Land-Use Evolution and Driving Forces in Urban Fringe Archaeological Sites: A Case Study of the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums

Abstract

Archaeological sites located on the edge of growing cities often struggle to reconcile heritage protection with rapid development. To understand this tension, we examined a 50.83 km² zone around the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums in the Qin-Han New District. Using Landsat images from 1992, 2002, 2012, and 2022, this study applied supervised classification, land-use transfer matrices, and dynamic-degree analysis to trace three decades of land-use change. From 1992 to 2022, built-up land expanded by 29.85 percentage points, largely replacing farmland, which shrank by 35.64 percentage points and became fragmented. Forest cover gained a modest 5.78 percentage points and migrated eastward toward the mausoleums. Overall, urban growth followed a “spread–integrate–connect” pattern along major roads. This study interprets these trends through five interrelated drivers, including policy, planning, economy, population, and heritage protection, and proposes an integrated management model. The model links archaeological pre-assessment with land-use compatibility zoning and active community participation. Together, these measures offer a practical roadmap for balancing conservation and sustainable land management at imperial burial complexes and similar urban fringe heritage sites.

1. Introduction

1.1. Heritage Under Urban Development Pressure

Urban fringe archaeological sites are under escalating preservation pressure as urbanization accelerates [1,2]. These sites represent living cultural heritage that safeguards collective memory and material culture [3]. Their dual function in heritage retention and spatial development places them at the core of land-resource conflicts between urban and rural interests [4,5]. When city expansion and large-scale infrastructure encroach upon protected zones, the physical fabric and historical landscapes of heritage areas are frequently compromised [6,7]. Imperial mausoleums near capitals such as Xi’an and Luoyang reveal the severity of such conflicts generated by urban sprawl and industrial restructuring [8]. The Western Han imperial mausoleum cluster in Qin-Han New City (see Figure 1) exemplifies this tension and therefore serves as the study area. Urban fringe is a special region between urban and rural areas, and it is the most active and sensitive place in the process of urbanization. As a distinct yet coherent geographic entity, it undergoes rapid transformation and exhibits pronounced heterogeneity. By integrating multi-source data to trace land-use trajectories and uncover their drivers, researchers can formulate strategies that reconcile heritage conservation with regional development [9,10].

1.2. Concept Framework

A conceptual lens is needed to interpret land-use change in this setting. The first key concept is the urban fringe, a dynamic interface where land transitions rapidly from rural to urban under intense development pressure [11]. In China, this zone concentrates heterogeneous land mosaics, overlapping tenure, ecological fragility, and volatile growth [12]. The second concept is the archaeological site, now understood as a dynamic cultural landscape rather than a static relic. Early conservation following the 1964 Venice Charter focused on preserving the physical fabric [13], whereas current scholarship emphasizes cultural, social, and ecological roles that make heritage an active vessel of societal evolution [14]. Imperial tombs symbolize political authority, support ritual practice, and transmit collective memory [15,16]. The Western Han mausoleums integrate tangible elements, such as tumuli, burial chambers, funerary villages, outer pits, ritual architecture, with intangible components such as sacrificial rites, construction know-how, spiritual beliefs, and narrative traditions [17,18]. These intertwined attributes highlight the need for a data-driven approach capable of capturing both spatial and cultural dynamics.

Quantitative land-use research has advanced through remote sensing and geographic information systems. Multi-temporal Landsat imagery combined with supervised classification traces shifts in built-up, agricultural, and forest areas on urban edges [19,20,21,22,23]. Transfer matrices elucidate dominant conversion pathways, while dynamic-degree metrics measure annual change rates across land categories [24]. Explanatory studies commonly adopt a push–pull framework in which push factors, such as falling farm incomes and inadequate rural infrastructure, propel residents outward and pull factors, such as infrastructure investment and new employment prospects, draw capital and population toward fringe zones [25,26,27]. In China, reliance on land-sale revenues and intensive construction spending strengthens these pulls, whereas rural livelihood pressures amplify the pushes [25,28,29]. Yet a sole push–pull perspective overlooks how power relations and institutional arrangements shape land outcomes [30].

To address these gaps, production-of-space theory has been introduced, illuminating how state planning agendas, capital accumulation strategies, and community practices co-produce the geography of urban edges [31,32]. Land therefore emerges not merely as a resource but as a socially constructed space that is continually reshaped through policy texts, construction activities, and local agency [33]. Research shows that negotiations among diverse stakeholders ultimately determine whether land aligns with macro-level plans or micro-level practices [34,35]. Concurrently, cultural-landscape scholarship has transcended the “island” model of isolated monument protection by emphasizing stratification and vitality [36]. Stratification recognizes archaeological sites as palimpsests of natural, historical, and social layers, each contributing to present-day meanings [37], whereas vitality highlights the ongoing role of intangible elements, local narratives, ritual practices, and collective memories, in regenerating material remains [38,39]. UNESCO’s 2011 Historic Urban Landscape recommendation synthesizes tangible and intangible heritage into a unified governance framework, providing a theoretical foundation for integrated conservation in peri-urban archaeological zones [40,41]. Moreover, a growing body of literature adopts a spatial-justice lens when protection policies clash with market forces, as marginalized groups often lack the voice or power to influence outcomes [42]. This perspective underscores equitable participation, transparent information, and benefit sharing as essential metrics of conservation success [29]. Together, production-of-space, cultural-landscape, and spatial-justice perspectives provide the conceptual foundation for this study.

Applying this integrated framework to the Western Han mausoleums reveals concrete forms of spatial injustice and cultural-landscape disruption. Spatial deprivation is evident where high-value urban and industrial land encroaches on farmland and homesteads, while strict zoning prevents long-term residents from developing or managing their property. Unequal participation compounds the problem: planning, permitting, and compensation are dominated by agencies and developers, leaving villagers, when invited, only observer status without voting rights or full access to records. From a cultural-landscape view, the mausoleum belt once balanced a loess terrace and the Wei River fan with linear tumuli and long-standing sacrificial villages. That order has been fractured by a new airport link-road interchange that cuts the ritual avenue and by light-industrial warehouses that replace contiguous crop fields with irregular plots.

