Next Article in Journal
Dairy Sheep and Goat Farmers: Socio-Demographic Characteristics and Their Associations with Health Management and Performance on Farms
Previous Article in Journal
Monitoring Land Cover Change: Towards Sustainability
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 10
Issue 12
10.3390/land10121357
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Influence Mechanism of Production-Living-Ecological Space Changes in the Urbanization Process of Guangdong Province, China

by
Yingxian Deng
1,2 and
Ren Yang
1,2,*
1
School of Geography and Planning, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China
2
Land Research Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2021, 10(12), 1357; https://doi.org/10.3390/land10121357
Submission received: 4 November 2021 / Revised: 3 December 2021 / Accepted: 6 December 2021 / Published: 9 December 2021
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Referencing the land use classification system of the “production-living-ecological” space and using 1 km × 1 km grids, this study examines the spatial pattern changes of “production-living-ecological” space in Guangdong Province, China, from 1990 to 2017. In the study, a multiple linear regression analysis model was constructed to explore the influencing factors and attribution mechanism of the changes. The results showed that between 1990 and 2017, the production spaces were mainly distributed in the Pearl River Delta and other coastal areas, showing a slight expansion trend (1). The expansion of production spaces mainly gathered in the Pearl River Delta, while the reduction was characterized by point-type dispersed. Living spaces were mainly distributed in the Pearl River Delta, the Shantou–Shanwei–Chaozhou–Jieyang urban agglomeration, the Zhanjiang-Maoming–Yangjiang urban agglomeration, and other rapidly growing urbanized areas. They showed a spatial pattern of “large scale agglomeration and small scale dispersion” with a trend towards expansion. Living spaces in urban agglomerations such as the Pearl River Delta showed a large-scale expansion from the core to the peripheral area, while expansion in other areas was small-scale and point-type. The reduction of living spaces was point-type dispersed. The ecological spaces were mainly distributed in mountainous and hilly areas in eastern, western, and northern Guangdong and showed a “regional agglomeration and partially fragmented” spatial pattern. Ecological spaces in urban agglomerations showed large-scale and regional reductions, while reductions in other areas were small-scale and point-type. Ecological space expansions were point-type dispersed. Human, natural, and especially land-use type factors drove the changes of Guangdong’s production-living-ecological spaces (2). The changes of the production-living-ecological space pattern resulted from the interaction between human society, nature, and politics (3).

1. Introduction

Since China’s reform and opening up in 1978, urbanization and industrialization have jointly driven its rapid economic development. From 1978 to 2019, China’s urbanization rate rose from 17.9% to 60.6%, and its gross domestic product (GDP) increased from 3.68 × 103 to 9.91 × 105 billion yuan. This created many problems such as tighter resource constraints, environmental pollution, degraded ecosystems, and unbalanced development between regions [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. The most severe problem among them was the excessive consumption of land resources. The scale and rate of land conversion from cultivated to non-agricultural land was so great that urban and rural construction took over land resources [8,9,10]. A large number of cultivated lands, forests, and grasslands with ecological functions have been converted into urban and rural construction lands [4,11]. The inefficient use and unlimited sprawl of construction land has had a tremendous negative impact on the ecological environment of China [12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. Specifically, the imbalance within the “production-living-ecological” space was the primary cause of environmental pollution, frequent disasters, excessive consumption of energy and resources, and degradation of ecosystem functions [19]. Production-living-ecological spaces are defined by existing research as follows: production space refers to the space for agricultural or industrial production activities; living space is the space for living, consumption, leisure, and entertainment functions; and ecological space is the space for regulating, maintaining, and protecting ecological security functions [6,20,21,22]. The coordinated development of the production-living-ecological space is related to the development of ecosystems and affects the development of human society [19,23]. It is also an important prerequisite for China’s economic development to shift from high-speed development to high-quality development, meaning that the extensive economic growth and land use pattern of the past few decades cannot be sustained. Accordingly, China’s future development should take a low-carbon economic approach that combines new industrialization and land intensification to achieve a balance between the population, resources, and the environment, and to unify economic, social, and ecological benefits [12]. To achieve the coordinated development of production-living-ecological spaces, research should focus on ways to control the pace of development, regulate its space composition, ensure that the space for production is used intensively and efficiently, making sure the living space is livable and proper in size, and that the ecological space is unspoiled [1,24,25]. Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China put forward the concept of coordinated development of production-living-ecological spaces [6,20,26], research on its space patterns has been increasing steadily with a focus on distribution characteristics [21,23,27], ecological effects [6,28], and spatial optimization [20,25]. Production-living-ecological spaces can be classified using two methods: based on dominant land function [21] and scoring based on a land function index system [23,26]. Based on the dominant function of lands as per certain standards, they can be divided into production, living, or ecological spaces. The land could also be scored using an index system based on the diversity of land function (production, living, or ecological) to achieve the spatial distribution pattern of each type of space. Zhang et al. [21] and Liu et al. [23] used the two above classification methods to analyze the distribution pattern and spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of production-living-ecological spaces on a national scale. Further, researchers have also analyzed the pattern distribution, spatio-temporal evolution, and ecological effect of these spaces based on the type of area (region, province, city, county, town, and village) [27,28,29]. Huang et al. [25] believe there are few studies on the optimization of production-living-ecological spaces, which has not yet risen to the height of theoretical research. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the evolution characteristics and influence mechanisms of production-living-ecological spaces. Existing research mainly focuses on the description and summary of the pattern and evolution characteristics of these spaces, while research on the quantitative factors affecting the evolution of space patterns and driving mechanisms is insufficient. There is also a scarcity of research on the basic theory and scientific support for the pattern optimization and coordinated development of production-living-ecological spaces.
Guangdong Province was at the forefront of China’s reform and opening up [30]. Relying on the advantage of its location, being adjacent to Hong Kong and Macao, Guangdong actively utilized foreign capital to develop labor-intensive industries and developed a bottom-up “export-oriented urbanization” mode [31,32]. As a result, Guangdong became one of the fastest growing provinces in terms of urbanization and industrialization in China since the reform period. The rapid development brought about tremendous changes in the production-living-ecological spaces of Guangdong Province [13,32,33,34]. However, it is accompanied by the inefficient use of land resources, environmental pollution, and unbalanced regional development, among other problems [35,36]. This situation reflects the lack of coordination regarding the production-living-ecological spaces in Guangdong Province. This paper focuses on the spatial and temporal evolution of the production-living-ecological spaces in Guangdong Province over the past 27 years, from 1990 to 2017. It attempts to reveal the process, spatial characteristics, and the quantitative factors driving the evolution of the production-living-ecological spaces in order to supplement the deficiency of existing research concerning its influence factors and attribution mechanisms. Guangdong Province was a step ahead of other regions in reform and opening-up in China. This is especially the case with the urbanization development in the Pearl River Delta region, which is not only a microcosm of China’s urbanization after the reform and opening up, but is also representative of its development trend [30]. Using Guangdong as an example to study the influencing factors and mechanisms behind the evolution of production-living-ecological spaces has certain typicality and reference value. It is theoretically and practically significant in regard to strengthening the understanding of production-living-ecological space pattern changes and guiding the coordinated development of these spaces in the new development stage in China. This study uses a scoring classification method based on the land function index system, with a 1 km × 1 km grid as the research unit to statistically analyze the pattern and changes of production-living-ecological spaces. The influence factors and the intensity of these changes are quantitatively identified at the prefecture-level city scale in Guangdong Province by constructing a multiple linear regression analysis model that includes human, natural, and land-use factor types. This paper presents an in-depth summary of the influence mechanisms of the changes of production-living-ecological spaces to enrich the existing research content filling the gap of its framework. The study also provides a scientific basis for optimizing the layout and scientific governance of these spaces, and supports economic, social, and ecological development that is comprehensive, coordinated, and sustainable.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Located on the southern coast of mainland China (20°13′–25°31′ N, 109°39′–117°19′ E), Guangdong Province is adjacent to the South China Sea and lies south of the Nanling Mountains in the subtropical monsoon climate zone of continental China (Figure 1). Since the reform and opening up, Guangdong has experienced rapid economic development. Guangdong’s GDP has been ranked first every year since 1989, making it China’s largest economic province. In 2019, Guangdong achieved a GDP of 10.77 trillion yuan for the year. From 1980 to 2019, the urbanization rate of the resident population in Guangdong Province rose from 17.4% to 71.4%, with an average annual increase of 1.38%. The landform types of Guangdong Province are complex and diverse, with more mountains and less plain. The areas of mountains, hills, tablelands, and plains account for 33.7%, 24.9%, 14.2%, and 21.7% of the total land area of the province, respectively. Rivers and lakes account for only 5.5% of the total land area of the province. Notably, the contradiction between people and land is prominent. Guangdong is elevated in the north and lower in the south. Based on its geographical location and differences in economic development, the province is divided into four economic zones: Pearl River Delta, Eastern Guangdong, Western Guangdong, and Northern Guangdong. Owing to their natural resources, geographical locations, and historical and cultural backgrounds, there is a significant imbalance between these four zones in terms of regional economic and urbanization development [37,38,39,40]. With the advantages of location and policy [39,41], the Pearl River Delta acquired over 80% of foreign capital, technology, talents, and other resources in the Guangdong Province. Other regions are experiencing human resource outflow and also lack funds, technology, and preferential policies [37], resulting in poorer development than the Pearl River Delta. In 2019, the GDPs of the Pearl River Delta, Eastern Guangdong, Western Guangdong, and Northern Guangdong were 8.69 × 104 billion yuan, 6.96 × 103 billion yuan, 7.61 × 103 billion yuan, and 6.21 × 103 billion yuan, respectively. The urbanization rates were 86.28%, 60.38%, 45.81% and 50.8%, respectively.

