Towards the evaluation of rural livability in China: Theoretical framework and empirical case study
Towards the evaluation of rural livability in China: Theoretical framework and empirical case study
复制标题
中国农村宜居性评价：理论框架与实证案例研究
DOI：
10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102241
复制
发表时间：
2020-11-01
影响因子：
6.8
通讯作者：
Karacsonyi, David
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Li Yurui;Qiao Luyin;Karacsonyi, David
宜居性，特别是城市的宜居性，在当代中国越来越受到人们的关注。然而，我们对农村宜居性的认识、评价和改善的认识还很薄弱。本文试图梳理乡村宜居的概念和内涵，提出江苏省常熟市村级乡村宜居评价指标体系，为更好地实施国家乡村振兴战略提供理论和方法支撑。农村宜居性定义为有能力实现居民渴望或期望的生活质量的农村地区，反映了环境和生活质量问题的结合。中国语境下的宜居村的概念内涵是生存和宜居的复兴。因此，本文建立的指标体系包含基础设施条件、公共服务、卫生状况、就业机会和社会参与五个维度。实证案例研究发现，综合指标及各维度得分存在明显差异。其中，基础设施条件和卫生状况维度得分高于其他三个维度。 222个村的总分呈现出明显的以县城为中心的圈层结构。在乡村振兴过程中，我们可以根据宜居得分的空间差异，采取更加精准的举措，更有效地提升乡村宜居水平。笔者认为，应注重加强农村宜居性评价综合监测体系建设，设定各评价指标的阈值，识别和协调老年人、妇女、儿童、流动人口等不同群体的宜居需求。
Livability, especially the livability of cities, attracts more and more attention in contemporary China. However, our knowledge towards understanding, evaluating, and improving rural livability is still weak. This paper attempts to sort out the concept and connotation of rural livability, put forward an indicator system for evaluating rural livability at village level in Changshu city of Jiangsu province, and thus provide theoretical and methodological support for better implementing national rural vitalization strategy. Rural livability defined as a rural place equipped with the capacity to achieve the aspired or desired quality of life for the residents reflects the combination of environment and life quality concerns. A livable village in Chinese context is conceptualized with substance of survival and revival to livability. The index system established in the article therefore contains five dimensions, namely infrastructure conditions, public services, sanitation situations, employment opportunities, and social engagement. The empirical case study found obvious disparities in the scores of the comprehensive index and each dimension. Specifically, the scores of infrastructure conditions and sanitation situations dimensions are higher than that of the other three. And the total scores of the 222 villages shows an obvious circle structure centered on the county-town. In the process of rural vitalization, we could adopt more precise measures according to the spatial differences of scores of livability, so as to improve the livability of rural areas more effectively. The authors argue that more attention should be paid to strengthen the construction of comprehensive monitoring system for rural livability evaluation and establish threshold value for each evaluation index, and identify and coordinate the livability needs of different groups, such as the elderly, women, children, and migrants.