Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Identifying spatial differentiation in low-carbon development is a prerequisite for differentiated transformation strategies in resource-exhausted cities. This study evaluates 11 districts and counties in Jiaozuo City across five dimensions: energy, technology, economy, environment, and lifestyle. Using cross-sectional data for 2014, 2019, and 2024, it applies a combined AHP–entropy weighting model, spatial autocorrelation analysis, and a coupling coordination degree model. The mean comprehensive score rose from 0.1853 to 0.2628, while the range widened from 0.1185 to 0.2604, indicating a core–periphery pattern. The global Moran I rose from 0.1748 (not significant) in 2014 to 0.3640 (p < 0.01) in 2024, indicating strengthening positive spatial autocorrelation and growing polarization. The core area scored higher in energy, economic, and living subsystems, whereas the peripheral area showed marked internal differentiation in economic–environmental coordination. Xiuwu County scored below the citywide average in all subsystems and remained in the imbalance interval, whereas Macun District had the highest coupling coordination degree in the city. We propose tiered governance: Tier 3 should explore low-threshold spatial substitution, Tier 2 should strengthen targeted industrial-chain integration, and Tier 1 should consolidate advantages and pursue potential spatial spillovers. This study provides a quantitative reference for low-carbon transition and spatial governance for resource-exhausted cities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: