China’s borders are vast and diverse, ranging from the arid Gobi Desert in the northwest to the frigid desert of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and karst mountains in the southwest. Each border zone has a distinct ecosystem and environmental conditions. These regions serve as windows for national economic development and critical zones for ecological security, and they exhibit a fragile and diverse ecological environment that is highly sensitive to human activities in various ways. With the initiation of the reform and opening up policy in 1978, China’s border areas have increasingly become focal points for reform and pivotal channels for both domestic and international economic circulation (Lin et al., 2022). Under the impetus of rapid economic growth and urbanization, there has been a profound transformation and restructuring of the Production-Living-Ecological Space (PLES) pattern in these border areas (Song et al., 2017; Wu et al., 2022). These changes inevitably lead to a range of ecological and environmental issues (Lin et al., 2022; 2023), the complexity and variability of which pose unprecedented challenges to managing territorial space and protecting the ecological environment in border regions. Therefore, this study uncovers the characteristics of territorial spatial transformation and its ecological effects in China’s terrestrial border areas since the reform and opening up and delves into the interactive mechanisms between PLES transformation and ecological environmental quality. This is of great reference value for balancing regional economic development with ecological and environmental protection and for enacting targeted land use and ecological conservation policies.

The concept of territorial spatial structure was initially introduced to address the spatial arrangement of agriculture across the Taiwan Province in China, with the objective of maintaining the balance between agricultural production and ecological landscape preservation. Over time, the concept of territorial space was proposed, which considers China’s national circumstances and includes the production, living, and ecological spaces that form the territorial structure, encompassing the entire land system, human activities, and natural ecosystems (Burke and Holford, 1966; Zhu et al., 2021; Jiang et al., 2022). The evolutionary characteristics of territorial space are the subject of further research on land use change. These studies have addressed changes in structural characteristics in the dimensions of production, living, and ecological spaces (Yang et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2022). Commonly used research methods include land-use dynamic attitude, the land transfer matrix, and hotspot analysis to reveal the contradictions of the national territorial space and optimize the foundation of the territory’s spatial pattern (Yang et al., 2020; 2022). Factors influencing the evolution of territorial space differ, owing to different regional resource endowments and levels of economic development. Studies exploring the driving mechanisms of territorial spatial changes often consider multidimensional factors, such as policies, regulations, humanities, and economic and natural environments. RS and GIS technologies have been used to combine mathematical models, such as multiple linear regression models, geographical detectors, and spatial regression models (Feng et al., 2021; Hu et al., 2022; Li et al., 2022; Peng et al., 2022). Studies evaluating territorial spatial functions have adopted qualitative or quantitative methods to examine the functions of territorial spatial patterns. The hierarchical analysis, Delphi, and entropy power methods were comprehensively scored in the regional territorial space. Statistical models, including the Gini coefficient and Theil index, have been used to examine the heterogeneity of territorial spatial pattern functions across various regions (Verburg et al., 2009; Zhou et al., 2017; Zhou et al., 2020). Research on optimizing territorial spaces has focused on the optimal allocation of territorial resources. The primary research approach was to construct a comprehensive evaluation index system to measure the efficiency of land use based on the territory space theory. This study also analyzed conflicts within the land-use structure by integrating land-use and DEM data, as demonstrated in previous studies (Ma et al., 2020; Jiang et al., 2021). Coordination and optimization measures have been proposed based on structural and spatial patterns (Jiang et al., 2015; Shi et al., 2015; Song et al., 2020). Research on the utilization of territorial space and ecological protection has been grounded in the concept of sustainable development. Land ecological resources provide the material foundation for constructing and developing the human economy and society and serve as a vital prerequisite for achieving sustainable development goals. This research holds immense significance for the high-quality and green development of the region (Song et al., 2020; Yang et al., 2020; Tao et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2022).

