Journal of Geographical Sciences >
Regional eco-efficiency evaluation and spatial pattern analysis of the Yangtze River Economic Zone
Ha Lin (1990-), PhD, specialized in regional development and cryospheric services. E-mail: hal213@126.com |
Received date: 2019-08-05
Accepted date: 2020-02-13
Online published: 2020-09-25
Supported by
The Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences(XDA23060704)
State Key Laboratory of Cryospheric Science(SKLCS-ZZ-2020)
Copyright
The environmental ecology of the Yangtze River Economic Zone (YREZ) faces ecological function decline, deterioration and degradation under intense human activities, long-term development and utilization and its economy has developed rapidly over recent decades. Eco-efficiency is considered as a measure of coordinated development of economy, resources, environment and ecology, and is currently considered a very important issue. In this paper, based on the slack-based measure and data envelope analysis model, we take 129 prefecture-level cities of the YREZ as the study unit and measure the eco-efficiency of the YREZ in 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015, which considers undesired output. The evaluation of the status quo of the regional eco-efficiency development was carried out at provincial, prefectural and city scales. The spatial autocorrelation test model and standard deviation ellipse were used to analyze the spatially distributed characteristics and the evolutionary regularity of eco-efficiency. Our study suggested that the eco-efficiency value varied significantly at different spatiotemporal scales and the overall distribution presented an “N-shaped” pattern, the value is the largest downstream and the smallest upstream. Regional eco-efficiency presented certain volatility in growth and a clear spatial positive agglomeration trend from 2000 to 2015. The spatial distribution of each agglomeration area was also significantly different, forming some high-high agglomeration areas at the center of the shaft with Shanghai and surrounding cities, and some low-low agglomeration areas at the center with middle reaches and upstream cities. The low-high over-aggregation and high-low polarization clusters were fewer. At the same time, with the change of the research period, the degree of positive agglomeration became increasingly pronounced and the eco-efficiency gap of the neighborhood unit reduced. The regional eco-efficiency value of the YREZ presented a spatial distribution pattern in the northeast-southwest axis and the evolutionary pattern of the regional eco-efficiency similarly showed a northeast-southwest orientation.
