IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i4p1373-d320109.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-Making of Green Space Utilization and Protection in Urban Fringe Based on Biodiversity Trade-Off

Author

Listed:
  • Haijiao Liu

    (School of Economics and Management, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, China
    Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27517, USA)

  • Yonghong Ma

    (School of Economics and Management, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, China)

  • Qing Liu

    (Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27517, USA
    School of Architecture, Harbin Institute of Technology, Key Laboratory of Cold Region Urban and Rural Human Settlement Environment Science and Technology, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Yan Song

    (Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27517, USA)

Abstract

Urbanization leads to the continuous expansion of urban built-up areas and the erosion of green space in urban fringe areas, leading to the continuous decline of biodiversity. Urban planners and managers need corresponding decision support tools to coordinate the contradiction between the utilization and protection of green space, ensure the maintenance capacity of biodiversity in green space, and realize the sustainable development of regional economy, society and ecology. Therefore, based on the Hellwig Method, this study designed a decision-making method of green space utilization and protection in urban fringe areas and applied the method to the decision simulation of single or multiple green space utilization and protection modes. In the decision simulation of a green space utilization mode, we evaluated the H k values of one or several green space sample units, respectively. The smaller the H k value, the smaller the influence of the green space unit on the biodiversity maintenance function of the whole green space in the region, so the green space unit can be selected first when making green space utilization planning decisions in the urban fringe. In the decision simulation of green space protection mode, the higher the H k value of single green space sample unit combination or multiple green space sample unit combination, the greater the influence of the green space unit in the combination on the maintenance function of the overall green space biodiversity in the region. Then, when planning the green space protection in the urban fringe, the combination of such green space sample units should be given priority as the key protection and control objects. As a decision support tool for optimal scheme of green space utilization and protection in urban fringe areas, the method is practical, instructive, reasonable, operable, flexible, and universal.