The spatial pattern of national land has been predominantly studied in national, provincial, city, watershed, and urban clusters by reviewing the existing literature. Research on terrestrial border areas distant from political and cultural centers is currently scarce, with a particular lack of investigation into the contribution of terrestrial space transformation to the ecological environment. However, against the backdrop of China’s opening-up transformation and the complex geopolitical environment of its periphery, the border regions serve as key support areas for implementing China’s opening-up strategy and sensitive areas for the ecological environment under rapid development. Beyond its economic, social, and ecological functions, the territorial spatial structure also exhibits features of territorial security essential for maintaining border stability. Therefore, it is imperative to comprehensively depict the evolution of the territorial spatial structure of China’s inland border areas and examine its ecological environmental effects. This study holds significant theoretical and practical importance for realizing comprehensive openness in border regions and constructing harmonious surrounding environments.

Taking China’s land border region as an example, this study explored the “spatial pattern - structural transformation - regional differences - ecological environmental effects” of territorial space based on three dimensions: spatial pattern, structural transformation, and ecological response. This study employed tools such as the land transfer matrix, Theil index, and ecological environment index for this purpose. These findings deepen our understanding of the transformation of territorial space in China’s border regions since the economic reform and opening-up, supplement research on changes in PLES and their ecological environmental effects in border areas, optimize the territorial spatial pattern of China’s land border region, and provide theoretical guidance for the high-quality development of these areas.

Building on existing literature on China’s border areas (Song and Zhu, 2020; Gu et al., 2022) and considering the variations in the natural geographical environment and socioeconomic status within the research zone, we divided China’s land border areas into 5 distinct regions (Figure 1): the Northeast Border Region (comprising three provinces in the northeast), the Northern Border Areas (including Inner Mongolia and Gansu), the Northwest Border Areas (encompassing Xinjiang), the Xizang Border Area, and the Southwest Border Area (covering Yunnan and Guangxi). This study used multiple data sources, including spatial, statistical, and topographic data, to assess the PLES and potential influencing factors (Table 1).

Based on the principles of functional dominance and operability, and using the abovementioned land-use data, the current data obtained were divided by territorial spatial structure and land-use type along China’s land border to build a classification system (Table 2), in which the third-level category corresponds to the existing land-use classification (Liu et al., 2017; Lin et al., 2022).

The dynamics of territory space are the changes in various territorial spaces during a certain period and reflect the increase or decrease in a particular land-use type (Mustafa et al., 2021).

where D is the dynamic attitude index of the spatial structure of the territory, A_i and A_ii refer to the transferred and non-transferred areas after the change in the territory space, and T is the time interval.

The transfer matrix model (Wang et al., 2021) was used to achieve the structural transformation of the PLES using the following mathematical formula:

where S_ij represents the total area of category i territorial space in the early stage of the study, which is transferred to category j territorial space in the late stage; n refers to the number of land-space utilization types.

The Theil index is a commonly used metric for characterizing individual, structural, and regional differences. In this study, the Theil index was employed to examine the spatiotemporal differences in the evolution of territorial space in China’s border areas (Yin et al., 2018). Its formulation is as follows:

where T represents the Theil index, Y_i represents the territorial space area, and $\overline{Y}$represents the average territorial space areas of different regions. T_b and T_k represent the intragroup and intergroup gaps, respectively, and Y_k represents the territorial space area of k.

The ecological environment index represents the spatial quality of ecosystems at the core of natural ecological systems and is influenced by human societal activities. It serves to uphold regional ecological security, provide ecological goods and services, and gauge the level of ecological services providing species habitats. In this study, we quantified the ecological environment index using three key indices: ecological quality, normalized difference vegetation index, and total ecosystem primary productivity (Table 3) (Zhang et al., 2020). To depict the extent to which different land-use practices disrupt the quality and arrangement of ecological services, we introduced the ecological contribution rate of land-use transitions. This rate quantifies the alteration in regional ecological quality resulting from changes in specific land-use types (Zhang et al., 2020).

where EEI represents the eco-environmental index, and α, β, and λ represent the weights of the three indices, which are as important as they are in this study, so they are taken as 1/3. LEI is the eco-contribution rate; LE_t+1 and LE_t are the eco-environmental indices at the end and beginning of the change reflected by the type of territorial spatial change, respectively.$S_i$is the change type, LEI is the ecological contribution rate, and LE_t+1 and E_t are the ecological environment indices at the end and beginning of the change reflected by the type of land space change, respectively; S_i is the area of the change type of land space, and S is the total area of the study area.

China’s border areas exhibited an increase in production and living space, while ecological space decreased from 1980 to 2020. Greenfield ecological space and potential ecological space areas accounted for more than 51.32% and 32.93%, respectively, totaling approximately 90% (Table 4). The distribution of territorial space in China’s border areas shows a “one belt, three districts, and multipoints” pattern (Figure 2). The “one belt” is an ecological barrier composed of mountains and rivers. The “three districts” are multiple concentrated areas of production space, namely, contiguous areas of Dandong-Heihe-Baotou City, Hami-Tacheng-Kashi City, and Nujiang Lisu Autonomous Prefecture-Baoshan-Chongzuo City. “Multipoints” refer to areas with concentrated living spaces, mainly scattered along the northeastern, central part of the northern, northwestern, and southwestern borders. From 1980 to 2020, the overall pattern of ecological space in China’s border areas was stable, and the pattern of “one belt, three districts, and multipoints” became significant. Considering the three different spaces yields the following observations: (1) While the ecological space has been slightly reduced since 1980, it is still the base of the land structure in the border areas. Many lakes, rivers, and mountains have become ecological barriers that provide a buffer area for national security and protect ecologically sensitive areas, such as the four major border lakes and 15 major international rivers. (2) Living spaces are mainly distributed on hills, plains, or mountains. The living spaces in urban areas and towns often cover the city; however, the distribution of rural living spaces is relatively sporadic, with a group distribution pattern. The living space as a whole presented a tendency to expand during the study period, but there is spatial heterogeneity in the approach, embodied in the clustering of rural communities in the form of belts focused around urban living spaces and the economic expansion of the relatively developed city living space. (3) Studies have found that the territorial spatial function of the production space is mainly agriculture. The concentrated joints were distributed around the living space. Typical areas were concentrated at the edge of the border between the northeast, southwest, and northwest.

According to the Theil index of the PLES in the border areas from 1980 to 2020 (Table 5), the production and living space values in the Theil index increased before 2000 and then decreased significantly. The Theil index value of the ecological space showed a steadily rising trend in the first four periods but slightly decreased in the last period. This indicates that production and living space in the border areas first increased and then decreased. From the perspective of the Theil index in various regions, in terms of production space, the five-phase Theil index value of the southwest border area was small, and the changing trend slowed annually. In terms of living space, the differences between the northeastern and Xizang borders are small. From the perspective of changes, the overall changes in the five border areas decreased after increasing in the first two phases. In terms of ecological space, in addition to the essentially unchanged border in the southwest, the rest of the regions showed a steady increase, indicating that the differences in ecological space between regions increased. This is consistent with the conclusion of the transformation from ecological to living and production spaces in the land structure, as indicated above. Because the imbalance of regional development entails the occupation of ecological land to different degrees, there is spatial differentiation in the heterogeneity of the ecological spatial pattern. Overall, the differences between the border areas were consistent with the changes in China’s border areas. This is because the border areas have been further developed since the reform and opening up, but the endowment of resources and production factors in various regions has caused regional development differences. Therefore, production and living spaces continue to expand at this stage, and the differences between the regions are increasing.

From 1980 to 2020, as China’s border areas experienced shifts and transformations in territorial space, the number of other types of spatial structures increased except for the decrease in green land and water ecological space. The growth rates of industrial and mining production spaces and urban living spaces were as high as 616.5% and 151.05%, respectively, while the lowest growth rate for potential ecological spaces was 9.13%. However, the rate of decrease for green land ecological space was -9.15%, and its area was reduced by as much as 179,186.95 km², making it the largest type of land transferred out.

