The Spatial–Temporal Evolution of the Trade-Offs and Synergy between the Suburban Rural Landscape’s Production–Living–Ecological Functions: A Case Study of Jiashan in the Yangtze River Delta Eco-Green Integrated Development Demonstration Zone, China

Abstract

The Yangtze River Delta is one of China’s most economically developed regions and includes parts of Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Shanghai. The economic development of the Yangtze River Delta region is in a stage of rapid growth. As a unique intersection of urban and rural functions, contradictions are prominent. The production, life, and ecological functions of suburban rural landscapes are forming new trade-off and synergistic relationships. Therefore, it is of great significance to study the production–living–ecological function of the suburban rural landscape in the Yangtze River Delta region. Jiashan County is located in Jiaxing City, Zhejiang Province, and is an important part of the Yangtze River Delta region. Jiashan County, which has location advantages and economic development, can be used as a representative area to study the relationship between the production–living–ecological function of the suburban rural landscape in the Yangtze River Delta region. To evaluate the current status of the production–living–ecological functions of suburban rural areas in the Yangtze River Delta region and provide data support for future planning decisions in the Yangtze River Delta region, this study selected the suburban rural landscape of Jiashan as the research object and used temporal rank correlation analysis and spatial bivariate autocorrelation analysis to explore the evolution characteristics of the suburban rural landscape of Jiashan from 2000 to 2020. The results show that (1) the linear increase in the production and life functions of Jiashan rural areas has led to a decline in ecological functions, and life functions has been dominant. (2) There are trade-offs and synergistic relationships between the different functions of the suburban rural landscape of Jiashan, showing a temporal change pattern dominated by trade-offs. (3) The multifunctional trade-offs and synergistic relationships for the suburban rural landscape in Jiashan County exhibited obvious spatial pattern variability, and there were differences in how the streets and towns evolved. The relevant policies for the construction of ecological green comprehensive demonstration areas affect the economic, social, and ecological development of the Yangtze River Delta region, resulting in substantial differences in the types of and trends in the spatiotemporal evolution of the functional trade-off and synergistic relationships of the suburban rural landscape. Targeted measures should be taken according to the local conditions to guide the coordinated development of landscape functions.

1. Introduction

The rural landscape is a multifunctional integrated development ecosystem with diverse social, economic, and ecological functions [1]. With rapid socio-economic development and urbanization in China, there is increasing demand for diversified landscape functions. The pursuit of multiple goals within limited natural ecosystems has increased the complexity of landscape functions and relationships [2], demonstrating a state of mutual trade-off and synergy [3]. Trade-off refers to the fact that a reduction in or the growth of one function leads to the enhancement or weakening of other functions, while synergy means that two or more functions weaken or strengthen together [4]. The suburban countryside serves as a transition area between urban and rural areas, plays a crucial role in rural urbanization, and serves as the frontier for the diffusion of urban function. It integrates material and intangible cultural elements from both urban and rural areas, making it the area where conflicting urban–rural functions are most intense [5]. The suburban countryside has comprehensive functions such as agricultural production, social life, ecological regulation, leisure, and entertainment [6,7,8]. Unprecedented changes have occurred in suburban rural landscapes not only in terms of material aspects such as land use and architectural forms but also in their functional positioning and mutual relationships. This has led to increasingly complex trade-offs and synergistic relationships among landscape functions [9]. Scholars have mainly studied the relationships between landscape functions from perspectives such as land use changes [10], landscape pattern change [11], agricultural landscape functions [12], and ecosystem service functions [13] in order to explore their connotations [14], value, and types [15]. Various models have been used to conduct special evaluations of different types of rural landscapes [16], such as terraced landscapes [17], plateau hilly areas [18], arid areas [19], cultivated landscapes [20], and agricultural areas [21,22]. However, temporal correlation analysis has often been used in the relevant studies, which ignores interactions with the functional space. As a result, the comprehensiveness of the research results on landscape functional relationship changes needs to be improved. In addition, many studies have focused on the differentiation of a single type of landscape function, and the universality of the resulting research results is worthy of discussion. However, few studies have been conducted on the landscape functions of the suburban countryside in the context of complex urban and rural problems and particularly prominent contradictions. Few studies have specifically focused on the landscape functions of the suburban countryside in the context of the regional integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta region. In view of this, this study evaluates the performance of the suburban villages in Jiashan County, Zhejiang Province, within the Yangtze River Delta eco-green integrated development demonstration zone by using ecological trade-off and synergistic research methods. We analyzed the relationships between suburban and rural landscape functions using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient and bivariate spatial autocorrelation analyses. The spatiotemporal evolution characteristics of the rural landscape function trade-offs and synergies were explored at three time nodes within 2000–2020 [23]. The results are not only helpful for understanding the evolution of rural landscape functions in suburban areas but also for understanding the evolution of rural landscape functions. The results also have important academic value for exploring how to coordinate the relationships between the functions of this type of rural landscape.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. The Study Area

The Yangtze River Delta region is one of the regions with the most active economic development, the fastest process of urban–rural integration, the earliest rural reform, and the most complete agricultural industry system in China. It has an important strategic position in the overall construction of agricultural and rural modernization. The Outline of the Regional Integrated Development Plan for the Yangtze River Delta [24], the Three-year Action Plan for the Integrated Development of the Yangtze River Delta (2018–2020) [25], and the Master Plan for the Yangtze River Delta Eco-Green Integrated Development Demonstration Zone (2021–2035) [26] describe the specific paths, such as shaping the characteristics of Jiangnan’s water towns based on regional resource endowments and realizing ecological priority and green development strategies [27]. The planning period of the Yangtze River Delta Ecological Green Integrated Development Demonstration Zone is 2021–2035. The Chinese government has proposed several key goals and strategic directions to ensure sustainable integrated development of the region: for example, the permanent farmland basic protection plan, the construction plan for the west extension of Metro Line 17, the high-tech industry and innovation promotion plan, the green economic development plan, and the policy governance plan of the Ministry of Natural Resources. These plans will promote the coordinated development of the economy and ecology of the Yangtze River Delta demonstration zone. The eco-green integrated development demonstration zone, as an innovative experimental field for the integrated development strategy of the Yangtze River Delta region, covers an area of about 2413 square kilometers, mainly including Qingpu District in Shanghai and Wujiang District in Suzhou City in Jiangsu Province and Jiashan County in Jiaxing City in Zhejiang Province. Jiashan County is located in the northeastern part of Jiaxing City and is less than an hour’s drive from the center of the city. It is a typical suburban village with a total area of 506.59 square kilometers. The terrain is flat, with an average elevation of 3.67 m and a ground elevation difference of less than 2 m. Jiashan County has jurisdiction over six towns (Xitang Town, Yaozhuang Town, Taozhuang Town, Tianning Town, Dayun Town, and Ganyao Town) and three streets (Luoxing Street, Weitang Street, and Huimin Street) (Figure 1). In recent years, the population and GDP of Jiashan County have increased rapidly. At the end of 2020, the total population of Jiashan County was approximately 409,822, an increase of approximately 4550 people compared with 2019. Jiashan County’s GDP has also increased in the past few years. In particular, driven by the construction of the Yangtze River Delta ecological green integrated development demonstration zone, the economy has developed more rapidly, and Jiashan’s economic growth rate has ranked among the highest in the Yangtze River Delta region, reflecting its important position in the regional economy and its importance as a research example. In 2018 and 2022, Jiashan was selected for the national comprehensive rural reform pilot twice and has become the vanguard of the promotion of the construction of Chinese-style modern rural areas. The recent development direction, focuses, and measures have undergone major adjustments. In terms of infrastructure construction, the transportation network is expanded, and the Jiashan government promotes the interconnection of roads, railways, and water transport. In terms of urban–rural integration, the balanced allocation of urban and rural resources is promoted to narrow the economic gap between urban and rural areas. In terms of agricultural development, agricultural science and technology innovation is promoted to improve agricultural production efficiency and the added value of agricultural products. In terms of high-tech development, the focus is on the development of high-tech industries, such as information technology, biotechnology, and new materials. In terms of the ecological environment, strict environmental protection measures are implemented to reduce pollutant emissions. The use of green buildings and green energy is promoted to improve energy efficiency. The functions of the rural landscape have also changed greatly. Therefore, clarifying the evolution characteristics of the balance and synergistic relationship between the suburban and rural landscape functions represented by Jiashan will help to reveal the real benefits and existing problems of suburban and rural landscape functions under high-speed economic growth in the context of the integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta region [28,29]. The results will support the development of targeted measures to promote the development of such rural ecological protection and economic development towards a win–win situation.

2.2. Basis of the Classification of Suburban Rural Landscape Functions

With the development of the concept of green, low-carbon, and sustainable development, at the end of the 20th century, European rural studies began to pay attention to the functions of the agricultural natural environment, production, and economic development, and they gradually began to pay attention to the quality of the rural natural ecological environment and the human environment, as well as the protection of local characteristics [30]. As the joint result of natural ecological elements, peoples’ living behavior, and social production activities, rural landscapes are a carrier of the integration and development of ecological, cultural, economic, and social functions. Therefore, stimulating the efficiency of the rural landscape enhances the multiple functions of rural production, living, and ecological space [31]. Based on the causes of rural landscape functions and the relationship between these functions [32], in this study, we took Jiashan as a representative area to build the target layer for suburban rural landscape production, life, and ecological function evaluation, and we selected the criterion layer and important indicators closely related to it.

2.2.1. Rural Landscape Production Function

The rural landscape production function mainly focuses on production activities in rural areas and the economic value provided by rural landscapes, mainly covering agricultural production and economic development functions. The production function of rural landscapes involves the production income from grain, fruits and vegetables, food, raw materials, medicine, and other agricultural products related to agriculture, forestry, fishing, and animal husbandry. The function of economic development goes beyond traditional agricultural production and covers the economic activities of primary and tertiary industries such as tourism, handicrafts, township enterprises, rural construction, and development, reflecting the value of rural landscapes in local economic development [32] and the importance of rural areas to regional and national economic development.

2.2.2. Rural Landscape Life Function

The rural landscape plays an important role in maintaining and improving peoples’ quality of life, including the spatial, cultural, and aesthetic dimensions, such as the spatial bearing function and the landscape aesthetic function. Among them, the spatial bearing function focuses on how the rural landscape provides residents with living, communication, and activity space and how to develop a rational layout to meet the needs of the community. The landscape aesthetic function focuses on reflecting the connectivity and diversity of the rural landscape, providing sensory pleasure, community comfort, and a local sense of place for villagers.

2.2.3. Ecological Function of the Rural Landscape

The ecological function of the rural landscape highlights the role of the rural landscape in maintaining and enhancing the stability of the ecosystem, emphasizing the harmonious coexistence of the landscape and nature, and it can be divided into an ecological balance function and an environmental maintenance function. The ecological balance function mainly reflects the coverage of the rural landscape and the uniformity of the various landscapes, which is the key to the ecological functions of the rural landscape [33]. The environmental sustainability function pays more attention to protecting and improving the environmental quality of the rural landscape, such as the air quality, the degree of fragmentation of the ecological environment, and the degree of destruction of biological habitats. In addition, the ecological function (EF) builds a regional ecological barrier to ensure the long-term stability and sustainable development of the rural ecological environment.

2.3. Design of a Rural Landscape Function Evaluation Index

In this study, we used the entropy method to set the weight of each index. The higher the entropy is, the more mixed the data are, the less effective the information carried is, the smaller the utility value is, and the smaller the corresponding weight is. This method can determine the multi-index weights of time series. We input the index values for 2000, 2010, and 2020 into the SPSS 28.0 software and carried out forward processing of the forward indicators and reverse processing of the reverse indicators based on the variable generation function in SPSS 28.0. Then, we used the entropy method to carry out weight analysis of the processed indicators. The specific rural landscape function evaluation indicators and their weights are presented in

Table 1. Rural landscape function evaluation index system.

Target Layer	Criterion Layer	Index Layer	Calculation Method or Index Significance	Index Relationship	Index Weight
Production function (PF)	Agricultural production function (APF)	Agricultural productivity per capita	Gross value of primary industry/total township population (10,000 yuan/person).	Forward direction	6.02%
		Agricultural output value per land	Agricultural output value/cultivated land area (yuan/square meter).	Forward direction	4.53%
	Economic development function (EDF)	Industrial contribution rate	(Output value of primary industry + output value of tertiary industry)/township GDP.	Forward direction	10.94%
		Township urbanization level	Township construction land/total area of township.	Forward direction	5.39%
Living function (LF)	Space carrying function (SCF)	Per capita living area	Township construction land area/total population (km2).	Forward direction	7.25%
		Population density	Reflects the population carrying capacity of the township.	Forward direction	12.27%
	Landscape aesthetic function (LAF)	Landscape connectivity	CONTAG (0, 100%]—The degree of the agglomeration or spread of different patch types in the landscape. The greater the value is, the better the patch connectivity is.	Forward direction	6.44%
		Landscape diversity	SHDI [0, +∞)—The larger the value is, the more abundant the patch types and distributions in the landscape are.	Forward direction	5.60%
Ecological function (EF)	Ecological regulation function (ERF)	NDVI	Reflects the vegetation state of the township.	Forward direction	23.91%
		Ecological synergy degree	SHEI [0, 1)—A smaller value indicates that the landscape is more dominated by a few dominant types, and a larger value indicates that the distribution of all of the landscape types is more uniform.	Forward direction	5.80%
	Environmental maintenance function (EMF)	PM2.5	Reflects the degree of air pollution in towns and villages.	Reverse direction	4.32%
		Landscape fragmentation	The landscape division index is one of the indicators used to evaluate landscape fragmentation, and it mainly measures the degree of fragmentation of views.	Reverse direction	7.54%

.

2.4. The Research Methods

2.4.1. Single-Function Evaluation of the Landscape

The value of the landscape single-function index is used to reflect the importance of a certain function of the suburban rural landscape, and the weighted summation model is mainly used to conduct the calculations. The equation is as follows:

$$f_i=\sum _{i=1}^n x_i\times w_i,$$

(1)

where f_i is the value of a single function, x_i is item indicator i, w_i is the weight of item indicator i, and n is the number of indicators of single-function item i. Using this equation, a single indicator is combined to provide a comprehensive evaluation value for each function.

2.4.2. Quantification of the Landscape’s Production–Living–Ecological Function Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships

In particular, when there is a potential conflict or complementary relationship between a pair of functions [34], the rank correlation coefficient can quantify the synergistic relationship between the two functions in the rural landscape. The equation is as follows:

$$\rho =1-{\displaystyle \frac{6\sum d_i^2}{n\left(n^2-1\right)}},$$

(2)

where d_i is represented as interpolation, and Spearman’s correlation coefficient ranges from −1 to 1, indicating a positive or negative correlation between the functions. A value close to 1 indicates a positive correlation, while a value close to −1 indicates a negative correlation.

2.4.3. Spatial Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships of the Landscape’s Production–Living–Ecological Functions

To spatially reveal the synergies between functions, Moran’s index is used.

$$I={\displaystyle \frac{n}{W}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sum _{i=1}^n \sum _{j=1}^n w_{ij}(x_i-\overline{x})(x_j-\overline{x})}{\sum _{i=1}^n (x_i-\overline{x}{)}^2}},$$

(3)

where I is Moran’s index, n is the number of sample points, W is the sum of the elements of the weight matrix, x_i and x_j are the observations at sample points i and j respectively, $\overline{x}$ is the mean of the observations, and w_ij is the weight between sample points i and j.

2.5. Research Data

The sources of the experimental data are presented in

Table 2. Data sources and descriptions.

Data	Data Source	Application Indicators
Multi-period land use/land cover remote sensing monitoring data for China [35]	The multi-period land use/land cover remote sensing monitoring Chinese National Land Use and Cover Change (CNLUCC) database from the Chinese Academy of Sciences has a resolution of 30 m.	Landscape connectivity, landscape diversity index, and landscape fragmentation
Satellite-derived PM2.5 [36]	The global and regional PM2.5 concentrations are estimated using information from satellite, modeling, and monitoring sources. The aerosol optical depth and simulation [Goddard Earth Observing System with Chemistry (GEOS-Chem)] from multiple satellites (MODIS, VIIRS, MISR, and SeaWiFS) and their respective retrievals (Dark Target, Deep Blue, and MAIAC) are combined to determine the relative uncertainties based on observations using ground-based solar photometers [Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET)] to produce geophysical estimates. This explains most of the differences in the ground-level PM2.5 measurements. Additional information from the PM2.5 measurements is then tallied at a resolution of 0.01°.	PM2.5
GDP	The China km grid GDP spatial distribution dataset from the Resources and Environmental Sciences Data Registration and Publication System, Chinese Academy of Sciences (http://www.resdc.cn/DOI (accessed on 16 February 2024)).	GDP
Population density [37]	China’s 1 km population density dataset was downloaded from WorldPop (https://hub.worldpop.org/ (accessed on 16 February 2024)).	Population density
Normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI)	Landsat 7 and Landsat 8 images with a resolution of 30 m were downloaded from NASA, and the NDVI index was calculated in ArcGIS Pro 3.2 (https://www.jiashan.gov.cn/ (accessed on 16 February 2024)).	NDVI
Administrative boundary data	The base map is from the standard map service system of the Ministry of Natural Resources, and the review number is GS(2023)2767.	\
Jiashan County Yearbook for 2001, 2011, and 2021	Jiashan County Statistics Bureau (https://www.jiashan.gov.cn/ (accessed on 20 February 2024)).	Agricultural earnings, industrial output, and commercial activity

. The data processing process is as follows: (1) raster data and relevant indicators of the text statistics are used in ArcGIS Pro 3.2. (2) The panel data are exported for Spearman’s correlation coefficient analysis into SPSS 28.0. (3) The shapefile data are exported for bivariate Moran’s index (global and local) analysis into GeoDA.

3. Results

3.1. Rural Landscape Function Evaluation Results

Based on a weighted comprehensive evaluation of 12 evaluation indicators, the average values of the production–living–ecological functions in the target layer and the landscape functions of the six criterion layers of the nine townships in Jiashan County were calculated at three points in time, and comprehensive evaluation results on the rural landscape’s production–living–ecological functions in Jiashan County were obtained (

Table 3. Results of comprehensive evaluation of production–living–ecological functions of the rural landscape in Jiashan County.

Category	Feature	2000	2010	2020
Target layer	PF	0.043	0.091	0.108
	LF	0.070	0.143	0.152
	EF	0.310	0.087	0.102
Criterion layer	APF	0.020	0.050	0.052
	EDF	0.023	0.041	0.056
	SCF	0.039	0.064	0.075
	LAF	0.031	0.077	0.079
	ERF	0.242	0.039	0.039

).

