Land (Mar 2024)

Spatial Pattern and Coordination Relationship of Production–Living–Ecological Space Function and Residents’ Behavior Flow in Rural–Urban Fringe Areas

  • Xiaochen Sun,
  • Bingzi Zhang,
  • Shuni Ye,
  • Sara Grigoryan,
  • Yazhuo Zhang,
  • Yike Hu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/land13040446
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 4
p. 446

Abstract

Read online

Territorial spatial planning requires thoughtful consideration of the scientific layout and synergistic control of production, living, and ecological spaces (PLESs). However, research in this field often neglects the human perspective and fails to account for people’s demands and behavioral characteristics. This study evaluates the level and spatial characteristics of residents’ production, living, and ecological behavioral (PLEB) flow, as well as the spatial pattern of the PLES functions, within the framework of the human–land coupling system. Therefore, to analyze the behavior–space coupling coordination relationship, the coupling coordination model is applied. The results indicate that the overall level of residents’ PLEB flow in rural–urban fringe areas is at a lower middle level and the functionality of the PLES is at a medium level, with a spatial distribution pattern of high in the northern and low in the southern areas. Most of the behavior–space matching types are in a state of mismatch between supply and demand. Meanwhile, the PLEB–PLES coupling coordination relationship is generally unbalanced, which is particularly noticeable in the production space. Regardless of whether the behavior–space matching type is a supply deficit or a supply surplus, the mismatch between supply and demand leads to uncoordinated and unreasonable spatial utilization. Overall, the findings of the study provide guidance for future research endeavors about PLESs and suggest embracing a human-centered scientific paradigm. Such a paradigm can promote high-quality, sustainable development of territorial spatial planning while strengthening the capacity and effectiveness of spatial governance and control.

Keywords