logo

SCIENCE CHINA Technological Sciences, Volume 62 , Issue 3 : 502-510(2019) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-018-9433-x

A quantitative analysis of inequality of urban cultural space distribution in Xi’an

More info
  • ReceivedOct 8, 2018
  • AcceptedJan 4, 2019
  • PublishedFeb 22, 2019

Abstract

Urban cultural space (UCS) has been of great social and economic value for sustainable development, and the existing researches about it mainly focus on some specific aspects, such as historical heritage or cultural service facility. However, UCS hasn’t been quantitatively assessed as an independent system with clear definition and comprehensive classification. Thus, we present a quantitative analysis based on the statistic of UCS provision in different categories between 44 sub-districts in Xi’an and find its inequalities. Xi’an urban land use data and population data of sub-district level are introduced in the analysis process with GIS, SPSS and MATLAB. Our results indicate that inequalities of UCS in Xi’an are mainly reflected in three aspects, including categories, geospatial and population. Among the four categories of UCS, historical heritage and cultural park account for higher percentage, while cultural service facility and religious space are lower. The inequalities in geospatial could be estimated from two indicators. The first indicator named cultural space rate ranges from 0 to 66.88%, while the other named distance between residential and cultural space varies from 100.47 m to 2004.75 m. The inequalities in population could be assessed by cultural space per capita and Gini coefficient. The results indicate that per capita ranges from 0 m2 to 214.79 m2. The Gini coefficient of Xi’an is 0.86, which means that the UCS distribution in population is extremely inequitable. Our studies would further the research on UCS and provide constructive suggestions in urban planning and policy formulation to ensure adequate UCS provision and improve its distributional order in Xi’an.


Funded by

the National Outstanding Youth Foundation of China(Grant,No.,51322812)


Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the National Outstanding Youth Foundation of China (Grant No. 51322812). We thank Prof. Pengfei Lu from Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications for his helpful guidance, Prof. Bianping Su from Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology for providing mathematical support, and Prof. Sining Yun from Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology for his kind suggestions.


Supplement

Supporting Information

The supporting information is available online at tech.scichina.com and www.springerlink.com. The supporting materials are published as submitted, without typesetting or editing. The responsibility for scientific accuracy and content remains entirely with the authors.


References

[1] Shan J X. Urban cultural heritage protection and cultural city construction (in Chinese). Urban Plann, 2007, 31: 9–23. Google Scholar

[2] National Bureau of Statistics. Statistical Communique on National Economic and Social Development in 2017 (in Chinese). 2018. Google Scholar

[3] United Nations, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. China Human Development Report. Beijing: China Translation Corporation. 2013. Google Scholar

[4] Shang Z Z, Huang Y P. An analysis of the concept, goals, contents, planning strategies and misunderstandings of new urbanization (in Chinese). Urban Plann Forum, 2013, 2: 16–22. Google Scholar

[5] Yang B J, Chen P, Lü X B. Urban and rural planning in transition: Starting from “National New-type Urbanization Planning” (in Chinese). City Plann Rev, 2014, 38: 67–76. Google Scholar

[6] Shan J X. Thoughts on “city”, “culture” and “city culture” (in Chinese). Literature Art Stud, 2007, 5: 35–46. Google Scholar

[7] Mumford L. The City in History. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 1961. Google Scholar

[8] Hall P. Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design in the twentieth. Oxford: Black well Pub, 2002. Google Scholar

[9] Miles S, Paddison R. Introduction: The rise and rise of culture-led urban regeneration. Urban Stud, 2005, 42: 833-839 CrossRef Google Scholar

[10] Zhang J Q. City culture and city spirit: Integrating urban planning dialectics (in Chinese). Planners, 2008, 24: 10–13. Google Scholar

[11] He X J, Chen C J. City culture development research review under urban planning (in Chinese). Planners, 2012, 28: 96–100. Google Scholar

[12] Pratt A C. The cultural contradictions of the creative city. City Culture Soc, 2011, 2: 123-130 CrossRef Google Scholar

[13] Amin A, Thrift N. Cultural-economy and cities. Prog Human Geography, 2007, 31: 143-161 CrossRef Google Scholar

