IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i20p11279-d654977.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Scenario Simulation of Urban Growth under Integrated Urban Spatial Planning: A Case Study of Wuhan, China

Author

Listed:
  • Haofeng Wang

    (School of Resource and Environmental Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China)

  • Yaolin Liu

    (School of Resource and Environmental Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China)

  • Guangxia Zhang

    (School of Resource and Environmental Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China)

  • Yiheng Wang

    (School of Resource and Environmental Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China)

  • Jun Zhao

    (Qingdao Surveying & Mapping Institute, Qingdao 266000, China)

Abstract

Although many publications have noted the impact of urban planning on urban development and land-use change, the incorporation of planning constraints into urban growth simulation has not been adequately addressed so far. This study aims to develop a planning-constrained cellular automata (CA) model by combining cell-based trade-off between urban growth and natural conservation with a zoning-based planning implementation mechanism. By adjusting the preference parameters of different planning zones, multiple planning-constrained scenarios can be generated. Taking the Wuhan Urban Development Area (WUDA), China as a case study, the planning-constrained CA model was applied to simulate current and future urban scenarios. The results show a higher simulation accuracy compared to the model without planning constraints. With the weakening of planning constraints, urban growth tends to occupy more ecological and agricultural land with high conservation priority. With the increase in preference on urban growth or natural conservation, the future urban land pattern will become more fragmented. Furthermore, new urban land beyond the planned urban development area can be captured in future urban scenarios, which will provide certain early warning. The simulation of the current urban spatial pattern should help planners and decisionmakers to evaluate the past implementation of urban planning, and scenarios simulation can provide effective support for future urban planning by evaluating the consequences.

Suggested Citation

  • Haofeng Wang & Yaolin Liu & Guangxia Zhang & Yiheng Wang & Jun Zhao, 2021. "Multi-Scenario Simulation of Urban Growth under Integrated Urban Spatial Planning: A Case Study of Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-21, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11279-:d:654977
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11279/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11279/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yang Zhang & Yanfang Liu & Yan Zhang & Xuesong Kong & Ying Jing & Enxiang Cai & Lingyu Zhang & Yi Liu & Zhengyu Wang & Yaolin Liu, 2019. "Spatial Patterns and Driving Forces of Conflicts among the Three Land Management Red Lines in China: A Case Study of the Wuhan Urban Development Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Luederitz, Christopher & Brink, Ebba & Gralla, Fabienne & Hermelingmeier, Verena & Meyer, Moritz & Niven, Lisa & Panzer, Lars & Partelow, Stefan & Rau, Anna-Lena & Sasaki, Ryuei & Abson, David J. & La, 2015. "A review of urban ecosystem services: six key challenges for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 98-112.
    3. Timon McPhearson & Susan Parnell & David Simon & Owen Gaffney & Thomas Elmqvist & Xuemei Bai & Debra Roberts & Aromar Revi, 2016. "Scientists must have a say in the future of cities," Nature, Nature, vol. 538(7624), pages 165-166, October.
    4. Robert Pontius & Wideke Boersma & Jean-Christophe Castella & Keith Clarke & Ton Nijs & Charles Dietzel & Zengqiang Duan & Eric Fotsing & Noah Goldstein & Kasper Kok & Eric Koomen & Christopher Lippitt, 2008. "Comparing the input, output, and validation maps for several models of land change," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 42(1), pages 11-37, March.
    5. Yang Bai & Christina P. Wong & Bo Jiang & Alice C. Hughes & Min Wang & Qing Wang, 2018. "Developing China’s Ecological Redline Policy using ecosystem services assessments for land use planning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Ke, Xinli & van Vliet, Jasper & Zhou, Ting & Verburg, Peter H. & Zheng, Weiwei & Liu, Xiaoping, 2018. "Direct and indirect loss of natural habitat due to built-up area expansion: A model-based analysis for the city of Wuhan, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 231-239.
    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. Qingsong He, 2023. "Urban Planning and Sustainable Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-4, June.
    2. Siqi Yi & Yong Zhou & Qing Li, 2022. "A New Perspective for Urban Development Boundary Delineation Based on the MCR Model and CA-Markov Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.

