IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i9p991-d639154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of the Kunming–Bangkok Highway on Land Use Changes along the Route between Laos and Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • Fangyu Zheng

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Jiuming Huang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Zhiming Feng

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Chiwei Xiao

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

Road construction fragments the landscape, reduces connectivity, and drives land use changes. To our knowledge, little is known about the scope and intensity of the effects of cross-border roads on changes in land use. Here, with the land use data products provided by the US Agency for International Development’s SERVIR Mekong project, using the GIS-based spatial analysis to quantitatively analyze and compare the effects of the cross-border road on land use changes within a 30 km buffer area along the Kunming–Bangkok Highway between Laos and Thailand. The results show the following: The greater the distance was from the highway, the smaller were the overall changes in land use within the buffer zone. A comparison of the situation before and after the road was opened in 2013 revealed significant differences in the most influential land use types of agricultural expansion, i.e., from 47.07% to 52.07% (the buffer zone was 1 km). In particular, 57.32% (1381.93 ha) and 40.08% (966.46 ha) of the land occupied by forests had been converted into land for plantation and agriculture, respectively, from 2013 to 2018. The scope of the impact of the operational route on the dynamics of land use was inconsistent. The largest impact before the road became operational was within 4 km of the buffer zone (0.26 to 0.24). Once the road had been opened, the range of its impact was beyond 10 km (0.63 to 0.57). The work here can provide a scientific basis for regional transportation planning and the sustainable use of land resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Fangyu Zheng & Jiuming Huang & Zhiming Feng & Chiwei Xiao, 2021. "Impact of the Kunming–Bangkok Highway on Land Use Changes along the Route between Laos and Thailand," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-12, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:9:p:991-:d:639154
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/9/991/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/9/991/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. François Bourguignon & Boris Pleskovic, 2007. "Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics Global 2007 : Rethinking Infrastructure for Development," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6834.
    2. Chen Zeng & Zhe Zhao & Cheng Wen & Jing Yang & Tianyu Lv, 2020. "Effect of Complex Road Networks on Intensive Land Use in China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Feder, Gershon & Feeny, David, 1991. "Land Tenure and Property Rights: Theory and Implications for Development Policy," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 5(1), pages 135-153, January.
    4. Kasraian, Dena & Raghav, Shivani & Miller, Eric J., 2020. "A multi-decade longitudinal analysis of transportation and land use co-evolution in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jelena Živanović Miljković & Omiljena Dželebdžić & Nataša Čolić, 2022. "Land-Use Change Dynamics of Agricultural Land within Belgrade–Novi Sad Highway Corridor: A Spatial Planning Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Jiahao Zhai & Chiwei Xiao & Zhiming Feng & Ying Liu, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Land-Use Changes and Conflicts between Cropland and Forest in the Mekong River Basin during 1990–2020," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-17, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Hui & Riedinger, Jeffrey & Jin, Songqing, 2015. "Land documents, tenure security and land rental development: Panel evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 220-235.
    2. Rayaprolu, Hema & Levinson, David, 2024. "Co-evolution of public transport access and ridership," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    3. John Giles & Ren Mu, 2018. "Village Political Economy, Land Tenure Insecurity, and the Rural to Urban Migration Decision: Evidence from China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(2), pages 521-544.
    4. Baye, Temesgen Gebeyehu, 2018. "Property Rights and Their Implications on Agricultural Productivity in Ethiopia: A History," Ethiopian Journal of Economics, Ethiopian Economics Association, vol. 27(01), April.
    5. Woubet Kassa, 2018. "Land Titling, Local Governance and Investment: An Empirical Investigation in Tanzania," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(1), pages 1-56, January.
    6. Cuffaro, Nadia, 1997. "Population growth and agriculture in poor countries: A review of theoretical issues and empirical evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 1151-1163, July.
    7. Joshi, P. K. & Pangare, V. & Shiferaw, B. & Wani, S. P. & Bouma, Jetske & Scott, Christopher, 2004. "Socioeconomic and policy research on watershed management in India: synthesis of past experiences and needs for future research," IWMI Research Reports H035345, International Water Management Institute.
    8. Daniel Ayalew Ali & Stefan Dercon & Madhur Gautam, 2011. "Property rights in a very poor country: tenure insecurity and investment in Ethiopia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(1), pages 75-86, January.
    9. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.
    10. Emran, M. Shahe & Shilpi, Forhad, 2015. "Do Land Market Restrictions Hinder Structural Change in a Rural Economy? Evidence from Sri Lanka," MPRA Paper 66017, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    12. Macours, Karen, 2002. "Insecurity Of Property Rights And Matching In The Tenancy Market," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19603, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Jérémie GIGNOUX & Karen MACOURS & Liam WREN-LEWIS, 2015. "Impact of land administration programs on agricultural productivity and rural development: existing evidence, challenges and new approaches," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 96(3), pages 467-498.
    14. Andrew Allan & Ali Soltani & Mohammad Hamed Abdi & Melika Zarei, 2022. "Driving Forces behind Land Use and Land Cover Change: A Systematic and Bibliometric Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, August.
    15. Han, Wenjing & Zhang, Xiaoling & Zhang, Zhengfeng, 2019. "The role of land tenure security in promoting rural women’s empowerment: Empirical evidence from rural China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 280-289.
    16. Ceyhun Haydaroglu, 2015. "The Relationship between Property Rights and Economic Growth: an Analysis of OECD and EU Countries," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 4, pages 217-239, December.
    17. Besley, Timothy, 1995. "Property Rights and Investment Incentives: Theory and Evidence from Ghana," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(5), pages 903-937, October.
    18. Ma, Shuang & Mu, Ren, 2020. "Forced off the farm? Farmers’ labor allocation response to land requisition in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    19. Tian, Guangjin & Duan, Jinlong & Yang, Lan, 2021. "Spatio-temporal pattern and driving mechanisms of cropland circulation in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    20. Sreeparna Saha & Prabal Roy Chowdhury & Jaideep Roy & Prasad Bhattarcharya, 2016. "Political Economy of Land Acquisition and Holdout," Discussion Papers 16-07, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:9:p:991-:d:639154. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.