HA Lin , TU Jianjun , YANG Jianping , XU Chunhai , PANG Jiaxing , LU Debin , YAO Zuolin , ZHAO Wenyu . Regional eco-efficiency evaluation and spatial pattern analysis of the Yangtze River Economic Zone[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2020 , 30(7) : 1117 -1139 . DOI: 10.1007/s11442-020-1773-0
Figure 1 Location of the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Table 1 The index system of eco-efficiency |
Indicator type | Indicator attribute | Indicator name (unit) |
---|---|---|
Input | Capital | Fixed assets investment (ten thousand yuan) |
Labor force | Employed population (10,000 people) | |
Energy | Energy consumption per 10 thousand yuan GDP | |
Land | Urban construction land area (square kilometers) | |
Water resources | Total urban water use (10,000 tons) | |
Desired output | Total economic development | Regional GDP (100 million yuan) |
Undesired output | Wastewater disposal | Wastewater discharge (10,000 tons) |
Exhaust emissions | Exhaust emissions (10,000 tons) | |
Solid waste discharge | Solid waste discharge (10,000 tons) |
Table 2 Eco-efficiency of each city in the Yangtze River Economic Zone (The number of letter “H” is corresponding to Figures 2 and 3) |
Decision unit | Evaluation value | Stdevp | Decision unit | Evaluation value | Stdevp | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2015 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2015 | ||||
Kunming (H1) | 0.173 | 0.270 | 0.236 | 0.278 | 0.041 | Ziyang (H43) | 0.126 | 0.504 | 0.168 | 0.603 | 0.207 |
Qujing (H2) | 0.143 | 0.471 | 0.165 | 0.236 | 0.130 | Ngawa* (H44) | 0.080 | 0.162 | 0.055 | 0.193 | 0.057 |
Yuxi (H3) | 0.287 | 1.000 | 0.253 | 0.350 | 0.306 | Garzê* (H45) | 0.061 | 0.118 | 0.053 | 0.155 | 0.042 |
Zhaotong (H4) | 0.132 | 0.434 | 0.127 | 0.207 | 0.125 | Liangshan* (H46) | 0.502 | 0.697 | 0.194 | 1.000 | 0.293 |
Chuxiong (H5) | 0.166 | 0.397 | 0.148 | 0.147 | 0.106 | Chongqing (H47) | 0.174 | 0.368 | 0.413 | 0.512 | 0.123 |
Honghe (H6) | 0.238 | 0.481 | 0.269 | 0.367 | 0.095 | Wuhan (H48) | 0.361 | 0.535 | 0.514 | 1.000 | 0.239 |
Wenshan (H7) | 0.114 | 0.362 | 0.130 | 0.192 | 0.098 | Huangshi (H49) | 0.233 | 0.381 | 0.254 | 0.554 | 0.128 |
Puer (H8) | 0.084 | 0.323 | 0.105 | 0.189 | 0.094 | Shiyan (H50) | 0.193 | 0.385 | 0.221 | 0.525 | 0.134 |
Xishuangbanna* (H9) | 0.109 | 0.271 | 0.127 | 0.155 | 0.063 | Jingzhou (H51) | 0.234 | 0.519 | 0.277 | 0.694 | 0.187 |
Dali* (H10) | 0.257 | 0.826 | 0.168 | 0.334 | 0.255 | Yichang (H52) | 0.295 | 0.637 | 0.409 | 1.000 | 0.269 |
Baoshan (H11) | 0.111 | 0.289 | 0.125 | 0.170 | 0.070 | Xiangyang (H53) | 0.292 | 0.687 | 0.675 | 1.000 | 0.251 |
Dehong (H12) | 0.081 | 0.170 | 0.113 | 0.112 | 0.032 | Ezhou (H54) | 0.165 | 0.201 | 0.263 | 0.562 | 0.157 |
Lijiang (H13) | 0.057 | 0.164 | 0.072 | 0.117 | 0.042 | Jingmen (H55) | 0.331 | 0.670 | 0.443 | 0.780 | 0.178 |
Nujiang (H14) | 0.034 | 0.081 | 0.098 | 0.072 | 0.023 | Xiaogan (H56) | 0.269 | 1.000 | 0.212 | 0.722 | 0.326 |
Diqing* (H15) | 0.035 | 0.135 | 0.084 | 0.114 | 0.037 | Huanggang (H57) | 0.431 | 1.000 | 0.403 | 1.000 | 0.292 |
Lincang (H16) | 0.089 | 0.374 | 0.101 | 0.183 | 0.114 | Xianning (H58) | 0.230 | 0.819 | 0.387 | 1.000 | 0.312 |
Guiyang (H17) | 0.081 | 0.102 | 0.167 | 0.399 | 0.126 | Enshi* (H59) | 0.261 | 0.489 | 0.377 | 0.639 | 0.139 |
Liupanshui (H18) | 0.060 | 0.159 | 0.115 | 0.565 | 0.199 | Suizhou (H60) | 0.443 | 0.617 | 0.511 | 1.000 | 0.215 |
Zunyi (H19) | 0.115 | 0.298 | 0.197 | 0.530 | 0.156 | Xiantao (H61) | 0.447 | 0.302 | 0.180 | 1.000 | 0.313 |
Tongren (H20) | 0.050 | 0.259 | 0.079 | 0.348 | 0.124 | Tianmen (H62) | 0.392 | 0.232 | 0.110 | 0.493 | 0.147 |
SW Guizhou* (H21) | 0.054 | 0.248 | 0.070 | 0.354 | 0.125 | Qianjing (H63) | 0.201 | 0.213 | 0.167 | 1.000 | 0.350 |
Bijie (H22) | 0.096 | 0.324 | 0.126 | 1.000 | 0.365 | Changsha (H64) | 0.154 | 1.000 | 0.513 | 0.710 | 0.308 |
Anshun (H23) | 0.055 | 0.154 | 0.072 | 0.297 | 0.096 | Zhuzhou (H65) | 0.110 | 0.790 | 0.162 | 0.426 | 0.270 |
SE Guizhou* (H24) | 0.059 | 0.166 | 0.073 | 0.388 | 0.132 | Xiangtan (H66) | 0.080 | 0.543 | 0.124 | 0.393 | 0.191 |
Qiannan* (H25) | 0.091 | 1.000 | 0.082 | 0.485 | 0.375 | Hengyang (H67) | 0.095 | 0.784 | 0.170 | 0.420 | 0.269 |
Chengdu (H26) | 0.217 | 0.455 | 0.428 | 0.587 | 0.133 | Shaoyang (H68) | 0.125 | 0.635 | 0.097 | 0.396 | 0.219 |
Zigong (H27) | 0.091 | 0.224 | 0.126 | 0.372 | 0.109 | Yueyang (H69) | 0.106 | 1.000 | 0.175 | 0.567 | 0.357 |
Panzhihua (H28) | 0.082 | 0.180 | 0.120 | 0.224 | 0.054 | Changde (H70) | 0.013 | 1.000 | 0.245 | 0.668 | 0.381 |
Luzhou (H29) | 0.085 | 0.174 | 0.104 | 0.335 | 0.098 | Zhangjiajie (H71) | 0.078 | 0.398 | 0.097 | 0.299 | 0.135 |
Deyang (H30) | 0.131 | 0.319 | 0.152 | 0.503 | 0.150 | Yiyang (H72) | 0.108 | 0.723 | 0.132 | 0.415 | 0.250 |
Mianyang (H31) | 0.128 | 0.313 | 0.124 | 0.401 | 0.120 | Chenzhou (H73) | 0.106 | 1.000 | 0.130 | 0.402 | 0.360 |
Guangyuan (H32) | 0.057 | 0.122 | 0.078 | 0.256 | 0.077 | Yongzhou (H74) | 1.000 | 0.597 | 0.104 | 0.387 | 0.327 |
Suining (H33) | 0.089 | 0.183 | 0.111 | 0.309 | 0.086 | Huaihua (H75) | 0.129 | 0.677 | 0.126 | 0.465 | 0.234 |
Neijiang (H34) | 0.062 | 0.263 | 0.117 | 0.413 | 0.137 | Loudi (H76) | 0.112 | 0.612 | 0.114 | 0.413 | 0.212 |
Leshan (H35) | 0.057 | 0.274 | 0.124 | 0.382 | 0.127 | Xiangxi (H77) | 0.054 | 0.138 | 1.000 | 0.268 | 0.374 |
Nanchong (H36) | 0.077 | 0.214 | 0.123 | 0.369 | 0.111 | Nanchang (H78) | 0.135 | 0.251 | 0.267 | 0.327 | 0.070 |
Yibin (H37) | 0.070 | 0.354 | 0.186 | 0.443 | 0.145 | Jingdezhen (H79) | 0.088 | 0.160 | 0.092 | 0.154 | 0.034 |
Guangan (H38) | 1.000 | 0.279 | 0.077 | 0.350 | 0.346 | Pingxiang (H80) | 0.099 | 0.142 | 0.085 | 0.164 | 0.032 |