    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. Hengyu Pan & Yong Geng & Ji Han & Cheng Huang & Wenyi Han & Zhuang Miao, 2020. "Emergy Based Decoupling Analysis of Ecosystem Services on Urbanization: A Case of Shanghai, China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    2. Zhang, Yan & Chang, Xia & Liu, Yanfang & Lu, Yanchi & Wang, Yiheng & Liu, Yaolin, 2021. "Urban expansion simulation under constraint of multiple ecosystem services (MESs) based on cellular automata (CA)-Markov model: Scenario analysis and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    3. Liye Wang & Xinli Ke & Assem Abu Hatab, 2020. "Trade-Offs between Economic Benefits and Ecosystem Services Value under Three Cropland Protection Scenarios for Wuhan City in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, April.
    4. Zuzheng Li & Xiaoqin Cheng & Hairong Han, 2020. "Analyzing Land-Use Change Scenarios for Ecosystem Services and their Trade-Offs in the Ecological Conservation Area in Beijing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-20, November.
    5. Xiaoyong Li & Wenhui Kuang & Fengyun Sun, 2020. "Identifying Urban Flood Regulation Priority Areas in Beijing Based on an Ecosystem Services Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Elliot, T. & Torres-Matallana, J.A. & Goldstein, B. & Babí Almenar, J. & Gómez-Baggethun, E. & Proença, V. & Rugani, B., 2022. "An expanded framing of ecosystem services is needed for a sustainable urban future," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    7. Wang, Bo & Liang, Youjia & Peng, Shouzhang, 2022. "Harnessing the indirect effect of urban expansion for mitigating agriculture-environment trade-offs in the Loess Plateau," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    8. Yang, Yuanyuan & Bao, Wenkai & Liu, Yansui, 2020. "Scenario simulation of land system change in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    9. Youjung Kim & Galen Newman, 2019. "Climate Change Preparedness: Comparing Future Urban Growth and Flood Risk in Amsterdam and Houston," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, February.
    10. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    11. Mengzhu Liu & Leilei Min & Jingjing Zhao & Yanjun Shen & Hongwei Pei & Hongjuan Zhang & Yali Li, 2021. "The Impact of Land Use Change on Water-Related Ecosystem Services in the Bashang Area of Hebei Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    12. Aritta Suwarno & Meine van Noordwijk & Hans-Peter Weikard & Desi Suyamto, 2018. "Indonesia’s forest conversion moratorium assessed with an agent-based model of Land-Use Change and Ecosystem Services (LUCES)," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 211-229, February.
    13. Sirakaya, Aysegül & Cliquet, An & Harris, Jim, 2018. "Ecosystem services in cities: Towards the international legal protection of ecosystem services in urban environments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 205-212.
    14. Yuanyuan Yang & Shuwen Zhang & Jiuchun Yang & Xiaoshi Xing & Dongyan Wang, 2015. "Using a Cellular Automata-Markov Model to Reconstruct Spatial Land-Use Patterns in Zhenlai County, Northeast China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, May.
    15. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    16. Evan Elderbrock & Chris Enright & Kathryn A. Lynch & Alexandra R. Rempel, 2020. "A Guide to Public Green Space Planning for Urban Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-23, October.
    17. Martin Unger & Tobia Lakes, 2023. "Land Use Conflicts and Synergies on Agricultural Land in Brandenburg, Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, March.
    18. Elmarie Nel & Andrew MacLachlan & Ollie Ballinger & Hugh Cole & Megan Cole, 2023. "Data-Driven Decision Making in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A City of Cape Town Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    19. Ziqi Meng & Jinwei Dong & Erle C. Ellis & Graciela Metternicht & Yuanwei Qin & Xiao-Peng Song & Sara Löfqvist & Rachael D. Garrett & Xiaopeng Jia & Xiangming Xiao, 2023. "Post-2020 biodiversity framework challenged by cropland expansion in protected areas," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 758-768, July.
    20. Pires, Aliny P.F. & Rodriguez Soto, Clarita & Scarano, Fabio R., 2021. "Strategies to reach global sustainability should take better account of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11279-:d:654977. 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.