2.2. Production-Living-Ecological Land Use Classification System

This paper references the production-living-ecological land use classification system from Liu et al. [23]. According to the classification system above, land has multi-functional attributes, and a land type can have multiple land use functions, though its functions will exhibit different strengths. Table 1 evaluates them according to their respective function grades [23], and a few adjustments have been made according to the situation in Guangdong Province (Table 1). The evaluation rules are as follows (using production function land as the example): the strongest function of production land is scored at 5 points, the medium function at 3 points, the weak function at 1 point, and non-production at 0 points [23]. The scoring rules for both living function land and ecological function land are rated the same way. Production land primarily includes cultivated land and other constructions, urban, and rural residential lands, which also have a medium production function. Living land mainly includes urban land and rural residential land. Other construction land also has weak living functions. Finally, ecological land includes all land types except urban, rural, industrial and mining, and residential. Cultivated land has a medium ecological function.

2.3. Grid Unit Analysis of Production-Living-Ecological Spaces

This study used the ArcGIS 10.5 software platform to score vector data values of land use status in Guangdong Province in 1990, 2000, 2013, and 2017 according to the scoring criteria in Table 1. The specific process is as follows: the original land use data are scored according to the scoring criteria in Table 1; a 1 km × 1 km vector grid is made to cover the entire study area and divides the land use data into grid units. Based on a 1 km × 1 km vector grid unit, the production, living, and ecological function scores of each grid are counted respectively, and the spatial pattern maps of production, living, and ecological space in Guangdong Province are illustrated. The corresponding grids of a 1 km × 1 km grid for spatial data in 1990 and 2017 were subtracted to obtain the change values of this period. The evolution results of the spatial pattern of production-living-ecological spaces in Guangdong Province from 1990 to 2017 were obtained by dividing the above change values into three types (narrowing, stability, and expansion) using the natural breakpoint method.

2.4. Multiple Linear Regression Analysis Model

A multiple linear regression model was constructed to analyze the relationship between the evolution of the patterns of production-living-ecological spaces and the influence factors. The mathematical model of multiple linear regressions is:
Y = β 0 + β 1 X 1 + β 2 X 2 + ⋯ + β n X n + ε
where Y is the dependent variable; X is the independent variable with a total of n independent variables; β0 is a constant term of the regression model; β1, β2…βn are partial regression coefficients; and ε is the random error of regression model.
This study uses the change values of production, living, and ecological function between 2000 and 2017 in Guangdong Province as the dependent variables (Y1, Y2, Y3) of the evolution of the production-living-ecological space patterns. This evolution is influenced by social, economic, institutional, political, technical, and natural factors [42,43,44] divided into human, natural, and political factors in this study. As some influence factors are difficult to quantify, such as political and institutional factors, these factors were not included in the model for regression analysis. However, land use area is an important factor influencing the production-living-ecological functions. Therefore, according to the actual situation of the evolution of this particular space pattern in Guangdong Province, with prefecture-level cities as units, the paper selected 32 indicators (Table 2) as the influencing factors of the independent variables following the principles of objectivity, scientificity, and feasibility. Formula (2) is used to calculate the index change rate X, which is used as the independent variable to analyze the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern. In order to eliminate dimensions, the data of dependent variables and independent variables were standardized by standard deviation
X = x 2017 − x 2000 x 2000 × 100 % .
When there are 32 independent variables, there is collinearity in the above model. The study repeated screening the influence factors through the regression model and excluded the variables that caused multicollinearity. As a result, there is no collinearity in the final model.

2.5. Data Sources

The land use data of Guangdong Province in 1990, 2000, 2013, and 2017 were Landsat remote sensing images with a scale of 1:100,000, which were downloaded from the Geospatial Data Cloud (https://www.gscloud.cn/, accessed on 3 December 2021). The data were classified into six first-level categories, including cultivated land, forest land, grassland, waters, construction land, and unused land, and 25 second-level land types including paddy field, dry land, forest land, shrubland, sparse forest land, other forest land, high, medium, and low coverage grassland, canals, lakes, permanent glaciers, snowfields, tidal flats, beaches, reservoir and pond, urban land, rural residential land, other construction land, sandy land, gobi, saline-alkali land, marshland, bare land, bare rock texture, and other land. The economic and social development data of influence factors were taken from the Guangdong Statistical Yearbook of 2018 [45]. Further, the meteorological data was taken from the official websites of municipal governments. The height data were downloaded from the Resource and Environment Science and Data Center of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (https://www.resdc.cn, accessed on 3 December 2021). The height data came from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) data from the American Space Shuttle Endeavour (2000).

