IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i24p13961-d704874.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Two-Stage Fuzzy Optimization Model for Urban Land Use: A Case Study of Chongzhou City

Author

Listed:
  • Jinjiang Yao

    (Science and Technology Innovation and Public Management Research Center of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China)

  • Bingkui Qiu

    (Department of Tourism Management, Jin Zhong University, Jinzhong 033619, China)

  • Min Zhou

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Aiping Deng

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Siqi Li

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China)

Abstract

Under the background of New-type Urbanization, with the continuous advancement of urbanization and the all-round development of cities, all kinds of demands are also rising. In the case of demand, it is difficult to quickly adjust from the land supply side and to guide the optimization of the structure and layout of land use is one of the methods to achieve this based on the current situation and shortage of urban land use structure and spatial arrangement. Because of the complexity, uncertainty and dynamics of the land use system, it is necessary to use an uncertain model to accurately describe and propose the approximate optimal solution, so this study analyzes the influencing mechanism of land use and optimize the land use structure under uncertainties by using a Bayesian network and fuzzy mathematical programming. Based on the results of the two stages of analysis, the cellular automata simulation is completed. The framework is applied to Chongzhou city in western China. The results indicated that the optimal land space for cultivated land is in the middle and the south based on the joint influence probability of arable land and urban construction land. The conversion probability of the area near the east is low, and the joint impact probability of construction land in all areas is generally similar except for the western protection area. After the optimization of the fuzzy planning, the optimal construction land scale is 69.42 km 2 . Under the condition that the cultivated land’s red line is guaranteed, there is still 98.87 km 2 of space for the increase in cultivated land. It is found through simulation that the increase in construction land would occur in the central and western parts of Chongzhou, which may be caused by the urban siphon effect. According to Monte Carlo verification, when the conversion probability exceeds 50%, the cultivated land could be turned into urban construction land, with an accuracy of 91.99%. Therefore, this proposed framework is helpful to understand the process of land use and provides a reference for making scientific and reasonable territorial spatial planning and guiding land use practice under uncertainties.

Suggested Citation

  • Jinjiang Yao & Bingkui Qiu & Min Zhou & Aiping Deng & Siqi Li, 2021. "A Two-Stage Fuzzy Optimization Model for Urban Land Use: A Case Study of Chongzhou City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-24, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:24:p:13961-:d:704874
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/24/13961/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/24/13961/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele, 2015. "The roles of human values and generalized trust on stated preferences when food is labeled with environmental footprints: Insights from Germany," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 84-91.
    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. Rui Han & Shiqi Yang, 2023. "A Study on Industrial Heritage Renewal Strategy Based on Hybrid Bayesian Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-32, July.

    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. Marie Diekmann & Ludwig Theuvsen, 2019. "Value structures determining community supported agriculture: insights from Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(4), pages 733-746, December.
    2. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Pappa, Valentina, 2016. "Elicitation formats and the WTA/WTP gap: A study of climate neutral foods," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 141-155.
    3. Giampietri, Elisa & Yu, Xiaohua & Trestini, Samuele, . "The role of trust and perceived barriers on farmer’s intention to adopt risk management tools," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 9(01).
    4. Kai Guo & Zhigang Wang & Lei Zhang & Chenya Li, 2023. "Self-Transcendence Values Influence Meaningful Sports Consumption Behavior: The Chain Mediator of Team Identification and Eudaimonic Motivation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-30, July.
    5. Tonkin, Emma & Meyer, Samantha B. & Coveney, John & Webb, Trevor & Wilson, Annabelle M., 2016. "The process of making trust related judgements through interaction with food labelling," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-11.
    6. Rao Yuan & Shaosheng Jin & Wen Lin, 2025. "Could trust narrow the intention‐behavior gap in eco‐friendly food consumption? Evidence from China," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(1), pages 260-288, January.
    7. Bhishma R. Dahal & Karen L. DeLong & Shijun Gao & Carola Grebitus & Andrew Muhammad, 2025. "Factors affecting Chinese consumers' beef purchase frequency," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(2), pages 521-543, April.
    8. De Marchi, Elisa & Caputo, Vincenzina & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Banterle, Alessandro, 2016. "Time preferences and food choices: Evidence from a choice experiment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 99-109.
    9. Anisimova, Tatiana & Vrontis, Demetris, 2024. "The food you can trust: The moderating role of age in the relationship between consumer values and organic food trust," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    10. Steiner, B.E. & Peschel, A.O. & Grebitus, C., 2017. "Multi-Product Category Choices Labeled for Ecological Footprints: Exploring Psychographics and Evolved Psychological Biases for Characterizing Latent Consumer Classes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 251-264.
    11. Enoch Owusu-Sekyere & Awudu Abdulai & Henry Jordaan & Helena Hansson, 2020. "Heterogeneous demand for ecologically sustainable products on ensuring environmental sustainability in South Africa," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(1), pages 39-64, January.
    12. Andreea Barbu & Ștefan-Alexandru Catană & Dana Corina Deselnicu & Lucian-Ionel Cioca & Alexandra Ioanid, 2022. "Factors Influencing Consumer Behavior toward Green Products: A Systematic Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-18, December.
    13. Yu Jiang & H. Holly Wang & Shaosheng Jin, 2023. "Mobilising the public to fight poverty using anti‐poverty labels in online food markets: Evidence from a real experimental auction," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 168-190, February.
    14. Haroon Qasim & Liang Yan & Rui Guo & Amer Saeed & Badar Nadeem Ashraf, 2019. "The Defining Role of Environmental Self-Identity among Consumption Values and Behavioral Intention to Consume Organic Food," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-22, March.
    15. Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele M., 2016. "Paying for sustainability: A cross-cultural analysis of consumers’ valuations of food and non-food products labeled for carbon and water footprints," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 50-58.
    16. Caputo, Vincenzina & Scarpa, Riccardo & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Ortega, David L., 2018. "Are preferences for food quality attributes really normally distributed? An analysis using flexible mixing distributions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 10-27.
    17. Ricci, Elena Claire & Banterle, Alessandro & Stranieri, Stefanella, 2018. "Trust to Go Green: An Exploration of Consumer Intentions for Eco-friendly Convenience Food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 54-65.
    18. Peschel, Anne & Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele, 2016. "How does consumer knowledge affect environmentally sustainable choices? Evidence from a cross-country latent class analysis of food labels," MPRA Paper 69864, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Hobbs, Jill E. & Goddard, Ellen, 2015. "Consumers and trust," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 71-74.
    20. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Hoefkens, Christine & Verbeke, Wim, 2017. "Healthy, sustainable and plant-based eating: Perceived (mis)match and involvement-based consumer segments as targets for future policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 46-57.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:24:p:13961-:d:704874. 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.