Identification of Cultural Landscapes and Spatial Distribution Characteristics in Traditional Villages of Three Gorges Reservoir Area

Abstract

The Three Gorges Reservoir Area (TGRA) is an important ecological barrier and cultural intermingling zone in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River, and its traditional villages carry unique information about natural changes and civilisational development, but face the challenges of conservation and development under the impact of modernisation and ecological pressure. This study takes 112 traditional villages in the TGRA that have been included in the protection list as the research objects, aiming to construct a cultural landscape identification framework for the traditional villages in the TGRA. Through field surveys, landscape feature assessments, GIS spatial analysis, and multi-source data analysis, we systematically analyse their cultural landscape type systems and spatial differentiation characteristics, and then reveal their cultural landscape types and spatial differentiation patterns. (1) The results of the study show that the spatial distribution of traditional villages exhibits significant altitude gradient differentiation—the low-altitude area is dominated by traffic and trade villages, the middle-altitude area is dominated by patriarchal manor villages and mountain farming villages, and the high-altitude area is dominated by ethno-cultural and ecologically dependent villages. (2) Slope and direction analyses further reveal that the gently sloping areas are conducive to the development of commercial and agricultural settlements, while the steeply sloping areas strengthen the function of ethnic and cultural defence. The results indicate that topographic conditions drive the synergistic evolution of the human–land system in traditional villages through the mechanisms of agricultural optimisation, trade networks, cultural defence, and ecological adaptation. The study provides a paradigm of “nature–humanities” interaction analysis for the conservation and development of traditional villages in mountainous areas, which is of practical value in coordinating the construction of ecological barriers and the revitalisation of villages in the reservoir area.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and Significance

The Three Gorges Reservoir Area, located in the western part of China, is an important ecological function area in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River, where the unique landscape and geomorphology have given rise to marvellous natural scenery [1]. Since ancient times, it has been a golden waterway connecting the east and west of China, where the “river corridor” and the “new western land and sea corridor” converge, and naturally it has become a hinterland for the fusion of multiple cultures and the nurturing of material culture [2,3,4]. After the construction of the Three Gorges Water Conservancy Project, the issues of human environment, ecology, sustainable economic and, social development in the reservoir area have attracted many researchers and scholars, and have become a hotspot for research in the disciplines of economics, sociology, humanities and geography, and urban and rural planning [5]. The urbanisation rate of the TGRA is generally lower than the national average, and the majority of rural areas are economically underdeveloped [6]. There are many traditional villages with high landscape value, as well as a long history and rich culture. These are the important rural landscape heritage of the TGRA, carrying the historical information of the natural change and civilisation development of this special geographical area. The comprehensive implementation of China’s rural revitalisation strategy has brought brand new development opportunities and conditions to the vast rural areas [7], but due to the insufficient knowledge of the value of rural landscape heritage and the lack of scientific planning, construction and management methods, these traditional villages are also faced with the impact of “modernisation”, ecological damage, and the destruction of historical relics during the development and construction process [8,9,10,11,12]. The lack of scientific planning and management methods makes these traditional villages face the impact of “modernisation”, the destruction of the ecological environment, and the disappearance of historical relics during the development and construction process.

In 2012, China’s Ministry of Housing and Construction, together with other relevant departments, jointly issued the Circular on the Survey of Traditional Villages, signalling the beginning of national-level attention to and protection of traditional villages [13]. The Indicator System for Evaluation and Recognition of Traditional Villages, issued in the same year, takes individual villages as the object of evaluation, and examines the traditional architecture, siting pattern, and intangible cultural heritage of the villages through quantitative and qualitative assessment methods. Provinces and municipalities select villages with high evaluation scores to enter the protection list of Chinese traditional villages [14]. As of 2024, six batches of village lists have been published, with a total of 8155 villages included in the lists; these are required to prepare conservation and use plans or programmes, and to increase conservation efforts and financial inputs [15]. These initiatives have provided policy support and financial guarantee for the protection of traditional villages, but there are still some problems. The evaluation of traditional villages takes a single village as the object, severing the connection with the surrounding environment; the cultures of different places are very different, making it difficult to judge them through a unified indicator system; the evaluation criteria tend to favour the evaluation of material heritage, such as architectural heritage, and it is difficult to measure the cultural value of the villages in terms of regionality, wholeness, and diversity [16,17,18]. Accurately identifying the heritage characteristics of traditional villages in a specific region can effectively promote the revitalisation and protection of rural cultural landscape heritage with the goal of value transmission [19]. This process not only helps to scientifically assess the unique value of traditional villages, but also provides a basis for the formulation of reasonable conservation strategies to ensure that this precious rural cultural heritage can be effectively inherited and utilised in modern society [20].

The study of the holistic and culturally diverse landscape characteristics of the traditional villages in the TGRA will help to synergise the conservation of the natural landscape and cultural heritage of the villages and promote the sustainable development of the rural society in the region. The scientific analysis of the spatial distribution and heritage characteristics of traditional villages in the TGRA is of great significance to the construction of a perfect village and town system, the realisation of large-scale protection, and the upgrading of village and town basic service facilities. In addition, the establishment of a targeted protection system for traditional villages will help to uphold the core values of heritage inheritance and explore differentiated development paths in line with the characteristics of the villages.

1.2. Literature Review

As the living carriers of China’s agrarian civilisation, traditional Chinese villages not only carry rich historical and cultural information, but also are an important manifestation of national and regional characteristics, with the characteristics of living heritage and the dual attributes of tangible and intangible cultural heritage [21,22]. On the other hand, traditional villages widely exist in rural areas of China, with large number and many types, and they are the real homes where the agricultural population gathers, produces, and lives, so the protection of traditional villages is not only the demand for cultural heritage protection, but also an important part of the strategy of rural revitalisation [23,24].

Domestic academic research on traditional villages mainly focuses on human geography, urban and rural planning, architecture, art, and other disciplines [25]. With regard to the theoretical discussion on the conservation of traditional villages, a number of scholars have put forward a theoretical framework of value-oriented conservation, which emphasises the preservation of the heritage value of traditional villages, and pays attention to the continuous changes in their spatial environment, functional use, social structure, economic development, and other aspects [26,27,28,29]. This theoretical understanding is in line with the conservation concepts of international organisations such as ICOMOS and UNESCO, which emphasise the social and cultural identity of heritage conservation [30].

The theory of cultural landscape conservation provides a new perspective for the conservation and development of traditional villages [31]. The interaction between nature and culture creates this unique type of heritage [32,33]. As a special type of cultural landscape heritage, the spatial distribution pattern and landscape characteristics of traditional villages reflect the complex interaction between the natural environment and socio-economic factors. With the rapid development of Geographic Information System (GIS) technology, its application in the study of traditional villages is becoming more and more extensive. Through the collection, processing, and analysis of spatial data, the spatial distribution characteristics of traditional villages can be effectively revealed [34]. Through digital elevation model (DEM) and slope and direction analysis, the influence of topography on the distribution of villages can be quantified, and the relationship between the layout of villages and topography can be effectively identified by combining satellite remote sensing image data [35,36].