3. Results

3.1. Characteristics of Production-Living-Ecological Space Patterns in Guangdong Province from 1990 to 2017

From the perspective of spatial and temporal patterns, the production space of Guangdong Province showed the characteristics of large area concentration and small area dispersion. In 1990, 2000, 2013, and 2017, the spatial pattern of production in Guangdong Province was almost the same with only minimal changes: the number of grids with a production function score greater than 1.0 based on the 1 km × 1 km grid unit increased from 49.3% to 49.9%, and the distribution of production space area expanded slightly (Figure 2). The number of grids with a production function score greater than 3.0 were reduced from 23.7% to 22.3%, presenting an aggregated distribution. They were mainly distributed in the flat plains in the south of Guangdong Province, such as the Pearl River Delta Plain, but also located in the valleys and basins below 100 m in northern and eastern Guangdong. Moreover, they were particularly concentrated in the Pearl River Delta urban agglomeration, Shantou–Shanwei–Chaozhou–Jieyang urban agglomeration, and Zhanjiang–Maoming–Yangjiang urban agglomeration.1 The number of grids with a production function score less than or equal to 3.0 and greater than 1.0 increased from 25.5% to 27.6%. They were contiguously distributed in urban centers and suburban areas, while dotted distribution was observed in mountainous areas (Figure 3).
The living space of Guangdong Province also presented a distribution pattern of large area concentration and small area dispersion. In 1990, 2000, 2013, and 2017, the spatial pattern of living in Guangdong Province changed slightly with the number of grids with a living function score greater than 1.0 based on 1 km × 1 km grid unit increasing from 5.4% to 8.8%, and the distribution of living space area expanding distinctly (Figure 2). The number of grids with a living function score greater than 3.0 increased from 1.0% to 3.3%, showing an aggregated distribution. They were mainly concentrated in the three main urban agglomerations, Pearl River Delta, Shantou–Shanwei–Chaozhou–Jieyang, and Zhanjiang–Maoming–Yangjiang. They were also distributed in the urban area of prefecture-level cities in the mountainous area of northern Guangdong, showing a small-area agglomeration. The number of grids with a living function score of less than or equal to 3.0 and greater than 1.0 based on a 1 km × 1 km grid unit increased from 4.4% to 5.6%. Their circular diffusion layout was shown in the suburban areas of cities at prefecture levels, while dotted and scattered distributions were observed in mountainous areas (Figure 4).
Meanwhile, the ecological space of Guangdong Province presented a distribution pattern of regional agglomeration in the north and partial fragmentation on the southern coast. In 1990, 2000, 2013, and 2017, the spatial pattern of ecological in Guangdong Province was basically the same with minimal changes, along with the production and living space: the number of grids with an ecological function score less than or equal to 1.0 based on a 1 km × 1 km grid unit increased from 1.4% to 3.7%, which were mainly distributed in the core areas of the three major urban agglomerations in Guangdong (Figure 2). The number of grids with an ecological function score less than or equal to 3.0 and greater than 1.0 based on a 1 km × 1 km grid unit increased from 4.4% to 5.6%, mainly distributed in the periphery of the three major urban agglomerations in Guangdong. The number of grids with an ecological function score greater than 3.0 based on a 1 km × 1 km grid unit were reduced from 85.2% to 81.7% and widely distributed outside the three major urban agglomerations (Figure 5).

3.2. Changes of the Production-Living-Ecological Space Pattern in Guangdong Province

From the perspective of dynamic evolution, from 1990 to 2017, the distribution pattern of production space in Guangdong Province was stable. The proportions of stability, expansion, and narrowing grids based on the change of a production function score of 1 km × 1 km grid unit, were 94.6%, 3.2%, and 2.2%, respectively. There was a slight decrease in the production function score. Based on a 1 km × 1 km grid unit, the provincial production function scores in 1990 and 2017 decreased from 2.90 × 105 to 2.85 × 105, showing a decrease of 4.23 × 103, accounting for 1.5% of the provincial production function scores in 1990. Additionally, the expansion areas of production space are mainly concentrated in the Pearl River Delta region and scattered throughout the rest of Guangdong. With urbanization and population growth, human demand for construction and agricultural lands rapidly increased. A large number of forest and unused lands close to the city center located in low altitude or small topographic relief areas were transformed into urban, rural residential, and cultivated lands. There was a large-scale agglomeration expansion of production function at the junction of the cities of Jiangmen and Foshan due to the human development of the water pit land, thus transforming it into construction and cultivated land. The expansion in coastal areas such as Shenzhen and Zhuhai resulted from human coastal reclamation, which involved converting water areas into construction land. The narrowing areas of production space were scattered. The main reason for the narrowing of production function in the three major urban agglomerations was that many cultivated lands were converted into urban and rural construction land. In addition, some reductions of production function were caused by the policy of returning farmland to the forest, such as the boundary area between Huizhou and Dongguan in the Pearl River Delta, Chaozhou and eastern Meizhou in eastern Guangdong, and Maoming and western Zhanjiang in western Guangdong (Figure 6).
From 1990 to 2017, the distribution pattern of living space in Guangdong Province was stable and showed an expanding trend. The proportions of stability, expansion, and narrowing grids based on the change of living function score of 1 km × 1 km grid unit were 96.1%, 3.5%, and 0.4%, respectively, and the provincial living function scores in 1990 and 2017 increased from 3.28 × 104 to 5.63 × 104, showing an increase of 2.35 × 104, and accounting for 71.9% of the provincial living function scores in 1990. Moreover, the living function score significantly increased. The expansion of living space was concentrated in the three major urban agglomerations—especially the Pearl River Delta—which was characterized by large-scale and regional expansion from the core of urban agglomeration to the periphery, whereas in other areas, the living space showed small-scale and point-type expansion. In urban areas, as economic development drove rapid urbanization, many other types of land were converted into urban construction land. In rural areas, population growth and foreign investment led to the conversion of cultivated land to rural residential land [31]. The reduction of living space was point-type dispersed. The decline in the living function score was mainly due to residential land consolidation and relocation in the rural areas; another reason was the active improvement of the ecological environment in urban areas. For example, the southwest peninsula of Shenzhen converted from formerly urban construction land to a city park, which reduced the living function and improved the ecological function (Figure 6).
The distribution pattern of ecological space in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017 was stable and showed a narrowing trend. The proportions of stability, narrowing, and expansion grids based on the change of the ecological function score of 1 km × 1 km grid unit were 94.3%, 5.3%, and 0.4%; the provincial ecological function scores in 1990 and 2017 decreased from 7.67 × 105 to 7.43 × 105, showing a decrease of 2.40 × 104 and accounting for 3.1% of the provincial ecological function scores in 1990. The narrowing ecological space was concentrated in the Pearl River Delta region, showing large-scale regional distribution. In other areas, the ecological space narrowing area showed a small-scale, dotted distribution. With the development of urbanization in Guangdong Province, the construction land greatly increased. At the same time, population growth caused the conversion of large areas of forest and unused lands to cultivated land, reducing the ecological function score in Guangdong. The expansion of ecological space was point-type dispersed, mainly due to the policy of returning farmland to the forest, such as the border area between Huizhou and Dongguan and the west of Leizhou Peninsula.2 The expansion of ecological space in southwest Foshan was due to the original pit and pond land being developed into cultivated land, thus increasing the ecological function score (Figure 6).

