IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i21p11979-d668250.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Land Cover and Ecological Quality Changes under the New-Type Urbanization from Multi-Source Remote Sensing

Author

Listed:
  • Fang Shi

    (College of Forestry, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)

  • Mingshi Li

    (College of Forestry, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
    Co-Innovation Center for Sustainable Forestry in Southern China, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)

Abstract

The traditional rapid urbanization process is the result of a strong focus on economic development, while its ecological and environmental aspects are less focused upon. The “new-type urbanization” (NTU) concept considers ecological conservation during the urbanization process. The different impacts of the two processes on regional ecological environment evolutions remain insufficiently investigated and still draw significant attention from urban planners and land managers when formulating proper land use policies. Thus, this study was designed to fill the gap by evaluating and comparing different effects of the traditional urbanization and NTU on urban land cover (LC) and ecological quality changes in the Jiangbei New Area, Nanjing, China. We first established a LC database using an object-oriented classification of multi-source high-resolution satellite images. Next, we quantified changes in ecological quality using the remote sensing ecological index (RSEI) model. Subsequently, spatial auto-correlation analysis was conducted to detect the clustering trend of the changing ecological quality in the study area over time. The results showed that the overall accuracy of the LC maps was 90.75% in 2009, 91.75% in 2015, and 92.04% in 2019. The average RSEI values of the study area were 0.583, 0.559, and 0.579, respectively. The spatial auto-correlation analysis indicated a strong positive correlation between the ecological qualities. However, the spatial distribution changed slightly from a clustered trend to a more random and dispersed trend as the Moran’s I decreased. The observed changes are attributed to the strict implementation of ecological conservation and restoration policies by the local government in the NTU process, as well as an increased residents’ awareness of protecting natural resources, indicating that the traditional urbanization has a stronger negative disturbance on regional ecological conditions than NTU. The proposed evaluation method can be applied to other similar regions for sustainable urban management.

Suggested Citation

  • Fang Shi & Mingshi Li, 2021. "Assessing Land Cover and Ecological Quality Changes under the New-Type Urbanization from Multi-Source Remote Sensing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:11979-:d:668250
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/11979/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/11979/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yuan-Bin Cai & Hui-Min Li & Xin-Yue Ye & Hao Zhang, 2016. "Analyzing Three-Decadal Patterns of Land Use/Land Cover Change and Regional Ecosystem Services at the Landscape Level: Case Study of Two Coastal Metropolitan Regions, Eastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Lai, Zhaohao & Chen, Meiqiu & Liu, Taoju, 2020. "Changes in and prospects for cultivated land use since the reform and opening up in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    3. Zhao, Zhe & Bai, Yuping & Wang, Guofeng & Chen, Jiancheng & Yu, Jiangli & Liu, Wei, 2018. "Land eco-efficiency for new-type urbanization in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 19-26.
    4. Jiangjun Wan & Yi Su & Huanglin Zan & Yutong Zhao & Lingqing Zhang & Shaoyao Zhang & Xiangyu Dong & Wei Deng, 2020. "Land Functions, Rural Space Governance, and Farmers’ Environmental Perceptions: A Case Study from the Huanjiang Karst Mountain Area, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-19, April.
    5. Arthur Getis & J. Keith Ord, 2010. "The Analysis of Spatial Association by Use of Distance Statistics," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Luc Anselin & Sergio J. Rey (ed.), Perspectives on Spatial Data Analysis, chapter 0, pages 127-145, Springer.
    6. Xu, Feng & Wang, Zhanqi & Chi, Guangqing & Zhang, Zhexi, 2020. "The impacts of population and agglomeration development on land use intensity: New evidence behind urbanization in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(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. Chan Lu & Lei Shi & Lihua Fu & Simian Liu & Jianqiao Li & Zhenchun Mo, 2023. "Urban Ecological Environment Quality Evaluation and Territorial Spatial Planning Response: Application to Changsha, Central China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-20, February.