1.3. Research Aim and Questions

Despite substantive progress, few studies have merged push–pull forces, production-of-space, cultural-landscape principles, and spatial-justice concerns into a unified, quantitative monitoring scheme for peri-urban archaeological zones. This gap motivates a five-dimensional analysis encompassing policy, planning, economy, population, and heritage protection. Using multi-source data from satellite imagery, cadastral records, and statutory plans, the present study addresses three questions between 1992 and 2022 in the Western Han mausoleum area: How do archaeological landscapes at urban fringes respond to rapid urbanization along each of the five dimensions? How do those dimensions interact to influence land-use trajectories? How can land allocation be optimized to reconcile protection with development?

This work contributes in three ways. It constructs a thirty-year, high-resolution land-use dataset through the integration of remote sensing, GIS, and systematic field verification, thereby mapping the evolution from construction expansion to farmland loss and forest fluctuation. It operationalizes a five-dimensional framework that links macro-level systems with on-site practices. Finally, it proposes adaptable management measures that harmonies spatial planning with heritage requirements, offering transferable guidance for heritage conservation and sustainable land governance at comparable archaeological sites worldwide.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The site area of the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums in Qin-Han New City is located at the border between Xi’an City and Xianyang City, Shaanxi Province, China (108°45′–108°56′ E, 34°18′–34°27′ N), and is the core area for the construction of the “City of Culture” in the Xixian New District (Figure 1). Because this area lies immediately outside the contiguous built-up footprints of Xi’an and Xianyang, it functions as a classic urban fringe. The zone where rural farmland, township settlements, and emerging urban infrastructure intermix and undergo rapid conversion under metropolitan influence. Prior to its designation as Xixian New Area in January 2014, the landscape already displayed these fringe attributes, characterized by heterogeneous land mosaics, fragmented governance, and accelerating farmland-to-construction transformation. The study area covers six Western Han Imperial Mausoleums, namely Chang, An, Yi, Wei, Kang, and Yan, and their protection zones, with a total area of 50.83 km². Geographically, the area lies within the Loess Plateau region on the northern bank of the Wei River. It features a terrain that slopes from northwest to southeast, averaging approximately 500 m in elevation. It has a warm–temperate semi-humid climate and an average annual precipitation of 580 mm. As one of the largest and best-preserved groups of imperial mausoleums in China, this site group reflects the Western Han Dynasty’s “mausoleum system” and “mountain for mausoleum”. As one of China’s largest and best-preserved imperial mausoleum complexes, this site vividly embodies the Western Han Dynasty’s mausoleum system and its traditional concept of utilizing natural mountains as mausoleums. Such distinctive planning highlights the profound historical and cultural significance of the region.

The study area displays four characteristics. First, spatial conflict is pronounced because 53 per cent of the heritage zone overlaps the planned construction land of Qin-Han New City, demonstrating how urbanization encroaches upon heritage space. Second, land-use change results from the joint influence of government directives and market forces, leading to a complex set of driving factors. Third, at the initial observation point in 1992 and for many years before the creation of Xixian New District, the landscape met the classic definition of an urban fringe. Farmland and rural settlements dominated the terrain, while isolated built-up clusters appeared as points or as loose ribbons along transport corridors. Although parts of the area have become urban since the new district was launched, the mausoleums and their buffer zones, especially the transitional belts between protected tomb precincts and new development plots, still face strong expansion pressure. The enduring presence of land-use conflict, heritage preservation challenges, and tension between conservation and development therefore confirms the area’s fringe identity. Fourth, continuous archaeological investigation and a record of high-resolution remote sensing imagery provide a solid data foundation for long-term quantitative analysis.

2.2. Data Source and Collection

This study employs a multi-source data fusion approach, specifically integrating data as detailed below. This study employs a multi-source data fusion approach that systematically integrates each step from defining the study area through spatial analysis to processing land-use data. The workflow includes data acquisition, processing techniques, and software platforms as shown in Figure 2, offering a structured theoretical framework that facilitates a detailed exploration of analytical methods throughout each research stage.

The four temporal milestones (1992, 2002, 2012, and 2022) coincide with key shifts in China’s cultural heritage policy. They mark, respectively, the introduction of heritage conservation principles in 1992, the revision of core legislation in 2002, the strategic transformation of archaeological practice in 2012, and the launch of a comprehensive planning and assessment regime in 2022. This decadal scheme also tracks major stages in Qin-Han New City’s growth: early urbanization, deepening of the Western Development policy, creation and rapid construction of the new district, and appraisal of its maturity. Moreover, it provides a coherent framework for observing the principal transitions in China’s contemporary heritage and archaeological governance. The next section details the underlying data structure.

(1)

Remote sensing images and preprocessing

The primary dataset is derived from Landsat satellite imagery, with acquisition dates corresponding to 4 May 1992; 20 May 2002; 25 June 2012; and 30 May 2022, respectively, with the orbit number of (127, 36), and maintaining a cloud cover of ≤5%. The imagery underwent preprocessing using ENVI 5.2, which included radiometric calibration, atmospheric correction, and image clipping to precisely extract the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area.

(2)

Remote sensing extraction of land-use information

ENVI5.2 is used to extract land-use information from the remote sensing images of the study area using supervised classification based on the maximum likelihood method. Observing the images of different bands after preprocessing, the more obvious patches in the study area are construction land, cultivated land, and forest land, which are basically consistent with the results of the field survey. Here, the site area land is categorized into construction land, cultivated land, and forest land. It should be noted that, firstly, the study area includes a variety of construction land types, and since it is difficult to distinguish the specific land use of each land use by satellite imagery alone, the above land uses are uniformly categorized as construction land. Second, there are also a few garden plots in the study area. Depending on the specific crops grown, garden land may show characteristics close to those of cultivated land or forest land in satellite imagery. Considering the small proportion of garden land within the study area and its weak influence on the analysis results, the garden land within the study area is categorized as arable land or forest land according to the type of crops planted, e.g., fruit trees with a certain height are categorized as forest land, and low crops are categorized as arable land.

To ensure the accuracy of the land-use classification, two corrections were made to the classification results. First, an initial visual interpretation was performed based on sample point validation and cross-comparison of multiple spectral bands using ENVI 5.2 software. In this process, particular attention was paid to the geometric characteristics of classified patches. Specifically, a perimeter-to-area ratio threshold greater than 1.8 was applied as an empirical guideline to identify irregular or fragmented land-use boundaries, thereby refining the classification results. Secondly, the classification results after the first correction. The classification results of each period were compared and verified with the current land-use maps in the urban planning and land-use planning of the same period, as well as the Google Earth map, and combined with the results of field observation and interviews, the classification results were corrected to a certain extent. The accuracy after correction can reach more than 80% [43].

(3)

Spatial analysis and data processing of land-use information

The raster images of the study area decoded from satellite images were imported into ArcGIS 10.6, and operations such as reclassification, raster-to-vector, fusion, intersection, etc. were carried out, and the resulting data were processed by Microsoft Excel 2016 and R software (version 4.5.0) to derive the relevant data of the area of each land-use type in different periods [44].

2.3. Methodology

(1)

Land-use transfer matrix

The land-use transfer matrix represents the conversion status between different land uses in a certain period. In the land-use transfer matrix (

Table 1. Schematic land-use transfer matrix.

		T1
		A1	A2	…	An
T2	A1	P11	P21	…	Pn1
	A2	P12	P22	…	Pn2
	…	…	…	…	…
	An	P1n	P2n	…	Pnn

), the rows indicate the land-use types (A1, A2… An) in the T1 period, and the columns indicate the land-use types (A1, A2… An) in the T2 period. Pab indicates the area of the conversion of land-use type a to land-use type b in the T1-T2 period. This matrix enables a systematic quantification of both the direction and magnitude of land-use conversions and has been widely used in remote sensing and GIS-based land change studies [45]. In particular, the transfer matrix method facilitates the identification of dominant transitions, such as conversions from cultivated land to construction land, while also accounting for the persistence or resilience of specific land categories over time [46,47]. The increasing integration of land-transfer matrices with spatial–temporal analysis and predictive models, such as the GM (1, 1) model or machine learning classifiers, enhances their utility in dynamic urban planning and heritage landscape management contexts [48].

(2)

Land-use dynamic attitude

The attitude of land-use dynamics indicates the change in the quantity of a certain kind of land in the study area within a certain time range, which can reflect the intensity of the change in land-use structure. The formula is as follows:

$$LUDI={\displaystyle \frac{U_b-U_a}{U_a\cdot T^{-1}}}\times 100\%$$

(1)

where LUDI indicates the dynamic attitude of a certain type of land use; U_a and U_b indicate the area of a certain type of land use at the beginning and the end of the study period, respectively; and T is the length of time of the study period. This metric is widely used in remote sensing and GIS research to quantify land-use change rates and assess development pressures or conservation effectiveness [49].

(3)

Land-use depletion degree

The degree of land-use depletion indicates the extent to which a certain type of land is consumed in a unit of time.

$$LUC={\displaystyle \frac{C_{ab}}{U_a\cdot T^{-1}}}\times 100\%$$

(2)

where LUC denotes the degree of depletion of a certain type of land use; C_ab denotes the sum of the areas of a certain type of land transformed into other types of land from the beginning to the end of the study; U_a denotes the area of a certain type of land at the beginning of the study; and T is the length of the study period. This depletion metric is useful for identifying high-risk land categories and for informing urban sustainability assessments [50,51].

3. Results and Analysis

3.1. Temporal Evolution of Land Use

Between 1992 and 2022, the land-use patterns in the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area underwent significant transformations (

Table 2. Land-use structure of the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area (unit: km²).

Type	1992		2002		2012		2022
	Area	Proportion	Area	Proportion	Area	Proportion	Area	Proportion
Farmland	45.03	88.58%	37.79	74.34%	34.73	68.32%	26.91	52.94%
Forest land	1.36	2.67%	4.16	8.18%	6.54	12.86%	4.29	8.45%
Construction land	4.45	8.75%	8.88	17.48%	9.57	18.82%	19.63	38.61%
Total	50.83	100%	50.83	100%	50.83	100%	50.83	100%

and Figure 3). In terms of quantitative changes, farmland experienced a dramatic decline, shrinking from 45.03 km² (88.58%) to 26.91 km² (52.94%), a reduction of 35.64%. The most rapid decrease occurred between 2012 and 2022, with an annual loss rate of −0.78 km²/year, indicating increasing urban expansion pressure in the later stages of urbanization. Concurrently, built-up land exhibited substantial growth, expanding from 4.45 km² (8.75%) in 1992 to 19.63 km² (38.61%) in 2022, marking an increase of 29.85%. Notably, the growth rate between 2012 and 2022 was 2.3 times that of the previous two decades, highlighting the intense encroachment of urban development on heritage spaces. Forest land, on the other hand, demonstrated fluctuating trends. During the initial period (1992–2002), its extent increased significantly (+2.80 km²) due to the implementation of the Grain for Green policy. However, in the later period (2012–2022), forest land experienced a noticeable decline due to urban expansion, and by 2022, its area was nearly equivalent to that of 2002.

