IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i10p5936-d815120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Analysis of Land-Use Conflict Potential Based on the Perspective of Production–Living–Ecological Function

Author

Listed:
  • Zilang Cheng

    (College of Earth Science, Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China)

  • Yanjun Zhang

    (College of Earth Science, Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China)

  • Lingzhi Wang

    (College of Earth Science, Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China)

  • Lanyi Wei

    (College of Earth Science, Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China)

  • Xuying Wu

    (College of Earth Science, Jilin University, Changchun 130061, China)

Abstract

Under the influence of human activities, natural climate change and other factors, the function-folding phenomenon of land use has appeared in China. The conflict levels of different land-use functions has intensified. Based on the perspective of production–living–ecological function, we constructed a land-use function evaluation model by using a multi-criteria evaluation analysis (MCE) method. According to the different arrangement and combination of each function intensity of land units, we constructed an intensity diagnosis model of land-use function conflicts (LUFCs) and divided LUFCs into eight types and four stages. The LUFCs potential was calculated and divided into four ranks, represented by four types of LUFC potential zones. We selected western Jilin Province, a typical, ecologically fragile area in Northeast China, as an empirical analysis area. Empirical research showed that the production, living and ecological functions in western Jilin Province were at low, high and medium intensity levels, respectively, in 2020. The proportions of different LUFCs stages were 54.90%, 24.99%, 19.06% and 1.05%, respectively. The entire study area was basically at risk of potential conflicts, with the area’s proportions accounting for 17.50%, 40.75%, 24.55% and 17.20% from zones of low potential to extreme potential. The hot spots for LUFC potential were concentrated in the east and south of the central area, which were basically consistent with the hot spots’ aggregation areas of LUFCs. The models and indicators established in this research can better reflect the conflict associated with regional land use, which can provide reference for land space planning and management.

Suggested Citation

  • Zilang Cheng & Yanjun Zhang & Lingzhi Wang & Lanyi Wei & Xuying Wu, 2022. "An Analysis of Land-Use Conflict Potential Based on the Perspective of Production–Living–Ecological Function," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:5936-:d:815120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/5936/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/5936/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    2. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    3. Alston, Lee J. & Libecap, Gary D. & Mueller, Bernardo, 2000. "Land Reform Policies, the Sources of Violent Conflict, and Implications for Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 162-188, March.
    4. Dadashpoor, Hashem & Ahani, Somayeh, 2019. "Land tenure-related conflicts in peri-urban areas: A review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 218-229.
    5. Anthony S. Kiem & Fiona Johnson & Seth Westra & Albert Dijk & Jason P. Evans & Alison O’Donnell & Alexandra Rouillard & Cameron Barr & Jonathan Tyler & Mark Thyer & Doerte Jakob & Fitsum Woldemeskel &, 2016. "Natural hazards in Australia: droughts," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 37-54, November.
    6. Jiang, Song & Meng, Jijun & Zhu, Likai, 2020. "Spatial and temporal analyses of potential land use conflict under the constraints of water resources in the middle reaches of the Heihe River," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    7. Milczarek-Andrzejewska, Dominika & Zawalińska, Katarzyna & Czarnecki, Adam, 2018. "Land-use conflicts and the Common Agricultural Policy: Evidence from Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 423-433.
    8. Petrescu-Mag, Ruxandra Mălina & Petrescu, Dacinia Crina & Azadi, Hossein & Petrescu-Mag, Ioan Valentin, 2018. "Agricultural land use conflict management—Vulnerabilities, law restrictions and negotiation frames. A wake-up call," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 600-610.
    9. Reuveny, Rafael & Maxwell, John W. & Davis, Jefferson, 2011. "On conflict over natural resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 698-712, February.
    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. Dandan Zhao & Wenyue Jia & Jiping Liu, 2023. "Dynamic Changes and Driving Mechanisms of Net Primary Production (NPP) in a Semi-Arid Region of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-12, August.
    2. Linzhong Luo & Chaoxian Yang & Rongrong Chen & Weiping Liu, 2023. "Comprehensive Land Consolidation Zoning Based on Minimum Cumulative Resistance Model—A Case Study of Chongqing, Southwest China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    3. Xinghua Cui & Ning Xu & Wanxu Chen & Guanzheng Wang & Jiale Liang & Sipei Pan & Binqiao Duan, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Variation and Influencing Factors of the Coupling Coordination Degree of Production-Living-Ecological Space in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-26, August.

    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. Guanglong Dong & Yibing Ge & Haiwei Jia & Chuanzhun Sun & Senyuan Pan, 2021. "Land Use Multi-Suitability, Land Resource Scarcity and Diversity of Human Needs: A New Framework for Land Use Conflict Identification," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, September.
    2. Czarnecki, Adam & Milczarek-Andrzejewska, Dominika & Widła-Domaradzki, Łukasz & Jórasz-Żak, Anna, 2023. "Conflict dynamics over farmland use in the multifunctional countryside," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    3. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    4. Egor Selivanov & Petra Hlaváčková, 2021. "Methods for monetary valuation of ecosystem services: A scoping review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(11), pages 499-511.
    5. Xiaomeng Guo & Li Wang & Qiang Fu & Fang Ma, 2024. "Ecological Function Zoning Framework for Small Watershed Ecosystem Services Based on Multivariate Analysis from a Scale Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Shafi, Ahsan & Wang, Zhanqi & Ehsan, Muhsan & Riaz, Faizan Ahmed & Ali, Muhammad Rashid & Xu, Feng, 2023. "A game theory approach to land acquisition conflicts in Pakistan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    7. Chen, Haojie & Costanza, Robert & Kubiszewski, Ida, 2022. "Legitimacy and limitations of valuing the oxygen production of ecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    8. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    9. Jian Zhang & Hengxing Xiang & Shizuka Hashimoto & Toshiya Okuro, 2021. "Observational Scale Matters for Ecosystem Services Interactions and Spatial Distributions: A Case Study of the Ussuri Watershed, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Marie Balková & Lucie Kubalíková & Marcela Prokopová & Petr Sedlák & Aleš Bajer, 2021. "Ecosystem Services of Vegetation Features as the Multifunction Anti-Erosion Measures in the Czech Republic in 2019 and Its 30-Year Prediction," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    11. Heinze, Alan & Bongers, Frans & Ramírez Marcial, Neptalí & García Barrios, Luis & Kuyper, Thomas W., 2020. "The montane multifunctional landscape: How stakeholders in a biosphere reserve derive benefits and address trade-offs in ecosystem service supply," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    12. Niu, Hebin & Wang, Jinman & Jing, Zhaorui & Liu, Biao, 2023. "Identification and management of land use conflicts in mining cities: A case study of Shuozhou in China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    13. Maurizio Sajeva & Marjo Maidell & Jonne Kotta, 2020. "A Participatory Geospatial Toolkit for Science Integration and Knowledge Transfer Informing SDGs Based Governance and Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, September.
    14. Pacini, Gaio Cesare & Bruschi, Piero & Ferretti, Lorenzo & Santoni, Margherita & Serafini, Francesco & Gaifami, Tommaso, 2023. "FunBies, a model for integrated assessment of functional biodiversity of weed communities in agro-ecosystem," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 486(C).
    15. Chenxi Li & Zhihong Zong & Haichao Qie & Yingying Fang & Qiao Liu, 2023. "CiteSpace and Bibliometric Analysis of Published Research on Forest Ecosystem Services for the Period 2018–2022," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, April.
    16. Wakita, Kazumi & Kurokura, Hisashi & Oishi, Taro & Shen, Zhonghua & Furuya, Ken, 2019. "Exploring the effect of psychometric variables on willingness to pay for marine ecosystem services: A survey in Japan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 130-138.
    17. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    18. Nathalie Dumax & Anne Rozan & Bénédicte Rulleau, 2020. "“Adapted” Habitat Evaluation Procedure and Choice Experiment: Substitutes or Complements?," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(02), pages 1-30, April.
    19. Tian Liang & Peng Du & Fei Yang & Yuanxia Su & Yinchen Luo & You Wu & Chuanhao Wen, 2022. "Potential Land-Use Conflicts in the Urban Center of Chongqing Based on the “Production–Living–Ecological Space” Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, August.
    20. Márquez, Laura Andreina Matos & Rezende, Eva Caroline Nunes & Machado, Karine Borges & Nascimento, Emilly Layne Martins do & Castro, Joana D'arc Bardella & Nabout, João Carlos, 2023. "Trends in valuation approaches for cultural ecosystem services: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(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:14:y:2022:i:10:p:5936-:d:815120. 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.