2016 International Conference on Mathematical, Computational and Statistical Sciences and Engineering (MCSSE 2016) ISBN: 978-1-60595-396-0
Evaluation of New-type Urbanization Level of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Xue-feng WANG and Yan-bing DING Northwest University for Nationalities, Gansu, China
Keywords: New-type urbanization, Evaluation index system, Entropy method.
Abstract. New-type urbanization construction should pay attention to both the acceleration of urbanization speed and overall improvement of urbanization development level. Evaluation of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization level helps grasp the status quo of new-type urbanization development and provides a basis for guiding the progress of new-type urbanization. From 4 aspects: economic development, social progress & equity, population quality & living standard, and environmental level, this paper constructs an Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization evaluation index system, and uses entropy method to comprehensively evaluate the urbanization level of each league and city of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, providing a quantitative basis for identifying the differences between regions and the problems existing in development.
Introduction Urbanization is a worldwide socioeconomic phenomenon that emerged with industrialization and economic development, and is an important symbol and inevitable trend of human economic and social development. In 2015, China’s urbanization rate was 56.1%, reaching the world's average level, which indicates that, after the reform and opening up, a remarkable achievement was achieved in urbanization. However, the traditional urbanization process attached importance to “quantitative” increase and neglected the "qualitative" improvement, which gave rise to widened urban-rural gap and a series of social problems such as “urban diseases”, and therefore the overall level of urbanization development is not quite satisfactory. Urbanization level evaluation is a scientific way to know about urbanization development quality, and the traditional urbanization quality evaluation system is hard to meet the development requirements of “new-type” urbanization, and therefore it is particularly important to timely construct a level evaluation system that meets the new-type urbanization’s development requirements.
Literature Review on New-Type Urbanization Level Evaluation After new-type urbanization is put forward, domestic scholars argue that the traditional single measurement index puts too much emphasis on the proportion of urban population and is no longer able to comprehensively measure the true level of new-type urbanization, so they go about looking for new measurement indexes. Domestic scholars have continuously tried using composite indexes to evaluate a certain region’s urbanization level. Chen Mingxing (2009, from such six aspects as population, economy, life, science & technology, and environment, set up an evaluation index system to measure urbanization. Chu Aili (2011) analyzed the factors affecting urbanized population, and used indexes that could reflect the population change, e.g., the proportion of urban population, and employee proportion of the secondary (and tertiary) industry, to analyze the urbanization level. Hao Huayong (2011) analyzed urbanization development from three perspectives: urbanization development potential, urbanization development equipment, and urbanization development economy, and selected corresponding indexes to construct an urbanization evaluation system. Niu Xiaochun et al. (2013) comprehensively discussed urbanization, involving not only the economy, population and space
494 mentioned by previous scholars but also the population’s way and quality of life. If we are to use composite indexes to evaluate urbanization, we need to bring together the indexes that reflect each aspect of urbanization, and obtain a comprehensive index, which can comprehensively reflect the status of urbanization development. Domestic scholars also have different choices about the urbanization evaluation method that involves composite indexes. According to index system weight’s defining method, evaluation method falls into objective weight method and subjective weight method. Subjective weight method includes: experts grading method, and analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Objective weight method includes: data envelopment analysis (DEA), entropy weight method, principal component analysis (PCA), factor analysis, etc. Yuan Yixing (2012) used expert scoring method to evaluate the urbanization level of 20 provinces, cities and municipalities. Shen Qingji (2012) used subjective weight defining method to, with northwest cities as the research object and urbanization development quality as the research content, evaluate their urbanization level from four aspects: economic development, living quality of residents, science & technology modernization, and environmental protection. Zhang Yin (2015) used analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to comprehensively evaluate Chongqing’s urbanization development quality, and the research shows that new-type urbanization development quality should comprehensively consider population, land, industry’s urbanization level, urbanization efficiency (contribution to economic growth, output rate of development elements, social development quality, eco-environmental quality, etc.), as well as degree of regional coordinated development. Tian Tianyu, Liu Kanghua (2011) used PCA and constructed an evaluation system that involved 4 aspects and 14 indexes to measure Xinjiang’s urbanization level. Wang Fuxi (2013), from 6 aspects: economic development, social development, population development, ecological environment, urban-rural coordinated development, and urbanization efficiency, constructed an urbanization quality evaluation index system and used entropy method to comprehensively measure Shandong’s urbanization quality, and meanwhile used hierarchical cluster analysis to divide 17 cities of Shandong into five types of regions: high-quality urbanization region, relatively-high-quality urbanization region, average-quality urbanization region, low urbanization quality region and poor-quality urbanization region. Zhang Nan and Zhang Xin (2014) optimized the existing composite index system and used factor analysis and cluster analysis to construct a new-type urbanization evaluation index system that included 26 basic indexes; through factor and cluster analysis of 14 cities of Gansu province, they obtained the spatial difference characteristics of urbanization level ranking of cities of Gansu. [1] Research results of the above scholars show that evaluation of new-type urbanization level can be measured with a variety of methods, but there is no unified evaluation standard. To avoid subjective weight method’s drawback of poor objectivity due to experts’ experience-based subjective judgment, this paper, in line with the practical situation of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, plans to select four aspects—economic development level, social development level, population quality & living standard, and environmental level, which include 16 indexes, and to use objective-weight entropy method to measure the development level of new-type urbanization in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region.
