Building a More Secure Territory Spatial Pattern in China: An Analysis Based on Human-Environment Interactions

Abstract

To understand and respond to the common ecological and environmental challenges faced by human beings, this study investigated the relationship between territorial spatial development (TSD), eco-environmental responses, and territorial spatial planning (TSP) from the perspective of human-environment interactions and explores a feasible way to modulate these human-environment interactions by taking China’s TSP practice as an illustrative case. The research results show that (1) the interplay between territorial development, resource utilization, and environmental feedback forms the crux of human-environment interactions. Notably, eco-environment responses, one of which is the spread of germs, coupled with human development and utilization behavior constitute a complete negative feedback loop. Human beings’ adjustment to the unbalanced conditions in these interactions, employing institutions, technology, planning, and other tools, constitutes a positive cycle within human-environment interactions. (2) TSP can regulate the whole process of human-environment interactions through mechanisms such as coordination and control, adaptation and mitigation, and consolidation and restoration. (3) Unreasonable agricultural development and urban expansion have triggered intense negative feedback on the ecological environment. (4) The Chinese government has carried out a top-down TSP reform initiative to establish a unified planning system. This aims to alleviate the adverse ecological and environmental effects caused by TSD and build a more secure territory space pattern. Therefore, nations around the globe should innovate their spatial planning management systems and spatial planning systems, standardize and guide the development and utilization of spatial resources, and coordinate the relationship between humans and the environment.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and Literature Review

Since the end of 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has ravaged the globe, posing a serious threat to human survival and development. The Secretary General of the United Nations warned that COVID-19 is the gravest test since the founding of the United Nations1. The global food and energy crises caused by the current epidemic have exposed the systematic shortcomings in the exploitation and utilization of territory and natural resources [1,2]. Due to the process of human development in the natural environment, the boundaries of our original environment are gradually shrinking, and the broader natural environment is being disturbed, becoming a secondary environment. When human beings moved from agricultural civilizations to industrial civilizations, the pace of urbanization accelerated, the populations of cities surged, and cities became the primary settlement form. The process of urbanization and industrialization intensifies human disturbances to the natural environment, and the intensive use of urban land causes the interaction between human activities and the natural environment to demonstrate decreased frequency, reduced scope, and simplified methods.

The pandemic outbreaks caused by the Ebola virus, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, monkeypox virus, etc., have successively broken out all over the world. The COVID-19 outbreak is not an isolated case. In fact, many of the outbreaks that have swept the globe since the twentieth century have been mostly animal-borne viruses, and zoonotic diseases contribute to an estimated 75% of new or reemerging infectious diseases in humans [3]. Studies have found that the Chinese chrysanthemum bat is the natural host of the SARS virus [4], and the infection of humans by the SARS virus may be caused by the transmission of the virus from the natural host to the paguma larvata [5]. Coincidentally, the origin of the COVID-19 outbreak is also believed to be from the Chinese chrysanthemum bat [6]. At the same time, the intermediate host of the new coronary pneumonia virus may be pangolins [7,8]. Scientists have found that the widespread spread of the Ebola virus may be caused by hunting and consuming bushmeat and through contact with infected chimpanzees, fruit bats, and forest antelope [9]. In some areas of Africa and South America, the high price of beef and mutton means that they are consumed primarily by the wealthy, while a large number of low-income groups can only access undomesticated meat protein from primitive jungles [10,11]. This type of bushmeat, termed “the poor’s protein”, has become a delicacy in Europe and the United States, and smuggling bushmeat has become a means for poachers and smugglers to become rich [12]. Human consumption behavior promotes illegal poaching and trading. Human production modes and lifestyles constantly transform the natural environments into artificial ones such as urban systems, artificial natural environments like farmland ecosystems, and those used for domesticating poultry and livestock, altering the way humans interact with animals, plants, and bacteria in nature. Analysis of human-environment interactions, especially their quantitative measurement, is needed to fully understand infectious disease transmission processes and conduct accurate risk assessments [13]. When viruses originating from nature continue to infect humans and cause major epidemics, this indicates that the relationship between humans and the environment may be unbalanced and dysfunctional, and it is worth contemplating how humans can maintain a harmonious symbiosis with the environment.

In addition to epidemic outbreaks, global warming and frequent extreme weather events are long-term security challenges that humanity must face. Building a secure and resilient territory spatial pattern is necessary and urgent to address many serious challenges. Irrational territory development leads to spatial disorder and ecological imbalance. However, proactive territorial spatial planning (TSP) can guide orderly spatial development and ecological restoration, achieving a rebalanced state between humans and the environment. The territory spatial pattern has gradually become a popular topic in the study of global change and sustainable development. It serves as a comprehensive reflection of the interaction and coupling between natural ecological processes and human systems [14]. The construction of the territory spatial pattern lies in giving full freedom to the subjective initiatives of human beings to realize the structure and layout of the regional territory space that satisfies the multi-objective coordination [15]. In 2015, the United Nations released the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs 2030), among which Goal 9 aims to “build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation”; Goal 11 aims to “make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”; and Goal 15 aims to “protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss”. All these goals necessitate active efforts in building a secure territory spatial pattern [16]. The pattern of urban and agricultural expansion has significantly impacted global ecosystems [17,18]. It is crucial to determine sustainable development paths for an urban planet and a cultivated planet [19,20]. Creutzig [21] called for a global consensus on the orderly development and management of land. Gao et al. [22] simulated and constructed pathways to achieve Australia’s national-scale land sustainability goals for 2030 and 2050. Stürck et al. [23] simulated and delineated future land change trajectories across Europe. Pérez-Soba et al. [24] emphasized the need to achieve sustainable land use through multifunctionality, resource use efficiency, controlled urban growth, rural renewal, and widespread natural environments in Europe. With the advancement of ecological civilization construction and territory spatial governance, authorities in China have undertaken numerous practical explorations in constructing secure and sustainable territory spatial patterns, such as the Major Function Oriented Zone [25,26] and TSP [27,28], particularly focusing on ecological red lines [29,30]. Presently, Chinese scholars are deeply engaged in researching territory spatial security patterns and have generated substantial empirical research results based on methods like ecosystem service assessment and ecological security pattern construction [31,32,33,34].

A series of academic concepts have been proposed to assess whether a territory is in a safe state. What can be defined as a safe Earth for mankind can be traced back to the limits of growth proposed by the Club of Rome [35]. Subsequently, scholars introduced academic concepts such as safe minimum standards [36], carrying capacity [37], resilience [38], ecological footprints [39], tolerable windows [40], and planetary boundaries [41] to measure the safety standards of a territory. China’s TSP assesses the security status of a territory and its future growth capacity through the evaluation of natural resources and environmental carrying capacity [42]. There is a wealth of empirical research exploring safe thresholds related to these concepts. Ecological footprints refer to biologically productive areas capable of sustainably providing resources or dissipating waste [39]. The Earth Ecological Overshoot Day in 1971 was in December, while in 2019, it advanced by a full five months to July 292. The concept of planetary boundaries is used to define Earth’s “safe operating space”. Additionally, the proportion of cultivated land development used to characterize land use change is an important indicator to measure whether the Earth exceeds the safety threshold. In 2009, the assessment indicated that the proportion of cultivated land in the world was 11.7%. The development boundary threshold was 15%, indicating that the Earth was still within a safe operating range [41]. In a subsequent update study, the proportion of forest land compared to the original forest land was employed as a new indicator to characterize land use change. The safe boundary threshold was 75%, yet the assessment result in 2015 was 62%, which is in a potentially high-risk category [43]. Although these concepts differ in research perspectives, they generally emphasize meeting human demands while ensuring territory security. This emphasis has evolved from focusing solely on food security for human consumption to encompassing ecological security for all species.

1.2. Research Purposes and Innovations

In response to potential future major public safety incidents, including significant epidemics, we should actively explore governance mechanisms for human-environment interactions in the post-epidemic era, especially leveraging the role of TSP in building a more secure territory spatial pattern that can prevent and solve major emergencies. Thus, the purpose of our study was to establish a theoretical analytical framework consisting of territory spatial development (TSD), ecological environment response, and TSP, taking the practice of China’s unified TSP as an example to illustrate a feasible path for shaping human-environment interactions. In Section 2, we explore a richer connotation of human-environment interactions in the context of the occurrence and spread of epidemics. In Section 3, we discuss the role of TSP as a regulator of human-environment interactions. In Section 4, we outline the eco-environmental responses to unreasonable TSD and map out human-environment interactions. In Section 5, we systematically analyze the practice of China’s unified TSP to demonstrate a viable approach to constructing a more secure territory spatial pattern to shape human-environment interactions. Finally, Section 6 and Section 7 are the discussion and conclusion.

This study offers two primary contributions. Firstly, the human exploitation of natural resources and ecosystems via changing land use is a major driver of climate change and biodiversity loss, contributing to the emergence and spread of zoonotic diseases [44]. Regarding major epidemics, the existing literature mainly focuses on treatment and prevention from the perspectives of biomedicine and public health, neglecting to understand human development behavior, climate change, biodiversity loss, and epidemic outbreaks through a planetary health approach [45]. Therefore, we integrated major epidemics, climate change, and other common challenges faced by human beings into a unified framework that comprehensively explores human-environment interactions. Secondly, the innovative top-down spatial planning system implemented by the Chinese government in response to significant population growth, rapid urbanization, and escalating environmental pressures offers valuable insights for countries at similar developmental stages and facing analogous challenges. However, studies addressing this aspect remain scarce.

2. The Connotations of the Human-Environment Interactions: The Dynamic Cycle of TSD and Resource and Environmental Feedback

Geographical studies have focused on human-environment interactions, including human impacts on the environment and sustainability and the effects of environmental change on human populations [46]. The objective relationship between humans and the environment is manifested in the dependence of humans on the environment and the dynamic function and mechanism of humans [47]. Human-environment interactions are characterized by great diversity, with many feedback mechanisms and nonlinear processes with thresholds and time lags [48,49]. Territory space is not only the carrier of natural resources, but also a space resource, and it is part of the natural environment [50]. The process of TSD is the overall action of human beings to develop territory, utilize natural resources, and affect the ecological environment, which is the original driving force for the development of human-environment interactions. Territory provides human beings with the space and material support that human beings need for survival and development and by-products for consumption, which constitute passive feedback for human-environment interactions. The developmental history of human civilization is, to some extent, a history of human development and the utilization of space [51]. The agricultural revolution is an important symbol and fundamental cause of human beings’ transition from hunter-gatherer civilizations to agricultural civilizations. Human groups moving towards settlement develop and utilize cultivated land resources, gradually enhancing the transformation of natural resources and environment [52]. The advent of agriculture led the emergence of human infectious diseases [53], and the domestication of wild animals led to close contact between humans and animals, and these animals brought deadly bacteria to humans. The development and utilization of natural resources by human beings made nature constrain and shape human behaviors at the same time.

After the Industrial Revolution, the large-scale use of machines and fossil fuels led to human beings developing and utilizing natural resources on a larger scale and releasing a large amount of waste into the natural environment. A second transition occurred in the pattern of human health and disease during the Industrial Revolution, seeing a decline in the incidence of infectious diseases and infant mortality and an increase in non-communicable, chronic diseases [54]. However, the development activities caused by industrial production also promoted the generation and spread of infectious diseases [55] through urbanization. Urban construction has induced a more thorough transformation of the natural environment, inflicting greater pressure on the natural environment. The Anthropocene was proposed as a new geological era to demonstrate the profound and irreversible changes that humans have made to the Earth, which began around the middle of the twentieth century [56]. During this period, major environmental pollution events occurred successively around the world, such as the Los Angeles smog event in 1943, the London smog event in 1952, and the Minamata disease in Kumamoto Prefecture, Japan, in 1953. At the same time, human beings are also facing global problems such as global warming, a sharp decline in biodiversity, and violent conflicts between human beings. Meanwhile, the pressure on the supply of various natural resources is increasing day by day, and the energy, food, and water crises continue to threaten humans. Therefore, as the breadth and depth of human development and the utilization of territory continue to increase, the resources and environments that have crossed the load-bearing threshold also produce strong negative feedback on human society, such as the spread of germs, chronic diseases, climate change, geological disasters, etc.

In the face of constant warnings regarding natural resources and the environment, the use of institutions, technology, and planning constitute the core means of coping for human beings. Institutional aspects include international cooperation mechanisms and local governance systems, while technology aspects include the development of technologies to improve resource utilization efficiency and environmental governance capabilities, as well as disaster prevention technology and medical treatments to enhance human resilience in the face of negative feedback from the environment for humans. Spatial planning is a key tool for preventing and resolving risks to natural resources and the ecological environment. Based on the above analysis, the development and utilization of territory and the feedback effects of the resource environment on human activities constitute the majority of human-environment interactions. The negative ecological, environmental response of natural resources and the environments affected by human development and utilization behavior constitutes a complete negative feedback loop of human-environment interactions. Human beings, as active subjects, after reflecting on and understanding human-environment interactions, have realized the positive cycle of human-environment interactions through the regulating effects of institutions, technology, and planning. Therefore, the double cycle of negative feedback and positive regulation based on human development and the utilization of territory constitutes the entirety of the connotations of human-environment interactions (Figure 1). The relationship between humans and germs is embedded in human-environment interactions, and the occurrence and development of epidemics is a manifestation of the conflict between humans and the environment. The healthy development of human-environment interactions will promote the control of epidemics and harmonious coexistence between humans and germs.

3. TSP: The Regulator of Human-Environment Interactions

Territory planning is the comprehensive deployment of techniques for the development, protection, and consolidation of territory resources and major territory construction activities [57]. Territory planning is a complex multifaceted technological process that is influenced by natural, economic, demographic, and other factors [58]. The goal of territory planning is to manage the relationship between resource development and environmental protection and between natural environment systems and human social systems to establish a harmonious regional system of human-environment interactions [59]. Meanwhile, spatial planning was first defined as “the geographic expression of economic, social, cultural and ecological policies” by the European Commission in 1983 [60]. The goal of spatial planning is to create a spatial organization with rational land use and function to balance the needs of environmental protection and socio-economic development according to the “Summary of the European Spatial Planning System” published in 1997 [61]. Spatial planning is meant to solve problems regarding the coordination of space, resources, and environment to make reasonable arrangements for various future activities in the territory [62]. Therefore, territory planning and spatial planning have the same connotations. In the context of some non-English-speaking countries, territory planning refers to the spatial planning system. But there are also views that the connotations of spatial planning are richer than those of territory planning [63] and that territory planning and regional planning have the same connotations [59,64]. With the continuous prominence of the contradiction between the development and protection of territory and the proposal of strategies such as High-Quality Development and Ecological Civilization Construction, the Chinese government has integrated Major Function-Oriented Planning, land use planning, urban and rural planning, and other spatial planning projects into unified TSP. As a spatial blueprint for sustainable development, this guides the whole country’s territory spatial activities regarding development, protection, and construction. TSP is a combination of territory planning and spatial planning [65]. The new planning system is designed to make up for the deficiencies of the existing spatial planning practice due to the lack of guidance that comprehensive territory planning would provide. The distinctive and prominent feature of territory planning is the overall planning of the development, protection, and remediation of territory in a holistic, omnidirectional, “trinity” style [57], which reflects the historical inheritance and mission of the era of TSP.