Although existing studies have made significant progress in the conservation theory, spatial distribution, and influencing factors of traditional villages, there are still some shortcomings. Firstly, the existing studies focus on spatial distribution analyses at the macro scale, and lack in-depth discussions on the cultural landscape of villages at the micro level [37,38]. Secondly, the research on traditional villages has strong geographical characteristics, and most of the existing studies tend to focus on the economically developed regions in the east and south of China, while the special geographical unit of the central and western regions, especially the world’s unparalleled “TGRA”, needs to be supplemented [34,35,36]. Again, most of the existing studies are based on single-discipline theories and methods, and further attempts should be made to explore multi-disciplinary research theories and methods, and to explore the multiple paths of traditional village conservation.

1.3. Research Objective and Questions

Building upon the existing literature and addressing the identified gaps, this study aims to

• Systematically classify the cultural landscape types of traditional villages in the TGRA based on an adapted Landscape Character Assessment framework;
• Quantitatively characterise their spatial distribution patterns, particularly concerning topographic gradients (elevation, slope);
• Reveal the coupling mechanisms between cultural landscape types and topographic conditions;
• Propose differentiated conservation and development strategies accordingly.

The key research questions guiding this study are: How are the cultural landscapes of traditional villages in the TGRA classified? What are their distinct spatial distribution characteristics, especially in relation to terrain? What are the underlying mechanisms driving the formation of these spatial patterns?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The TGRA is located in the combination of the Sichuan Basin and the middle and lower plains of the Yangtze River, and refers to the reservoir inundation area formed as a result of the construction of the Three Gorges Water Conservancy Project, which is a specific geographic area concept. The reservoir area extends from Sandouping in Yichang City, Hubei Province, to Honghuabao in Jiangjin District, Chongqing, stretching 678 km along the main stream of the Yangtze River, covering 18 districts and counties in the provinces of Chongqing and Hubei (Figure 1), with a total area of about 57,000 km² [39]. The area is not only an important hub for water regulation and navigation of the Yangtze River, but also a crucial ecological barrier in the Yangtze River water system [10]. The topography of the reservoir area runs from west to east along the main stream of the Yangtze River, transitioning from the Sichuan Basin to the hilly mountains and lofty hills, with the overall terrain being high in the east and low in the west, forming a distinct gradient topography. The TGRA belongs to the subtropical monsoon climate zone, with a humid climate, abundant rainfall, the characteristics of rain and heat at the same time, and high average annual relative humidity. The annual precipitation ranges from 1000 mm to 1800 mm and is mainly concentrated in summer (June to August), accounting for more than 80% of the annual precipitation [40]. With its abundant water resources and unique natural landscape, the TGRA has been positioned as a national ecological functional area and a pilot demonstration area for the green development of the Yangtze River Economic Belt and is actively implementing the strategy of “ecological priority and green development”.

The rural areas of the TGRA are rich in regional cultural information, and the traditional villages therein are a treasure trove of rural cultural heritage. Within the TGRA, 1393 administrative villages are involved, of which 71 national-level traditional villages and 41 municipal-level traditional villages are included in the protection list (

Table 1. Statistics on the number of traditional villages in the districts and counties of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area.

Province	District and County	Number of Traditional Villages (Number)
		National Level	District and County	Total
Chongqing	Jiangjin	7	1	8
	Jiulongpo	1	0	1
	Banan	1	4	5
	Beibei	0	1	1
	Yubei	0	1	1
	Fuling	5	0	5
	Wulong	6	4	10
	Fengdu	7	9	16
	Shizhu	19	8	27
	Zhongxian	7	1	8
	Wanzhou	5	3	8
	Yunyang	1	3	4
	Fengjie	1	2	3
	Wuxi	0	2	2
	Wushan	6	2	8
Hubei	Badong	2	0	2
	Xingshan	2	0	2
	Zigui	1	0	1
Total		71	41	112

For academic research only, same note below.

). These villages carry deep historical and cultural values and are witnesses to the cultural heritage of the basin. They are facing the threats of fragile ecological environment, lagging economic development, and destructive development and construction. This study aims to construct a regional geospatial data model, combine field visits and field survey analysis of villages, and systematically sort out and summarise the spatial distribution characteristics and regional features of traditional villages in the TGRA. The study is committed to identifying the cultural heritage values of traditional villages in the TGRA and exploring strategies for their inheritance and revitalisation, with a view to providing support for the sustainable development of the region.

2.2. Data Sources

The data collection of this study covers 18 districts (counties) within the TGRA, and the specific data sources are as follows (

Table 2. Data sources and classification for the study.

Data Characteristics	Data Description	Data Source	Data Type
Quantitative	Administrative division data for 18 districts (counties)	by the National Centre for Basic Geographic Information (NCBGI) on the National Geographic Information Public Service Platform (Tianmap)	Spatial Data
Quantitative	River boundary data	Geospatial Data Cloud (access date: 18 January 2025)	Spatial Data
Quantitative	DEM data (with 30 m resolution)	Geospatial Data Cloud (access date: 18 January 2025) GDEMV2 30 m resolution digital elevation data	Spatial Data
Qualitative	Traditional villages catalogue	Derived from one to six batches of Chinese traditional villages list published by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (as of December 2024).	Non-spatial Data
Qualitative	Specific Latitude and longitude information of traditional villages	Based on the Google Earth coordinate system (WGS84), Baidu maps, and on-site visits and surveys	Spatial Data

):

• Administrative divisions: from the “Administrative Divisions Visualisation” published by the National Centre for Basic Geographic Information (NCBGI) on the National Geographic Information Public Service Platform (Tianmap) (Review No. GS(2024)0650).
• River boundary data: from Geospatial Data Cloud (Geospatial Data Cloud, access date: 18 January 2025), vector data of basic elements such as administration, rivers, roads, etc., at all levels in China.
• DEM data: Derived from Geospatial Data Cloud (Geospatial Data Cloud, access date: 18 January 2025) GDEMV2 30M resolution digital elevation data.
• Traditional villages catalogue: Derived from one to six batches of Chinese traditional villages list published by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, and the national and municipal traditional villages list published by Chongqing Municipal Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Development and Hubei Provincial Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (

  Table A1. Inventory of traditional village conservation in TGRA.

