Assessing the Effect of Eco-City Practices on Urban Sustainability Using an Extended Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Xi’an, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- (1)
- To generalize an eco-city practices framework based on ecological footprint (EF) theory, thus understanding China’s eco-city development better;
- (2)
- To evaluate the sustainable effects of these practices during the development process of an eco-city by using an extended EF model, thus identifying and assessing the gaps where adaptation and improvement are needed.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Framework of Eco-City Practices
2.2. EF
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Case Context
3.2. Methods
3.2.1. Step One: Defining Eco-City
3.2.2. Step Two: Framing Eco-City Practices
3.2.3. Step Three: Measuring the Performance of Eco-Efforts
3.3. Data Collection
4. Eco-Practices Framework and Hypotheses
- (1)
- Environmental pollution control. The main green practices include water and air pollution source control (e.g., clean energy action). Logically, these measures may greatly reduce the footprints of water area, forest land, and fossil energy.
- (2)
- Fossil energy consumption control. This dimension includes two major aspects, one is “greening” facilities, buildings, and industries, and the other is transportation systems renovation. Thus, the consumption of fossil energy footprint was expected to reduce.
- (3)
- Biological resource consumption control. Xi’an encouraged citizens to participate in green consumption through various participatory activities, which positively related to the reduction of pasture land and arable land footprints.
- (4)
- EC improvement. Eco-practices include eco-agriculture construction and the increase of water area and forest land area. The construction of eco-agriculture may have a positive effect on the improvement of the EC of arable land. Wetland eco-restoring projects, as well as forest plantation and conservation, are expected to increase the ecological carrying capacities of water land and forest land.
5. Sustainable Impact Evaluation: Extended EF Model
6. Conclusions
6.1. Discussion
6.2. Implications
6.3. Limitations and Future Directions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Joss, S. Eco-cities: The mainstreaming of urban sustainability—Key characteristics and driving factors. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World. 2011, 6, 268–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y. Low carbon eco-city: New approach for Chinese urbanization. Habitat. Int. 2014, 44, 102–110. [Google Scholar]
- The Index of Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City. Available online: http://www.eco-city.gov.cn/eco/html/zjstc/zbtx.html (accessed on 3 June 2017).
- Wang, Y.; Ding, Q.; Zhuang, D. An eco-city evaluation method based on spatial analysis technology: A case study of Jiangsu Province, China. Ecol. Indic. 2015, 58, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howard, E. To-Tomorrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform; Swan Sonnenschein: London, UK, 1898. [Google Scholar]
- Register, R. Ecocity Berkeley: Building Cities for a Healthy Future; North Atlantic Books: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1973. [Google Scholar]
- Yanitsky, O. Towards an eco-city: Problems of integrating knowledge with practice. Int. Soc. Sci. J. 1982, 34, 469–480. [Google Scholar]
- Newman, P.; Jennings, I. Cities as Sustainable Ecosystems: Principles and Practices; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Li, H.L.; Yu, L. Chinese eco-city indictor construction. Urban. Stud. 2011, 18, 81–86. [Google Scholar]
- Roseland, M. Dimensions of the eco-city. Cities 1997, 14, 197–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joss, S. Eco-cities: A global survey 2009. WIT Trans. Ecology. Environ. 2010, 129, 239–250. [Google Scholar]
- Van Dijk, M.P. Measuring eco cities, comparing European and Asian experiences: Rotterdam versus Beijing. Asia Eur. J. 2015, 13, 75–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Flynn, A.; Yu, L.; Feindt, P.; Chen, C. Eco-cities, governance and sustainable lifestyles: The case of the Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City. Habitat. Int. 2016, 53, 78–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bunning, J. Governance for regenerative and decarbonised eco-city regions. Renew. Energy 2014, 67, 73–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, Y.; Olsson, A.R.; Håkansson, M. The role of local governance and environmental policy integration in Swedish and Chinese eco-city development. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 134, 78–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, C.; Dijkema, G.P.J.; Jong, M.D.; Shi, H. From an eco-industrial park towards an eco-city: A case study in Suzhou, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 102, 264–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cugurullo, F. Urban eco-modernisation and the policy context of new eco-city projects: Where Masdar City fails and why. Urban Stud. 2016, 53, 2417–2433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, M.C.; Wadin, J.L.; Lo, H.C.; Huang, J.Y. Transformation toward an eco-city: Lessons from three Asian cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 123, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Qiu, L. A comparative study on the quality of China’s eco-city: Suzhou vs. Kitakyushu. Habitat. Int. 2015, 50, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, H.; Fujita, T.; Geng, Y.; Dong, L. A review on eco-city evaluation methods and highlights for integration. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 60, 1184–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hubacek, K.; Giljum, S. Applying physical input–output analysis to estimate land appropriation (ecological footprints) of international trade activities. Ecol. Econ. 2003, 44, 137–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, J.; Liu, Y.; Meng, F.; Cui, S.; Xu, L. Using hybrid method to evaluate carbon footprint of Xiamen City, China. Energy Policy 2013, 58, 220–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geng, Y.; Zhang, L.; Chen, X.; Xue, B.; Fujita, T.; Dong, H. Urban ecological footprint analysis: Acomparative study between Shenyang in China and Kawasaki in Japan. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 75, 130–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Collins, A.; Flynn, A. Measuring the environmental sustainability of a major sporting event: A case study of the FA Cup Final. Tour. Econ. 2008, 14, 751–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ecological Footprint. Available online: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/our-work/ecological-footprint/ (accessed on 24 July 2017).
- Hunter, C.; Shaw, J. The ecological footprint as a key indicator of sustainable tourism. Tour. Manag. 2007, 28, 46–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wackernagel, M.; Rees, W. Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth; New Society Publishers: Gabriola Island, BC, Canada, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Rees, W.E. Ecological footprint and appropriated carrying capacity: What urban economics leaves out? Environ. Urban 1992, 4, 120–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wackernagel, M.; Onisto, L.; Bello, P.; Linares, A.C. National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 29, 375–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McDonald, G.W.; Patterson, M.G. Ecological footprints and interdependencies of New Zealand regions. Ecol. Econ. 2004, 50, 49–67. [Google Scholar]
- Li, J.A.B. Study of Sustainable Development Based on the Ecological Footprint Model in Baotou. Master’s Thesis, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, May 2010. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
- Bao, H.J.; Chen, H.X.; Jiang, S.L.; Ma, Y.H. Regional sustainability assessment based on long periods of ecological footprint: A case study of Zhejiang Province, China. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2011, 5, 1774–1780. [Google Scholar]
- Tang, W.; Zhong, X.H.; Liu, S.Q. Analysis of major driving forces of ecological footprint based on the STRIPAT Model and RR Method: A case of Sichuan Province, Southwest China. J. Mt. Sci. 2011, 4, 611–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wackernagel, M. Methodological advancements in the footprint analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 1925–1927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, H.A.B. Study on the Principle of Water Resources Ecological Footprint in Xi’an. Master’s Thesis, Xian University of Architecture and Technology, Xian, China, June 2007. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
- Feng, M.; Gu, X.W.; Wang, Q.; Wang, F.B. Ecological footprint and intensity of solid waste disposal in Shenyang. J. Northeast. Univ. Nat Sci. 2011, 32, 133–135. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Hoekstra, A.Y. Human appropriation of natural capital: A comparison of ecological footprint and water footprint analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 1963–1974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, Q.M.; Wang, F.Y. Effects of Xi’an Expo preparations on Xi’an urban ecological footprint. Econ. Geog. 2014, 34, 154–160. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Xi’an Statistic Bureau. Xi’an Statistical Yearbook; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2000–2015.