The focus of TSP is on the complex system of human-environment interaction. The essence of TSP is a spatial optimization decision [66] to optimize the development and protection of a territory [51]. From the perspective of theory and practice, TSP plays an important role in coordinating human-environment interactions. (i) The role of TSP lies in coordination and control. Based on the mastery of the background conditions of resources and the environment and the status quo regarding the spatial distribution of development activities, TSP could coordinate human socio-economic activities with ecological security patterns and natural resource protection, as well as controlling land use and development intensity, which would enable the protection and maintenance of the health ecosystem and services [67,68]. (ii) The role of TSP is also in adaptation and mitigation. TSP is considered to be and should be regarded as an exchange platform for the mitigation of and adaptation to climate change and natural disasters to improve the effectiveness of adaptation and mitigation measures and achieve sustainable development goals [69,70]. (iii) The role of TSP is also in consolidation and restoration. Territory spatial ecological restoration planning is an important type of planning under the TSP system that can optimize the territory spatial pattern, improve the efficiency of land use, and coordinate ecological restoration strategies to aid in the restoration of degraded, damaged, or destroyed natural ecosystems [71,72]. Therefore, TSP could adjust human-environment interactions before, during, and after the whole process through mechanisms such as coordination and control, adaptation and mitigation, and consolidation and restoration (Figure 2). In this process, the territory spatial pattern is the result of the interaction between human beings and between people, resources, and the environment; that is, the mapping of the relationship between humans and environment. Correspondingly, actively constructing the territory spatial pattern through territory spatial planning will guide and standardize the rational development of human territories, so as to alleviate the conflict between humans and the environment and shape human-environment interactions.

4. Eco-Environmental Responses to TSD

The essence of TSD is the development and utilization of territory and its natural resources by human beings, while the intensity of territory development emphasizes the scope and degree of development and utilization. The development of territory includes the development of agriculture, the mining of minerals, and non-agricultural production space, as well as the construction of settlements, among which agricultural development and the construction of settlements are key. Research shows that the impact of global land use change on biodiversity has exceeded the threshold of the planetary boundaries [73]. The proportion of cultivated land in China is 14.3%, which is close to the threshold of the planetary boundaries. With the addition of 1.5% of garden land, the scale of agricultural reclamation in China has reached the high-risk area of the planetary boundaries. In the context of rapid urbanization in China, the academic community pays more attention to the development intensity represented by the proportion of construction space to the total area of the region [74]. In addition to providing positive feedback for accommodation carriers and resource supply, territory also produces negative eco-environmental responses in the face of pressures from human demands. This section focuses on reviewing the eco-environmental responses to TSD from the perspectives of agricultural development and urban expansion.

4.1. The Pressure of Agricultural Development

In the development of farmland, jungles, grasslands, wetlands, etc., are changed into farmland or plantations, the type and succession laws of vegetation are controlled by human beings, and the natural environment becomes a semi-natural environment or artificial environment. The large-scale development of farmland can alter the local climate, hydrological processes, and soil structure. Studies have shown that the development of arable land or permanent pastures has reduced the natural habitat of arable land by more than 50% [75]. In China, in order to supplement cultivated land, a large amount of marginal land has been developed by “going up the mountain”, “going to the sea”, “cultivating grass”, “planting sand”, “relocating forests”, and “surrounding lakes” [76]. Under the realistic background of a large amount of agricultural land being abandoned [77], this has not improved human-environment interactions but has deepened the conflict between humans and the environment due to the destruction of the ecological environment [78]. In northwest China, grain production areas have been formed at the expense of grasslands, wetlands, and ecological land, which has intensified the conflicts between agriculture and animal husbandry in the region. However, the over-utilization of cultivated land in northeast China has led to the overall degradation of the quality of black soil cultivated land [79]. In addition to the development of farmland, the development of single-species artificial economic forest land and garden land could cause the degradation of native species, a reduction in biodiversity, and the weakening of ecosystem functions, which are often described as characteristics of “green deserts” [80]. For example, over the last 50 years, rubber plantations have replaced nearly half of the native primary tropical forests in Xishuangbanna in southwest China, and areas of rubber monoculture have a significantly lower biodiversity, lower total biomass carbon stocks, rapidly fluctuating microclimate temperatures, and negative hydrological effects [81].

