IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i2p124-d1324604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Household Dynamics on Land-Use Change in China: Past Experiences and Future Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Yaxue Luo

    (School of Geographical Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai 201100, China)

  • Ruishan Chen

    (School of Geographical Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai 201100, China
    School of Design, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200040, China)

  • Bo Xiong

    (School of Geography and Tourism, Huizhou University, Huizhou 516007, China)

  • Nan Jia

    (Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA)

  • Xiaona Guo

    (School of Design, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200040, China)

  • Chenglong Yin

    (School of Geographical Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai 201100, China)

  • Wen Song

    (School of Design, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200040, China)

Abstract

Population is the main driver of land-system and environmental change. However, population is usually treated as a variable that only considers the population number, and multi-dimensional population structure is largely ignored. There has been a systematic transition of population structure in the past several decades, including changes in household structure, increasing aging populations, increasing divorce rates, and increasing human migration. All of these changes have direct or indirect impacts on land use and environmental issues. Here, taking China as an example and using statistical analysis, namely the Mann–Kendall trend test and a land-use-transition matrix, we examine the relationship between household dynamics and land-use change in China by examining changes in household structure and land-use changes in China between 1980 and 2020. The results show the following three groups of findings. (1) The number of households increased by 130.95% from 1980 to 2020, while the population only increased by 42.83%; the size of households decreased from 4.41 to 2.62 in China from 1982 to 2020; and the household dynamics varied from province to province, which is affected by urbanization rate and economic development. (2) Birth rates, divorce rates, population aging, and migration all affect household structure, which directly or indirectly affect changes in land-use systems. (3) The changes in China’s land use are interlinked and interact with changes in household structure, which is evident in the increase in Residential land use and the abandonment of arable land. The rising household number increased the area of urban and rural settlement, leading to the fragmentation of cultivated land and the reduction of ecological land. To regulate land-use change for sustainable development, future land-use planning should take into account the effect of household dynamics and should reduce the negative effects of household dynamics on land systems and environmental change.

Suggested Citation

  • Yaxue Luo & Ruishan Chen & Bo Xiong & Nan Jia & Xiaona Guo & Chenglong Yin & Wen Song, 2024. "The Impact of Household Dynamics on Land-Use Change in China: Past Experiences and Future Implications," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:2:p:124-:d:1324604
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/2/124/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/2/124/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jianguo Liu & Gretchen C. Daily & Paul R. Ehrlich & Gary W. Luck, 2003. "Effects of household dynamics on resource consumption and biodiversity," Nature, Nature, vol. 421(6922), pages 530-533, January.
    2. Wang, Degen & Zhu, Yujia & Zhao, Meifeng & Lv, Qingyue, 2021. "Multi-dimensional hollowing characteristics of traditional villages and its influence mechanism based on the micro-scale: A case study of Dongcun Village in Suzhou, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    3. Judith Blake, 1966. "Ideal family size among white Americans: A quarter of a century’s evidence," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 3(1), pages 154-173, March.
    4. Kramer, Daniel Boyd & Urquhart, Gerald & Schmitt, Kristen, 2009. "Globalization and the connection of remote communities: A review of household effects and their biodiversity implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2897-2909, October.
    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. Yang, Hongbo & Dietz, Thomas & Yang, Wu & Zhang, Jindong & Liu, Jianguo, 2018. "Changes in Human Well-being and Rural Livelihoods Under Natural Disasters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 184-194.
    2. Juan Antonio Duro & Jordi Teixidó-Figueras & Emilio Padilla, 2017. "The Causal Factors of International Inequality in $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 Emissions Per Capita: A Regression-Based Inequality Decomposition Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(4), pages 683-700, August.
    3. Vincent Sennes & Jacques Breillat & Francis Ribeyre & Sandrine Gombert, 2009. "Local policies for reducing the ecological impact of households: the case study of a suburban area in France," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 1031-1049, October.
    4. Xue, Jin, 2014. "Is eco-village/urban village the future of a degrowth society? An urban planner's perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 130-138.
    5. Lolagene Coombs, 1979. "Reproductive goals and achieved fertility: A fifteen-year perspective," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 16(4), pages 523-534, November.
    6. Goulden, Murray & Ryley, Tim & Dingwall, Robert, 2014. "Beyond ‘predict and provide’: UK transport, the growth paradigm and climate change," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 139-147.
    7. John Knodel & Visid Prachuabmoh, 1973. "Desired family size in Thailand: Are the responses meaningful?," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 10(4), pages 619-637, November.
    8. Guangdong Li & Chuanglin Fang & James E. M. Watson & Siao Sun & Wei Qi & Zhenbo Wang & Jianguo Liu, 2024. "Mixed effectiveness of global protected areas in resisting habitat loss," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    9. Overman, Henry G. & Puga, Diego & Turner, Matthew A., 2008. "Decomposing the growth in residential land in the United States," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 487-497, September.
    10. Solomon Zena Walelign & Martin Reinhardt Nielsen & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, 2019. "Roads and livelihood activity choices in the Greater Serengeti Ecosystem, Tanzania," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, March.
    11. Squalli, Jay, 2010. "An empirical assessment of U.S. state-level immigration and environmental emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1170-1175, March.
    12. Eleftherios Giovanis & Oznur Ozdamar, 2025. "The transboundary effects of climate change and global adaptation: the case of the Euphrates–Tigris water basin in Turkey and Iraq," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 68(4), pages 1935-1972, April.
    13. David N. Koons & Randall Holmes & James B. Grand, 2006. "Population inertia and its sensitivity to changes in vital rates or initial conditions," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2006-040, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    14. Melissa R. McHale & Steward T.A. Pickett & Olga Barbosa & David N. Bunn & Mary L. Cadenasso & Daniel L. Childers & Meredith Gartin & George R. Hess & David M. Iwaniec & Timon McPhearson & M. Nils Pete, 2015. "The New Global Urban Realm: Complex, Connected, Diffuse, and Diverse Social-Ecological Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-30, April.
    15. Jessica Pearlman & Lisa D. Pearce & Dirgha J. Ghimire & Prem Bhandari & Taylor Hargrove, 2017. "Postmarital Living Arrangements in Historically Patrilocal Settings: Integrating Household Fission and Migration Perspectives," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 54(4), pages 1425-1449, August.
    16. Pere Ariza-Montobbio & Katharine Farrell & Gonzalo Gamboa & Jesus Ramos-Martin, 2014. "Integrating energy and land-use planning: socio-metabolic profiles along the rural–urban continuum in Catalonia (Spain)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 925-956, August.
    17. Zhang, Qi & Jin, Cai & Cao, Jing & Hu, Jing & Dai, Chun & Bilsborrow, Richard E. & Li, Tan & Song, Conghe, 2025. "Understanding the role of land attachment in the emergence of hollow villages based on the agent-based complex system framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    18. Wu Yang & Thomas Dietz & Wei Liu & Junyan Luo & Jianguo Liu, 2013. "Going Beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: An Index System of Human Dependence on Ecosystem Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-9, May.
    19. Wei Wang & Qianfei Shi & Guoyu Wang, 2024. "Analysis of Performance and Genetic Characteristics of Cultural Landscapes in Traditional Villages along the Jinzhong Section of the Wanli Tea Road from a Landscape Gene Information Chain Perspective:," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-25, September.
    20. Mbanze, Aires Afonso & Viera da Silva, Carina & Ribeiro, Natasha Sofia & Silva, João F. & Santos, José Lima, 2020. "A Livelihood and Farming System approach for effective conservation policies in Protected Areas of Developing Countries: The case study of the Niassa National Reserve in Mozambique," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).

    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:13:y:2024:i:2:p:124-:d:1324604. 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.