3.4.1. Carbon Emissions

In this section, three periods, 2011, 2014 and 2017, are taken to map the distribution pattern of carbon emissions. These maps will provide a better picture of the spatio-temporal evolution of carbon emissions in eastern China. In addition, carbon emissions are classified into three classes—high, medium and low emissions—based on the "expectation ± 1 times standard deviation" (data processed by Winsor 95%). Figures 3–6 depict the spatial and temporal evolution of carbon emissions at the prefecture level in eastern China. It can be found that:

**Figure 3.** Spatio-temporal evolution map of carbon emissions. (**a**) Beijing, Tianjin and Shanghai. (**b**) Jiangsu Province. (**c**) Zhejiang Province. (**d**) Fujian Province.

**Figure 4.** Spatio-temporal evolution map of carbon emissions in Hebei Province.

**Figure 5.** Spatio-temporal evolution map of carbon emissions in Shandong Province.

In Figure 3, the relative levels of carbon emissions in Fujian, Zhejiang and Jiangsu Provinces have not changed at any of the three time points (2011, 2014, 2017). From Figure 3a, we can see that the relative levels of carbon emissions in Beijing, Tianjin and Shanghai are all at a high level and have not changed over time, with the exception of Beijing. Figure 3b shows that the overall level of carbon emissions in Jiangsu Province is high, with the northern part at an intermediate level, but the southern part is at a high level. Figure 3c shows that Hangzhou and Huzhou have high carbon emissions, while the southeastern part of Zhejiang Province has moderate emissions. Figure 3d shows that Fujian Province has a low overall level of carbon emissions, with its relatively less economically developed northwestern region having low carbon emissions, while its southeastern coastal region has relatively higher carbon emissions.

In Figure 4, the overall level of carbon emissions in Hebei Province is moderate and the relative emission levels of the other prefecture-level cities have not changed over time, except for Lanfang where the level of carbon emissions has increased.

In Figure 5, the overall level of carbon emissions in Shandong Province is moderate, with the western region having lower levels than the eastern region. At the same time, it can be found that the carbon emission levels in its southeastern region (Rizhao, Linyi) are reduced.

In Figure 6, the overall level of carbon emissions in Guangdong Province is low, where the level of carbon emissions decreases in all directions with Guangzhou as the strongest center. At the same time, it can be noticed that the carbon emission levels of Shantou and Jieyang, which are located in the southeast of Guangdong Province, have increased as time progressed.

#### 3.4.2. Land Economic Efficiency

Similarly, according to the method in Section 3.4.1, Figures 7–10 present maps of the spatio-temporal evolution of land economic efficiency (Land\_EcoE) in 2011, 2014 and 2017. It can be found that:

In Figure 7a, the Land\_EcoE levels in the three municipalities of Beijing, Tianjin and Shanghai are all high, with the exception of Tianjin, which dropped to a moderate level in 2017, while the other two remained unchanged. In Figure 7b, the Land\_EcoE in Shandong Province is at a moderate level overall, with only Qingdao at "high efficiency". In addition, the relative levels of Land\_EcoE in Shandong Province did not change as time progressed, and the trend was stable. In Figure 7c, the overall Land\_EcoE in Zhejiang Province is at a moderate level. Among them, Quzhou and Lishui are "low efficiency" and Hangzhou and Shaoxing are "high efficiency". However, as time progresses, the Land\_EcoE levels of all regions in Zhejiang Province are at the "medium efficiency" stage and tend to be homogeneous. In Figure 7d, the overall Land\_EcoE in Fujian Province is at a low to moderate level. The relative efficiency of Nanping and Longyan is low, while the relative efficiency of Xiamen is high. Overall, the efficiency of southeastern Fujian Province is higher than that of northwestern Fujian Province, and although there is a tendency to assimilate towards "medium efficiency" over time, the pattern of higher efficiency in eastern Fujian Province is still evident.

In Figure 8, the overall Land\_EcoE in Hebei Province is at a moderate to high level, with the southern and northern parts showing lower levels of efficiency than the central regions. In addition, three regions (Baoding, Zhangjiakou and Qinhuangdao) have seen their relative efficiency levels degrade over time, while the rest of the regions remain unchanged.

In Figure 9, the overall Land\_EcoE in Jiangsu Province is at a moderate level, with higher levels of efficiency in Changzhou, Wuxi and Suzhou and lower levels in Suqian. It is clear that Land\_EcoE in southern Jiangsu is higher. As time progresses, the efficiency levels of each region in Jiangsu tend to homogenize, with Suqian's efficiency level increasing and Suzhou's decreasing.

In Figure 10, the relative efficiency of land in Guangdong Province is at a low to medium level. The efficiency of Yunfu, Qingyuan, Shaoguan and Meizhou is low, while the efficiency of Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Zhongshan and Dongguan is high. It can be seen that Land\_EcoE in Guangdong Province is centered on Shenzhen and radiates downwards in all directions, reflecting the central position of Shenzhen and the "siphon effect". As time progresses, Land\_EcoE in Guangdong does not change significantly, and three regions— Yunfu, Qingyuan and Meizhou—are still "low efficiency".