With regard to agricultural irrigation, worldwide agricultural development has increased the demand for crop irrigation, reducing water availability for other uses and increasing the breeding grounds for disease vectors [55]. In the inland arid regions of China, agriculture relies heavily on irrigation, but the development of uncontrolled irrigation agriculture would exacerbate the decline in the groundwater level and the progression of environmental degradation, threatening the sustainability of agricultural development in those areas [82]. The development of irrigated agriculture at high latitudes, especially the acceleration of paddy development in northeast China [83], has increased the demand for water resources, causing water insecurity, the shrinking or disappearance of wetlands, and damage to biodiversity [84]. In terms of agricultural engineering construction, The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs and The Ministry of Land and Resources of China have carried out a large number of farmland water conservancy projects and much rural land consolidation construction, but the concept of ecological design needs to be strengthened [85].

In terms of agricultural management, human beings input a lot of fertilizer and pesticides into farmland systems, which pollutes soil and water resources and further affects biodiversity. China is the world’s largest consumer of agrochemicals, using more than 30% of the world’s fertilizers and pesticides on only 9% of the world’s farmland [86]. The reactive nitrogen present in compound fertilizers plays a central role in food production but at the same time has significant impacts on air and water quality, biodiversity, and human health [87]. Excessive use of chemical pesticides can lead to resistance in crop pests and may kill some beneficial organisms [88]. Therefore, agricultural production has become the biggest threat to wild animals, and scholars have proposed two competing solutions accordingly: wildlife-friendly agriculture and land-sparing agriculture [75]. In terms of disease transmission, wildlife-friendly agricultural practice, on the one hand, can lead to more contact between humans and poultry and livestock, and studies have found that mixed habitats between wild animals and domesticated poultry increase the incidence of avian influenza [89]. On the other hand, studies have found that maintaining habitat integrity and increasing host diversity can reduce the risk of disease through a “dilution effect” [90]. Due to the differences in the number of local biological populations and the convenience and intensity of human intervention, the impact of agricultural practices on the ecological environment in plain areas and mountainous areas is heterogeneous, requiring differentiated policy control.

4.2. The Impact of Urban Expansion

Although the total proportion of urban construction space is much lower than the proportion of agricultural development space, such as cultivated land, its irreversibility and rapid growth have attracted wider attention. Urbanization is a major contributor to not only economic/social transformation but also resource consumption and environmental damage [91]. In 2016, Science magazine launched a city-themed special issue entitled “Urban Planet—Cities are the Future”, pointing out that the Earth has become a planet of cities, with the expansion of urban land exceeding the speed of urban population growth and encroaching on large areas of farmland and wilderness [19]. Controlling urban sprawl is a global problem, and China’s starting point for addressing this problem is to protect cultivated land [92]. The expansion of urban and rural construction land is the main reason for the reduction in cultivated land in traditional agricultural areas in China [93]. In China’s management practice, the land management department adopts a policy of balance of occupation and compensation to ensure the safety of cultivated land and to cope with the occupation of cultivated land by urban expansion; however, the alienation of policy practice essentially produces the effect of double development [94].

In the process of urbanization, the original natural and semi-natural landscapes are transformed into impervious surface landscapes [95]. The evolution of urban landscape patterns—which are characterized by an increase in impervious surfaces, the reduction in green space, and the fragmentation and dispersal of ecological landscapes [96]—will produce eco-environmental effects such as urban heat islands, atmospheric environments, water environments, ecological services, ecological land loss effects, and regional ecological risks [95]. It is estimated that from 2000 to 2030, the global land cover change caused by urban expansion will lead to an increase of 2.5 times in the area of cities suffering from both floods and droughts [97]. Between 1961 and 2013, China detected an overall average warming of 1.44 °C, of which about 0.49 °C was considered to be from urbanization [98]. The urban heat island effect and global warming are mutually reinforcing, and the effects of global warming on the transmission of vector-borne diseases have been demonstrated [99]. Moreover, the mutual reinforcing effects have resulted in the development of many allergies and various infections [100]. At the same time, some studies have found that the impact of urbanization on wildlife has extended to the atmosphere, and the impact of anthropogenic factors on airspace habitats deserves attention [101].

As urban areas expand, the encroachment of human activity on wildlife habitats expands the connection between wildlife and humans, increasing the chance of infectious disease emergence in wildlife and the possibility of spread to humans [55]. Due to the high population density, the urban environment provides favorable conditions for the spread of epidemics, and the threat of explosive urban epidemics is looming [102]. With such a large population and rapid urbanization, China faces enormous risks and challenges. Therefore, how to rationally expand urban regions should be further considered from the perspective of preventing and controlling infectious diseases. Is it safer to have a sprawling, single-core urban pattern or a clustered, multi-center urban pattern? Is a giant urban system or a small-town system safer? At the same time, when faced with the spread of infectious diseases, the public health facilities and prevention and control systems in cities often struggle to match the size of the city. Studies have found that the risk of plague transmission increases as more and more people gather in urban slums [103]. Correspondingly, the widespread urban villages in China have poor infrastructure, poor sanitation, a risk of rodent-borne diseases, and an inability to deal with the risk.