The temporal evolution of land use can be categorized into three distinct phases. From 1992 to 2002, the region underwent a phase of rapid transformation, characterized by a substantial reduction in farmland while built-up land and forest land expanded. Between 2002 and 2012, the rate of change decelerated, and different land-use types tended to reach a relative balance; however, the overall trend remained consistent, with continued farmland loss alongside increases in built-up and forest land. The period from 2012 to 2022 marked an era of accelerated urbanization, where farmland loss intensified, built-up land expanded rapidly, and forest land exhibited a downward trajectory. These findings reveal the growing pressures exerted by urban expansion on land resources, particularly in the vicinity of heritage sites, underscoring the urgent need for integrated land-management strategies to balance conservation with development imperatives.

The calculation of the Land-Use Dynamic Index (LUDI) and Land-Use Consumption Index (LUC) reveals distinct trends in the transformation of land-use categories over the study period (

Table 3. Dynamic changes in land use of the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area.

Type	Land-Use Dynamics			Land-Use Reduction Degree
	1992–2002	2002–2012	2012–2022	1992–2002	2002–2012	2012–2022
Farmland	−1.61%	−0.81%	−2.25%	1.94%	2.92%	5.06%
Forest land	20.67%	5.71%	−3.43%	33.87%	45.47%	41.90%
Construction Land	9.98%	0.77%	10.51%	2.54%	5.65%	0.81%

). Farmland consistently exhibited a negative LUDI across all time intervals, indicating a continuous decline, with values of −1.61% from 1992 to 2002 and −2.25% from 2012 to 2022. Simultaneously, the LUC for farmland demonstrated a gradual increase, suggesting a stable yet accelerating trend of conversion, which underscores the persistent pressure of urban expansion on agricultural land. Built-up land, in contrast, maintained a consistently positive LUDI, reflecting sustained expansion, with an increase from 9.98% in 1992–2002 to 10.51% in 2012–2022. However, its LUC approached zero in the later stage, indicating a transition from extensive outward growth to spatial optimization and a more stabilized development pattern. The dynamic evolution of forest land exhibited a fluctuating trend, with an initial positive LUDI followed by a subsequent decline, while its LUC remained relatively high throughout the study period. This pattern suggests that forest land was influenced by a complex interplay of policy-driven afforestation, industrial restructuring, and urban encroachment.

3.2. Spatial Differentiation of Land-Use Patterns

The annual land-use data were spatially overlaid in ArcGIS 10.6, and land-use transition matrices were established for 1992–2002, 2002–2012, and 2012–2022 (

Table 4. Land-use transfer matrix for the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area from 2000 to 2010 (unit: km²).

Type		1992
		Farmland	Forest Land	Construction Land	Total
2002	Farmland	36.29	0.73	0.76	37.79
	Forest land	3.71	0.31	0.14	4.16
	Construction Land	5.03	0.32	3.54	8.88
	Total	45.03	1.36	4.45	50.83

,

Table 5. Land-use transfer matrix for the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area from 2002 to 2012 (unit: km²).

Type		2002
		Farmland	Forest Land	Construction Land	Total
2012	Farmland	29.25	2.88	2.59	34.73
	Forest land	5.17	0.75	0.62	6.54
	Construction Land	3.37	0.53	5.68	9.57
	Total	37.79	4.16	8.88	50.83

and

Table 6. Land-use transfer matrix for the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area from 2012 to 2022 (unit: km²).

Type		2012
		Farmland	Forest Land	Construction Land	Total
2022	Farmland	23.05	3.14	0.71	26.91
	Forest land	3.02	1.26	0.01	4.29
	Construction Land	8.65	2.14	8.84	19.63
	Total	34.73	6.54	9.57	50.83

). The spatial evolution of regional land use primarily exhibited the following three characteristics.

Fragmentation of Farmland: Initially, farmland was continuously distributed across large areas. However, with the expansion of settlements and urban infrastructure (e.g., transportation corridors), the previously continuous farmland became increasingly fragmented, forming dispersed patches and remaining only within core protected areas. Table 4 illustrates that some farmland had already been converted into built-up land and forest land in the early years, while Figure 4 visually depicts the emerging fragmentation pattern of farmland.

Expansion and Connectivity of Built-up Land: Built-up land initially appeared as scattered patches. However, as urbanization accelerated, these patches expanded outward along major transportation corridors and urban boundaries, gradually forming a more integrated spatial structure. Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7 show that not only did the area of built-up land significantly increase, but its spatial configuration also evolved from scattered clusters into large, contiguous urbanized zones. Data from Table 5 and Table 6 further confirm this trend, revealing the transformation of built-up land from localized expansion in the early stage to overall connectivity and spatial consolidation in the later stage.

Localized Clustering and Eastward Shift of Forest Land: Initially, forest land was sporadically distributed and interspersed with farmland. Due to policies such as the Grain for Green program and adjustments in regional agricultural structures, forest land gradually formed localized clusters in the mid-period, resulting in several distinct concentration areas. However, in the later stage, urban expansion encroached upon both farmland and portions of forest land, leading to a reduction in forested areas (Figure 7) and an evident eastward shift in their spatial distribution. Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6 indicate that while forest land initially expanded, it later declined, reflecting a broader spatial restructuring process.

Thereby, the spatial evolution of land use in this area can be characterized as follows: Initially, the landscape was dominated by contiguous farmland with a relatively homogeneous distribution. Over time, farmland underwent continuous fragmentation, forming scattered patches, while built-up land expanded outward, gradually clustering into larger, connected urban areas. Concurrently, forest land experienced localized aggregation and an eastward shift. This transformation process not only highlights the interactions between different land-use types but also reflects the combined effects of urbanization, infrastructure development, and policy-driven land adjustments.

3.3. Comparative Analysis of Land-Use Change Extremes in Imperial Mausoleums

Based on a composite ranking of three quantitative indicators, built-up land expansion, cropland reduction, and net woodland change, Wei and Chang were identified as representing two extremes of land-use transformation within the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums sites between 1992 and 2022 (Figure 8). Wei showed the most significant changes overall, with built-up land increasing by 45.10%, cropland declining by 43.85%, and woodland experiencing a slight net increase of 1.24%. In contrast, Chang was relatively stable, with built-up land growth limited to 20.58%, cropland declining by 29.87%, and woodland area rising more substantially by 9.28%.

The Chang Imperial Mausoleum Site exhibited a relatively stable land-use trajectory, marked by continuous ecological restoration (Figure 9a and Figure 10a). In the first phase (1992–2002), built-up land increased slightly by 0.67 km², cropland decreased by 2.16 km², and woodland expanded from 0.41 km² to 0.75 km². In the second phase (2002–2012), cropland retirement and wetland rehabilitation projects helped maintain a dynamic equilibrium in land use, as the growth of built-up land slowed significantly. In the third phase (2012–2022), small-scale developments emerged from visitor facilities and village renewal, following a dispersed “point-band” pattern. Despite these changes, the core cropland–woodland mosaic remained intact, reflecting the effectiveness of strict permitting policies and community co-management in limiting unregulated expansion and strengthening ecological corridors.

In contrast, at the Wei Imperial Mausoleum site area, land-use evolution occurred in three phases: rapid expansion, linear connectivity, and high-intensity consolidation (Figure 9b and Figure 10b). First, from 1992 to 2002, the built-up area expanded rapidly from 0.76 km² to 3.54 km², averaging more than 27% annually. This growth corresponded closely with Xi’an’s northward urban expansion strategy and the rapid establishment of the Zhouling Industrial Park. Second, between 2002 and 2012, built-up land expanded linearly by 2.59 km² along transportation corridors following the construction of the Yinchuan–Xi’an high-speed railway and the G70 Fuyin Expressway, demonstrating an axial growth pattern. Third, from 2012 to 2022, urbanization and industrial agglomeration led to an additional built-up area expansion of 8.84 km². As a result, the core protection zone became contiguous with surrounding towns, cropland nearly disappeared, and woodland was fragmented by further development. These changes highlight the intense pressure from major infrastructure projects and land-intensive industries.

The divergent land-use trajectories at Chang and Wei are shaped by three key factors. First, differences in transportation infrastructure and industrial layout played a major role. Wei capitalized on high-speed rail and expressways to develop rapid transit corridors, attracting land-intensive industries. In contrast, Chang’s limited transportation connectivity supported only small-scale, tourism-oriented development. Second, ecological restoration and community governance differed significantly. Chang actively carried out cropland retirement, reforestation, and wetland restoration, with strong village participation in homestead renewal. In contrast, Wei’s community engagement was limited mainly to site patrols, which constrained long-term land conservation efforts. Third, regional differences in economic development and land policy also contributed. Wei experienced intense land conversion driven by rapid urbanization and industrialization. In contrast, Chang adopted a stable, institutionalized framework oriented toward ecological and cultural tourism, resulting in more controlled development. Together, these factors shaped the markedly different land-use evolution trajectories of the two mausoleum sites.

3.4. Summary of Findings

The preceding results elucidate how thirty years of rapid urbanization have reshaped land use in the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area. Three core patterns emerge. First, farmland underwent continuous contraction, declining by a total of 35.64%, with 72.3% of the lost area converted into built-up land. Second, construction land expanded following a corridor-oriented pattern of “outward expansion, integration, and connectivity,” increasing by 29.85% and forming continuous urban clusters along major transportation corridors. Third, forest land showed a policy-induced rise followed by urban-driven decline, ending with a modest net gain (2.93 km²) yet a marked eastward spatial shift and internal heterogeneity.

Spatially, farmland has fragmented into isolated patches, built-up land has consolidated into linked blocks, and forest land has migrated and re-aggregated. Dynamic indices confirm these trends: farmland’s negative LUDI deepened over time, built-up area maintained a consistently positive but stabilizing LUDI, and forest land’s LUDI fluctuated with policy cycles. A micro-scale comparison underscores site-level divergence: Wei exemplifies high-intensity transformation, whereas Chang retains a conservation-oriented mosaic.

Collectively, these findings reveal that policy reforms, infrastructure-led planning, economic restructuring, population influx, and uneven heritage protection interact in a nonlinear feedback system that favors development over conservation. Understanding these intertwined dynamics provides the empirical foundation for the ensuing discussion, which evaluates their implications for reconciling heritage preservation with sustainable urban growth.

4. Discussion

4.1. Reflections on Heritage Integrity and Urban Expansion Conflict

The Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site exemplifies the intensifying conflict between cultural heritage preservation and rapid urban expansion. Over the past three decades, farmland has been steadily lost to expanding built-up areas along major transportation corridors, fragmenting the archaeological landscape despite the presence of conservation policies. This encroachment has compromised the historical environment and now threatens the integrity of the mausoleum sites.

The primary challenge is a spatial policy misalignment: protected heritage zones exist, yet adjacent lands are often designated for urban or industrial development, leading to conflicting land-use objectives [8]. In practice, economic incentives and population growth still drive land conversion and weaken the ability of heritage regulations to curb expansion. Infrastructure projects, including highways and high-speed rail, intensify these tensions and make it harder to preserve the cultural landscape’s authenticity. The concept of authenticity as emphasized in UNESCO’s Guidance on the Protection and Management of Archaeological Heritage encompasses the integrity of physical structures, the continuity of spatial settings, the persistence of cultural context, and the experiential sense of place [52,53,54].

Yet each of these aspects is challenged by development. First, subsurface construction (e.g., blasting, soil compaction, ground subsidence) can damage archaeological stratigraphy and material integrity [55]. Second, surface infrastructure elements disrupt the historic relationship between the site and its surroundings, breaking spatial continuity [56]. Third, modern intrusions like traffic noise and visual clutter erode the site’s sense of place, diminishing the immersive experience that is vital for public engagement with heritage [57].