- Monfreda, C.; Wackernagel, M.; Deumling, D. Establishing national natural capital accounts based on detailed ecological footprint and biological capacity assessments. Land Use Policy 2004, 21, 231–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Z.M.; Zhang, Z.Q.; Cheng, G.D. The calculation and analysis of ecological footprints of Gansu province. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2000, 55, 607–616. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- An, X.Z. On the comprehensive method of growth rate calculation. J. Jilin Agric. Univ. 1999, 21, 115–118. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Xi’an Municipal Government. Available online: http://www.xa.gov.cn/ptl/index.html (accessed on 3 June 2017).
- Xian Expo Park Official Website. Available online: http://en.expo2011.cn/ (accessed on 3 June 2017).
- State Statistical Bureau of China. China City Statistical Yearbook; China Statistic Press: Beijing, China, 2000–2015.
- Department of Land and Resources of Shanxi Province. Land Use Change Survey Data of Shanxi Province. Available online: http://gtzyt.shaanxi.gov.cn/gtyw/tdgl/4.htm (accessed on 3 June 2017).
- Database of World Agriculture (FAO). Available online: http://faostat.fao.org (accessed on 1 June 2017).
- Zhang, Z.Q.; Xu, Z.M.; Cheng, G.D.; Chen, D.J. The ecological footprints of the 12 provinces of west China in 1999. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2001, 56, 599–609. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wackernagel, M.; Onisto, L.; Bello, P.E.F. Ecological Footprints of Nations. In Proceedings of the Earth Council for the Rio+5 Forum, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 13–19 March 1997; International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives: Toronto, ON, Canada, 1997; pp. 10–21. [Google Scholar]
- Writing Group of China National Biodiversity Research Report. China National Biodiversity Research Report; China Environmental Science Press: Beijing, China, 1998. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Du, G.M.; Xie, S.A.; Xiong, Y. Urban forest resources assessment and sustainable development in Xi’an. Shaanxi For. Sci. Tchnol. 2008, 1, 23–27. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wu, J.J.; Zhang, Q.H.; Cai, L.; Xue, H.F. Dynamic analysis of ecological footprint of Xi’an from 1995 to 2004. J. Shaanxi Univ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 6, 128–133. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Characteristics and Development Trend of Chinese Eco-City. Available online: http://www.docin.com/p-1700830649.html (accessed on 29 July 2017). (In Chinese).
- Pow, C.P.; Neo, H. Modeling green urbanism in China. Area 2014, 47, 132–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
First-Level Dimensions | Secondary Dimensions | Sources |
---|---|---|
Environment pollution control | Practices involving environmental protection (e.g., pollution control); waste minimization; water conservation; proper environmental quality standards | Wang et al., 2015 [4]; The Index of Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-city (ISSTE) (2008) [3]; Roseland (1997) [10]; Van Dijk (2015) [12]; Flynn et al., 2016 [13] |