3.3. Analysis of Influence Factors of the Evolution of the Production-Living-Ecological Spatial Pattern in Guangdong Province

A multiple linear regression analysis on the influence factors of the production-living-ecological space pattern evolution in Guangdong Province was carried out. After repeated screening and fitting of the influence factors using the regression model, the independent variables that had no significant influence on the dependent variables and caused multiple collinearity were eliminated, and the final model (Table 3) was obtained. According to the model results, the adjustment R2s of the evolution of production, living, and ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province were 0.778, 0.929, and 0.971, respectively. This indicates there were strong linear correlations between the dependent variables and independent variables in the three regression models, and the influence factors selected by each model could explain the 77.8%, 92.9%, and 97.1% of the dependent variables, respectively. The fitting effect of the linear regression analysis model for the evolution of the production space pattern was not as good as that of the other two regression models, which may be because the evolution of the production space pattern was also affected by other unquantifiable factors. The F-test statistics of the production space pattern evolution model was 10.986, and the significance was 0.000, less than the significance test level of 0.05. The regression model was effective. The change value of the production function score had a significant linear correlation with the seven influencing factors. The F-test statistics of the living space pattern evolution model was 65.996, and the significance was 0.000, less than the significance test level of 0.05. The change value of the living function score had a significant linear correlation with four influence factors. The F-test statistics of the ecological space pattern evolution model was 136.683, and the significance was 0.000, less than the significance test level of 0.05. The change value of the ecological function score had a significant linear correlation with five influence factors. The Durbin–Watson values of the three models were 2.273, 2.199, and 1.817, respectively, which were close to 2, reflecting that there was no autocorrelation in the residual sequence of each model. It was proved that the three regression equations fully explain the variation of dependent variables, and the selected regression models were reasonable. The variance expansion factors of all variables in the three models were between 1.0 and 2.3, indicating that the multicollinearity between each variable in each model was weak.
After analysis, since the three regression models had significant linear correlation and the model fitting effect was good, the regression equations could be determined. According to Table 3, the multivariate linear regression equations of the evolution of production, living, and ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province under the standardized coefficient were obtained (in that order) as follows:
Y1 = −1.273 × 10−15 + 0.860X2 + 0.561X10 − 0.581X11 − 0.482X14 − 0.565X24 − 0.621X25 + 1.146X29
Y2 = −2.283 × 10−16 + 0.329X1 + 0.225X19 + 0.522X26 − 0.557X21
Y3 = 1.048 × 10−16 − 0.182X2 + 0.184X24 + 0.253X25 + 0.670X29 − 0.199X30
According to the results of regression models (3)–(5), the changes of production, living, and ecological function scores in Guangdong Province were affected by seven, four, and five factors, respectively, and the influence degree of each factor on each dependent variable was different. The most influential factor on all three dependent variables was land use type. Change in the cultivated land area was the dominant influencing factor for the evolution of production and ecological space patterns, and change in rural residential land area was the dominant influencing factor for the evolution of living space patterns.
According to the descending order of influence intensity, the seven factors that affected the change value of production function score were the changes of cultivated land area, per capita GDP, mean elevation, planting industry output value, electricity consumption, grain yield, and fishery output value. Among them, the changes of cultivated land area, per capita GDP, and grain yield were positively correlated with the change of production function score, and the changes of mean elevation, planting industry output value, electricity consumption, and fishery output value were negatively correlated.
In the descending order of influence intensity, the four factors that affected the change value of living function score were the changes of rural residential land area, terrain relief, GDP, and employees in the secondary industry. Among them, the changes of the terrain relief, GDP, and employees in the secondary industry were positively correlated with the changes of living function score, while the change of rural residential land area correlated negatively with it.
According to the descending order of influence intensity, the five factors that affected the change value of ecological function score were the changes to cultivated land area, mean elevation, urban land area, electricity consumption, and per capita GDP. Among them, the changes to cultivated land area, mean elevation, and electricity consumption were positively correlated with the change of ecological function score, while the changes of urban land area and per capita GDP were negatively correlated.

4. Discussion

The evolution of production-living-ecological space patterns reflects the change in the relationship between the natural environment and human society at the land use level. It is a complex dynamic evolution process, the result of the interaction of an external driving force and internal constraint force under a guiding and decision-making power. The external driving force is primarily aimed at meeting the needs of human development that presents as economic development, population growth, urbanization, industrialization, and other processes. It is the main driving force behind the evolution of production-living-ecological space patterns. The internal constraint force shows that the topography, geomorphology, climate, precipitation, and other natural environmental factors restricted the evolution of production-living-ecological space patterns. In particular, guiding and decision-making power refers to the influence of the local political environment, such as guidelines, policies, laws, regulations, and development plans promulgated by the state and local governments. These political factors determine the direction and speed of the development of human society and also determine and guide the direction and speed of the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern [12,43] (Figure 7).

4.1. The Development of Human Society as the External Driving Force of the Evolution of the Production-Living-Ecological Space Patterns

Economic growth, population growth, technological progress, urbanization, and industrialization are the results of the development of human society. The development of human society changes the relationship between itself and the Earth’s surface system and changes the pattern of the production-living-ecological space. With economic growth, population growth, and technological progress, production and living space dominated by human activities gradually expanded into ecological space, i.e., production and living space increased while simultaneously reducing ecological space. Urbanization and industrialization driven by economic growth were the main external driving factors for the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern. From 1990 to 2017, the economy of Guangdong Province maintained rapid growth, during which the industrial structure of the province was constantly optimized, promoting the transfer of rural labor to the second and third industries. As a result, a large number of rural populations moved into cities and towns, and the urbanization rate of Guangdong Province grew continuously. Urbanization led to an increased investment in fixed assets which strongly increased the demand for urban land, which accelerated the process of rural residential and cultivated lands around the city, converting them into urban and other construction lands [4]. Thus, urban areas spread to rural areas [12,46]. Meanwhile, foreign capital drove the process of rural industrialization in Guangdong Province, especially in the Pearl River Delta. Agricultural land in rural areas had been largely converted into non-agricultural land for industrial production [12], forming rural urbanization with Guangdong characteristics [38], which showed a mix of cultivated, rural residential, and construction lands [31,47]. In summary, economic development, urbanization, and industrialization had a significant driving effect on the expansion of living space and the narrowing of production and ecological space in Guangdong Province.
Population growth was another external driving factor affecting the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern [34,48,49,50]. As the population grew, more land was needed to meet more food and housing needs, so a large number of ecological spaces were developed for production and living spaces. In addition to the natural population growth within the province, the urbanization and industrialization of Guangdong Province also attracted a large number of migrants from other provinces [31]. In 2000–2017, the resident population of Guangdong Province increased from 8.65 × 103 million to 1.12 × 104 million, an increase of 29%. The employed population in the three industries changed from 1.59 × 103, 1.11 × 103, and 1.28 × 103 million to 1.36 × 103, 2.54 × 103, and 2.44 × 103 million. The employed population in the primary industry declined, while the employed population in the secondary and tertiary industries rose continuously. In the same period, the total area of forest land, grassland, waters, and unused land in Guangdong Province decreased by 1267.4 km2. With the growth of the population, the ecological space naturally shrunk. The progress of human society and the development of science and technology were the third external driving factor affecting the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern [51]. Taking the change of food structure as an example, with the development of the economy and the improvement of people’s living standards, the food structure gradually shifted from grain to meat, eggs, and milk [12]. Driven by economic benefits, the adjustment of the agricultural structure increased as farmers tended to shift from grain farming to higher-yielding farming, such as fisheries, fruit tree farming, fast-growing plantations, and other agricultural activities [33,48]. Notably, from 2000–2017, grain yield and cultivated land in Guangdong Province decreased by 33.7% and 8.7%, respectively. Finally, the optimization of food structure gradually shrunk the production space of Guangdong Province.
Economic development promoted the process of urbanization and industrialization, accelerating the conversion of agricultural production space to living space [52]. At the same time, population growth drove human beings to develop more ecological space for production and living space to meet survival needs [50]. The progress of human society, science, and technology changed the agricultural structure, resulting in reduced agricultural production space. All these factors played an important external role in promoting the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern [34]. The characteristics of this particular space pattern evolution in Guangdong Province under the influence of human social external driving force were obvious, as shown by the following: in urban areas, especially in the Pearl River Delta urban agglomeration, the living space expanded regionally and the ecological space shrunk correspondingly while production space shrunk in the core of the city and expanded outside the city. In rural areas, the production and living spaces showed a point-type decentralized expansion, and the ecological space showed a corresponding reduction.

4.2. Natural Factors Are the Internal Constraint Force of the Evolution of the Production-Living-Ecological Space Patterns

Natural conditions such as elevation, relief, climate, and precipitation are all Earth’s surface system attributes. These natural conditions are stable and will not significantly change in a short time. They have internal constraint effects on the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern, restricting its evolution direction [43,51]. As Guangdong Province is in the subtropical monsoon climate zone, climate and precipitation conditions are the same throughout the province, so the intensity of their influence on the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern is the same. However, there are large differences in elevation and topographic relief across the area. The mountains and hills are mainly distributed in northern Guangdong, while the tablelands and plains are mainly distributed about the Pearl River Delta region and other coastal areas. In flat areas with low altitude and small topographic relief, land use types were abundant, including cultivated land, urban and rural, industrial and mining, residential land, etc. [53]. Accordingly, due to the ease of human development and utilization, the production-living-ecological space here was more likely to be changed [54]. In fact, it was mainly manifested in the conversion of cultivated land, grassland, and unused land into urban and rural, industrial and mining, and residential land, the ecological space changed to production or living space. In hilly and mountainous areas with high altitude and elevated topographic relief where cultivated land, urban and rural, industrial and mining, and residential land is rare, it is mainly covered by forest land. This is due to technological difficulty and the high cost of development. Thus, the probability of evolution here was low, and it can be stably maintained as a forest-based ecological space [36]. Hence, elevation and topographic relief were the dominant natural factors affecting the distribution and evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern in Guangdong Province [7]. These factors have a direct constraint effect on the direction, scale, intensity, and speed of the production-living-ecological space pattern evolution.
As a result, the production and living spaces of Guangdong Province are mainly distributed in the Pearl River Delta and other coastal areas with low altitudes and low topographic reliefs. In contrast, the ecological space is distributed in the hilly and mountainous areas with high altitudes and large topographic relief in eastern, western, and northern Guangdong. From 1990 to 2017, the production-living-ecological space pattern in the Pearl River Delta region underwent a dramatic evolution, but outside the Pearl River Delta, the production and living spaces had a point-type decentralized expansion and the ecological space underwent a corresponding reduction. All these events are due to the internal constraint effects of elevation and topographic relief, the regional expansion of production space and limited living space in the province, and the ecological space being maintained in a relatively stable state outside the Pearl River Delta. However, with the shortage of land resources and the promotion of human technology for natural transformation, when the benefits of transformation were greater than the cost, human beings transformed ecological space such as hills and mountains into production and living space. The internal constraint force of natural factors on the production-living-ecological space was gradually disrupted by the external driving force of human society [7,55].

4.3. Political Factors Are the Guiding and Decision-Making Powers of the Evolution of the Production-Living-Ecological Space Patterns

Political factors such as national strategies, policy guidelines, laws and regulations, and development plans guide the direction and speed of social and economic development, determining the direction and speed of the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern [36,48]. During the planned economy period, the central government planned and strictly implemented production, resource allocation, and product consumption. Meanwhile, the production-living-ecological spaces were arranged under the central plan. Political factors played a decisive role in their evolutions. Since the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee, the central government has carried out various policies, laws, and regulations to promote China’s economic development based on Deng Xiaoping’s idea that development is the absolute truth. In 1979, Guangdong Province became one of the first provinces in the country to open to the outside world. In 1982, the central government established the household contract responsibility system, which greatly improved productivity and the farmers’ enthusiasm, liberated many rural laborers, and provided an important prerequisite for the subsequent urbanization of rural populations flowing into cities and towns. In February 1985, the Pearl River Delta region was opened up as one of the coastal economic open areas. In 1992, the socialist market economic system was gradually established. Under market regulations, land resources have begun to transform from low economic return to high economic return uses. The market economic system made it possible for the above factors such as economy, population, and technology to drive the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern. Under the guidance of the reform and opening up policy, Guangdong Province—especially the Pearl River Delta region—has been at the forefront of the country and has made various institutional reforms and new attempts to promote economic development. Under the joint action of a series of rural reforms along with population and land policies, Guangdong Province formed an urbanization model of the Pearl River Delta, driven by export-oriented, bottom-up, land, and labor factors [31,32,56]. As a result, a large amount of cultivated land and rural residential land has been converted into construction land, which has greatly changed the pattern of the production-living-ecological space. At the same time, the spatial plans formulated and implemented by the provincial government, such as the “Urban System Planning of Guangdong Province”, “Land Use Planning of Guangdong Province”, “Planning of Main Functional Areas in Guangdong Province”, “Coordinated Development Planning of Urban Clusters in Pearl River Delta”, and “Global Spatial Planning of the Pearl River Delta” played a guiding role in the scale and direction of the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern in Guangdong Province.
Effective land utilization policy is the key to realizing the coordinated development of production-living-ecological spaces and an important guarantee to realizing the sustainable development goal of ecological civilization construction in China [12]. After the 2008 international financial crisis, the export-oriented economy in Guangdong Province—especially in the Pearl River Delta—has been seriously affected. The government made various efforts to avert the crisis and began to guide industrial development toward the transformation of internal and external demand via jointly driven and innovation driven actions [56]. Especially since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, with the call of the State to “control the intensity of development and adjust the spatial structure” and other calls for construction of ecological civilization, the government of Guangdong Province actively implemented national policies and policies of protecting cultivated land, intensive land use, industrial transformation and upgrading, and energy conservation and emission reduction in the new stage of high-speed economic growth turning to high-quality development [12,57]. It brought new influence to the pattern of the production-living-ecological space, which slowed down the occupation of the ecological space by production space and living space, and made some regions change from production or living space to ecological space (Figure 6).

4.4. Uncertainty

The existing research on the production-living-ecological space has mainly focused on the descriptive study of its pattern and evolutionary characteristics, contributing to the research on the formation and evolution mechanism of this space pattern. Owing to the limitation of data, the study mainly explored the relationship between the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern and the influencing factors at the scale of prefecture-level cities. There may be insufficient data accuracy and a failure to accurately reflect the relationship between dependent and independent variables. Further, due to the regional development differences between the Pearl River Delta and the other regions of Guangdong, in the future it will be necessary to analyze the influencing factors of the evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern among different economic zones of Guangdong Province and explore the differences in different regions. In addition, there are non-quantifiable factors to be explored, such as political factors. In the model of production space evolution, the fitting model has a relatively low degree of interpretation, which may be due to the lack of some unquantifiable political factors [50,57], resulting in a certain degree of deviation in the research model.

5. Conclusions

(1) From 1990 to 2017, the production, living, and ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province remained consistent. There were spatial differences in each pattern, mainly between the Pearl River Delta region and the other regions. Both production and living spaces presented the distribution pattern of large area concentration and small area dispersion. The large-area concentration areas are mainly distributed in coastal regions such as the Pearl River Delta Plain, Chaoshan Plain, Jianjiang Plain, etc. The living space is also concentrated to a small scale in the prefecture-level downtown areas in the mountainous area of northern Guangdong. The ecological space presented a distribution pattern of large-area agglomeration and partial fragmentation, mainly distributed in areas outside the living space.
From the perspective of the spatial evolution of the production-living-ecological space, the total distribution area of production space showed a slight expansion. However, the overall function score dropped slightly while the total distribution area and the overall function score of the living space both greatly increased. Notably, the expansion areas of the two concentrated mainly in three major urban agglomerations: the living space expanded on a large scale and regionally within the urban agglomerations while the production space expanded in a sprawling fashion in the peripheries of the urban agglomerations. The reduced areas are distributed in point-type in the province. In contrast, the total distribution area and the overall function score of the ecological space both declined. The reduced areas are distributed on a large scale and regionally in the Pearl River Delta region; also, they are distributed on a small scale and point-type in other regions. The expansion areas dispersed in point-type in the Pearl River Delta region, eastern, and western Guangdong.
(2) The dominant factors affecting the evolution of production space in Guangdong Province were the change of cultivated land area and per capita GDP. The dominant factors affecting the evolution of living space were the change of rural residential land area and terrain relief. The dominant factor affecting the evolution of ecological space was also the change of cultivated land area.
(3) The evolution of the production-living-ecological space pattern is the reflection of the change of the relationship between the natural environment and human society in land use. Moreover, it results from the joint action of an external driving force and internal restraint force under the guiding and decision-making power [4,12]. Under the combined effect of human society, natural environment, and political factors, the living space of Guangdong Province significantly expanded from 1990 to 2017. The production space gradually moved from the core to the periphery of the city with the expansion of living space, and correspondingly the ecological space shrunk under the expansion of production space and living space. The evolution of production space and living space dominated by human activities and the evolution of ecological space with less human activities have a contrary relationship.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.Y.; methodology, Y.D.; software, Y.D.; validation, R.Y. and Y.D.; formal analysis, Y.D.; investigation, Y.D.; resources, R.Y.; data curation, R.Y. and Y.D.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.D.; writing—review and editing, R.Y. and Y.D.; visualization, Y.D.; supervision, R.Y.; project administration, R.Y.; funding acquisition, R.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Key Area Research and Development Program of Guangdong Province (2020B0202010002) and the National Natural Science Foundations of China (41871177; 42171193).

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We appreciate critical and constructive comments and suggestions from the reviewers that helped improve the quality of this manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Notes

1
Shantou-Shanwei-Chaozhou-Jieyang urban agglomeration includes Shantou, Shanwei, Chaozhou, and Jieyang, four prefecture-level cities, which make up Eastern Guangdong with Shantou as its center. The Zhanjiang-Maoming-Yangjiang urban agglomeration includes Zhanjiang, Maoming, and Yangjiang, three prefecture-level cities, which constitute Western Guangdong with Zhanjiang as its center.
2
Leizhou Peninsula is located at the southernmost tip of mainland China and is under the jurisdiction of Zhanjiang City.

