IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v18y2026i10p5153-d1947300.html

Research on the Construction of a County-Level Urban-Rural Equivalent Comprehensive Evaluation System Under the Community Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Qingmu Su

    (School of Architecture and Planning, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou 350118, China
    Observation and Research Station of Land Consolidation in Hilly Region of Southeast China, MNR, Fuzhou 350001, China
    Research Center for the Integration and Development of Marine Culture and Technology, Fujian Provincial Social Science Research Base, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou 350118, China)

  • Yunxia Chen

    (School of Architecture and Planning, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou 350118, China)

  • Muying Yao

    (School of Architecture and Planning, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou 350118, China
    Co-first author.)

Abstract

Traditional evaluation systems in the current process of urban–rural integration are guided by the goal of “equalization.” They predominantly focus on material facilities and services while neglecting both the integration of socio-cultural dimensions and the disparities between urban and rural areas. Consequently, they are ill-equipped to systematically assess or facilitate the formation of urban–rural communities. To address this gap, this study, grounded in community theory, constructs a county-level comprehensive evaluation framework for urban–rural equivalence that integrates the three dimensions of “material, service, and social” spheres, encompassing material infrastructure, socioeconomic services, and cultural identity. This framework consists of three dimensions, seven criteria, and twenty-one indicators, which are operationalized through statistical data, questionnaire surveys, and field investigations. An empirical application to Xiapu County, Fujian Province, yields a composite urban–rural equivalence index of 0.8184, indicating a moderate level of equivalence, with relatively balanced development across the three dimensions. Furthermore, diagnostic analysis reveals that the key bottlenecks constraining progress toward a higher level of equivalence are not absolute resource shortages but rather the organizational efficiency of spatial linkages, the grassroots-level transmission capacity of public services, and deficiencies in social identity and public participation. Accordingly, differentiated planning response pathways are proposed from the three perspectives of territorial community, governance community, and relational community. By constructing a multidimensional comprehensive evaluation framework, this study advances urban–rural equivalence assessment from mere “disparity description” toward “mechanism diagnosis,” thereby offering a more systematic and operationally feasible evaluation tool and strategic reference for county-level urban–rural integration.

Suggested Citation

  • Qingmu Su & Yunxia Chen & Muying Yao, 2026. "Research on the Construction of a County-Level Urban-Rural Equivalent Comprehensive Evaluation System Under the Community Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-27, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:10:p:5153-:d:1947300
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/10/5153/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/10/5153/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:18:y:2026:i:10:p:5153-:d:1947300. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.