Similar heritage-development conflicts occur worldwide. In the U.K., the controversial A303 tunnel project near Stonehenge, though designed to reduce visual intrusion from the road, raised widespread concerns among archaeologists and local groups. Critics warned that ventilation shafts and tunnel portals would cause irreversible disruption to the prehistoric ritual landscape and its ceremonial alignments [58]. Similarly, the HS2 high-speed railway project has been criticized for its large-scale and long-duration construction, which poses significant risks to ancient field patterns, burial mounds, and historic pathways along its route [59].

The Western Han mausoleum belt is also exposed to incremental infrastructure pressure. In the Yan sub-district (Figure 1a), minor access roads, paved farm tracks, and utility lines have steadily encroached upon the buffer, and small housing clusters have appeared along these corridors (Figure 11). Although small in scale, these linear and nodal facilities interrupt sightlines, generate continuous traffic, and create impermeable patches that fragment the landscape and hamper enforcement of the protection plan.

The Western Han site must therefore address these challenges, particularly the spatial-justice and cultural-landscape issues outlined in the Introduction. In response, international charters now guide the sustainable management of archaeological sites, especially those embedded in living cultural landscapes. The 2005 Vienna Memorandum and the 2011 UNESCO Historic Urban Landscape Recommendation mark key shifts in conservation thinking, stressing the dynamic link between heritage sites and their socio-cultural and environmental settings. Both documents advocate a landscape-based approach that embeds heritage values in urban planning, infrastructure development, and community-engagement strategies. The ICOMOS Cultural Tourism Charters (1976–2021) further stress that archaeological heritage management must be grounded in local values and cultural diversity. They promote responsible tourism to protect archaeological landscapes while fostering community resilience and cultural continuity.

By viewing archaeological sites as parts of living cultural landscapes, these charters expand preservation to include community engagement, socioeconomic development, and cultural authenticity. This integrative vision helps reconcile heritage conservation with modern infrastructural and urban demands. Without an integrated plan that embeds heritage conservation, rapid land-use change will continue to threaten the historical continuity and ecological resilience of archaeological landscapes. Adaptive land-management strategies are therefore essential to balance urban-growth pressure with long-term heritage protection [60,61].

4.2. Comprehensive Analysis of the Five-Dimensional Driving Mechanism

The transformation of land use in the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area is a result of the interplay of five driving forces: policy, planning, economic development, population growth, and heritage protection. Over the past three decades, these factors have shaped spatial restructuring in three successive stages, each reflecting a shifting balance between development pressures and conservation needs.

• High-speed change period (1992–2002)

During the first decade, development forces overwhelmingly dominated while heritage constraints were minimal. The 1999 Western Development Strategy removed earlier restrictions on northward urban growth in Xianyang, accelerating the conversion of agricultural land via proactive land leasing and infrastructure investment. Infrastructure expansion was a planning priority [62]. Under this macro-policy framework, infrastructure projects, such as the Airport Expressway and Xian–Song Road, were prioritized, activating land development along key transportation corridors [63]. Concurrently, township and village enterprises expanded rapidly, creating a substantial demand for industrial land, which placed additional pressure on agricultural areas [64]. The ongoing rural population growth further intensified land-use competition, as village settlements increasingly encroached upon arable land [65]. Despite the initiation of the Grain for Green policy, heritage protection remained passive, and zoning regulations were not strictly enforced, although significant conflicts between conservation needs and development pressures had not yet fully emerged. Thus, during this period, the interplay of the five dimensions followed a clear logic of policy-led, planning-guided axis development, responsive economic and demographic growth, and lagging heritage protection, reflecting a strong prioritization of regional economic expansion.

• Dynamic equilibrium period (2002–2012)

During this period, policies were partially tightened, leading planning practices to strike a more effective balance between development and conservation. At the national level, stronger regulations emerged concerning farmland preservation and heritage conservation [66]. Specifically, revisions to China’s Land Management Law and updates to local master plans introduced stricter land-use controls, enhancing spatial governance rigidity [67]. Industrial development transitioned toward intensification, shifting land-use priorities from continuous expansion to optimizing existing land stocks, thus reducing new land development pressures. Additionally, with rural populations increasingly migrating outwards, the demand for new residential areas slowed. In terms of heritage protection, archaeological research findings began to influence planning decisions directly, and the Grain for Green policy was expanded to align cultural heritage preservation with ecological restoration objectives [68]. Consequently, this stage exhibited a buffering balance characterized by boundary-focused planning controls, integrated heritage and ecological restoration, stable economic growth, and alleviated demographic pressures, ushering the regional land-use system into a temporary state of equilibrium.

• Accelerated Urbanization Period (2012–2022)

The most recent decade saw development pressures surge again, destabilizing the previous equilibrium. The resident population increased from 270,839 in 2010 to 303,516 in 2020, reflecting a total growth of 32,677 over ten years and an average annual growth rate of 1.15%, which is considered stable [69]. The regional GDP rose from CNY 26.6 billion in 2012 to CNY 34.4 billion in 2016 [70]. Since 2017, following the administrative transition of the six Western Han Imperial Mausoleums from Xianyang’s Weicheng District to Qin-Han New City, the area has maintained an average annual GDP growth rate of approximately 8%, reaching CNY 14.543 billion in 2022 [71]. This division of jurisdiction marks two distinct economic stages: pre-2017 (under Xianyang) and post-2017 (under Qin-Han New City). Against this backdrop, the dual pressures of economic growth and demographic expansion disrupted the equilibrium among the five driving dimensions. In particular, land-driven fiscal incentives, greatly intensified following the official approval of Xixian New District in 2014, exerted structural pressure on heritage conservation goals [72]. Rapid growth in the logistics and manufacturing industries further heightened demand for industrial land, accelerating farmland conversion. Simultaneously, an influx of migrants increased the pressure for residential and infrastructure development. Heritage conservation measures struggled to respond effectively; dynamic zoning adjustments fell behind urban development demands, and local initiatives such as the fallow land projects faced operational challenges. By the end of this stage, the five-dimensional system was severely imbalanced. This manifested as a largely uncontrolled pattern of fringe urban expansion dominated by economic and demographic forces, with planning coordination compromised and heritage protection insufficient.

