Analysis of the Environmental Benefits and Driving Forces of the Development of the “Production–Living–Ecological Space” Pattern Based on the ERI-ESV Geodetector

Based on five periods of Landsat remote sensing data from 1980 to 2020, this study constructs a landscape ecological risk-ecosystem service value evaluation model and integrates it with a geodetector model to analyse the environmental benefits of the development of the “production–living–ecological space” pattern and its driving factors in the Xuzhou planning area. The results of the study are as follows: (1) Over the past 40 years, the expansion of living spaces has significantly encroached upon adjacent agricultural production areas and ecological spaces, such as forests and grasslands. Specifically, the areas of agricultural land, forests, and grassland have been diminished by 277.39 km 2 , 23.8 km 2 and 12.93 km 2 , respectively; in contrast, urban and rural living spaces have increased by 238.62 km 2 and 58.92 km 2 , alongside a rise in industrial production areas, water bodies, and other ecological spaces. (2) Throughout the 40-year period, both the landscape ecological risk (ERI) and ecosystem service value (ESV) in the study area have shown a decreasing trend. The proportion of high- and medium-high-risk areas of the ERI have decreased by 5.19% and 7.50%, respectively, while low, lower, and medium ecological risk areas have increased by 6.40%, 3.22% and 3.07%, respectively. In addition, low-ESV areas have increased by 14.22%, while the proportion of high- and medium-high-ESV areas have decreased by 1.16%. (3) There is a significant positive spatial correlation between the ERI and ESV. Regions with dense ecological spaces comprising forests, water bodies, and grasslands, particularly in the northeastern part of the Jiawang District and the southeastern part of the Tongshan District, demonstrate superior regional ecosystem service quality. The ERI and ESV are dominated by “high–high” and “low–high” aggregation. Conversely, in the southwestern part of the study area, the expansion of living space has led to the transformation of some agricultural land, forest land, and grassland into less risky construction land, resulting in a decline in the quality of regional ecosystem services. The local spatial correlation between the ERI and ESV changed from “high–high”, “low–low”, “low–high” agglomeration to “low–low” agglomeration. (4) Key factors influencing the spatial differentiation of the “production–living–ecological space” include the GDP, population density, soil type, and the distance to towns and roads. Among these, the interaction between population density and soil type has the most significant effect on the changes in the pattern of the “production–living–ecological space”.