[14] Gunay Z, Dokmeci V. Culture-led regeneration of Istanbul waterfront: Golden horn cultural valley project. Cities, 2012, 29: 213-222 CrossRef Google Scholar

[15] Kana K. An experiment in urban regeneration using culture and art in Senba, Osaka’s historic urban center, with a focus on the regeneration of urban space. City Culture Soc, 2012, 3: 151-163 CrossRef Google Scholar

[16] Evans G. Measure for measure: Evaluating the evidence of culture’s contribution to regeneration. Urban stud, 2005, 42: 959–983. Google Scholar

[17] Keitumetse S O. Cultural resources as sustainability enablers: Towards a community-based cultural heritage resources management (COBACHREM) model. Sustainability, 2014, 6: 70–85. Google Scholar

[18] Gogolou C, Dimopoulou E. Land administration standardization for the integration of cultural heritage in land use policies. Land Use Policy, 2015, 49: 617-625 CrossRef Google Scholar

[19] Shen L, Lu W, Wang B. Strategic thinking on the cultural spatial planning of shanghai toward a global city (in Chinese). Urban Plann Forum, 2016, 229: 63–70. Google Scholar

[20] Jin S, Yan A, Zhou L, et al. A study on the spatial distribution of public cultural facilities from the perspective of spatial cognition: A case of Shenzhen (in Chinese). Archit J, 2015, 3: 19–23. Google Scholar

[21] Owens R P. World Cities Culture Report. Shanghai: Tongji University Press, 2013. Google Scholar

[22] Tian D D, Rui J X, Chen N. Shanghai public cultural facility numerical character and spatial layout (in Chinese). Planners, 2011, 27: 24–28. Google Scholar

[23] Fuller R A, Gaston K J. The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biol Lett, 2009, 5: 352-355 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[24] Wüstemanna H, Kalischa D, Kolbeb J. Access to urban green space and environmental inequalities in Germany. Landscape Urban Plann, 2017, 164: 124–131. Google Scholar

[25] Astell-Burt T, Feng X, Mavoa S, et al. Do low-income neighbourhoods have the least green space? A cross-sectional study of Australia’s most populous cities. BMC Public Health, 2014, 14: 292 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[26] Byrne J, Wolch J, Zhang J. Planning for environmental justice in an urban national park. J Environ Plann Manage, 2009, 52: 365-392 CrossRef Google Scholar

[27] Wolch J R, Byrne J, Newell J P. Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landscape Urban Plann, 2014, 125: 234-244 CrossRef Google Scholar

[28] Kabisch N, Haase D. Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landscape Urban Plann, 2014, 122: 129-139 CrossRef Google Scholar

[29] Yin H W, Kong F H, Zong Y G. Accessibility and equality assessment on urban green space (in Chinese). Acta Ecologica Sin, 2008, 28: 3375–3383. Google Scholar

[30] Zhou X, Zhang X G, He L B, et al. Equity assessment on urban green space pattern based on human (in Chinese). Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2013, 49: 892–898. Google Scholar

[31] Xi’an Municipal Bureau of Statistics, National Bureau of Statistics Survey Office in Xi’an. Xi’an Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2017. Google Scholar

[32] Wang S S. Promote the idea of the sublime order of oriental ancient capital, explore the pattern of the modern city of Xi’an (in Chinese). J Xi’an Univ Arch Tech, 2011, 43: 761–767. Google Scholar

[33] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. Code for Classification of Urban Land Use and Planning Standards of Development Land. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2011. Google Scholar

[34] National Bureau of Statistics. Population Census office of the State Council. Tabulation on the 2010 Population Census of the People’s Republic of China by Township. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2010. Google Scholar

[35] Barbosa O, Tratalos J A, Armsworth P R, et al. Who benefits from access to green space? A case study from Sheffield, UK. Landscape Urban Plann, 2007, 83: 187-195 CrossRef Google Scholar

[36] Sotoudehnia F, Comber L. Measuring perceived accessibility to urban green space: An integration of GIS and participatory map. In: Proceedings of the 14th AGILE Conference on Geographic Information: Advancing Geo-Information Science for A Changing World. 2011. Google Scholar

