4.7 Article

Will rapid urban expansion in, the drylands of northern China continue: A scenario analysis based on the Land Use Scenario Dynamics-urban model and the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 165, 期 -, 页码 57-69

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.018

关键词

Drylands of northern China; Urban expansion; Shared Socioeconomic Pathways; LUSD-Urban model; Scenario analysis

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2014CB954302, 2014CB954303]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41621061, 41501195]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
  4. State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding spatiotemporal urbanization is one of the key questions related to sustainable urbanization in the drylands of northern China (DNC). However, urban expansion in the DNC has not been quantified and assessed effectively due to a lack of reliable data and methods. In this paper, we investigate urban expansion in the DNC at multiple scales, ranging from the whole region to four dryland subtypes, and six urban agglomerations in the DNC from 1992 to 2015. We also simulate urban expansion in the DNC from 2015 to 2050 by coupling the scenario framework of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) with the Land Use Scenario Dynamics-urban (LUSD-urban) model. Despite of the uncertainty in the research, our findings provide useful insight into the past and the future urban expansion in the DNC. The results indicate that the urban land in the DNC expanded rapidly from 4110 km(2) in 1992 to 20,969 km(2) in 2015. Furthermore, the urban land in the DNC will continue to expand from 20,969 km(2) to 22,987-36,622 km(2) by 2040, with an annual growth of 80.72-403.48 km(2) under all SSPs. Thus, it is suggested that effective measures are urgently needed to facilitate sustainable urban development in the DNC. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据