IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i11p1877-d950602.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Urban Expansion Triggers Spatio-Temporal Differentiation of Systemic Risk in Suburban Rural Areas: A Case Study of Tianjin, China

Author

Listed:
  • Jian Tian

    (School of Architecture, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

  • Suiping Zeng

    (School of Architecture, Tianjin Chengjian University, Tianjin 300384, China)

  • Jian Zeng

    (School of Architecture, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

  • Sen Wang

    (School of Architecture, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

Abstract

Rapid urban expansion has strongly impacted rural development in China’s suburbs. The increasing probability of socio-ecosystem hazards, such as the shrinking and fragmentation of ecological space, the outflow of labor force, the disintegration of traditional society, and the decline in collective economy has become a systemic risk restricting the sustainable development of rural areas in the suburbs. At present, the influence of urban expansion on rural systemic risk in the suburbs is not clear, which is not conducive to putting forward differentiated and targeted strategies for rural revitalization. Therefore, in this study, we propose the ecological, industrial, social, and livelihood elements of rural systemic risk in the suburbs and construct a multi-dimensional risk resistance analysis framework involving functionality, stability, and sustainability. Taking 93 villages in the western suburbs of Tianjin as an example, and using spatial econometric methods such as remote sensing interpretation, GIS analysis, multiple linear regression, and random forest model testing, we analyze the relationship between external transportation construction, urban employment attraction, construction of land growth, rural risk factors, and the dimension of risk resistance. Finally, the influence of urban expansion on the spatial–temporal differentiation of rural systemic risk and the risk management strategy are discussed. The results show that the difference in the urban expansion intensities is the main factor of the spatial differentiation of rural systemic risk in the suburbs. With the acceleration of the land replacement rate between urban and rural areas, the proportion of urban construction of land is increasing, leading to various degrees of change in the rural land use pattern and the ecological security pattern. Meanwhile, because of the urban employment attraction, part of the rural labor force continues to decrease, leading to the spatial differentiation of rural industrial risks and social risks aggravated. Precise risk management strategies are put forward according to the systemic risks in different types of villages. In villages with a high proportion of urban construction land and inefficient land consolidation, ecological restoration projects should be carried out. For villages severely divided by transit roads, internal spatial connections should be strengthened by constructing public transport. For villages with good accessibility, the allocation of rural non-agricultural industries and service facilities should be strengthened to mitigate the impact of urban expansion on the rural social structure. From the perspective of risk management, the research results will provide a basis for making decisions regarding rural public policymaking and spatial resource allocation in the suburbs of developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Jian Tian & Suiping Zeng & Jian Zeng & Sen Wang, 2022. "How Urban Expansion Triggers Spatio-Temporal Differentiation of Systemic Risk in Suburban Rural Areas: A Case Study of Tianjin, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-25, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:11:p:1877-:d:950602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/11/1877/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/11/1877/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mega Febrina Kusumo Astuti & Wiwandari Handayani, 2020. "Livelihood vulnerability in Tambak Lorok, Semarang: an assessment of mixed rural-urban neighborhood [Vulnerabilität des Lebensunterhalts in Tambak Lorok, Semarang: Bewertung einer gemischt ländlich," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 40(2), pages 137-157, October.
    2. Zhao, Pengjun & Wan, Jie, 2021. "Land use and travel burden of residents in urban fringe and rural areas: An evaluation of urban-rural integration initiatives in Beijing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    3. Ma, Wenqiu & Jiang, Guanghui & Zhang, Ruijuan & Li, Yuling & Jiang, Xiaoguang, 2018. "Achieving rural spatial restructuring in China: A suitable framework to understand how structural transitions in rural residential land differ across peri-urban interface?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 583-593.
    4. Nani Maiya Sujakhu & Sailesh Ranjitkar & Jun He & Dietrich Schmidt-Vogt & Yufang Su & Jianchu Xu, 2019. "Assessing the Livelihood Vulnerability of Rural Indigenous Households to Climate Changes in Central Nepal, Himalaya," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Zhu, Fengkai & Zhang, Fengrong & Ke, Xinli, 2018. "Rural industrial restructuring in China’s metropolitan suburbs: Evidence from the land use transition of rural enterprises in suburban Beijing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 121-129.
    6. Timothy Sim & Ziqiang Han & Chunlan Guo & Jocelyn Lau & Junlei Yu & Guiwu Su, 2021. "Disaster preparedness, perceived community resilience, and place of rural villages in northwest China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 108(1), pages 907-923, August.
    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. Supannika Lursinsap & Ruth Sirisunyaluck & Suraphol Sreshthaputra & Juthathip Chalermphol, 2023. "Factors Influencing the Chance of Inheriting the Family Farming Career among Heirs in the Upper Northern Region of Thailand in the Crisis of Farming Labor Decline," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Liuwen Liao & Enpu Ma & Hualou Long & Xiaojun Peng, 2022. "Land Use Transition and Its Ecosystem Resilience Response in China during 1990–2020," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Kaiming Li & Kaishun Li & Yong Liu & Liying Yue & Xiji Jiang, 2023. "Transition Characteristics and Driving Mechanisms of Rural Settlements in Suburban Villages of Megacities under Policy Intervention: A Case Study of Dayu Village in Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-26, October.

    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. Libang Ma & Xijuan Cui & Yao Yao & Shichun Liu, 2021. "Gradient Difference of Structure of Rural Construction Land in Loess Hilly Region: A Case Study of Yuzhong County, Gansu Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, March.
    2. Su, Kangchuan & Hu, Baoqing & Shi, Kaifang & Zhang, Zhongxun & Yang, Qingyuan, 2019. "The structural and functional evolution of rural homesteads in mountainous areas: A case study of Sujiaying village in Yunnan province, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    3. Jin, Hong & Li, Heping & Lee, Jia & Sun, Weitong, 2023. "Simulation analysis of rural land use using rate of change driven by population and economic dynamics - A case study of Huangguashan village in Chongqing, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 475(C).
    4. Changchun Feng & Hao Zhang & Liang Xiao & Yongpei Guo, 2022. "Land Use Change and Its Driving Factors in the Rural–Urban Fringe of Beijing: A Production–Living–Ecological Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Peng Wang & Yihui He & Kengcheng Zheng, 2023. "Effects of the Implementation of the Broadband China Policy (BCP) on House Prices: Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Sanjib Mondal & Pritam Ghosh & Pratima Rohatgi, 2023. "Village‐level livelihood security: A case study on a wasteland‐dominated forest fringe region of rural India," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 1019-1036, June.
    7. Xia, Min & Zhang, Yanyuan & Zhang, Zihong & Liu, Jingjie & Ou, Weixin & Zou, Wei, 2020. "Modeling agricultural land use change in a rapid urbanizing town: Linking the decisions of government, peasant households and enterprises," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    8. Hua Xia & Shidong Ge & Xinyu Zhang & Gunwoo Kim & Yakai Lei & Yang Liu, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Green Infrastructure in an Agricultural Peri-Urban Area: A Case Study of Baisha District in Zhengzhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Cheng, Mingyang & Yansui Liu, & Zhou, Yang, 2019. "Measuring the symbiotic development of rural housing and industry: A case study of Fuping County in the Taihang Mountains in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 307-316.
    10. Shangkun Yu & Yi Miao & Mengcheng Li & Xiaoming Ding & Chengxin Wang & Wangsheng Dou, 2022. "Theoretical Development Model for Rural Settlements against Rural Shrinkage: An Empirical Study on Pingyin County, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, August.
    11. Danielle Emma Johnson & Karen Fisher & Meg Parsons, 2022. "Diversifying Indigenous Vulnerability and Adaptation: An Intersectional Reading of Māori Women’s Experiences of Health, Wellbeing, and Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-40, May.
    12. Malin Song & Weiliang Tao, 2022. "Coupling and coordination analysis of China's regional urban‐rural integration and land‐use efficiency," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 1384-1413, September.
    13. Sui Zhang & Minghao Wang & Zhao Yang & Baolei Zhang, 2021. "A Novel Predictor for Micro-Scale COVID-19 Risk Modeling: An Empirical Study from a Spatiotemporal Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Jia Gao & Ge Song & Shuhan Liu, 2022. "Factors influencing farmers’ willingness and behavior choices to withdraw from rural homesteads in China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 112-131, March.
    15. Ma, Wenqiu & Jiang, Guanghui & Chen, Yunhao & Qu, Yanbo & Zhou, Tao & Li, Wenqing, 2020. "How feasible is regional integration for reconciling land use conflicts across the urban–rural interface? Evidence from Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei metropolitan region in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    16. Boshe, Fredrick & Venus, Terese & Vrachioli, Maria & Khatri-Chhetri, Arun & Sauer, Johannes, 2021. "Measuring Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Under Climate Variability: A Micro Study from Nepal," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315039, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Liboster Mwadzingeni & Raymond Mugandani & Paramu L. Mafongoya, 2021. "Assessing Vulnerability to Climate Change in Smallholder Irrigation Schemes of Zimbabwe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-18, September.
    18. Mei Zhang & Jia Tang & Jun Gao, 2023. "Examining the Effects of Built Environments and Individual Characteristics on Commuting Time under Spatial Heterogeneity: An Empirical Study in China Using HLM," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, August.
    19. Yi Lou & Guanyi Yin & Yue Xin & Shuai Xie & Guanghao Li & Shuang Liu & Xiaoming Wang, 2021. "Recessive Transition Mechanism of Arable Land Use Based on the Perspective of Coupling Coordination of Input–Output: A Case Study of 31 Provinces in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-27, January.
    20. Zhiheng Yang & Nengneng Shen & Yanbo Qu & Bailin Zhang, 2021. "Association between Rural Land Use Transition and Urban–Rural Integration Development: From 2009 to 2018 Based on County-Level Data in Shandong Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, 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:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:11:p:1877-:d:950602. 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.