Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The spatial reconstruction process of suburban villages is an important aspect of integrated urban–rural development. Evaluating the level of spatial reconstruction of tourist villages and the characteristics of their developmental stages has become a critical issue in current rural development. Exploring the spatial reconstruction of typical tourist-oriented villages can help provide experiences for other rural spatial reconstructions. In this study, East Tumen Village and West Tumen Village in Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province, were selected as the research objects of rural tourism space. Through in-depth interviews and human–computer interactive interpretation of remote sensing images, this study traced the process of rural spatial reconstruction. The spatial reconstruction index of the rural tourism space was constructed from three dimensions: production space (product production capacity, industrial development activity, production space foundation), living space (living space convenience, tourism space convenience, living space comfort, living space foundation), and ecological space (ecological space regulation ability, ecological space stability capacity, ecological space foundation). Using the rural spatial reconstruction intensity index and rural spatial reconstruction contribution rate, this study quantitatively evaluated the spatial development level of tourism villages on a microscopic scale and examined the stage characteristics of their spatial reconstruction. The results show that the two villages experienced a budding stage, a development stage, and an accelerated development stage from 2005 to 2020 and have not yet reached a stable stage of relative balance and coordination; production activities are integrated into other spaces, and single-function space has become production–living and production–ecology composite space. The spatial reconstruction of East and West Tumen villages is driven by a combination of ‘top-down’ external drivers, such as rural tourism development, multi-governance subject participation, and public policy, and ‘bottom-up’ internal drivers, such as production demand, living demand, and ecological demand.
Nie et al. (Thu,) studied this question.