5. Building a More Secure Territory Spatial Pattern: China’s TSP Practice

Faced with the increasingly complex and tense relationship between humans and the environment, and in response to frequent public security incidents including major epidemics, it is necessary to build a more secure territory spatial pattern through spatial planning, so as to adjust and shape human-environment interactions. As a developing country with one of the fastest economic development and urbanization processes, China has been actively taken proactive measures to address the existing spatial governance issues and seek solutions for future sustainable development. This section will explore sustainable territory space development and protection paths by analyzing the innovative practices of the Chinese government’s TSP.

5.1. Reform of the Spatial Planning Management System

Although most governments and the public are aware of the positive role of spatial planning, the lack of an effective spatial planning management system has led to various obstacles in the formulation and implementation of spatial planning. The Chinese government has carried out bold reforms in its spatial planning management system, providing support for the implementation of spatial planning that serves the national will. Before the reform, spatial planning powers were dispersed among multiple departments such as the former Ministry of Land and Resources, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Forestry, Ministry of Water Resources, Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, and the National Development and Reform Commission. The segmented management system among multiple departments resulted in inconsistent planning standards, conflicting planning results, and difficulties in subsequent planning implementation. A pattern where the same space and its natural resources are dominated by different planning powers leads to conflicts in spatial planning. In 2014, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Land and Resources, the Ministry of Environmental Protection, and the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development jointly promoted the Multiple Planning Integration (MPI) pilot project in 28 counties. However, pilot schemes under the guidance of different departments have different technical and value guidelines, and the pilot results also leaned towards the interests and demands of the relevant departments. Therefore, most pilot areas regarded MPI as a technical coordination solution to alleviate conflicts between plans in the short term. The profound contradictions caused by the chaotic spatial planning system have not been completely resolved.

In 2018, the Chinese central government promoted the institutional reform of the State Council and established the Ministry of Natural Resources to be responsible for establishing a spatial planning system and supervising its implementation. The Ministry of Natural Resources has integrated the responsibilities of the Ministry of Land and Resources, the major function-oriented planning responsibilities of the National Development and Reform Commission, and the urban-rural planning management responsibilities of the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development. The core responsibilities of the Ministry of Natural Resources can be summarized into seven items (as shown in Figure 3), mainly including resource investigation, monitoring and evaluation, the unified registration of resource rights, the reasonable development and utilization management of resources, TSP, the regulation of territory spatial use, the ecological restoration of territory spatial resources, and the supervision of and law enforcement regarding natural resources. It can be observed that throughout the entire process the spatial planning authority has been centralized in the Ministry of Natural Resources, and the power system of spatial planning has been integrated. This lays the institutional foundation for the formulation and implementation of unified TSP.

5.2. Innovation in the Planning System

The reform of the planning management system has created conditions for the reconstruction of the planning system. In May 2019, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council issued Several Opinions on Establishing a Territory Spatial Planning System and Supervising its Implementation, marking the official transition of MPI from pilot to implementation, and the final establishment of a territory spatial planning system with five levels and three categories. The TSP system inherits the system structure of the land use planning system with five levels and three categories, while incorporating only two levels of major function-oriented planning, four levels of urban system planning, and three levels of overall urban planning for integrated creation. The so-called five levels and three categories of the TSP system (as shown in Figure 4) specifically refer to the division of TSP into three categories: overall planning, special planning, and detailed planning. Overall planning includes a total of five levels: the national, provincial, municipal, county, and township levels.

Overall TSP mainly constructs the pattern of territory space development, utilization, and protection by determining the territory space layout and key indicator system. National-level TSP focuses on strategic deployment, while provincial-level TSP plays a bridging role and emphasizes coordination, and city-, county-, and township-level TSP focus on the implementation of planning. The five-level and three-category TSP system in China builds a transmission mechanism that transmits planning content layer by layer, so that the high-level territory spatial security pattern can transmit both the index and layout of territory spatial to the lowest-level administration unit. The determination of the scale of the overall planning indicators depends on the scientific and efficient transmission of indicators allocated by higher-level planning. Specifically, the scale of cultivated land and ecological land must be allocated based on the major function-oriented strategy, the resource utilization status, and the scale of reserve resources. The construction of the transmission mechanism of planning is the key to ensuring the smooth operation of the multi-level planning system and is currently a hot topic for academic and practical exploration.

Detailed planning is aimed at specific plots of land to facilitate project implementation. Although the detailed planning of village-level land use has been discussed in theory and practice, it is generally absent in reality. For a long time, the vast rural space in China lacked detailed planning guidance based on legal norms. Therefore, various regions in China are currently working hard to formulate practical village plans, which are detailed plans for rural areas outside the boundaries of urban development. This is an important foundation for guiding the development and construction of rural areas and implementing use regulations, which fills the gap in detailed rural spatial planning. Detailed TSP covers the entire village area, including living spaces, such as residential areas; agricultural and non-agricultural production spaces; and ecological spaces. The formulation and implementation of detailed planning provide a regulated method for the construction and protection of future village space, and also puts forward higher requirements for the planning and implementation capabilities of grassroot governments.

Special planning is aimed at specific regions or industries, such as transportation planning, ecological protection planning, etc. The ecological restoration of territory space is not only an important strategic aim in overall planning, but also a key special plan to support the implementation of TSP. The governance of territorial space has entered a new stage of ecological and systematic guidance, which is an inevitable requirement for the construction of ecological civilizations and the modernization of spatial governance. The ecological restoration of territorial space is the core link that can best reflect the concept of systematicity and ecology. The practice of China’s territorial spatial governance has upgraded from ecological restoration mainly based on ecological engineering to territorial spatial ecological restoration, coordinating an ecological-social composite system. It has shifted from land remediation focusing on resource quantity to comprehensive territorial spatial governance focusing on efficiency, fairness, and balance. The current Chinese government is promoting the restoration and comprehensive improvement of national spatial ecology by implementing the restoration of mountain-river-forest-field-lake-grassland systems, comprehensive territory space improvement, mining ecological restoration, and marine ecological restoration.

5.3. Reconstruction of the Planning Zoning System

The competitive nature of territorial space has led to conflicts in the utilization of territorial space. The zoning of TSP is an important way to control and alleviate conflicts in spatial planning. In the era of multi planning parallelism, the spatial zoning system led by various departments often conflict with each other. Therefore, integrating and reconstructing the various types of spatial zoning systems determined by the original multiple plans is the foundation and primary task of building a unified TSP system. The Chinese government has established a composite zoning system consisting of functional zoning, regulatory zoning, and the use of zoning through reform practices (Figure 5).

Major functional zoning at the national and provincial levels have shaped the chassis and planning criteria for carrying out national spatial planning. At the levels of cities, counties, and even towns, the “three zones and three lines” (the three zones include urban space, agricultural space, and ecological space; the three lines include urban development boundaries, permanent basic farmland, and ecological protection red lines) are important contents of the downscaling transmission of the major functional zones in the TSP system. Major functional zoning is the “revolving door” between development planning and spatial planning, which has a macro guiding effect on the layout of TSP. The division of functional zoning highlights the differences in spatial functions and determines the dominant function and development direction of the space, mainly regulated based on the development threshold indicators and regulatory boundaries. The guidance of major functional zoning on the “three zones” in TSP is reflected in the fact that the proportion of the “three zones” structure in each administrative unit must match the positioning of the major functional zoning. For example, the agricultural space in the main production areas of agricultural products should be dominant, while the ecological space in key ecological functional areas should account for a larger proportion.

Regulatory zoning is aimed at highlighting the intention of hierarchical control and guiding differentiated control measures, mainly regulating by using the development and utilization access list as the control basis. It mainly refers to the “three lines” in the “three zones and three lines”: namely, urban development boundaries, permanent basic farmland, and ecological protection red lines. The “three lines” represent a one-to-one correspondence with the first-level planning zones in the city and county planning zoning system, such as urban development boundaries with urban development zones, permanent basic farmland with farmland protection zones, and ecological protection red lines with ecological protection zones. Use zoning is a form of secondary planning zoning determined by TSP that is used to guide the implementation of specific uses, which are mainly controlled through detailed planning and planning permits. Urban spaces located within the urban development boundaries are designated as concentrated construction areas, elastic development areas, and special-use areas. Rural development areas can be divided into village construction areas, ordinary agricultural areas, forestry development areas, and animal husbandry development areas. The “three zones and three lines” is the core of China’s TSP and use regulation system, and it is also an important innovation in spatial planning management practice. Unlike existing planning systems that focus on coordinating competition between construction land and agricultural land, the zoning system of “three zones and three lines” aims to use rigid control lines to constrain the competition between urban development, agricultural development, and ecological protection in a relatively stable state.

6. Discussion

Based on the regulating effect of TSP on human-environment interactions, we have discussed how to build a territory spatial pattern through TSP to shape human-environment interactions. The purpose of the TSP implemented by the Chinese government is to integrate the original multiple spatial plans implemented by multiple departments into a unified planning system to guide the development and protection of territory. The development of territorial space, especially sustainable urban construction, requires adherence to the two core concepts of compactness and diversity [104]. The compact urban layout aims to reduce the occupation of arable land and ecological land and save resources and energy. Urban diversity, on the other hand, advocates for mixed use of land and seeks multiple functions for urban spaces. The protection of territorial space protects spaces with important cultural and ecological values from the interference of urbanization. China has established ecological protection red lines and permanent basic farmland systems to achieve better territorial space protection. For example, grassland reserves in North America and special environmental protection areas in Türkiye are important examples of this strategy [105,106], but whether the protected areas focus on multi-purpose utilization or implement strict protection and how to use information technology to assist governance are important issues that need to be discussed. From ideal planning as a concept to the reality of the territory spatial security pattern, two obstacles need to be overcome. The first is how to formulate scientific planning, which requires clear planning goals, scientific recognition of planning objects, the precise application of planning methods, and the timely selection of solutions based on values. The second is how to implement the plan in an orderly manner, which requires an efficient planning coordination mechanism, strict planning approval procedures, and a continuous planning supervision system. At present, China’s national-scale planning practice calculates the scale of ecological space protection from the supply capacity of natural resources, and it is crucial to explore safe planetary boundaries based on the dimension of planetary health. It is also conducive to take the comprehensive human-environment interactions involved in TSD, ecological diversity, and the spread of epidemics into account in planning practice [45].

