A Quantitative Assessment of Sustainable Development Based on Relative Resource Carrying Capacity in Jiangsu Province of China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Model
3.1. Expansion of Relative Resources Carrying Capacity Model
3.2. Modeling
4. Data and Results
4.1. Comparison between Models before and after Improvement
4.2. The Analysis Based on the Improved Model
4.2.1. Relative Comprehensive Resource Carrying Capacity
4.2.2. The Development Trend of Each Resource Carrying Capacity
4.2.3. The Trend of Natural Resources Development
4.2.4. The Trend of Social Resources Development
4.3. Regional Differences of Relative Resource Carrying Capacity among Cities in Jiangsu Province
4.3.1. The Comprehensive Carrying Capacity Is Extremely Abundant (South Jiangsu)
4.3.2. The Comprehensive Carrying Capacity Is Lightly Surplus (Central Jiangsu)
4.3.3. The Comprehensive Carrying Capacity Is Overloaded (North Jiangsu)
5. Discussion and Suggestions
5.1. Discussion
5.2. Implications and Suggestions
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sohu.com. Available online: https://www.sohu.com/a/233389680_730713 (accessed on 9 November 2018).
- Yang, D.G.; Chen, Y.F.; Niu, W.Y. A review of the four representative indicator systems for sustainable development. Sci. Manag. Res. 2001, 19, 58–61. [Google Scholar]
- Luo, X.H.; Wu, Q.L. Evaluation of the coordination degree and development strategy of the cities outside the Pearl River Delta in Guangdong. Trop. Geogr. 2014, 34, 561–567. [Google Scholar]
- Li, X.D. Spatial and temporal dynamic changes in the relative carrying capacity of resources in the Wumeng Mountain area, Guizhou, China. Geogr. Res. 2013, 32, 233–244. [Google Scholar]
- Miit. Gov. Available online: http://www.miit.gov.cn/n973401/n1234620/n1234622/index.html (accessed on 11 October 2018).
- Sohu.com. Available online: http://www.sohu.com/a/220664071_171301 (accessed on 7 November 2018).
- Huang, C.F.; He, L.Z. Relative resource carrying capacity model improvement and empirical analysis. Resour. Sci. 2011, 33, 41–49. [Google Scholar]
- Daily, G.C.; Ehrlich, P.R. Population, sustainability, and earth’s carrying capacity. BioScience 1992, 42, 761–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seidl, I.; Tisdell, C.A. Carrying capacity reconsidered: From Malthus’ population theory to cultural carrying capacity. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 31, 395–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.B.; Li, W.H.; Liu, X.F. The origin, development and prospect of carrying capacity theory. Chin. J. Ecol. 2009, 29, 878–888. [Google Scholar]
- Park, R.E.; Burgess, E.W. Introduction to the Science of Sociology; The University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1920. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, W.C.; Zhou, X. A review of theories and methods of land carrying capacity. J. Jiangxi Agric. Sci. 2008, 20, 100–103. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, Y.L. Evaluation and Application of Regional Comprehensive Land Carrying Capacity; China University of Geosciences: Beijing, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Millington, R.; Gifford, R. Energy and How We Live; Australian UNESCO seminar Committee for Man and Biosphere: Adelaide, Australia, 1973. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, H.; Zhou, Y.; Tang, Y.; Wu, M.; Deng, Y. Fluctuation of the water environmental carrying capacity in a huge river-connected lake. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 3564–3578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeng, C.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Hu, J.; Bai, X.; Yang, X. An integrated approach for assessing aquatic ecological carrying capacity: A case study of Wujin district in the Tai Lake Basin, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2011, 8, 264–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bishop, A.B.; Fullerton, H.H.; Crawford, A.B. Carrying capacity in regional environment management. Conserv. Pract. 1974, 1, 17–24. [Google Scholar]
- Holling, C.S. The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: Local surprise and global change. Sustain. Dev. Biosphere 1986, 14, 292–317. [Google Scholar]