(1)

The “production–living–ecological functions” of the rural landscape in Jiashan County changed regularly over time. From 2000 to 2020, the production–living–ecological functions of the target layer in Jiashan County exhibited regular changes, and the production function (PF; contains agricultural productivity per capita, agricultural output value per land, industrial contribution rate, and township urbanization level) and life function (LF; contains per capita living area, population density, landscape connectivity, and landscape diversity) exhibited linearly increasing trends. The ecological function (EF; contains NDVI, ecological synergy degree, PM2.5, and landscape fragmentation) rapidly decreased to 0.087 from 2000 to 2010 and then rebounded to 0.102 from 2010 to 2020. However, it was still 67% lower than the initial value of 0.310. This situation shows that under accelerated industrialization and urbanization processes in Jiashan County, a large amount of agricultural land has been transformed into industrial parks and residential areas. This change in land use has improved the regional production functions (such as an increase in the industrial contribution) and living functions (such as an increase in the urbanization level), but it has also led to deterioration of ecological functions. For example, large amounts of green space and wetlands have been replaced by urban buildings, resulting in a significant decline in the normalized vegetation index (NDVI) and increases in PM2.5 pollution and landscape fragmentation. This conclusion reflects the decline in the overall ecological function of the landscape under the influence of the gradual urbanization of rural and suburban areas in Jiashan County.

(2)

The single function of the rural landscape in Jiashan County changed regularly over time. From 2000 to 2020, the agricultural production function (APF), the economic development function (EDF), the space carrying function (SCF), and the landscape aesthetic function (LAF) all exhibited linearly increasing trends, while the ecological regulation function (ERF) rapidly decreased to 0.039 from 2000 to 2010 and basically remained stable from 2010 to 2020. The environmental maintenance function (EMF) decreased slightly from 0.068 to 0.048 from 2000 to 2010. From 2010 to 2020, it increased slightly to 0.064, and there was basically no change during the total period, indicating that the single functions of the production function and living function in the rural landscape in Jiashan County steadily increased over time, while the single function of the ecological function fluctuated greatly under the influence of rural urbanization. Specifically, the decrease in the ecological regulation function (ERF) will lead to a decrease in the ability of landscapes to filter air pollutants, causing loss and fragmentation of biological habitats. In turn, this could lead to a decrease in species diversity. In addition, the degradation of ecological functional monomers may also lead to a decline in urban soil quality and an increase in surface runoff, increasing the threat of flooding.

In summary, linear increases in the rural landscape production function and the living function affected the decline in the ecological function. Each single function of the ecological function gradually degraded, and the living function was dominant. The main reason for this is that in the process of rural urbanization and construction, Jiashan County mainly took into account the development needs for production and life, and less attention was paid to the maintenance of ecological functions.

3.2. The Temporal Evolution of the Function Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships of the Production–Living–Ecological Functions of the Landscape

Spearman’s rank correlation analysis was used to obtain the temporal evolution pattern of the trade-offs and synergy relationships between the production–living–ecological functions in the rural landscape using Equation (2). In Figure 2, the absolute value of each function is taken, and then the change is taken. The corresponding values are shown in

Table 4. The temporal pattern of the functional trade-offs and synergistic relationships of the rural landscape in Jiashan.

Rural Landscape Function Synergy Type	2000		2010		2020
	Correlation Coefficient	p-Value	Correlation Coefficient	p-Value	Correlation Coefficient	p-Value
PF-LF	−0.25	0.516	0.55	0.125	0.15	0.7
PF-EF	0.433	0.244	0.217	0.576	0.05	0.898
LF-EF	−0.15	0.7	−0.117	0.765	−0.567	0.112
APF-EDF	0.286	0.493	−0.527	0.145	−0.700 *	0.036
APF-SCF	−0.571	0.139	−0.405	0.279	−0.700 *	0.036
APF-LAF	0.071 *	0.008	0.720 *	0.029	0.717 *	0.03
APF-ERF	−0.31 *	0.04	0.851 **	0.004	0.733 *	0.025
APF-EMF	0.143	0.736	−0.736 *	0.024	−0.633	0.067
EDF-SCF	0.452	0.26	0.613	0.079	0.800 **	0.01
EDF-LAF	−0.405	0.32	−0.4	0.286	−0.617	0.077
EDF-ERF	0.119	0.779	−0.492	0.179	−0.6	0.088
EDF-EMF	−0.048	0.911	0.583	0.099	0.733 *	0.025
SCF-LAF	−0.19	0.651	−0.58	0.102	−0.817 **	0.007
SCF-ERF	0.405	0.32	−0.154	0.693	−0.5	0.17
SCF-EMF	−0.286	0.493	0.336	0.376	0.6	0.088
LAF-ERF	0.667	0.071	0.695 *	0.038	0.700 *	0.036
LAF-EMF	−0.786 *	0.021	−0.717 *	0.03	−0.783 *	0.013
ERF-EMF	−0.952 **	0	−0.915 **	0.001	−0.867 **	0.002

p > 0.05 denotes not significant; p ≤ 0.05 denotes significant *, p ≤ 0.01 denotes very significant **.

. It can be seen from the chart that the rural landscape functions in Jiashan County mainly exhibited a trade-off relationship, for which there were 11 groups of trade-off relationships. There were 9 groups of synergistic relationships and 34 groups of compatible relationships, and these relationships changed in different directions over time. The trade-off relationships were significantly negative, the synergy relationships were significantly positive, and the compatibility relationships were not significant; that is, there was neither synergistic development nor trade-off confrontation, and the two sides remained neutral and compatible.

3.2.1. The Temporal Pattern of Rural Landscape Synergy in Jiashan County

The rural landscape’s agricultural production function–landscape aesthetic function (APF-LAF) in Jiashan County is maintaining a synergistic relationship. It increased from 0.071 to 0.720 from 2000 to 2010 and slightly decreased by 0.003 from 2010 to 2020, exhibiting a steadily increasing trend overall. This indicates that the agricultural production function and the aesthetic function achieved good integration during the study period, and the maintenance of this synergistic relationship was conducive to promoting the stable development of the rural landscape, improving the overall image and attractiveness of the rural areas and promoting a non-harmful interaction between agricultural production and landscape aesthetics. These results provide important support for the sustainable development of local villages.

3.2.2. The Temporal Pattern of Rural Landscape Trade-Offs in Jiashan County

In the rural landscape in Jiashan County, the landscape aesthetic function–environmental sustainability function (LAF-EMF) and the ecological trade-off function–environmental sustainability function (ERF-EMF) remained in trade-off relationships, and the landscape aesthetic function–environmental sustainability function changed from −0.786 in 2000 to −0.717 in 2010. Finally, it stabilized at −0.783, that is, the trade-off between the landscape aesthetic function and the environmental sustainability function was in a stable state for these past 20 years. The ecological trade-off function–environmental sustainability function varied from −0.952 to −0.915 to −0.867, exhibiting a slowly decreasing trend, but it was relatively stable overall. This indicates that there was irrationality in the environmental sustainability function of the rural landscape in Jiashan County. In general, the increases in the landscape aesthetic function and the ecological trade-off function were often accompanied by improvements in the environmental sustainability function. Improvements in the landscape connectivity, diversity, the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), and ecological synergy did not effectively improve the local environmental sustainability function. This indicates that in order to achieve better environmental sustainability, Jiashan County should further enhance the integration of the rural landscape aesthetic function and the ecological function so as to achieve the dual goals of environmental sustainability and rural development.