Dazhou (H39) | 0.126 | 0.343 | 0.235 | 0.425 | 0.113 | Jiujiang (H81) | 0.079 | 0.177 | 0.120 | 0.258 | 0.067 |
Yaan (H40) | 0.065 | 0.202 | 0.063 | 0.405 | 0.140 | Xinyu (H82) | 0.084 | 0.131 | 0.117 | 0.174 | 0.032 |
Bazhong (H41) | 0.064 | 0.272 | 0.091 | 0.310 | 0.108 | Yingtan (H83) | 0.079 | 0.162 | 0.089 | 0.198 | 0.050 |
Meishan (H42) | 0.088 | 0.369 | 0.197 | 0.225 | 0.100 | Ganzhou (H84) | 0.156 | 0.347 | 0.154 | 0.249 | 0.079 |
Fuzhou (H85) | 0.152 | 0.214 | 0.111 | 0.238 | 0.050 | Changzhou (H108) | 0.482 | 0.428 | 0.381 | 0.679 | 0.114 |
Ji'an (H86) | 0.255 | 0.283 | 0.111 | 0.235 | 0.066 | Suzhou2) (H109) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 |
Yichun (H87) | 0.252 | 0.239 | 0.108 | 0.262 | 0.062 | Nantong (H110) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.744 | 1.000 | 0.111 |
Shangrao (H88) | 0.266 | 0.361 | 0.124 | 0.309 | 0.088 | Lianyungang (H111) | 0.371 | 0.395 | 0.239 | 0.468 | 0.083 |
Hefei (H89) | 1.000 | 0.247 | 0.358 | 0.525 | 0.288 | Huai'an (H112) | 0.364 | 0.331 | 0.200 | 0.466 | 0.095 |
Wuhu (H90) | 0.455 | 0.182 | 0.175 | 0.456 | 0.139 | Yancheng (H113) | 0.820 | 0.731 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.117 |
Bengbu (H91) | 0.281 | 0.168 | 0.108 | 0.261 | 0.070 | Yangzhou (H114) | 0.573 | 0.599 | 0.608 | 0.757 | 0.072 |
Huainan (H92) | 0.294 | 0.117 | 0.140 | 0.292 | 0.083 | Zhenjiang (H115) | 0.460 | 0.487 | 0.529 | 1.000 | 0.221 |
Maanshan (H93) | 1.000 | 0.145 | 0.121 | 0.318 | 0.357 | Taizhou3) (H116) | 0.544 | 0.738 | 1.000 | 0.819 | 0.164 |
Huaibei (H94) | 0.241 | 0.141 | 0.095 | 0.284 | 0.076 | Suqian (H117) | 1.000 | 0.782 | 0.265 | 0.643 | 0.268 |
Tongling (H95) | 0.430 | 0.141 | 0.136 | 0.324 | 0.125 | Hangzhou (H118) | 0.589 | 1.000 | 0.626 | 1.000 | 0.197 |
Anqing (H96) | 0.328 | 0.228 | 0.103 | 0.404 | 0.113 | Ningbo (H119) | 0.733 | 1.000 | 0.663 | 1.000 | 0.153 |
Huangshan (H97) | 0.326 | 0.201 | 0.099 | 0.301 | 0.090 | Jiaxing (H120) | 0.583 | 0.738 | 0.456 | 0.672 | 0.106 |
Chuzhou (H98) | 0.436 | 0.499 | 0.156 | 0.417 | 0.131 | Huzhou (H121) | 0.554 | 0.741 | 0.293 | 1.000 | 0.259 |
Fuyang (H99) | 0.234 | 0.173 | 0.114 | 0.423 | 0.116 | Shaoxing (H122) | 0.600 | 0.436 | 1.000 | 0.504 | 0.219 |
Suzhou1) (H100) | 0.308 | 0.210 | 0.119 | 0.419 | 0.112 | Zhoushan (H123) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.130 | 0.532 | 0.363 |
Lu'an (H101) | 0.298 | 0.216 | 0.140 | 0.403 | 0.097 | Wenzhou (H124) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 |
Xuancheng (H102) | 0.476 | 0.564 | 0.999 | 1.000 | 0.242 | Jinhua (H125) | 0.539 | 0.655 | 1.000 | 0.904 | 0.185 |
Chizhou (H103) | 0.190 | 0.245 | 0.088 | 0.338 | 0.091 | Quzhou (H126) | 0.284 | 0.319 | 0.373 | 0.420 | 0.052 |
Bozhou (H104) | 0.417 | 0.291 | 0.099 | 0.388 | 0.124 | Taizhou4) (H127) | 0.853 | 1.000 | 0.654 | 0.608 | 0.158 |
