Assessing China’s human-environment relationship

doi:10.1007/s11442-019-1658-2

Abstract

Abstract:

China’s coupled human-environment system (CHES) is assessed here via a systems schema that emphasizes the complex interactions of components and their attributes. In addition to the human and environment components, we identified two other components to evaluate the relationship. The four components are human activity intensity, resource carrying capacity, ecological constraints and system’s openness. Based on their interactions, we derived a cognitive schema for classifying the level of strain or stress of an area. The analysis draws on 11 indicators and 29 sub-indicators including remote sensing data and statistical data that are used to estimate the four components. The findings indicate that human activities are highly intense in a few geographical areas, particularly large urban systems and trade and investment zones on the eastern coastal areas. Nonetheless, these areas are also well-endowed in water resources and fertile soils although urban systems are increasingly stressed from negative pollution externalities. They are also open systems which allow them to bear a higher level of pressure and adjust accordingly. Desertification and soil erosion point to relatively fragile biophysical systems in the west and southwest, but human activities are still relatively less intense compared to their coastal counterparts. As a whole, only 14% of areas may be said to be relatively or highly strained. This however belies another one-third of areas that are currently unstable, and likely to become strained and thereby vulnerable in the near future.

Key words: coupled human-environment relationship, systems, human activity intensity, resource-carrying capacity, ecological constraint, openness, China

YANG Yu, LI Xiaoyun, DONG Wen, POON P H Jessie, HONG Hui, HE Ze, LIU Yi. Assessing China’s human-environment relationship[J].Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2019, 29(8): 1261-1282.

Figures/Tables 11

Appendix 1

H-E system components and their indicators"

Main components	Indicators	Sub-indicators	Notes
Human Activities Intensity (HAI)	Population intensity (PI)	Total population of permanent residents (P)	i. Statistical data ii. Use area as the denominator to estimate intensity
	Economic development intensity (EI)	Economic output (E)
	Land development intensity (LI)	Land area under construction (C)
Resource Carrying Capacity (RCC)	Land area suitable for construction per capita (L(P))	Gradient (G), Altitude (A), Area of water (A_w), Area of woodland (A_wl), Area of grassland (A_g), Area of desert (A_d), Area of restricted development zones (A_r), Area of forbidden development zones (A_f)	i. Intersect G and A to get alternative land, based on remote sensing data ii. Remove A_w, A_wl, A_g, A_d, A_rand A_f to estimate available land iii. Evaluate per capita land area
	Available water per capita (W(P))	Surface water (W_sf), Groundwater (W_g)	i. Sum average annual W_sf and W_g to estimate available water ii. Evaluate per capita available water resources
	Energy and mineral resources per capita (M(P))	Available energy and mineral resource measured in industrial outputs (M_s)	i. Based on ten categories of energy and mineral resources ii. Calculate by output value to eliminate dimensional effects of various energy and mineral resources.
Ecological Constraints (EC)	Fragility of the ecosystem (ECO_f)	Soil erosion vulnerability (SE), Stony desertification vulnerability (SD), Desertification vulnerability (D), Soil salinization vulnerability (SS)	Methodology based on references 38 & 39
	Significance of the ecosystem (ECO_s)	Importance of water conservation (WC), Importance of soil conservation (SC), Importance of wind prevention and sand fixation (WSC), Importance of biodiversity (B), Importance of special ecosystems (SE)	Methodology based on references 38 & 39
	Environmental capacity (ENC)	National standard for environmental performance(ENC_s), Environmental quality of the areas based on the presence of typical atmospheric pollutants (ENC_p)	Estimated from the difference between EC_sand EC_c
Openness of the System (SO)	Transport accessibility (T)	Road network density (RD), Grade level of trunk route (LTR),	i. D is a composite index of main transportation infrastructure (rail, highway, fairway, airport and port). Infrastructure grade and distance to trunk routes are used to estimate the road network density. ii. See references of 42&43.
Openness of the System (SO)	Net migration (NMP)	Migration in-flow (IMP) Migration outflow (OMP)	Statistical data

