guangzhou [J]. Resources Science, 2015, 37 (11): 2179–2192 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [20] Wang Feng, Dong Yuxiang. Dynamic evaluation of land use functions based on grey relation projection method and diagnosis of its obstacle indicators: A case study of Guangzhou City [J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2015, 30 (10): 1698–1713 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [21] Du Guoming, Sun Xiaobing, Wang Jieyong. Spatiotemporal patterns of multi–functionality of land use in Northeast China [J]. Progress in Geography, 2016, 35 (2): 232–244 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [22] Liu Yansui, Liu Yu, Chen Yufu. Territorial multifunctionality evaluation and decision–making mechanism at county scale in China [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2011, 66 (10): 1379–1389 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [23] Li Pingxing, Chen Wen, Sun Wei. Spatial differentiation and influencing factors of rural territorial multifunctions in developed regions: A case study of Jiangsu Province [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014, 69 (6): 797–807 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [24] Wang Jing, Guo Xudong. A study of scientific regulation of sustainable land use at county scale in China [J]. Progress in Geography, 2002, 21 (3): 216–222 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [25] Zhen Lin, Cao Shuyan, Wei Yunjie, et al. Land use functions: Conceptual framework and application for China [J]. Resources Science, 2009, 31 (4): 544–551 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [26] Wang Ming, Zhou Zhongxue, Feng Haijian. Coordinated development of urban agricultural multi-functionality of Xi’an metropolitan zone [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2015, 38 (4): 858–866 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [27] Yu Zhonglei, Tang Yuyu, Zhang Hua, et al. Spatial pattern and driving factors of Chinese urban amenities [J]. Geographical Research, 2016, 35 (9): 1783–1798 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [28] Ren Guoping, Liu Liming, Zhuo Dong. Analysis of spatial differentiation of landscape ecological quality and its affecting factors in metropolitan suburbs [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering (Transactions of the CSAE), 2016, 32 (21): 252–263 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [29] Du Ting, Zhu Daolin, Zhang Lixin, et al. Spatial distribution and formation mechanism of cultivated land transfer price in Henan Province [J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering (Transactions of the CSAE), 2016, 32 (20): 250–258 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [30] Wang Jiankang, Gu Guofeng, Yao Li, et al. Analysis of new urbanization’s spatial pattern evolution and influence factors in China [J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2016, 36 (1): 63–71 (in Chinese with English abstract).

This Article

ISSN:1002-6819

CN:11-2047/S

Vol 33, No. 15, Pages 283-292

August 2017

Downloads:0

Share
Article Outline

Abstract

  • 0 Introduction
  • 1 Research area overview and data sources
  • 2 Research methods
  • 3 Results and analysis
  • 4 Conclusion and discussion
  • References