Notably, the analysis reveals a nuanced spatial outcome behind these aggregate trends (shown in

Table 7. Comparison of the five-dimensional driving mechanism of the three stages of spatial and temporal land-use evolution in the site area of the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site.

Period	Dominant Factors	Interaction Pattern	Land-Use Response
High-speed change period (1992–2002)	Policy + Economy	Policy liberalized land transfer; economic demand drove extensive expansion	Construction land dispersed along transportation corridors; large farmland blocks became fragmented
Dynamic equilibrium period (2002–2012)	Planning + Heritage Protection	Planning temporarily paused northern urban expansion; heritage protection policies partially restrained development	Construction land consolidated into clustered areas; forest land concentrated around core mausoleums
Accelerated urbanization period (2012–2022)	Economy + Population + Policy	Combined effect of land-based finance and population pressure; policy tacitly allowed encroachment into protected zones	Construction land expanded in contiguous patches; forest land shifted eastward; farmland remained only within protected zones

). Within the core mausoleum protection zones, strict “no-construction” rules and reforestation incentives effectively curbed new development and even supported some forest regeneration. However, in the surrounding buffer and transition areas, the absence of equally stringent controls, combined with aggressive land-financing practices and post-2014 population spillover, allowed continued encroachment onto farmland and open space. In effect, formal conservation regulations remained largely confined to the core zones and failed to safeguard the broader cultural landscape from urban incursions.

The evolution across these phases demonstrates that classical push–pull dynamics of urbanization explain only part of the process. Equally important are the institutional and spatial planning dimensions, as highlighted by production-of-space theory and the way heritage is conceptualized in development. The second phase showed that proactive state intervention and a cultural landscape approach. For example, linking heritage conservation with ecological restoration. This kind of approach can slow land conversion, but the third phase revealed that without inclusive governance, market-driven forces will reassert themselves. In particular, the minimal involvement of local communities in land-use decisions, which could be a clear spatial-justice concern, meant that those most affected had little influence on outcomes, further tilting the balance toward unchecked development. These insights reinforce the need for a more holistic strategy to reconcile heritage preservation with urban expansion.

4.3. Implications for Policy Adjustments: A Composite Management Model

To address ongoing land-use conflicts and challenges in heritage conservation, this study proposes an integrated management model that seeks to align cultural heritage protection with urban development through institutional, scientific, and participatory approaches. The model incorporates archaeological pre-assessment, land-use compatibility analysis, and community engagement, ensuring that conservation goals are systematically embedded into regional development strategies.

4.3.1. Archaeological Pre-Assessment Mechanism

The archaeological pre-assessment mechanism acts as a crucial preemptive tool for heritage protection, especially amid rapid urbanization. It helps reduce the risk of irreversible damage to subsurface cultural relics from construction activities. It requires a comprehensive archaeological investigation and assessment prior to any land-use changes or construction, ensuring that development aligns with heritage preservation objectives. The process begins by identifying assessment zones based on urban planning and land-use policies. It then employs methods such as literature review, field surveys, geophysical prospecting, and drilling to detect potential cultural remains. Discovered artifacts are evaluated by experts to determine their historical, artistic, and scientific significance. Based on these findings, suitable protection measures are developed. Depending on assessment results and project requirements, conservation strategies, such as on-site preservation, relocation, or excavation, are proposed. The pre-assessment report is required for land-use change approvals, ensuring that heritage considerations are fully integrated into planning decisions. Effective implementation requires coordination among heritage, planning, natural resource, and construction agencies to strengthen data sharing and interdepartmental communication. Additionally, building the capacity of archaeological professionals and improving legal frameworks establishes a solid foundation for integrating heritage conservation into urban and land-use planning.

4.3.2. Land-Use Compatibility Framework

A land-use compatibility framework should be developed through a tiered zoning system, delineating core heritage zones, buffer zones, and transition zones, each with specific development restrictions and management requirements. This structured approach controls development intensity while embedding conservation principles into urban planning and land-management policies, ensuring the coexistence of economic development and heritage preservation [73].

The process begins with a detailed assessment of current land use within the heritage area, identifying major land-use types and their spatial distribution. An evaluation of the compatibility between various land-use types is then conducted, aligning conservation needs with regional development goals. Based on these findings, differentiated regulatory measures are formulated. These include strict limitations on industrial and large-scale commercial development in core heritage zones and controlled development strategies in general protection areas. A dynamic monitoring and evaluation mechanism should be implemented to periodically assess policy effectiveness, revise zoning regulations, and enhance the adaptability of the framework. This ensures long-term effectiveness of land-resource management in the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area, providing a sustainable model for balancing heritage conservation and regional development.

4.3.3. Community and Stakeholder Participation Mechanism

To ensure the long-term effectiveness and equity of conservation efforts, it is essential to establish participatory planning mechanisms that actively involve local communities and diverse stakeholders. A key step is to form community-based heritage committees composed of village representatives, cultural heritage experts, and planning officials. These committees would meet regularly to review land-use proposals and discuss the findings of archaeological pre-assessments, providing grassroots feedback in the decision-making process [74]. In parallel, tripartite coordination groups (including local government authorities, developers, and academic experts) should be set up to translate technical assessment results into practical planning guidelines and to oversee their implementation [75]. To further incentivize community engagement, local development initiatives that link economic benefits with heritage preservation, such as eco-tourism and cultural and creative industries, should be encouraged. When residents can gain financial or social benefits from protecting heritage, it creates a positive synergy that fosters long-term public participation and reinforces the dual goals of conservation and development [76,77].