To further analyze the distribution of various types of land conversion, a structural conversion diagram of the PLES of China’s land border was drawn for the four periods during 1980-2020 (Figure 3). Since China’s reform and opening-up, the main transformation types of territorial space in China’s border areas have been the mutual transformation of production and ecological spaces, which were mainly distributed in the northeast and southwest regions in the early stages and then gradually spread to all border regions. Second, the living and production spaces are intertwined and distributed in the southwest, northwest, and northeast border areas. The land structure conversion with the smallest area was the conversion between ecological and living spaces, which was concentrated in the northwestern and northern border areas and scattered in other areas. There are differences in the transformation of the land structure during different periods: (1) From 1980 to 1990, the main type of transformation was the change from ecological space to production space, mainly in the northeast and southwest border areas. (2) The type of land structure conversion between 1990 and 2000 was consistent with that of the previous period. (3) The period from 2000 to 2010 experienced the greatest structural transformation in the PLES. The main conversion types were ecological and production spaces. (4) The main conversion types and spatial distribution in 2010-2020 were not significantly different from those in the previous phase; however, there was a significant decline in the area of production and living space in the ecological space.

From 1980 to 2020, the ecological environment quality index in China’s border regions decreased continuously from 0.59 to 0.57. Despite an overall deterioration in quality, the overall distribution pattern remained stable, delineating an overarching spatial pattern characterized by “higher values in the southern and eastern sectors and lower values in the northern and western regions” (Figure 4). From 1980 to 2020, the ecological quality index rankings for the different regions were as follows: northeastern border > southwestern border > Xizang border > northern border > northwestern border. Influenced by diverse topographical features, China’s border areas have been subject to industrial and urban development restrictions. Collectively, these regions exhibited relatively high ecological quality. This can be attributed to the abundance of lakes, rivers, and mountain ranges, which serve as critical ecological barriers. Noteworthy features encompass four major border lakes, including Tianchi Lake on Changbai Mountains, Xingkai Lake, Baikal Lake, and Bangong Lake, as well as 15 major international rivers, including the Yalu River, Tumen River, Aksu River, Lancang River-Mekong River, Yuanjiang River-Honghe River, Left River, and Beilun River. Moreover, prominent mountain ranges such as the Himalayas, Kunlun Mountains, Tianshan Mountains, Hengduan Mountains, Da Hinggan Range, Changbai Mountains, and Ten Thousand Mountains add to the ecological significance of China’s terrestrial border regions. These areas encompass a substantial ecological domain, are characterized by relatively stable ecological functions, and have substantial potential for delivering ecological goods and services.

Variations in the quality index and their respective contributions concerning major land-use categories in China’s border regions from 1980 to 2020 have been shown in Table 6. These parameters play pivotal roles in enhancing and degrading the ecological environment. The conversion of agricultural production spaces into green and potential ecological spaces has emerged as the predominant driving factor for ecological improvement. Notably, ecological transformation in the territorial space contributed 9.7615% to the overall ecological enhancement. Conversely, the transformation of green ecological spaces into potential ecological spaces, agricultural production spaces, and aquatic ecological spaces emerged as a crucial factor responsible for the deterioration of ecological quality, collectively accounting for a substantial 89.83% of the total contribution. In summary, from 1980 to 2020, the contribution rate of land space transformation to ecological quality in China’s border regions exhibited a negative trend, signifying the simultaneous presence of ecological improvement and deterioration. However, it is essential to emphasize that the trend of ecological improvement has remained considerably weaker than that of ecological deterioration, leading to an overall decline in China’s ecological quality index. Looking forward, it is imperative for China to place environmental concerns at the forefront of socioeconomic development in its terrestrial border areas and strike a harmonious balance between economic growth and ecological preservation.

