Evaluation and countermeasures of sustainable development for urban energy‐economy‐environment system: A case study of Jinan in China

Abstract

The coordinated development of urban energy-economy-environment (3E) systems is an inherent requirement for high-quality and sustainable development of cities. Circulation degree and sustainable development degree (SDD) are combined to the previous 3E system evaluation system to construct the integrated sustainable development evaluation model. This model realizes the accurate evaluation of different dimensions of 3E system. Jinan, the capital city of Shandong Province in eastern China, is selected for empirical analysis. Findings show that development degree, circulation degree, and SDD of the 3E system in Jinan are increasing basically, and temporal trend of development degree and SDD of 3E system is synchronized. This shows that 3E system in Jinan has been improved gradually during this period, and the development of 3E system is a key factor affecting its sustainability. In 2015-2017, circulation degree and SDD were superimposed and developed in parallel, indicating that Jinan has entered the primary stage of high-quality development. The obstacle degree model is introduced to explore the main factors that impede the sustainable development of 3E system in Jinan. This study revealed that the energy consumption structure, the proportion of new energy utilization, the development of tertiary industry, and water resources protection are the key issues that should be addressed in the sustainable development of 3E system in Jinan. The top-level design concerning these issues should be highlighted in the forthcoming 14th five-year plan period.

Coupling coordination degree spatiotemporal characteristics and driving factors between new urbanization and construction industry: evidence from China

“…Based on the existing research results (Cai et al. , 2021; Wang et al. , 2020), the coordination types of the two systems were classified, as detailed in Table 3.…”

Challenges facing indicators to become a universal language for sustainable urban development

“…Due to various references of different sustainability frameworks, the frameworks of proposed indicator systems are also different. There are many other dimensions in different studies, such as the energy dimension (Carli et al, 2018;Wang et al, 2020), the smart dimension (Shmelev & Shmeleva, 2018), the water dimension (Carli et al, 2018), etc. As a result, urban sustainability is defined with different and diverse frameworks, although it is a shared global issue, which challenges international communication and comparison.…”

“…For example, some research defined the environmental dimension with cleanliness and built environment , while some defined it with gross indexes, environmental quality, and environmental governance (Wang et al, 2020). In turn, the same category may appear in different dimensions of different articles.…”

Coupling coordination and spatial-temporal characteristics of resource and environmental carrying capacity and high-quality development

“…On the other hand, the coupling between HQD and RECC subsystems can be distilled into interactions between society, economy, resources, and environment. Scholars have studied the economic-resource (Chen and Chen, 2019), economicenvironmental (Li et al, 2022), economic-ecological (Liao et al, 2019), economic-energy-environmental (Wang et al, 2020), economic-resource-environmental (Zhu et al, 2020), socio-economic-environmental (Yang et al, 2015), and socioeconomic-ecological (Wan et al, 2021;Bao et al, 2022) perspectives. Most of the studies on these issues are empirical studies covering multiple countries and provinces, and they all demonstrate the interconnectedness of subsystems.…”