IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i9p1821-d1241519.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Construction of the Landscape- and Village-Integrated Green Governance System Based on the Entropy Method: A Study from China

Author

Listed:
  • Jinsong Zhang

    (Accounting School, Harbin University of Commerce, Harbin 150028, China)

  • Yiding Wang

    (Accounting School, Harbin University of Commerce, Harbin 150028, China)

Abstract

Improving the landscape- and village-integrated green governance (LVIGE) is currently a problem faced by various countries. China has also put forward the revitalization strategy of “rural development, the environment is the background color”. How to judge and evaluate the landscape- and village-integrated green governance (LVIGE) is the main research purpose of this study. This study is based on the rural data from 2012 to 2021 in China to construct an evaluation system, which mainly includes three dimensions: economic production construction, social and cultural construction, and ecological environment construction. This study uses the relevant entropy method to calculate the landscape- and village-integrated green governance (LVIGE), and the following conclusions are drawn: There is a significant difference in the data on the ecological factors among rural areas in various provinces of China, and there is a gap in green governance. Many provinces still do not pay sufficient attention to rural development, especially the problem of rural green governance. Northeast China ranks at the bottom in terms of economic production construction, social and cultural construction, and ecological environment construction with a large gap. The rapid improvement of the landscape- and village-integrated green governance (LVIGE) is inseparable from the national policies. Therefore, to improve the development of the landscape- and village-integrated green governance (LVIGE), not only national policy support is needed, but also the local government should pay full attention to the development of the rural economy, social culture, and ecology, especially the construction of an ecological environment. The construction of the evaluation system of the LVIGE not only corresponds to the national policy, but also promotes the provinces’ attention to the environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Jinsong Zhang & Yiding Wang, 2023. "The Construction of the Landscape- and Village-Integrated Green Governance System Based on the Entropy Method: A Study from China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:9:p:1821-:d:1241519
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/9/1821/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/9/1821/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sofia Nikolaidou & Tanja Klöti & Simone Tappert & Matthias Drilling, 2016. "Urban Gardening and Green Space Governance: Towards New Collaborative Planning Practices," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 1(1), pages 5-19.
    2. Xing Niu & Fenghua Liao & Ziming Liu & Guancen Wu, 2022. "Spatial–Temporal Characteristics and Driving Mechanisms of Land–Use Transition from the Perspective of Urban–Rural Transformation Development: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Catherine C. Benjamin, 1994. "The growing importance of diversification activities for French farm households [L'importance croissante des activités de diversification des ménages agricoles français]," Post-Print hal-02847751, HAL.
    4. Liangliang GAO & Cuiping MA & Junxia ZENG & Bin WANG & Yue LI, 2019. "How Did Poverty Reduction in China Contribute to the World? Viewing from the Implementation of the UN MDGs and SDGs," Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies (CJUES), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 1-29, March.
    5. Thi Thu Huong Hoang & Anton Van Rompaey & Patrick Meyfroidt & Gerard Govers & Kim Chi Vu & An Thinh Nguyen & Luc Hens & Veerle Vanacker, 2020. "Impact of tourism development on the local livelihoods and land cover change in the Northern Vietnamese highlands," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 1371-1395, February.
    6. Catherine Benjamin, 1994. "The growing importance of diversification activities for French farm households," Post-Print hal-01937035, HAL.
    7. Daimou Wei & Zhexiao Wang & Bin Zhang, 2021. "Traditional Village Landscape Integration Based on Social Network Analysis: A Case Study of the Yuan River Basin in South-Western China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Lingyu Kong & Xiaodong Xu & Wei Wang & Jinxiu Wu & Meiying Zhang, 2021. "Comprehensive Evaluation and Quantitative Research on the Living Protection of Traditional Villages from the Perspective of “Production–Living–Ecology”," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-25, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jan Fałkowski & Maciej Jakubowski & Paweł Strawiński, 2014. "Returns from income strategies in rural Poland," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 22(1), pages 139-178, January.