The impact of the PLES transformation on the ecological environment is a multilevel, interactive process (Figure 5). It is not only limited by the attributes of PLES but is also simultaneously influenced by a multitude of factors, including natural conditions, policy frameworks, and environmental protection standards (Zhang et al., 2020). The interactions and mechanisms between the factor system, PLES, and the ecological environment have been widely discussed in geography, ecology, and urban planning. The ecological environmental conditions of China’s border areas are generally poor and exhibit significant regional differences. Over the past 40 years, there has been a substantive transformation in PLES utilization patterns and the ecological and environmental qualities of China’s border regions. The sustainability of ecosystems in China’s border areas requires a balance between spatial use, ecological environmental protection, and economic development. Against the backdrop of rapid development in border areas, the transformation of PLES by altering the structure and function of ecosystems has directly resulted in a decline in ecological environmental quality. Depending on the different border regions and their evolutionary nature, the impact of the PLES transformation on the ecological environment can be either positive or negative. For example, in the Ali region of Xizang, where ecosystems are naturally fragile, the expansion of living and production spaces caused by population growth and economic activities has significantly deteriorated the ecological environmental quality. Meanwhile, the Chinese government has implemented various ecological restoration policies tailored to local conditions in different border zones. In the border areas of Xinjiang, ecological environmental quality has been improved through sand prevention and control as well as afforestation projects. In Chongzuo City, Guangxi, thanks to the return of farmland to forest and grassland and the treatment of karst desertification, the quality of the ecological environment has also significantly improved.

There is considerable natural background variation in China’s border areas, which necessitates differentiated planning and management to promote the harmonious coexistence of PLES and drive the positive dynamics of ecological environmental quality. The interaction between the element system of China’s border regions, PLES, and the ecological environment is characterized by the following relationships: (1) Natural environmental factors within the element system provide the basic conditions and boundaries for the PLES, whereas human disturbance factors restructure and change the PLES through various economic and social activities. (2) The static characteristics of PLES determine the structure and function of regional ecosystems, whereas dynamic transformation leads to habitat fragmentation and degradation of soil and water environments, which are the main driving forces affecting ecological environmental quality (Li et al., 2019; Lin et al., 2021). (3) The oversupply or shortage of production and living spaces can lead to overexploitation or underutilization of land resources, reducing ecological service functions and exacerbating ecological footprints. The supply and demand imbalance in the land market reflects the overconsumption of natural capital, which further diminishes ecosystem integrity and resilience. (4) By controlling the use of land space, optimizing the layout of the PLES, and preventing overdevelopment in ecologically fragile areas, it is possible to improve ecological environmental quality and sustainable development (Hu et al., 2023). (5) The feedback of ecological environmental quality on human activities is reflected in the capacity to supply ecological services; environmental degradation leading to reduced services, in turn, requires a change in human use patterns of PLES and resource management strategies (Deng et al., 2021). Under the comprehensive effects of multiple systems, ecological environmental quality tends to develop negatively (Fu et al., 2022), but humans also enhance the service functions of ecosystems through ecological restoration activities, such as afforestation and wetland restoration (Zhang et al., 2024).

The rapid development of China’s border regions began with the reform and opening up in the late 1980s and accelerated in the 21st century with the advancement of the Belt and Road Initiative. Benefiting from key national development policies and a series of infrastructure investments, economic activities, such as the construction of roads, railways, ports, and cross-border economic cooperation zones, have greatly expanded the production and living spaces in these regions (Guo et al., 2023), leading to varying degrees of shrinkage in ecological spaces across different border zones. Additionally, policies implemented by the Chinese government, such as the Western Development Strategy and the Prosperous Border Initiative, have propelled the rapid socioeconomic development of China’s border areas and triggered habitat fragmentation and ecological niche compression. By controlling the scale of construction land, the Chinese government delineates urban development boundaries, designates ecological protection redlines, sets boundaries for basic farmland, and strictly regulates the scope of production, living, and ecological spaces to protect and restore green mountains and clear waters. Although these spatial land-use control strategies have achieved certain effects in some areas, they have not effectively alleviated the contradictions and conflicts between production, living, and ecological spaces.

