Analysis of the Driving Mechanism of Land Comprehensive Carrying Capacity from the Perspective of Urban Renewal

Abstract

After a period of rapid development, the process of urbanization in China has gradually shifted from “scale expansion” to “enhanced quality”. The scarcity of urban land resources has created constraints on resources and economic development. This paper examines the carrying capacity of urban land resources from the perspective of urban renewal. A conceptual model of the driving mechanism of land comprehensive carrying capacity is constructed, incorporating six dimensions and 22 indicators, including urban renewal and urban ecology. Through questionnaire surveys and structural equation modeling, feedback data are analyzed, and measurement models, structural models, and mediation effects are examined to analyze the causal paths of factors in different dimensions on the comprehensive carrying capacity of urban land. The research results indicate that all six dimensions in the conceptual model have a direct positive impact on the land carrying capacity. In terms of direct effects, the influencing factors are ranked in descending order of magnitude as follows: urban development, urban disaster prevention and mitigation capacity, infrastructure development, urban renewal, social economy, and urban ecology. In terms of overall effects, factors are ranked in descending order of magnitude as follows: urban development, social economy, urban ecology, urban renewal, urban disaster prevention and mitigation capacity, and infrastructure development.

A Study on Resource Carrying Capacity and Early Warning of Urban Agglomerations of the Yellow River Basin Based on Sustainable Development Goals, China

“…The origin of the carrying capacity concept comes from biology and ecology [4], and the resource carrying capacity has been widely evaluated, from studies that assess single elements to much more comprehensive evaluations [5], which primarily focus on the study of the land carrying capacity [6], water carrying capacity [7,8], ecological carrying capacity [9], and other elements with potent relevance. The specific measures of resource carrying capacity include the system dynamics model [10,11], multiobjective function [12], neural network [13], ecological footprint method [14], principal component analysis [15], hierarchical analysis [16], and the TOPSIS method [17], which have all undergone development from an original focus on single resource constraints to comprehensive assessments of the human occupation of resources. The increasing depth of research has meant that resource carrying capacity has gradually changed from a classification to a synthesis, from qualitative to quantitative assessments, and from evaluating the current carrying capacity to developing monitoring and early warning strategies [3].…”