    2. Diogo Ferraz & Fernanda P. S. Falguera & Enzo B. Mariano & Dominik Hartmann, 2021. "Linking Economic Complexity, Diversification, and Industrial Policy with Sustainable Development: A Structured Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-29, January.
    3. Mirosław Biczkowski & Aleksandra Jezierska-Thöle & Roman Rudnicki, 2021. "The Impact of RDP Measures on the Diversification of Agriculture and Rural Development—Seeking Additional Livelihoods: The Case of Poland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-26, March.
    4. Mukherjee, Swayambhu & Kar, Saibal, 2020. "Leveraging Non-Farm Income: Micro-evidence of Occupational Choice for Rural Households in India," MPRA Paper 109940, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. M. Farzana Halim & Carla Barbieri & Duarte B. Morais & Susan Jakes & Erin Seekamp, 2020. "Beyond Economic Earnings: The Holistic Meaning of Success for Women in Agritourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, June.
    6. Bouchakour, Radhia & Saad, Mohammed, 2020. "Farm and farmer characteristics and off-farm work: evidence from Algeria," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(2), April.
    7. Chaplin, Hannah & Davidova, Sophia & Gorton, Matthew, 2003. "Agricultural Adjustment And The Diversification Of Farm Households In Central Europe," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25843, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Sondell, Erik & Francès Tudel, Gemma & Rosell Foxà, Jordi & Wibergs, Ulf, 2000. "The Measurement Of On-Farm Diversification," ERSA conference papers ersa00p245, European Regional Science Association.
    9. Vroege, Willemijn & Meraner, Manuela & Polman, Nico & Storm, Hugo & Heijman, Wim & Finger, Robert, 2020. "Beyond the single farm – A spatial econometric analysis of spill-overs in farm diversification in the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    10. Frank Ellis, 2000. "The Determinants of Rural Livelihood Diversification in Developing Countries," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 289-302, May.
    11. Banski, Jerzy, 2003. "Transforming the functional structure of Poland’s rural areas," Rural Areas and Development, European Rural Development Network (ERDN), vol. 1, pages 1-19.
    12. Fertő, Imre, 2002. "A mezőgazdasági termelés szerkezetének változásai a fejlett országokban, I. Miért a családi gazdaság a meghatározó üzemforma a fejlett országok mezőgazdaságában? [Changes in the structure of agricu," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 574-596.
    13. Markus LIPS & Dierk SCHMID & Pierrick JAN, 2013. "Labour-use pattern on Swiss dairy farms," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 59(4), pages 149-159.
    14. Alexis Annes & Wynne Wright, 2016. "Value-added agriculture: a context for the empowerment of French women farmers?," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 97(3), pages 185-201, November.
    15. Chaplin, Hannah & Davidova, Sophia & Gorton, Matthew, 2002. "Non-Agricultural Diversification of Farm Households and Corporate Farms in Central Europe," Workshop on the Farm Household-Firm Unit: Its Importance in Agriculture and Implications for Statistics, April 12-13,2002, Wye Campus, Imperial College 15728, International Agricultural Policy Reform and Adjustment Project (IAPRAP).
    16. Peng Zeng & Sihui Wu & Zongyao Sun & Yujia Zhu & Yuqi Chen & Zhi Qiao & Liangwa Cai, 2021. "Does Rural Production–Living–Ecological Spaces Have a Preference for Regional Endowments? A Case of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, November.
    17. Yangyang Yuan & Yuchen Yang & Ruijun Wang & Yuning Cheng, 2022. "Predicting Rural Ecological Space Boundaries in the Urban Fringe Area Based on Bayesian Network: A Case Study in Nanjing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, October.
    18. Jahrl, Ingrid & Moschitz, Heidrun & Cavin, Joëlle Salomon, 2021. "The role of food gardening in addressing urban sustainability – A new framework for analysing policy approaches," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    19. Efrat Eizenberg & Yosef Jabareen, 2017. "Social Sustainability: A New Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, January.
    20. Mariana Nae & Liliana Dumitrache & Bogdan Suditu & Elena Matei, 2019. "Housing Activism Initiatives and Land-Use Conflicts: Pathways for Participatory Planning and Urban Sustainable Development in Bucharest City, Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-26, November.

    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:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:9:p:1821-:d:1241519. 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.