A multi-tiered engagement network is also recommended. On one level, digital platforms can disseminate project information, collect public feedback, and provide timely responses to local concerns [78]. On another level, partnerships with civil society organizations and volunteer groups can support on-the-ground activities. These include community-led heritage patrols, monitoring of site conditions, and workshops that equip residents with basic archaeological knowledge and planning participation skills [79]. Economic incentives will further strengthen these efforts. For example, a dedicated “Community Heritage Protection Fund” could reward residents for contributions such as volunteer monitoring, tour guiding, or the preservation of traditional crafts, thereby building social capital and encouraging sustained stewardship of heritage resources [80].

Finally, a performance-based evaluation and incentive system should be introduced. This “community heritage performance framework” would track indicators such as participation rates, adoption of local proposals, satisfaction levels, and economic outcomes. Annual performance reports should be publicly released, with recognition and financial support awarded to exemplary communities, organizations, and individuals [81,82]. By institutionalizing this kind of feedback loop, heritage governance can become more transparent and inclusive, building a robust social foundation for long-term conservation and sustainable urban development.

5. Conclusions

This study systematically analyzes the spatiotemporal evolution and driving mechanisms of land-use transformation in the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums site area of Qin-Han New City from 1992 to 2022, using multi-source remote sensing data and spatial analytical methods. The findings reveal distinct trends and underlying dynamics shaping land-use changes in the region.

The land-use evolution follows a distinct trajectory characterized by continuous farmland loss, corridor-based expansion of built-up area, and fluctuating eastward shifts in forest land. Over the past three decades, farmland area has declined by 35.64%, with 72.3% of the converted land transformed into built-up areas. This transition was accompanied by increasing landscape fragmentation driven by urbanization. Built-up area expanded along major transportation corridors, following an outward expansion–integration–connectivity pattern, with a total increase of 29.85%. Forest land initially expanded due to the Grain for Green policy but later contracted under urban encroachment, with its spatial center shifting eastward. By the end of the study period, forest land showed a net increase of 2.93 km². However, its spatial distribution exhibited significant heterogeneity, reflecting the complex interaction of conservation policies and urban expansion pressures.

The multi-dimensional driving framework highlights the coupled effects of policy, planning, economy, population, and heritage conservation. Macroeconomic policies, including rural land system reforms and the Western Development Strategy, accelerated farmland conversion to non-agricultural uses through institutional incentives. Planning decisions, such as the establishment of Xixian New District and the expansion of transportation networks, redefined spatial boundaries and promoted the agglomeration of built-up areas. Economic growth and industrial restructuring increased demand for industrial and logistics land, while population growth and urban migration drove the expansion of residential areas. Although heritage conservation efforts, such as cemetery greening and protective zoning, contributed to slowing farmland loss, they remained under constant pressure from urban expansion, highlighting the ongoing conflict between development and preservation.

Resolving the conflict between heritage conservation and urban expansion requires an integrated management strategy. This study proposes a three-pronged strategy consisting of archaeological pre-assessment, land-use compatibility zoning, and community participation. The archaeological pre-assessment component ensures systematic evaluation of heritage sites prior to development, helping prevent irreversible damage. The land-use compatibility framework introduces zoning-based regulations that minimize land-use conflicts by evaluating functional compatibility, thereby aligning heritage protection with regional development goals. Community participation is encouraged through eco-tourism and benefit-sharing programs, fostering a collaborative model of heritage conservation. This integrated model offers a practical pathway for balancing cultural heritage preservation and sustainable urban development.

Although this study rigorously documents land-use change surrounding the Western Han Imperial Mausoleums, the main five limitations remain. First, the land-use classification results are generally robust and sufficient to support the intended regional-scale analyses. Nevertheless, limitations in the quantity and spatial distribution of ground reference data currently constrain the possibility of producing a full confusion matrix, Kappa statistic, or detailed class-level accuracy metrics. Future work will prioritize expanding field sampling to enhance validation precision and provide more comprehensive uncertainty assessments. Second, the garden-land scheme, chosen for its parsimony in peri-urban areas, aggregates some agriculture–service mosaics and may misclassify them. Future versions will include NDVI, texture metrics, multi-temporal features, and repeated classification tests to sharpen class boundaries. Third, several drivers, such as annual land-transfer revenue, fine-scale zoning metrics, and high-resolution population density, are probably represented by coarse proxies. This simplification obscures potential nonlinear or threshold effects that segmented or panel regression could detect when finer data become available. Fourth, full cross-validation with detailed regulatory plans and historic cadastral maps is not yet feasible because recent planning layers are unreleased. Although the composite governance model provides a useful integrative framework, it is still only a high-level outline. Policy tools such as transferable development rights and adaptive compensation also remain at a conceptual stage. Future work will refine and test the model through pilot projects, stakeholder workshops, and detailed case studies. These efforts will be grounded in the Western Han mausoleums’ management, site conditions, and current land-market and fiscal settings. These limitations do not weaken the study’s main contributions; instead, they define a clear agenda for future research. Future work will parameterize these tools under alternative land-market and fiscal scenarios to assess feasibility, equity, and long-term performance. These limitations might not diminish the study’s main contributions. Instead, it might outline a clear agenda for future study.

In conclusion, this study enhances the understanding of human–land interactions in urban fringe areas and provides scientific insights for optimizing land-resource management in archaeological sites worldwide. Cultural heritage conservation must shift beyond static preservation toward institutional innovation and multi-stakeholder collaboration to achieve a dynamic balance between protection and development.