Measurement, Spatial-Temporal Evolution, and Optimization Path of the Level of Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation: The Case of China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Background
1.2. Literature Review
- Construct a comprehensive evaluation index system for the coordinated development of ecological civilisation construction based on the 3E1S system theory.
- Measure the coordinated development level of ecological civilisation construction in China as a whole and in 31 provinces and cities from 2005 to 2020 on the basis of the construction of the evaluation index system and analyse its spatial and temporal evolution characteristics.
- Explore and analyse regional differences in the level of coordinated development of ecological civilization construction in the east, central, west, and northeast regions.
- Propose optimisation paths for promoting the coordinated development of ecological civilisation construction based on empirical research findings and conclusions.
2. Theoretical Foundations and Analyses
2.1. Theoretical Foundations
2.1.1. Synergistic Theory
2.1.2. 3E1S System Theory
2.2. Theoretical Analyses
3. Research Design
3.1. Selection of Indicators and Data Sources
3.1.1. Selection of Indicators
3.1.2. Data Sources
3.2. Research Methodology
3.2.1. Methodology for Measuring the Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation Construction
3.2.2. Spatial and Temporal Characteristics and Methods of Analysing Regional Differences
- (1)
- Kernel density estimation method
- (2)
- Standard deviation ellipse method
- (3)
- Theil index
4. Results and Analyses
4.1. Orderliness of the 3E1S Subsystem for the Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation Construction
4.2. SDCS of Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation at the National Level
4.3. Spatial-Temporal Evolution of the SDCS of Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation Construction in 31 Provinces and Cities
4.4. Analysis of Regional Differences in the SDCS of Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation in the East, Central, West, and Northeast Regions
5. Discussion and Conclusions
5.1. Discussion
5.2. Conclusions
6. Optimisation Paths
6.1. Energy and Ecological Civilisation Construction
6.2. Economy and Ecological Civilisation Construction
6.3. Environment and Ecological Civilisation Construction
6.4. Society and Ecological Civilisation Construction
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Morrison, R. Ecological Democracy; South End Press: Boston, MA, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Pan, J. Ecological Civilization: A New Development Paradigm. China Econ. 2015, 10, 44. [Google Scholar]
- Tao, H. The Achievement and experiment of the Chinese communist party in constructing a system of ecological civilization since its 18th national congress. J. Fujian Norm. Univ. (Philos. Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2022, 3, 59–65+170. [Google Scholar]
- Gu, Y.; Wu, Y.; Liu, J.; Xu, M.; Zuo, T. Ecological civilization and government administrative system reform in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 155, 104654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, L.; Liu, Y. Review and prospect of ecological construction in China. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2021, 41, 3306–3314. [Google Scholar]
- Ye, Q. Ways of training individual ecological civilization under nature social conditions. Sci. Communism 1984, 2, 1. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, S.; Huang, X. Research on connotation of ecological civilization. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 12, 184–187. [Google Scholar]
- Gare, A. China and the struggle for ecological civilization. Capital. Nat. Social. 2012, 23, 10–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, C.A.; Dong, Y.G.; Lian, J.Y. On the concept of ecological civilization in China and Joel Kovel’s ecosocialism. Capital. Nat. Social. 2016, 27, 27–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, S.; Hu, Y.; Zhou, H. Ecological civilization construction: Scientific connotation and basic paths. Resour. Sci. 2013, 35, 2–13. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, J.; Li, Z. Key points in construction of ecological civilization. J. Ecol. Rural Environ. 2014, 30, 545–551. [Google Scholar]
- Meng, F.; Guo, J.; Guo, Z.; Lee, J.C.; Liu, G.; Wang, N. Urban ecological transition: The practice of ecological civilization construction in China. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 755, 142633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, M.H.; Li, H.; Svarverud, R. Ecological civilization: Interpreting the Chinese past, projecting the global future. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2018, 53, 195–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, F.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Hu, M.; Gao, Y.; Zhu, J. Exploring ecological civilization performance and its determinants in emerging industrialized countries: A new evaluation system in the case of China. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 315, 128051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, X.; Sun, Q. How to Evaluate Ecological Civilization Construction and Its Regional Differences: Evidence from China. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, P.; Wu, H.; Yang, T.; Jiang, F.; Zhang, W.; Zhu, Z.; Yue, Q.; Liu, M.; Xu, X. Evaluation of urban water ecological civilization: A case study of three urban agglomerations in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 123, 107351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Chen, X. An evaluation index system of China’s development level of ecological civilization. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Wang, Y.; Qi, Y.; Wu, J.; Liao, W.; Shui, W.; Zhang, Y.; Deng, S.; Peng, H.; Yu, X. Evaluating the trends of China’s ecological civilization construction using a novel indicator system. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 133, 910–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Wang, W.; Wu, D.; Shi, B.; Zhao, D. Research on a Four-Dimensional Evaluation Indicator System for Eco-Civilization Construction: A Case Study of Guangdong Province in China. Chin. J. Urban Environ. Stud. 2018, 6, 1850017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Yang, J.; Li, D.; Liu, H.; Xie, Y.; Song, T.; Luo, S. Evaluation of the ecological civilization index of China based on the double benchmark progressive method. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 222, 511–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, H.; Lan, Z. Urban Sustainable Development Evaluation Index System of Ecological Civilization Construction—A Case Study of Tianjin City. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2013, 361, 90–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, P. Assessment of ecological civilization development level of coastal cities based on entropy weighting method. Ccamlr Sci. 2019, 26, 135–149. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Y. Research on the evaluation of ecological civilization construction based on TOPSIS. Acad. J. Math. Sci. 2022, 3, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Y.; Dai, R.; Yang, Y.; Li, F.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, X. Integrated evaluation of resource and environmental carrying capacity during the transformation of resource-exhausted cities based on Euclidean distance and a Gray-TOPSIS model: A case study of Jiaozuo City, China. Ecol. Indic. 2022, 142, 109282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, P.; Xi, H. International-level comparison of China’s ecological civilization construction based on PSR model. World For. Res. 2015, 28, 61–67. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, C.; Feng, B.; Zhang, Z.; Huang, J.; Wu, D. Evaluation model of water ecological civilization based on pressure-state-response matter element model. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2017, 33, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Zuo, Z.; Guo, H.; Cheng, J.; Li, Y. How to achieve new progress in ecological civilization construction?–Based on cloud model and coupling coordination degree model. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 127, 107789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Liu, W.; Yan, Y.; Liu, C. A perspective of ecological civilization: Research on the spatial coupling and coordination of the energy-economy-environment system in the Yangtze River Economic Belt. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2022, 194, 403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Liu, H. Evaluation of ecological civilization city construction level in Longnan area based on entropy weight TOPSIS model. Eco Cities 2021, 2, 1837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, D.; Li, Y.; Yang, X.; Zhang, Z.; Gao, S.; Zhou, Q.; Zhuo, Y.; Wen, X.; Guo, Z. Evaluating urban ecological civilization and its obstacle factors based on integrated model of PSR-EVW-TOPSIS: A case study of 13 cities in Jiangsu Province, China. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 133, 108431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, Z.; Peng, Y. Comprehensive Evaluation of Ecological Civilization in Henan Province: Based on Entropy Method and Coupling Coordination Degree Model. J. Yunnan Agric. Univ. (Soc. Sci.) 2023, 17, 135–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, M.; Liu, X.; Yang, Z. An integrated indicator on regional ecological civilization construction in China. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2016, 23, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, F.; Pan, Y.; Zhang, X.; Sun, Z. How to evaluate provincial ecological civilization construction? The case of Jiangsu province, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, T.; Deng, H. Evaluating urban resource and environment carrying capacity by using an innovative indicator system based on eco-civilization—A case study of Guiyang. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 6941–6955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, Y.; Zhang, H.; Ye, G.; Jiang, J.; Jiang, Q. Marine eco-civilization performance evaluation in Oujiang Estuary, Zhejiang Province, China. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023, 25, 176–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haken, H. Can synergetics be of use to management theory? In Self-Organization and Management of Social Systems: Insights, Promises, Doubts, and Questions; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1984; pp. 33–41. [Google Scholar]
- Ma, L.; Liu, P.; Fu, F.; Li, Z.; Ni, W. Integrated energy strategy for the sustainable development of China. Energy 2011, 36, 1143–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soytaş, U.; Sarı, R. Routledge Handbook of Energy Economics; Routledge: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Q.; Yuan, X.; Cheng, X.; Mu, R.; Zuo, J. Coordinated development of energy, economy and environment subsystems—A case study. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 46, 514–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mu, X.; Kong, L.; Tu, C.; Chen, J.; Hu, G. Correlation and synergy analysis of urban economy–energy–environment system—A case study of Beijing. Nat. Res. Model. 2022, 35, e12329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Q.; Hu, H.; Li, M.; Zhang, Y.; Song, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, F. Ecological civilization evaluation and coordinated development between environment, economy and society. Resour. Sci 2015, 37, 1444–1454. [Google Scholar]
- Chai, Q.; Guo, Y.; Gong, C.; Li, W. Comprehensive evaluation of Chinese provincial ecological civilization coordinated development degree. Chin. J. Manag. Sci. 2017, 7, 184–190. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, P.; Shi, X. Dynamic evaluation of China’s ecological civilization construction based on target correlation degree and coupling coordination degree. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2022, 93, 106734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gan, C.; Zheng, R.; Yu, D. The impact of industrial structure change on economic growth and volatility in China. Econ. Res. J. 2011, 46, 4–16+31. [Google Scholar]
- Sun, H.; Gui, H.; Yang, D. Measurement and evaluation of the high-quality of China provincial economic development. Zhejiang Soc. Sci. 2020, 8, 4–14. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, S.; Chen, D. Air pollution, government regulations and high-quality economic development. Econ. Res. J. 2018, 53, 20–34. [Google Scholar]
- Deng, H.; Yang, L. Haze governance, local competition and industrial green transformation. China Ind. Econ. 2019, 10, 118–136. [Google Scholar]
- Wu, C. Research on the synergistic effect of low-carbon economy in China. J. Manag. World 2021, 37, 105–117. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, J. Measurement and evaluation of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei regional collaborative innovation ability based on coordinating measurement model with respect to composite system. Sci. Technol. Manag. Res. 2015, 35, 165–170. [Google Scholar]
- Shi, X.; Brasseur, G.P. The response in air quality to the reduction of Chinese economic activities during the COVID-19 outbreak. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2020, 47, e2020GL088070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, D.; Yang, H.; Thompson, J.R.; Li, J.; Loiselle, S.; Duan, H. COVID-19 lockdown improved river water quality in China. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 802, 149585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Terry, C.; Rothendler, M.; Zipf, L.; Dietze, M.C.; Primack, R.B. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on noise pollution in three protected areas in metropolitan Boston (USA). Biol. Conserv. 2021, 256, 109039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- You, S.; Sonne, C.; Ok, Y.S. COVID-19’s unsustainable waste management. Science 2020, 368, 1438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Klemeš, J.J.; Van Fan, Y.; Tan, R.R.; Jiang, P. Minimising the present and future plastic waste, energy and environmental footprints related to COVID-19. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 127, 109883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McKibben, B. The End of Nature; Random House Trade Paperbacks: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2006. [Google Scholar]
Subsystems | Ordinal Parameter | Sequential Variable | Unit (of Measure) | Symbol |
---|---|---|---|---|
Energy | Energy structure | Share of coal consumption | (%) | − |
Share of natural gas consumption | (%) | + | ||
Share of LPG consumption | (%) | + | ||
Share of electricity consumption | (%) | + | ||
Energy consumption | Total natural gas supply | (Ten thousand cubic meters) | + | |
Total LPG supply | (Tonne) | + | ||
Electricity consumption of society as a whole | (Hundred million kWh) | + | ||
Total coal consumption | (Million tonnes of standard coal) | − | ||
Economy | Economic scale | Gross domestic product (GDP) | (Billion yuan) | + |
GDP per capita | (yuan/person) | + | ||
Total retail sales of consumer goods | (Hundred million yuan) | + | ||
General public budget expenditure | (Hundred million yuan) | + | ||
Economic structure | Value added of the secondary sector as a share of GDP | (%) | − | |
Tertiary sector output as a share of GDP | (%) | + | ||
Industrial structure rationalisation index | Dimensionless | − | ||
Industrial structure advancement index | Dimensionless | + | ||
Economic potential | Energy consumption per unit of GDP | (Million tonnes of standard coal/CNY billion) | − | |
Investment efficiency | Dimensionless | + | ||
Marketability of technology results | (%) | + | ||
R&D investment intensity | (%) | + | ||
Environment | Improvement of stress | Carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP | (Million tonnes/CNY billion) | − |
Sulphur dioxide emissions per unit of GDP | (Million tonnes/CNY billion) | − | ||
NOx emissions per unit of GDP | (Million tonnes/CNY billion) | − | ||
Total wastewater discharge per unit of GDP | (Million tonnes/CNY billion) | − | ||
Environmental management | Environmental regulation intensity | Dimensionless | + | |
Comprehensive industrial solid waste utilisation rate | (%) | + | ||
Capacity for environmentally sound treatment of domestic waste | (tonnes/day) | + | ||
Investment in industrial pollution control as a share of GDP | (%) | + | ||
Ecological carrying capacity | Area of nature reserves | (Million hectares) | + | |
Total afforestation area | (Million hectares) | + | ||
Forest cover | (%) | + | ||
Green area (of a building or park) | (Million hectares) | + | ||
Society | Social development | Urbanisation rate | (%) | + |
Population density | (Persons/km2) | + | ||
Marketability | Dimensionless | + | ||
Students enrolled in higher education institutions per 10,000 population | (Person) | + | ||
Public service | Number of public tram vehicles operating per capita in the city | (Vehicles/10,000 persons) | + | |
Greening coverage in built-up areas | (%) | + | ||
Parkland per capita | (Square metres/person) | + | ||
Road area per capita | (Square metres/person) | + |
Year | Energy Subsystem | Economy Subsystem | Environment Subsystem | Society Subsystem |
---|---|---|---|---|
2005 | 0.1478 | 0.0891 | 0.1072 | 0.0821 |
2006 | 0.2055 | 0.1149 | 0.1572 | 0.1685 |
2007 | 0.2482 | 0.1569 | 0.2306 | 0.2263 |
2008 | 0.2545 | 0.1821 | 0.2997 | 0.2780 |
2009 | 0.2601 | 0.2475 | 0.3639 | 0.3168 |
2010 | 0.2781 | 0.2535 | 0.4028 | 0.3407 |
2011 | 0.2678 | 0.2670 | 0.4312 | 0.3939 |
2012 | 0.2941 | 0.3350 | 0.4382 | 0.4587 |
2013 | 0.3401 | 0.4168 | 0.5069 | 0.5076 |
2014 | 0.3759 | 0.4643 | 0.5466 | 0.5778 |
2015 | 0.4088 | 0.5505 | 0.5592 | 0.6070 |
2016 | 0.4260 | 0.6124 | 0.5807 | 0.6404 |
2017 | 0.4574 | 0.6584 | 0.5387 | 0.6924 |
2018 | 0.5018 | 0.7172 | 0.5667 | 0.7226 |
2019 | 0.5046 | 0.7609 | 0.5608 | 0.7853 |
2020 | 0.4637 | 0.7897 | 0.5326 | 0.8514 |
Year | Overall Differences | Interregional Differences and Contribution Rates | Intraregional Differences and Contribution Rates | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Overall | East | Central | West | Northeast | |||
2006 | 0.2166 | 0.0313 | 0.1853 | 0.1730 | 0.1888 | 0.2806 | 0.0039 |
(14.45) | (85.55) | (27.45) | (22.16) | (35.71) | (0.23) | ||
2007 | 0.0960 | 0.0129 | 0.0832 | 0.1870 | 0.0349 | 0.0643 | 0.0000 |
(13.39) | (86.61) | (53.06) | (9.00) | (24.56) | (0.00) | ||
2008 | 0.1391 | 0.0284 | 0.1107 | 0.0455 | 0.0196 | 0.2240 | 0.2987 |
(20.40) | (79.60) | (11.56) | (3.79) | (50.61) | (13.65) | ||
2009 | 0.1584 | 0.0298 | 0.1285 | 0.0189 | 0.0197 | 0.4213 | 0.0108 |
(18.84) | (81.16) | (4.32) | (3.13) | (72.94) | (0.77) | ||
2010 | 0.1495 | 0.0469 | 0.1025 | 0.0297 | 0.0273 | 0.3347 | 0.0198 |
(31.39) | (68.61) | (7.60) | (4.73) | (54.77) | (1.51) | ||
2011 | 0.1685 | 0.0383 | 0.1303 | 0.0410 | 0.0331 | 0.4093 | 0.0130 |
(22.70) | (77.30) | (9.37) | (4.75) | (62.29) | (0.89) | ||
2012 | 0.1457 | 0.0199 | 0.1257 | 0.0999 | 0.0402 | 0.2602 | 0.0312 |
(13.69) | (86.31) | (24.21) | (6.84) | (53.08) | (2.18) | ||
2013 | 0.1151 | 0.0224 | 0.0928 | 0.0255 | 0.0157 | 0.2698 | 0.0097 |
(19.43) | (80.57) | (7.53) | (3.36) | (68.67) | (1.01) | ||
2014 | 0.1053 | 0.0134 | 0.0920 | 0.1025 | 0.0086 | 0.1767 | 0.0023 |
(12.68) | (87.32) | (30.98) | (1.96) | (54.12) | (0.26) | ||
2015 | 0.0476 | 0.0081 | 0.0395 | 0.0288 | 0.0040 | 0.0861 | 0.0013 |
(17.05) | (82.95) | (19.32) | (1.99) | (61.37) | (0.28) | ||
2016 | 0.0728 | 0.0108 | 0.0620 | 0.0142 | 0.0030 | 0.1745 | 0.0023 |
(14.88) | (85.10) | (6.48) | (0.96) | (77.32) | (0.35) | ||
2017 | 0.0754 | 0.0102 | 0.0652 | 0.0134 | 0.0061 | 0.1806 | 0.0108 |
(13.54) | (86.46) | (6.06) | (1.85) | (77.00) | (1.54) | ||
2018 | 0.0442 | 0.0052 | 0.0390 | 0.0141 | 0.0013 | 0.0982 | 0.0002 |
(11.71) | (88.29) | (10.11) | (0.65) | (77.47) | (0.06) | ||
2019 | 0.0423 | 0.0047 | 0.0376 | 0.0073 | 0.0037 | 0.0986 | 0.0033 |
(11.15) | (88.85) | (5.63) | (1.92) | (80.50) | (0.80) | ||
2020 | 0.0247 | 0.0024 | 0.0223 | 0.0132 | 0.0082 | 0.0414 | 0.0105 |
(9.57) | (90.43) | (17.18) | (7.24) | (62.28) | (3.75) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 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
He, X.; Zeng, S. Measurement, Spatial-Temporal Evolution, and Optimization Path of the Level of Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation: The Case of China. Sustainability 2024, 16, 2126. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052126
He X, Zeng S. Measurement, Spatial-Temporal Evolution, and Optimization Path of the Level of Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation: The Case of China. Sustainability. 2024; 16(5):2126. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052126
Chicago/Turabian StyleHe, Xu, and Shian Zeng. 2024. "Measurement, Spatial-Temporal Evolution, and Optimization Path of the Level of Coordinated Development of Ecological Civilisation: The Case of China" Sustainability 16, no. 5: 2126. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16052126