4.7 Article

The varying driving forces of urban expansion in China: Insights from a spatial-temporal analysis

期刊

LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING
卷 174, 期 -, 页码 63-77

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.03.004

关键词

Urban expansion; Driving forces; National-level sampling; Spatial-temporal modelling; Spatial Probit model; China

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [41590842, 41501175]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Identifying the driving mechanisms and forces of urban expansion is an important step toward better understanding of the spatial pattern, process, and consequences of urban expansion, which is essential for making effective urban growth planning and policies. Despite many previous studies devoted to investigating urban expansion patterns and mechanisms, the spatial-temporal dynamics of driving forces and their regional differences have not been well-documented. This study examines drivers of urban expansion and their effects across different regions in China in different periods. A spatial Probit model is employed, with data selected based on a national-level sampling strategy, to model urban expansion probability from a spatially explicit perspective. Results indicate that multiple factors including socioeconomic, physical, proximity, accessibility, and neighborhood factors have driven urban expansion in China. Driving factors for urban expansion vary between national and regional levels, suggesting that analyses on different spatial scales are necessary. The dynamics and driving forces of urban expansion in China have been spatial heterogeneous. Furthermore, driving forces have trended toward more diversity over time, and the constraining effects of natural conditions on urban expansion have gradually decayed. These findings aid in gaining a better understanding of the urban expansion process in China, which will in turn benefit urban planning and management across different regions. Lastly, important policy implications are inferred.

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