Next Article in Journal
Rural Energy Communities as Pillar towards Low Carbon Future in Egypt: Beyond COP27
Next Article in Special Issue
System Cognition and Analytic Technology of Cultivated Land Quality from a Data Perspective
Previous Article in Journal
A Comparative Analysis of Characteristics and Synoptic Backgrounds of Extreme Heat Events over Two Urban Agglomerations in Southeast China
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Cooperative-Dominated Model of Conservation Tillage to Mitigate Soil Degradation on Cultivated Land and Its Effectiveness Evaluation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 11
Issue 12
10.3390/land11122236
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Is Cultivated Land Increased by Land Consolidation Sustainably Used in Mountainous Areas?

by
Jian Zhou
1,
Chao Li
2,*,
Xiaotong Chu
1 and
Chenying Luo
3
1
Northwest Land and Resource Research Center, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China
2
China Land Surveying and Planning Institute, Beijing 100035, China
3
School of Geography and Tourism, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2022, 11(12), 2236; https://doi.org/10.3390/land11122236
Submission received: 5 November 2022 / Revised: 4 December 2022 / Accepted: 6 December 2022 / Published: 8 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Arable Land Quality: Observation, Estimation, Optimization and Application)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Land consolidation (LC) in China is an important means by which we can increase the quantity and improve the quality of cultivated land. At present, large areas of cultivated land are abandoned in mountainous areas. It is unclear whether the increased cultivated land from LC in mountainous areas is sustainably used. Data from 64 land consolidation zones completed in 2016 in the Qinba Mountain Area were collected. The land-use status was obtained from high-resolution remote sensing images by the method of visual interpretation, and land-use changes were analyzed. According to our results, the increased cultivated land by LC is mainly terrace, accounting for 92.22% of the total area of increased cultivated land. The increased cultivated land is mainly distributed in the Qinba Mountainous Area, and terrace is the main type of increased cultivated land in both the Hanzhong Basin Area and Qinba Mountainous Area. The transformation rate of cultivated land from LC, especially terrace, is small. The transformation rates of terrace in the Hanzhong Basin Area and Qinba Mountainous Area are 0.36% and 0.09%, respectively. The socioeconomic development in mountainous areas is relatively lagging, and the per capita cultivated land area is small. Many farmers are still engaged in agricultural production and earn a basic income. Thus, high-quality cultivated land with convenient transportation is sustainably used. LC remains a key avenue for increasing cultivated land area, improving agricultural productivity, increasing farmers’ incomes, and promoting rural development in the mountainous areas.

