Can the Land Use Master Plan Control Urban Expansion and Protect Farmland in China? A Case Study of Nanjing

Abstract

Urbanization represents a challenge for plans aimed at controlling urban expansion and protecting farmland, such as the land use master plan (LUMP) instituted by the Chinese national government. This paper studies the effectiveness of such top–down plans under the authoritarian regime through the case study of Nanjing. In contrast to previous studies that compare actual and planned land‐use maps, we compare actual and planned land‐use patterns. We use land‐use change data to examine spatio‐temporal land‐use change between the years 1997 and 2014. The results indicate that the actual amount of urban‐rural built‐up land exceeded planned regulatory amount by 50,185 ha and the total farmland was 70,541 ha less than the target outlined in the LUMP (1997–2010). Based on these results, and the fact that the allowed total urban‐rural built‐up land had already been surpassed in 2014, it is to be expected that the target of farmland protection outlined in the LUMP (2006–2020) will be broken, signaling the ineffectiveness of the plan to control urban expansion and protect farmland. Plan‐led developments (e.g., new towns, development zones) and market forces (e.g., housing market, foreign direct investment) explain these developments. This study indicates that when cities embrace “growth‐led” development and entrepreneurial governance, the ability of plans to control urban expansion and protect farmland is severely limited.

Monitoring and Evaluation of Eco-Environment Quality Based on Remote Sensing-Based Ecological Index (RSEI) in Taihu Lake Basin, China

“…From 2010 to 2018, with the implementation of a new overall plan for land utilization in China, the state advocated the intensive use of land and increasingly strict control over urban expansion. Urban expansion in the Taihu Lake Basin slowed down, and the frequency of exchange between land-use types decreased [45]. During this period, the construction land area increased by 1318.18 km 2 , with the main sources still being cultivated land and forest land, 1448.72 km 2 and 48.28 km 2 , respectively, which reduced the total RSEI by 94.53 × 10 3 and 5.26 × 10 3 , respectively.…”

Fixability–Flexibility Relations in Sustainable Territorial Spatial Planning in China: A Review from the Food–Energy–Water Nexus Perspective

“…Since 1987, China has experienced three rounds of quota-oriented land use master planning, generating many positive impacts to coordinate the relationship between the demands of social and economic development, as well as resource and environmental protection, with many tools utilised to control urban construction land expansion, reduce farmland loss and protect important ecological land [6,7]. However, many scholars have expressed critical opinions on the performance and risks of the control tools used in land use planning, noting that urban expansion and farmland protection have not been adequately achieved under the enormous demand from urbanisation and industrialisation [8,9].…”

From “Division” to “Integration”: Evolution and Reform of China’s Spatial Planning System

“…On the one hand, the control of the key indicators was a major characteristic of this round of LUMP. Centering on the dynamic balance of the total area of farmland and control of the total area of construction land, the main indicators were decomposed from top to bottom, level by level, at the national, provincial, city, county, and town (township) levels [48], thereby significantly improving the rigidity of this round of LUMP. On the other hand, land use management and control was another major characteristic of this round of LUMP.…”