Construction of Evaluation Index System Division of Indexes Based on an understanding of the connotation of new-type urbanization, and according to the characteristics of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, this paper constructs an index system that includes four first-grade indexes: economic development level, social development level, population quality & living standard, and environmental level, which include 16 second-grade indexes. The first first-grade index is economic development level; intensive, efficient development of economy is the foundation of new-type urbanization and the goal thereof. The second is social
495 progress level, which directly reflects the new-type urbanization level. The third is population quality & living standard. And the fourth is environmental level. Data Source and Standardization Based on data’s availability and actual demand, this paper’s data come from Statistical Yearbook of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region and CEInet Statistics Database. The sample interval is 2008-2014. Before empirical analysis, in order to avoid the effect of different statistical calibers of data on analysis results, each index data needs to go through standardization treatment. min ' X ij X j X ij max min Positive indexes: X j X j min max In the formula: X ij is the value of evaluation index j in year i, X j and X j are ' the minimum and maximum values of evaluation index j in all years, and X ij is standardized value. All indexes selected in this paper are positive indexes, and the result is calculated through each formula. Calculation of Weight Calculation steps of objective-weight entropy method are[2]: 1. Calculate the proportion of index value j in year i ' X ij ij n Y ' X ij i1 , (i 1,2,,n ; j 1,2, ,m) In the formula, n is the number of samples, and m is the number of indexes. 2. Calculate the information entropy of each index n k ln e j Y ij Y ij i1 , ( ; ) In the formula, k is a constant, k 1/ ln(n), in which n is the number of evaluation years, and m is the number of indexes. 3. Calculate the difference coefficient of index j. 1 d j e j , (j 1,2, ,m) A certain index’s information utility value depends on the difference between its information entropy ej and 1, and its value directly affects the weight: the greater the information utility value is, the greater its importance to evaluation is, and the greater its weight is. 4. Calculate the weight index j m / W j d j d j j1 , ( j 1,2,,m) 5. Calculate the evaluation value of sample i m U i Y ijW j j1 , j 1,2,,m In the formula, U is the comprehensive evaluation value, m is the number of indexes, W j is the weight of index j. Obviously, the greater U is, the better the sample effect is; at last, all the U values are compared, to draw the evaluation conclusions.
Comprehensive Evaluation Results of New-Type Urbanization (Entropy Method) According to the above calculation steps, the comprehensive scores of new-type urbanization of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region and its 9 cities are calculated.
496 Table 1. Weight of each index in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization index system 2008-2014 First-grade Second-grade index Index First-grade Second-grade index index weight index weight Per capita regional GDP X1 6.10% Proportion of added value of the secondary X2 4.04% Economic industry in regional GDP Proportion of added value of the tertiary industry development X3 25.81% 4.54% level in regional GDP Local public finance income X4 5.68% Completed investment in fixed assets X5 5.44% Proportion of non-agricultural population X6 10.34% Year-end number of employed persons in urban X7 8.94% Social units 28.90% progress level Number of medical and health institutions X8 3.35% Number of beds in medical and health X9 6.27% institutions Number of regular institutions of higher learning X10 5.34% Number of institutions in public library industry X11 8.12% Population quality & Per capita urban road area X12 38.18% 6.78% living standard Average wages of on-the-job urban workers X13 9.79% Annual supply amount of urban domestic water X14 4.82%
Environmental Urban green space area X15 5.69% 10.45% level Green coverage rate of urban built-up areas X16 4.76% Table 1 shows, in the evaluation index system, the population quality & living standard index has the greatest weight, that is, this evaluation index has the biggest effect on new-type urbanization development, and environmental level has the smallest weight. Whereas, the sum of the two accounts for nearly half of the total weight, which indicates that they are equally important as economic development and social progress in the new-type urbanization development process. Among second-grade indexes, proportion of non-agricultural population, average wages of on-the-job urban workers, and year-end number of employed persons in urban units contribute the most to new-type urbanization level. In Excel, use entropy method to obtain the weights and calculate the comprehensive scores of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization level 2008-2013, as shown in Table 2. Table 2. Comprehensive score of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization level 2008-2014
Economic Population Comprehensive Social Environmental Rank Year development quality & living score progress level level level standard 1 2008 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.01 2 2009 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.01 3 2010 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.01 4 2011 0.20 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.02 5 2012 0.24 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.02 6 2013 0.29 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.03 7 2014 0.33 0.10 0.09 0.11 0.03
497 Comprehensive score
Figure 1. Change trend of comprehensive index of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization 2008-2014. Table 2 shows, comprehensive score of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization has an increasing trend year by year, and during 2010 and 2011 it increased the fastest. The total score value grew from 0.08 in 2008 to 0.33 in 2014, with an average annual growth rate of 3.6%. On the whole, economic development and social progress increased synchronously, population quality & living standard increased fast, and environmental level did not change much.
Evaluation of New-Type Urbanization Level of Each City of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Based on relevant data of 2014, the new-type urbanization comprehensive evaluation index system is used to calculate the new-type urbanization level of each city of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, and the comprehensive scores and ranking are obtained as follows. Table 3. Comprehensive score and ranking of new-type urbanization level of each city of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region 2014.
City Score Ranking
Ordos 0.346564 1
Hohhot 0.342348 2
Wulanchabu 0.341581 3
Chifeng 0.337975 4
Hulun Buir 0.328492 5
Baotou 0.295288 6
Tongliao 0.28998 7
Wuhai 0.261603 8
Bayannur 0.246645 9
Table 3 shows, in 2014, Ordos, Hohhot and Wulanchabu have close scores, ranking top three. Lowest scorer Bayannur and highest scorer Ordos have a score difference of 0.1, which shows there is a big gap among the cities in terms of new-type urbanization development. Hohhot, Wulanchabu, Ordos and Baotou are adjacent, but Baotou’s new-type urbanization development is relatively backward, and its population quality & living standard and environmental level remain to be improved.
498 Conclusions of Comprehensive Evaluation of New-Type Urbanization This paper makes an empirical study on the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization level, uses a multi-index comprehensive analysis method to make an evaluation and analysis of the new-type urbanization level of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region and that of each city thereof, and draws the following conclusions. (1) New-type urbanization in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region takes on an accelerating trend. An entropy-method-based evaluation index system is built to measure the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization development during 2008-2014, and the results obtained are expressed in a line chart (Fig.1), which shows that, after 2010, the development level accelerated continually, which signifies that the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region had achieved a remarkable achievement in new-type urbanization, and had entered a rapid development stage. (2) New-type urbanization level is unbalanced in different regions of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. Resource-rich regions such as the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s provincial capital Hohhot, Ordos, and Wulanchabu, as well as advantageously located cities (leagues) score higher on new-type urbanization level, and form a “higher in the central and lower in the east and west” unbalanced spatial pattern. The highest scoring city and the lowest scoring city have a big difference, which means the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s overall new-type urbanization development is not balanced, and it should strengthen the radiation and diffusion effect of various regions, and make them realize coordinated development, paying equal attention to speed and quality.[3] (3) Regional division of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region’s new-type urbanization level. According to each city’s comprehensive score, we can divide the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region into two types: high-level new-type urbanization regions and low-level new-type urbanization regions. High-level regions include Hohhot, Hulun Buir, Wulanchabu, Ordos, and Chifeng, and low-level regions include Wuhai, Baotou, Tongliao and Bayannur. Division of new-type urbanization level can provide reference for policy-making regarding new-type urbanization development in the future.
Acknowledgement This research was financially supported by the xsczl 201602.
References [1] Zhang Nan, Zhang Xin. Evaluation of Gansu’s New-type Urbanization Level [J]. Gansu Science and Technology, 2014, 30(23). [2] Xu Yaping, Yu Huixin. Entropy-method-based Evaluation of New-type Urbanization Quality in Hebei [J]. Journal of Commercial Economics, 2015 (16). [3] Zhang Yin, Yang Qingyuan, et al. Evaluation and Comparison Analysis of Chongqing’s New-type Urbanization Development Quality [J]. Economic Geography, 2015, 35 (7).
499