Examining the influence of the implementation of Major Function-oriented Zones on built-up area expansion in China

doi:10.1007/s11442-017-1398-0

Abstract

Abstract:

China had implemented the national strategies for Major Function-oriented Zones (MFOZs) to realize the goal of national sustainable development since 2010. This study analyzed and compared spatio-temporal characteristics and differences in built-up area for China’s MFOZs using a China’ s Land Use Database (CLUD) derived from high-resolution remotely sensed images in the periods of 2000-2010 and 2010-2013. To sum up: (1) The percentage of built-up area in each of the MFOZs was significantly different, revealing the gradient feature of national land development based on the distribution of the main functions. (2) Annual growth in built-up area in optimal development zones (ODZs) decreased significantly during 2010-2013 compared with the period 2000-2010, while annual growth in built-up area in key development zones (KDZs), agricultural production zones (APZs) and key ecological function zones (KEFZs) increased significantly. (3) In ODZs, the average annual increase in built-up area in the Yangtze River Delta region was significantly higher than in other regions; the average area increase and rate of increase of built-up area in KDZs was faster in the western region than in other regions; average annual area growth of built-up area in APZs in the northeast, central and western regions was twice as high as the previous decade on average; the annual rate of change and increase in the dynamic degree of built-up area were most notable in KEFZs in the central region. (4) The spatial pattern and characteristics of built-up area expansions in the period 2010-2013 reflected the gradient feature of the plan for MFOZs. But the rate of increase locally in built-up area in ODZs, APZs and KEFZs is fast, so the effective measures must be adopted in the implementation of national and regional policies. The conclusions indicated these methods and results were meaningful for future regulation strategies in optimizing national land development in China.

Key words: Major Function-oriented Zones, satellite remote sensing, land use change, development of urban and town built-up area, China

Wenchao LIU, Jiyuan LIU, Wenhui KUANG, Jia NING. Examining the influence of the implementation of Major Function-oriented Zones on built-up area expansion in China[J].Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2017, 27(6): 643-660.

Figures/Tables 17

Figure 1

Table 1

Figure 2

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

References 20

[1]	Chen Y Y, 2004. Some views on regional adaptation to global change research.Advances in Earth Science, 19(4): 495-499. (in Chinese)
[2]	Fan J, 2015. Draft of Major Function Oriented Zoning of China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 70(2): 186-201. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11821/dlxb201502002
[3]	Fan J, Sun W, Yang Z Set al., 2012. Focusing on the Major Function-oriented Zone: A new spatial planning approach and practice in China and its 12th Five-Year Plan.Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 53(1): 85-95.
[4]	Fan J, Sun W, Zhou Ket al., 2012. Major Function Oriented Zone: New method of spatial regulation for reshaping regional development pattern in China.Chinese Geographical Science, 22(2): 1-14. doi: 10.1007/s11769-012-0510-8
[5]	Foley J A, DeFries R, Asner G Pet al., 2005. Global consequences of land use.Science, 309(5734): 570-574. doi: 10.1126/science.1111772 pmid: 16040698
[6]	GLP Science Plan and Implementation Strategy (GLP), 2005. IGBP Report No.53/IHDP Report No.19, Stockholm, 64.
[7]	Kuang W H, Liu J Y, Zhang Z Xet al., 2013. Spatiotemporal dynamics of impervious surface areas across China during the early 21st century.Chinese Science Bulletin, 14: 1-11. doi: 10.1007/s11434-012-5568-2
[8]	Lambin E F, Baulies X, Bockstael Net al., 1995. Land-use and land-cover change (LUCC): Implementation strategy. A Core Project of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme and the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change. IGBP Report 48. IHDP Report 10. IGBP, Stockholm, 125.
[9]	Liu J Y, 1996. Macro-scale Survey and Dynamic Study of Natural Resources and Environment of China by Remote Sensing. Beijing: China Science and Technology Press. (in Chinese)
[10]	Liu J Y, Kuang W H, Zhang Z Xet al., 2014. Spatiotemporal characteristics, patterns and causes of land use changes in China since the late 1980s.Acta Geographica Sinica, 69(1): 3-14. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1007/s11442-014-1082-6
[11]	Liu J Y, Zhang Z X, Xu X Let al., 2010. Spatial patterns and driving forces of land use change in China during the early 21st century.Journal of Geographical Sciences, 20(4): 483-494. doi: 10.1007/s11442-010-0483-4
[12]	Liu J Y, Zhang Z X, Zhuang D Fet al., 2003. A study on the spatial-temporal dynamic changes of land-use and driving forces analyses of China in the 1990s.Geographical Research, 22(1): 1-12. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1007/BF02873097
[13]	Liu Y B, Li R D, Song X F, 2005. Grey associative analysis of regional urbanization and eco-environment coupling in China.Acta Geographica Sinica, 60(2): 237-247. (in Chinese)
[14]	Lu D D, Fan J, 2009. 2050: The Regional Development of China. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)
[15]	McMahon G, Benjamin S P, Clarke Ket al., 2005. Geography for a Changing World: A Science Strategy for the Geographic Research of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015, Sioux Falls. SD: U.S. Geological Survey Circular, 1281: 1-76.
[16]	Salazar A, Baldi G, Hirota Met al., 2015. Land use and land cover change impacts on the regional climate of non-Amazonian South America: A review.Global & Planetary Change, 128: 103-119. doi: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2015.02.009
[17]	Shi P J, Gong P, Li X B et al., 2000. Methods and Practice of Land Use/Cover Change. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)
[18]	Turner B L, Skole D, Sanderson Set al., 1995. Land-use and land-cover change: Science/research plan. Joint Publication of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (Report No.35) and the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Programme (Report No.7). Stockholm: Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
[19]	Turner B L, Skole D, Sanderson Set al., 1995. Land Cover Change Science/Research Plan, IGBP Report No. 35, HDP Report 7. IGBP of the ICSU and HDP of the ISSC, Stockholm and Geneva.
[20]	Zhang Z X, Zhao X L, Wang X et al., 2012. Remote Sensing Monitoring of Land Use in China. Beijing: Star Maps Publishing House. (in Chinese)

National-level functions	Number of counties		Land area
National-level functions	Number	Percentage	(×10⁴ km²)	Percentage (%)
Optimal development zones	134	8.50	13.87	2.15
Key development zones	361	23.46	67.76	10.51
Agricultural production zones	692	41.98	181.90	28.21
Key ecological function zones	419	26.06	381.25	59.13

	Major Function-oriented Zones area (×10⁴ km²)	Built-up area (×10⁴ km²)	Proportion of national land area (%)
Optimal development zones	13.87	3.74	27.02
Key development zones	67.76	4.25	6.27
Agricultural production zones	181.90	7.61	4.18
Key ecological function zones	381.25	1.63	0.43

	Area of built-up area (×10⁴ km²)	Proportion of urban land (%)	Proportion of rural residential land (%)	Proportion of land used for factory, mining and transportation (%)
Optimal development zones	3.74	50.82	31.82	17.35
Key development zones	4.25	36.40	44.41	19.19
Agricultural production zones	7.61	18.33	71.03	10.64
Key ecological function zones	1.63	16.85	68.01	15.14

Zones	Total area of MFOZs (km²)	Indicator	2000-2010	2010-2013
Optimal development zones	138,677.75	Area of change (km²)	9863.24	3277.02
		Annual area of change (km²/yr)	986.32	1092.34
		Built-up area annual rate of change (%/yr)	4.07	3.20
		Built-up area dynamic degree (%/yr)	0.71	0.79
Key development zones	677,553.16	Area of change (km²)	8300.64	5238.82
		Annual area of change (km²/yr)	830.06	1746.27
		Built-up area annual rate of change (%/yr)	2.86	4.68
		Built-up area dynamic degree (%/yr)	0.12	0.26
Agricultural production zones	1,819,041.33	Area of change (km²)	6551.95	5016.57
		Annual area of change (km²/yr)	655.19	1672.19
		Built-up area annual rate of change (%/yr)	1.02	2.35
		Built-up area dynamic degree (%/yr)	0.04	0.09
Key ecological function zones	3,812,537.64	Area of change (km²)	1449.10	1337.47
		Annual area of change (km²/yr)	144.91	445.82
		Built-up area annual rate of change (%/yr)	1.07	2.98
		Built-up area dynamic degree (%/yr)	0.004	0.012