  Province	District and County	Number of Traditional Villages	Inventory of Villages	Inventory Level
  				National Level	District and County
  Chongqing	Jiangjin	8	Dongzhai, Tanghe	√
  			Shilongmen, Tanghe	√
  			Xingjia, Wutang	√
  			Baozhu, Baisha	√
  			Yuwan, Zhongshan	√
  			Changle, Zhongshan	√
  			Shuangfeng, Simianshan	√
  			Yangshi, Shimo		√
  	Jiulongpo	1	Jiaoyuan, Zhouma	√
  	Banan	5	Hehua, Jielong		√
  			Dalian, Shilong		√
  			Shengdengshan		√
  			Tianping, SDS		√
  			Qiaoshang, Fengsheng	√
  	Beibei	1	Jingang, Beiwenquan		√
  	Yubei	1	Datianchi, Luozi		√
  	Fuling	5	Dashun, Dashun	√
  			Datian, Dashun	√
  			Anzhen, Qingyang	√
  			Fengyang, Linshi	√
  			Jiaobangzhai, Wulingshan	√
  Chongqing	Wulong	10	Wenfeng, Houping	√
  			Tiansheng, Tudi	√
  			Lujiayan, Huolu	√
  			Datian, Canggou	√
  			Puban, Xiangkou	√
  			Tongluo, Wenfu	√
  			Zoujia, Haokou		√
  			Haokou, Haokou		√
  			Guantian, Tongzi		√
  			Honglong, Pingqiao		√
  	Fengdu	16	Jinzhulin, Xiannvhu	√
  			Houxi, Dudu	√
  			Jinlongzhai, Lizi	√
  			Lvchunba, Sanjian	√
  			Xiaba, Taipingba	√
  			Honghuapo, Baoluan	√
  			Pengjiaba, Dongjia	√
  			Baiguoba, Xiaoanxi		√
  			Xinwu, Xiaoanxi		√
  			Guanyinsi, Longhe		√
  			Guantang, Jiangchi		√
  			Zhaishang, Shizhi		√
  			Taiyun, Gaojia		√
  			Fenglai, Jilong		√
  			Wuyang, Jilong		√
  			Liangqiao, Dudu		√
  Chongqing	Zhongxian	8	Dongyan, Huaqiao	√
  			Zhongba, Xinsheng	√
  			Shangci, Yangdu	√
  			Dongfang, Yongfeng	√
  			Guguo, Guanba	√
  			Changan, Ruxi	√
  			Duzhu, Zhongzhou	√
  			Huguo, Baigong		√
  	Shizhu	27	Yinxing, Jinling	√
  			Huanglong, Shijia	√
  			Xincheng, Yuelai	√
  			Jinhua, Huangshui	√
  			Fumin, Hezui	√
  			Pingba, Zhongyi	√
  			Xiangshui, Jinling	√
  			Shisun, Jinling	√
  			Shuangtang, Fengmu	√
  			Shanhe, Huanghe	√
  			Shangsheng, Jinzhu	√
  			Muping, Longtan	√
  			Dabao, Sanyi	√
  			Taoyuan, Shazi	√
  			Yuquan, Shazi	√
  			Anqiao, Shijia	√
  			Huayuan, Wangjia	√
  			Honghe, Xinle	√
  			Xinjian, Xinle	√
  			Liushui, Daxie		√
  			Leizhuang, Sanxing		√
  			Xinglong, Shazi		√
  			Shuiqiao, Yuelai		√
  			Yangguan, Xinle		√
  			Henong, Jinzhu		√
  			Hongyang, Linxi		√
  			Guanghua, Wangjia		√
  Chongqing	Wanzhou	8	Fenghuang, Taian	√
  			Yongping, Luotian	√
  			Quanshui, Yanshan	√
  			Wuxing, Henghe	√
  			Gechuang, Zhushan	√
  			Wanchang, Puzi		√
  			Wulong, Baitu		√
  			Longtou, Lishu		√
  	Yunyang	4	Liming, Fengming	√
  			Changping, Sangping		√
  			Wutai, Shuangtu		√
  			Shengji, Shangba		√
  	Fengjie	3	Huilong, Xinglong	√
  			Fangdong, Xinglong		√
  			Liuya, Xinglong		√
  	Wuxi	2	Maoertan, Ningchang		√
  			Tongcheng, Tongcheng		√
  	Wushan	8	Longxi, Longxi	√
  			Gaoping, Dangyang	√
  			Tongxin, Liangping	√
  			Xiangya, Liangping	√
  			Guihua, Wuxia	√
  			Xiazhuang, Zhuxian	√
  			Daxi, Daxi		√
  			Qingtai, Jianping		√
  Hubei	Badong	2	Chuanxinyan, Yesanguan	√
  			Niudongping, Dongrang	√
  	Xingshan	2	Tanping, Zhaojun	√
  			Qinghua, Zhaojun	√
  	Zigui	1	Xiangxi, Guizhou	√

  ). Within the TGRA, a total of 112 villages were included in the study (as of December 2024). The study was carried out by a team of experts from the TGRA.
• Latitude and longitude information of traditional villages: Based on the Google Earth coordinate system (WGS84), Baidu maps, and on-site visits and surveys, the specific locations of traditional villages were further determined, and a geographic information database of traditional villages in the TGRA was established.

2.3. Research Methods

This study adopts a combination of qualitative and quantitative multi-source data analysis methods, with field survey and GIS spatial analysis as the core, aiming to systematically reveal the spatial distribution characteristics and cultural landscape types of traditional villages in the TGRA. The specific methods and steps are as follows (Figure 2):

• Data collection and collation

Multi-source data collection: Combine field surveys, the literature, and archive reviews, remote sensing images, and geospatial data to build a comprehensive database. The field survey mainly obtains the physical layout, architectural style, cultural relics, and living status of the village; the literature and archive research provide supporting evidence for the historical evolution and cultural background of the village; the remote sensing and DEM data provide precise geographic information for the subsequent spatial analyses.

Data pre-processing: All spatial data are uniformly projected to the WGS84 coordinate system, the DEM is resampled (e.g., 30 m resolution) and data cleaning is performed to ensure data consistency and accuracy.

2.

Field survey and validation

For the 71 national and 41 municipal traditional villages, systematic visits and interviews were carried out to collect high-definition photos, videos and detailed observation records to obtain first-hand information. According to the results of GIS spatial analysis, representative villages are selected for on-site verification, comparing the field data with the analysis results to ensure the reliability of the research conclusions.

3.

Collection and classification of cultural landscape elements

Literature research, field visits and remote sensing image interpretation are used to identify the architectural style, land use pattern, water distribution and other cultural landscape features of the villages. According to the collected elements, the cultural landscape of the villages is classified into categories, which provides basic data for the subsequent coupling analysis with terrain factors.

4.

Spatial data integration and analysis

Terrain classification: Based on parameters such as elevation, slope and slope direction, the study area is divided into different terrain categories. For example, elevation is classified as <400 m, 400–800 m, 800–1200 m and >1200 m. Slope and slope direction are classified according to percentage slope and eight directions.

Overlay and statistical analysis: Using ArcGIS 10.8 to overlay the village distribution data with terrain classification layers, the correlation between village distribution patterns, terrain preferences and cultural landscape types was explored through frequency statistics, kernel density analysis, hotspot analysis and chi-square test.

5.

Tools and Software

ArcGIS 10.8: for spatial data processing, map mapping, overlay analysis and spatial clustering analysis.

Google Earth Pro: to assist in visual verification of village locations and observation of the surrounding environment.

The comprehensive use of multi-dimensional data collection, processing and analysis methods not only ensures the organic integration of macro spatial background and micro field data, but also provides a solid empirical support for revealing the coupling relationship between the cultural landscape of traditional villages and topographic conditions.

