Spatio-Temporal Pattern and Influence Mechanism of Cultivated Land System Resilience: Case from China

Abstract

The study of cultivated land systems from the perspective of resilience is of great significance for the innovation of the research paradigm of cultivated land use and the rational utilization and protection of cultivated land. This study aims to explain the theoretical connotations of cultivated land system resilience (CLSR), construct an evaluation system and zoning rules for CLSR, and take 30 provinces of China as case study areas to explore the influencing factors of CLSR, so as to provide a reliable governance plan for the sustainable development of cultivated land. The results show that: (1) CLSR refers to a sustainable development ability that CLS—by adjusting the structure and scale of internal elements—absorbs and adapts to internal and external disturbances and shocks to the maximum possible extent, abandons the original inapplicable state, creates a new recovery path, achieves a new balance, and avoids system recession. (2) The overall CLSR of the 30 provinces showed an upward trend, and the degree of polarization of the distribution pattern was gradually intensified and experienced a transition process from “leading by resource and ecological resilience—equilibrium of each resilience—leading by production and scale structural resilience”. (3) In the north, east, and south coastal areas of China, CLSR mainly consists of the major evolution areas and the stable development areas; the potential excitation areas of CLSR are mainly concentrated in the central and western regions of China; the CLSR-sensitive lag areas and degraded vulnerable areas are mainly distributed in the northwest and southwest of China. (4) Water resource endowment has a strong influence on CLSR, while social economy mainly influences CLSR through ‘economic foundation-superstructures’ and ‘economic development-factor agglomeration’. (5) According to the different CLSR zones, CLSR was strengthened mainly from the aspects of driving factor agglomeration, building factor free-flow systems, and multi-means support.

Evaluation of Cropland System Resilience to Climate Change at Municipal Scale Through Robustness, Adaptability, and Transformability: A Case Study of Hubei Province, China

“…A single indicator, such as grain output (Di Falco and Chavas, 2008;Birthal et al, 2015) or agricultural GDP (Hsiang and Jina, 2014), has been applied to indirectly reflect the resilience change. In addition, multi-dimension index systems are also constructed by previous studies (Allison and Hobbs, 2004;Tambo, 2016;Lyu et al, 2021;Nasr et al, 2021). However, few studies have focused on a specific disturbance or shock external to the system, which would be difficult to form a unified evaluation system or acknowledged indicators.…”

“…For example, Di Falco and Chavas (2008) argued that greater landscape heterogeneity supports higher species diversity and thus makes the agricultural system more resilient to future climate change. Lyu et al (2021) believed that nature reserve area is an important factor affecting CSRCC because the establishment of nature reserves would hinder the large-scale sustainable management of cropland. In addition, geomorphic characteristics also deeply impact CSRCC because of weaker robustness to natural hazards and enormous difficulty in implementing agricultural mechanization in mountain or hilly areas (Li et al, 2018).…”

“…Other studies attempted to innovate the theoretical framework for the evaluation (Altieri et al, 2015). For example, a recent study by Lyu et al (2021) proposed an assessment framework based on cropland resource resilience, ecological resilience, production resilience, and scale structural resilience. Generally, previous research studies have evaluated cropland system resilience from various socio-ecological dimensions.…”

Spatiotemporal evolution and the detection of key drivers in the resilience of cultivated land system in major grain‐producing regions of China

“…Sustainable utilization of cultivated land means that the cultivated land system (CLS) can keep normal operation in the future, which also means that even if it is disturbed, the system can remain normal through adjustment (Tendall et al, 2015). More specifically, when the CLS suffers from external interference, it can continuously adjust its adaptability and capacity to recover, so as to ensure that its basic structure and function are not affected (Li et al, 2022; Lyu et al, 2022). The ability of CLS can be interpreted as cultivated land system resilience (CLSR).…”

Spatio-Temporal Pattern and Influence Mechanism of Rural Human Settlements System Resilience: Case from China

“…Falk et al (2010) also argued that the current phase of resilience thinking focuses on three different aspects of social-ecological systems, namely resilience as persistence, adaptability, and transformability [10]. This is the concept of resilience in evolutionary resilience theory, in which a resource system constantly adapts its structure to external disturbances and stimuli, and uses the self-regulatory and external protection capacities granted by the socio-economic system to create new development paths and thus increase its sustainability [12]. The connotation of resilience has been different from the single recovery and resilience, and is essentially a coupling of the two [9].…”