The Evolution Mode and Driving Mechanisms of the Relationship between Construction Land Use and Permanent Population in Urban and Rural Contexts: Evidence from China’s Land Survey

Abstract

(1) Background: Achieving harmonious human–land relations is one of the key objectives of sustainable urban–rural development, and the degree of decoupling of permanent population levels from changes in construction land use is an important factor in related analyses. Due to the existence of huge urban–rural differences, rethinking China’s human–land relations from the perspective of integrating urban and rural areas is of great value for the advancement of high-quality urban–rural development. (2) Methods: By studying the lower reaches of the Yangtze and Yellow Rivers of China, and based on data from the second and third national land surveys of China, this paper analyzes the spatio-temporal evolution of urban and rural population, construction land use, and human–land relations from 2009 to 2019 using exploratory spatial data analysis (ESDA) and a decoupling model; in addition, this paper proposes a differentiated zoning management strategy and establishes a new framework that integrates evolutionary patterns, human–land relations, spatial effects, and policy design. (3) Results: The geographic distribution patterns of urban and rural population and construction land use remained stable over time, with high levels of spatial heterogeneity, agglomeration, and correlation. Changes in urban and rural population levels and construction land use are becoming increasingly diversified and complex, with both increases and reductions existing side by side. Based on a Boston Consulting Group matrix, the evolution patterns of urban and rural population and construction land use are divided into four types, referred to as star-cities, cow-cities, question-cities, and dog-cities. Over the time period examined in this paper, the spatial autocorrelation of urban land evolution patterns turned from negative to positive; however, that of rural land, as well as those of urban and rural population evolution patterns, were statistically insignificant. Urban human–land relations are coordinated, in general, and are mostly in a state of either weak decoupling or expansive coupling. In contrast, rural human–land relations are seriously imbalanced, and most of them are in a state of strong negative decoupling. Human–land relations are dominated by regressive changes in urban areas but remain unchanged in rural areas. Cold- and hot-spot cities are concentrated in clusters or in bands, forming a core-periphery structure. The formation and evolution of the decoupling relationship between construction land use and permanent population are the results of multiple factors, including urbanization, industrialization, globalization, and government demand and policy intervention. The interaction effects between different factors show bifactor enhancement and nonlinear enhancement, with complex driving mechanisms and large urban–rural differences. It should be highlighted that the influence intensity, operation mechanism, and changes in the trends for different factors vary greatly. Urbanization rate, gross domestic product, and government revenue are key factors that exert a strong direct driving force; international trade, foreign direct investment, and per capita GDP are important factors, while the remaining factors are auxiliary factors that remain heavily dependent on interaction effects. (4) Conclusions: To further transform human–land relations from imbalanced to coordinated, we divide the study area into four area types based on the concept of urban–rural community: urban and rural intensive policy areas, urban intensive policy areas, rural intensive policy areas, and urban and rural controlled policy areas. Furthermore, we put forward suggestions on the differentiated management of land use for the four types of policy areas.

Effects of Land Use Changes on Ecosystem Service Value in Xiangjiang River Basin, China

“…On the one hand, this can be explained by the large initial area of cultivated land and forest land in the Xiangjiang River Basin; on the other hand, the population scale and economic and social development in the Xiangjiang River Basin changed significantly from 1990 to 2000, with the population size increasing from 43 million in 1990 to 46 million in 2000. During this period, farmers' livelihoods mainly depended on agricultural production [55,56]. Since 2000, the living demand of farmers has been continuously improving, and more and more farmers choose to work in cities, and the phenomenon of abandoning farmland gradually appears.…”

Coordination Dynamics between Population Change and Built-Up Land Expansion in Mainland China during 2000–2020

“…Changes in the human-land relationship result from various factors, including urbanization, industrialization, globalization, and government policies. Zhu et al [30] analyzed the changes in the human-land relationship in cities along the Yangtze River and the lower Yellow River from 2009 to 2019 and found that the urbanization rate, GDP, and government revenues were the main driving factors. We find that the GDP per capita, the proportion of urban population, the proportion of tertiary industry, and the proportion of employees are not simply linearly related to HLEC in most provinces.…”

“…Between 2000 and 2020, the controls of population growth in China's cities gradually shifted from purely economic factors to a combination of economic factors and the availability of public services [24]. The expansion of built-up land in China is shaped not only by population dynamics but also by socio-economic development [25,26], migration [27], land-use market [28], and governmental policies [29], and the interactions between these influencing factors make the human-land relationship more complex [30]. The interplay between population and built-up land in a region may significantly affect the economic development levels of its neighboring regions in the developed regions, such as the case in the Yangtze River Delta [31], while in rural regions, factors such as slope and altitude predominantly contribute to disparities in the human-land relationship [32].…”

Characterizing Sprawl Development in Urban China: A Perspective from Urban Amenity

“…The lack of intra-urban and spatiotemporal studies is partly due to the limitations of urban data [49]. First, despite the high involvement and exploration of remote sensing in urban studies, existing planning decisions, especially in China, still rely mostly on land surveys or master planning data for land use [50,51]. These approaches are highly reliable but present problems, such as data barriers, high costs, long time intervals, and regional limitations.…”