How Different Land Systems Lead to Discrepancy of Rural Population–Land Relationships: Case Study of Heilongjiang Province, China

IF 3.2 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Land Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI:10.3390/land13010038
Guoming Du, Ru Zhang, Yuheng Li, Mengqi Zhang, Bonoua Faye
{"title":"How Different Land Systems Lead to Discrepancy of Rural Population–Land Relationships: Case Study of Heilongjiang Province, China","authors":"Guoming Du, Ru Zhang, Yuheng Li, Mengqi Zhang, Bonoua Faye","doi":"10.3390/land13010038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are two types of land systems in China: collective-owned and state-owned. Under both systems, differences in land ownership have led to different land-use and management systems, resulting in urban–rural dual structures under the jurisdiction of local governments and urban–rural unitary structures in reclamation areas of the state-owned land system. This has significantly changed the relationship between the rural population and land, which has been intensified by rapid urbanization and industrialization. Therefore, based on the rural population and remote sensing data, this study uses the Tapio decoupling model to determine the relationships between the rural population and residential land under different land systems. The main results indicate that the evolution of the rural population and residential land area under different land systems presents an obvious inverse relationship. From 1995 to 2020, under the jurisdiction of the local government, the land area and population of rural dwellers declined, with the decline in population being faster than that in residential areas. At the same time, the spatial agglomeration of residential areas from the middle to the south of the province expanded. In contrast, the population and residential land area showed significant reverse changes in state-owned domains. Rural residential land area declined, and the rural population increased, most notably in the eastern region. Furthermore, strong negative decoupling between the rural population and rural residential land was observed in areas under local government jurisdiction (accounting for 89.61%), meaning that the population declined while the living area increased, which is not conducive to increasing intensive land-use and productivity. Simultaneously, in state-owned domains, only 33.33% of the rural population and residential land areas presented the above-mentioned negative decoupling, with the remaining 66.67% being coordinated. After 2010, due to the socio-economic gap, the proportion of coordination in local government jurisdiction areas continued to decrease, whereas coordination in reclamation areas remained stable. Therefore, the data suggest that a single land allocation and governance regime across urban and rural domains under the state-owned land system is more helpful in enabling populations and efficient land-use. This suggests that, in the future, it will be helpful to consider promoting the effective integration of urban and rural land markets, optimizing the allocation of urban and rural land resources, and enhancing the reform of the rural land system in order to realize synergistic interactions between the urban and rural populations and construction land in Heilongjiang Province.","PeriodicalId":37702,"journal":{"name":"Land","volume":"8 5‐6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/land13010038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There are two types of land systems in China: collective-owned and state-owned. Under both systems, differences in land ownership have led to different land-use and management systems, resulting in urban–rural dual structures under the jurisdiction of local governments and urban–rural unitary structures in reclamation areas of the state-owned land system. This has significantly changed the relationship between the rural population and land, which has been intensified by rapid urbanization and industrialization. Therefore, based on the rural population and remote sensing data, this study uses the Tapio decoupling model to determine the relationships between the rural population and residential land under different land systems. The main results indicate that the evolution of the rural population and residential land area under different land systems presents an obvious inverse relationship. From 1995 to 2020, under the jurisdiction of the local government, the land area and population of rural dwellers declined, with the decline in population being faster than that in residential areas. At the same time, the spatial agglomeration of residential areas from the middle to the south of the province expanded. In contrast, the population and residential land area showed significant reverse changes in state-owned domains. Rural residential land area declined, and the rural population increased, most notably in the eastern region. Furthermore, strong negative decoupling between the rural population and rural residential land was observed in areas under local government jurisdiction (accounting for 89.61%), meaning that the population declined while the living area increased, which is not conducive to increasing intensive land-use and productivity. Simultaneously, in state-owned domains, only 33.33% of the rural population and residential land areas presented the above-mentioned negative decoupling, with the remaining 66.67% being coordinated. After 2010, due to the socio-economic gap, the proportion of coordination in local government jurisdiction areas continued to decrease, whereas coordination in reclamation areas remained stable. Therefore, the data suggest that a single land allocation and governance regime across urban and rural domains under the state-owned land system is more helpful in enabling populations and efficient land-use. This suggests that, in the future, it will be helpful to consider promoting the effective integration of urban and rural land markets, optimizing the allocation of urban and rural land resources, and enhancing the reform of the rural land system in order to realize synergistic interactions between the urban and rural populations and construction land in Heilongjiang Province.
不同的土地制度如何导致农村人口与土地关系的差异:中国黑龙江省案例研究
中国有两种土地制度:集体所有制和国有土地制度。在这两种制度下,土地所有权的不同导致了土地使用和管理制度的不同,形成了地方政府管辖下的城乡二元结构和国有土地制度下垦区的城乡单元结构。这极大地改变了农村人口与土地的关系,而快速的城市化和工业化又加剧了这种关系。因此,本研究以农村人口和遥感数据为基础,利用塔皮奥解耦模型确定了不同土地制度下农村人口与宅基地的关系。主要结果表明,不同土地制度下农村人口与居住用地面积的演变呈现出明显的反比关系。从 1995 年到 2020 年,在地方政府的管辖范围内,农村居民的土地面积和人口均有所下降,其中人口的下降速度快于宅基地的下降速度。与此同时,居住区的空间集聚从省内中部向南部扩展。相比之下,国有领域的人口和居住用地面积则出现了明显的反向变化。农村居住用地面积减少,农村人口增加,这在东部地区最为明显。此外,在地方政府管辖范围内(占 89.61%),农村人口与农村宅基地之间出现了强烈的负脱钩,这意味着人口减少而居住面积增加,不利于提高土地的集约利用率和生产力。与此同时,在国有土地上,只有 33.33%的农村人口和居住用地呈现上述负脱钩,其余 66.67%的农村人口和居住用地得到了协调。2010 年以后,受社会经济差距的影响,地方政府辖区的统筹比例持续下降,而垦区的统筹比例保持稳定。因此,数据表明,在国有土地制度下,城乡统一的土地配置和治理制度更有助于实现人口和土地的高效利用。这表明,未来应考虑促进城乡土地市场的有效整合,优化城乡土地资源配置,加强农村土地制度改革,以实现黑龙江省城乡人口与建设用地的协同互动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Land
Land ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-Nature and Landscape Conservation
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
23.10%
发文量
1927
期刊介绍: Land is an international and cross-disciplinary, peer-reviewed, open access journal of land system science, landscape, soil–sediment–water systems, urban study, land–climate interactions, water–energy–land–food (WELF) nexus, biodiversity research and health nexus, land modelling and data processing, ecosystem services, and multifunctionality and sustainability etc., published monthly online by MDPI. The International Association for Landscape Ecology (IALE), European Land-use Institute (ELI), and Landscape Institute (LI) are affiliated with Land, and their members receive a discount on the article processing charge.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信