Suggested Citation

  • Haijiao Liu & Yonghong Ma & Qing Liu & Yan Song, 2020. "Decision-Making of Green Space Utilization and Protection in Urban Fringe Based on Biodiversity Trade-Off," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1373-:d:320109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1373/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1373/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhiming Li & Zhengxi Fan & Shiguang Shen, 2018. "Urban Green Space Suitability Evaluation Based on the AHP-CV Combined Weight Method: A Case Study of Fuping County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Bo†sin Tang & Siu†wai Wong & Anton K.W. Lee, 2005. "Green Belt, Countryside Conservation And Local Politics: A Hong Kong Case Study," Review of Urban & Regional Development Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 230-247, November.
    3. Shiyi Guo & Kaoru Saito & Weida Yin & Chang Su, 2018. "Landscape Connectivity as a Tool in Green Space Evaluation and Optimization of the Haidan District, Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, June.
    4. Guzman, Luis A. & Escobar, Francisco & Peña, Javier & Cardona, Rafael, 2020. "A cellular automata-based land-use model as an integrated spatial decision support system for urban planning in developing cities: The case of the Bogotá region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(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. Martin Seidl & Manal Saifane, 2021. "A green intensity index to better assess the multiple functions of urban vegetation with an application to Paris metropolitan area," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 15204-15224, October.
    2. Natalia Świdyńska & Mirosława Witkowska-Dąbrowska, 2021. "Indicators of the Tourist Attractiveness of Urban–Rural Communes and Sustainability of Peripheral Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, 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. Zhen Li & Wanmin Zhao & Miaoyao Nie, 2021. "Scale Characteristics and Optimization of Park Green Space in Megacities Based on the Fractal Measurement Model: A Case Study of Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Daniel Oviedo & Luis A. Guzman, 2020. "Revisiting Accessibility in a Context of Sustainable Transport: Capabilities and Inequalities in Bogotá," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-22, June.
    3. Zixuan Lian & Xianhui Feng, 2022. "Urban Green Space Pattern in Core Cities of the Greater Bay Area Based on Morphological Spatial Pattern Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-15, September.
    4. Xiangnan Fan & Yuning Cheng & Fangqi Tan & Tianyi Zhao, 2022. "Construction and Optimization of the Ecological Security Pattern in Liyang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Lawrence Wai Chung Lai & Kelvin Siu Kei Wong & Kwong Wing Chau, 2011. "Are Engineering Reasons Zoning Neutral? An Empirical Inquiry into Development Proposals in Green Belt and Agriculture Zones," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(2), pages 322-337, April.
    6. Huang, Xinxin & Wang, Haijun & Xiao, Fentao, 2022. "Simulating urban growth affected by national and regional land use policies: Case study from Wuhan, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    7. Shouqiang Yin & Jing Li & Jiaxin Liang & Kejing Jia & Zhen Yang & Yuan Wang, 2020. "Optimization of the Weighted Linear Combination Method for Agricultural Land Suitability Evaluation Considering Current Land Use and Regional Differences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Hui Ye & Zhaoping Yang & Xiaoliang Xu, 2020. "Ecological Corridors Analysis Based on MSPA and MCR Model—A Case Study of the Tomur World Natural Heritage Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, January.
    9. Zhiming Li & Zhengxi Fan & Shiguang Shen, 2018. "Urban Green Space Suitability Evaluation Based on the AHP-CV Combined Weight Method: A Case Study of Fuping County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, July.
    10. Chenjing Fan & Wei Ouyang & Li Tian & Yan Song & Wensheng Miao, 2019. "Elderly Health Inequality in China and its Determinants: A Geographical Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-18, August.
    11. LIANG, Jingmin & CHEN, Jiayu & TONG, De & LI, Xin, 2022. "Planning control over rural land transformation in Hong Kong: A remote sensing analysis of spatio-temporal land use change patterns," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    12. Ge Song & Hongmei Zhang, 2021. "Cultivated Land Use Layout Adjustment Based on Crop Planting Suitability: A Case Study of Typical Counties in Northeast China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, January.
    13. Ustaoglu, E. & Aydınoglu, A.C., 2020. "Suitability evaluation of urban construction land in Pendik district of Istanbul, Turkey," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    14. Ke Peng & Nikhil Kaza, 2020. "Association between Neighborhood Food Access, Household Income, and Purchase of Snacks and Beverages in the United States," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-14, October.
    15. Shanshan Feng & Jiake Shen & Shuo Sheng & Zengqing Hu & Yuncai Wang, 2023. "Spatial Prioritizing Brownfields Catering for Green Infrastructure by Integrating Urban Demands and Site Attributes in a Metropolitan Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-29, April.
    16. KW Chau & Lawrence WC Lai & Mark H Chua, 2022. "Post-colonial conservation of colonial built heritage in Hong Kong: A statistical analysis of historic building grading," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(2), pages 671-686, February.
    17. Huiying Li & Dianfeng Liu & Jianhua He, 2022. "Exploring Differentiated Conservation Priorities of Urban Green Space Based on Tradeoffs of Ecological Functions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-14, February.
    18. Zhou, Lin & Tian, Li & Gao, Yuan & Ling, Yingkai & Fan, Chenjing & Hou, Deyi & Shen, Tiyan & Zhou, Wentong, 2019. "How did industrial land supply respond to transitions in state strategy? An analysis of prefecture-level cities in China from 2007 to 2016," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    19. Kazemi, Fatemeh & Hossein pour, Nazanin & Mahdizadeh, Hassan, 2022. "Sustainable low-input urban park design based on some decision-making methods," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    20. Ouyang, Xiao & Xu, Jun & Li, Jiayu & Wei, Xiao & Li, Yonghui, 2022. "Land space optimization of urban-agriculture-ecological functions in the Changsha-Zhuzhou-Xiangtan Urban Agglomeration, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1373-:d:320109. 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.