Abstract：This paper, considering the diversity of urbanization modes and suitability of multi-scales, develops an index framework including all these aspects to evaluate the coordination relationship between urbanization and regional development comprehensively. The case study of Sichuan and Zhejiang provinces, which are chosen as the representatives of western and eastern provinces, shows that diversities of coordination level generally exist between and within the two provinces. In the eastern region, urbanization is lagged slightly behind industrialization and relatively coordinated with economic development, while social development is seriously delayed, reflecting more complex and diverse relationships between them after rapid industrialization. In the western region, urbanization and regional development are relatively coordinated under a more simple development mode. Similar results are also found in coordination of county-scale spatial pattern analysis. Through different paths of regional development, it is quite difficult for rapidly developing regions to keep urbanization synchronous with industrialization and socioeconomic development. Therefore, the coordination levels of urbanization and industrialization, economic development, social development, and the integrated level of regional development tend to decline rather than increase. Besides, compared to urbanization, and industrialization, socioeconomic development are more stable processes. As the level of urbanization increased, the phenomenon of urbanization lagging regional development has been weakened. Regression analysis reveals that the large regional diversity of coordination levels between urbanization and regional development is significantly influenced by natural conditions, location, administrative types, and inner-provincial migration.
刘涛, 曹广忠, 边雪, 郜晓雯. 城镇化与工业化及经济社会发展的协调性评价及规律性探讨[J]. 人文地理, 2010, 25(6): 47-52.
LIU Tao, CAO Guang-zhong, BIAN Xue, GAO Xiao-wen. EVALUATING THE COORDINATION BETWEEN URBANIZATION AND INDUSTRIALIZATION AND SOCIOECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. HUMAN GEOGRAPHY, 2010, 25(6): 47-52.
