Satisfying multidimensional human well-being efficiently and equitably through dynamic urban planning

1. UN DESA. World Urbanization Prospects (2018).

2. Brevik, K., Adams, J., Dube, B., Barbieri, L. & Haage, G. Y. Wellbeing in the more-than-human world. in Sustainable Wellbeing Futures 151–166 (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020).

3. Fang, Z. et al. A comprehensive framework for detecting economic growth expenses under ecological economics principles in China. Sustain. Horiz. 4, 100035 (2022).

   Google Scholar 

4. Cheng, C. et al. Nature’s hand in megacity cluster progress: Integrating SDG11 with ecosystem service dynamics. Sustain. Cities Soc. 108, 105471 (2024).

   Google Scholar 

5. Grabowski, Z. J., McPhearson, T. & Pickett, S. T. A. Transforming US urban green infrastructure planning to address equity. Landsc. Urban Plan. 229, 104591 (2023).

   Google Scholar 

6. Nguyen, N. T. H. et al. Maximising resilience to sea-level rise in urban coastal ecosystems through systematic conservation planning. Landsc. Urban Plan. 221, 104374 (2022).

   Google Scholar 

7. Vaz, A. S. et al. Integrating conservation targets and ecosystem services in landscape spatial planning from Portugal. Landsc. Urban Plan. 215, 104213 (2021).

   Google Scholar 

8. Zhang, Y., Smith, J. P., Tong, D. & Turner II, B. L. Optimizing the co-benefits of food desert and urban heat mitigation through community garden planning. Landsc. Urban Plan. 226, 104488 (2022).

   Google Scholar 

9. Xue, D. et al. Empirical investigation of urban land use efficiency and influencing factors of the Yellow River basin Chinese cities. Land Use Policy 117, 106117 (2022).

   Google Scholar 

10. Gong, J. et al. Tradeoffs/synergies of multiple ecosystem services based on land use simulation in a mountain-basin area, western China. Ecol. Indic. 99, 283–293 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

11. Adem Esmail, B. et al. Greening cities through urban planning: a literature review on the uptake of concepts and methods in Stockholm. Urban For. Urban Green. 72, 127584 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

12. Jiang, Y., Tang, Y.-T., Long, H. & Deng, W. Land consolidation: a comparative research between Europe and China. Land Use Policy 112, 105790 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

13. Liu, Y. & Zhou, Y. Territory spatial planning and national governance system in China. Land Use Policy 102, 105288 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

14. Daly, H. E. & Farley, J. Ecological Economics, Second Edition: Principles and Applications (Island Press, 2011).

15. Gould, R. K. et al. How Ecosystem Services Research Can Advance Ecological Economics Principles Ch. 8 (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020).

16. Sun, L., Chen, J., Li, Q. & Huang, D. Dramatic uneven urbanization of large cities throughout the world in recent decades. Nat. Commun. 11, 5366 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

17. Fanning, A. L., O’Neill, D. W., Hickel, J. & Roux, N. The social shortfall and ecological overshoot of nations. Nat. Sustain. 5, 26–36 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

18. O’Neill, D. W., Fanning, A. L., Lamb, W. F. & Steinberger, J. K. A good life for all within planetary boundaries. Nat. Sustain. 1, 88–95 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

19. Jabbar, M., Yusoff, M. M. & Shafie, A. Assessing the role of urban green spaces for human well-being: a systematic review. GeoJournal 87, 4405–4423 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

20. Pinto, L. V., Inácio, M., Ferreira, C. S. S., Ferreira, A. D. & Pereira, P. Ecosystem services and well-being dimensions related to urban green spaces – A systematic review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 85, 104072 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

21. Mouratidis, K. Urban planning and quality of life: a review of pathways linking the built environment to subjective well-being. Cities 115, 103229 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

22. Han, T. et al. Response of ecosystem services and environmental dynamics in large open-pit coal mines: A case study in semi-arid areas. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 51, e02891 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

23. Fang, Z. et al. Framework of land use planning for an energy producing city of Northwest China based on water-energy-food nexus. J. Clean. Prod. 451, 142126 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

24. Fang, Z. et al. Impacts of land use/land cover changes on ecosystem services in ecologically fragile regions. Sci. Total Environ. 831, 154967 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

25. Kati, V., Kassara, C., Vrontisi, Z. & Moustakas, A. The biodiversity-wind energy-land use nexus in a global biodiversity hotspot. Sci. Total Environ. 768, 144471 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

26. Farley, J. & Kish, K. Ecological economics: the next 30 years. Ecol. Econ. 190, 107211 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

27. Aryal, K., Maraseni, T. & Apan, A. How much do we know about trade-offs in ecosystem services? A systematic review of empirical research observations. Sci. Total Environ. 806, 151229 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

28. Costanza, R. Ecological economics in 2049: getting beyond the argument culture to the world we all want. Ecol. Econ. 168, 106484 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

29. Egarter Vigl, L., Depellegrin, D., Pereira, P., De Groot, R. & Tappeiner, U. Mapping the ecosystem service delivery chain: capacity, flow, and demand pertaining to aesthetic experiences in mountain landscapes. Sci. Total Environ. 574, 422–436 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

30. Metzger, J. P. et al. Considering landscape-level processes in ecosystem service assessments. Sci. Total Environ. 796, 149028 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

31. Arvidsson, M., Lovsjö, N. & Keuschnigg, M. Urban scaling laws arise from within-city inequalities. Nat. Hum. Behav. 7, 365–374 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

32. Wang, L., Zheng, H., Chen, Y., Ouyang, Z. & Hu, X. Systematic review of ecosystem services flow measurement: main concepts, methods, applications and future directions. Ecosyst. Serv. 58, 101479 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

33. Yang, L., Zhang, F. & Qin, L. Construction and stability evaluation of ecological networks in the Loess Plateau. Ecol. Indic. 159, 111697 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

34. Lin, L. et al. Ecological security patterns at different spatial scales on the Loess Plateau. Remote Sens. 15, 1011 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

35. Battersby, S. How to expand solar power without using precious land. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2301355120 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

36. Dunnett, S., Holland, R. A., Taylor, G. & Eigenbrod, F. Predicted wind and solar energy expansion has minimal overlap with multiple conservation priorities across global regions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2104764119 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

37. Miskin, C. K. et al. Sustainable co-production of food and solar power to relax land-use constraints. Nat. Sustain. 2, 972–980 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

38. Pascual, U. et al. Diverse values of nature for sustainability. Nature 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06406-9 (2023).

39. Deng, C. et al. How trade-offs between ecological construction and urbanization expansion affect ecosystem services. Ecol. Indic. 122, 107253 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

40. Jones, N. A., Shaw, S., Ross, H., Witt, K. & Pinner, B. The study of human values in understanding and managing social-ecological systems. Ecol. Soc. 21, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26270349 (2016).

41. Keeler, B. L. et al. Social-ecological and technological factors moderate the value of urban nature. Nat. Sustain. 2, 29–38 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

42. Pan, H., Deal, B., Chen, Y. & Hewings, G. A Reassessment of urban structure and land-use patterns: distance to CBD or network-based? — Evidence from Chicago. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 70, 215–228 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

43. Kwak, Y., Chen, S. & Deal, B. Transitioning complex socioeconomic modeling to informed and visualized decision-making: a tightly coupled planning support system. Appl. Geogr. 169, 103332 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

44. Alcamo, J. Chapter six the SAS approach: combining qualitative and quantitative knowledge in environmental scenarios. in Developments in Integrated Environmental Assessment Vol. 2 (ed Alcamo, J) 123–150 (Elsevier, 2008).

45. Saltelli, A. et al. Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

46. Masoomi, Z. & Mesgari, M. S. Spatial modeling of urban land use change using NSGA-II algorithm and clustering of the Pareto-front for urban dynamic plans. J. Geomat. Sci. Technol. 5, 139–157 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

47. Miao, H. & Zhou, H. Evaluation of county-level economic efficiency and its spatiotemporal differentiation in Hohhot-Baotou-Ordos-Yulin urban agglomeration in China. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 10, 1–15 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

48. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, M. E. A. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being. Vol. 5 (Island Press Washington, DC, 2005).

49. Ranis, G., Stewart, F. & Samman, E. Human development: beyond the human development index. J. Hum. Dev. 7, 323–358 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

50. Rao, N. D. & Min, J. Decent living standards: material prerequisites for human wellbeing. Soc. Indic. Res. 138, 225–244 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

51. Rosenthal, S. S. & Strange, W. C. How close is close? The spatial reach of agglomeration economies. J. Econ. Perspect. 34, 27–49 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

52. Huang, Y., Hong, T. & Ma, T. Urban network externalities, agglomeration economies and urban economic growth. Cities 107, 102882 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

53. Jiao, J., Wang, J., Zhang, F., Jin, F. & Liu, W. Roles of accessibility, connectivity and spatial interdependence in realizing the economic impact of high-speed rail: Evidence from China. Transp. Policy 91, 1–15 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

54. Eminagaoglu, M. A new similarity measure for vector space models in text classification and information retrieval. J. Inf. Sci. 48, 463–476 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

55. Wątróbski, J., Bączkiewicz, A., Ziemba, E. & Sałabun, W. Sustainable cities and communities assessment using the DARIA-TOPSIS method. Sustain. Cities Soc. 83, 103926 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

56. Ordos Municipal People’s Government. Ordos City Plan (2011–2030) (2011).

57. Ordos Energy Bureau. Ordos 14th Five-Year Comprehensive Energy Development Plan (2025–2030) (2024).

58. Ye, Y., Qin, Y., Yu, R. & Wu, Q. Optimization of Chinese land spatial pattern in the transformation process of resource-based cities: a case study in Tongling City, China. Sci. Rep. 14, 6092 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

59. Zhao, J., Chen, N. & Jin, Z. The more centralized the spatial structure is, the greater the economic growth? Evidence from urban agglomerations in western China. Humanit Soc. Sci. Commun. 12, 483 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

60. Wu, C., Smith, D. & Wang, M. Simulating the urban spatial structure with spatial interaction: a case study of urban polycentricity under different scenarios. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 89, 101677 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

61. Sun, S. Transformation from urban and rural planning to territory spatial planning. FURP 1, 2 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

62. Li, L., Cheng, J., Bannister, J. & Mai, X. Geographically and temporally weighted co-location quotient: an analysis of spatiotemporal crime patterns in greater Manchester. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 36, 918–942 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

Download references