Nanjing (H105) | 0.291 | 0.371 | 0.490 | 0.797 | 0.192 | Lishui (H128) | 0.308 | 0.650 | 0.470 | 1.000 | 0.257 |
Wuxi (H106) | 0.919 | 1.000 | 0.788 | 0.880 | 0.076 | Shanghai (H129) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 |
Xuzhou (H107) | 0.386 | 0.621 | 0.494 | 0.670 | 0.111 |
*Autonomous Prefecture; SW-southwest; SE-southeast1) in Anhui Province; 2) in Jiangsu Province; 3) in Jiangsu Province; 4) in Zhejiang Province |
Table 3 Division of eco-efficiency levels |
Classification | Low level | Medium level | Medium to high level | High level | Relatively effective | Fully effective |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eco-efficiency | (0, 0.2] | (0.2, 0.4) | (0.4, 0.6] | (0.6, 0.8] | (0.8, 1) | 1 |
Figure 2 Eco-efficiency changes of the prefecture-level cities scale |
Figure 3 Spatial eco-efficiency differences of the prefecture-level cities scale in the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Figure 4 Changes of eco-efficiency at the provincial scale in the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Figure 5 Distribution of eco-efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Figure 6 Eco-efficiency changes in different reaches of the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Table 4 Statistical values of regional eco-efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Year | Moran's I | Standard deviation | Z value | P value |
---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | 0.5372 | 0.6670 | 7.9833 | 0.01 |
2005 | 0.3770 | 0.0707 | 5.4944 | 0.01 |
2010 | 0.5660 | 0.0651 | 8.7050 | 0.01 |
2015 | 0.5365 | 0.0638 | 8.4087 | 0.01 |
Figure 7 Moran's I scatter plot of regional eco-efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Table 5 Information of Moran's I scatter plot of regional eco-efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Year | First-quadrant | Second-quadrant | Third-quadrant | Fourth-quadrant |
---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | Yuxi, Chongqing, Xianning, Jingdezhen, Pingxiang, Ganzhou, Fuzhou, Wuhu, Huaibei, Tongling, Anqing, Chuzhou, Fuyang, Suzhou1), Lu'an, Xuancheng, Chizhou, Bozhou, Nanjing, Wuxi, Xuzhou, Changzhou, Suzhou2), Nantong, Lianyungang, Huai'an, Yancheng, Taizhou3), Suqian, Hangzhou, Ningbo, Jiaxing, Huzhou, Shaoxing, Jinhua, Quzhou, Lishui, Yangzhou, Zhenjiang | Kunming, Mianyang, Guangyuan, Ya'an, Ji'an, Liangshan, Xiangyang, Changsha, Changde, Shangrao, Hefei, Huainan, Huangshan, Taizhou4), Shanghai | Qvjing, Zhaotong, Chuxiong, Honghe, Wenshan, Pu'er, Dali*, Baoshan, Dehong, Lijiang, Diqing*, Lincang, Guiyang, Liupanshui, Tongren, SW Guizhou*, Bijie, Anshun, SE Guizhou, Qiannan*, Chengdu, Zigong, Panzhihua, Luzhou, Deyang, Neijiang, Leshan, Nanchong, Yibin, Guang'an, Dazhou, Bazhong, Meishan, Ziyang, A'ba*, Ganzi, Huangshi, Shiyan, Jingzhou, Yichang, Ezhou, Jingmen, Xiaogan, Huanggang, Enshi*, Suizhou, Xiantao, Tianmen, Qianjiang, Xiangtan, Hengyang, Shaoyang, Yueyang, Zhangjiaji, Yiyang, Chenzhou, Yongzhou, Huaihua, Loudi, Nanchang, Jiujiang, Xinyu, Maanshan, Zhoushan, Wenzhou, Sipsongpanna*, Zunyi | Nujiang, Sui- ning, Wuhan, Zhuzhou, Xiangxi, Yingtan, Yichun, Bengbu |
2005 | Yuxi, Bijie, Chongqing, Wuhan, Jingmen, Xiaogan, Xianning, Enshi*, Suizhou, Xiantao, Tianmen, Qianjiang, Changsha, Zhuzhou, Changde, Xinyu, Ganzhou, Fuzhou, Huaibei, Tongling, Anqing, Suzhou1), Lu'an, Chizhou, Bozhou, Nanjing, Wuxi, Xuzhou, Lianyungang, Taizhou3), Suqian, Hangzhou, Jinhua | Kunming, Qvjing, Dali*, Baoshan, Diqing*, Guiyang, Anshun, Liangshan, Shiyan, Jingzhou, Yueyang, Jiujiang, Chuzhou, Fu- yang, Ningbo, Shaoxing, Zhoushan, Quzhou, Taizhou4) | Zhaotong, Chuxiong, Wenshan, Pu'er, Sipsongpanna*, Dehong, lijiang, liupanshui, Zunyi, Tongren, SE Guizhou*, Qiannan*, Chengdu, Zigong, Panzhihua, Luzhou, Deyang, Mianyang, Guangyuan, Suining, Neijiang, Nanchong, Yibin, Guang'an, Dazhou, Ya'an, Bazhong, Meishan, Ziyang, Ganzi, Yichang, Xiangyang, Xiangtan, Hengyang, Shaoyang, Zhangjiajie, Yiyang, Chenzhou, Yongzhou, Huaihua, Loudi, Xiangxi, Nanchang, Jingdezhen, Pingxiang, Ji'an, Yichun, Shangrao, Hefei, Wuhu, Bengbu, Maanshan, Huangshan, Xuancheng, Changzhou, Suzhou2), Nantong, Huai'an, Yancheng, Yangzhou, Lishui | Honghe, Nujiang, Lincang, Leshan, A'ba*, Huangshi, Ezhou, Huanggang, Yingtan, Huainan, Zhenjiang, Jiaxing, Huzhou, Wenzhou, SW Guizhou, Shanghai |
2010 | Chongqing, Wuhan, Huangshi, Xianning, Yingtan, Ganzhou, Fuzhou, Huaibei, Tongling, Anqing, Huangshan, Chuzhou, Fuyang, Suzhou1), Lu'an, Chizhou, Bozhou, Nanjing, Wuxi, Xuzhou, Changzhou, Nantong, Lianyungang, Taizhou3), Suqian, Hangzhou, Jinhua | Kunming, Yuxi, Liangshan*, Shiyan, Yichang, Ezhou, Enshi*, Jiu- jiang, Huainan, Suzhou2), Ningbo, Jia- xing, Shaoxing, Quzhou, Taizhou4), Lishui | Qvjing, Zhaotong, Chuxiong, Honghe, Wenshan, Pu'er, Sipsongpanna*, Dali*, Baoshan, Dehong, lijiang, Nujiang, Diqing*, Guiyang, Liupanshui, Zunyi, Tongren, SW Guizhou*, Bijie, Anshun, SE Guizhou*, Qian'an*, Chengdu, Zigong, Panzhihua, Luzhou, Deyang, Mianyang, Guangyuan, Suining, Neijiang, Leshan, Nanchong, Yibin, Guang'an, Dazhou, Ya'an, Bazhong, Meishan, Ziyang, Ganzi, Jingmen, Xiaogan, Huanggang, Xiantao, Tianmen, Qianjiang, Changsha, Zhuzhou, Xiangtan, Hengyang, Shaoyang, Yueyang, Changde, Zhangjiajie, Yiyang, Yongzhou, Huaihua, Loudi, Xiangxi, Nanchang, Jingdezhen, Pingxiang, Ji'an, Yichun, Shangrao, Hefei, Wuhu, Bengbu, Maanshan, Xuancheng, Huai'an, Yangzhou, Zhenjiang, Zhoushan, Wenzhou | Lincang, A'ba*, Jingzhou, Xiangyang, Suizhou, Chenzhou, Xinyu, Yancheng, Huzhou, Shanghai |
2015 | Kunming, Yuxi, Anshun, Liangshan, Chongqing, Wuhan, Huangshi, Huanggang, Xianning, Enshi*, Jiujiang, Xinyu, Yingtan, Ganzhou, Fuzhou, Huainan, Huaibei, Tongling, Anqing, Chuzhou, Fuyang, Suzhou1), Lu'an, Chizhou, Bozhou, Nanjing, Wuxi, Xuzhou, Changzhou, Nantong, Lianyungang, Taizhou3), Suqian, Hangzhou, Jiaxing, Jinhua, Quzhou, Taizhou4), Lishui, Shanghai | Zunyi, Bijie, SW Guizhou*, Shiyan, Jingmen, Yongzhou, Pingxiang, Huangshan, Xuancheng, Suzhou2), Ningbo, Shaoxing | Qvjing, Zhaotong, Chuxiong, Honghe, Wenshan, Pu'er, Sipsongpanna*, Dali*, Baoshan, Dehong, lijiang, Diqing*, Lincang, Guiyang, liupanshui, Tongren, Qiannan*, Chengdu, Zigong, Panzhihua, Luzhou, Mianyang, Guangyuan, Suining, Neijiang, Nanchong, Yibin, Guang'an, Dazhou, Ya'an, Bazhong, Meishan, Ganzi, Jingzhou, Yichang, Ezhou, Xiaogan, Xiantao, Tianmen, Qianjiang, Changsha, Zhuzhou, Xiangtan, Hengyang, Shaoyang, Yueyang, Changde, Zhangjiajie, Yiyang, Chenzhou, Huaihua, Loudi, Xiangxi, Nanchang, Jingdezhen, Ji'an, Yichun, Shangrao, Hefei, Wuhu, Bengbu, Maanshan, Huai'an, Yangzhou, Zhenjiang, Zhoushan, Wenzhou | Nujiang, Deyang, Leshan, Ziyang, A'ba*, Xiangyang, Suizhou, Yancheng, SE2Guizhou*, Huzhou |
* Autonomous Prefecture; SW-southwest; SE-southeast 1) in Anhui Province; 2) in Jiangsu Province; 3) in Jiangsu Province; 4) in Zhejiang Province |
Figure 8 LISA significance of eco-efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Figure 9 LISA agglomeration of eco-efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Zone |
Figure 10 Distribution of regional eco-efficiency standard deviation ellipse |
Figure 11 The migration orbit of regional eco-efficiency gravity center |
Table 6 Center and standard elliptic difference parameter of regional eco-efficiency |
Year | Average center X (°) | Average center Y (°) | Standard distance X (m) | Standard distance Y(m) | The direction of the ellipse (°) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | 115.473 | 30.436 | 302346.9 | 848975.7 | 69.357 |
2005 | 113.089 | 29.552 | 313050.6 | 942349.6 | 68.645 |
2010 | 114.728 | 30.183 | 294889.3 | 893137.3 | 70.664 |
2015 | 113.453 | 30.075 | 296667.2 | 872024.5 | 70.803 |
We are very grateful to Geoffrey Pearce for English language editing. In addition, special thanks go to two anonymous reviewers for their numerous invaluable comments and suggestions in improving this study.
[1] |
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
|
[8] |
|
[9] |
|
[10] |
|
[11] |
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
|
[14] |
|
[15] |
|
[16] |
|
[17] |
|
[18] |
|
[19] |
|
[20] |
|
[21] |
|
[22] |
|
[23] |
|
[24] |
|
[25] |
|
[26] |
|
[27] |
|
[28] |
|
[29] |
|
[30] |
|
[31] |
|
[32] |
|
[33] |
|
[34] |
|
[35] |
|
[36] |
|
[37] |
|
[38] |
|
[39] |
|
[40] |
|
[41] |
|
[42] |
|
[43] |
|
[44] |
|
[45] |
|
[46] |
|
/
〈 |
|
〉 |