3. Results

3.1. Field Investigation of Traditional Villages and Classification of Cultural Landscapes

3.1.1. Classification and Description of Cultural Landscape Characteristics (Classification and Description of Cultural Landscape Characteristics)

Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) is a systematic method for identifying and describing landscape characteristics, which originated in the UK. Later, with the signing of the European Landscape Convention, the methodology and experience of LCA have been widely disseminated, and many countries have formulated Landscape Character Maps, which have become the scientific basis for the formulation of relevant management policies. Many countries have developed landscape character maps, which have become the scientific basis for the formulation of relevant management policies [41]. The Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland, jointly published by the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage in 2002, systematically defines the landscape character of the landscape in the LCA. England and Scotland jointly issued by the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage in 2002, which systematically defines the concepts, methods and steps of LCA, and provides detailed assessment criteria, classifying the evaluation factors of landscape character into three categories: natural character, cultural and social character, and perceptual and aesthetic character [42]. (

Table 3. Classification of Landscape Character Assessment factors.

Classification	Class I Factor	Class II Factor	Class III Factor
Landscape Character Evaluation Factor 1	Natural Character	Landscape pattern Geology, Geomorphology Hydrology, climate Vegetation, fauna	Mountain types, water systems Soil types, Rock types Rivers, lakes, groundwater Climate type, precipitation Vegetation type, cover, biodiversity
	Cultural and social characteristics	Land use patterns Productive landscapes Living landscapes Spirituality	Farmland/tea plantations/forest plantations, etc. Water facilities Fish ponds, livestock breeding areas Settlement Formation, Building Types Religious culture and social activities
	Perceptual and aesthetic features	Sight Hearing Smell Touch	Colour, texture, form Sounds of nature, sounds of human activity Smells of nature, smells of human activities Ground material, texture of vegetation

¹ In this study, on the basis of referring to the universal assessment factors in the Landscape Character Assessment guidelines, we pay full attention to the unique regional characteristics of the TGRA and make comprehensive considerations in combination with the specific conditions of the countryside in the region.

)

“Landscape” is a composite form formed in the process of interaction between people and places, including three core components: nature, culture and society, perception and aesthetics. Among them, the “natural” element covers geological conditions, geomorphological types, climate, soil, vegetation and animals, etc.; the “cultural and social” element includes land use, settlement patterns and paddocks, etc.; the “perceptual and aesthetic” element consists of visual (vegetation) materials, textures, and the ‘landscape’ is a composite form that emerges from the interaction between people and their environments. The “cultural and social” elements include land use, settlement form and paddocks, etc. The “perceptual and aesthetic” elements are composed of vision (colour, texture, style and form), hearing, smell, touch, preference, association and memory, etc. [43].

This study draws on the above Landscape Character Assessment methods [44] to conduct field research on the rural landscape of traditional villages in the TGRA. High-definition photos and detailed records of the site conditions were collected through field visits and interactive interviews, combined with the verification and analysis of remote sensing satellite image data and the interpretation of archival literature to form a village landscape database, which classified and summarised the evaluation factors of the cultural landscape of the villages and classified the cultural landscape characteristics of the 112 traditional villages in the TGRA into five types: traffic and commerce type, patriarchal manor type, mountain farming type, ethnic village, and ecological dependence type. This classification takes into account the requirement of “outstanding universal value” for the selection criteria and content of heritage in the nomination and protection process of UNESCO’s protected list. The categorisation of the various types is characterised as follows (

Table 4. Classification system of traditional villages in the TGRA.

Cultural Landscape	Core Characteristics	Spatial Paradigm	Social Structure
Traffic and commerce village	Transport network nodes, linear commercial space	Mixed commercial and residential units with shops in front and houses at the back, industry-specific neighborhoods, transport service facilities (stagecoach stops/boatyards)	Guild-led community
Patriarchal Manor village	Patriarchal bloodline, manor economic unit	Clan ancestral hall hierarchy, defensive buildings (towers/walls), production and living complexes (mills/barns)	Differential order pattern under the clan field system
Mountain farming village	Vertical agro-ecosystems, subsistence production units	Scattered dwellings within the radius of terraced farming, mountain-adapted structures (dry fences/overhangs), micro-land water system (peasant ponds/bamboo spouts)	Collaborative family-based production
Ethno-cultural village	Ethnic culture material carriers, non-physical cultural inheritance space	Ethnic architectural paradigms (hanging footstools/drum towers), sacred spaces, places of cultural memory	Traditional headman system or village elder governance
Ecologically dependent villages	Habitat system dominated by natural landscape, adaptive construction in ecologically fragile areas	Point layout under the constraints of landscape pattern, disaster defence system (flood prevention stone steps/windbreak forest belt), resource use marking (medicinal trails/fishing and hunting wharves)	Micro-communities under the constraints of environmental carrying capacity

):

• Traffic and commercial villages: These villages are formed by ancient postal routes or water transport terminals and other transport hubs, with a clear layout of streets and lanes and a dense architectural structure, and are organised around linear commercial spaces, usually with multiple functions such as residence, commerce and public gatherings (e.g., theatres, guild halls, temples), reflecting the prosperity of traditional towns. The landscape of the village is dominated by artificial features, including linear streets and alleys, water transportation docks, temples and stone inscriptions from the Ming and Qing dynasties, all of which hold significant cultural value. The architectural heritage of the village is extensive and clustered, encompassing well-preserved ancient shops, clan halls, guildhalls, and residential courtyards. For instance, the core area of Fengyang Village in Ancient Town of Fuling, Baozhu Village in Baisha Ancient Town of Jiangjin, and Wangshui Old Street in Zhongba Village, which is located on the ancient salt route, all belong to this category of traditional villages with distinctive town characteristics (Figure 3).
• Patriarchal manor-type villages: The social structure of the village relies on the bloodline network of the big families, the family gathered in the large manor distributed in the vast farmland, manor architecture is rigorous, large-scale, exquisite craftsmanship, and the manor is equipped with specific features (such as theatre, watchtowers), highlighting the power of the family. Taking Anzhen Village in Fuling District as a typical representative of this kind of village, the Chen Wanbao Mansion located there is a well-preserved historical building. The mansion is grand in scale and exquisite in craftsmanship. It is evenly distributed with several other mansions of the Chen brothers, together forming the basic unit of the village landscape pattern. In addition to this, traditional villages such as Shilongmen Village in Jiangjin and Quanshui Village in Wanzhou, which take clan mansions as their basic architectural form, also display unique rural landscapes (Figure 4).
• Mountain farming villages: Primarily oriented towards farming production, and their building layout is mostly scattered. Simple farmhouses are built according to the contours of the mountains. In front of the houses, there are drying grain dams, and backyards are used for raising poultry and storing farm equipment, showcasing a tranquil, ecological rural lifestyle. This type of rural landscape is widely distributed in the TGRA. The architectural heritage itself is not of high value. The rudimentary houses often appear dilapidated. However, when combined with the surrounding forests and productive terraced fields, they present a unique rural charm. Typical representatives of this kind of village include Jinzhulin Village in Fengdu and Guihua Village in Wushan (Figure 5).
• Ethnic and cultural villages: These villages are located in areas inhabited by ethnic minorities, and their architectural styles, materials and colours have ethnic characteristics, equipped with special gathering or sacrificial places, and carrying rich intangible cultural heritage activities all year round, with a strong cultural experience. These ethnic villages and settlements vary in size. Their architectural layouts follow the natural contours of the mountains and the flow of water. The street and alley traffic is free and flexible, and the rural landscapes are highly impressive. For example, the Tianchi Miao Village and the Xiniu Ancient Village both in Wulong District, are typical representatives of ethnic and cultural villages. (Figure 6)
• Ecologically dependent villages: Located in unique geographical environments, these villages are formed on the basis of karst landscapes, deep rivers or canyons, and their villages are integrated with the magnificent natural landscapes in the neighbourhoods, as if they were natural scenic areas. However, there are development constraints such as sparse population and fragile ecology.