3.2.3. The Temporal Pattern of the Transformation of the Rural Landscape’s Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships in Jiashan County

In 2000, agricultural production–the ecological balance function in Jiashan County exhibited a trade-off relationship (−0.31 *), which transformed into a synergistic relationship (0.851 **) in 2010. A synergistic relationship (0.733 *) occurred in 2020, that is, the temporal evolution of the relationship of the APF-ERF for the rural landscape was a trade-off–synergy relationship. This indicates that the synergy and interactions between the agricultural production functions and the ecological balance functions was strengthened, and the correlation and support between them improved.

3.2.4. The Temporal Pattern of the Rural Landscape Compatibility in Jiashan County

In the rural landscape in Jiashan County, the production function–living function (PF-LF), the production function–ecological function (PF-EF), and the living function–ecological function (LF-EF) were all compatible at the three time nodes (failed the significance test). The positive and negative changes in the three groups of functions were analyzed. It was found that the production function and the life function exhibited a trade-off and synergy trend, the production function and the ecological function exhibited a synergy development relationship, and the life function and the ecological function exhibited a trade-off development relationship, indicating that the basic production–living–ecological function of the rural landscape in Jiashan County needs to gradually improve in its synergistic development capability so that compatibility can be transformed into a synergy relationship.

In summary, the main problems existing in the analysis of the function trade-offs and synergistic relationships of the production–living–ecological functions of the rural landscape in suburban Jiashan County are as follows:

(1)

The landscape aesthetic function and the ecological balance function cannot develop in concert with the environmental sustainability function, which indicates that the design of aesthetic and ecological adjustments to the landscape cannot solve the problem with the local environmental sustainability function.

(2)

The production–living–ecological functions of the rural landscape in Jiashan County were compatible, that is, there was no obvious synergistic relationship, indicating that the production–ecology–life functions of the rural landscape in Jiashan County could not increase synergistically.

3.3. Analysis of the Spatial Evolution of the Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships between the Landscape’s Production–Living–Ecological Functions

3.3.1. Spatial Pattern of the Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships of the Production–Living–Ecological Functions in the Rural Landscape

Through bivariate global spatial autocorrelation analysis, the global Moran’s index values for the rural landscape function in Jiashan County during 2000–2020 were obtained (

Table 5. Bivariate global spatial autocorrelation index of the rural landscape functions in Jiashan County.

Rural Landscape Function Synergy Type	2000		2010		2020
	Moran’s I	Z-Value	Moran’s I	Z-Value	Moran’s I	Z-Value
PF-LF	−0.0863	−1.0237	0.3171	2.2568	−0.1111	−0.6131
PF-EF	0.1299	1.1015	−0.0957	−0.3133	0.111	0.6636
LF-EF	−0.2152	−1.5692	0.0288	−0.0399	−0.3997	−2.7636
APF-EDF	−0.1333	−0.424	0.1815	0.7392	0.0323	−0.2552
APF-SCF	0.0059	−0.3166	0.0097	−0.2245	0.0652	0.0348
APF-LAF	−0.0398	−1.6717	0.2665	1.8745	0.2243	1.6523
APF-ERF	0.0104	−0.3515	0.2062	1.5868	0.1796	1.3963
APF-EMF	−0.0047	0.3975	−0.141	−1.2271	−0.179	−1.397
EDF-SCF	−0.0227	0.0049	−0.1681	−0.5528	−0.0477	0.2823
EDF-LAF	−0.1692	−1.3248	0.1249	0.4548	−0.1605	−1.4015
EDF-ERF	−0.134	−1.0232	0.159	0.6713	−0.158	−1.4562
EDF-EMF	0.156	1.1781	−0.194	−0.8462	0.169	1.4948
SCF-LAF	0.044	0.3829	−0.052	−0.6616	−0.094	−0.9531
SCF-ERF	−0.0092	0.261	−0.1226	−1.0871	−0.1343	−1.206
SCF-EMF	−0.0126	−0.3724	0.1017	0.9138	0.1243	1.1151
LAF-ERF	0.178	1.6897	0.4774	2.7977	0.4597	2.7344
LAF-EMF	−0.1937	−1.6544	−0.3953	−2.4541	−0.463	−2.7251
ERF-EMF	−0.0638	−0.984	−0.241	−1.781	−0.3482	−2.2479

). Among them, eight groups were compatible (did not pass the α = 0.05 level test), one group was synergistic (positive statistic), and no group exhibited a trade-off (negative statistic). Among the six sub-functions, 33 groups were compatible, 7 groups exhibited trade-offs, and 5 groups were synergistic. This indicates that the suburban rural landscape functions in Jiashan County from 2000 to 2020 generally exhibited a trade-off relationship, and there was a significant spatial difference between the degrees of trade-off and synergy of the landscape functions.

(1)

There were significant differences in the trade-offs and synergies at the spatial scale. The landscape’s aesthetic function–environmental sustainability function always exhibited a trade-off relationship, which is consistent with the results of the temporal evolution analysis, indicating that the design of the aesthetic function of the rural landscape in Jiashan County was irrational. The landscape aesthetic function–ecological trade-off (LAF-ERF) function were always in a synergistic relationship. The spatial evolution of the agricultural production function–landscape aesthetic function manifested as trade-offs and synergies.

(2)

The spatial heterogeneity of the trade-off in the degree of synergy increased steadily over time. The trade-off between the landscape aesthetic function and the environmental sustainability function increased year by year. The synergistic relationship between the landscape aesthetic function and the ecological balance function increased year by year.

