[1]LI Xiao-kun,WANG Shu-wei.Assessment of the County’s Rurality in the Eco-economic Zone of the Three-Gorge Reservoir Area in Chongqing[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2013,20(01):168-172.
Copy
Assessment of the County’s Rurality in the Eco-economic Zone of the Three-Gorge Reservoir Area in Chongqing
Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume:
20
Number of periods:
2013 01
Page number:
168-172
Column:
Public date:
2013-02-28
- Title:
- Assessment of the County’s Rurality in the Eco-economic Zone of the Three-Gorge Reservoir Area in Chongqing
- Keywords:
- rural economics; county; rural development type; rurality index; the eco-economic zone of the Three-Gorge Reservoir area in Chongqing
- CLC:
- F127
- DOI:
- -
- Abstract:
- The eco-economic zone of the Three-Gorge Reservoir area in Chongqing is characterized as a large number of rural populations, high proportions of poor people, and a wide range of poverty-stricken areas. Assessment of the rurality and determination of the development direction are helpful for the promotion of the balancing urban-rural development and new countryside constructions. The data were collected from Chongqing Statistical Yearbook of 2010. The relative proportion of the three industries in the GDP was used to categorize this eco-economic zone into four rural development types which were agricultural-dominated, industrial and mineral-dominated, balanced and business, tourism and service-oriented. On this basis, the rurality of each country was assessed by the indicators of urbanization, agricultural labor productivity, agricultural output growth, the ratio of agricultural output to non-agricultural, highway density, radio and television coverage. It indicated that significant differences exist between similar and different rural development types. There were only three districts which had weak rurality and two counties with significant rurality in the mining and industrial-oriented countries; and there were four counties with middle rurality, and another four counties with significant rurality in the balanced counties. However, all the agriculture-dominated, business, tourism and service-oriented counties were significant. In addition, the development direction for each county of various rural development types were proposed.
- References:
-
[1] Cloke P, Goodwin M, Milbourne P, et al. Deprivation, poverty and marginalization in rural lifestyles in England and Wales[J]. Journal of Rural Studies,1995,11(2):351-365.
[2] 李小建,周雄飞,郑纯辉.河南农区经济发展差异地理影响的小尺度分析[J].地理学报,2008,63(2):147-155.
[3] Woods M. Rural Geography:Processes, Responses and Experiences in Rural Restructuring[M]. London:Sage,2005.
[4] Halfacree K. Locality and social representation:space, discourse and alternative definitions of the rural[J]. Journal of Rural Studies,1993,9(3):23-37.
[5] 吴国庆,杨良山,金敏毓,等.浙江省生态环境区域类型划分及不同区域生态环境[J].中国农业资源与区划,2000,21(5):30-34.
[6] 重庆市统计局.重庆统计年鉴2010[Z].北京:中国统计出版社,2010.
[7] 龙花楼,刘彦随,邹健.中国东部沿海地区乡村发展类型及其乡村性评价[J].地理学报,2009,64(4):426-434.
[8] 叶长盛,黄建军.江西省县域农村居民纯收入空间差异研究[J].水土保持研究,2011,18(3):153-157.
[9] 曹连海,郝仕龙,陈南祥.农村生态环境指标体系的构建与评价[J].水土保持研究,2011,18(5):238-244.
[10] 刘慧.我国农村发展地域差异及类型划分[J].地理学与国土研究,2002,18(4):71-75.
[11] 牛传军,张超,王秀茹.休闲农业-旅游新看点[J].水土保持研究,2011,18(2):264-265.
[12] 王闰平,陈凯.中国退耕还林还草现状及问题分析[J].水土保持研究,2011,18(5):188-192.
[13] 邓广山,苏维词,赵国军.重庆农村经济社会发展水平评价[J].重庆师范大学学报:自然科学版,2011,28(2):28-34.
- Similar References:
Memo
-
Last Update:
1900-01-01