The harmonious coexistence of traditional villages and natural landscapes has greatly enhanced the cultural heritage value of these villages. Take Huilong Village in Fengjie County as an example. Located within the 4A—level scenic area, the village is surrounded by towering cliffs and precipices, forming a natural “mountain gate” landscape (Figure 7). Outside the village lies the deep valley, with clear streams and steep cliffs, which has become a paradise for hikers. In addition to this, there are also Duzhu Village on the midstream peninsula of the Yangtze River and Xiazhuang Village in Wushan, where the construction of external transportation required the carving of cliffs. Both are exemplary cases of the perfect integration of nature and culture in the TGRA.

3.1.2. Cluster Analysis of the Cultural Landscapes of Traditional Villages in the TGRA

In this study, the coordinates of five types of traditional villages in the TGRA were overlaid with geospatial data for analysis, and based on the results of GIS analysis and visualisation, the results of the spatial distribution of the types of 112 traditional villages in the TGRA were obtained (Figure 8). According to the results of spatial clustering statistics, the five cultural landscape types of traditional villages in the TGRA accounted for the largest proportion of the five types of traditional villages were the mountain farming type, with a total of 30, accounting for 26.8% of the total number of villages. The next two types of villages are the ethnic culture type and the patriarchal manor type (25 villages each, accounting for 22.3%, respectively). Ethnic culture-type villages are mainly gathered in areas where ethnic minorities gather, such as Wulong and Shizhu, while patriarchal manor-type villages are more widely distributed. There are 20 ecologically dependent villages with natural ecology as the dominant landscape feature, accounting for 17.9% of the total, which are scattered evenly in the study area. Traffic and commerce type traditional villages accounted for the smallest proportion (about 10.7%), with only 12 villages, and the distribution location was more related to the distance of the river. (

Table 5. Traditional villages in the TGRA: cultural landscape type statistics.

Cultural Landscape	Total (Number)	Proportion
Traffic and commerce Village	12	10.7%
Patriarchal Manor Village	25	22.3%
Mountain Farming Village	30	26.8%
Ethno-cultural Village	25	22.3%
Ecologically Dependent Villages	20	17.9%

)

3.2. The Geographical Spatial Distribution of Traditional Villages

3.2.1. The Distribution of Traditional Village Quantity Across Altitude Gradients

Previous studies in the TGRA in related fields have two main representative division methods for the division of altitude zones, one is from the perspective of village siting evolution and historical and cultural studies, such as Feng Min and other scholars proposed a simplified two-zone division framework for the study of village evolution under the pressure of migrants from the perspective of colony evolution: the inundation zone (<175 m) and the migrant resettlement zone (175–600 m). The classification highlights the policy-driven spatial dynamics, where villages in low-lying areas are forced to migrate to higher elevations due to reservoir inundation [45]. Liu Qingguo et al. established a six-level altitude zone division system (<400 m, 400–800 m, 800–1200 m, 1200–1600 m, 1600–2000 m, >2000 m) through GIS analysis and mathematical statistics methods. The low-altitude zone (<400 m) is centred on hydrological place names, while the area above 1200 m is dominated by topographic and geomorphological place names [46]. The second type of division method is from the dynamic research perspective of natural ecology and vegetation zoning. For example, Wang Pengcheng et al.’s six-level altitude model (<400 m, 400–800 m, 800–1200 m, 1200–1600 m, 1600–2000 m, >2000 m) reveals the vertical differentiation of forest types-from shrub forests at low altitudes to mixed forests above 1200 m, and 1600 m is the transition from low-elevation shrub forests to mixed forests. mixed forests, and the forest cover in the area above 1600 m is more than 75% [47]. Based on agricultural adaptation, Fang Chuanglin et al. divided the TGRA into four major functional zones: the river valley zone (<200 m), the shallow hilly zone (200–600 m), the low mountain zone (600–1000 m), and the mid-alpine zone (>1000 m). In order to cope with the complexity of the traditional village ecosystem and to improve the accuracy of the analysis, this study, based on the seven-level altitude band grading system, formed a distribution heat map of the number of traditional villages in different districts and counties (Figure 9), and the results of the analyses showed that the spatial distribution of traditional villages has a significant altitude stratification law [48].

• Traditional villages are concentrated in two key altitude zones: 400–800 m and 800–1200 m, and the number of villages in these two altitude zones accounts for 72.32% of the total number of villages (among them, there are 31 villages in the altitude zone of 400–800 m, accounting for 27.7%; 800–1200 m, 27.7%; and 800–1200 m, 27.7% of the total number of villages). 27.7%, and 50 villages in the 800–1200 m altitude range, accounting for 44.6% of the total). These villages are mainly clustered in Shizhu County, Fengdu County, Zhong County, Wushan County, Wulong District and Wanzhou District, reflecting the synergistic effect of the favourable climatic environment, the suitability of the terrain and the historical settlement pattern. The moderate climate and relatively gentle topography of the middle and high altitude regions are suitable for agricultural production and human habitation, while the historical patterns of population movement and settlement also tend to favour these regions.
• In the lower altitude regions below 400 m, the density of villages decreases significantly. 13 villages (11.6%) in the 175–300 m range are located in nine districts and counties, including Beibei, Jiangjin, Fuling, Fengdu, Wulong, Zhongxian, Wuxi, Wushan, and Zigui in Hubei Province, and are located by the Yangtze River or its tributaries; while only 6 villages (11.6%) in the 300–400 m range are located by the Yangtze River or its tributaries; the 300–400 m range has only 6 villages (11.6%). −400 m zone has only six villages (5.4%), which are sporadically distributed in Jiangjin District, Wushan and the main city of Chongqing. ① The low distribution of villages at low altitudes may be related to the following factors: low-altitude areas are prone to flooding, which increases the risk of habitation. ② Low-altitude areas are mostly river valley plains with limited land resources and are mostly used for modern town construction and agricultural development, making it difficult to preserve traditional villages.
• Traditional villages are extremely rare in high-altitude areas. 11 villages (9.8% of the total) are found between 1200 and 1600 m, mainly in Shizhu and Fengdu counties. It is worth noting that there is only one village in the 1600–2000 m zone, Kajiping, Liuya Village, Xinglong Town, Fengjie County (1600 m in elevation, municipal traditional village), which is recommended to be included in the unified analysis of the 1200 m zone because of the similarity of ecological and socio-economic constraints. No traditional villages were found in the region of altitude >2000 m, which shows the limitations of extreme altitude on residential life and agricultural production.