1. Introduction

Land consolidation (LC) is an important means with which to increase the quantity and improve the quality of cultivated land to ensure food security around the world [1,2,3]. LC in China includes land reclamation, cropland consolidation, and land rehabilitation [4]. Land reclamation refers to the transformation of non-cultivated lands, such as grassland, into cultivated land. Land rehabilitation is the conversion of cultivated land damaged by construction, disasters, and other incidents into cultivated land. Cropland consolidation seeks to enhance the agricultural productivity of existing cultivated land by improving cultivated land quality [5]. The practices of land leveling engineering, irrigation and drainage engineering, field road engineering, and eco-environment engineering are conducted in LC. From 1999 to 2017, LC increased by 9.0 × 108 hm2 of cultivated land in China, accounting for 70% of the total increased cultivated land area and exceeding the 7.8 × 108 hm2 of cultivated land occupied by construction [6]. Therefore, apart from using LC to increase the cultivated land area, China also deploys LC under its comprehensive rural vitalization strategy aimed at increasing farmers’ incomes by reducing agricultural production costs and increasing grain yields [7,8], coordinating urban and rural development [9], and promoting the modernization of agriculture and rural areas [10,11].
The potential of using LC to increase cultivated land area has been extensively studied. Studies in Poland show that LC has increased the area of cadastral plots by 17% [12]. A set of criteria showing the potential for LC at the municipal level and project level were established in Europe [13]. Vegetation cover was used to reflect the dilapidated degree of rural residential areas to estimate the potential for rural residential areas to be consolidated into cultivated land [14]. The distribution of increased cultivated land has gradually moved to the ecologically fragile western areas of China, which has hindered the sustainable utilization of cultivated land [15]. To understand the potential of increasing cultivated land area, China conducted surveys on reserved land resources for cultivation in 2000, 2015, and 2021. The survey of reserved land resources for cultivation mainly investigated the natural and ecological conditions of land resources. In addition, the natural potential of LC to increase cultivated land area was revised from the perspectives of government management, farmer participation, and economic conditions [16,17,18]. In a study of LC to enhance the quality of cultivated land, eliminating the limiting factor of cultivated land quality was an important research aspect [19,20]. Soil quality, land fragmentation, parcel shape and area, farm structure, the accessibility of roads, and terrain difficulty were identified as factors affecting agricultural production, and the land consolidation sequence was determined according to these factors [21]. The effects of LC on soil pH, soil organic matter, total N, available P, and available K were studied [22]. The change in cultivated land quality after LC was also explored [23]. The improvement of agricultural production efficiency by LC mainly occurred through the optimization of cultivated land plot shapes and the adjustment of landownership [24,25,26]. From the aspects of average cultivated land parcel size, the number of cultivated land parcels, and the average number of cultivated land parcels per landowner, two different models were used to study the allocation of newly increased cultivated land parcels in LC in Turkey [27]. A cultivated land plot exchange halved the number of plots per household, increased the size of plots, and boosted labor productivity in Vietnam [28]. LC increased farmers’ income and reduced rural poverty by increasing the area of cultivated land, enhancing the quality of cultivated land, and improving the efficiency of agricultural production [29,30]. LC is an important means of promoting rural vitalization [31]. It should be noted that the above-mentioned functions of LC largely depend on the sustainable use of increased cultivated land. Mountainous areas are a special geographical system featuring a human–land relationship [32]. With the advancement of China’s urbanization, the rural population in mountainous areas is decreasing substantially [33,34], and large areas of cultivated land have been abandoned [35,36,37,38]. From 2000 to 2020, the rural population in China decreased from 808.37 million to 509.92 million. The proportion of the rural population to the total population dropped from 63.78% to 36.11%. A survey in China showed that 13.5% and 15% of cultivated land was abandoned in 2011 and 2013, respectively [39]. In 2015, more than 30% of the cultivated land area was abandoned and not used for cultivation in mountainous areas [40]. Cultivated land abandonment in mountainous areas is becoming increasingly severe [41]. The abandonment rate of low-quality cultivated land in Wulong County, Chongqing City, reached 46.25% in 2010 [42]. The maximum abandonment rate of villages in Sichuan Province was 44.64% in 2016–2018 [43]. From 2001 to 2010, 2.76 × 106 hm2 of cultivated land was increased by LC in China. From 2011 to 2015, 1.84 × 106 hm2 of cultivated land was increased by LC in China. During 2006–2012 and 2011–2015, the government invested more than USD 30.74 billion and USD 76.71 billion in LC, respectively. Under rural vitalization and food security strategies, more funds will be spent on LC. However, it is unclear whether or not the increased cultivated land from LC in mountainous areas is sustainably used (Figure 1). Experts have also called for a halt to LC in mountainous areas due to the severe abandonment of cultivated land in these regions. If the increased cultivated land by LC is not sustainably used in mountainous areas, the investment will not be able to play its role. Therefore, under the background of cultivated land abandonment in mountainous areas, it is urgent to study the sustainable use of cultivated land by LC, to guide the development of LC in mountainous areas.
Thus, taking 64 land consolidation zones completed in 2016 in the Qinba Mountain Area as research samples, this article (1) analyzes the increased cultivated land by LC, (2) calculates the transformation rate of cultivated land after LC, and (3) puts forward a suggestion for the future development of LC in mountainous areas.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Hanzhong City is located at 105°30′50″ E–108°16′45″ E, 32°08′54″ N–33°53′16″ N. It is a prefecture-level city in Shaanxi Province (Figure 2). The total area is 27,000 km2. The Han River, the largest tributary of the Yangtze River, passes through the middle of Hanzhong City. Hanzhong City is an important water conservation area for China’s South-to-North Water Diversion Project. The geomorphic types of Hanzhong City are Hanzhong Basin Area (HZBA) and Qinba Mountainous Area (QBMA). Areas of HZBA and QBMA account for 6.03% and 93.97% of the total area of Hanzhong City, respectively.
At the end of 2019, Hanzhong City had a total population of 3.44 million, and the per capita land area was 0.79 hm2. The cultivated land area was 212,370 hm2, and the per capita cultivated land area was only 0.07 hm2 in rural areas. The per capita GDP was RMB 45,027, which was lower than the per capita GDP of RMB 66,545 for Shaanxi Province and the per capita GDP of RMB 69,765 for China. According to the results of the Seventh National Population Census in 2020, the urbanization rate was 50.96%. Thus, the per capita cultivated land area is small and socioeconomic development is relatively backward in Hanzhong City.

2.2. Data and Methods

The data from 64 land consolidation zones (LCZs) completed in Hanzhong City in 2016 were collected. (1) To obtain land use in the land consolidation zone (LCZ) before LC, a remote sensing image of LCZ before 2016 was downloaded using BigMap software. The spatial resolution was 0.5 m. Land use of LCZs before LC was obtained by visual interpretation. The land use at this phase was defined as first-phase land use (FPLU). (2) To analyze increased cultivated land by LC, remote sensing images of LCZs after 2016 were also downloaded. The spatial resolution was also 0.5 m, and land use of LCZs after LC was obtained by visual interpretation. The land use at this phase was defined as mid-term land use (MTLU). Increased cultivated land by LC was analyzed using FPLU and MTLU. (3) To analyze the transformation of cultivated land by LC, a remote sensing image with a spatial resolution of 0.5 m after mid-term land use was downloaded and interpreted by visual interpretation. The land use at this phase was defined as the third-phase land use (TPLU). Acquisition times of all remote sensing images were between 2013 and 2021 (Table 1). The number of LCZs with the time intervals of MTLU and TPLU, or of less than 1 year, 1–2 years, and greater than 2 years, were 10, 26, and 28, respectively. The area of LCZs with time intervals of less than 1 year, 1–2 years, and greater than 2 years was 115,709 m2, 783,883 m2, and 111,0581 m2, accounting for 5%, 36%, and 59%, respectively. Transformed cultivated land refers to the conversion of cultivated land to non-cultivated land after LC. The land-use type in MTLU is cultivated land, and the land-use type in TPLU is non-cultivated land. The transformation rate of cultivated land was calculated:
A R = E A
where AR is the transformation rate of cultivated land or terrace; E is the area of transformed cultivated land or terrace after LC; and A is the area of cultivated land or terrace of MTLU.
Land-use types included cultivated land, forest land, shrubland, grassland, inland beach, land for roads, land for ditches, land for rural settlements, water bodies, and spare land. The terrace was separated from cultivated land.

