The Comparative Study Of Evaluation Of Cultivated Land And Agricultural Land Classification

The change in the quality and quantity of cultivated land has been thefocus of all levels of Government, Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry ofLand and Resources in our country. With the rapid development of theregional social economy, urbanization process has been accelerated whichcauses the decreasing in quantity and the declining of comprehensive qualityof cultivated land. Thus, the sustainable development of regional socialeconomy is severely restricted. The current national quality evaluationsystems of cultivated land mainly are “the cultivated land productivityevaluation system” from Ministry of Agriculture and “the evaluationsystem of agriculture land classification and gradation” from Ministry ofLand and Resources. There are some similarities and differences betweenthese two systems. Through the realization of connection of these twoevaluation systems and the exploratory analysis of unified plan for cultivatedland quality, the thesis aims to find the general law and the differences of twosystems, and to fulfill the effective connection and application of twoachievements by the maximization of resources sharing. It not only can satisfythe macro management of land and resources, but also guide agriculturalmeasures, and it is convenience for farmers to understand and apply.The thesis-based Inner Mongolia institution of higher educationScientific research project “Hohhot cultivated land resource protection andsocial economy harmonious development research(NJ10013)”and InnerMongolia National Land Agency project” Complements of farmland qualitygrade achievement in Helingeer County” firstly indicates the implications ofcultivated land productivity evaluation and agricultural land classification,and compares the objectives and theoretical basis of them, and then separatelyapplies cultivated land productivity evaluation and agricultural landclassification on Helingeer County. The thesis makes comparison of choosingthe evaluation factors, of conforming the weight of factors, of the methods and results of evaluation between them, and sufficiently studies theconnection between them, and then explores to analyze the unified plan forcultivated land quality evaluation. The thesis adopts Delphi method to choosethe evaluation factors, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to calculate weightof factors, and ARCGIS10.0to do spatial analysis.The evaluation result shows that cultivated land productivity ofHelingeer County is classified into five levels. The quality of level1is thebest and level5is the worst, and respectively7.75%and2.22%of the totalcultivated land. Level2,3the highest percentage and75.29%of the totalcultivated land. According to the classification standard of Inner MongolianAutonomous Region, the natural quality grade of agricultural land inHelingeer Land is classified into5classes. The quality of grade1is the worstand grade5is the best and respectively7.75%and2.22%of the totalcultivated land. The highest percentage is grade2which is50.59%of the totalcultivated land. The utilizing grade is of agricultural land is also divided into5classes. The quality of grade1is the worst and grade5is the best andrespectively39.53%and8.94%of the total cultivated land. The economicgrade of agricultural land is divided into5classes. The quality of grade1isthe worst and grade5is the best and respectively56.99%and0.83%of thetotal cultivated land.Based on the comparative study of theoretical basis, the cultivated landquality, the purpose and result of evaluation between these two evaluationsystems, the conclusions can be drawn like that: the primary reasons forcausing some discrepancy of results from these two evaluation systems arethe different starting points and focuses in knowing the cultivated land qualityand the different evaluation purposes. The former mainly provides the basisfor the agriculture measures; the latter provides the basis for the macromanagement of land and resources, ensuring the red line for protectingcultivated land and guaranteeing the security of national food. The differencesin constructing the evaluation indicator system, index selection and weightdefinition are the direct reasons for causing some discrepancy of results from these two evaluation systems. The cultivated land productivity evaluationtakes more natural quality of arable soil into consideration, and forms a singleproductivity level; the cultivated land quality of level1is the best, while level5is the worst. However, the grade of agricultural land classification, based onthe consideration of soil natural property and the amendment of social andeconomic properties, gets multi-grade classification results including thenatural quality grade, the utilizing grade and the comprehensive grade. Theresults of multi-grade classification are same; the cultivated land quality ofgrade1is the worst, while grade5is the best. After comparative study ofthese two evaluation systems, the author finds that both are sharing highcoherence in area number and spatial distribution on the natural quality levelbut low coherence in land utilizing grade and comprehensive grade.Due to the high coherence between the “grade” of natural quality ofagricultural land and the “level” of cultivated land productivity evaluation,the thesis built the linear regression model (LRM) between the natural qualitygrade of agricultural land and cultivated land productivity evaluation andfulfilled the connection and examination of these two evaluation systems. Thethesis also explored to analyze the unified plan for cultivated land qualityevaluation.