Spatial Identification and Redevelopment Evaluation of Brownfields in the Perspective of Urban Complex Ecosystems: A Case of Wuhu City, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Conceptual Framework, Methods and Materials
2.1. Definition, Classification and Characteristics of Brownfield
- Landscape characteristics: Brownfields are developed lands, which are partially or completely abandoned, unused or unoccupied, with traces of construction and industry.
- Environmental pollution characteristics: Brownfield sites have real or potential pollution problems, with pollution sources coming from within.
- Social Characteristics: The presence of a brownfield site can have an impact on its surrounding community and the wider region.
2.2. Conceptual Framework for Brownfield in Complex Urban Ecosystem
- Definition and identification of brownfield sites.
- Data collection and analysis.
- Assessment and Redevelopment strategies.
2.2.1. Brownfield Identification
2.2.2. Brownfield Redevelopment Evaluation
2.3. Study Area Overview
2.4. Basic Geographic Information Data
3. Results of the Empirical Study
3.1. Results of Spatial Identification of Urban Brownfields in Wuhu
3.2. Results of Urban Brownfield Site Investigation
3.2.1. Results of Questionnaires
3.2.2. Results of Environmental Investigation and Experiments
3.3. The Directions of Urban Brownfields Redevelopment in Wuhu City
4. Discussion
4.1. Effective Identification of Urban Brownfield Sites
4.2. Assessing Brownfield Redevelopment from the Perspective of Complex Urban Ecosystems
4.3. Empirical Study for Wuhu City
4.4. Shortcomings and Prospects
- It is unrealistic for the management of brownfield sites to rely solely on the advice of researchers at a particular moment in time. Urban construction never stops, and the condition of brownfields changes; accordingly, researchers should take into account the dynamic that exists.
- The time and effort required to identify and evaluate the many brownfield sites in a city and the unavailability of some data in the selection of indicators lead to the construction of a research system that must take into account streamlining and feasibility. For example, the soil contamination detection of brownfield sites only considers heavy metal contamination. There are only nine evaluation indicators which is a small number and leads to a lack of clarity in reflection of the indicator system to the urban complex ecosystem. In future research, environmental testing of brownfield sites should also include other pollutants, such as organic pollutants. More indicators should also be added to the system to make it more complete.
5. Conclusions
- The characteristics of brownfield sites are summarized through the definition of brownfield sites in various countries, and the connotation of urban brownfield sites applicable to China is proposed in this study. Based on this definition, an urban brownfield identification process is developed that involves a combination of comparative analysis of planning texts and field research of sites.
- Based on the conceptual model of brownfield sites from the perspective of complex urban ecosystems, a brownfield redevelopment evaluation system comprising four primary indicators and nine secondary indicators was constructed using the Delphi method and the AHP approach.
- In the empirical study, 19 brownfield sites in Wuhu were identified and soil sampling and social surveys were conducted, followed by an assessment of the redevelopment of urban brownfield sites in the city.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Indicator Calculation Methods
- Soil Contamination Level Assessment
- 2.
- Method of Base Price of Land Coefficient Modification
- 3.
- Method for Assessing the Ecosystem Services Value (ESV)
Appendix B
Appendix C
- Placement of sites and sampling. Based on historical POI data, a preliminary determination of the possible distribution of contamination sources within the site was made based on the former production of the site and sampling was conducted in April 2021. For small sites, 5 sampling points were taken in equal amounts using the randomized distribution method and mixed into 1 sample using the quadratic method, while for larger sites 2–3 samples were taken in the same way depending on the shape of the site, and the sampling depth of each sample could be divided into three layers of 0–20 cm, 20–40 cm and 40–60 cm according to the actual situation. Surface soil samples were obtained by excavation, and deep soil samples were collected mainly by borehole sampling and also by slot probing, and a total of 59 samples were obtained for experiments.
- By judging the types of land use and production business before the brownfields were born, we believe that their signature pollutants are heavy metal elements. The elemental analysis of soil samples was performed using a Japanese Rigaku ZSX Primus II wavelength dispersive fluorescence spectrometer (rated tube voltage 60 kV, rated tube current 150 mA, rated power 4 kW, rhodium target X-ray tube). The theoretical basis of X-ray fluorescence spectrometry is to use primary X-ray photons or other microscopic particles to excite atoms in the substance to be measured to produce characteristic X-ray fluorescence (secondary X-rays), to determine the elements present in the sample by precisely measuring the energy or wavelength of the fluorescence, and then to determine the specific content of the measured elements by the relationship between wavelength and elemental number, and finally to determine the specific content of the measured elements by the proportional relationship between fluorescence intensity and content. After processing the sample, 2 g of the sample was weighed and placed in a mold with a polyethylene border and pressed for 1 min under 30 tons of pressure to form a 12 mm diameter round sample, which was numbered for testing. The testing process was monitored using Chinese national standard soil samples GSS-3 and GSS-6, with test content range of 10−6–100%, measurement accuracy at 0.001‰ level and analytical error of less than 2% for the main elements.