3. Results

3.1. Scale of Land Consolidation Zone

The number of LCZs gradually decreases with the increase in the area of LCZ. When the area of the LCZs was less than 1.7 hm2, the number of LCZs in the different area groups was between 9 and 16 (Figure 3). When the area of the LCZs was between 1.7 hm2 and 6.7 hm2, the number of LCZs of the different area groups was between 2 and 5. The number of LCZs of the different area groups was all 1, as the area of LCZs was greater than 8.2 hm2. Thus, as the scale of LCZs increases, the number of LCZs decreases.

3.2. Increased Cultivated Land by Land Consolidation

3.2.1. Type and Source of Increased Cultivated Land by Land Consolidation

Increased cultivated land by LC is dominated by terrace. According to the FPLU and MTLU, the area of increased cultivated land by LC was 952,527 m2 (Table 2). The area of terrace land increased by 878,433 m2, accounting for 92.22% of the total area of increased cultivated land (Figure 4).
The increased cultivated land is mainly derived from grassland, shrubland, and forest land. Their areas accounted for 71.284%, 14.177%, and 10.656% of the total area of increased cultivated land, respectively (Table 3). Some inefficient forest land has been reclaimed for cultivation by LC in China. The increased terrace mainly comes from grassland, shrubland, forest land, and non-terraced cultivated land. The proportions of each of their areas to the total area of the increased terrace were 65.320%, 13.005%, 11.172%, and 10.500%, respectively (Table 3).
Thus, the increased cultivated land is mainly terrace. The increased cultivated land and increased terrace are mainly derived from grassland, shrubland, forest land, and non-terraced cultivated land.

3.2.2. Increased Cultivated Land by Land Consolidation in Different Geomorphic Regions

The QBMA is the main distribution area for increased cultivated land. The increased cultivated land in the QBMA was 881,943 m2, accounting for 91.46% of the total increased cultivated land area. For the QBMA, an average of 34.76 m2 of cultivated land was added per 100 km2. The increased cultivated land in the QBMA was mainly from grassland, shrubland, and forest land (Table 4). The increased cultivated land in the HZBA was 82,323 m2, accounting for 8.54% of the total increased cultivated land area. An average of 50.56 m2 of cultivated land was added per 100 km2 in the HZBA. The increased cultivated land in the HZBA was mainly from grassland and shrubland.
The terrace is the main type of increased cultivated land in the QBMA and HZBA. The increased terrace area in the QBMA was 816,979 m2, accounting for 92.63% of the total area of the increased cultivated land in the QBMA. The increased terrace was mainly from grassland, shrubland, and forest land (Table 5). The increased terrace area in the HZBA was 63,269 m2, accounting for 76.85% of the total area of the increased cultivated land in the HZBA. The increased terrace area is mainly derived from grassland and non-terraced cultivated land.
Thus, the increased cultivated land by LC is mainly distributed in the QBMA, and terrace is the main type of increased cultivated land in both the QBMA and HZBA.

3.3. Transformation of Cultivated Land after Land Consolidation

The transformation rate of cultivated land by LC is small, but the transformation rate in the HZBA is larger than that in the QBMA. According to the MTLU and TPLU, 46,207 m2 of cultivated land was transformed after LC, accounting for 3.08% of the total cultivated area in the MTLU. The transformed cultivated land in the HZBA was 23,440 m2, accounting for 9.38% of the total cultivated land area of the MTLU in this region (Table 6). The transformed cultivated land in the QBMA was 22,767 m2, accounting for 1.82% of the total cultivated land area of the MTLU in this region.
The transformation rate of terrace by LC is also small. The area of transformed terrace was 895 m2, accounting for 0.09% of the total area of terrace in the MTLU. The transformed terrace in the HZBA was 225 m2, accounting for 0.36% of the total area of terrace in the MTLU in this region (Table 6). The transformed terrace in the QBMA was 670 m2, accounting for 0.07% of the total area of terrace in the MTLU in this region.
Cultivated land is mainly transformed into grassland. The areas of cultivated land converted into grassland or land for roads were 45,901 m2 and 306 m2, respectively, accounting for 99.34% and 0.66% of the total transformed cultivated land area. The conversion of cultivated land into roads existed in two LCZs, which was the consequence of roads being widened. In the HZBA, the areas of cultivated land converted into grassland or land for roads were 23,215 m2 and 225 m2 (Table 6), respectively, accounting for 99.04% and 0.96% of the total transformed cultivated land area in this region. In the QBMA, the areas of cultivated land converted into grassland or land for roads were 22,686 m2 and 81 m2, respectively, accounting for 99.64% and 0.36% of the total transformed cultivated land area in this region.

4. Discussion

The transformation rate of cultivated land, especially terrace, is much less than the abandonment rate of currently cultivated land. A survey of rural households in 262 counties in 29 provinces in China found that 13.5% and 15% of cultivated land was abandoned in 2011 and 2013, respectively [39]. According to the results of an investigation into the abandoned cultivated land in 142 mountainous counties of China, the abandonment rate of cultivated land in Jiangxi Province and Chongqing City reached 34.03% and 32.49% in 2015, respectively [40]. In addition, relevant studies have shown that cultivated land abandonment in mountainous areas is becoming increasingly severe [41]. The abandonment rate of villages in Sichuan Province reached 44.64% during 2016–2018 [43]. However, the transformation rate of cultivated land by LC was 3.08% but that of terrace was only 0.09%. The transformation rate of cultivated land in the HZBA and QBMA was 9.38% and 1.82%, respectively. The transformation rate of terrace in the HZBA and QBMA was 0.36% and 0.07%, respectively.
Firstly, the infrastructure of cultivated land by LC is much better than that of currently cultivated land. Related research has demonstrated that the accessibility of cultivated land was an important factor affecting the abandonment of cultivated land in mountainous areas [44,45,46]. With the increase in farmland-to-housing distance, the abandonment rate increased. When the distance was greater than 3 km, the abandonment rate was greater than 50% [42]. The “Acceptance specification for land consolidation and rehabilitation projects (TD/T 1013-2013)” stipulates that the accessibility of increased cultivated land is an important aspect of the acceptance of LC [47]. Thus, cultivated land by LC has very good accessibility by road (Figure 5).
Secondly, the quality of cultivated land by LC is much better than that of currently cultivated land. Terrace is the main type of increased cultivated land by LC. Terrace accounted for 92.22% of the total area of increased cultivated land. The soil thickness of terrace is much greater than that of cultivated land. In addition, terrace has functions of soil conservation, water storage, and increasing crop yield [48]. The abandonment rate increased as the quality of cultivated land declined, and the abandonment rate of low-quality cultivated land in Wulong County, Chongqing City, reached more than 46% in 2010 [42]. The high quality of cultivated land by LC prevents cultivated land abandonment.
Thirdly, socioeconomic development in mountainous areas is relatively lagging, and per capita cultivated land area is small. (1) Although China has been promoting urbanization for decades, the urbanization rate in mountainous areas is relatively low. In 2020, the urbanization rates in Hanzhong City, Shaanxi Province, and China were 50.96%, 62.65%, and 63.89%, respectively. From 2010 to 2020, the urbanization rate of Hanzhong City was much smaller than that of Shaanxi Province and China (Figure 6). (2) Young people are moving to cities because of the low incomes earned from farming. According to monitoring reports of China’s migrant workers, young people earn about 21% more in cities than in rural areas. In China, more than 50% of people in their 20s and 30s moved to cities from rural areas in 2016 [33]. (3) Women and elderly people are the main labor force in agricultural production. In 2020, the average age of the labor force in agricultural production was about 55 years old in China [49]. There are few off-farm employment opportunities in mountainous areas, especially for the elderly. In other words, many farmers are still engaged in agricultural production and earn a basic income in mountainous areas. (4) Cultivated land is scarce in mountainous areas. For Hanzhong City, the per capita cultivated land area of the rural population at the end of 2011 and 2019 was 1.77 mu and 1.05 mu (1 mu ≈ 666.7 m2), respectively [50]. That of China’s rural population in 2019 was 3.67 mu [51]; and that of the global rural population in 2019 was 6.84 mu, while the per capita cultivated land area was 3.06 mu. Despite the scarcity of cultivated land resources in mountainous areas, the per capita area of cultivated land has not increased due to the abandonment of cultivated land. This is mainly attributed to the poor quality and infrastructure of abandoned cultivated land and its low grain yield. Therefore, high-quality cultivated land after LC with convenient transportation is sustainably used in mountainous areas.
Under the background of the abandonment of currently cultivated land in mountainous areas, LC is still a key way for increasing cultivated land area, improving agricultural productivity, increasing farmers’ incomes, and promoting rural development in this region.
The socioeconomic development of the HZBA makes the transformation rate of the cultivated land of this region larger than that of the QBMA. The municipal government of Hanzhong City is in the HZBA (Figure 2). In addition, the HZBA is relatively developed within the socio-economy of Hanzhong City. Farmers have more off-farm employment opportunities. The income from off-farm employment is higher than that of crop farming. Thus, the transformation rate of the cultivated land of the HZBA is larger than that of the QBMA.
Cultivated land abandonment is widespread throughout the world [52,53]. Cultivated land abandonment is severe in Europe, and significant differences are found among different countries. For example, in Poland, cultivated land abandonment is 13.9%, and in Portugal, it is 40% [47]. Flooding was an important factor that led to the abandonment of cultivated land in Vietnam [54]. From 2001 to 2012, the abandoned cultivated land in Turkey was mainly distributed in northern mountainous areas, and mountainous areas were the hotspot areas of cultivated land abandonment in Europe [55]. This article found that the transformation rate of cultivated land after LC in mountainous areas, especially for terrace, is very low. Therefore, terrace can be added by LC in mountainous areas to prevent cultivated land abandonment around the world.
The numbers of LCZs with a time interval of MTLU and TPLU of less than 1 year, 1–2 years, and greater than 2 years were 10, 26, and 28, respectively. Their areas of transformed cultivated land after LC were 3775 m2, 16,306 m2, and 26,126 m2, respectively. Their cultivated land areas were 64,374 m2, 510,372 m2, and 923,850 m2, respectively. Thus, their transformation rates were 5.86%, 3.19%, and 2.83%, respectively. This indicates that the transformation rate is decreasing with the extension of time. Further research will be carried out on the use of cultivated land after a longer period in the future.

