Assessment and forecast of Beijing and Shanghai's urban ecosystem health

Quantitative Evaluation of Ecosystem Health in a Karst Area of South China

“…Many experts and scholars have put forward different definitions [8,9] and various indicators [10][11][12] to analyze ecosystem health. Ecosystem health research has tended to examine single-ecosystem scales, such as forests [13,14], wetlands [15,16], river basins [17][18][19], marine environments [20,21], farmlands [22,23], mines [24], and cities [25][26][27]. Research on regional, multi-ecosystem scales have only begun to emerge in recent years.…”

Assessing urbanization quality using structure and function analyses: A case study of the urban agglomeration around Hangzhou Bay (UAHB), China

“…Qualitative assessment mainly includes basic theories of urbanization (Wu, Zhao, & Gao, 2013), urbanization processes (Chen et al, 2014;Feng & Chen, 2010;Goncalves, Pacheco, Xavier Tanajura, & da Silva, 2013), and urbanization paths (Bai, Shi, & Liu, 2014;Cao, Lv, Zheng, & Wang, 2014;Chen, Liu, & Tao, 2013;Hsieh, 2014;Zhao, 2013). Quantitative assessment mainly consists of comprehensive assessment of urbanization quality (Chen et al, 2014;Li, Gao, Gao, Shi, & Liu, 2010;Li & Li, 2014;Yew, 2012), development and applications of assessment index systems Yu, Wu, Zheng, Zhang, & Shen, 2014), and dynamic coupling of coordination degrees between urbanization and socio-economic and ecoenvironmental development (Alemulali, Fereidouni, Lee, & Sab, 2013;Chen et al, 2013;Gregg, Jones, & Dawson, 2003;Liu & Xie, 2013;Ponce de Leon Barido & Marshall, 2014;Tu, 2013;Xia, Wang, Song, & Da, 2014;Xiong et al, 2012;Yang, Yin, & Long, 2013;You & Shi, 2013;Zhao et al, 2013). In the current literature, the UQ assessment indicators can be classified into two types: 1) single indicators, including demographic type (Chen, Zhang, Wu, & Chen, 2010;Liu, 2000), land type and spatial type (Wang, Zhao, Sun, & Yang, 2011); and 2) composite indicators, including societal type (Inkeles & David, 1974), environmental type (Tursun & Zibibula, 2010), economic-social-ecological (environmental) type (Ghosh & Kanjilal, 2014;, and driving forces-quality-fairness type (Niu, 2012).…”

Assessment of Urban Ecosystem Health Based on Entropy Weight Extension Decision Model in Urban Agglomeration

“…Based on previous academic achievements and regional characteristics, this study established a comprehensive indexing system for selecting reasonable indicators and scientifically evaluating the ecosystem health of the cities in the UA located in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River [17,18,20,21]. Meanwhile, the choice of index system took into consideration the availability, operability, hierarchy, and completeness of the scientific data.…”

“…All factors were positive indicators, except for energy consumption per 10,000 Yuan of GDP, water consumption per 10,000 Yuan of GDP, the per capita annual disposable income ratio of urban and rural areas, Engel's coefficient of urban households, and the urban area's population density. In this study, the classification of most indicators' attributes draw on the experience of the previous academic achievements [17,18,20,21], except for the per capita annual disposable income ratio of urban and rural areas and the urban area's population density. The classification of these two indicators' attributes is based on the development actuality and the State Environmental Protection Agency's policy (the proposed regulations on the construction index of eco-county, eco-city, and eco-province).…”

“…The other is objective weighting methods, which includes information entropy method, principle component analysis, deviation and mean square difference method, etc. Compared with objective weighting, subjective weighting is easily influenced by the experts' subjective consciousness, which has a certain deviation and cannot correctly reflect the relationship between the indicator data [21].…”