The results show that the spatial distribution of traditional villages in the TGRA exhibits a significant altitude stratification pattern, accounting for 72.32% (81) of the total number of recorded villages in the 400–800 m and 800–1200 m altitude zones, with the number of traditional villages in the lower and higher altitude zones showing a decreasing trend, with the number of traditional villages in the less than 400 m altitude zone and the number of traditional villages in the more than 400 m altitude zone decreasing. Among them, there were 19 traditional villages in the less than 400 m altitude interval, accounting for about 17% of the total number of villages, while there were only 12 traditional villages at altitudes above 1200 m, accounting for 10.7% of the number of villages (Figure 10). This altitude stratification law reveals the interaction between biophysical thresholds (e.g., temperature gradient, slope stability) and human adaptive strategies (e.g., terraced agriculture, flood control measures), which provides a basis for consideration of conservation priority classification and zoning policy optimisation for ecologically sensitive mountainous rural cultural landscapes.

3.2.2. Analysis of the Coupling Relationship Between Cultural Landscape Types of Traditional Villages and Elevation Gradients

In order to further explore the geospatial aggregation characteristics of traditional villages of different cultural landscape types, this study uses the kernel density analysis map of GIS to visualise and express the aggregation of villages in different altitude regions, and then conducts the kernel density analysis of the distribution of villages of different cultural landscape types, compares the kernel density maps of the villages in the zonal classification, and carries out the coupling analysis of the degree of aggregation. According to the results of GIS data visualisation, the following relationships are summarised:

• In the low-altitude area below 400 m, the main type of village distributed is the traffic and trade village. There are a total of 19 traditional villages distributed in the low elevation area, 79% of which are located directly along the Yangtze River (0 km from the Yangtze River). Typical villages include Fengyang Village, Linshi Town, Fuling District (200 m above sea level) and Xiangxi Village, Guizhou Town, Zigui County (185 m above sea level). These villages show the settlement pattern of traditional villages linearly distributed along the river.

By comparing the kernel density analyses of the traffic and trade type villages with those of the villages in the low elevation area, it can be seen that the two have a strong coupling relationship (Figure 11). The distribution of villages forms a strong coupling relationship in three concentrated areas, which are in Jiangjin District, Fuling District and tributaries of Wuxi County in Chongqing Municipality. The results of the analyses further indicate that the sites of traditional villages in the lower altitude areas are mostly concentrated in places near rivers or with convenient transport, which are flat and suitable for commercial and agricultural development, with a more concentrated population and frequent economic activities, which provide good external conditions for the formation and development of traditional villages. However, the number of traditional villages in low elevation areas is small, accounting for only 16.96%, which may be directly related to the inundation and relocation caused by the rising water level of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area [45].

2.

In the 400–800 m interval of the altitude band, the terrain begins to become complex and diverse, and the village types are richer. The 30 traditional villages distributed in this altitude band totalled four types. The two types with the highest number are the patriarchal manor type and the mountain farming type, both with a number of 12 each, which together account for 80% of the total number of villages in this altitude zone. On the kernel density analysis map, it can be seen that traditional villages of the patriarchal manor type are clustered at multiple points along the Yangtze River and are widely distributed (Figure 12a), while traditional villages of the mountain farming type are mainly clustered in the Wulong and Shizhu mountainous areas, with a small number of distributions in Fengjie and Wushan (Figure 12b). Superimposed analysis of the distribution of the two types of villages presents a strong coupling between the kernel density of the villages presented and that of the villages in the middle- and low-altitude zones of 400–800 m (Figure 12c,d).

3.

In the altitude band 800–1200 m interval, the main village types are ethnic and cultural villages and ecologically dependent villages. There are 50 traditional villages distributed in this altitude band, accounting for 44.64% of the total number. The village types are more diversified, and this altitude band covers all five types of traditional villages, among which the number of ethnic and cultural villages is more prominent. The analysis shows that 88% of the ethnic and cultural villages (22) are concentrated in this altitude band. Meanwhile, the prominence of ecologically dependent villages in this altitude zone indicates that the natural landscape resources in this altitude zone are richer. According to the kernel density analysis, it was learnt that ethno-cultural-type villages have a strong concentration within the TGRA (Figure 13a), which is related to the fact that the ethnic minority settlement areas are located in the middle and high altitude zones, and that these villages tend to retain a rich ethno-culture and traditional way of life.

4.

In the interval above 1200 m in the altitude band, the main type of distribution is the ecologically dependent traditional villages. At higher altitudes, the types and numbers of traditional villages decrease sharply, with only 12 villages, and four types of distribution are visible. Traffic and commerce type villages disappeared in this region, and there was only one ethnic and cultural type village, with two patriarchal manors, respectively, Shuangtang Village in Shizhu and Wulong Village in Wanzhou. From the kernel density analysis diagram, it can be seen that the aggregated distribution of ecologically dependent traditional villages has a strong coupling with the aggregated distribution of traditional villages in the high altitude area (Figure 14). From the field survey, it can be confirmed that most of the traditional villages in this altitude area are distributed in natural ecological areas with special environment and superior natural landscape conditions, but the areas suitable for human habitation and agricultural development are also very limited due to the limitation of the climatic and geographic conditions in the high altitude area.

Through the above study, it is found that the distribution of traditional villages’ cultural landscape types is significantly correlated with the altitude characteristics: the low-altitude zone below 400 m altitude is dominated by the traffic and trade type; the middle and low-altitude zones from 400 to 800 m show diversity, with the patriarchal manor type as the main feature; the middle and high altitude zones from 800 to 1200 m show the emergence of the ethno-cultural type of villages, and are highly concentrated in the areas of Shizhu and Wulong in Chongqing In the middle-high altitude zone of 800–1200 m, ethnic and cultural villages are concentrated in Shizhu and Wulong in Chongqing; in the high-altitude zone above 1200 m, the natural landscape value is the core, and the main types of traditional villages are the ecological dependence type and the mountain farming type.

3.2.3. Cross-Tabulation of Cultural Landscape Types of Traditional Villages by Terrain Slope

• Data Acquisition Method of Average Slope of Traditional Villages

Based on 112 samples of traditional villages in the TGRA, this study uses a GIS model to achieve the systematic extraction of slope parameters. The study adopts a 30 m resolution digital elevation model (DEM) to reveal the topographic adaptation features of the core area of traditional villages through multi-scale spatial analysis. Taking the centre point of the main settlement of the village as the benchmark, the GIS Buffer tool was used to construct a 200-metre radius circular buffer zone to accurately cover the core area of the settlement (Figure 15). The slope ($\alpha$) and aspect vector $\overrightarrow{\mathit{\beta }}$ data for the grid cells within the region were calculated using the ArcGIS 10.8 Surface Analysis toolset. The average slope was used as the basis for determining the slope type of the village. The calculation formula is as follows:

$$\overline{\alpha }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}\sum _1^n\alpha$$

(1)

The aspect type of the slope is determined based on the azimuth angle $\overrightarrow{\mathit{B}}$ of the aspect vector $\overrightarrow{\mathit{\beta }}$, the calculation formula is as follows:

$$\overrightarrow{\mathit{B}}=\sum _1^n\overrightarrow{\mathit{\beta }}$$

(2)

where n represents the number of sampled grid cells.

Finally, a mixed calibration strategy of field survey method was used to implement field measurements for reachable villages, and the unvisited samples were verified by Google Earth 3D model for terrain parameters.