Territory spatial security is a flexible concept that is closely related to the external environment, internal demand, and technological progress. When the international environment is more peaceful and technology progresses faster, food security has more room for external adjustment. From a dialectical point of view, territory spatial security must have a bottom-line constraint while being flexible. When the intensification of international conflicts and the growth of domestic demand occur at the same time, a minimum required level of security is necessary. Territory spatial security is the result of value selection based on multi-objective coordination and trade-offs, and scientific nature is not the only principle of TSP. Absolute ecological security, food security, and economic security cannot be attained in the practice of TSP. Therefore, we need to pay more attention to the public policy attributes of TSP. In particular, in legal terms, the issue of whether the interference caused by spatial planning to private property rights belongs to expropriation and whether administrative compensation should be made is a hot topic of discussion [107]. Therefore, we need to improve the legal content and procedures of spatial planning to ensure the effective use of planning power, and at the same time, we need to conduct a more cautious examination of spatial planning to avoid excessive planning and regulation. In the practice of China’s TSP, the delimitation of the urban growth boundary, permanent prime farmland red line, and ecological protection red line must be a process of constant compromise and coordination. If this is ignored, the self-considered scientific plan will eventually be difficult to implement. It should be emphasized that negotiation and compromise must be based on scientific principles for policy optimization.

At the same time, we should realize that the ecological and environmental effects of TSD are not completely unacceptable. We need to carry out ecological and environmental impact assessments on TSD activities and strive to control the impact within an acceptable range based on eco-friendly development methods. What cannot be ignored objectively is that a large number of ancient and continuing agricultural development practices are widely praised as models of harmonious coexistence between man and nature, such as the Honghe Hani Rice Terraces in Yunnan, China. The Hani people developed an ecosystem of “forests, villages, terraced fields and water systems” by taking advantage of the local natural conditions, and based on this system, sustainable terraced farming was established [108]. More importantly, through the creative development of natural resources such as marginal and degraded land, a win-win result of replenishing cultivated land and protecting the ecological environment can be achieved. China’s solutions to food shortages, such as the gully reinforcement project in Yan’an City, Shaanxi Province, the development and protection of wetland highlands in the Xinghua City, Jiangsu Province, and the terraced field project in Zhuanglang County, Gansu Province, have addressed both ecological crises and resource scarcity, providing a reference for the rest of the world that is currently under the threat of both ecological and food security [109].

Because this paper is a framework discussion on TSP, territory spatial patterns, and human-environment interactions rather than a methodological study, it does not fully discuss the specific implementation of TSP. At the same time, this paper mainly uses literature review, so the quantitative assessment of ecological environment impacts is not the focus of this paper but can be a future research direction. Finally, this paper takes the occurrence and development of the epidemic into the connotation of human-environment interactions, which expands the scope of the current research. However, the connotation of human-environment interactions should be further expanded, especially when the new trend of never-before-seen human-computer interactions arising from the rise of artificial intelligence, supported by computer technology and data science, emerges. Human-computer interactions will be deeply embedded in the connotations of the extension of the relationship between humans and the environment, providing an important tool for future governance.

7. Conclusions

Starting from the connotations of the human-environment interactions formed by the dynamic cycle of TSD and resource and environmental feedback, this paper embeds the relationship between humans and germs into human-environment interactions, and reflects on common challenges faced by human beings, such as major epidemics and climate change, and countermeasures. In the process of human development and the utilization of territory, germs are also spread. Therefore, it is of broader and practical significance to internalize the response to the epidemic in the handling of the relationship between humans and the environment. The ecological and environmental responses caused by the unreasonable development and utilization of territory, especially agricultural development and urban expansion, reflect the intense conflicts in human-environment interactions. Based on the theory and practice of spatial planning, TSD can adjust the relationship between humans and the environment through mechanisms such as coordination and control, adaptation and mitigation, and remediation and restoration. The essence of spatial planning is to optimize the allocation of the territory spatial pattern, which is the result of the interaction between people and between people and the environment: that is, the mapping of the relationship between humans and the environment. Actively constructing territory spatial patterns and spatial planning guides is a prudent human behavior in territorial development toward positively adjusting the human-environment relationship and mitigating their inherent conflicts.

Therefore, based on the effect of TSP on the dynamic construction of the territory spatial pattern, this paper analyzed the practice of China’s TSP reform from three aspects: planning management system reform, planning system innovation, and planning zoning reconstruction. The top-down spatial planning system innovation of the Chinese government could offer valuable insights for countries at similar developmental stages and facing analogous challenges. The construction of a scientific and secure territory spatial pattern requires the support of systematic TSP, which will be an important direction for future theoretical explorations and practical innovations. In the post-epidemic era, it is necessary to maintain a full and clear understanding of the consequences of human development and the utilization of territory space, strive to realize the transformation of development concepts and progress in governance technology, and promote the modernization and innovation of territory spatial governance systems and governance capabilities to achieve sustainable, long-lasting harmony between humans and the environment.