Land management and ecological protection policies should adopt diverse and location-specific strategies to achieve the dual goals of economic development and ecological protection in the border areas. Differentiated land-use policies should be formulated according to the ecological functions and development potential of different regions, with stricter land-use control and ecological protection redline policies implemented in ecologically sensitive and fragile border areas. Simultaneously, economic incentive policies such as ecological compensation and environmental taxation should be implemented to encourage the development of green industries and eco-friendly land use. Moreover, incorporating ecological encroachment into national land law enforcement, enhancing the formulation and supervision of environmental regulations, and ensuring the strict legal protection of the ecological environment is crucial. In terms of land management, the scope of living and production construction should be precisely delineated to ensure that ecological space is not encroached upon by disorderly expansion. Second, integrating border customs and natural landscapes to vigorously develop eco-agrarian-cultural-tourism industries can promote green industry development and reduce pressure on ecological spaces. Third, implementing ecological product value accounting and using it in local government performance evaluations can help promote the inclusion of the total value of ecological products as an important reference for the natural resource asset departure audits of leading cadres. Regions are guided to balance economic development and ecological protection by refining their green performance evaluation systems through performance assessments. Through such a comprehensive set of measures, it is possible to effectively protect and improve the ecological environment of the border regions while promoting economic and social development.

China’s border areas are vast, with significant differences in natural foundations and ecological conditions among different regions. It is necessary to adopt differentiated planning and management approaches to achieve the coordinated development of production, living, and ecological spaces, thus promoting a positive trend in ecological environmental quality. Under the long-term coupling of economic activities and the natural environment, different border regions face various land-use issues and ecological and environmental challenges. The northeastern border area, encompassing the borders of the Liaoning, Jilin, and Heilongjiang provinces, has experienced prominent ecological issues, such as the reduction of forest resources and lower forest coverage due to the dual development of industry and agriculture. In the northern border areas, overgrazing and agricultural reclamation have caused degradation of the grassland ecosystem, leading to sparse grassland vegetation, desertification, and land desertification. The ecological plight of the northwestern border areas mainly stems from its arid climate and uneven water resource distribution, leading to serious surface ecological degradation challenges. Human activity-induced living space expansion continuously exacerbates this region’s ecological environmental burden. Ecological and environmental issues in the Xizang border areas are mainly caused by the unique natural conditions of the Tibetan Plateau, with ecosystem vulnerability, soil erosion, and grassland degradation being the main ecological problems. The southwestern border area, located at the intersection of China’s three-step terrain with significant topographical changes, has suffered serious rocky desertification and soil erosion owing to long-term over-cultivation and irrational land use (Wei et al., 2021).

The following suggestions are proposed in response to the characteristics and ecological environmental problems of each border area in China. The northeastern border area should promote sustainable agricultural practices, advance the transformation and upgrading of the agricultural industry structure, improve land use efficiency, and ensure harmonious coexistence between regional economic and social development and environmental protection. The northern border areas should deepen grassland ecological protection projects, implement strict nature reserve management and rotational grazing systems, enhance the efficacy of desertification prevention and control, and create a new sustainable development model centered on energy and ecological tourism to lead the regional economy toward quality and efficiency transformation. For the northwestern border area, the construction of oasis ecological shelterbelt systems should be strengthened, and scientific planning should actively develop clean energy industries such as solar and wind power to build a green development system adapted to regional characteristics. Considering the unique plateau ecological environment of Xizang, it is suggested to increase the assessment and monitoring of ecosystem service functions, perfect and deepen the ecological protection redline system, develop suitable high-altitude crop planting and animal husbandry models, and promote a positive interaction between economic and social development and ecological environmental protection. The southwestern border area should actively promote the implementation of ecological migration and conversion of sloping farmland to forest projects, strictly prohibit the setting of mining rights in ecologically sensitive areas and key water source areas, accelerate land remediation and vegetation restoration of bare land blocks, and improve the habitat quality of vegetation and aquatic ecosystems. By implementing these targeted management strategies, it is possible to stimulate the economic and social vitality of the border areas while improving and strengthening the protection of the ecological environment and providing support for the sustainable development of each border region (Sun et al., 2017).

This study is based on a classification system for the production-living-ecological space of China’s border region. Considering the aspects of temporal and spatial evolution, structural transformation, and differences in territorial space patterns, a systematic study was conducted on the characteristics of territorial space evolution, transformation, and their impact on the quality of the ecological environment from 1980 to 2020. The conclusions are as follows.

(1) The territorial space in China’s border areas is distributed in a “one belt, three districts, and multipoints” pattern. Human activities and social development accelerate changes in the shape of territorial space, promote changes in the landscape pattern and ecological effects of the land’s spatial structure, and improve the fusion of sectors with different functions. In terms of the number of territorial spaces, the production and living spaces in China’s border areas increased from 1980 to 2020, and the ecological space gradually decreased. The territorial space changed from a pattern of production space development dominated by economic development to the harmonious development of production, living, and ecological spaces, supporting the need for food, construction, and ecology. These cases are similar to those of the Yellow River Basin, middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, Hubei province, Fujian province, Guangxi Beibu Gulf Urban Group, Hengduan Mountains, and Guangxi border region. These changes are necessary for high-quality development and ecological progress in the new era. They also offer a scientific proposition that must be addressed urgently to build a beautiful China (Kuang et al., 2019; Zhuang et al., 2021).

(2) During the study period, the differences in ecological space in the border areas showed no significant changes, and regional differences in production and living spaces declined. From the perspective of the Theil index in different border areas, although the territorial space in various regions shows spatial differentiation, the differences in the layout of production and living spaces as a whole show a trend of fluctuation and reduction, whereas the differences in territorial space in other regions are growing. This is because the Chinese economy has entered a rapid development stage in the 21st century. With the implementation of the strategy of cross-border economic cooperation zones and the “Plan to revitalize border areas and enrich people,” the country’s support for border areas has increased. The coordinated development process has gradually decreased, but the “siphon effect” between regions will still widen the gap.

(3) The development of the border area has transitioned from economic construction to leading the development of production, living, and ecology, and land conflicts have been reduced. During the research period, other land types showed a growth trend except for a decrease in green land and water space. From the perspective of the transfer of land types, the conversion type was mainly based on the mutual conversion of production and ecological spaces, followed by the mutual conversion of living and production spaces concentrated in the northeast, southwest, and northwestern regions. However, the rate and scale of the decrease in ecological space gradually decreased during the later period. At a certain level, the concept of ecological protection, in which “lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets,” has become deeply rooted in people’s hearts. The number of land types also decreased on a large scale, indicating increased population and agglomeration of border areas. The territorial space in the border area is developing toward a harmonious symbiosis.

(4) The ecological and environmental qualities of China’s border regions decreased from 0.59 in 1980 to 0.57 in 2020, indicating a slight deterioration in environmental quality. However, the distribution pattern of the ecological space remained stable, exhibiting a spatial configuration characterized by higher values in the southeast and lower values in the northwest. Due to the ecological barrier functions of border lakes, international rivers, and significant mountain ranges, a considerable portion of the border zones maintain a relatively high level of ecological quality. During the study period, the contribution of land space transformation in China’s border areas to ecological quality exhibited a negative trend. However, these results suggest that ecological improvement and degradation occur simultaneously across different regions. The transformation of agricultural production spaces into green and potential ecological spaces has a positive effect on ecological quality. Conversely, converting green ecological spaces into potential ecological, agricultural production, and aquatic ecological spaces has emerged as a key factor contributing to ecological degradation. Achieving a balance between economic development and ecological protection is an important strategy for China’s border regions.