- Slesser, M. Enhancement of Carrying Capacity Options—ECCO; The Resource Use Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, N.S.; Kuang, Y.Q. Relative resources carrying capacity and sustainable development issues in Guangdong. Econ. Geogr. 2000, 20, 52–56. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, B.S. Population and economy—Regional matching model of resource carrying capacity. Chin. Popul. Sci. 1993, 8–13. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Z.D.; Zhen, X.G. Yangtze River Basin relative resource carrying capacity and sustainable development. Resour. Environ. Yangtze River Basin 2002, 11, 10–15. [Google Scholar]
- Jing, Y.J. Dynamic analysis of relative resource carrying capacity in Northeast China. J. Soc. Sci. Jilin Univ. 2006, 46, 104–110. [Google Scholar]
- He, M.; Liu, Y.Z. Research on relative resource carrying capacity and sustainable development in Jiangsu Province. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 2003, 13, 81–85. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Z.M.; Zhang, B.; He, Y.F. Dynamic analysis of relative resource carrying capacity in Jilin Province. Arid. Land Resour. Environ. 2004, 18, 5–10. [Google Scholar]
- Yue, X.Y.; Wang, Y.M.; Zhao, Y.F. Ningxia’s relative resources carrying capacity and sustainable development research. Arid. Land Resour. Environ. 2007, 21, 55–59. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Z.H.; Dong, S.C.; Tang, S.Y. Relative resource carrying capacity model improvement and empirical analysis. Resour. Sci. 2008, 30, 1336–1342. [Google Scholar]
- Sun, H.; Liu, Y.Y. The expansion and empirical analysis of relative resource carrying capacity model. China Polity Resour. Environ. 2014, 24, 126–135. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, M.; Zhang, X.P. Coupling degree of social economy, resource and environment in ecologically fragile areas: A case study of Zhaotong City, Yunnan Province. J. Chin. Univ. Chin. Acad. Sci. 2017, 06, 684–691. [Google Scholar]
- Peng, Z.; Guo, S. Research on the Relative Carrying Capacity of resources Based on Improved Model in the Southwest District of China: A Case Study in Ya’an City of Sichuan Province. Areal Rearch Dev. 2018, 37, 153–158. [Google Scholar]
- Qu, B.; Xie, S.Y. Chongqing Sanxia ecological economic zone ecological security and countermeasures. Reg. Res. Dev. 2006, 25, 120–124. [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, H.L.; Huang, J. Theoretical snalysis and reconstruction of capacity building for sustainable development. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 1999, 9, 20–24. [Google Scholar]
- Stdaily.com. Available online: http://www.stdaily.com/cxzg80/guonei/2018-03/14/content_647382.shtml (accessed on 7 November 2018).
- Xiao, Z.Y. Population quality, economic growth and CO2 emission analysis. Arid Land Resour. Environ. 2013, 27, 25–31. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, P.; Zhou, X.; Xiang, Y.; Ling, W.; Chen, M. Contamination and risk assessment of estrogens in livestock manure: A case study in Jiangsu Province, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eastmoney.com. Available online: http://finance.eastmoney.com/news/11063,20180731916249585.html (accessed on 8 November 2018).
- Xie, X.; Pu, L. Assessment of urban ecosystem health based on matter element analysis: A case study of 13 cities in Jiangsu Province, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China. The 2015 Jiangsu Statistical Yearbook; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2015. (In Chinese)
Year | P | The Traditional Model | The Improved Model | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cs | P′ | R | The Type of Carrying State | Cs | P′ | R | The Type of Carrying State | ||
2001 | 73.59 | 102.94 | −29.35 | −39.89 | surplus | 94.54 | −20.95 | −28.47 | surplus |
2002 | 74.06 | 102.75 | −28.70 | −38.75 | surplus | 93.29 | −19.23 | −25.97 | surplus |
2003 | 74.58 | 102.33 | −27.76 | −37.22 | surplus | 94.61 | −20.03 | −26.86 | surplus |
2004 | 75.23 | 104.78 | −29.56 | −39.29 | surplus | 94.81 | −19.58 | −26.03 | surplus |
2005 | 75.88 | 112.04 | −36.16 | −47.65 | surplus | 102.17 | −26.29 | −34.64 | surplus |
2006 | 76.56 | 111.92 | −35.36 | −46.19 | surplus | 101.86 | −25.30 | −33.05 | surplus |
2007 | 77.23 | 108.65 | −31.42 | −40.68 | surplus | 98.94 | −21.71 | −28.11 | surplus |
2008 | 77.62 | 109.27 | −31.64 | −40.76 | surplus | 98.44 | −20.82 | −26.82 | surplus |
2009 | 78.10 | 110.79 | −32.69 | −41.85 | surplus | 100.75 | −22.65 | −29.00 | surplus |
2010 | 78.69 | 112.30 | −33.61 | −42.71 | surplus | 101.57 | −22.88 | −29.08 | surplus |
2011 | 78.99 | 111.52 | −32.53 | −41.18 | surplus | 102.10 | −23.11 | −29.26 | surplus |
2012 | 79.20 | 111.76 | −32.56 | −41.11 | surplus | 100.71 | −21.51 | −27.16 | surplus |
2013 | 79.39 | 112.03 | −32.64 | −41.11 | surplus | 100.34 | −20.95 | −26.38 | surplus |
2014 | 79.60 | 111.42 | −31.82 | −39.97 | surplus | 100.05 | −20.45 | −25.69 | surplus |
2015 | 79.76 | 113.25 | −33.49 | −41.98 | surplus | 102.47 | −22.71 | −28.47 | surplus |
Average | 77.23 | 109.18 | −31.95 | −41.36 | surplus | 99.11 | −21.88 | −28.33 | surplus |
Year | Crwle1 | Cre2 | Cre3 | Crch | Cs | P | P′ | R |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2001 | 33.51 | 170.71 | 108.87 | 88.41 | 94.54 | 73.59 | −20.95 | −28.47 |
2002 | 33.84 | 162.88 | 111.94 | 84.88 | 93.29 | 74.06 | −19.23 | −25.97 |
2003 | 40.86 | 150.70 | 117.01 | 85.56 | 94.61 | 74.58 | −20.03 | −26.86 |
2004 | 33.52 | 154.91 | 120.51 | 88.10 | 94.81 | 75.23 | −19.58 | −26.03 |
2005 | 38.12 | 159.37 | 129.83 | 99.55 | 102.17 | 75.88 | −26.29 | −34.64 |
2006 | 38.28 | 157.16 | 130.24 | 99.35 | 101.86 | 76.56 | −25.30 | −33.05 |
2007 | 40.22 | 143.97 | 127.22 | 99.56 | 98.94 | 77.23 | −21.71 | −28.11 |
2008 | 37.15 | 142.89 | 128.77 | 100.44 | 98.44 | 77.62 | −20.82 | −26.82 |
2009 | 38.68 | 145.79 | 131.73 | 102.36 | 100.75 | 78.10 | −22.65 | −29.00 |
2010 | 36.72 | 148.93 | 134.49 | 102.12 | 101.57 | 78.69 | −22.88 | −29.08 |
2011 | 41.78 | 143.74 | 135.23 | 101.23 | 102.10 | 78.99 | −23.11 | −29.26 |
2012 | 37.27 | 144.27 | 135.46 | 100.19 | 100.71 | 79.20 | −21.51 | −27.16 |
2013 | 36.39 | 143.02 | 136.60 | 99.21 | 100.34 | 79.39 | −20.95 | −26.38 |
2014 | 38.96 | 136.48 | 138.25 | 97.95 | 100.05 | 79.60 | −20.45 | −25.69 |
2015 | 42.64 | 142.24 | 139.88 | 96.34 | 102.47 | 79.76 | −22.71 | −28.47 |
Average | 37.86 | 149.80 | 128.40 | 96.35 | 99.11 | 77.23 | −21.88 | −28.33 |
Region | P | Crwle1 | Cre2 | Cre3 | Crch | Cs | P′ | The Type of Carrying State | R |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nanjing | 8.24 | 2.48 | 15.99 | 19.39 | 14.46 | 12.65 | −4.41 | surplus | −53.60 |
Wuxi | 6.51 | 1.69 | 15.15 | 16.99 | 9.36 | 10.51 | −4.00 | surplus | −61.38 |
Xuzhou | 8.67 | 6.42 | 7.55 | 10.61 | 9.98 | 8.62 | 0.05 | overload | 0.62 |
Changzhou | 4.70 | 1.77 | 8.94 | 10.52 | 6.73 | 6.82 | −2.12 | surplus | −45.06 |
Suzhou | 10.62 | 2.53 | 41.69 | 28.93 | 14.04 | 20.59 | −9.97 | surplus | −93.91 |
Nantong | 7.30 | 5.38 | 10.85 | 12.27 | 8.83 | 9.23 | −1.93 | surplus | −26.45 |
Lianyungang | 4.47 | 3.53 | 5.06 | 4.31 | 4.28 | 4.22 | 0.25 | overload | 5.66 |
Huai’an | 4.87 | 5.03 | 4.81 | 5.48 | 4.63 | 5.04 | −0.17 | surplus | −3.45 |
Yancheng | 7.23 | 8.83 | 11.16 | 8.40 | 6.57 | 8.72 | −1.49 | surplus | −20.59 |
Yangzhou | 4.48 | 3.26 | 6.28 | 8.01 | 5.09 | 5.66 | −1.17 | surplus | −26.19 |
Zhenjiang | 3.18 | 1.82 | 6.24 | 6.99 | 3.91 | 4.67 | −1.49 | surplus | −47.06 |
Taizhou | 4.64 | 3.61 | 5.48 | 7.36 | 4.40 | 5.27 | −0.63 | surplus | −13.47 |
Suqian | 4.85 | 3.98 | 3.03 | 4.24 | 4.08 | 3.89 | 0.97 | overload | 19.93 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yang, J.; Ding, H. A Quantitative Assessment of Sustainable Development Based on Relative Resource Carrying Capacity in Jiangsu Province of China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2786. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122786
Yang J, Ding H. A Quantitative Assessment of Sustainable Development Based on Relative Resource Carrying Capacity in Jiangsu Province of China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2018; 15(12):2786. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122786
Chicago/Turabian StyleYang, Jinbi, and Hao Ding. 2018. "A Quantitative Assessment of Sustainable Development Based on Relative Resource Carrying Capacity in Jiangsu Province of China" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15, no. 12: 2786. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122786
APA StyleYang, J., & Ding, H. (2018). A Quantitative Assessment of Sustainable Development Based on Relative Resource Carrying Capacity in Jiangsu Province of China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(12), 2786. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122786