Appendix D
Sample No. | Elements 1 | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
As | Cd | Co | Cr | Ni | Pb | Sb | V | Cu | Zn | F | Mn | |
BF001-1-1 | 16 | 1 | 19 | 307 | 44 | 38 | 0 | 127 | 58 | 182 | 461 | 904 |
BF001-1-2 | 15 | 0 | 18 | 153 | 45 | 26 | 0 | 139 | 47 | 105 | 518 | 999 |
BF001-1-3 | 15 | 0 | 24 | 167 | 43 | 30 | 0 | 146 | 51 | 102 | 567 | 889 |
BF002-1-1 | 11 | 0 | 15 | 109 | 37 | 23 | 0 | 130 | 34 | 91 | 579 | 856 |
BF002-1-2 | 12 | 0 | 17 | 95 | 45 | 26 | 0 | 135 | 37 | 95 | 664 | 840 |
BF002-1-3 | 12 | 2 | 17 | 119 | 40 | 28 | 0 | 132 | 35 | 97 | 584 | 798 |
BF002-2-1 | 16 | 0 | 16 | 111 | 40 | 30 | 0 | 117 | 43 | 135 | 571 | 779 |
BF002-2-2 | 16 | 0 | 17 | 204 | 43 | 35 | 0 | 116 | 44 | 142 | 571 | 789 |
BF002-2-3 | 17 | 1 | 20 | 173 | 39 | 32 | 0 | 115 | 45 | 126 | 565 | 783 |
BF003-1-1 | 27 | 0 | 18 | 175 | 40 | 33 | 0 | 108 | 78 | 165 | 537 | 741 |
BF003-1-2 | 16 | 0 | 17 | 128 | 46 | 27 | 0 | 127 | 42 | 106 | 570 | 816 |
BF003-1-3 | 14 | 0 | 19 | 144 | 43 | 32 | 0 | 126 | 44 | 125 | 626 | 658 |
BF003-2-1 | 11 | 1 | 17 | 104 | 42 | 24 | 0 | 130 | 34 | 81 | 539 | 706 |
BF003-2-2 | 14 | 0 | 24 | 116 | 43 | 22 | 0 | 140 | 34 | 86 | 627 | 797 |
BF004-1-1 | 15 | 1 | 15 | 113 | 38 | 28 | 0 | 126 | 41 | 103 | 537 | 671 |
BF004-1-2 | 17 | 1 | 17 | 105 | 45 | 27 | 0 | 130 | 48 | 101 | 586 | 887 |
BF004-1-3 | 16 | 0 | 20 | 110 | 46 | 23 | 0 | 128 | 42 | 98 | 548 | 863 |
BF005-1-1 | 15 | 4 | 16 | 180 | 42 | 22 | 0 | 129 | 37 | 77 | 559 | 601 |
BF005-1-2 | 11 | 0 | 16 | 115 | 38 | 24 | 0 | 130 | 34 | 74 | 528 | 560 |
BF005-2-1 | 12 | 2 | 16 | 113 | 38 | 20 | 0 | 115 | 31 | 87 | 497 | 665 |
BF006-1-1 | 23 | 1 | 16 | 187 | 32 | 50 | 0 | 127 | 50 | 143 | 483 | 515 |
BF008-1-1 | 14 | 1 | 20 | 124 | 37 | 30 | 0 | 114 | 51 | 129 | 538 | 851 |
BF008-1-2 | 17 | 2 | 13 | 125 | 43 | 29 | 0 | 124 | 53 | 133 | 654 | 842 |
BF009-1-1 | 32 | 2 | 10 | 195 | 32 | 106 | 0 | 194 | 35 | 695 | 674 | 1954 |
BF009-1-2 | 28 | 1 | 12 | 159 | 33 | 73 | 0 | 145 | 32 | 340 | 475 | 1503 |
BF009-1-3 | 27 | 0 | 14 | 115 | 34 | 64 | 0 | 135 | 30 | 258 | 547 | 1176 |
BF009-2-1 | 16 | 1 | 15 | 166 | 40 | 33 | 0 | 116 | 45 | 127 | 593 | 786 |
BF009-2-2 | 18 | 0 | 17 | 100 | 39 | 27 | 0 | 123 | 37 | 110 | 529 | 833 |
BF009-2-3 | 17 | 0 | 14 | 87 | 37 | 27 | 0 | 125 | 35 | 175 | 533 | 1137 |
BF010-1-1 | 17 | 2 | 18 | 131 | 40 | 32 | 0 | 124 | 57 | 112 | 547 | 855 |
BF010-1-2 | 22 | 1 | 19 | 108 | 36 | 44 | 0 | 114 | 44 | 91 | 477 | 1072 |
BF011-1-1 | 50 | 0 | 14 | 204 | 35 | 66 | 0 | 89 | 47 | 208 | 583 | 802 |
BF013-1-1 | 133 | 4 | 18 | 159 | 41 | 179 | 0 | 126 | 98 | 922 | 500 | 1486 |
BF013-1-2 | 125 | 4 | 19 | 229 | 37 | 139 | 0 | 148 | 111 | 767 | 413 | 1354 |
BF014-1-1 | 13 | 0 | 14 | 121 | 36 | 30 | 0 | 124 | 33 | 75 | 497 | 432 |
BF014-1-2 | 11 | 0 | 13 | 97 | 31 | 23 | 0 | 116 | 26 | 56 | 476 | 618 |
BF014-1-3 | 205 | 3 | 15 | 92 | 48 | 207 | 11 | 146 | 51 | 316 | 814 | 1577 |
BF015-1-1 | 11 | 0 | 15 | 113 | 29 | 26 | 0 | 115 | 30 | 65 | 401 | 464 |
BF015-1-2 | 12 | 3 | 17 | 120 | 34 | 26 | 0 | 116 | 29 | 64 | 420 | 716 |
BF015-1-3 | 10 | 2 | 13 | 107 | 29 | 26 | 0 | 108 | 26 | 63 | 407 | 605 |
BF016-1-1 | 10 | 0 | 15 | 95 | 32 | 27 | 0 | 122 | 29 | 70 | 486 | 393 |
BF016-1-2 | 11 | 0 | 15 | 110 | 31 | 24 | 0 | 120 | 29 | 56 | 510 | 410 |
