4.6 Article

Assessment of Social-Economic Risk of Chinese Dual Land Use System Using Fuzzy AHP

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 10, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su10072451

Keywords

dual land use system; social-economic risk; fuzzy AHP; Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA); unified management system

Funding

  1. Innovative Research Funding of the Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality [18DZ1201102]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Chinese dual land use system (DLUS) has played a crucial role in the industrialization of China since 1950s. However, this dual system caused/causes obstacles in urban development under the new market economic conditions. This paper presents an approach to assess the social-economic risks during urban development in China by integrating the strategic environment assessment (SEA) principle into the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. In the proposed approach, SEA principles are set as the influencing factors in AHP. Fuzzy AHP is used to assess the relative importance degree of the six principles in SEA. To illustrate the application procedure of the proposed approach, a building collapse incident in Wenzhou is used as a case for the risk analysis. The assessment results show that the index of the manage system has the greatest importance to social-economic risk. The principle of sustainable development (A) and monitoring measures (E) have more importance than the other principles in SEA. It can be concluded that the DLUS in the market management of China may be responsible for building collapse incidents in rural areas. It is suggested that the principles of sustainable development and monitoring measures in SEA should be strictly implemented during urbanization, and it is recommended that the government establish a unified management system and ensure the effective implementation of sustainable urbanization.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available