5. Conclusions

Land consolidation is a vital measure to increase cultivated land in China. The cultivated land in mountainous areas has been severely abandoned. During 2016–2018, the abandonment rate of villages in Sichuan Province reached 44.64%. The abandonment rate increased with the increase in farmland-to-housing distance and more than 50% of cultivated land was abandoned when the farmland-to-housing distance was greater than 3 km. As a result, some experts suggested that LC should be stopped in mountainous areas. Taking 64 land consolidation zones completed in 2016 in the Qinba Mountain Area as research samples, this paper studies the land-use condition of cultivated land by LC. The number of LCZs gradually decreases with the increase in the LCZs’ area. The increased cultivated land by LC is mainly distributed in the QBMA, and the increased cultivated land in the QBMA and HZBA is mainly terrace. The increased terrace area accounts for 92.63% and 76.85% of the increased cultivated land area in the QBMA and HZBA, respectively. The transformation rate of cultivated land by LC, especially terrace, is small. The transformation rates of terrace in the HZBA and QBMA are 0.36% and 0.09%, respectively.
Under the background of the abandonment of currently cultivated land in mountainous areas, LC remains an important way to increase cultivated land area and improve the agricultural production condition to increase farmers’ income and promote rural development in this region. In the mountainous areas of the world, terrace can be added by LC to prevent cultivated land abandonment.

Author Contributions

Methodology, data curation, writing—original draft preparation, writing—review and editing, J.Z.; conceptualization, supervision, writing—review and editing, C.L. (Chao Li); visualization, X.C.; validation, C.L. (Chenying Luo). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was funded by the Social Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province (2022R065), the Major Theoretical and Practical Problems of Philosophy and Social Sciences in Shaanxi Province (2022ND0381), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (GK202103126), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41801067).

