4.3 Article

Spatio-Econometric Analysis of Urban Land Use Efficiency in China from the Perspective of Natural Resources Input and Undesirable Outputs: A Case Study of 287 Cities in China

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17197297

Keywords

urban land use; super efficiency SBM model; influencing factors; spatial econometrics

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71873053, 71573101, 71804054, 71704061, 71974068]
  2. Major Project of National Social Science Foundation of China [18ZDA054]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The rapid urbanization in China has had a huge impact on land use and the scarcity of land resources has become a constraint for sustainable urban development. As urban land is an indispensable material basis in economic development, measuring its use efficiency and adopting effective policies to improve urban land use efficiency (ULUE) are important links in maintaining sustainable economic growth. By establishing a comprehensive ULUE evaluation index system that emphasizes on incorporating the natural resources input and the undesirable output, ULUE from 2010 to 2016 was calculated based on super efficiency SBM model, and its potential influencing factors were explored using a spatial econometric model. The results show that: (1) temporally, the overall ULUE in China is upward growing, and the gap among regions is becoming gradually convergent. (2) Spatially, the ULUE of Chinese cities are positively correlated. (3) Economic agglomeration and industrial structure significantly improve ULUE in China, but the intensity of energy consumption has a negative impact on ULUE. We suggest that: (1) differentiated industrial development strategies should be formulated; (2) the economic growth pattern should be changed from energy-consuming to energy-saving; (3) priority should be given to innovation on science and education, so as to increase in clean energy input and cleaner production.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available