Three Types of Spatial Function Zoning in Key Ecological Function Areas Based on Ecological and Economic Coordinated Development: A Case Study of Tacheng Basin, China

  • Guiling Wang
  • Degang YangEmail author
  • Fuqiang Xia
  • Ruisen Zhong
  • Chuanhe Xiong


Three types of spatial function zoning is an effective measure for regional environmental protection and orderly development. For ecological and economic coordinated development, spatial function zones should be divided scientifically to clear its direction of development and protection. Therefore, based on ecological constraints, a beneficial discussion would be about the key ecological function areas adopting the concept of ecological protection restriction and supporting socioeconomic development for spatial function zoning. In this paper, the researchers, taking Tacheng Basin, Xinjiang of China as an example, choose township as basic research unit and set up an evaluation index system from three aspects, namely, ecological protection suitability, agricultural production suitability, and urban development suitability, which are analyzed by using spatial analysis functions and exclusive matrix method. The results showed that: 1) This paper formed a set of multilevel evaluation index systems for three types of spatial function zoning of the key ecological function areas based on a novel perspective by scientifically dividing Tacheng Basin into ecological space, agricultural space, and urban space, which realized the integration and scientific orientation for spatial function at the township scale. 2) Under the guidance of three types of spatial pattern, the functional orientation and suggestions of development and protection was clearly defined for ecological protection zones, ecological economic zones, agricultural production zones, and urban development zones. 3) A new idea of space governance is provided to promote the coordinated and sustainable development between ecology and economy, which can break the traditional mode of thinking about regional economic development, and offers a scientific basis and reference for macro decision-making.


key ecological function areas township scale spatial function zoning mutual exclusion matrix method coordination of ecology and development Tacheng Basin China 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Albrechts L, Healey P, Kunzmann K R, 2003. Strategic spatial planning and regional governance in Europe. Journal of America Planning Association, 69(2): 113–129. doi: 10.1080/01944-360308976301Google Scholar
  2. Baral N, Dhungana A, 2014. Diversifying finance mechanisms for protected areas capitalizing on untapped revenues. Forest Policy and Economics, 41(3): 60–67. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol. 20-14.01.002Google Scholar
  3. Baur J W R, Tynon J F, Ries P et al., 2016. Public attitudes abouturban forest ecosystem services management: a case study in Oregon cities. Urban For Urban Greening, 17: 42–53. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.03.012Google Scholar
  4. Brian H R, Alan T M, 2002. National and regional corporate spatial structure. The Annals of Regional Science, 36(2): 347–368. doi: 10.1007/s001680200082Google Scholar
  5. Carranza T, Manica A, Kapos V et al., 2014. Mismatches between conservation outcomes and management evaluation in protected areas: a case study in the Brazilian Cerrado. Biological Conservation, 173(8):10–16. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.0-3.004Google Scholar
  6. Chen W, Duan X J, Chen J L et al., 2004. The methods of spatial development function regionalization. Acta Geographica Sinica, 59(Z1), 53–58.Google Scholar
  7. Gualini E, 2004. Regionalization as experimental regionalism: the rescaling of territorial policy-making in Germany. International Journal of Urban and Research, 28(2): 329–353. doi: 10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00522.xGoogle Scholar
  8. European Commission, 2003. European Spatial Development Perspective. European Commission.Google Scholar
  9. Fan Jie, Tao Anjun, Ren Qing, 2010. On the historical background, scientific intentions, goal orientation, and policy framework of major function-oriented zone planning in China. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 4: 289–299. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  10. Fan J, 2015. Draft of major function oriented zoning of China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 70(2): 186–201.Google Scholar
  11. Fan Shuping, Cheng Jiumiao, Xiang Sike, 2011. Major function oriented zoning in Wuhu urban area: an approach based on the model of Three-dimensional Rubik’s Cube. Journal of Subtropical Resources and Environment, 7(2): 66–74. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  12. Farnworth E G H, Golley F B, 1975. Fragile ecosystems: evaluation of research and applications in the Neotropics. Journal of Ecology, 64(1): 384–384. doi: 10.2307/2258706Google Scholar
  13. Friedmann J, 1998. Urban and Regional Governance in the Asia Pacific. Vancouver: The University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  14. Greater L A, 2011. The London Plan, Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. London: Greater London Authority. Gu Linsheng, 2003. The characteristics and new trend of foreign land planning. The World Geography Research, 12(1): 60–70. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  15. Higgins A J, Hajkowicz S, 2008. A model for landscape planning under complex spatial conditions. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 13(4): 459–471. doi: 10.1007/s10666-007-91-17-3Google Scholar
  16. Hong W Y, Guo R Z, 2017. Indicators for quantitative evaluation of the social services function of urban greenbelt systems: a case study of shenzhen, China. Ecological Indicators, 75: 259–267. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.12.044Google Scholar
  17. Liu X H, Liu L, Peng Y, 2017. Ecological zoning for regional sustainable development using an integrated modeling approach in the Bohai Rim, China. Ecological Modeling, 353(10): 158–166. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.09.027Google Scholar
  18. Lu Dadao, Liu Yi, Fan Jie, 1999. The regional policy effects and regional development states in China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 54(6): 496–508. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  19. Ma Suisui, Zhu Chuangeng, Qiu Fangdao, 2010. Progress and prospect of study on major function regionalization of China. The World Geography Research, 19(4): 91–97. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  20. Mamat K, Du P J, Ding J L, 2017. Ecological function regionalization of cultural heritage sites in Turpan, China, based on GIS. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 10(4): 1–12. doi: 10. 1007/s1-2517-017-2892-5Google Scholar
  21. Mi N, Yang M L, Fan X G et al., 2016. Theory and application of the main functional subdivision of limited development ecological zones. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 36(16): 5058–5066. doi: 10.5846/stxb201501290239Google Scholar
  22. Petrosillo I, Zurlini G, Grato E et al., 2006. Indicating fragility of socio-ecological tourism-based systems. Ecological Indicators, 6(1): 104–113. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.08.008Google Scholar
  23. Roberts B H, Murray A T, 2002. National and regional corporate spatial structure. The Annals of Regional Science, 36(2): 347–368. doi: 10.1007/s001680200082Google Scholar
  24. Shaw D, Sykes O, 2005. Addressing connectivity in spatial planning: the case of the English regions. Planning Theory and Practice, 6(1): 11–33. doi: 10.1080/1464935042000334949Google Scholar
  25. Stephen, 2013. Health workforce planning and innovations in service delivery. Brain Research, 348(1): 201–203.Google Scholar
  26. Tang Changchun, 2011. Construction of method and index system of MFOZ in a river basin: a case study of Yangtze River Basin. Geographical Research, 30(12): 2173–2185. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  27. Tian Lingling, 2014. The Research of Major Function Oriented Zone Planning in Important Eco-function County. Wuhan: Central China Normal University. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  28. Tonts M, Martinus K, Plummer P, 2013. Regional development, redistribution and the extraction of mineral resources: the Western Australinan Goldfields as a resource bank. Applied Geography, 45(5): 365–374. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.03.004Google Scholar
  29. Wang Li, Zhang Zhuo, Wang Dan et al., 2012. Research on division of the major function oriented zoning of Liaoning Province. Areal Research and Development, 29(6): 8–11. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  30. Wang Tianfu, 2015. The ‘Ecological’ Landscape Construction of Eco-Village. Tianjin: Tianjin University. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  31. Yang Qinye, Wu Shaohong, Zheng Du, 2002. A retrospect and prospect of researches on regional physiogeographical system (RPGS). Geographical Research. 21(4): 407–417. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  32. Yang Meiling, 2014. Research on the Main Functional Subdivision of Limited Development Ecological Zones and Regional Development Mode. Xian: Northwest University. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  33. Zhang Li, 2009. Research on the County Land Use Planning Based on the ‘Anti-planning’ Theory: A Case Study of Biyang County, Henan Province. Beijing: China University of Geosciences. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  34. Zhang Lihua, Zou Bo, Huang Baorong, 2012. New perspective of comprehensive evaluation research on urban green space Ecosystem. China Population Resource and Environment, 22(4): 67–71. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  35. Zhao Yongjiang, Dong Jianguo, Zhang Li, 2007. Researches of index system for planning the main functional regions: a case study of Henan Province. Geographical Research and Development, 26(6): 39–42. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  36. Zhu Lijuan, 2016. County Functional Division in the Important Eco-function Areas: A Case Study in Guangze, Fujian Province. Fuzhou: Fujian Normal University. (in Chinese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press and Northeast Institute of Geography and Agricultural Ecology, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guiling Wang
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Degang Yang
    • 2
    Email author
  • Fuqiang Xia
    • 2
  • Ruisen Zhong
    • 2
  • Chuanhe Xiong
    • 4
  1. 1.Nantong University, College of Geographic ScienceNantongChina
  2. 2.Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and GeographyChinese Academy of SciencesÜrümqiChina
  3. 3.University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  4. 4.Key Laboratory of Watershed Geographic Sciences, Nanjing Institute of Geography & LimnologyChinese Academy of SciencesNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations