4.7 Article

Assessment of city sustainability-Coupling coordinated development among economy, society and environment

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 256, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120453

关键词

City sustainability; Sustainability assessment; Objective coupling weights; Coupling degree; Coupling coordination model

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71701040, 71671031]
  2. Humanities and Social Sciences Foundation of the Chinese Ministry of Education [17YJC630067]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds of the Central Universities of China [N170604004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The coordination development among various subsystems, especially among economic, social and environmental subsystems, is an important part of urban sustainability that directly affects the quality of urbanization. This paper evaluated the sustainability of the 9 China's national central cities using the coupling coordination model. In the evaluation process, an objective coupling weighting method was developed by the combination of the coupling analysis and the sequential relationship analysis method. The validity of this method was illustrated by comparing the coordination level of the cities with that obtained by the entropy method. Long-term use of this method can guide the coordination development among economy, society and environment of cities. The assessment results indicate that the coordination development among economy, society and environment of the cities was not ideal. Only one city, Beijing, located in the good coordination grade. The main reason is the lower development of economic sustainability. Policy recommendations were provided to address the problem. In addition, the paper concludes that there is a great room for improvement in the coordinated development of the cities, because they showed an increase trend in coordinated development and the economic growth rate was relatively high. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据