BF016-1-3 | 8 | 0 | 15 | 89 | 26 | 21 | 0 | 108 | 24 | 47 | 454 | 500 |
BF017-1-1 | 16 | 0 | 18 | 100 | 36 | 22 | 0 | 120 | 30 | 76 | 581 | 770 |
BF017-1-2 | 15 | 2 | 15 | 97 | 33 | 22 | 0 | 119 | 31 | 71 | 528 | 748 |
BF017-1-3 | 11 | 0 | 15 | 111 | 36 | 21 | 0 | 121 | 30 | 71 | 535 | 751 |
BF018-1-1 | 19 | 1 | 18 | 107 | 29 | 25 | 0 | 115 | 28 | 79 | 480 | 786 |
BF018-1-1 | 210 | 2 | 19 | 93 | 50 | 204 | 9 | 150 | 50 | 317 | 761 | 1582 |
BF018-1-2 | 36 | 1 | 17 | 104 | 31 | 31 | 0 | 105 | 27 | 118 | 535 | 800 |
BF018-1-2 | 212 | 2 | 19 | 95 | 53 | 220 | 6 | 155 | 53 | 355 | 765 | 1712 |
BF019-1-1 | 10 | 2 | 16 | 240 | 39 | 30 | 0 | 115 | 37 | 106 | 611 | 788 |
BF019-1-2 | 8 | 0 | 13 | 162 | 34 | 34 | 2 | 119 | 43 | 109 | 627 | 770 |
BF019-1-3 | 8 | 0 | 15 | 251 | 38 | 30 | 0 | 122 | 45 | 109 | 575 | 752 |
BF019-2-1 | 12 | 2 | 14 | 498 | 37 | 56 | 0 | 103 | 326 | 567 | 584 | 879 |
BF019-2-2 | 10 | 0 | 17 | 290 | 43 | 35 | 0 | 120 | 84 | 192 | 644 | 798 |
BF019-2-3 | 9 | 0 | 16 | 185 | 39 | 29 | 0 | 114 | 47 | 109 | 607 | 692 |
BF019-3-1 | 17 | 0 | 18 | 212 | 42 | 40 | 0 | 128 | 58 | 146 | 632 | 1006 |
BF019-3-2 | 16 | 0 | 18 | 106 | 35 | 35 | 0 | 124 | 65 | 138 | 587 | 985 |
BF019-3-3 | 17 | 2 | 16 | 214 | 45 | 39 | 0 | 136 | 63 | 146 | 592 | 1146 |
Elements | Background Values 1 |
---|---|
As | 9.6–13.7 2 |
3.5–6.2 3 | |
Cd | 0.12–0.19 |
Co | 11.6–15.4 2 |
15.4–20.0 3 | |
Cr | 73.9–94.6 |
Ni | 24.9–33.0 |
Pb | 23.9–31.1 |
Sb | 1.43–2.03 |
V | 60.3–76.8 |
Cu | 20.7–27.3 |
Zn | 67.3–88.5 |
F | 453–582 |
Mn | 163–342 |
References
- Song, Y.; Lin, H.; Wang, S. International experience of brownfield reuse and its enlightenment. World Reg. Stud. 2015, 24, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atkinson, G.; Doick, K.J.; Burningham, K.; France, C. Brownfield regeneration to greenspace: Delivery of project objectives for social and environmental gain. Urban For. Urban Green. 2014, 13, 586–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrara, V.; Beriatos, E.; Brebbia, C.A. Brownfield identification: Different approaches for analyzing data detected by means of remote sensing. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2008, 107, 45–54. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.; Xie, H.; Lin, M. Methodology construction of brownfield identification and its application—A case study of typical site in Fuzhou. J. Hainan Norm. Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 2013, 26, 452–457. [Google Scholar]
- Frickel, S.; Elliott, J.R. Tracking industrial land use conversions: A new approach for studying relict waste and urban development. Organ. Environ. 2008, 21, 128–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bezama, A.; Agüero, R.; Márquez, F. Land register of contaminated sites in an industrial chilean region: Identification and evaluation of suspected sites. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 588–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, F.; Geertman, S.; Kuffer, M. An integrative methodology to improve brownfield redevelopment planning in Chinese cities: A case study of Futian, Shenzhen. Comput. Environ. Urban 2011, 35, 388–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luis, L.; Eric, V. Exploring expert perception towards brownfield redevelopment benefits according to their typology. Habitat Int. 2018, 72, 66–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, Y.; Zhang, X.; Lyu, Y. Review and Prospects on Urban Brownfield Research from a Geographical Perspective. Sci. Geogr. Sin. 2019, 39, 886–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Y.; Hipel, K.W.; Guo, P. A Research Framework for Tackling Brownfield Problems in China Using Project Management Theory. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Singapore, 12–15 October 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Hsueh, S.L.; Su, F.L. Critical factors that influence the success of cultivating seed teachers in environmental education. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2016, 12, 2817–2833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De Sousa, C.A. Turning brownfields into green space in the City of Toronto. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2003, 62, 181–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bacot, H. Establishing indicators to evaluate brownfield redevelopment. Econ. Dev. Q. 2006, 20, 142–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wedding, G.C.; Crawford-Brown, D. Measuring site-level success in brownfield redevelopments: A focus on sustainability and green building. J. Environ. Manag. 2007, 85, 483–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stefania, T.; Pietro, B. Assessment of brownfield redevelopment opportunities using a multi-tiered approach: A case in Italy. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2020, 71, 100812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sareh, M.; Geoffrey, R.B. Advancing the Adaptive, Participatory and Transdisciplinary decision-making framework: The case of a coastal brownfield transformation. Cities 2021, 111, 103106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kolosz, B.W.; Athanasiadis, I.N.; Cadisch, G.; Dawson, T.P.; Giupponi, C.; Honzák, M.; Martinez-Lopez, J.; Marvuglia, A.; Mojtahed, V.; Ogutu, K.; et al. Conceptual advancement of socio-ecological modelling of ecosystem services for re-evaluating Brownfield land. Ecosyst. Serv. 2018, 33, 29–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhong, Q.; Zhang, L.; Zhu, Y.; Bosch, C.K.; Han, J.; Zhang, G.; Li, Y. A conceptual framework for ex ante valuation of ecosystem services of brownfield greening from a systematic perspective. Ecosyst. Health Sustain. 2020, 6, 1743206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Song, X.; Lin, N.; Yin, H. Contaminated Site Remediation Industry in China: Current State and Future Trends. Soils 2015, 47, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Brownfields Road Map to Understanding Options for Site Investigation and Cleanup, Sixth Edition. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/brownfields/brownfields-road-map (accessed on 28 April 2021).
- Zheng, J.; Chen, Y.; Wang, G. A Review on the Sustainable Redevelopment of Brownfields since 2000—Based on Visualized Bibliometric Analysis. Chin. Landsc. Archit. 2019, 35, 27–32. Available online: https://t.cnki.net/kcms/detail?v=Pi4e6uL0F8zU2vjCkiV-e7ujP2Qs8UTcWjQiD2t56LBYJnM0SbjvpQ4UvPx9XX0bX4UB0GzoAl0AqT6jSmNsQ0-Fu_lj_OWDKzODvSGPd92B5rM7e-_80u0fsqO_mMcl&uniplatform=NZKPT (accessed on 16 March 2021).
