长江流域资源与环境 >> 2024, Vol. 33 >> Issue (12): 2647-2660.doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj202412008

• 自然资源 • 上一篇    下一篇

城乡融合背景下县域土地利用功能网络空间关联演变与驱动机制——以湖北省汉江流域为例

高艳丽1,李红波2,刘双良1*   

  1. (1.天津商业大学公共管理学院,天津 300400; 2.华中农业大学公共管理学院,湖北 武汉 430000)
  • 出版日期:2024-12-20 发布日期:2024-12-27

Spatial Correlation Evolution and Driving Mechanism of County Land Use Function Network Under the Background of Urban-Rural Integration:A Case Study of Han River Basin in Hubei Province

GAO Yan-li1 , LI Hong-bo2 , LIU Shuang-liang1   

  1. (1. School of Public Administration, Tianjin University of Commerce, Tianjin 300400, China; 2. College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430000, China)
  • Online:2024-12-20 Published:2024-12-27

摘要: 土地多功能利用是缓解人地矛盾冲突,实现土地可持续发展的重要手段。以汉江流域为研究区域,明确土地利用功能网络与城乡融合的交互机理,综合运用土地利用多功能评价法、社会网络分析法和空间计量模型构建城乡融合背景下的土地利用多功能网络,探究土地利用功能网络的演变特征及驱动机制。结果表明:(1)随着城乡融合度增加,汉江流域生产功能网络和生活功能网络的节点中心度、网络密度和网络互惠性均呈增加趋势,并且具有下游>中游>上游的空间分布特征。而生态功能网络的节点中心度下降,网络密度和网络互惠性整体变化较小,整体呈现出上游>中游>下游的分布特点。(2)在生产功能网络的驱动因素中,城乡融合度及其空间滞后项对网络节点中心度具有显著的抑制作用,但对网络密度和网络互惠性具有正向促进作用。(3)在生活功能网络分析中,城乡融合度对生活功能节点中心度、网络密度、网络互惠性均具有正向促进作用。(4)在生态功能网络中,城乡融合度对生态功能网络节点中心度不显著,对网络密度和网络互惠性显著为正。该研究结果对实现城乡融合目标和区域可持续发展具有重要的现实意义。


Abstract: Multifunctionality of land use is not only an important means to alleviate the conflict between human activities and land, but also a crucial factor in achieving sustainable development. This study focused on the Han River Basin as the research area and aimed to define the interaction mechanism between land use functional networks and urban-rural integration. By employing comprehensive methods such as land use multifunctional evaluation, social network analysis, and spatial metrology modeling, a multifunctional land use network was constructed under the context of urban-rural integration. The evolution characteristics and driving mechanisms of this network were further explored. The findings indicated that: (1) with an increasing rural-urban integration, there existed an increase in node centrality, network density, and network reciprocity of both production function networks and living function networks in rural-urban areas. The spatial distribution followed a pattern of downstream > midstream > upstream. However, for ecological function networks, although node centrality decreased slightly with an increased integration level, there was little change in network density or reciprocity, showing a distribution patter of upstream > midstream > downstream. (2) Among the driving factors affecting production function networks, both rural-urban integration degree and its spatial lag term significantly inhibited node centrality, but positively promoted network density and reciprocity. (3)The analysis of living function network showed that the degree of urban-rural integration had a positive effect on the living function node centrality, network density and network reciprocity. (4)For ecological function networks, rural-urban integration did not have significant effects on node centrality, but had a significant positive impact on both network density and reciprocity. The results of this study are of great practical significance for realizing urban-rural integration and promoting regional sustainable development.


No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!