Analysis reveals urban competitiveness evolution in China, suggesting strategies for improvement.
Urban competitiveness encapsulates a city’s comprehensive capacity for development. Utilizing panel data for 282 prefecture-level cities from 2012 to 2020, this study constructs an evaluation index system of urban competitiveness and applies kernel density estimation, standard deviational ellipse, trend-surface analysis, and Dagum Gini coefficient decomposition to examine its spatiotemporal evolution and regional disparities. The results indicate that: (1) urban competitiveness exhibits a V-shaped recovery, with intensified polarization after 2016, widening innovation advantages in the East, and persistent decline in the Northeast; (2) the spatial configuration follows a “dual-gradient, polycentric” structure, characterized by an inverted-U pattern along the east–west axis and an expanding gradient gap along the north–south axis; (3) club convergence and hierarchical entrenchment coexist, as polarization deepens in the East while the Northeast tends toward internal balance; and (4) the competitiveness center shifts southeastward, accompanied by a pronounced fragmentation trend in the Northeast. Based on these findings, the paper proposes differentiated spatial governance, the development of multi-tier innovation networks, and the promotion of green and sustainable development as integrated strategies to systematically enhance urban competitiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: