CollectHomepage AdvertisementContact usMessage
  • Jul. 17, 2025

Arid Land Geography ›› 2025, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (5): 916-929.doi: 10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2024.357

• Regional Development • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Evaluation and its driving factors of sustainable development states in the cities of the Yellow River Basin

CUI Panpan1(), ZHANG Lijun1, QIN Yaochen1,2(), XIA Siyou3,4   

  1. 1. College of Geography and Environmental Science/Key Laboratory of Geospatial Technology for the Middle and Lower Yellow River Regions, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, Henan, China
    2. Key Research Institute of Yellow River Civilization and Sustainable Development & Collaborative Innovation Center on Yellow River Civilization Jointly Built by Henan Province and Ministry of Education, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, Henan, China
    3. Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Science and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
    4. Department of Geography, University at Buffalo-SUNY, Buffalo 14261, New York, America
  • Received:2024-06-07 Revised:2024-07-05 Online:2025-05-25 Published:2025-05-13
  • Contact: QIN Yaochen E-mail:cuipan3353@163.com;qinyc@henu.edu.cn

Abstract:

Research on the sustainable development status of a region is critical for facilitating informed decision-making and effective management. This study established an evaluation framework for assessing sustainable development employing the concept of pairwise system interaction. The asset-debt method was applied to evaluate the sustainable development status of the Yellow River Basin in China from 2006 to 2020. Further, the internal dominant drivers of sustainable development were identified using the Weaver-Thomas model. The results indicated the following. (1) The sustainable development states of the Yellow River Basin are not optimistic. Although the asset level has exhibited positive growth, both debt and net asset levels exhibit a declining trend, thereby signaling an imbalance. (2) The spatial distribution of asset, debt, and net asset levels demonstrates significant differentiation characteristics. It follows an evolving pattern from an inverted “U” type to a gradual climbing trend across latitudinal directions. Radially, it yields a relatively stable pattern of “low in the north and high in the south”. In addition, the debt level exhibits a circular spatial structure, decreasing incrementally from north to south. Both the high- and low-value areas of net assets exhibit temporal inertia and spatial agglomeration. (3) Certain differences exist in the dominant drivers of different types of cities. Among them, the low asset-low debt type cities exhibit intense leading dynamics and complex structures, with ecological efficiency being the primary driving system. Conversely, the other three city types demonstrate less intense leading dynamics, which are primarily influenced by asset-related factors. However, in low asset-high debt cities, debt-related dynamics play a relatively larger role. Therefore, cities in the Yellow River Basin should optimize development paths based on their own development characteristics in the future.

Key words: system interaction, assets, debts, Weaver-Thomas model, Yellow River Basin