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We thank the reviewers and editors for their insightful comments.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Nguyen, H.Q.; Warr, P. Land consolidation as technical change: Economic impacts in rural Vietnam. World Dev. 2020, 127, 104750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Janus, J.; Ertunç, E. Differences in the effectiveness of land consolidation projects in various countries and their causes: Examples of Poland and Turkey. Land Use Pol. 2021, 108, 105542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Huylenbroeck, G.V.; Coelho, J.C.; Pinto, P.A. Evaluation of land consolidation projects (LCPs): A multidisciplinary approach. J. Rural Stud. 1996, 12, 297–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhou, J.; Cao, X. What is the policy improvement of China’s land consolidation? Evidence from completed land consolidation projects in Shaanxi Province. Land Use Pol. 2020, 99, 104847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Du, X.; Zhang, X.; Jin, X. Assessing the effectiveness of land consolidation for improving agricultural productivity in China. Land Use Pol. 2018, 70, 360–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zhou, Y.; Li, X.; Liu, Y. Cultivated land protection and rational use in China. Land Use Pol. 2021, 106, 105454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhou, Y.; Guo, L.; Liu, Y. Land consolidation boosting poverty alleviation in China: Theory and practice. Land Use Pol. 2019, 82, 339–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ying, L.; Dong, Z.; Wang, J.; Mei, Y.; Shen, Z.; Zhang, Y. Rural economic benefits of land consolidation in mountainous and hilly areas of southeast China: Implications for rural development. J. Rural Stud. 2020, 74, 142–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Luo, W.; Timothy, D.J. An assessment of farmers’ satisfaction with land consolidation performance in China. Land Use Pol. 2017, 61, 501–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Rao, J. Comprehensive land consolidation as a development policy for rural vitalisation: Rural In Situ Urbanisation through semi socio-economic restructuring in Huai Town. J. Rural Stud. 2022, 93, 386–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jiang, Y.; Long, H.; Tang, Y.; Deng, W.; Chen, K.; Zheng, Y. The impact of land consolidation on rural vitalization at village level: A case study of a Chinese village. J. Rural Stud. 2021, 86, 485–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Basista, I.; Balawejder, M. Assessment of selected land consolidation in south-eastern Poland. Land Use Pol. 2020, 99, 105033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Pašakarnis, G.; Maliene, V.; Dixon-Goughc, R.; Malys, N. Decision support framework to rank and prioritise the potential land areas for comprehensive land consolidation. Land Use Pol. 2021, 100, 104908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zhu, T.; Zhang, F.; Li, C.; Zhu, F.; Qu, Y.; Li, L.; Liu, J. Estimation and validation of rural residential land consolidation potential based on vegetation coverage rate. Trans. CSAE 2013, 29, 240–249. [Google Scholar]
  15. Zhou, J.; Zhang, F.; Wang, X.; Zhang, B. Spatial-temporal change and analysis of land consolidation’s newly increased cultivated land in China. Trans. CSAE 2014, 30, 282–289. [Google Scholar]
  16. Gao, Y.; Zhang, F.; Hao, J.; Zhang, B.; Zhou, J. Consolidation sequence of rural residential land based on consolidation potential and urgency degree. Resour. Sci. 2016, 38, 185–195. [Google Scholar]
  17. Janus, J.; Ertunç, E. Towards a full automation of land consolidation projects: Fast land partitioning algorithm using the land value map. Land Use Pol. 2022, 120, 106282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Asiama, K.O.; Bennett, R.M.; Zevenbergen, J.A. Land consolidation on Ghana’s rural customary lands: Drawing from The Dutch, Lithuanian and Rwandan experiences. J. Rural Stud. 2017, 56, 87–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chartin, C.; Evrard, O.; Salvador-Blanes, S.; Hinschberger, F.; Oost, K.V.; Lefèvre, I.; Daroussin, J.; Macaire, J.J. Quantifying and modelling the impact of land consolidation and field borders on soil redistribution in agricultural landscapes (1954–2009). Catena 2013, 110, 184–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yuan, X.; Shao, Y.; Li, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Wei, X.; Wang, X.; Zhao, Y. Cultivated land quality improvement to promote revitalization of sandy rural areas along the Great Wall in northern Shaanxi Province, China. J. Rural Stud. 2019, 93, 367–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Janus, J.; Taszakowski, J. Spatial differentiation of indicators presenting selected barriers in the productivity of agricultural areas: A regional approach to setting land consolidation priorities. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 93, 718–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wu, C.; Huang, J.; Zhu, H.; Zhang, L.; Minasny, B.; Marchant, B.P. Spatial changes in soil chemical properties in an agricultural zone in southeastern China due to land consolidation. Soil Tillage Res. 2019, 187, 152–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Song, W.; Pijanowski, B.C. The effects of China’s cultivated land balance program on potential land productivity at a national scale. Appl. Geogr. 2014, 46, 158–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Harasimowicz, S.; Janus, J.; Bacior, S.; Gniadek, J. Shape and size of parcels and transport costs as a mixed integer programming problem in optimization of land consolidation. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2017, 140, 113–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Liu, J.; Jin, X.; Xu, W.; Sun, R.; Han, B.; Yang, X.; Gu, Z.; Xu, G.; Sui, X.; Zhou, Y. Influential factors and classification of cultivated land fragmentation, and implications for future land consolidation: A case study of Jiangsu Province in eastern China. Land Use Pol. 2019, 88, 104185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gong, Y.; Tan, R. Emergence of local collective action for land adjustment in land consolidation in China: An archetype analysis. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 214, 104160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Uyan, M.; Cay, T.; Inceyol, Y.; Hakli, H. Comparison of designed different land reallocation models in land consolidation: A case study in Konya/Turkey. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2015, 110, 249–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tran, D.; Thu, V.H.; Goto, D. Agricultural land consolidation, labor allocation and land productivity: A case study of plot exchange policy in Vietnam. Econ. Anal. Policy 2022, 73, 455–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bahar, S.K.; Kirmikil, M. The evaluation of agricultural landowner inputs before and after land consolidation: The Kesik Village example. Land Use Pol. 2021, 109, 105605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bizoza, A.R. Investigating the effectiveness of land use consolidation—A component of the crop intensification programme in Rwanda. J. Rural Stud. 2021, 87, 213–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zhou, Y.; Li, Y.; Xu, C. Land consolidation and rural revitalization in China: Mechanisms and paths. Land Use Pol. 2020, 91, 104379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhong, X. Strengthen research on mountain sciences as the core of man-mountain in a real system. J. Geogr. Sci. 2011, 29, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  33. Liu, Y.; Li, Y. Revitalize the world’s countrysides. Nature 2017, 548, 275–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Zhang, H.; Zhang, S.; Liu, Z. Evolution and influencing factors of China’s rural population distribution patterns since 1990. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0233637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Hua, X.; Yan, J.; Li, H.; He, W.; Li, X. Wildlife damage and cultivated land abandonment: Findings from the mountainous areas of Chongqing, China. Crop Prot. 2016, 84, 141–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hou, D.; Meng, F.; Prishchepov, A.V. How is urbanization shaping agricultural land-use? Unraveling the nexus between farmland abandonment and urbanization in China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 214, 104170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cheng, X.; Zhou, H.; Liu, X.; Chen, X. Study on effect of farmers’ concurrent business degree on cropland abandonment in mountainous area: A case study in Wuling Mountain Area. Resour. Environ. Yangtze Basin 2021, 30, 246–256. [Google Scholar]
  38. Chen, Q.; Xie, H.; Zhai, Q. Management policy of farmers’ cultivated land abandonment behavior based on evolutionary game and simulation analysis. Land 2022, 11, 336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Li, S.; Li, X. Progress and prospect on farmland abandonment. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2016, 71, 370–389. [Google Scholar]
  40. Li, S.; Li, X.; Xin, L.; Tan, M.; Wang, X.; Wang, R.; Jiang, M.; Wang, Y. Extent and distribution of cropland abandonment in Chinese mountainous areas. Resour. Sci. 2017, 39, 1801–1811. [Google Scholar]
  41. Shi, K.; Yang, Q.; Li, Y.; Sun, X. Mapping and evaluating cultivated land fallow in Southwest China using multisource data. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 654, 987–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhang, Y.; Li, X.; Song, W.; Zhai, L. Land abandonment under rural restructuring in China explained from a cost-benefit perspective. J. Rural Stud. 2016, 47, 524–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wang, Y.; Peng, P.; Li, Q.; Chen, Z.; Tang, W. Spatial heterogeneity of farmland abandonment in the Sichuan Province, China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Ge, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Li, X. Farmland fragmentation and land use intensity in mountain areas: A case study of Yayu Village, Guizhou Province. Prog. Geogr. 2020, 39, 1095–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gellrich, M.; Zimmermann, N.E. Investigating the regional-scale pattern of agricultural land abandonment in the Swiss mountains: A spatial statistical modelling approach. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 79, 65–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Castillo, C.P.; Jacobs-Crisioni, C.; Diogo, V.; Lavalle, C. Modelling agricultural land abandonment in a fine spatial resolution multi-level land-use model: An application for the EU. Environ. Modell. Softw. 2021, 136, 104946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ministry of Land and Resources of the People’s Republic of China. Acceptance Specification for Land Consolidation and Rehabilitation Projects (TD/T 1013–2013); Ministry of Land and Resources of the People’s Republic of China: Beijing, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  48. Zhang, F.; Xu, Y. Theory and Practice of Rural Land Consolidation; China Agricultural University Press: Beijing, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  49. Liu, J.; Zhang, C.; Hu, R.; Zhu, X.; Cai, J. Aging of agricultural labor force and technical efficiency in tea production: Evidence from Meitan county, China. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Shaanxi Provincial Bureau of Statistics; Shaanxi Survey Team of the National Bureau of Statistics. Shaanxi Statistical Yearbook 2020; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  51. National Bureau of Statistics. China Statistical Yearbook 2020; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  52. Bista, R.; Zhang, Q.; Parajuli, R.; Karki, R.; Chhetri, B.B.K.; Song, C. Cropland abandonment in the community-forestry landscape in the middle hills of Nepal. Earth Interact. 2021, 25, 136–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Su, G.; Okahashi, H.; Chen, L. Spatial pattern of farmland abandonment in Japan: Identification and determinants. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Nguyen, H.D.; Pham, V.D.; Vu, P.L.; Nguyen, T.H.T.; Nguyen, O.H.; Nguyen, T.G.; Dang, D.K.; Tran, V.T.; Bui, Q.T.; Lai, T.A.; et al. Cropland abandonment and flood risks: Spatial analysis of a case in North Central Vietnam. Anthropocene 2022, 38, 100341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Estel, S.; Kuemmerle, T.; Alcántara, C.; Levers, C.; Prishchepov, A.; Hostert, P. Mapping farmland abandonment and recultivation across Europe using MODIS NDVI time series. Remote Sens. Environ. 2015, 163, 312–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Land 11 02236 g001 550
Figure 1. Theoretical analysis framework.
Figure 1. Theoretical analysis framework.
Land 11 02236 g001
Land 11 02236 g002 550
Figure 2. The location and geomorphy of Hanzhong City and land consolidation zones are indicated by points.
Figure 2. The location and geomorphy of Hanzhong City and land consolidation zones are indicated by points.
Land 11 02236 g002
Land 11 02236 g003 550
Figure 3. The number of LCZs with different scales.
Figure 3. The number of LCZs with different scales.
Land 11 02236 g003
Land 11 02236 g004 550
Figure 4. Increased terrace by land consolidation.
Figure 4. Increased terrace by land consolidation.
Land 11 02236 g004
Land 11 02236 g005 550
Figure 5. Remote sensing images of land consolidation zone before and after land consolidation in Hanzhong City.
Figure 5. Remote sensing images of land consolidation zone before and after land consolidation in Hanzhong City.
Land 11 02236 g005
Land 11 02236 g006 550
Figure 6. Urbanization rate of China, Shaanxi Province, and Hanzhong City from 2010 to 2020.
Figure 6. Urbanization rate of China, Shaanxi Province, and Hanzhong City from 2010 to 2020.
Land 11 02236 g006
Table
Table 1. Acquisition time of remote sensing images of land consolidation zones.
Table 1. Acquisition time of remote sensing images of land consolidation zones.
Number of LCZAcquisition Time of Remote Sensing ImageNumber of LCZAcquisition Time of Remote Sensing Image
FPLUMTLUTPLUFPLUMTLUTPLU
114 January 20145 December 201710 February 2020334 December 201317 December 201819 July 2020
26 August 20152 November 201820 December 20203427 January 201319 January 201820 December 2020
36 August 20152 November 201820 December 20203527 January 201319 January 201820 December 2020
46 May 20152 November 201820 December 20203627 January 201319 January 201820 December 2020
531 August 20155 December 201720 December 2020376 August 20159 January 201820 December 2020
622 January 20155 December 201720 December 20203814 August 201417 May 201713 July 2019
728 June 201119 February 201625 February 20203914 August 201417 May 201719 February 2020
821 December 201428 November 201711 March 20194014 August 201417 May 201719 February 2020
921 December 201423 May 201711 March 20194114 August 201417 May 201719 February 2020
1024 July 201511 May 20189 December 20194214 August 201417 May 201719 February 2020
1116 December 201311 May 201822 January 20204314 August 201417 May 201719 February 2020
1216 December 201311 May 201822 January 20204425 October 20131 March 201720 January 2018
1312 October 20137 June 20162 November 2017456 October 20131 March 201716 January 2018
1412 October 20137 June 20162 November 2017466 October 20131 March 201716 January 2018
1512 October 20137 June 20162 November 2017476 October 20131 March 201716 January 2018
1612 October 20137 June 20162 November 2017486 October 20131 March 201716 January 2018
1712 October 20137 June 20162 November 2017496 October 20131 March 201716 January 2018
1812 October 20137 June 20162 November 2017506 October 20131 March 201716 January 2018
1912 October 20137 June 20162 November 2017516 October 20131 March 201716 January 2018
2012 October 20137 June 20162 November 20175228 March 20151 March 20178 February 2021
2112 October 20137 June 20162 November 20175328 March 20151 March 20178 February 2021
2212 October 20137 June 20162 November 20175428 March 20151 March 201718 March 2019
2312 October 20137 June 20162 November 20175528 March 20151 March 201718 March 2019
2412 October 201326 March 201614 August 20195628 March 20151 March 201718 March 2019
2512 October 20131 July 20162 November 20175728 March 20151 March 201718 March 2019
2627 January 201319 January 201826 October 20185828 March 201511 March 201718 March 2019
2728 March 20158 January 201826 October 20185928 March 201511 March 201718 March 2019
2814 August 20141 March 201726 October 2018603 September 201412 May 201715 August 2019
293 September 20148 April 201815 August 2019613 September 201412 May 201718 March 2019
307 February 20159 August 20178 March 2019623 September 201412 May 201715 August 2019
3118 December 20149 August 201726 October 2018633 September 201412 May 201715 August 2019
326 October 20131 March 201726 October 2018649 October 20131 March 201715 August 2019
Table
Table 2. Land use of LCZ before and after LC.
Table 2. Land use of LCZ before and after LC.
Land-Use TypeArea in FPLU (m2)Area in MTLU (m2)Area Change (m2)
Cultivated land546,0691,498,596952,527
Forest land360,911289,761−71,150
Shrubland257,965160,657−97,308
Grassland928,548172,013−756,535
Inland beach41,1591625−39,534
Land for roads24,23034,1749944
Land for ditches5420972043
Land for rural settlements658165810
Water body1811325−1486
Spare land014991499
Table
Table 3. Sources of increased cultivated land and increased terrace.
Table 3. Sources of increased cultivated land and increased terrace.
Land-Use Type in FPLUIncreased Cultivated Land (m2)Proportion (%)Increased Terrace (m2)Proportion (%)
Non-terraced cultivated land0092,42410.500
Forest land102,74910.65698,34311.172
Shrubland136,70314.177114,47213.005
Grassland687,37671.284574,98665.320
Inland beach35,9063.72400.000
Land for roads460.005230.003
Water body14860.15400
Table
Table 4. Sources of increased cultivated land in different geomorphic regions.
Table 4. Sources of increased cultivated land in different geomorphic regions.
Land-Use Type in FPLUHZBAQBMA
Area (m2)Proportion (%)Area (m2)Proportion (%)
Forest land27693.36499,98011.336
Shrubland10,88513.222125,81814.266
Grassland68,66983.414618,70770.154
Inland beach0035,9064.071
Land for roads00460.005
Water body0014860.168
Total82,323100881,943100
Table
Table 5. Sources of increased terrace in different geomorphic regions.
Table 5. Sources of increased terrace in different geomorphic regions.
Land-Use Type in FPLUHZBAQBMA
Area (m2)Proportion (%)Area (m2)Proportion (%)
Non-terraced cultivated land10,88517.20481,5399.981
Forest land27694.37795,57411.697
Shrubland00114,47214.012
Grassland49,61578.419525,37164.307
Land for roads00230.003
Total63,269100816,979100
Table
Table 6. Transformed cultivated land and terrace after land consolidation.
Table 6. Transformed cultivated land and terrace after land consolidation.
Geomorphic RegionLand-Use Type in TPLULand-Use Type in MTLU
Cultivated Land (m2)Terrace (m2)
HZBAGrassland (m2)23,2150
Land for roads (m2)225225
Total23,440225
QBMAGrassland (m2)22,686670
Land for roads (m2)810
Total22,767670
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhou, J.; Li, C.; Chu, X.; Luo, C. Is Cultivated Land Increased by Land Consolidation Sustainably Used in Mountainous Areas? Land 2022, 11, 2236. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11122236

AMA Style

Zhou J, Li C, Chu X, Luo C. Is Cultivated Land Increased by Land Consolidation Sustainably Used in Mountainous Areas? Land. 2022; 11(12):2236. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11122236

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhou, Jian, Chao Li, Xiaotong Chu, and Chenying Luo. 2022. "Is Cultivated Land Increased by Land Consolidation Sustainably Used in Mountainous Areas?" Land 11, no. 12: 2236. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11122236

APA Style

Zhou, J., Li, C., Chu, X., & Luo, C. (2022). Is Cultivated Land Increased by Land Consolidation Sustainably Used in Mountainous Areas? Land, 11(12), 2236. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11122236

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop