Spatial–Temporal Coupling Analysis of Land Use Function and Urban–Rural Integration in Heilongjiang, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Framework and Methods
2.1. Theoretical Framework
2.2. Measuring the Level of LUF and URI with the Comprehensive Index Model
2.3. Analysis of the Coupling and Coordination Degree between LUF and URI
- (1)
- Coupling coordination degree model
- (2)
- Coupling coordination stage and type division
2.4. Obstacle Degree Model
2.5. Study Area and Data Sources
2.5.1. Study Area
2.5.2. Data Sources
3. Results Analysis
3.1. Evaluation of LUF
3.1.1. Temporal Variation Characteristics of LUFs
3.1.2. Spatial Pattern Distribution Characteristics of LUFs
- (1)
- The spatial distribution characteristics of LUF
3.2. Evaluation of URI
3.2.1. Temporal Variation Characteristics of URI Level
3.2.2. Spatial Pattern Distribution Characteristics of Urban–Rural Integration Level
3.3. Evaluation of Coupling Coordination Degree between Land Use Function and Urban–Rural Integration Level in Heilongjiang Province
3.3.1. Time Series Characteristics of Coupling Coordination between Land Use Function and Urban–Rural Integration Level
3.3.2. Spatial Pattern Distribution Characteristics of Coupling Coordination between Land Use Function and Urban–Rural Integration Level
3.4. Obstacle Degree of LUF and URI
4. Discussion
4.1. Understanding of Coupling and Coordination Degree between LUF and URI
4.2. Recognition of the Spatial–Temporal Characteristics of URI and LUF
4.3. Limitations and Future Prospects
5. Conclusion and Policy Implications
5.1. Conclusion
- (1)
- The comprehensive index of land use function in various regions in Heilongjiang Province showed an overall upward trend, but there was a large gap between the regions. The spatial distribution pattern is “high in the west and low in the east, high in the north and low in the south”. Overall, it showed a trend of “ecological function > social function > economic function”, and the change in land use function in Heilongjiang Province became more and more intense.
- (2)
- The overall level of urban–rural integration in Heilongjiang Province is on the rise. The spatial distribution characteristics show “high in the middle and low in the east and west, high in the south and low in the north”. Overall, there was a trend of “urban-rural ecology level > urban-rural public service level > urban-rural economic development level > urban-rural people’s living standard”.
- (3)
- The coupling and coordination level of LUF and URI in Heilongjiang Province showed an increasing trend, except for Yichun and Harbin. The coupling coordination degree of the two systems shows a spatial distribution pattern of “high in the north and low in the south, high in the middle and low in the east and west”.
- (4)
- The obstacle degree analysis of LUF and URI in Heilongjiang Province shows that there is a close correlation of obstacle factors between the two systems. Properly handling the factors hindering the development of LUF and URI can effectively promote the coordinated development of LUF and URI.
5.2. Policy Implications
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sovacool, B.; Newell, P.; Carley, S.; Fanzo, J. Equity, Technological Innovation and Sustainable Behaviour in a Low-Carbon Future. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2022, 6, 326–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- United Nations. Inequality in Asia and the Pacific in the Era of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; UN: New York, NY, USA, 2018; ISBN 978-92-1-363297-0. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. World Social. Report. 2020: Inequality in a Rapidly Changing World; UN: New York, NY, USA, 2020; ISBN 978-92-1-004367-0. [Google Scholar]
- Pan, W.; Wang, J.; Li, Y.; Chen, S.; Lu, Z. Spatial Pattern of Urban-Rural Integration in China and the Impact of Geography. Geogr. Sustain. 2023, 4, 404–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, K.; Long, H.; Liao, L.; Tu, S.; Li, T. Land Use Transitions and Urban-Rural Integrated Development: Theoretical Framework and China’s Evidence. Land. Use Policy 2020, 92, 104465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, L.; Fang, C.; Chen, W.; Zeng, J. Urban-Rural Land Structural Conflicts in China: A Land Use Transition Perspective. Habitat. Int. 2023, 138, 102877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, J.; Zhu, M.; Xiao, Y. Urbanization for Rural Development: Spatial Paradigm Shifts toward Inclusive Urban-Rural Integrated Development in China. J. Rural Stud. 2019, 71, 94–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, H.; Tu, S.; Ge, D.; Li, T.; Liu, Y. The Allocation and Management of Critical Resources in Rural China under Restructuring: Problems and Prospects. J. Rural Stud. 2016, 47, 392–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, H.; Qu, Y. Land Use Transitions and Land Management: A Mutual Feedback Perspective. Land. Use Policy 2018, 74, 111–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howe, C.; Suich, H.; Vira, B.; Mace, G. Creating Win-Wins from Trade-Offs? Ecosystem Services for Human Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis of Ecosystem Service Trade-Offs and Synergies in the Real World. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2014, 28, 263–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiggering, H.; Dalchow, C.; Glemnitz, M.; Helming, K.; Müller, K.; Schultz, A.; Stachow, U.; Zander, P. Indicators for Multifunctional Land Use—Linking Socio-Economic Requirements with Landscape Potentials. Ecol. Indic. 2006, 6, 238–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verburg, P.; Overmars, K. Combining Top-down and Bottom-up Dynamics in Land Use Modeling: Exploring the Future of Abandoned Farmlands in Europe with the Dyna-CLUE Model. Landsc. Ecol. 2009, 24, 1167–1181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, W.; Li, X.; Yang, J.; Ni, H.; Sang, X. How Land Use Functions Evolve in the Process of Rapid Urbanization: Evidence from Jiangsu Province, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 380, 134877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Shen, N.; Qu, Y.; Zhang, B. Association between Rural Land Use Transition and Urban–Rural Integration Development: From 2009 to 2018 Based on County-Level Data in Shandong Province, China. Land 2021, 10, 1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niu, X.; Liao, F.; Liu, Z.; Wu, G. Spatial–Temporal Characteristics and Driving Mechanisms of Land–Use Transition from the Perspective of Urban–Rural Transformation Development: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta. Land 2022, 11, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, H.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, L.; Tu, S. Land Use Transitions: Progress, Challenges and Prospects. Land 2021, 10, 903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elshof, H.; Haartsen, T.; Van Wissen, L.J.G.; Mulder, C.H. The Influence of Village Attractiveness on Flows of Movers in a Declining Rural Region. J. Rural Stud. 2017, 56, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Westlund, H.; Liu, Y. Why Some Rural Areas Decline While Some Others Not: An Overview of Rural Evolution in the World. J. Rural Stud. 2019, 68, 135–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Li, Y. Revitalize the World’s Countryside. Nature 2017, 548, 275–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Niu, B.; Ge, D.; Sun, J.; Sun, D.; Ma, Y.; Ni, Y.; Lu, Y. Multi-Scales Urban-Rural Integrated Development and Land-Use Transition: The Story of China. Habitat. Int. 2023, 132, 102744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; An, W.; Zhang, J.; Gan, M.; Wang, K.; Ding, L.; Li, W. Optimizing Limit Lines in Urban-Rural Transitional Areas: Unveiling the Spatial Dynamics of Trade-Offs and Synergies among Land Use Functions. Habitat. Int. 2023, 140, 102907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Li, Y.; Li, T. The Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Urban–Rural Development Transformation in China since 1990. Habitat Int. 2016, 53, 178–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheykhi, M. Rural—Urban Balance as a Measure of Socio-Economic Development with Special Reference to Iran. J. Soc. Econ. Res. 2016, 3, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ovaska, U.; Vihinen, H.; Oostindie, H.; Farinós, J.; Hrabar, M.; Kilis, E.; Kobal, J.; Tisenkopfs, T.; Vulto, H. Network Governance Arrangements and Rural-Urban Synergy. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rickardsson, J. The Urban–Rural Divide in Radical Right Populist Support: The Role of Resident’s Characteristics, Urbanization Trends and Public Service Supply. Ann. Reg. Sci. 2021, 67, 211–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lynch, K. Rural-Urban Interaction in the Developing World; Routledge Perspective on Development: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y. Research on the Urban-Rural Integration and Rural Revitalization in the New Era in China. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2018, 73, 637–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.; Cui, P. A Study of the Time–Space Evolution Characteristics of Urban–Rural Integration Development in a Mountainous Area Based on ESDA-GIS: The Case of the Qinling-Daba Mountains in China. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Lu, S.; Chen, Y. Spatio-Temporal Change of Urban–Rural Equalized Development Patterns in China and Its Driving Factors. J. Rural Stud. 2013, 32, 320–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, J.; Zou, W.; Qin, F. Review of Urban-Rural Multi-Dimensional Integration and Influencing Factors in China Based on the Concept of Equivalence. Geogr. Res. 2020, 39, 1836–1851, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andersen, P.; Vejre, H.; Dalgaard, T.; Brandt, J. An Indicator-Based Method for Quantifying Farm Multifunctionality. Ecol. Indic. 2013, 25, 166–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paracchini, M.; Pacini, C.; Jones, M.; Pérez-Soba, M. An Aggregation Framework to Link Indicators Associated with Multifunctional Land Use to the Stakeholder Evaluation of Policy Options. Ecol. Indic. 2011, 11, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, D.; Xu, J.; Lin, Z. Conflict or Coordination? Assessing Land Use Multi-Functionalization Using Production-Living-Ecology Analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 577, 136–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldwin, C.; Hamerlinck, J.; McKinlay, A. Institutional Support for Building Resilience within Rural Communities Characterised by Multifunctional Land Use. Land Use Policy 2023, 132, 106808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.; Li, J.; Qin, K.; Zhou, Z.; Yang, X.; Li, T. Changes in Land-Uses and Ecosystem Services under Multi-Scenarios Simulation. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 586, 522–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fan, Y.; Jin, X.; Gan, L.; Jessup, L.; Pijanowski, B.; Lin, J.; Yang, Q.; Lyu, L. Dynamics of Spatial Associations among Multiple Land Use Functions and Their Driving Mechanisms: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta Region, China. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2022, 97, 106858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eric, F.; Patrick, M. Land Use Transitions: Socio-Ecological Feedback versus Socio-Economic Change. Land Use Policy 2010, 27, 108–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fei, W.; Gao, Z.; Gao, W. Development of a Protocol to Identify Land Function Based on Multifunctionality and Suitability Analysis: A Case Study of the Nanyuntai Forest Farm, China. Ecol. Inform. 2023, 75, 102081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, G.; Zhen, L.; Zhang, C.; Deng, X.; Hannes, J.; Karen, T.; Katharina, H. Assessing the Multifunctionalities of Land Use in China. J. Resour. Ecol. 2010, 1, 311. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, B.; Tian, J.; Wang, S. Process and Mechanism of Transition in Regional Land Use Function Guided by Policy: A Case Study from Northeast China. Ecol. Indic. 2022, 144, 109527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Li, J.; Yang, Y. Strategic Adjustment of Land Use Policy under the Economic Transformation. Land Use Policy 2018, 74, 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castle, E.; Wu, J.; Weber, B. Place Orientation and Rural–Urban Interdependence. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 2011, 33, 179–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y. Urban–Rural Interaction Patterns and Dynamic Land Use: Implications for Urban–Rural Integration in China. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2012, 12, 803–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kūle, L. Urban–Rural Interactions in Latvian Changing Policy and Practice Context. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2014, 22, 758–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verburg, P.; Erb, K.-H.; Mertz, O.; Espindola, G. Land System Science: Between global challenges and local realities. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2013, 5, 433–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Long, H. Land use transition and land management. Geogr. Res. 2015, 34, 1607–1618, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
- Borrelli, P.; Robinson, D.A.; Fleischer, L.R.; Lugato, E.; Ballabio, C.; Alewell, C.; Meusburger, K.; Modugno, S.; Schütt, B.; Ferro, V.; et al. An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Long, H.; Chen, K. Urban-rural integrated development and land use transitions: A perspective of land system science. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2021, 76, 295–309, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duan, J.; Liu, S.; Li, P.; Yang, W. Study on Research Progress and Directions of Land Functions. China Land Sci. 2020, 34, 8–16, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, X.; Wu, Z.; Ouyang, Z. Changes of cultivated land function in China since 1949. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2014, 69, 435–447, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Li, X.; Xin, L. Spatiotemporal evolution of the old-age security function of cultivated land assets for Chinese farmers in the past 30 years and its policy implications. Geogr. Res. 2020, 39, 956–969, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Y.; Sun, X. The review and prospect of land use policy in China after the 40 years of reform and opening up: An urbanization perspective. China Land Sci. 2018, 32, 7–14, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, H.; Ge, D.; Zhang, Y.; Tu, S.; Qu, Y.; Ma, L. Changing man-land interrelations in China’s farming area under urbanization and its implications for food security. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 209, 440–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, J.; Qin, F.; Liu, J.; Zhu, G.; Zou, W. Measurement, spatial-temporal evolution and influencing mechanism of urban-rural integration level in China from a multidimensional perspective. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 2019, 29, 166–176, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Y.; Bao, W.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y. Measurement of Urban-Rural Integration Level and Its Spatial Differentiation in China in the New Century. Habitat. Int. 2021, 117, 102420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, G.; Sun, X.; Wang, J. Spatiotemporal Patterns of Multi-Functionality of Land Use in Northeast China. Prog. Geogr. 2016, 35, 232–244, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.; Wang, Z.; Xu, F. Geospatial Characteristics and the Application of Land Use Functions in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China: Perspectives on Provinces and Urban Agglomerations. Ecol. Indic. 2023, 155, 110969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, W.; Dunford, M.; Song, Z.; Chen, M. Urban–Rural Integration Drives Regional Economic Growth in Chongqing, Western China. Area Dev. Policy 2016, 1, 132–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; Zhang, L.; Su, L.; Nie, Q. Exploring the Coupling Coordination Relationship between Eco-Environment and Renewable Energy Development in Rural Areas: A Case of China. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 880, 163229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bi, G.; Yang, Q.; Liu, S. Coupling Coordination Development between Ecological Civilization Construction and Urbanization in China. Econ. Geogr. 2017, 37, 50–58, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Zhao, T.; Xia, L. Spatial-Temporal Differentiation of Carbon Efficiency and Coupling Coordination Degree of Chinese County Territory and Obstacles Analysis. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 76, 103429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, H.; Dai, H. Health evaluation and obstacle factor diagnosis of land use system in Heilongjiang Province based on PSR model. Hubei Agric. Sci. 2022, 61, 20–27, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chi, X. Research on the Development Path of Urban-rural Integration in Heilongjiang Province under the Background of Rural Revitalization. Shanxi Agric. Econ. 2023, 16, 17–19, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Zhao, C.; Han, M. Evaluation of Coordinated Development between Urban-rural Construction Land Transition and Rural Transformation and Diagnosis of Obstacle Factors. Chin. J. Agric. Resour. Reg. Plan. 2022, 43, 140–152, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
- Liu, J.; Chen, D. Evaluation and Analysis on the Process of Urban-rural Integration in Heilongjiang Province. Chin. Agric. Sci. Bull. 2014, 30, 107–113, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, M. Study on the Measurement of Urban–rural Integration Development Level and Spatial Evolution Pattern in China: Empirical Analysis of Provincial Data from 2015 to 2019. J. Mianyang Teach. Coll. 2023, 42, 17–27, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, Y.; Ren, Y.; Zhu, H. Spatial and temporal evolution of land use and interactive response between different land use types. J. Northwest A F Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2022, 22, 119–129, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Target Layer | Criterion Layer | Element Layer | Indicator Layer | Unit | Indicator Attributes | Indicator Weight (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LUF evaluation [56,57] | Economic function | Agricultural production (L1) | The ratio of output value of agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, and fishery to total output value (L11) | % | + | 5.19 |
Land reclamation rate (L12) | % | + | 4.46 | |||
Grain yield (L13) | t/hm2 | + | 3.90 | |||
Non-agricultural production (L2) | Proportion of secondary and tertiary industries (L21) | % | + | 5.52 | ||
Land economic density (L22) | CNY 108 /km2 | + | 9.74 | |||