[37] Kabisch N, Strohbach M, Haase D, et al. Urban green space availability in European cities. Ecol Indicators, 2016, 70: 586-596 CrossRef Google Scholar

[38] Hu C R, Jiang D, Tang X. Sampling analysis of national urban land use status based on Lorentz curves (in Chinese). China Land Sci, 2009, 23: 44–50. Google Scholar

[39] Qu S J, Hu S G, Tong L. Spatiotemporal patterns of urban land use transition in the middle Yangtze River Economic Belt (in Chinese). Resour Sci, 2017, 39: 240–251. Google Scholar

[40] Yang J, Huang X, Liu X. An analysis of education inequality in China. Int J Educ Dev, 2014, 37: 2-10 CrossRef Google Scholar

[41] Asada Y. A framework for measuring health inequity. J Epidemiol Community Health, 2005, 59: 700-705 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[42] Tsai Y H. Quantifying urban form: Compactness versus sprawl. Urban Studies, 2005, 42: 141-161 CrossRef Google Scholar

[43] Li F, Liu X, Hu D, et al. Measurement indicators and an evaluation approach for assessing urban sustainable development: A case study for China’s Jining City. Landscape Urban Plann, 2009, 90: 134-142 CrossRef Google Scholar

[44] Ran S Q, Pei C R. Research on the coordination of city space development and conservation of big cultural site: A case study of Xi’an (in Chinese). Modern Urban Res, 2014, 11: 92–96. Google Scholar

  • Figure 1

    Study area and urban cultural space distribution of 44 sub-districts in Xi’an.

  • Figure 2

    Distance from the centroid of residential space to the boundary of the nearest urban cultural space in Xi’an.

  • Figure 3

    Cultural space rate, mean distance to cultural space and cultural space per capita of 44 sub-districts in Xi’an.

  • Figure 4

    Proportion of four categories in 44 sub-districts’ cultural space.

  • Figure 5

    Population density (a), cultural space rate (b), cultural space per capita (c) and distance to cultural space (d) of 44 sub-districts in Xi’an.

  • Figure 6

    Lorenz curve and Gini coefficient representing the dissimilarity of urban cultural space distribution in Xi’an and its subordinate five districts.

  • Table 1   Land use categories incorporated in the analysis for urban cultural space distribution

    Land use category

    Explanation

    Examples

    €€Historical heritage

    Includes heritage with historical, artistic, scientific value and conservation significance

    Ancient ruins, ancient tombs, ancient architecture, modern representative buildings, revolution memorial buildings

    €€Religious space

    Includes space for religious activities

    Church, mosque, temple, taoist temple

    €€Cultural service facility

    Includes free space for public cultural activities

    Library, museum, gallery, memorial, exhibition center

    €€Cultural park

    Includes parks and green space constructed around the heritage

    Heritage park, huancheng park, xingqing park, tang paradise

  • Table 2   Data sources and calculated variables

    Data sources

    Variables

    Explanation

    €€Urban land use data

    €€(from Xi’an Land Use Map recorded by Xi’an €€City Planning & Design Institute)

    Cultural space rate

    The proportion of cultural space in urban development land in percentage

    Cultural space per capita

    The per capita possession of urban cultural space

    Distance to cultural space

    Euclidean distance from the centroid of a residential space to the boundary of the nearest cultural space in meter

    €€Xi’an population data of each sub-district (from €€China Population Census Data of 2010)

    Population data at sub-district level

    Population data of each sub-district investigated in Xi’an

  • Table 3   Variables and results of data analysis of urban cultural space provision in 44 sub-districts

    Variables

    Mean

    Median

    Minimum

    Maximum

    SD

    Variance

    Cultural space rate (%)

    8.93

    2.36

    0.00

    66.88

    13.95

    194.68

    Cultural space per capita (m2/person)

    15.23

    2.22

    0.00

    214.79

    43.36

    1879.67

    Distance to cultural space (m)

    701.94

    630.93

    100.47

    2004.75

    507.98

    258047.46

Copyright 2020  CHINA SCIENCE PUBLISHING & MEDIA LTD.  中国科技出版传媒股份有限公司  版权所有

京ICP备14028887号-23       京公网安备11010102003388号