2.

Geographical Distribution Characteristics of Traditional Village Types on Topographic Slope

The slope-type share cross-tabulation revealed the spatial differentiation patterns of traditional village types in the three slope zones (

Table 6. Slope-type percentage cross-tabulation table.

	Village Type
Slope Classification	Traffic and Commerce	Patriarchal Manor	Mountain Farming	Ethnic Culture	Ecological Dependence	Total
Gentle Slope	21.15%	26.92%	28.85%	17.31%	5.77%	100%
Middle Slope	8.51%	19.15%	23.41%	25.53%	23.40%	100%
Steep Slope	0	7.69%	23.08%	30.77%	38.46%	100%

). There were 52 villages distributed in the gently sloping zone (≤15°), which were dominated by the mountain farming type (28.85%) and the patriarchal manor type (26.92%), and the flat terrain provided the advantage of infrastructure development for the transport and trade type (21.15%). Among the 47 villages in the mid-slope zone (15–25°), the proportion of ethno-cultural type (25.53%) and ecologically dependent type (23.40%) increased significantly, and their easily defensible topography may have strengthened the cultural protection function. There were only 13 villages in the steep slope area (>25°), where the ecologically dependent type (38.46%) and the ethno-cultural type (30.77%) dominated, reflecting the adaptability of these two types of villages to the micro-environment such as water source and vegetation.

The functional characteristics of different types of villages dominated the village site selection preferences (

Table 7. Cross-tabulation of type–slope ratio.

	Slope Classification
Village Type	Gently Sloping ≤15°	Medium Slope 15–25°	Steep Slope ≥25°	Total
Traffic and commerce	73.33%	26.67%	0	100%
Patriarchal Manor	58.33%	37.50%	4.17%	100%
Mountain Farming	51.73%	37.93%	10.34%	100%
Ethnic Culture	36.00%	48.00%	16.00%	100%
Ecological Dependence	15.79%	57.89%	26.32%	100%

). Statistics show that 73.33% of the traffic and trade villages were built on gently sloping terrain, 48% of the ethnic and cultural villages preferred medium-sloping terrain to form a defensive village settlement space, and mountain farming villages preferred gently sloping terrain (51.72%) and medium-sloping terrain (37.93%), which reflects the good adaptability of terraced agriculture to the mountainous terrain; and patriarchal manor villages relied on gently sloping terrain (58.33%) and flat terrain for constructing large-scale farms. Flat terrain is particularly favourable for the construction of both large-scale farmland and large-scale settlement systems.

The above analysis of the topographic characteristics of traditional villages shows that topographic factors such as elevation and slope affect the landscape generation mechanism of the villages through various paths such as agricultural optimisation, trade, cultural defence and ecological coordination, and drive the synergistic evolution of the human–land system of traditional villages in the TGRA under the constraints of nature. In the future, it is necessary to formulate differentiated conservation strategies for different types of villages and topographic features, so as to balance the inheritance of cultural heritage and the sustainable development of village landscapes.

4. Discussion

In this study, the cultural landscape types and spatial distribution characteristics of 112 traditional villages in the TGRA were systematically explored through field surveys and GIS spatial analysis methods. In general, the spatial pattern of traditional villages is the result of the combined effects of natural geographic thresholds (elevation, slope, and slope direction), historical functional choices, and modern interventions. The environmental features brought about by altitudinal differences and topographical conditions significantly drive the formation and differentiation of cultural landscapes: the low-altitude area relies on water and land transport to form a trade hub. The mid-altitude and low-altitude areas are centred on patriarchal manor-type villages, embodying the historical choices of family settlements and farming societies. In contrast, the middle and high-altitude areas highlight the composite features of ethnic cultures and ecological dependence. Based on this, the driving factors of the five cultural landscape types of traditional villages in the TGRA and the future development strategies can be discussed as follows:

4.1. Differentiated Development Path of Traditional Villages Based on Cultural Landscape Characteristics Analysis

• Traffic and commerce type villages: reconstruct the characteristic traffic experience and realise the synergistic revitalisation of “traffic–commerce-landscape”.

There are a total of 15 traffic and commerce villages within the study area, accounting for 13.4% of the total number of villages. Most of the traffic and commerce villages are located at low altitudes and have a close relationship with the water transport of the Three Gorges. The villages have a clear street texture, dense buildings, diverse functions and relatively concentrated population. However, with the passage of time, the old trade functions and hub advantages no longer exist, and only the unique street space and village texture have been preserved. Due to the complex and changing topography of the TGRA, these ancient streets and lanes are built on the mountains, usually traversed by a one-line main street, with narrow lanes extending in the form of branches on both sides, and the characteristic traffic paths with undulating heights provide a multi-dimensional observation perspective for the landscape experience of the villages, highlighting the unique experience of the interaction between the landscape and the humanities in the TGRA. The development of this type of village should create a characteristic spatial experience through an appropriate amount of functional expansion and upgrading, the development of community commercial functions adapted to modern needs, and the combination of the mountainous three-dimensional transport system. At the same time, the intangible cultural heritage of the village and its surroundings should be excavated and commercialised to stimulate the commercial vitality of the market town and attract popularity and customer flow, so that the advantageous resources of the village can be inherited and developed in a living state [49].

2.

Patriarchal manor-type villages: coordinated development of kinship social networks and human–land systems

Patriarchal manor villages are a typical type of traditional villages in the TGRA with high heritage value. There are 24 patriarchal villages in the study area, accounting for 21.4% of the total number of villages. Most of the patriarchal manor-type villages are located in the middle- and low-altitude zones, with relatively gentle topographic slopes. The function of the land is dominated by large tracts of farmland, and there are relatively mature farmland water conservancy facilities. The manor buildings are scattered, forming a social network with clan kinship as the bond. Manor and towers form a family settlement unit, the building has a long history, large scale, exquisite craftsmanship, has a high heritage value. These landscape features reflect the social carrier of bloodline ethics and traditional farming, is an important witness to the cultural diversity of the TGRA. In order to address the inheritance and development of patriarchal manor villages, we should focus on maintaining the local traditional clan culture, taking the ancestral hall as the governance node, integrating genealogical repairs, and formulating township covenants to strengthen the cultural subjectivity of the villagers. The symbiotic relationship of “architecture—terraces—community” should be maintained to avoid the systematic disintegration caused by the change of production mode. Combined with rural revitalisation and the construction of “family style” culture, ecological and cultural study tours with Three Gorges characteristics can be developed.

3.

Mountain farming villages: developing green eco-tourism by making use of local cultural landscapes.

Mountain farming villages are the most common type of traditional villages in the TGRA. There are 29 mountain farming villages in the study area, accounting for 25.9% of the total number of villages. The spatial structure of these villages is similar to that of the patriarchal manor villages, in that they are also social networks established by family-based farming production, except that the scale of the farmhouses is smaller and the form is simpler. The scale of farmland is more scattered, and the terrain is relatively more adaptable, so this type of village can be found in almost all elevation zones, and is the most basic farming settlement unit in the TGRA. The main problems faced by mountain farming villages are the hollowing out of the population, economic backwardness, and withering of the villages due to the inconvenient transport and poor infrastructure [50]. After entering the conservation list, these traditional villages should be integrated into the overall conservation and development plan of the region, and the infrastructure should be upgraded to improve the basic production and living conditions. At the same time, they should protect the characteristics of local culture and landscape, create green eco-habitat products through the integration of agriculture, culture and tourism, activate the rural economy, and realise the sustainable development of the villages.

4.

Ethnic Villages: Transformation of Cultural Diversity and Economic Empowerment of Culture and Tourism

The number of ethnic villages accounts for 22.3%, with a total of 25 villages, with significant aggregation in spatial distribution. They are mainly distributed in the middle and high-altitude mountainous areas where Miao, Tujia and other ethnic minorities live (Wulong, Shizhu and Badong). The spatial characteristics of these traditional villages are obvious, and the shapes and colours and materials of the buildings are unique. The unique lifestyles, ecological wisdom, handicrafts, and colourful festive customs of ethnic minorities constitute a rich intangible cultural heritage. For the protection and development of such villages, priority should be given to improving transport, water and electricity facilities, and upgrading the resilience of the living environment; at the same time, attention should be paid to the inheritance and revitalisation of ethnic minority cultures and intangible heritages, and through in-depth cultural research, the creation of innovative cultural and tourism industries such as festivals and non-heritage experiences should be made, so as to activate the village’s potential for development, and to promote the transformation of cultural resources into economic value.

5.

Ecologically Dependent Villages: Ecological Threshold Control and Low Impact Vitality Injection

There are 19 ecologically dependent villages in the study area, accounting for about 17% of the total number of villages. Ecologically dependent villages dominate in high-altitude areas above 1200 m. Most of the villages occupy the unique location of the mountain and river dangers, with a wide view of the landscape, and the surrounding environment is dominated by magnificent natural mountains and waters, which fully demonstrates the unique charm of the karst landscape in the TGRA. The villages are small in scale, sparsely populated, with complex terrain and fragile ecology. The development of such villages focuses on the balance and sustainability of the ecological environment. Based on the assessment of ecological carrying capacity, the core protection area and flexible use area should be designated, and spatial hierarchical control should be implemented; relying on the ecological secret area, novel tourism projects such as scientific research and outdoor adventure can be developed, and combined with the planning of film and television creation, art residency and other activities, to achieve the common enhancement of “natural wonders and cultural vitality”.

4.2. Research Limitations and Future Prospects

This study has made some progress in data collection and spatial analysis methods, but there are still limitations: on the one hand, the field survey data in some areas may be insufficient due to time and traffic constraints; on the other hand, the static spatial data fails to comprehensively reflect the process of dynamic evolution of the villages over time. In the future, we can further introduce long-time remote sensing images and socio-economic dynamic data, and combine them with qualitative methods such as ethnography, so as to explore the mechanism of the formation and evolution of traditional villages and their adaptive management strategies in a more in-depth manner.

By adopting the paradigm of “nature–humanities” interactive analysis, this study reveals the influence of natural geographic factors on the cultural landscape characteristics of the TGRA, further deepens the understanding of the landscape characteristics of traditional villages in the TGRA, and provides a scientific basis for the living conservation of cultural heritage. It is hoped that in the future development practice of the villages, a balance of economic, cultural and ecological benefits will be achieved, and a low-impact strategy will be adopted to construct an ecological barrier for the sustainable development of the traditional villages in the TGRA, so as to scientifically promote the implementation of the strategy for the revitalisation of the countryside in the reservoir area, and to promote the high-quality development of the region. This will promote the implementation of the rural revitalisation strategy in the reservoir area and promote the high quality development of the region.

5. Conclusions

This study achieves the following core advances in the cultural landscape research of traditional villages in the TGRA by integrating Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) with GIS geospatial analysis.

5.1. Theoretical Contributions

This research pioneers the construction of a “terrain gradient–cultural function” coupling model for use in the study of cultural landscapes of traditional villages in the TGRA. It systematically reveals how altitude and slope differentiation drive cultural landscape formation through four distinct pathways: trade networks in low-altitude river valleys foster linear commercial street settlements; agricultural optimisation on gentle slopes in mid–low altitudes supports patriarchal manor and terraced farming systems; cultural defence needs on mid-high steep slopes shape ethnic minority stilt-house clusters; and natural adaptation mechanisms in ecologically sensitive high-altitude areas produce point-dependent villages. This discovery deepens our understanding of the synergistic evolution of mountainous human–land systems and fills a research gap in micro-scale terrain-culture interaction mechanisms.

Furthermore, this study develops a methodological framework for the “living identification” of cultural landscapes. Building upon the UK Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) system and grounding it in the regional characteristics of the TGRA, it innovatively refines five cultural landscape types: traffic–commerce, patriarchal manor, mountain farming, ethnic culture, and ecological dependence. This framework overcomes the limitation of “emphasising individual buildings over holistic context” in traditional village conservation. It integrates material spaces (e.g., ancestral hall spatial patterns in patriarchal manors), social structures (e.g., clan-based ethical networks), and ecological wisdom (e.g., micro-hydrological systems in mountain farming) into a unified evaluation system, achieving a paradigm shift from static heritage appraisal to dynamic cultural gene identification. Crucially, this classification aligns with UNESCO’s authenticity requirements for “living heritage,” providing a theoretical tool to address widespread cultural fossilisation in conservation practice.

5.2. Practical Value

The conservation practice for traditional villages in the TGRA stands at a critical crossroads, transitioning from “emergency salvage conservation” to “value-driven revitalization.” Amid China’s rapid urbanization, while government-led conservation initiatives have achieved significant material restoration, they are trapped in a deeper paradox of “conservation-induced destruction”: conservation projects proceed in full swing, yet homogenization risks manifest as “thousand-villages-one-face” uniformity and intensify. The authenticity of villages as “culture-ecology-society” composite living entities is eroded by the logic of administrative efficiency. The root cause lies in current models reducing multi-dimensional cultural values to operational administrative labels, neglecting the diversity of cultural genes formed through terrain-gradient dynamics—precisely the theoretical starting point of this study for resolving the dilemma.

The five-dimensional cultural landscape classification system proposed in this research—traffic–commerce, patriarchal manor, mountain farming, ethnic culture, and ecological dependence—with its scientific core of elevation-slope-cultural function coupling mechanisms, offers a new paradigm for value-driven revitalization. For example, revitalising patriarchal manor-type villages must transcend architectural restoration to reactivate the “ancestral halls–genealogical records–village covenants” ethical community network, preventing clan culture from degenerating into symbolic performances. Similarly, ethnic culture-type villages require safeguarding the “stilt houses–terraced fields–song fair” eco-cultural chain to avoid tourism development severing material carriers from intangible practices.

This classification system shifts conservation logic from “administrative categorization” to “cultural landscape value identification”, fundamentally curbing homogenization risks. The cultural landscape identification framework constructed for traditional villages in the TGRA not only provides a scientific tool for coordinating ecological barrier construction and rural revitalization in the reservoir area but also demonstrates exemplary significance for implementing the “ecological priority and green development” strategy throughout the Yangtze Economic Belt.