In summary, through bivariate global spatial autocorrelation analysis, it was found that the rural landscape functions in Jiashan County from 2000 to 2020 were dominated by trade-off relationships. The landscape aesthetic function and the ecological balance function maintained a synergistic relationship, and the landscape aesthetic function and the environmental sustainability function were always in a trade-off relationship. The relationship between the agricultural production function and the landscape aesthetic function exhibits alternating changes in trade-offs and synergies over time. In addition, the spatial difference in the trade-offs and synergies was significant, and the degree of trade-offs and synergies continued to increase over time, among which the trade-off of the landscape aesthetic function–environmental sustainability function and the synergies of the landscape aesthetic function–ecological balance function increased year by year. This indicates that in the rural landscape of the suburban area in Jiashan County, the trade-off and synergy between the functions constantly changed at the spatial scale, reflecting the complex interactions and spatial heterogeneity among the functions of the rural landscape. Moreover, the spatial trade-off between the landscape aesthetic function and the environmental sustainability function revealed that the design of the aesthetic function of the rural landscape in Jiashan County did not play a synergistic role in the enhancement of the local environmental sustainability function, that is, improvement in the appreciation of the local landscape did not drive an improvement in functionality. While beautifying the appearance, attention should be paid to the improvement of the internal air quality and continuity of the landscape.

3.3.2. The Spatiotemporal Evolution of the Trade-Off and Synergy between the Production, Life, and Ecological Functions

Based on GeoDA’s bivariate local Moran’s index analysis of the trade-off and synergistic relationships between the production, life, and ecological functions, Figure 3 was obtained.

Table 6. GeoDA bivariate autocorrelation legend with descriptions of the functional relationships.

Legend	Significance
Non-significant area (compatible)	p > 0.05 indicates a non-significant region, that is, the function of the region is compatible.
Significant H-H region (synergy)	p < 0.05 indicates a significant region, and there was synergy among the regional functions, as well as synergy in the surrounding areas, so the spatial heterogeneity was small and the relationship was stable.
Significant L-L region (trade-off)	There were trade-offs between the regional functions, and the surrounding areas also involved trade-offs, so the spatial heterogeneity was small and the relationship was stable.
Significant L-H region (trade-off—peripheral region is synergistic)	The regional functions were trade-offs, but the surrounding areas were synergistic, so the spatial heterogeneity was large and the relationship was unstable.
Significant H-L region (synergy—peripheral region exhibits a trade-off)	There was synergy among the regional functions, but the surrounding areas involved trade-offs, so the spatial heterogeneity was large and the relationship was unstable.

Note: When describing the entire study area, if most of the sub-regions were a certain type, then the relationship that dominates the time node in the study area is indicated.

describes the specific significance of each section of the legend, from which the spatiotemporal evolution of the functional trade-off and synergistic relationships of the production–living–ecological functions in Jiashan County was ascertained.

(1)

The production–life functions in the study area were dominated by a trade-off relationship (i.e., most of the research units exhibited a trade-off), but in Xitang Town and Ganyao Town, a synergistic relationship occurred in 2010, and the trade-off relationship transformed into a trade-off relationship in 2020, and the trade-off relationship transformed into a synergistic relationship on Luoxing Street from 2010 to 2020.

(2)

There was obvious spatial heterogeneity in the relationship of the production–ecological functions in the study area, among which the evolution relationship in Xitang Town from 2000 to 2020 was synergy–compatibility–trade-off, that on Weitang Street and in Dayun Town was synergy–compatibility–compatibility, and that on Huimin Street was trade-off–compatibility–trade-off.

(3)

The life function–ecological function in the study area was dominated by a trade-off relationship, but the evolution relationship in Xitang Town was trade-off–compatibility–trade-off. In Dayun Town, it changed from synergy to compatibility in 2010, and Huimin Street and Luoxing Street exhibited a trade-off–compatibility–trade-off based evolution model.

In summary, it was found that the production–living–ecological functions on Huimin Street were in a balanced relationship in all of the time periods, while the other towns and streets exhibited a certain evolution relationship, which indicates that the production–living–ecological functions on Huimin Street, as a relatively central area in Jiashan County, could not achieve synergistic development, indicating that compared with the other streets and towns, the relationship between the production–living–ecological functions should be improved on Huimin Street.

3.3.3. The Spatiotemporal Evolution of the Trade-Off and Synergy of Subfunction

Using GeoDA 1.14, bivariate local Moran’s index analysis of the trade-offs and synergy between the sub-functions was performed to obtain Figure 4, from which the spatiotemporal law of the trade-offs and synergy between the sub-functions in Jiashan County was ascertained.

(1)

In 2000, the single-function trade-offs and synergies for the suburban rural landscape in Jiashan County mostly manifested as compatible relationships. In 2010, single-function trade-offs and synergies for the suburban rural landscape in each township began to appear and mainly manifested as synergies. In 2020, the trade-offs and synergies began to change into trade-offs.

(2)

Agricultural production function–economic development function (APF-EDF): The spatial pattern of trade-offs in the north and synergy in the south in 2000 changed to trade-offs in the north in 2010, and it stabilized as a trade-off in the north in 2020.

(3)

Agricultural production function–spatial carrying function (APF-SCF): This relationship was compatible between 2000 and 2020.

(4)

Agricultural production function–landscape aesthetic function: In 2000, it manifested as a trade-off relationship between Taozhuang Town and Xitang Town. In 2010, it manifested as a trade-off relationship between Xitang Town, Huimin Street, and Luoxing Street. In 2020, it manifested as a trade-off relationship between Xitang Town, Huimin Street, and Luoxing Street.

(5)

Agricultural production function–ecological balance function: A compatible relationship in 2000 evolved into a trade-off relationship between Taozhuang Town, Huimin Street, and Luoxing Street in 2010. There was a synergistic relationship for Xitang Town and a trade-off relationship between Taozhuang Town, Xitang Town, Huimin Street, and Luoxing Street in 2020.

(6)

Agricultural production function–environmental sustainability function (APF-EMF): In 2000, there was a compatible relationship. In 2010, the relationship evolved into a trade-off relationship between Taozhuang Town, Huimin Street, and Luoxing Street and a synergistic relationship between Xitang Town. In 2020, there was a trade-off relationship between Taozhuang Town, Xitang Town, Huimin Street, and Luoxing Street.

(7)

Economic development function–spatial carrying function (EDF-SCF): All of the towns and streets were compatible in the three periods.

(8)

Economic development function–landscape aesthetic function (EDF-LAF): In 2000, the pattern of trade-offs in the north between Taozhuang Town and Xitang Town changed into a compatible relationship in Taozhuang Town, a synergistic relationship between Luoxing Street and Xitang Town, and a trade-off relationship on Huimin Street in 2010. There was a synergistic relationship on Luoxing Street, a trade-off relationship on Huimin Street, and a compatible relationship in Taozhuang Town in 2020.