Fossil energy consumption control | Practices involving industrial transformation (e.g., developing green industries and reducing energy-intensive industries); practices of building green facilities and infrastructure; expansion of the use of clean energy, recycling and re-using; energy efficiency improvement; transportation systems that advocate walking, cycling, and public transport | ISSTE (2008) [3]; Roseland (1997) [10]; Joss (2010) [11]; Van Dijk (2015) [12] |
Biological resource consumption control | Practices that advocates green lifestyle (e.g., promoting the pattern of saving and green consumption); adjustment of the structure of daily consumption | Roseland (1997) [10]; Flynn et al., 2016 [13] |
EC improvement | Improvement of the yield of arable land (e.g., co-agriculture development); widening the biological productive land area of forest land and water land | McDonald et al., 2004 [30]; Monfreda et al., 2004 [40] |
Year | Grain Output (Ten Thousand Tons) | Total Cultivated Area (hm²) | The Global Average (kg/hm²) | Arable Land Yield Factors |
---|---|---|---|---|
1999 | 204.4 | 300,493.33 | 2744 | 2.48 |
2000 | 201.9 | 295,580.00 | 2744 | 2.49 |
2001 | 197.1 | 287,793.33 | 2744 | 2.50 |
2002 | 192.4 | 282,973.33 | 2744 | 2.48 |
2003 | 176.3 | 275,893.33 | 2744 | 2.33 |
2004 | 195.8 | 269,913.33 | 2744 | 2.64 |
2005 | 205.5 | 266,780.00 | 2744 | 2.81 |
2006 | 193.5 | 263,860.00 | 2744 | 2.67 |
2007 | 189.1 | 261,180.00 | 2744 | 2.64 |
2008 | 214.4 | 260,513.33 | 2744 | 3.00 |
2009 | 218.2 | 258,593.33 | 2744 | 3.08 |
2010 | 221.7 | 255,546.67 | 2744 | 3.16 |
2011 | 182.0 | 251,400.00 | 2744 | 2.64 |
2012 | 192.6 | 246,606.67 | 2744 | 2.85 |
2013 | 183.1 | 244,153.33 | 2744 | 2.73 |
2014 | 175.6 | 240,486.67 | 2744 | 2.66 |
First-Level Dimensions | Secondary Dimensions | Eco-City Practices |
---|---|---|
Environment pollution control | 1. Water pollution control |
|
| ||
| ||
2. Air pollution control |
| |
| ||
| ||
Fossil energy consumption control | 3. Greening industries |
|
| ||
| ||
4. Green buildings and facilities |
| |
| ||
5. Transportation systems renovation |
| |
| ||
| ||
Biological resource consumption control | 6. Green citizens |
|
| ||
EC improvement | 7. Eco-agricultural construction |
|
8. Expansion of forest land area |
| |
| ||
9. Expansion of Water area |
|
Year | Arable Land | Forest Land | Water Area | Pasture Land | Built-Up Land | Fossil Energy Land |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1999 | 0.2816 | 0.0846 | 1.7677 | 0.0852 | 0.0077 | 0.1656 |
2000 | 0.2906 | 0.0742 | 1.6036 | 0.0917 | 0.0068 | 0.2183 |
2001 | 0.2872 | 0.0721 | 1.3962 | 0.0694 | 0.0073 | 0.2915 |
2002 | 0.2899 | 0.0657 | 1.9541 | 0.0749 | 0.0083 | 0.2709 |
2003 | 0.2843 | 0.0629 | 2.0136 | 0.0799 | 0.0083 | 0.3085 |
2004 | 0.2712 | 0.0779 | 2.2045 | 0.0795 | 0.0092 | 0.4861 |
2005 | 0.3196 | 0.0741 | 2.7155 | 0.1167 | 0.0094 | 0.4225 |
2006 | 0.2916 | 0.0706 | 2.5593 | 0.1088 | 0.0117 | 0.4525 |
2007 | 0.2755 | 0.0735 | 2.9518 | 0.1043 | 0.0106 | 0.4785 |
2008 | 0.3403 | 0.0728 | 2.8368 | 0.1343 | 0.0107 | 0.4516 |
2009 | 0.3042 | 0.0636 | 2.0439 | 0.1139 | 0.0124 | 0.5503 |
2010 | 0.3160 | 0.0592 | 2.0744 | 0.0893 | 0.0141 | 0.5105 |
2011 | 0.2206 | 0.0701 | 1.9708 | 0.0862 | 0.0137 | 0.4844 |
2012 | 0.2253 | 0.0607 | 1.5368 | 0.0843 | 0.0120 | 0.5205 |