- Wang, R.; Zhiyun, O. Social-Economic-Natural Complex Ecosystem and Sustainability. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci. 2012, 27, 337–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Yang, Z.; Li, W. Measurement and evaluation of interactive relationships in urban complex ecosystem. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2005, 25, 1734–1740. [Google Scholar]
- Matthews, J. Book Reviews: Graham Haughton and Colin Hunter SUSTAINABLE CITIES: Regional Studies Association. Eur. Urban Reg. Stud. 1995, 2, 282–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stephen, J.J.; Pauline, A.V. An index of ecosystem integrity for Northern Chesapeake Bay. Environ. Sci. Policy 2000, 3, 59–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tjallingii, S.P. Ecopolis: Strategies for Ecologically Sound Urban Development; Backhuys Publishers: Leiden, The Netherlands, 1995; p. 159. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.; Li, H. Material metabolism, industrial metabolism and material economic metabolism—Metabolism and circular economy theory. In Proceedings of the 2006 Global China Association of Environmental Specialists Annual Meeting and Workshop on Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, Qingdao, China, 1 January 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Fisher, B.; Turner, R.K.; Morling, P. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 643–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ostrom, E. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 2009, 325, 419–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reyers, B.; Biggs, R.; Cumming, G.S.; Elmqvist, T.; Hejnowicz, A.P.; Polasky, S. Getting the measure of ecosystem services: A social–ecological approach. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2013, 11, 268–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nassl, M.; Löfflfflffler, J. Ecosystem services in coupled social–ecological systems: Closing the cycle of service provision and societal feedback. AMBIO 2015, 44, 737–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dorsey, J.W. Brownfields and Greenfields: The intersection of sustainable development and environmental stewardship. Environ. Pract. 2003, 5, 69–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brookes, P. The use of microbial parameters in monitoring soil pollution by heavy metals. Biol. Fertil. Soils 1995, 19, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weng, X.H.; Zhu, Y.M.; Song, X.Y.; Ahmad, N. Identification of Key Success Factors for Private Science Parks Established from Brownfield Regeneration: A Case Study from China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Liang, Y.; Wei, J.; Lu, H.; Zhang, L. Evaluating Brownfield Redevelopment using a Modified Multilevel Grey Method—A Case Study of Xi’an. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2017, 13, 8383–8392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wuhu Municipal People’s Government. Wuhu Overview. Available online: https://www.wuhu.gov.cn/mlwh/whgk/whgk/index.html (accessed on 2 May 2021).
- State Council of the PRC. Outline of the Yangtze River Delta Regional Integrated Development Plan. Available online: http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2019-12/01/content_5457442.htm (accessed on 2 May 2021).
- Hu, X. Research on the Evaluation and Potential Mining of Industrial Land Intensive Use. Master’s Thesis, Anhui Normal University, Wuhu, China, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Wuhu Municipal People’s Government. Economic Development. Available online: https://www.wuhu.gov.cn/mlwh/whgk/jjfz/index.html (accessed on 2 May 2021).
- Wuhu Municipal People’s Government. Wuhu Financial Reform and Development “13th Five-Year Plan” (2016–2020). Available online: https://www.wuhu.gov.cn/openness/public/6596381/14312101.html (accessed on 3 May 2021).
- Fang, G.; Wang, Y.; Yao, S.; Lu, L. Evolution and Dynamic Mechanism of Urban form in the Period of Rapid Urbanization-A Case Study of Wuhu. Econ. Geogr. 2009, 29, 1277–1281. Available online: http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-JJDL200908009.htm (accessed on 4 May 2021).
- He, D.; Wu, J. Study on the diagnosis, intensity and efficiency of urban construction land use in Wuhu City. J. Hubei Coll. Econ. (Humanit. Soc. Sci.) 2019, 16, 76–78. Available online: https://t.cnki.net/kcms/detail?v=Pi4e6uL0F8x7_c66L2hRPJpEg0j1D7GpLPJ_Towveo3_au5g5vvILMKsP8VzQ4RzQayaKQ426IzHrWYmQD3m0oxLB4GFWsomaoYJaEB88yoong2krFQQtQsk5Y7xuR-O&uniplatform=NZKPT (accessed on 4 May 2021).
- Chen, H.; Zheng, F.; Yao, H.; Guan, R. Research on the evaluation of the effect of reforming the industrial land supply system in Wuhu City. Mod. Trade Ind. 2017, 10, 150–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Natural Resources Standard Map Service. Available online: http://bzdt.ch.mnr.gov.cn (accessed on 5 May 2021).
