IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i23p6623-d290199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecological Environment Vulnerability and Driving Force of Yangtze River Urban Agglomeration

Author

Listed:
  • Benhong Peng

    (Binjiang College, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Wuxi 214105, China
    School of Management Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044, China)

  • Qianqian Huang

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044, China)

  • Ehsan Elahi

    (School of Business, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China)

  • Guo Wei

    (Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of North Carolina at Pembroke, Pembroke, NC 28372, USA)

Abstract

The vulnerability of ecological environment threatens social and economic development. Recent studies failed to reveal the driving mechanism behind it, and there is little analysis on the spatial clustering characteristics of the vulnerability of urban agglomerations. Therefore, this article estimates ecological environment vulnerability in 2005, 2011, and 2017, determines Moran Index (MI) with spatial autocorrelation model, analyzes the spatial-temporal difference characteristics of ecological environment vulnerability of Yangtze River Urban Agglomeration and the spatial aggregation effect, and discusses its driving factors. The study results estimate that the overall vulnerability index of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomeration is in a mild fragile state. However, most fragile and slightly fragile cities are developing in the direction of moderate to severe vulnerability. The spatial agglomeration effect of the ecological environment vulnerability of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomeration is not obvious, and the effect of mutual ecological environment influence among cities is not obvious. Moreover, the driving factors of ecological environment vulnerability of Yangtze River city group changed from natural factors to social economic factors and then to policy factors. It is necessary to develop an ecological economy, coordinate the spatial agglomeration of urban agglomerations, and make balance the internal differences of urban agglomerations.

Suggested Citation

  • Benhong Peng & Qianqian Huang & Ehsan Elahi & Guo Wei, 2019. "Ecological Environment Vulnerability and Driving Force of Yangtze River Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:23:p:6623-:d:290199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/23/6623/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/23/6623/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Guiltinan, 2009. "Creative Destruction and Destructive Creations: Environmental Ethics and Planned Obsolescence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 19-28, May.
    2. Gu, Qiwei & Wang, Hongqi & Zheng, Yinan & Zhu, Jingwen & Li, Xiaoke, 2015. "Ecological footprint analysis for urban agglomeration sustainability in the middle stream of the Yangtze River," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 86-99.
    3. Wackernagel, Mathis & Onisto, Larry & Bello, Patricia & Callejas Linares, Alejandro & Susana Lopez Falfan, Ina & Mendez Garcia, Jesus & Isabel Suarez Guerrero, Ana & Guadalupe Suarez Guerrero, Ma., 1999. "National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 375-390, June.
    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. Yue Chen & Kangning Xiong & Xiaodong Ren & Cai Cheng, 2021. "Vulnerability Comparison between Karst and Non-Karst Nature Reserves—With a Special Reference to Guizhou Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Rong Li & Rui Han & Qianru Yu & Shuang Qi & Luo Guo, 2020. "Spatial Heterogeneous of Ecological Vulnerability in Arid and Semi-Arid Area: A Case of the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Jing Wang & Yuhong Song & Beichen Ge & Ying Zhou, 2023. "Dynamic Spatiotemporal Land Use Evolution in China’s Plateau Lake Basins in Response to Landscape Ecological Sensitivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Batara Surya & Despry Nur Annisa Ahmad & Harry Hardian Sakti & Hernita Sahban, 2020. "Land Use Change, Spatial Interaction, and Sustainable Development in the Metropolitan Urban Areas, South Sulawesi Province, Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-43, March.
    5. Zahra Ebrahimi Gatgash & Seyed Hamidreza Sadeghi, 2023. "Prioritization-based management of the watershed using health assessment analysis at sub-watershed scale," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 9673-9702, September.

    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. Chuxiong Deng & Zhen Liu & Rongrong Li & Ke Li, 2018. "Sustainability Evaluation Based on a Three-Dimensional Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Hunan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Yunhe Yin & Xiang Han & Shaohong Wu, 2017. "Spatial and Temporal Variations in the Ecological Footprints in Northwest China from 2005 to 2014," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Lu Wang & Bonoua Faye & Quanfeng Li & Yunkai Li, 2023. "A Spatio-Temporal Analysis of the Ecological Compensation for Cultivated Land in Northeast China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Das, Kallol & Patel, Jayesh D. & Sharma, Anuj & Shukla, Yupal, 2023. "Creativity in marketing: Examining the intellectual structure using scientometric analysis and topic modeling," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. Alvarez-Herranz, Agustin & Balsalobre-Lorente, Daniel & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Cantos, José María, 2017. "Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 386-397.
    6. Chen, B. & Chen, G.Q., 2007. "Modified ecological footprint accounting and analysis based on embodied exergy--a case study of the Chinese society 1981-2001," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 355-376, March.
    7. Yang Zhong & Aiwen Lin & Zhigao Zhou & Feiyan Chen, 2018. "Spatial Pattern Evolution and Optimization of Urban System in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China, Based on DMSP-OLS Night Light Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, October.
    8. Benjamin Leard, 2011. "Joan Martinez-Alier and Ingo Ropke (eds.): Recent developments in ecological economics (2 vols.)," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 161-178, July.
    9. Maria Serena Mancini & Mikel Evans & Katsunori Iha & Carla Danelutti & Alessandro Galli, 2018. "Assessing the Ecological Footprint of Ecotourism Packages: A Methodological Proposition," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-37, June.
    10. Rajan Varadarajan, 2017. "Innovating for sustainability: a framework for sustainable innovations and a model of sustainable innovations orientation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 14-36, January.
    11. Lect. Alexandra-Codru?a Popescu (Bîzoi) Ph. D, 2015. "Fast Fashion And Sustainable Supply Chain Management," Revista Tinerilor Economisti (The Young Economists Journal), University of Craiova, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 1(24), pages 29-40, APRIL.
    12. Dominique Roux & Marie Schill, 2019. "Waste prevention in practice: Confronting public discourses about reusing, reducing, and recycling with consumers' perceptions of wasting material possessions," Post-Print hal-02877091, HAL.
    13. Ella Furness & Harry Nelson, 2016. "Are human values and community participation key to climate adaptation? The case of community forest organisations in British Columbia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 243-259, March.
    14. Małgorzata Stachowiak & Jerzy Śleszyński, 2002. "How Big Is Ecological Footprint of the Polish Economy?," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 8.
    15. Kaiping Wang & Weiqi Wang & Niyi Zha & Yue Feng & Chenlan Qiu & Yunlu Zhang & Jia Ma & Rui Zhang, 2022. "Spatially Heterogeneity Response of Critical Ecosystem Service Capacity to Address Regional Development Risks to Rapid Urbanization: The Case of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-21, June.
    16. Kolcava, Dennis & Nguyen, Quynh & Bernauer, Thomas, 2019. "Does trade liberalization lead to environmental burden shifting in the global economy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 98-112.
    17. Jia, Junsong & Deng, Hongbing & Duan, Jing & Zhao, Jingzhu, 2009. "Analysis of the major drivers of the ecological footprint using the STIRPAT model and the PLS method--A case study in Henan Province, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2818-2824, September.
    18. Hua Liu & Dan-Yang Li & Rong Ma & Ming Ma, 2022. "Assessing the Ecological Risks Based on the Three-Dimensional Ecological Footprint Model in Gansu Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    19. Herendeen, Robert A. & Wildermuth, Todd, 2002. "Resource-based sustainability indicators: Chase County, Kansas, as example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 243-257, August.
    20. Fuyuan Wang & Kaiyong Wang, 2017. "Assessing the Effect of Eco-City Practices on Urban Sustainability Using an Extended Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, September.

    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:11:y:2019:i:23:p:6623-:d:290199. 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.