| In recent years,with the rapid urbanization and development of urban economy,cities are experiencing the rapid expansion of space scale and the change of spatial structure,the specific performance is urban construction migration to the suburbs and sprawl spatial dispersion.The continuing spatial expansion has led to the city scale out of control,the scattered urban construction land layout,and the deterioration of urban ecological environment.Therefore,how to choose the reasonable spatial expansion strategy to coordinate the development of social economy and natural environment,achieve the goal of intensive land use and sustainable development in the current rapid urbanization process,was an issue of great concern to the government and academia,smart growth is an effective way to solve this problem.Taking the prefecture-level and county-level city of Jiangxi as example,According to 2000,2005,2010,2013 date of remote sensing,dynamic and static analysis of urban spatial expansion characteristics by sector analysis;From the aspect of urban form,efficiency and influence,built the model of urban sprawl,and analyzed the spatial expansion quantitatively;Principal component analysis and fuzzy mathematics were used to evaluate the difference of smart growth in different scales;Based on the comprehensive evaluation of the smart growth and urban sprawl,analysed the relationship between urban sprawl and smart growth quantificationally,and divided the city types.The corresponding development strategies are proposed for different scale cities.In order to provide a scientific basis for the relevant departments at all levels of policy formulation,planning and so on.The main conclusions were as following:(1)During 2000-2013,Jiangxi urban construction land area increased by 326.06km2,the average growth rate was 9.83%.In prefecture-level cities,Nanchang has the largest expansion,reached 94.54km2,average annual growth rate was 9.83%;Jiujiang has the smallest expansion,only 7.08km2,average annual growth rate was 1.76%;In county-level cities,Leping has the largest expansion of construction land,reached 5.69km2,average annual growth rate was 2.20%;Jinggangshan has the smallest expansion,only 0.77km2,average annual growth rate was 4.96%.During 2000-2013,Jiangxi gravity migration distance of the construction land was 21.66 km,the leading direction was northwest.In prefecture-level cities,Nanchang has the maximum migration distance,reached 6.98 km,the leading direction was northwest;In county-level cities,Fengcheng has the maximum migration distance,reached 4.67 km,the leading direction was northwest.The direction of the expansion of the construction land is basically in line with the gravity migration direction.There are significant differences in the directions of urban expansion,but it's scale,rate and intensity of expansion are basically the same.(2)During 2000-2013,Jiangxi urban sprawl score increased 0.0672,from less sprawl to medium sprawl.In prefecture-level cities,Nanchang has the largest increase of sprawl,reached 0.2736,from less sprawl to relatively serious sprawl;Pingxiang increased by 0.2495,from less sprawl to relatively serious sprawl;Yingtan increased by 0.1814,the sprawl level unchanged;Yichun,Shangrao and Xinyu has smaller increase,only 0.0205,0.0170 and 0.0050,Yichun from less sprawl to medium sprawl,others has no changes;Ganzhou,Fuzhou,Ji'an,Jiujiang and Jingdezhen has negative growth,reached-0.0167,-0.0377,-0.0778,-0.12254 and-0.1569,Jiujiang and Jingdezhen from medium sprawl to less sprawl,others remain unchanged.In county-level cities,Ruijin has the largest increase of sprawl,reached 0.2776,from smallest sprawl to medium sprawl;Guixi,Zhangshu,Leping,Gao'an,Fengcheng and Dexing increased by 0.2077,0.1730,0.1609,0.1271,0.1091 and 0.1008,Guixi from smallest sprawl to medium sprawl,Zhangshu,Gao'an,Fengcheng and Dexing from less sprawl to medium sprawl,Leping has no changes;Nankang and Ruichang has smaller increase,only 0.0467 and 0.0029,remain unchanged;Jinggangshan has negative growth,reached-0.1264,from medium sprawl to less sprawl.(3)During 2000-2013,Jiangxi smart growth score decreased from 3.084 to 2.861,smart growth level remained unchanged in the intermediate state.In prefecture-level cities,Nanchang and Yingtan score decreased from 3.756 and 3.502 to 3.289 and 2.852,from smart growth to intermediate state;Jingdezhen,Xinyu,Ganzhou,Ji'an,Yichun,Fuzhou and Shangrao have a smaller amplitude,the intermediate state unchanged;Pingxiang score decreased from 3.229 to 2.452,from state of intermediate to not smart growth.Jiujiang score increased from 2.903 to 3.572,From state of intermediate to smart growth.In county-level cities,Fengcheng score decreased from 3.509 to 2.679,from smart growth to intermediate state;Guixi,Dexing,Ruichang,Dexing,Nankang and Gao'an have a smaller amplitude,the intermediate state unchanged;Leping and Ruijin score decreased from 2.865 and 2.759 to 2.493 and 2.110,from state of intermediate to not smart growth.Jinggangshan score increased from 2.878 to 3.516,From state of intermediate to smart growth.(4)During 2000-2013,there is a strong coupling relationship between urban sprawl and smart growth,the grey correlation coefficient between the membership grade of urban land use structure,input and output of construction land,construction land use intensity,development trend of intensive use of construction land,urban livable level with the reciprocal of urban sprawl score increased continuously,respectively by 0.5142,0.5528,0.6583,0.6454 and 0.6795 in 2000,increased to 0.5734,0.5929,0.6826,0.6741 and 0.7019 in 2013.Among them,the prefecture-level city from 0.5214,0.5603,0.6689,0.6259 and 0.6845 increased to 0.5869,0.5947,0.6877,0.6809 and 0.7114;the county-level city from 0.5028,0.5312,0.6114,0.6156 and 0.6523,increased to 0.5514,0.5738,0.6408,0.6376 and 0.6654.It shows that the 5 factors are closely related to the urban sprawl,and the influence on the harmonious development of cities is deepened day by day.The correlation and significant coefficient between smart growth and urban sprawl were-0.551 and 0.040 in 2000,-0.541 and 0.045 in 2013.Among them,the prefecturelevel cities were-0.645,0.032 and-0.486,0.118;the county-level cities were-0.306,0.278 and-0.613,0.045.There is a significant negative correlation between Smart Growth and urban sprawl.According to the gray correlation and correlation analysis,combined with the actual situation,the study area can be divided into 6 types of urban smart growth.Finally,according to the different types of smart growth,put forward the corresponding development strategy. |
PDF Full Text Request