References

  1. Keping, Y. Scientific development and ecological civilization. Marx. Real. 2005, 4, 4–5. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  2. Chen, A. Urbanization and disparities in China: Challenges of growth and development. China Econ. Rev. 2002, 13, 407–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Friedmann, J. Four theses in the study of China’s urbanization. China City Plan. Rev. 2006, 15, 80–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Tan, M.; Li, X.; Xie, H.; Lu, C. Urban land expansion and arable land loss in China—A case study of Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region. Land Use Policy 2005, 22, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Long, H.; Liu, Y.; Hou, X.; Li, T.; Li, Y. Effects of land use transitions due to rapid urbanization on ecosystem services: Implications for urban planning in the new developing area of China. Habitat Int. 2014, 44, 536–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Yang, Y.; Bao, W.; Li, Y.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Z. Land use transition and its eco-environmental effects in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei urban agglomeration: A production–living–ecological perspective. Land 2020, 9, 285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Dewan, A.M.; Yamaguchi, Y. Land use and land cover change in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh: Using remote sensing to promote sustainable urbanization. Appl. Geogr. 2009, 29, 390–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Liu, Y.; Fang, F.; Li, Y. Key issues of land use in China and implications for policy making. Land Use Policy 2014, 40, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Decoville, A.; Schneider, M. Can the 2050 zero land take objective of the EU be reliably monitored? A comparative study. J. Land Use Sci. 2015, 11, 331–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bencardino, M. Land take and urban sprawl: Drivers e contrasting policies. Boll. Della Soc. Geogr. Ital. 2019, 8, 217–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. 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]
  12. Wang, J.; Lin, Y.; Glendinning, A.; Xu, Y. Land-use changes and land policies evolution in China’s urbanization processes. Land Use Policy 2018, 75, 375–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Weng, Q. Land use change analysis in the Zhujiang Delta of China using satellite remote sensing, GIS and stochastic modelling. J. Environ. Manag. 2002, 64, 273–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Deng, J.S.; Wang, K.; Hong, Y.; Qi, J.G. Spatio-temporal dynamics and evolution of land use change and landscape pattern in response to rapid urbanization. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2009, 92, 187–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Su, S.; Jiang, Z.; Zhang, Q.; Zhang, Y. Transformation of agricultural landscapes under rapid urbanization: A threat to sustainability in Hang-Jia-Hu region, China. Appl. Geogr. 2011, 31, 439–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhou, X.; Wang, Y.-C. Spatial–temporal dynamics of urban green space in response to rapid urbanization and greening policies. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 100, 268–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Romano, B.; Zullo, F.; Fiorini, L.; Ciabò, S.; Marucci, A. Sprinkling: An approach to describe urbanization dynamics in Italy. Sustainability 2017, 9, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Saganeiti, L.; Favale, A.; Pilogallo, A.; Scorza, F.; Murgante, B. Assessing urban fragmentation at regional scale using sprinkling indexes. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Liu, Y. On the logical structures, checks and balances mechanisms and development principles of “production-living-ecological spaces”. Hubei Soc. Sci. 2016, 351, 5–9. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  20. Zhu, Y.; Yu, B.; Zeng, J.; Han, Y. Spatial optimization from three spaces of production, living and ecologyin national restricted zones—A case study of Wufeng County in Hubei province. Econ. Geogr. 2015, 35, 26–32. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhang, H.; Xu, E.; Zhu, H. An ecological-living-industrial land classification system andits spatial distribution in China. Resour. Sci. 2015, 37, 1332–1338. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  22. Yu, Z.; Xu, E.; Zhang, H.; Shang, E. Spatio-temporal coordination and conflict of production-living-ecology land functions in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region, China. Land 2020, 9, 170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Liu, J.; Liu, Y.; Li, Y. Classification evaluation and spatial-temporal analysis of “production-living-ecological” spaces in China. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2017, 72, 1290–1304. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  24. Qingji, S. Study on new urbanization based on ecological civilization. Urban Plan. Forum 2013, 206, 29–36. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  25. Huang, J.; Lin, H.; Qi, X. A literature review on optimization of spatial development pattern based on ecological-production-living space. Prog. Geogr. 2017, 36, 378–391. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  26. Li, G.; Fang, C. Quantitative function identification and analysis of urban ecological-production-living spaces. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2016, 71, 49–65. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  27. Wang, C.; Tang, N. Spatio-temporal characteristics and evolution of rural productionliving-ecological space function coupling coordination in Chongqing Municipality. Geogr. Res. 2018, 37, 1100–1114. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  28. Yang, Q.; Duan, X.; Wang, L. Jin, Z. Land use transformation based on ecological-production-living spaces and associated eco-environment effects: A case study in the Yang-tze River Delta. Sci. Geogr. Sin. 2018, 38, 97–106. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  29. Cao, G.; Gu, C.; Zhang, Q. Recognition of “ecological space, living space, and production space” in the urban central area based on POI data: The case of Shanghai. Urban Plan. Forum 2019, 249, 44–53. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  30. Xu, X.; Li, X. Review and preview of the urbanization in Pearl River Delta in the past 30 years of reform and opening up. Econ. Geogr. 2009, 29, 13–18. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  31. Sit, V.F.S.; Yang, C. Foreign-investment-induced Exo-urbanisation in the Pearl River Delta, China. Urban Stud. 1997, 34, 647–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Seto, K.C.; Kaufmann, R.K. Modeling the drivers of urban land use change in the Pearl River Delta, China: Integrating remote sensing with socioeconomic data. Land Econ. 2003, 79, 106–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Li, X.; Yeh, A.G.-O. Analyzing spatial restructuring of land use patterns in a fast growing region using remote sensing and GIS. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2004, 69, 335–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Long, H.; Tang, G.; Li, X.; Heilig, G.K. Socio-economic driving forces of land-use change in Kunshan, the Yangtze River Delta economic area of China. J. Environ. Manag. 2007, 83, 351–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Li, Z.; Li, X. The driving forces and pattern of spatial development in the Pearl River Delta in the new era. Planners 2008, 24, 44–48. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  36. Wang, X.; Yan, F.; Zeng, Y.; Chen, M.; He, B.; Kang, L.; Su, F. Ecosystem services changes on farmland in response to urbanization in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area of China. Land 2021, 10, 501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fan, C.C. Economic opportunities and internal migration: A case study of guangdong province, China. Prof. Geogr. 1996, 48, 28–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zhu, H.; Xue, D. Urbanization in Guangdong Province and choice of its development model. Trop. Geogr. 2001, 21, 17–21. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  39. Liu, Z. Difference assessment of regional economic development and the coordinated development countermeasures of Guangdong. Econ. Geogr. 2010, 30, 723–727. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  40. Liao, F.H.F.; Wei, Y.D. Dynamics, space, and regional inequality in provincial China: A case study of Guangdong Province. Appl. Geogr. 2012, 35, 71–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Seto, K.C.; Woodcock, C.E.; Song, C.; Huang, X.; Lu, J.; Kaufmann, R.K. Monitoring land-use change in the Pearl River Delta using Landsat TM. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2002, 3, 1985–2004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Yan, X.; Mao, J.; Pu, J. Research on the human dimensions of land use changes in the mega-urban region: A case study of the Pearl River Delta. Acta Geographica Sinica 2006, 61, 613–623. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  43. Liu, Y.; Long, H. Land use transitions and their dynamic mechanism: The case of the Huang-Huai-Hai Plain. J. Geogr. Sci. 2016, 26, 515–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Chen, B.; Zhang, F. Trend and priority areas in land use research of China. Geogr. Res. 2011, 30, 1–9. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  45. Statistics Bureau of Guangdong Province, National Bureau of Statistics Guangdong Investigation Team. Guangdong Statistical Year Book; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2008. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  46. Deng, X.; Huang, J.; Rozelle, S.; Zhang, J.; Li, Z. Impact of urbanization on cultivated land changes in China. Land Use Policy 2015, 45, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ye, Y.; Zhang, H.; Xu, X.; Zhou, C. Study on the relationship between construction land expansion and economic growth pattern in the Pearl River Delta. Geogr. Res. 2011, 30, 2259–2271. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  48. Liu, Y.; Wang, L.; Long, H. Spatio-temporal analysis of land-use conversion in the eastern coastal China during 1996–2005. J. Geogr. Sci. 2008, 18, 274–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Wu, X.; Wang, S.; Fu, B.; Liu, Y.; Zhu, Y. Land use optimization based on ecosystem service assessment: A case study in the Yanhe watershed. Land Use Policy 2018, 72, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhou, Y.; Li, X.; Liu, Y. Land use change and driving factors in rural China during the period 1995–2015. Land Use Policy 2020, 99, 105048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Shao, J.; Ni, J.; Wei, C.; Xie, D. Land use change and its corresponding ecological responses: A review. J. Geogr. Sci. 2005, 15, 305–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Liu, J.; Zhang, Z.; Xu, X.; Kuang, W.; Zhou, W.; Zhang, S.; Li, R.; Yan, C.; Yu, D.; Wu, S.; et al. Spatial patterns and driving forces of land use change in China during the early 21st century. J. Geogr. Sci. 2010, 20, 483–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Bu, X.; Wang, Y.; Shen, C.; Zhang, X. Influence of landforms of on the land use dynamics in Shenzhen City. Geogr. Res. 2009, 28, 1011–1021. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  54. Ye, Y.; Zhang, H.; Liu, K.; Wu, Q. Research on the influence of site factors on the expansion of construction land in the Pearl River Delta, China: By using GIS and remote sensing. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2012, 21, 366–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Han, H.; Yang, C.; Song, J. The spatial-temporal characteristic of land use change in Beijing and its driving mechanism. Econ. Geogr. 2015, 35, 148–154, 197. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  56. Zhou, C.; Wang, Y.; Xu, Q.; Li, S. The new process of urbanization in the Pearl River Delta. Geogr. Res. 2019, 38, 45–63. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  57. Wang, J.; Chen, Y.; Shao, X.; Zhang, Y.; Cao, Y. Land-use changes and policy dimension driving forces in China: Present, trend and future. Land Use Policy 2012, 29, 737–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Land 10 01357 g001 550
Figure 1. Location of Guangdong Province, China.
Figure 1. Location of Guangdong Province, China.
Land 10 01357 g001
Land 10 01357 g002 550
Figure 2. Percentage changes of the grids’ number of production-living-ecological function score based on a 1 km × 1 km grid unit in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Figure 2. Percentage changes of the grids’ number of production-living-ecological function score based on a 1 km × 1 km grid unit in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Land 10 01357 g002
Land 10 01357 g003 550
Figure 3. Spatial pattern of production space in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Figure 3. Spatial pattern of production space in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Land 10 01357 g003
Land 10 01357 g004 550
Figure 4. Spatial pattern of living space in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Figure 4. Spatial pattern of living space in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Land 10 01357 g004
Land 10 01357 g005 550
Figure 5. Spatial pattern of ecological space in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Figure 5. Spatial pattern of ecological space in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Land 10 01357 g005
Land 10 01357 g006 550
Figure 6. Changes in the production-living-ecological spatial pattern in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Figure 6. Changes in the production-living-ecological spatial pattern in Guangdong Province between 1990 and 2017.
Land 10 01357 g006
Land 10 01357 g007 550
Figure 7. The influence mechanism of the changes of the production-living-ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province.
Figure 7. The influence mechanism of the changes of the production-living-ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province.
Land 10 01357 g007
Table
Table 1. Production-living-ecological land use classification and assessment.
Table 1. Production-living-ecological land use classification and assessment.
Primary TypeSecondary TypeScore
NameNameProduction
Land		Living
Land		Ecological
Land
Cultivated landPaddy field, Dry land503
Forest landForest land, Shrub land, Sparse forest land,
Other forest land		005
GrasslandHigh coverage grassland305
Medium coverage grassland105
Low coverage grassland005
WatersCanals, Lakes, Permanent glaciers, Snowfields, Tidal flats, Beaches005
Reservoir and Pond101
Urban and rural, industrial and mining, and residential landUrban land, Rural residential land350
Other construction land510
Unused landSandy land, Gobi, Saline-alkali land, Marshland, Bare land, Bare rock texture, Other land005
Table
Table 2. The candidate index of quantitative analysis of the evolution of the production-living-ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province.
Table 2. The candidate index of quantitative analysis of the evolution of the production-living-ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province.
Index CategoryIndicator Name
Human
factor		GDP (X1), GDP per capita(X2), The total retail sales of social consumer goods (X3), Fixed asset investment (X4), Proportion of primary industry output value (X5), Proportion of secondary industry output value (X6), Proportion of tertiary industry output value (X7), Gross industrial production (X8), Total agricultural output value (X9), Grain yield (X10), Planting industry output value (X11), Forestry output value (X12), Animal husbandry output value (X13), Fishery output value (X14), Total registered population (X15), Total permanent population (X16), Proportion of urban population to permanent population (X17), Employees in the primary industry (X18), Employees in the secondary industry (X19), Employees in the tertiary industry (X20), Highway traffic mileage (X21), Local general public budget revenue (X22), Population density (X23), Electricity consumption (X24)
Natural
factor		Mean elevation (X25), Terrain relief (X26), Yearly average temperature (X27), Average annual precipitation (X28)
Land-use typeCultivated land area (X29), Urban land area (X30), Rural residential land area (X31), Other construction land area (X32)
Table
Table 3. The regression coefficient of the evolution of production-living-ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province.
Table 3. The regression coefficient of the evolution of production-living-ecological space patterns in Guangdong Province.
Non-Standardized CoefficientStandardization
Coefficient		t-Test StatisticsSignificanceCollinearity Statistics
BStandard ErrorBetaToleranceVIF
Production space(Constant)−1.273 × 10−150.103 0.0001.000
GDP per capita (X2)0.8600.1430.8605.9980.0000.5411.849
Grain yield (X10)0.5610.1240.5614.5200.0010.7221.385
Planting industry output value (X11)−0.5810.148−0.581−3.9180.0020.5051.980
Fishery output value (X14)−0.4820.118−0.482−4.0920.0010.8001.250
Electricity consumption (X24)−0.5650.136−0.565−4.1600.0010.6031.659
Mean elevation (X25)−0.6210.145−0.621−4.2810.0010.5291.890
Cultivated land area (X29)1.1460.1591.1467.2110.0000.4402.271
Living space(Constant)−2.283 × 10−160.058 0.0001.000
GDP (X1)0.3290.0620.3295.3200.0000.9351.069
Employees in the secondary industry (X19)0.2250.0620.2253.6290.0020.9291.076
Terrain relief (X26)0.5220.0600.5228.6730.0000.9841.016
Rural residential land area (X31)−0.5570.064−0.557−8.7620.0000.8831.132
Ecological space(Constant)1.048 × 10−160.037 0.0001.000
GDP per capita (X2)−0.1820.054−0.182−3.3820.0040.4972.014
Electricity consumption (X24)0.1840.0490.1843.7130.0020.5861.706
Mean elevation (X25)0.2530.0450.2535.6160.0000.7031.422
Cultivated land area (X29)0.6700.0470.67014.1060.0000.6351.574
Urban land area (X30)−0.1990.050−0.199−3.9940.0010.5781.731
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Deng, Y.; Yang, R. Influence Mechanism of Production-Living-Ecological Space Changes in the Urbanization Process of Guangdong Province, China. Land 2021, 10, 1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10121357

AMA Style

Deng Y, Yang R. Influence Mechanism of Production-Living-Ecological Space Changes in the Urbanization Process of Guangdong Province, China. Land. 2021; 10(12):1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10121357

Chicago/Turabian Style

Deng, Yingxian, and Ren Yang. 2021. "Influence Mechanism of Production-Living-Ecological Space Changes in the Urbanization Process of Guangdong Province, China" Land 10, no. 12: 1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10121357

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop