国土与自然资源研究
國土與自然資源研究
국토여자연자원연구
TERRITORY & NATURAL RESOURCES STUDY
2014年
6期
75-78
,共4页
周飞%吴雪彪%刘升%陈士银
週飛%吳雪彪%劉升%陳士銀
주비%오설표%류승%진사은
城市化质量%对比%湛江市
城市化質量%對比%湛江市
성시화질량%대비%담강시
urbanization quality%comparison%Zhanjiang city
根据城市化质量的内涵,构建了城市化质量评价指标体系,运用综合指数法分析了2010年湛江市城市化质量及其与珠三角先进城市、粤西其他城市的对比关系。结果发现:2010年湛江市城市化质量处于中等发展阶段,各子系统质量呈现生态环境质量>城乡与地区协调水平>社会发展质量>城市化效率>基础设施质量>经济发展质量的态势。与广州市、佛山市相比,除生态环境质量外,湛江市城市化质量及各子系统质量均远低于该二市。与阳江市、茂名市相比,湛江市城市化质量与该二市相当,经济发展质量、城乡与地区协调水平均低于该二市,社会发展质量、基础设施质量均高于该二市,生态环境质量、城市化效率介于该二市之间。
根據城市化質量的內涵,構建瞭城市化質量評價指標體繫,運用綜閤指數法分析瞭2010年湛江市城市化質量及其與珠三角先進城市、粵西其他城市的對比關繫。結果髮現:2010年湛江市城市化質量處于中等髮展階段,各子繫統質量呈現生態環境質量>城鄉與地區協調水平>社會髮展質量>城市化效率>基礎設施質量>經濟髮展質量的態勢。與廣州市、彿山市相比,除生態環境質量外,湛江市城市化質量及各子繫統質量均遠低于該二市。與暘江市、茂名市相比,湛江市城市化質量與該二市相噹,經濟髮展質量、城鄉與地區協調水平均低于該二市,社會髮展質量、基礎設施質量均高于該二市,生態環境質量、城市化效率介于該二市之間。
근거성시화질량적내함,구건료성시화질량평개지표체계,운용종합지수법분석료2010년담강시성시화질량급기여주삼각선진성시、월서기타성시적대비관계。결과발현:2010년담강시성시화질량처우중등발전계단,각자계통질량정현생태배경질량>성향여지구협조수평>사회발전질량>성시화효솔>기출설시질량>경제발전질량적태세。여엄주시、불산시상비,제생태배경질량외,담강시성시화질량급각자계통질량균원저우해이시。여양강시、무명시상비,담강시성시화질량여해이시상당,경제발전질량、성향여지구협조수평균저우해이시,사회발전질량、기출설시질량균고우해이시,생태배경질량、성시화효솔개우해이시지간。
Evaluation index system is established in this paper ac-cording to the essence of urbanization quality. The urbanization quality of Zhanjiang city in 2010 and the comparative relation among Zhanjiang city and the typical cities in Pearl River Delta and other cities in western Guangdong are analyzed by use of comprehensive index method. It is found that the urbanization quality of Zhanjiang city was in the stage of middle development, and the subsystems of urbanization quality presented the stance of environment quality>the level of urban-rural and regional coordi-nation>the quality of social development>urbanization efficiency>infrastructure quality>the quality of economic development. The urbanization quality of Zhanjiang city and its subsystems except e-co-environment was well below Guangzhou city and Foshan city. In contrast with Yangjiang city and Maoming city, the urbanization quality of Zhanjiang city matched them, the quality of economic development and the level of urban-rural and regional coordina-tion was below them, the quality of social development and infras-tructure was above them, the eco-environment quality and the urbanization efficiency was between them.