Sustainability Assessment Of Urban Development And Planning In China

Driven by unprecedented economic development for more than three decades, China’s urban population rose from 17.9% in 1978 to 53.7% in 2013. This breakneck speed of urbanization has resulted in environmental problems and social inequities, and begun to hinder sustainable development in China. Megacities are political, economic, cultural centers and their sustainability assessment can help us gain insights into the major characteristics of urban development in China as a whole. Sustainability indicators represent an effective tool for measuring sustainability, and their applications at the urban scale are relatively few. We selected Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), Ecological Footprint (EF), Biocapacity (BC), Environmental Performance Index (EPI), City Development Index (CDI), Human Development Index (HDI), Gini coefficient and Urban-rural income ratio, adjusted the methodologies according to the characteristics of Chinese cities and data, and then quantified the sustainability of ten Chinese megacities between 1978 and 2012. The results showed that the GPI of ten megacities increased after 2005. It meant that although GDP had increased exponentially since 1994, the GDP increasing between 1995 and 2005 had been offset by the environmental, social and economic loss. The main cost items included income inequality, commuting cost, pollution cost and nonrenewable resource depletion. All cities’EF increased, while BC decreased. Megacities’education, health and infrastructure were approaching targets within 35 years. Meanwhile, the urban-rural income ratio was small first, got larger, and then remained steady or decreased in recent years. Chengdu, Xi’an, and Chongqing, the three western cities, put less pressure on the environment, performed better in economic sustainability, but had a higher degree of social inequality. Among the remaining seven cities, Nanjing and Wuhan performed poorly in economic sustainability, created large ecological footprints, and had a widening gap in urban-rural income. Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou, Tianjin, and Shenyang need to focus more on economic sustainability, reduce ecological footprints, and continue to narrow the wealth gap between urban and rural populations.Sustainability indicators can not only assess urban historical development, but also help identify the obstacles to urban sustainable development, select the feasible scenarios, and assess the sustainability of each scenario. Using the indicators above, we evaluated the historical development of Shanghai. The results showed that social inequity, environmental pollution, and ecological degradation had been major hurdles for Shanghai to achieve sustainability since the economic reform and open-door policy in 1978. Using these sustainability indicators, we further assessed the sustainability of five scenarios of Shanghai in 2040, including Market Forces, Policy Reform, Fortress World, Multicultural equitable Society, and New Sustainability Paradigm. Only the scenario of New Sustainability Paradigm seemed in accordance with the three-bottom-line principle of sustainable development. Comparing and contrasting the scenario of New Sustainability Paradigm and the guiding principle of general plan of Shanghai in 2040, we suggested that the general plan should pay more attention to land recycling, affordable housing, and living quality of middle and lower classes.From the perspective of indicator development, we found that EPI is not suitable for Chinese megacities’environmental quality assessment afterthe analysis ofits pros and cons. The existing sustainability indicators are weak in environmental sustainability assessment. We suggestedthat urban sustainability indicators should capture more of the relationship between pattern and process at multiple scales, and incorporating landscape metrics. In the case study of Yueqing City, Zhejiang Province, we chose Total Class Area, Percent Class Area, Number of Patches, Patch Density, Mean Patch Size, Shape Index, Area-weighted Mean Patch Shape Index, Area-weighted Mean Patch Fractal Dimension, Shannon’s Diversity Index, Shannon’s Evenness Index, and Contagion to analyze the change of landscape pattern between 2005 and 2009. The results showed that, at the class level, the area of built-up area increased drastically, the degree of fragmentation of other land use types increased, and the strong-connectivity of forest became dispersing within five years. At the landscape level, the degree of fragmentation and the patch shape complexity increased. Such information on spatiotemporal patterns of cities revealed by landscape metrics should be incorporated in urban sustainability indicators. In addition, "ecological civilization", proposed by the Chinese government, is another new interpretation of sustainable development. Through the"Master Plan of Ecological Civilization Construction in Tewo County, Gansu Province", we analyzed the ecological civilization from the perspectives of ecological culture, ecological protection, ecological industry and ecological inhabitation. Based on these four parts, we developedan ecological civilization construction indicator system using the theme- based framework. Quantification of cultural dimensions was difficult but critically important in this case. But only the different aspects of ethnic harmony could be quantified practically in the Tewo study. Thus, future research should put more emphasis on the development of cultural sustainability indicators.This research demonstrated that choosing proper sustainability indicators from the dimensions of economy, society and environment can not only assess the urban historical development, but also serve as an effective tool in urban planning. Adding landscape metrics and cultural indicators contribute to the development of sustainability indicators.