This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
The present research examined the “production–living–ecological space” (“PLES”) by using land use data, the ecological and environmental quality index model, growth and reduction based on the spectrum, the center of gravity migration model, and the optimal parameter geoprobe model to further evaluate adjustments to ecological quality and the driving mechanisms. The findings indicate that (1) spanning the years 2000–2020, the production space and living area in Panjin increased to 2093 km2 and 380 km2 respectively, and the ecological area of forest land and water area showed a decreasing trend. (2) The center of gravity of the urban living space and the industrial and mining production space shifted significantly. (3) The negative effect of the contribution rate was of greater value than the positive effect. Thus, it can be concluded that the negative effect of “PLES” is greater than the positive one. (4) The results for this region showed that the mean annual temperature was the strongest explanation for the spatial variation in natural factors, and that social factors such as population density also had a strong effect, so an interaction analysis was carried out to analyze the interaction between the two factors, which showed that the relationship between mean annual temperature and density of population had the strongest explanatory power.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cheng et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: