Author
Listed:
- Zhen Zeng
(Survey and Planning Research Center of Sichuan Institute of Geological Survey, Chengdu 610072, China)
- Chuangli Jing
(Survey and Planning Research Center of Sichuan Institute of Geological Survey, Chengdu 610072, China)
- Kuan Song
(Survey and Planning Research Center of Sichuan Institute of Geological Survey, Chengdu 610072, China)
- Mingzhe Wu
(Survey and Planning Research Center of Sichuan Institute of Geological Survey, Chengdu 610072, China)
- Zhaoguo Wang
(Survey and Planning Research Center of Sichuan Institute of Geological Survey, Chengdu 610072, China)
- Guochao Li
(College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)
- Yibo Bao
(College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)
- Yi Chen
(College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)
Abstract
In practice, village planning often suffers from an “emphasis on plan preparation but neglect of implementation”, a challenge that is especially evident in Sichuan Province, China, where highly diverse landforms and uneven development foundations make one-size-fits-all evaluation approaches difficult to apply. This study aims to develop a locally adaptable and operational method to quantify village planning implementation effectiveness control, enabling cross-type comparison and bottleneck diagnosis. We construct a three-level indicator system spanning eight domains—baseline control, land-use layout and construction, ecological protection and restoration, industrial development, infrastructure, public service facilities, living environment, and disaster prevention and mitigation—and determine indicator weights using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). To capture both compliance and progress, a dual-path scoring strategy is employed: constraint-based indicators are assessed using a threshold method by comparing current values (T1) with planning standards/thresholds (T2), while expectation-based indicators adopt a progress-ratio method incorporating baseline values before plan preparation (T0), current status (T1), and targets (T2). Three representative villages—Gaohuai (peri-urban integration), Sanlongchang (agglomeration and upgrading), and Lianmeng (characteristic protection)—are examined. Results show medium-to-high comprehensive scores (81–85) with pronounced type differences: Gaohuai ranks highest (85.37), whereas Sanlongchang is lowest (81.40), and Lianmeng is intermediate (83.71). Comparative diagnosis reveals shared bottlenecks driven by the superposition of “quota–space–ecological constraints”, alongside type-specific weaknesses requiring differentiated control strategies. The proposed framework offers a replicable, multi-source-data-oriented tool for implementation monitoring and adaptive policy adjustment. The novelty lies in reframing village plan implementation evaluation as implementation control effectiveness under a baseline-constrained planning system, while operationalizing a dual-path, unified-scale scoring scheme with a type-screenable indicator library for cross-type comparison and checklist-oriented diagnosis.
Suggested Citation
Zhen Zeng & Chuangli Jing & Kuan Song & Mingzhe Wu & Zhaoguo Wang & Guochao Li & Yibo Bao & Yi Chen, 2026.
"Construction and Empirical Study of an Evaluation System for Village Planning Implementation Effectiveness Control in Sichuan Province, China,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-45, February.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:4:p:2010-:d:1866020
Download full text from publisher
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:4:p:2010-:d:1866020. 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 (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.