Appendix 1

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Table 1

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Table 2

Figure 7

Figure 8

References 39

[1]	Chen S Y , 2009. Energy consumption, CO₂ emission and sustainable development in Chinese industry. Economic Research Journal, ( 4):41-55.
[2]	Demestis D S, Lee A S , 2016. Crafting theory to satisfy the requirements of systems science. Information and Organization, ( 26):116-126.
[3]	Feng Z M, Liu D, Yang Y Z , 2009. Evaluation of transportation ability of China: From county to province level. Geographical Research, 28(2):419-429. (in Chinese)
[4]	Fu B J, Liu S L, Ma K M , 2001. The contents and methods of integrated ecosystem assessment (IEA). Acta Ecologica Sinica, 21(11):1885-1892. (in Chinese)
[5]	Galvani A P, Bauch C T, Anand M et al., 2016. Human-environment interactions in population and ecosystem health. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(51):14502-14506.
[6]	Harden C P , 2012. Framing and reframing questions of human-environment interactions. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(4):737-747.
[7]	Jin F J, Wang C J, Li X W , 2008. Discrimination method and its application analysis of regional transport superiority. Acta Geographica Sinica, 63(8):787-798. (in Chinese)
[8]	Li J Y, Li L J , 2012. Water resources supporting capacity to regional socio-economic development of China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 67(3):410-419. (in Chinese)
[9]	Li X Y, Yang Y, Liu Y , 2017. Research progress in man-land relationship evolution and its resource-environment base in China. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 27(8):899-924.
[10]	Li Y B, Xie J, Luo G J et al., 2015. The evolution of a karst rocky desertification land ecosystem and its driving forces in the Houzhaihe area. Open Journal of Ecology, 5(10):501-512.
[11]	Liu D, Feng Z M, Yang Y Z , 2012. Ecological balance between supply and demand in China using ecological footprint method. Journal of Natural Resources, 27(4):614-624. (in Chinese)
[12]	Liu J G, Hull V, Carter N H et al., 2016. Framing sustainability of couple human-environment systems. In: Liu J G, Hull V, Yang W et al. (eds). Pandas and People: Coupled Human and Natural Systems for Sustainability. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 15-32.
[13]	Liu J J, Dong S C, Li Z H , 2011. Comprehensive evaluation of China’s water resources carrying capacity. Journal of Natural Resources, 26(2):258-269. (in Chinese)
[14]	Liu J Y, Zhang Z X, Z D F , 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)
[15]	Liu Y S, Chen B M , 2002. The study framework of land use/cover change based on sustainable development in China. Geographical Research, 21(3):324-330. (in Chinese)
[16]	Ministry of Environment Protection of the People’s Republic of China, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2014. The Remote Sensing Investigation and Evaluation of National Ecological Environment Decade Changing (2000-2010). Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)
[17]	Moran E , 2011. Human-Environment Interactions and Sustainability. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
[18]	Moran E F, Elinor O , 2005. Seeing the Forest and the Trees: Human-Environment Interactions in Forest Ecosystems. MIT Press.
[19]	National Research Council of the National Academies, US ( NRCNA), 2010. Understanding the Changing Planet Strategic Directions for the Geographical Sciences. California: National Academies Press.
[20]	Newell B, Crumley C L, Hassan N et al., 2005. A conceptual template for integrative human-environment research. Global Environmental Change, 15(4):299-307.
[21]	Nir D , 2002. Region as a Socio-Environment System. Boston: Kluwer Publishing.
[22]	Roman S, Palmer E, Brede M , 2018. The dynamics of human-environment interactions in the collapse of the classic Maya. Ecological Economics, 146:312-324.
[23]	Skyttner L , 2005. General Systems Theory: Problems, Perspectives, Practice. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.
[24]	Sun D Q, Zhang J X, Zhu C G et al., 2012. An assessment of China's ecological environment quality change and its spatial variation. Acta Geographica Sinica, 67(12):1599-1610. (in Chinese)
[25]	Tian Q , 2017. Rural Sustainability: A Complex Systems Approach to Policy Analysis. Amsterdam: Springer.
[26]	Turner II B L , 2010. Vulnerability and resilience: Coalescing or paralleling approaches for sustainability science? Global Environmental Change, 20(4):570-576.
[27]	Turner II B L, Lambin E F, Reenberg A , 2007. The emergence of land change science for global environmental change and sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(52):20666-20671.
[28]	Turner II B L, Matsond P A, McCarthye J J , 2003. Illustrating the coupled human-environment system for vulnerability analysis: Three case studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100(14):8080-8085.
[29]	Wang N , 2004. The role of construction industry in China and sustainable urban development. Habitat International, 44:442-450.
[30]	Wang W, Zhang X, Wu Y et al., 2017. Development priority zoning in China and its impact on urban growth. Cities, 62:1-9.
[31]	Wang X, Chen F, Dong Z , 2006. The relative role of climatic and human factors in desertification in semiarid China. Global Environmental Change, 16(1):48-57.
[32]	Wu C J , 2008. Man- earth Relationship and Economic Layout: Collections of Wu Chuanjun. Beijing: Xueyuan Press. (in Chinese)
[33]	Xu Y, Sun X Y, Tang Q , 2015. Human activity intensity of land surface: Concept, method and application in China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 70(7):1068-1079. (in Chinese)
[34]	Xu Y, Zhang X F, Li L J et al., 2016. Regional differentiation and classification for constraints of national resources and environment carrying. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 31(1):34-43. (in Chinese)
[35]	Yang Q S, Mei L , 2001. Human-activity-geographical-environment relationship, its system and its regional system. Economic Geography, 21(5):532-537. (in Chinese)
[36]	Yang Y, Liu Y , 2016. Progress in China’s sustainable development research: Contribution of Chinese geographers. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 26(8):1176-1196.
[37]	Yu X S , 1991. Calculation of the population carrying capacity of the land resource and its significance in the study of man-nature relation: A case in Binhai and Suzhou of Jiangsu province. Journal of Natural Resources, 6(2):117-126. (in Chinese)
[38]	Zhang K H , 2014. Globalization and regional industrial performance: Evidence from China. Paper in Regional Science, 93(2):269-280.
[39]	Zhang W Z, Yu J H, Wang D et al., 2014. Study on Sustainable Development of Resource-based Cities in China. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)

Level	Count	Total area (km²)	Proportion (%)
Very unstrained	42	666810	7.0
Relatively unstrained	527	3795953	39.9
Balanced	976	3671385	38.6
Highly balanced	112	186130	1.96
Antagonistic balanced	626	1865094	19.62
Lowly balanced	238	1620161	17.04
Relatively strained	689	1266533	13.3
Very strained	153	106345	1.1
Total	2387	9507026	100.0