IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i10p1011-d643785.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of Potential Land-Use Conflicts between Agricultural and Ecological Space in an Ecologically Fragile Area of Southeastern China

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Zhang

    (Institute of Applied Remote Sensing and Information Technology, College of Environmental and Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
    Key Laboratory of Urban Land Resources Monitoring and Simulation, Ministry of Natural Resources, Shenzhen 518000, China
    Technology Innovation Center for Land Spatial Eco-restoration in Metropolitan Area, Ministry of Natural Resources, Shanghai 200003, China)

  • Yan Chen

    (Institute of Applied Remote Sensing and Information Technology, College of Environmental and Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Congmou Zhu

    (Institute of Applied Remote Sensing and Information Technology, College of Environmental and Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Bingbing Huang

    (Institute of Applied Remote Sensing and Information Technology, College of Environmental and Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Muye Gan

    (Institute of Applied Remote Sensing and Information Technology, College of Environmental and Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

Abstract

In the context of ensuring national food security, high-intensity agricultural production and construction activities have aggravated the conflicts between agricultural and ecological spaces in ecologically fragile areas, which have become one of the most important factors hindering regional sustainable development. This study took Lin’an District, a typical hilly region of southeastern China, as an example. By constructing a landscape ecological risk evaluation model, land-use conflicts between agricultural and ecological spaces were identified, spatial autocorrelation and topographic gradient characteristics were analyzed, and land-use conflict trade-off mechanisms were proposed. During 2008 and 2018, the degree of land-use conflict in Lin’an District displayed an increasing trend, and the proportion of severe conflicts increased obviously. Slope is the main factor affecting land-use conflicts in a hilly region and shows a negative correlation, mainly because areas with flat terrain are more conducive to human activities. Based on the characteristics of land-use conflicts in Lin’an District, conflict trade-off mechanisms were proposed to provide a theoretical basis and practical support for land-use conflict management. Our study provides scientific evidence for sustainable land-use planning and ecological management in ecologically fragile areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Zhang & Yan Chen & Congmou Zhu & Bingbing Huang & Muye Gan, 2021. "Identification of Potential Land-Use Conflicts between Agricultural and Ecological Space in an Ecologically Fragile Area of Southeastern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:10:p:1011-:d:643785
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/10/1011/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/10/1011/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deininger, Klaus & Castagnini, Raffaella, 2006. "Incidence and impact of land conflict in Uganda," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 321-345, July.
    2. Giacomo Luca & Petros Sekeris, 2012. "Land inequality and conflict intensity," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 119-135, January.
    3. Kachele, H. & Dabbert, S., 2002. "An economic approach for a better understanding of conflicts between farmers and nature conservationists--an application of the decision support system MODAM to the Lower Odra Valley National Park," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 241-255, November.
    4. Jiahui Fan & Ya Wang & Zhen Zhou & Nanshan You & Jijun Meng, 2016. "Dynamic Ecological Risk Assessment and Management of Land Use in the Middle Reaches of the Heihe River Based on Landscape Patterns and Spatial Statistics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-15, June.
    5. Lu, C. H. & van Ittersum, M. K. & Rabbinge, R., 2004. "A scenario exploration of strategic land use options for the Loess Plateau in northern China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 145-170, February.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/12867 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. 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).
    8. Gang Lin & Dong Jiang & Jingying Fu & Chenglong Cao & Dongwei Zhang, 2020. "Spatial Conflict of Production–Living–Ecological Space and Sustainable-Development Scenario Simulation in Yangtze River Delta Agglomerations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-11, March.
    9. Amman, Hans M & Duraiappah, Anantha Kumar, 2001. "Modeling Instrumental Rationality, Land Tenure and Conflict Resolution," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 18(3), pages 251-257, December.
    10. Orr, Alastair & Mwale, Blessings, 2001. "Adapting to Adjustment: Smallholder Livelihood Strategies in Southern Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 1325-1343, August.
    11. YANG, Yongfang & ZHU, Lianqi, 2013. "Theories and Diagnostic Methods of Land Use Conflicts," Asian Agricultural Research, USA-China Science and Culture Media Corporation, vol. 5(04), pages 1-6, April.
    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. Xiangnan Fan & Yuning Cheng & Yicheng Li, 2023. "Multi-Scenario Land Use Simulation and Land Use Conflict Assessment Based on the CLUMondo Model: A Case Study of Liyang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-26, April.
    2. Jiao Chen & Liwei Zhang & Shan Zhao & Hua Zong, 2023. "Assessing Land-Use Conflict Potential and Its Correlation with LULC Based on the Perspective of Multi-Functionality and Landscape Complexity: The Case of Chengdu, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Guanglong Dong & Zhonghao Liu & Yuanzhao Niu & Wenya Jiang, 2022. "Identification of Land Use Conflicts in Shandong Province from an Ecological Security Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Maciej J. Nowak & Agnieszka Brelik & Anna Oleńczuk-Paszel & Monika Śpiewak-Szyjka & Justyna Przedańska, 2023. "Spatial Conflicts concerning Wind Power Plants—A Case Study of Spatial Plans in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-20, January.
    5. Gang Lin & Dong Jiang & Jingying Fu & Yi Zhao, 2022. "A Review on the Overall Optimization of Production–Living–Ecological Space: Theoretical Basis and Conceptual Framework," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, February.
    6. Amir H. Aghmashhadi & Samaneh Zahedi & Azadeh Kazemi & Christine Fürst & Giuseppe T. Cirella, 2022. "Conflict Analysis of Physical Industrial Land Development Policy Using Game Theory and Graph Model for Conflict Resolution in Markazi Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Yanru Zhao & Xiaomin Zhao & Xinyi Huang & Jiaxin Guo & Guohui Chen, 2022. "Identifying a Period of Spatial Land Use Conflicts and Their Driving Forces in the Pearl River Delta," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Xiaoqing Zhao & Yifei Xu & Qian Wang & Junwei Pu & Xiaoqian Shi & Pei Huang & Zexian Gu, 2022. "Sustainable Agricultural Development Models of the Ecologically Vulnerable Karst Areas in Southeast Yunnan from the Perspective of Human–Earth Areal System," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-19, July.

    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. Yanru Zhao & Xiaomin Zhao & Xinyi Huang & Jiaxin Guo & Guohui Chen, 2022. "Identifying a Period of Spatial Land Use Conflicts and Their Driving Forces in the Pearl River Delta," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Guoqiang Qiu & Yinghong Wang & Shanshan Guo & Qian Niu & Lin Qin & Di Zhu & Yunlong Gong, 2022. "Assessment and Spatial-Temporal Evolution Analysis of Land Use Conflict within Urban Spatial Zoning: Case of the Su-Xi-Chang Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Mugizi, Francisco M.P. & Matsumoto, Tomoya, 2021. "From conflict to conflicts: War-induced displacement, land conflicts, and agricultural productivity in post-war Northern Uganda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Guanglong Dong & Zhonghao Liu & Yuanzhao Niu & Wenya Jiang, 2022. "Identification of Land Use Conflicts in Shandong Province from an Ecological Security Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Yang Zheng & Linlin Cheng & Yifang Wang, 2022. "Measuring the Spatial Conflict of Resource-Based Cities and Its Coupling Coordination Relationship with Land Use," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, September.
    7. Aragón, Fernando M. & Restuccia, Diego & Rud, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Are small farms really more productive than large farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Houssa, Romain & Verpoorten, Marijke, 2015. "The Unintended Consequence of an Export Ban: Evidence from Benin’s Shrimp Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 138-150.
    9. Jiaxing Cui & Xuesong Kong & Jing Chen & Jianwei Sun & Yuanyuan Zhu, 2021. "Spatially Explicit Evaluation and Driving Factor Identification of Land Use Conflict in Yangtze River Economic Belt," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-24, January.
    10. Djimoudjiel, Djekonbe & Tchoffo Tameko, Gautier, 2019. "Land conflicts and land tenure effects on agriculture productivity in Chad," MPRA Paper 97696, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Leakey, Roger & Kranjac-Berisavljevic, Gordana & Caron, Patrick & Craufurd, Peter & Martin, Adrienne M. & McDonald, Andy & Abedini, Walter & Afiff, Suraya & Bakurin, Ndey & Bass, Steve & Hilbeck, Ange, 2009. "Impacts of AKST on development and sustainability goals," Book Chapters,, International Water Management Institute.
    12. Astrid Sneyers, 2017. "Food, Drought and Conflict Evidence from a Case-Study on Somalia," HiCN Working Papers 252, Households in Conflict Network.
    13. Ali, Daniel Ayalew & Deininger, Klaus & Goldstein, Markus, 2014. "Environmental and gender impacts of land tenure regularization in Africa: Pilot evidence from Rwanda," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 262-275.
    14. Xiaofang Sun & Chao Yu & Junbang Wang & Meng Wang, 2020. "The Intensity Analysis of Production Living Ecological Land in Shandong Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Habibullah Magsi & Andre Torr & Yansui Liu & M. Javed Sheikh, 2017. "Land Use Conflicts in the Developing Countries: Proximate Driving Forces and Preventive Measures," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 56(1), pages 19-30.
    16. Bao Meng & Shaoyao Zhang & Wei Deng & Li Peng & Peng Zhou & Hao Zhang, 2023. "Identification and Analysis of Territorial Spatial Utilization Conflicts in Yibin Based on Multidimensional Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, May.
    17. Klaus Deininger & Daniel Ayalew Ali & Takashi Yamano, 2008. "Legal Knowledge and Economic Development: The Case of Land Rights in Uganda," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(4), pages 593-619.
    18. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    19. Ponsioen, Thomas C. & Hengsdijk, Huib & Wolf, Joost & van Ittersum, Martin K. & Rotter, Reimund P. & Son, Tran Thuc & Laborte, Alice G., 2006. "TechnoGIN, a tool for exploring and evaluating resource use efficiency of cropping systems in East and Southeast Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 80-100, January.
    20. Ghebru, Hosaena, 2015. "Is There a Merit to the Continuum Tenure Approach? A Case of Demand for Land Rights Formulation in Rural Mozambique," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211683, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:10:p:1011-:d:643785. 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.