- Government Information Disclosure. Available online: https://www.huainan.gov.cn/public/content/12691704 (accessed on 7 July 2021).
- Mccarthy, J. Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration: Liveable Places from Problem Spaces. Urban Stud. 2010, 47, 1154–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Odum, E.P.; Valiela, I. Basic ecology. Q. Rev. Biol. 1983, 1, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malm, A.; Hornborg, A. The geology of mankind? A critique of the Anthropocene narrative. Anthr. Rev. 2014, 1, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barfuss, W.; Donges, J.F.; Wiedermann, M.; Lucht, W. Sustainable use of renewable resources in a stylized social-ecological network model under heterogeneous resource distribution. Earth Syst. Dyn. 2016, 1, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Filatova, T.; Verburg, P.H.; Parker, D.C.; Stannard, C.A. Spatial agent-based models for socio-ecological systems: Challenges and prospects. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 45, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schädler, S.; Morio, M.; Bartke, S.; Rohr-Zänkerc, R.; Finkela, M. Designing sustainable and economically attractive brownfield revitalization options using an integrated assessment model. J. Environ. Manag. 2011, 92, 827–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, Y.; Wu, B.; Wang, D. Comprehensive evaluation of ecosystem services for brownfield redevelopment in Changsha. Arab. J. Geosci. 2021, 14, 1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Green, T.L. Evaluating predictors for brownfield redevelopment. Land Use Policy 2018, 73, 299–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nijkamp, P.; Rodenburg, C.A.; Wagtendonk, A.J. Success factors for sustainable urban brownfield development: A comparative case study approach to polluted sites. Ecol. Econ. 2002, 40, 235–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barta, G.; Beluszky, P.; Borbély, S.; Győri, R.; Keresztély, K.; Kovács, Z.; Locsmándi, G.; Sikos, T.T. A város peremén. (A rozsdaövezet múltja és jelene Budapesten) = At the outskirts of the city. (Past and Present of the brownfield area in Budapest). Hd21 Reg. Econ. 2007, 1, 1–6. Available online: http://real.mtak.hu/id/eprint/160 (accessed on 10 May 2021).
- Sousa, C. Measuring the public costs and benefits of brownfield versus greenfield development in the Greater Toronto area. Environ. Plan. B 2002, 29, 251–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, S.; Yang, J.; Zhang, S.; Wang, L.; Liu, D.; Zheng, S.; Wang, X.; Yu, L.; Fu, D. Investigation and analysis of brownfield redevelopment. Hum. Agric. Sci. 2014, 6, 79–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navratil, J.; Picha, K.; Martinat, S.; Nathanail, P.C.; Tureckova, K.; Holesinska, A. Resident’s preferences for urban brownfield revitalization: Insights from two Czech cities. Land Use Policy 2018, 76, 224–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, M.; Guo, P.; Zhu, Y. Research on Combination Evaluation of Brownfield Redevelopment Project Based on Method Set. Oper. Res. Manag. Sci. 2011, 20, 119–126. [Google Scholar]
- Haughton, G.; Hunter, C. Sustainable Cities, Regional Policy and Development; Jessica King Sley: London, UK, 1994; p. 357. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, H.; Zou, C. Environmental Edaphology; Hefei University of Technology Publishing House: Hefei, China, 2013; pp. 163–178. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Du, H. The Approach to Modulus Revision in Land Grading & Evaluating. Geo-Inform. Sci. 2000, 3, 17–23. [Google Scholar]
- Xiang, S.; Zhu, H. Value Accounting of Public Administration and Service Land in the Government Assets. Stat. Res. 2017, 34, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costanza, R.; d’Arge, R.; de Groot, R.; Farber, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; Limburg, K.; Naeem, S.; O’Neill, R.V.; Paruelo, J.; et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387, 253–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, G.; Lu, C.; Leng, Y.; Zheng, D.; Li, S. Valuation of ecological assets on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. J. Nat. Resour. 2003, 2, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, G.; Zhang, C.; Zhang, L.; Chen, W.; Li, S. Improvement of ecosystem service valorization method based on unit area value equivalent factor. J. Nat. Resour. 2015, 30, 1243–1254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, H. Research on Accounting for Ecosystem Service Value and Its Influence Factors in Anhui Province. Ph.D. Thesis, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, J.; Xiao, H.; Wu, G. A comparative analysis of physical and value evaluation methods of ecosystem services. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 2000, 2, 290–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anhui Statistical Yearbook-2020. Available online: http://tjj.ah.gov.cn/oldfiles/tjj/tjjweb/tjnj/2020/cn.html (accessed on 24 June 2021).
- Wuhu City Urban Planning Management Technical Regulations (2018 Edition). Available online: https://www.wuhu.gov.cn/public/content/32290701 (accessed on 24 June 2021).
- Zheng, C. Atlas of Soil Environmental Background Values in the People’s Republic of China; China Environmental Science Press: Beijing, China, 1994; p. 125. [Google Scholar]
Guideline Layer | Support Layer | Indicator Description | Measurement method |
---|---|---|---|
F1: Policy factors (0.3148) | F11: Planned land use attributes | Positioning of parcel properties in relevant plans such as territorial spatial planning, general urban planning, main function zoning of general land use planning. | Questionnaire method and qualitative evaluation |
(0.0630) | |||
F12: Government decision influence | Relationship between major projects and land parcels promoted by the government. | ||
(0.2519) | |||
F2: Social factors (0.0634) | F21: Community Resident Support | The degree of community residents’ support for each redevelopment direction of the site renovation. | Questionnaire method |
(0.0476) | |||
F22: NIMBY 1 | Residents are concerned about the negative impact of redevelopment projects on their health, the quality of their living environment, and the value of their assets. | ||
(0.0159) | |||
F3: Economic factors (0.2519) | F31: Pollution Management | Spending money on remediation of soils with different levels of contamination. | Single factor contaminant index method |
(0.0840) | |||
F32: Redevelopment benefits | Sum of economic benefits and ecosystem service values from redevelopment of land. | Base price of land coefficient modification method and the unit area value equivalent factor method | |
(0.1679) | |||
F4: Characteristic and environmental factors (0.3699) | F41: Location | Suitability of the location in the city for the direction of development. | Qualitative evaluation |
(0.1638) | |||
F42: Land Use Compatibility | Multiple options for the use of the same piece of land and the possibility of replacement. | ||
(0.0628) | |||
F43: Transportation Capacity | Distance from public infrastructure. | GIS and qualitative evaluation | |
(0.1433) |
No. | Contents | Description | Source |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Basic Vector Data | Administrative zoning, road and POI data, etc. (2012 and 2020) | Gaode Map Open Platform https://lbs.amap.com (accessed on 13 January 2021) |
2 | Satellite Data | 1–2 m high resolution satellite remote sensing data (2005, 2012 and 2020) | Geospatial Data Cloud site, Computer Network Information Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences http://www.gscloud.cn (accessed on 26 January 2021) |
3 | Special Data | Wuhu City Master Plan Central Urban Area Land Status Map (2012) and Central Urban Area Land Layout Plan (revised version in 2018) | Wuhu Municipal People’s Government https://www.wuhu.gov.cn/openness/public/6605831/31690221.htm (accessed on 25 January 2021) |
Brownfield Codes | Original Land Use Type | Planned Land Use Type | Former Business Type | Area 1 | Central Longitude | Central Latitude |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BF001 | Industrial | Residential | Cardboard manufacturing factory | 15.90 | 118.346455 | 31.44428087 |
BF002 | Regional Public Facilities | Residential | Power plant | 44.19 | 118.349184 | 31.44047217 |
BF003 | Commercial Service Facilities | Education and research | Paper mill | 4.14 | 118.361378 | 31.41782043 |
BF004 | Industrial | Logistics and warehousing | Water Industry Park | 13.93 | 118.355526 | 31.40149272 |
BF005 | Industrial | Agriculture and Forestry | Aluminum products factory | 1.95 | 118.418081 | 31.4054295 |
BF006 | Industrial | Residential | Silk factory, furniturefactory | 6.01 | 118.356348 | 31.36472786 |
BF007 | Industrial | Commercial and service facilities | Shipyard | 39.10 | 118.354064 | 31.34901619 |
BF008 | Industrial | Residential | Automobile instrument factory | 1.39 | 118.379637 | 31.34456229 |
BF009 | Industrial | Commercial Service Facilities | Auto parts industrial park | 121.55 | 118.426488 | 31.34037402 |
BF010 | Industrial | Green space and plaza | Sewing machine factory | 2.33 | 118.377899 | 31.32737946 |
BF011 | Industrial | Commercial Service Facilities | Kiln | 6.73 | 118.42133 | 31.32727667 |
BF012 | Industrial | Residential, green spaces and plazas, commercial, educational and research facilities | Iron and Steel Factory | 158.29 | 118.406048 | 31.31088943 |
BF013 | Industrial | Ecological | Mining area | 6.34 | 118.440699 | 31.30888251 |
BF014 | Industrial | Agriculture and Forestry | Cement pipe factory | 0.56 | 118.389088 | 31.27281272 |
BF015 | Industrial | Commercial Service Facilities | Pickle factory | 1.60 | 118.384024 | 31.26964164 |
BF016 | Industrial | Commercial Service Facilities | Slaughterhouse | 2.38 | 118.386266 | 31.27004683 |
BF017 | Industrial | Ecological | Plastic foam factory, distillery | 1.43 | 118.39625 | 31.26336227 |
BF018 | Mining | Ecological | Mining area | 61.07 | 118.377577 | 31.221302 |
BF019 | Industrial | Ecological | Shipyard | 83.75 | 118.337127 | 31.30738344 |
Pollutant Items | CAS No. 1 | Screening Value | Control Value | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type I 2 | Type II 3 | Type I | Type II | ||
As | 7440-38-2 | 20 4 | 60 4 | 120 | 140 |
Co | 7440-48-4 | 20 4 | 70 4 | 190 | 350 |
Cr | - | 400 | 800 | - | - |
V | 7440-62-2 | 165 4 | 752 | 330 | 1500 |
Sample No. | Pollutant Items 1 | Explanation of Pollution Situation | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
As | Co | Cr | V | ||
BF001-1-3 | 24 | 2 | |||
BF003-1-1 | 27 | ||||
BF003-2-2 | 24 | ||||
BF006-1-1 | 23 | ||||
BF009-1-1 | 32 | 194 | 3 | ||
BF009-1-2 | 28 | 2 | |||
BF009-1-3 | 27 | ||||
BF010-1-2 | 22 | ||||
BF011-1-1 | 50 | ||||
BF013-1-1 | 133 | 4 | |||
BF013-1-2 | 125 | 5 | |||
BF014-1-3 | 205 | ||||
BF018-1-2 | 36 | 2 | |||
BF018-2-1 | 210 | 5 | |||
BF018-2-2 | 212 | ||||
BF019-2-1 | 498 |
Brownfield Codes | Original Land Use Type | Planned Land Use Type | Redevelopment Direction | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended Directions | Alternative Direction | ||||
BF001 | Industrial | Residential | Greenfield type | Residential type | Commercial type |
BF002 | Regional Public Facilities | Residential | Residential type | Greenfield type | Public facility type |
BF003 | Commercial Service Facilities | Education and research | Residential type | Greenfield type | Public facility type |
BF004 | Industrial | Logistics and warehousing | Urban industrial type | Commercial type | Residential type |
BF005 | Industrial | Agriculture and Forestry | Greenfield type | Urban industrial type | Public facilities type |
BF006 | Industrial | Residential | Residential type | Greenfield type | Commercial type |
BF007 | Industrial | Commercial and service facilities | Greenfield type | Commercial type | Residential type |
BF008 | Industrial | Residential | Residential type | Public facilities type | Commercial type |
BF009 | Industrial | Commercial Service Facilities | Commercial type | Residential type | Greenfield type |
BF010 | Industrial | Green space and plaza | Greenfield type | Commercial type | Residential type |
BF011 | Industrial | Commercial Service Facilities | Commercial type | Public facilities type | Residential type |
BF012 | Industrial | Residential, green spaces and plazas, commercial, educational and research facilities | Residential type | Greenfield type | Commercial type |
BF013 | Industrial | Ecological | Greenfield type | - | - |
BF014 | Industrial | Agriculture and Forestry | Greenfield type | Urban industrial type | - |
BF015 | Industrial | Commercial Service Facilities | Public facility Type | Urban industrial type | Greenfield type |
BF016 | Industrial | Commercial Service Facilities | Urban industrial type | Public facilities type | Commercial type |
BF017 | Industrial | Ecological | Urban industrial type | Greenfield type | Public facilities type |
BF018 | Mining | Ecological | Greenfield type | Commercial type | Public facilities type |
BF019 | Industrial | Ecological | Greenfield type | Commercial type | Public facility type |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, Z.; Chen, X.; Huang, N.; Yang, Y.; Wang, L.; Wang, Y. Spatial Identification and Redevelopment Evaluation of Brownfields in the Perspective of Urban Complex Ecosystems: A Case of Wuhu City, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 478. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19010478
Wang Z, Chen X, Huang N, Yang Y, Wang L, Wang Y. Spatial Identification and Redevelopment Evaluation of Brownfields in the Perspective of Urban Complex Ecosystems: A Case of Wuhu City, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(1):478. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19010478
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Zihao, Xiaoqiang Chen, Na Huang, Yinan Yang, Li Wang, and Yuan Wang. 2022. "Spatial Identification and Redevelopment Evaluation of Brownfields in the Perspective of Urban Complex Ecosystems: A Case of Wuhu City, China" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 1: 478. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19010478