2013 | 0.2275 | 0.0467 | 1.3591 | 0.0962 | 0.0127 | 0.6629 |
2014 | 0.2316 | 0.0461 | 1.0159 | 0.1071 | 0.0108 | 0.5816 |
CSEI | −0.012 | −0.036 | −0.142 | 0.028 | 0.030 | 0.099 |
Effect | positive | positive | positive | — | — | — |
Year | Arable Land | Forest Land | Water Area | Pasture Land | Built-Up Land |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1999 | 0.2721 | 0.0545 | 0.0008 | 0.0002 | 0.0897 |
2000 | 0.2446 | 0.0496 | 0.0008 | 0.0001 | 0.0836 |
2001 | 0.2547 | 0.0529 | 0.0008 | 0.0002 | 0.0909 |
2002 | 0.2459 | 0.0526 | 0.0008 | 0.0002 | 0.0915 |
2003 | 0.2209 | 0.0517 | 0.0008 | 0.0002 | 0.0865 |
2004 | 0.2425 | 0.0518 | 0.0008 | 0.0001 | 0.1010 |
2005 | 0.2287 | 0.0466 | 0.0007 | 0.0001 | 0.0979 |
2006 | 0.2112 | 0.0457 | 0.0007 | 0.0001 | 0.0944 |
2007 | 0.2045 | 0.0446 | 0.0007 | 0.0001 | 0.0935 |
2008 | 0.2299 | 0.0448 | 0.0007 | 0.0001 | 0.1044 |
2009 | 0.2323 | 0.0505 | 0.0004 | 0.0001 | 0.1266 |
2010 | 0.2349 | 0.0502 | 0.0004 | 0.0001 | 0.1333 |
2011 | 0.1920 | 0.0499 | 0.0004 | 0.0001 | 0.1153 |
2012 | 0.2022 | 0.0496 | 0.0004 | 0.0001 | 0.1266 |
2013 | 0.1915 | 0.0521 | 0.0005 | 0.0001 | 0.1299 |
2014 | 0.1828 | 0.0519 | 0.0005 | 0.0001 | 0.1291 |
CSEI | −0.029 | −0.002 | −0.035 | −0.022 | 0.028 |
Effect | — | — | — | — | positive |
Year | Arable Land | Pasture Land | Forest Land | Water Area | Built-Up Land |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1999 | −0.0095 | −0.0851 | −0.0302 | −1.7668 | 0.0821 |
2000 | −0.0460 | −0.0916 | −0.0246 | −1.6028 | 0.0768 |
2001 | −0.0325 | −0.0692 | −0.0192 | −1.3954 | 0.0837 |
2002 | −0.0440 | −0.0748 | −0.0131 | −1.9533 | 0.0832 |
2003 | −0.0634 | −0.0797 | −0.0111 | −2.0128 | 0.0783 |
2004 | −0.0286 | −0.0794 | −0.0261 | −2.2037 | 0.0918 |
2005 | −0.0909 | −0.1165 | −0.0275 | −2.7148 | 0.0885 |
2006 | −0.0803 | −0.1086 | −0.0249 | −2.5586 | 0.0827 |
2007 | −0.0710 | −0.1042 | −0.0289 | −2.9511 | 0.0829 |
2008 | −0.1105 | −0.1342 | −0.0280 | −2.8362 | 0.0937 |
2009 | −0.0719 | −0.1138 | −0.0132 | −2.0434 | 0.1142 |
2010 | −0.0811 | −0.0892 | −0.0090 | −2.0740 | 0.1192 |
2011 | −0.0286 | −0.0861 | −0.0202 | −1.9703 | 0.1015 |
2012 | −0.0232 | −0.0842 | −0.0112 | −1.5364 | 0.1146 |
2013 | −0.0361 | −0.0961 | 0.0055 | −1.3587 | 0.1172 |
2014 | −0.0488 | −0.1070 | 0.0058 | −1.0155 | 0.1182 |
CSEI | 0.406 | 0.028 | −0.064 | −0.142 | 0.029 |
Effect | — | — | Positive | Positive | — |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, F.; Wang, K. Assessing the Effect of Eco-City Practices on Urban Sustainability Using an Extended Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Xi’an, China. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091591
Wang F, Wang K. Assessing the Effect of Eco-City Practices on Urban Sustainability Using an Extended Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Xi’an, China. Sustainability. 2017; 9(9):1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091591
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Fuyuan, and Kaiyong Wang. 2017. "Assessing the Effect of Eco-City Practices on Urban Sustainability Using an Extended Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Xi’an, China" Sustainability 9, no. 9: 1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091591