Production–Living–Ecological Conflict Identification Using a Multiscale Integration Model Based on Spatial Suitability Analysis and Sustainable Development Evaluation: A Case Study of Ningbo, China

Abstract

Production–living–ecological space (PLES) basically covers the scope of spatial activities in people’s material production and spiritual life and is the basic carrier of human social development and economic activities. The coordinated development of PLES is an effective method to mitigate land-use conflicts to achieve balanced and coordinated development of the region. However, so far, compared with the single-scale study based on administrative unit, the PLES conflicts between microcosmic grid-scale receives less attention. Considering the important scale problems of the geographical study, this study aims to analyze the synergetic degree of PLES under different scales (administrative-unit, grid, and integrated multiscale) and to scientifically diagnose land use conflicts in Ningbo, China. Results indicated that production land and ecological land in Ningbo were continuously occupied by human activities from 2010 to 2018. The lowest and lower suitability areas of ecological space in Ningbo increased from 2010 to 2018. Land ecological suitability was seriously affected by urban expansion, its ecological value was reduced, and the PLES developed towards the trend of being uncoordinated. Multiscale coupling analysis showed that the PLES in Ningbo was in less conflict on the whole, but with the development of the economy, the coupling coordination degree of PLES was also damaged. This study establishes the different scales of a PLES coupling coordination development degree evaluation index system and enriches the methods of multiscale land use fusion conflict diagnosis and also provides a scientific reference for the optimized and sustainable development of regional territorial space.

Spatial Transformation Characteristics and Conflict Measurement of Production-Living-Ecology: Evidence from Urban Agglomeration of China

“…However, scholars differ in their understanding of land-bearing functions, which are mainly divided into single spatial division and composite spatial division. Among them, scholars who hold a single spatial view believe that each land use type only considers its dominant function, and the division results in three spatial categories including production, living and ecology space, with no overlapping areas between the spaces [9,13,25]. Some scholars also believe that land can carry multiple functions at the same time, in addition to the single function of production, living and ecological, but also, has three spatial types of composite functions [26], for example, cultivated lands have both production and ecological functions, so the land is divided into production-ecological, living-production, etc., which is a composite spatial division.…”

“…The methods adopted include interview investigation methods [42], multicriteria decision analysis methods [43], pressure-state-response models [35] and adaptability evaluations [44]. Most studies believe that spatial conflict is the result of multiple factors [9,14]. In the early stage when human disturbance intensity is low, natural factors play a major role, while with the increase in population and the acceleration of urbanization and industrialization, human activities gradually play a leading role in shaping the landscape.…”

“…It is the result of the interaction of different spatial environments and spatial scale elements, and is manifested in different utilization structures and ways in land use [2]. With the continuous deepening of research on PLES, many scholars divide land use into ecology space, production-ecology space, ecology-production space and living-production space from the perspective of the dominant and secondary functions of land use [9,25]. On the basis of exploring the connotation of PLES theory, some scholars established a spatial classification and evaluation system of PLES based on land use classification according to the national standard of land use classification [45].…”

“…Since the beginning of the new century, China's rapid population urbanization and land urbanization process have accelerated the demand for land resources [6][7][8], and urban and rural construction land has continuously encroached on agricultural and ecological land, causing increasing land use conflicts in space. In essence, land use conflict is the competition for resource elements in time and space among land-using subjects [9], which is manifested as the uncoordinated development of the human-land relationship. Once the conflict level is intensified or out of control, it will lead to a series of problems such as the waste of spatial resources, destruction of ecosystem, weakening of the stability of the landscape pattern and imbalance of social development [10][11][12][13][14][15].…”

Optimizing the Production-Living-Ecological Space for Reducing the Ecosystem Services Deficit

“…The PLES optimization belongs to the problem of optimizing the allocation of national land resources. Based on land characteristics and land-use system principles, the structure and direction of land resource use are arranged, designed, combined, and laid out at a hierarchical level on a spatial and temporal scale to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of land use, maintain the relative balance of land ecosystems, and realize the sustainable use of land resources [40]. The main theoretical support for current PLES optimization comes from the theory of regional resource and environmental carrying capacity and the theory of coupling urbanization and ecological environment [41,42].…”