Evaluation, Recognition and Implications of Urban–Rural Integration Development: A Township-Level Analysis of Hanchuan City in Wuhan Metropolitan Area
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Data Sources
2.3. Methods
2.3.1. Evaluation Model of the Current Integration Development Level
- (1)
- Construction of the Indicator System
- (2)
- Data Normalizations
- (3)
- Weight Calculation
2.3.2. Evaluation Model of Potential Urban–Rural Integration Development Level
- (1)
- Construction of the Indicator System
- (2)
- Weight Calculation
2.3.3. The Comprehensive Evaluation System of Urban–rural Integration Development
2.3.4. The Division of Urban–rural Integration Development Zones
3. Results
3.1. Comprehensive Evaluation of Urban–Rural Integration Development
3.1.1. The Current Level of Urban–Rural Integration Development
3.1.2. Potential Level of Urban–Rural Integration Development
3.1.3. The Comprehensive Evaluation of Urban–Rural Integration Development
3.2. Divisons of Urban–Rural Integration Development Zones
3.2.1. The Centers of Urban–Rural Integration Development Zones
3.2.2. Zones of Urban–Rural Integration Development
3.3. Recongnition of Urban–Rural Integration Development Pattern
3.3.1. The Pattern of the Town Gathering Type
3.3.2. The Pattern of the Agro-Tourism Interaction Type
3.3.3. The Pattern of the Industry-Trade Driven Type
3.3.4. The Pattern of the Agricultural Service Type
4. Implications for Urban–Rural Integration Development Planning
4.1. Centralization
4.2. Differentiation
4.3. Demonstration
5. Discussion
5.1. The Mechanism for Forming Urban–Rural Integration Development Patterns
5.2. Limitations
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Caffyn, A.; Dahlström, M. Urban-Rural Interdependencies: Joining up Policy in Practice. Reg. Stud. 2005, 39, 283–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y. Research on the Urban-Rural Integration and Rural Revitalization in the New Era in China. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2018, 73, 637–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Overbeek, G. Opportunities for Rural-Urban Relationships to Enhance the Rural Landscape. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2009, 11, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Li, Y. Revitalize the World’s Countryside. Nature 2017, 548, 275–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Simon, D. Co-Productive Tools for Transcending the Divide: Building Urban–Rural Partnerships in the Spirit of the New Leipzig Charter. Land 2021, 10, 894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yao, Y.; Liang, M. Logic of Political Economics in the Development of Urban and Rural Integration–An Investigation on the Development of New China in the past 70 years. Seeking Truth 2019, 46(05), 11–18. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Y.; Lu, S.; Chen, Y. Spatio-Temporal Change of Urban-Rural Equalized Development Patterns in China and Its Driving Factors. J. Rural Stud. 2013, 32, 320–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; Chen, J.; Teng, Y. Rural Revitalization on the Path of Common Prosperity: Problems, Challenges and Suggestions. J. Lanzhou Univ. (Soc. Sci.) 2021, 49, 37–46. [Google Scholar]
- Lovell, D.W. Socialism, Utopianism and the “Utopian Socialists”. Hist. Eur. Ideas 1992, 14, 185–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bussard, R.L. The “dangerous Class” of Marx and Engels: The Rise of the Idea of the Lumpenproletariat. Hist. Eur. Ideas 1987, 8, 675–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batchelor, P. The Origin of the Garden City Concept of Urban form. J. Soc. Archit. Hist. 1969, 28(3), 184–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pribadi, D.O.; Pauleit, S. The Dynamics of Peri-Urban Agriculture during Rapid Urbanization of Jabodetabek Metropolitan Area. Land Use Policy 2015, 48, 13–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Li, Y.; Li, T. The Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Urban-Rural Development Transformation in China since 1990. Habitat Int. 2016, 53, 178–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Yang, Q. Study on Spatial–Temporal Evolution Characteristics and Restrictive Factors of Urban–Rural Integration in Northeast China from 2000 to 2019. Land 2022, 11, 1195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, Z.H.; Choi, C.H. Does E-Commerce Narrow the Urban–Rural Income Gap? Evidence from Chinese Provinces. Internet Res. 2022, 32, 1427–1452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Requena, F. Rural–Urban Living and Level of Economic Development as Factors in Subjective Well-Being. Soc. Indic. Res. 2016, 128, 693–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, Y.; Qian, J.; Wang, L. Village Classification in Metropolitan Suburbs from the Perspective of Urban-Rural Integration and Improvement Strategies: A Case Study of Wuhan, Central China. Land Use Policy 2021, 111, 105748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, Y.; Legates, R.; Qin, B. Coordinated Urban-Rural Development Planning in China. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2013, 79, 125–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.; LeGates, R.; Fang, C. From Coordinated to Integrated Urban and Rural Development in China’s Megacity Regions. J. Urban Aff. 2019, 41, 150–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davoudi, S.; Stead, D. Urban–Rural Relationships: An Introduction and Brief History. Built Environ. 2006, 122, 25–27. [Google Scholar]
- Mayer, H.; Habersetzer, A.; Meili, R. Rural-Urban Linkages and Sustainable Regional Development: The Role of Entrepreneurs in Linking Peripheries and Centers. Sustainability 2016, 8, 745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, J.; Liu, M.; Deng, X.; Zhuang, D.; Zhang, Z.; Luo, D. The Land Use and Land Cover Change Database and Its Relative Studies in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2002, 12, 275–282. [Google Scholar]
- Chuanglin, F. Theoretical Foundation and Patterns of Coordinated Development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration. Prog. Geogr. 2017, 36, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ma, L.; Liu, S.; Fang, F.; Che, X.; Chen, M. Evaluation of Urban-Rural Difference and Integration Based on Quality of Life. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 54, 101877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, M.; Tao, W. Coupling and Coordination Analysis of China’s Regional Urban-Rural Integration and Land-Use Efficiency. Growth Change 2022, 53, 1384–1413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, C.; Gao, Y. Evaluation Mechanism Design for the Development Level of Urban-Rural Integration Based on an Improved TOPSIS Method. Mathematics 2022, 10, 380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, J.; Chen, H.; Xia, F. Toward Improved Land Elements for Urban–Rural Integration: A Cell Concept of an Urban–Rural Mixed Community. Habitat Int. 2018, 77, 110–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qian, L.; Zhang, K.; Song, J.X.; Tang, W.Y. Regional Differences and Convergence of Urban-Rural Integration Development from the Perspective of Factor Flow. J. Environ. Public Health 2022, 2022, 2695366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, W.; Jiang, C. Analysis of the Spatial and Temporal Characteristics and Dynamic Effects of Urban-Rural Integration Development in the Yangtze River Delta Region. Land 2022, 11, 1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Zhao, T.; Xia, L. Spatial-Temporal Differentiation of Carbon Efficiency and Coupling Coordination Degree of Chinese County Territory and Obstacles Analysis. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 76, 103429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malah, A.; Bahi, H. Integrated Multivariate Data Analysis for Urban Sustainability Assessment, a Case Study of Casablanca City. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 86, 104100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Y.; Bao, W.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y. Measurement of Urban-Rural Integration Level and Its Spatial Differentiation in China in the New Century. Habitat Int. 2021, 117, 102420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bu, X.; Pu, L.; Shen, C.; Xie, X.; Xu, C. Study on the Spatial Restructuring of the Village System at the County Level Oriented toward the Rural Revitalization Strategy: A Case of Jintan District, Jiangsu Province. Land 2020, 9, 478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, B.; Zhang, J.; Miao, C. Urbanization Level in Chinese Counties: Imbalance Pattern and Driving Force. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 2268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, H.; Zou, J.; Pykett, J.; Li, Y. Analysis of Rural Transformation Development in China since the Turn of the New Millennium. Appl. Geogr. 2011, 31, 1094–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Cao, X. Village Evaluation and Classification Guidance of a County in Southeast Gansu Based on the Rural Revitalization Strategy. Land 2022, 11, 857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, S.; Ge, J.; Bai, M.; Yao, M.; He, L.; Chen, M. Toward Classification-Based Sustainable Revitalization: Assessing the Vitality of Traditional Villages. Land Use Policy 2022, 116, 106060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeong, J.S.; García-Moruno, L.; Hernández-Blanco, J.; Jaraíz-Cabanillas, F.J. An Operational Method to Supporting Siting Decisions for Sustainable Rural Second Home Planning in Ecotourism Sites. Land Use Policy 2014, 41, 550–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maliene, V.; Fowles, S.; Atkinson, I.; Malys, N. A Sustainability Assessment Framework for the High Street. Cities 2022, 124, 103571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Yi, T.; Wang, H.; Wang, H.; Fu, J.; Zhao, Y. Evaluation of Medical Carrying Capacity for Megacities from a Traffic Analysis Zone View: A Case Study in Shenzhen, China. Land 2022, 11, 888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, P.J.; Hoyler, M. Lost in Plain Sight: Revealing Central Flow Process in Christaller’s Original Central Place Systems. Reg. Stud. 2021, 55, 345–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forsberg, G.; Lindgren, G. Regional Policy, Social Networks and Informal Structures. Eur. Urban Reg. Stud. 2015, 22, 368–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reimer, B. A Sample Frame for Rural Canada: Design and Evaluation. Reg. Stud. 2002, 36, 845–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Long, H.; Liu, Y. Spatio-Temporal Pattern of China’s Rural Development: A Rurality Index Perspective. J. Rural Stud. 2015, 38, 12–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mowl, G.; Barke, M.; King, H. Exploring the Heterogeneity of Second Homes and the ‘Residual’ Category. J. Rural Stud. 2020, 79, 74–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, Y.; Tan, J.; Huang, Y.; Wang, Z. The Governance Path of Urban–Rural Integration in Changing Urban–Rural Relationships in the Metropolitan Area: A Case Study of Wuhan, China. Land 2022, 11, 1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Zamora, P.; Gallardo-Cobos, R.; Ceña-Delgado, F. Rural Areas Face the Economic Crisis: Analyzing the Determinants of Successful Territorial Dynamics. J. Rural Stud. 2014, 35, 11–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Target | Criterions | Indicators | Unit | Method of Calculation | Index Attribute |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Evaluation of the current Urban–rural Integration Development (A) | Urban–rural population integration (A1) [25] | Level of population urbanization (A01) | % | (Number of urban population/Total population) × 100% | Positive |
Rate of urban and rural population going out (A02) | % | (Number of outworkers/Total population) × 100% | Negative | ||
Proportion of agricultural labor (A03) | % | Number of labor force in (primary industry/Total labor force) × 100% | Negative | ||
Urban–rural spatial integration (A2) [26] | Urban–rural road network density (A04) | km/km2 | (Road length/Total land area) × 100% | Positive | |
Urban–rural public service facilities density ratio (A05) | % | (Density of rural public service facilities/Density of urban public service facilities) × 100% | Positive | ||
Level of land urbanization (A06) | % | (Area of built-up area/Total land area) × 100% | Positive | ||
Urban–rural economic integration (A3) [27] | Ratio of non-agricultural output value to agricultural output value (A07) | % | (Non-agricultural output value/Agricultural output value) × 100% | Positive | |
Per capita GDP (A08) | Yuan | GDP/Total population | Positive | ||
Rural per capita net income (A09) | Yuan | - | Positive | ||
Output value of industrial enterprises above designated size (A10) | Billion yuan | - | Positive | ||
Urban–rural social integration (A4) [28] | Every ten thousand people have the number of primary school teachers (A11) | People | Number of elementary school teachers/10,000 people | Positive | |
Number of students in urban–rural primary schools (A12) | People | - | Positive | ||
Number of health technicians per thousand population in urban–rural areas (A13) | People | Number of health technicians/Thousands of people | Positive | ||
Number of medical beds per thousand population (A14) | Beds/1000 people | Number of beds in urban–rural medical institutions/Thousands of people | Positive | ||
Urban–rural ecological integration (A5) [29] | Urban–rural garbage harmless disposal rate (A15) | % | (Amount of harmless garbage disposal/Amount of urban–rural garbage generation) × 100% | Positive |
Target | Criterions | Indicators | Scoring Standard |
---|---|---|---|
Urban–rural integration development potential (B) | Location and Transportation (B1) [33] | Is the town located around economically developed areas (B01) | 5 points for proximity to large cities, 3 points for the periphery of the central city, 2 points for being located in the development axis, and 1 point for other areas |
Distance of the town from transportation hubs and roads (B02) | High-speed railway station, high-speed exit, rail transit station, national highway, provincial highway, other roads are assigned 5, 4, 4, 3, 2, 1 | ||
Town scale (B2) [34] | Whether the township is a key development township (B03) | National key town assignment points 5, provincial model towns, central town assignment points 3, general town assignment points 1 | |
Population size (B04) | Total resident population size | ||
Township construction scale (B05) | Township built-up area land size | ||
Economic level (B3) [35] | Industrial output (B06) | The output value of industrial enterprises above the scale | |
Number of Industrial Parks (B07) | Current and planned number of industrial parks | ||
Per capita net income of farmers (B08) | - | ||
Agricultural production (B09) | Average grain land yield | ||
Facility Construction (B4) [36] | Educational Facilities (B10) | Number of primary and secondary schools | |
Medical Facilities (B11) | Number of medical beds per 1000 population | ||
Garbage disposal (B12) | Township waste disposal rate | ||
Characteristic resources (B5) [37] | Natural Waters (B13) | Lakes, rivers, wetlands, assigned 5, 3, 2, respectively | |
Geographical system (B14) | Forest land, water area, arable land, and town are assigned 5, 3, 2, and 1 point, respectively. | ||
Brand Resources (B15) | National well-known trademarks and provincial famous trademarks are assigned 5 and 3 points, respectively | ||
Tourism Resources (B16) | National and provincial scenic spots are assigned 5 and 3 points, respectively | ||
Tangible Cultural Heritage (B17) | According to the heritage level, the national level is assigned 5 points, the provincial level is assigned 3 points, the municipal level is assigned 1 point | ||
Intangible Cultural Heritage (B18) | According to the level of intangible cultural heritage, the national level is assigned 5 points, the provincial level is assigned 3 points, and the municipal level is assigned 1 point. |
Town | Urban–Rural Integration Level Evaluation Revision Score | Urban–Rural Integration Potential Evaluation Revision Score | Overall Score | Ranking |
---|---|---|---|---|
Xiannvshan Street | 0.380 | 0.418 | 0.798 | 1 |
Makou Town | 0.213 | 0.410 | 0.624 | 2 |
Xinhe Town | 0.216 | 0.354 | 0.570 | 3 |
Chenhu Town | 0.165 | 0.278 | 0.443 | 4 |
Ma’an Town | 0.104 | 0.304 | 0.408 | 5 |
Chenghuang Town | 0.153 | 0.220 | 0.373 | 6 |
Fenshui Town | 0.154 | 0.199 | 0.353 | 7 |
Diaodong Street | 0.162 | 0.174 | 0.336 | 8 |
Nanhe Town | 0.081 | 0.243 | 0.324 | 9 |
Tianerhe Town | 0.097 | 0.216 | 0.313 | 10 |
Miaotou Town | 0.128 | 0.107 | 0.235 | 11 |
Maiwang Town | 0.118 | 0.107 | 0.225 | 12 |
Xinyan Town | 0.073 | 0.145 | 0.218 | 13 |
Mahe Town | 0.075 | 0.141 | 0.216 | 14 |
Dongzhong Town | 0.083 | 0.128 | 0.210 | 15 |
Liujiage Town | 0.093 | 0.116 | 0.210 | 16 |
Huilong Town | 0.104 | 0.101 | 0.205 | 17 |
Diaochahu Farm | 0.062 | 0.138 | 0.200 | 18 |
Huayan Farm | 0.109 | 0.081 | 0.190 | 19 |
Xijiang Town | 0.068 | 0.122 | 0.190 | 20 |
Yanglingou Town | 0.080 | 0.089 | 0.169 | 21 |
Sanxingyuan Rice Farm | 0.102 | 0.061 | 0.163 | 22 |
Wantan Town | 0.081 | 0.069 | 0.150 | 23 |
Hanji Town | 0.054 | 0.090 | 0.144 | 24 |
Zhongzhou Farm | 0.060 | 0.079 | 0.139 | 25 |
Litan Town | 0.053 | 0.060 | 0.113 | 26 |
Town | Xiannvshan Street | Makou Town | Chenhu Town | Xinyan Town |
---|---|---|---|---|
Xinhe Town | 60.09 | 8.79 | 1.82 | 1.07 |
Ma’an Town | 18.77 | 49.3 | 1.08 | 0.6 |
Chenghuang Town | 104.19 | 19.2 | 2.5 | 0.83 |
Fenshui Town | 7.13 | 4.6 | 7.84 | 1.04 |
Diaodong Street | 93.73 | 8.74 | 1.43 | 0.87 |
Nanhe Town | 9.66 | 37.49 | 0.86 | 0.37 |
Tianerhe Town | 1.85 | 1.09 | 23.13 | 1.91 |
Miaotou Town | 38.96 | 66.21 | 1.05 | 0.44 |
Maiwang Town | 2.79 | 1.46 | 25.74 | 0.5 |
Mahe Town | 3.66 | 1.33 | 0.4 | 0.25 |
Dongzhong Town | 1.18 | 0.63 | 0.79 | 3.78 |
Liujiage Town | 14.63 | 3.04 | 0.66 | 0.39 |
Huilong Town | 1.59 | 0.9 | 93.73 | 0.82 |
Diaochahu Farm | 20.38 | 4.49 | 1.05 | 1.34 |
Huayan Farm | 12.35 | 4.23 | 2.34 | 1.01 |
Xijiang Town | 2.47 | 2.65 | 0.91 | 0.15 |
Yanglingou Town | 3.26 | 3.27 | 0.75 | 0.16 |
Sanxingyuan Rice Farm | 2.84 | 1.33 | 3.2 | 3.62 |
Wantan Town | 5.05 | 5.09 | 1.81 | 0.18 |
Hanji Town | 3.23 | 1.26 | 1.62 | 4.54 |
Zhongzhou Farm | 1.37 | 0.66 | 1.7 | 5.6 |
Litan Town | 1.19 | 0.7 | 4.67 | 1.04 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2022 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lu, S.; Huang, Y.; Wu, X.; Ding, Y. Evaluation, Recognition and Implications of Urban–Rural Integration Development: A Township-Level Analysis of Hanchuan City in Wuhan Metropolitan Area. Land 2023, 12, 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010014
Lu S, Huang Y, Wu X, Ding Y. Evaluation, Recognition and Implications of Urban–Rural Integration Development: A Township-Level Analysis of Hanchuan City in Wuhan Metropolitan Area. Land. 2023; 12(1):14. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010014
Chicago/Turabian StyleLu, Shiwei, Yaping Huang, Xiaoqing Wu, and Yichen Ding. 2023. "Evaluation, Recognition and Implications of Urban–Rural Integration Development: A Township-Level Analysis of Hanchuan City in Wuhan Metropolitan Area" Land 12, no. 1: 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010014
APA StyleLu, S., Huang, Y., Wu, X., & Ding, Y. (2023). Evaluation, Recognition and Implications of Urban–Rural Integration Development: A Township-Level Analysis of Hanchuan City in Wuhan Metropolitan Area. Land, 12(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010014