    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. Bei He & Xiaoyun Du & Junkang Li & Dan Chen, 2023. "A Effectiveness-and Efficiency-Based Improved Approach for Measuring Ecological Well-Being Performance in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-29, January.
    2. Xiuju Feng & Jian Gao & Jittaporn Sriboonjit & Zhongmin Wang & Jianxu Liu & Songsak Sriboonchitta, 2023. "The Impact of Urbanization on Cultivated Land Use Efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Belt in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Yuling Wu & Pei Zhang & Jia Li & Jiao Hou, 2022. "Spatial Distribution Evolution and Optimization Path of Eco-Efficiency of Cultivated Land Use: A Case Study of Hubei Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Ning Zhang & Ying Mao, 2021. "Spatial Effects of Environmental Pollution on Healthcare Services: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-21, February.
    5. Li, Shuoshuo & Liu, Yaobin & Wei, Guoen & Bi, Mo & He, Bao-Jie, 2024. "Carbon surplus or carbon deficit under land use transformation in China?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    6. Mehmet Ronael & Tüzin Baycan, 2022. "Place-based factors affecting COVID-19 incidences in Turkey," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 1053-1086, October.
    7. Thomas M. Koutsos & Georgios C. Menexes & Andreas P. Mamolos, 2021. "The Use of Crop Yield Autocorrelation Data as a Sustainable Approach to Adjust Agronomic Inputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Cláudia M. Viana & Dulce Freire & Patrícia Abrantes & Jorge Rocha, 2021. "Evolution of Agricultural Production in Portugal during 1850–2018: A Geographical and Historical Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, July.
    9. Meng Wang & Aleksandra Krstikj & Huan Liu, 2022. "Planning Compact City in Rapidly Growing Cities—An Estimation of the Effects of New-Type Urbanization Planning in Hangzhou City," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Ehsan Moradi & Jesús Rodrigo-Comino & Enric Terol & Gaspar Mora-Navarro & Alexandre Marco da Silva & Ioannis N. Daliakopoulos & Hassan Khosravi & Manuel Pulido Fernández & Artemi Cerdà, 2020. "Quantifying Soil Compaction in Persimmon Orchards Using ISUM (Improved Stock Unearthing Method) and Core Sampling Methods," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Fang Yin & Zhanli Sun & Liangzhi You & Daniel Müller, 2024. "Determinants of changes in harvested area and yields of major crops in China," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 16(2), pages 339-351, April.
    12. 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.
    13. Felipe Santos‐Marquez & Carlos Mendez, 2021. "Regional convergence, spatial scale, and spatial dependence: Evidence from homicides and personal injuries in Colombia 2010–2018," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 1162-1184, August.
    14. Jianwei Qi & Yayan Lu & Fang Han & Xuankai Ma & Zhaoping Yang, 2022. "Spatial Distribution Characteristics of the Rural Tourism Villages in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and Its Influencing Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-21, July.
    15. Yuqi Zhu & Siwei Shen & Linyu Du & Jun Fu & Jian Zou & Lina Peng & Rui Ding, 2023. "Spatial and Temporal Interaction Coupling of Digital Economy, New-Type Urbanization and Land Ecology and Spatial Effects Identification: A Study of the Yangtze River Delta," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-27, March.
    16. Cuixia Yan & Lucang Wang & Qing Zhang, 2021. "Study on Coupled Relationship between Urban Air Quality and Land Use in Lanzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-21, July.
    17. Zhe Zhao & Pengyu Peng & Fan Zhang & Jiayin Wang & Hongxuan Li, 2022. "The Impact of the Urbanization Process on Agricultural Technical Efficiency in Northeast China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-20, September.
    18. Xuesong Zhang & Zijin Xu, 2021. "Functional Coupling Degree and Human Activity Intensity of Production–Living–Ecological Space in Underdeveloped Regions in China: Case Study of Guizhou Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, January.
    19. María-Jesús Perles & Juan F. Sortino & Matías F. Mérida, 2021. "The Neighborhood Contagion Focus as a Spatial Unit for Diagnosis and Epidemiological Action against COVID-19 Contagion in Urban Spaces: A Methodological Proposal for Its Detection and Delimitation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-24, March.
    20. Krisztina Soreg & Guillermo Bermudez-Gonzalez, 2021. "Measuring the Socioeconomic Development of Selected Balkan Countries and Hungary: A Comparative Analysis for Sustainable Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.

    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:13:y:2021:i:21:p:11979-:d:668250. 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.