(9)

Economic development function–ecological balance function (EDF-ERF): In 2000, the entirety of Jiashan exhibited a compatible relationship, which evolved into a trade-off relationship between Taozhuang Town and Huimin Street in 2010, a synergistic relationship between Xitang Town and Luoxing Street in 2020, and a stable synergistic relationship on Luoxing Street.

(10)

Economic development function–environmental sustainability function (EDF-EMF): In 2000, the entirety of Jiashan exhibited a compatible relationship, which evolved into a trade-off relationship between Taozhuang Town and Huimin Street in 2010, a synergistic relationship between Xitang Town and Luoxing Street in 2020, and a stable synergistic relationship on Luoxing Street.

(11)

Space carrying function–landscape aesthetic function: In 2000, it manifested as a trade-off relationship between Taozhuang Town and Xitang Town, which evolved into a synergistic relationship between Xitang Town, Luoxing Street, and Huimin Street in 2010, and a synergistic relationship was maintained between these areas in 2020.

(12)

Spatial carrying function–ecological balance function: The compatibility relationship of the entire study area in 2000 evolved into a synergistic relationship between Xitang Town, Luoxing Street, and Huimin Street in 2010 and 2020 and a trade-off relationship in Taozhuang Town.

(13)

Space bearing function–environmental sustainability function (SCF-EMF): In 2000, the relationship was compatible, and in 2010 and 2020, it evolved into a collaborative relationship between Xitang Town, Luoxing Street, and Huimin Street and a trade-off relationship in Taozhuang Town.

(14)

Landscape aesthetic function–ecological balance function: In 2000, the relationship was compatible, and in 2010 and 2020, it evolved into a synergistic relationship between Xitang Town and Taozhuang Town and a trade-off relationship between Huimin Street and Luoxing Street.

(15)

Landscape aesthetic function–environmental sustainability function: In 2000, it was a compatible relationship, and in 2010 and 2020, it evolved into a collaborative relationship between Xitang Town and Taozhuang Town and a trade-off relationship between Huimin Street and Luoxing Street.

(16)

Ecological trade-off function–environmental sustainability function: In 2000, it was a compatible relationship, and in 2010 and 2020, it evolved into a collaborative relationship between Xitang Town and Taozhuang Town and a trade-off relationship between Huimin Street and Luoxing Street.

In summary, from the perspective of space, the spatiotemporal law of the trade-offs and synergies among the sub-functions in Jiashan County mainly manifested as compatibility–trade-off in the streets and compatibility–synergy–trade-off in the towns. From the perspective of time, synergies and trade-offs among the functions of various streets and towns gradually appeared. The number of towns and streets with synergistic or trade-off functions increased rapidly from 2000 to 2010 and was stable from 2010 to 2020. This also demonstrates that the development of the urban and rural economy from 2000 to 2010 led to a sharp change in the functional relationship between these three and life. After economic development became stable in 2010, although there the number of production–living–ecological sub-functional relationships in the suburban rural areas no longer increased, most of them transformed from synergy into trade-offs, indicating that the development of production–living–ecological functions was not synergistic under economic development and that the regional development was not synergistic. It should be noted that among the 15 single-function relationships, only the spatial carrying function–landscape aesthetic function relationship in Jiashan County evolved from being mainly weighted to being mainly collaborative, and this relationship remained stable from 2010 to 2020, indicating that the spatial carrying capacity of the residents in Jiashan County was complementary to the local landscape aesthetics, reflecting the synergistic development of the living space and the living environment of the residents in Jiashan County. The Yangtze River Delta ecological green integrated development demonstration zone indicates that production, life, and ecological functions should develop in a coordinated manner. Relevant governments can consider promoting the coordinated development of production, life, and ecological functions through specific measures, such as planning and zoning, developing sustainable agriculture and industry, and strengthening environmental protection and restoration.

4. Discussion

Taking nine towns and streets in Jiashan County, Jiaxing City, as examples, this section discusses the evolution characteristics and rules of the suburban rural landscape functions in the Yangtze River Delta eco-green integrated development demonstration zone. The results help to more comprehensively determine the sustainable development direction of suburban rural landscape functions in the context of rapid economic development in the Yangtze River Delta region and provide a scientific basis for relevant decision-making. Based on the above research conclusions and problems and the relevant policies and plans for the construction of the eco-green integrated development demonstration zone in the Yangtze River Delta region, we make suggestions for achieving improvement of the rural landscape in Jiashan County:

(1)

The linear increase in the overall production function and the living function led to a decline in the ecological function. This suggests that the production function and the living function should be maintained under the premise of protecting the ecological function, and the behavior of sacrificing the ecological environment to improve the production and living functions should be controlled at the county scale, with the Taipu River–Changbaitang water conservation area as the core. The spatial layout of the water, forest, and field land use types should be optimized, and the ecological garden of the new southern part of Jiangnan should be designed according to the integration of rivers, lakes, forests, and farmland. For example, we suggest that the following measures be taken: vigorously carrying out comprehensive remediation actions for unappropriated cultivated land, requisitioning cultivated land, and/or developing forest land for urban construction and economic activities, carrying out land remediation actions on non-grain and non-agricultural cultivated land, and curbing the occurrence of farmland abandonment.

(2)

In view of the trade-off conflict between the landscape aesthetic function and the environmental sustainability function in the rural landscape, it is suggested that in rural planning and management involving landscape aesthetics, not only should artistic appreciation of the landscape be considered but more attention should also be paid to the contiguous design and construction of the local ecological environment. Strengthening the relationship between Xitang, Jinze, and Dianshan Lake in the Hongqitang Clean Water Corridor and the Jiaxing Wusong River Historical and Cultural Belt would not only help to shape the new Jiangnan water town according to a modern style with Jiangnan charm and small town flavor but would also improve the ecological and environmental functions of the entire demonstration area and would promote the development of the landscape aesthetic and environmental sustainability functions.

(3)

In view of the unbalanced development between the towns and streets, Jiashan County should maintain a basic compatibility relationship between the production–living–ecological functions and should eliminate the differences between the production–living–ecological functions in the towns and streets as much as possible. It should transform development from compatibility to synergy and divide the identified H-H areas into corresponding functional advantage areas. The L-L areas should be divided into corresponding function improvement areas, the H-L areas should be divided into corresponding function protection advantage areas, and the L-H areas should be divided into corresponding function key improvement areas. In addition, with the Jiaxing Xiangfudang Innovation Center planned in the Yangtze River Delta Ecological and Green Integrated Development Demonstration Zone Territorial Space Master Plan (2021–2035) as the core, a green science and innovation corridor should be created, and administrative barriers and institutional barriers in the demonstration zone should be removed. A new mechanism for regional integration and synergistic development that integrates ecological standards, the sharing of living and production resources, and the integration of management and law enforcement should be established. In addition, in view of the prominent trade-off between the production–living–ecological functions on Huimin Street, it is proposed that Dianshan Lake and Yuandang be taken as ecological green centers, and on the basis of centralized continuous protection and the stability of high-quality cultivated land, part of the cultivated land and/or laid-down cultivated land should be converted into forest land. Lakeside plants should be enriched, the greening rate of the community should be improved, and the integrity and connectivity of the blue and green spaces should be ensured. The appropriate introduction of tourism, leisure, horticultural expos, and other services should be conducted to enhance the production–living–ecological functions according to a synergistic development relationship.

5. Conclusions

With the rapid development of urban construction and the urban and rural economy, the expectation of rural residents regarding their quality of life and the environment has been significantly improved, and the rural landscape has also been developed in the direction of production–living–ecological functions. The implementation of an integrated development strategy in the Yangtze River Delta region has accelerated the urbanization process in the three provinces and one city in the Yangtze River Delta region, strengthened the connection between the countryside and the city, and provided new opportunities and challenges for the collaborative evolution of rural landscape functions. The development of and changes in the ecological environment, economy, and society in Jiashan County have had profound impacts on the rural landscape’s functions. The related evolution is driven by various factors, such as relevant policies for the Yangtze River Delta eco-green integrated development demonstration zone, modernization, and globalization development, resulting in a non-linear change in the trade-offs and synergistic evolution of the landscape’s production–living–ecological functions. The complex trade-offs and conflicts between the ecological, economic, and social functions are reflected by the speed and direction of evolution at the time level, in the differentiation and volatility at the spatial level, by constant changes in the value of the rural landscape at the edge of the city, and by rapid changes in the living environment and lifestyle of rural community residents. Although the three functions have not fully achieved coordinated development in general, they are moving in that direction. Based on this study the following three conclusions were drawn:

(1)

The linear growth of the production function and the living function led to a decline in the ecological function, and the individual functions of the ecological function were also gradually degraded. This was mainly due to the excessive emphasis on the improvement of the production and living functions during the recent rapid urbanization of rural areas in Jiashan County. By ignoring the maintenance and sustainable development of ecological functions, this emphasis led to deterioration of the ecological environment, which not only affected the quality of life of the residents but also posed a threat to the long-term development of the region. Healthy urban development should combine ecological protection with economic growth and urbanization efforts. Based on the current analysis of Jiashan County, its planning does not meet this demand. In subsequent development, ecological protection policies should be prioritized, and the economy should be developed only after stable ecology.

(2)

The functional relationships of the rural landscape in Jiashan County exhibited significant temporal and spatial changes. The agricultural production function and the landscape aesthetic function consistently maintained a synergistic relationship, whereas the spatial carrying function and the landscape aesthetic function shifted from a trade-off to synergy, promoting industrial adjustment and ecological optimization. However, persistent trade-offs were observed between the landscape aesthetic function and the environmental sustainability function, as well as the ecological trade-off function and the environmental sustainability function. This indicates that short-term aesthetic improvements have not resulted in long-term environmental benefits, highlighting the challenge of balancing aesthetic and sustainability functions for overall regional development.

(3)

The spatial synergistic relationships of the rural landscape in Jiashan County exhibited significant geographic differentiation, influenced by geographic location, economic development, and ecological factors. On Huimin Street, the basic production–living–ecological functions displayed a trade-off relationship, unlike other towns and streets, which exhibited major changes. On Weitang, Luoxing, and Huimin Street, the focus on production and living functions overshadowed ecological considerations, particularly in Jiashan County’s old city, where landscape function conflicts remained unresolved. The recent Yangtze River Delta integration strategy and the development of demonstration zones caused the evolution pattern in Xitang and Yaozhuang Towns to shift from synergy to trade-off relationships, reflecting the challenges of balancing rapid development with ecological sustainability.

Our results are in line with previous similar studies. However, we conclude that Jiashan County faced declining ecological functions in 2020, while Jia Zhao et al. [38]. concluded that the Yangtze River Economic Belt is currently dominated by ecological functions. These diverging conclusions may be due to the differences in the geographical scale between Jiashan County and the entire Yangtze River Economic Belt, which also indirectly reflects the importance of studying individual regions. In summary, the main problem facing Jiashan County is the contradiction between coordinated development of the regional economy and ecological environmental sustainability. In response to this problem, we propose the following suggestions to provide corresponding decision-making support for local relevant departments:

(1)

Ecological restoration and protection: We suggest that wetland restoration projects be implemented to protect and restore local wetland ecosystems, enhance water purification and habitat functions, and promote biodiversity.

(2)

Green infrastructure construction: We suggest that the development of green buildings and infrastructure, such as rain gardens and green roofs, be promoted to reduce urban heat island effects and rainwater runoff problems.

(3)

Agricultural ecology: We suggest that organic agriculture and ecological agriculture be promoted to reduce the use of fertilizers and pesticides, protect soil and water sources, and improve agricultural sustainability.

(4)

Community participation and education: We suggest that environmental awareness education for residents be strengthened to encourage them to participate in ecological protection activities and promote harmonious coexistence between humans and nature.

6. Limitations

There are still some shortcomings in the interpretation of the temporal and spatial changes at the township scale in this study. (1) In this study, we mainly analyzed the functional values of the three static time nodes in a differentiated manner. Although this method is objectively representative, it can easily cause discontinuity and imprecision in the results of analysis [29]. Continuity of the research nodes will be added in future relevant studies. (2) The accuracy of the indicators is a prerequisite for accurate presentation of the results [39]. The evaluation of the landscape function involves a wide range of aspects. In this study, we screened out the functional dimensions and several representative indicators corresponding to the rural production–living–ecological space, but the rural landscape is the result of both multi-function and multi-factor effects [40]. Our research did not involve cultural inheritance, social support, ideology, emotional levels, or other issues, and the representative integrity of the index combination was insufficient. Various indicators will be further refined in order to obtain more comprehensive characterization results. (3) Subjective needs at multiple levels and the diversity of human beings are difficult to represent using quantitative indicators [41]. In this study, we did not fully consider the differences in the wishes and preferences of groups and individuals, and we quantitatively assessed the landscape aesthetics from the perspective of ecological connectivity and diversity [42] and did not consider factors such as visual perception and the local characteristics of the aesthetics. Quantitative input on peoples’ needs and difference indicators will be increased in future relevant studies to improve the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the data and results.