Investment in fixed assets (L23) | CNY 108 | + | 14.7 | |||
Social function | Residence support (L3) | Population density (L31) | 104 person/km2 | − | 4.53 | |
Social guarantee (L4) | Rural employees (L41) | 104 person | + | 9.38 | ||
Per capita disposable income ratio of urban and rural residents (L42) | — | — | 3.08 | |||
Food supply (L5) | Per capita grain possession (L51) | t/ 104 person | + | 6.71 | ||
Ecological function | Resource conservation (L6) | Forest coverage rate (L61) | % | + | 6.16 | |
Green coverage rate of built-up area (L62) | 108 m3/ 104 person | + | 4.22 | |||
Water resources per capita (L63) | % | + | 19.67 | |||
Pollutant discharge reduction (L7) | Wastewater discharge (L71) | 104 t | — | 2.74 | ||
URI evaluation [4,55] | Economic integration | Economic production integration (U1) | Urban–rural per capita GDP (U11) | CNY/ person | + | 16.36 |
The tertiary industry structure as a proportion of GDP (U12) | % | + | 3.32 | |||
Investment Integration (U2) | Urban–rural fixed asset investment ratio (U21) | — | — | 1.95 | ||
Social integration | People’s living standards integration (U3) | Per capita disposable income ratio of urban–rural residents (U31) | — | — | 3.31 | |
Urban–rural minimum living security ratio (U32) | % | — | 3.25 | |||
Public services integration (U4) | Urban and rural ordinary middle school students teacher–student ratio (U41) | % | — | 1.43 | ||
Urban and rural beds in medical and health institutions ratio of ten thousand person (U42) | % | + | 20.18 | |||
Space integration | Urbanization (U5) | Urbanization level (U51) | % | + | 6.90 | |
Ratio of built-up area (U52) | % | + | 15.29 | |||
Traffic integration (U6) | Road traffic network density (U61) | % | + | 6.17 | ||
Ecological integration | Resource conservation (U7) | Forest coverage rate (U71) | % | + | 11.74 | |
Energy saving and emission reduction rate (U72) | % | + | 4.32 | |||
Pollutant discharge reduction (U8) | Wastewater discharge (U81) | 104 t | — | 3.26 | ||
Smoke emissions (U82) | 104 t | — | 2.52 |
Coupling Coordination Degree D Value Interval | Rank of Harmony Degree | Coupling Coordination Degree |
---|---|---|
(0.0–0.1) | 1 | Extreme disorder |
[0.1–0.2) | 2 | Serious disorder |
[0.2–0.3) | 3 | Moderate disorder |
[0.3–0.4) | 4 | Mild disorder |
[0.4–0.5) | 5 | On the verge of disorder |
[0.5–0.6) | 6 | Reluctant coordination |
[0.6–0.7) | 7 | Mild coordination |
[0.7–0.8) | 8 | Moderate coordination |
[0.8–0.9) | 9 | Serious coordination |
[0.9–1.0) | 10 | Extreme coordination |
2013 | 2017 | 2022 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coupling Coordination Degree | Coupling Type | Coupling Coordination Degree | Coupling Type | Coupling Coordination Degree | Coupling Type | |
Harbin | 0.402 | On the verge of disorder | 0.466 | On the verge of disorder | 0.477 | On the verge of disorder |
Qiqihaer | 0.242 | Moderate disorder | 0.292 | Moderate disorder | 0.379 | Mild disorder |
Jixi | 0.241 | Moderate disorder | 0.262 | Moderate disorder | 0.341 | Mild disorder |
Hegang | 0.311 | Mild disorder | 0.317 | Mild disorder | 0.368 | Mild disorder |
Shuangyashan | 0.242 | Moderate disorder | 0.254 | Moderate disorder | 0.385 | Mild disorder |
Daqing | 0.319 | Mild disorder | 0.288 | Moderate disorder | 0.355 | Mild disorder |
Yichun | 0.400 | Mild disorder | 0.439 | On the verge of disorder | 0.456 | On the verge of disorder |
Jiamusi | 0.248 | Moderate disorder | 0.275 | Moderate disorder | 0.442 | On the verge of disorder |
Qitaihe | 0.268 | Moderate disorder | 0.288 | Moderate disorder | 0.300 | Moderate disorder |
Mudanjiang | 0.378 | Mild disorder | 0.296 | Moderate disorder | 0.322 | Mild disorder |
Heihe | 0.295 | Moderate disorder | 0.311 | Mild disorder | 0.488 | On the verge of disorder |
Suihua | 0.148 | Serious disorder | 0.199 | Serious disorder | 0.315 | Mild disorder |
Daxing‘anling | 0.375 | Mild disorder | 0.230 | Moderate disorder | 0.747 | Moderate disorder |
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. |
© 2023 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
Zhang, N.; Yao, Y.; Wang, L.; Li, Q. Spatial–Temporal Coupling Analysis of Land Use Function and Urban–Rural Integration in Heilongjiang, China. Land 2023, 12, 2152. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12122152
Zhang N, Yao Y, Wang L, Li Q. Spatial–Temporal Coupling Analysis of Land Use Function and Urban–Rural Integration in Heilongjiang, China. Land. 2023; 12(12):2152. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12122152
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhang, Na, Yishan Yao, Lu Wang, and Quanfeng Li. 2023. "Spatial–Temporal Coupling Analysis of Land Use Function and Urban–Rural Integration in Heilongjiang, China" Land 12, no. 12: 2152. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12122152