Dynamic simulation and conflict identification analysis of production-living-ecological space in Wuhan, Central China

Under the current rapid urbanization and industrialization in China, competition for production, living, and ecological spaces is becoming fierce. Improving production-living-ecological spaces (PLESs) has become a core issue in China's land-space development strategy. In this study, the multiple linear logistic regression (MLLR)-multicriteria evaluation (MCE)-cellular automata (CA)-Markov hybrid model was used to predict the land-use pattern for 2030, and the spatial conflict model was established based on landscape indices to measure the evolution characteristics of spatial conflicts. The results demonstrated that, from 2005 to 2030, the production-ecological space (PES) will have front-runner status in Wuhan, followed by the ecological-production space (EPS). In 2005-2015, the living-production space (LPS) and PES occupied large amounts of EPS and ecological space (ES), especially in the main urban areas and near rivers, and the spatial transformation was the most significant. By 2030, there will be less transformation of each space type, but the conversion amount of LPS will still be relatively large. With the passage of time, the LPS will increase, the EPS will decrease slightly, and the ES will fluctuate. During the period 2005-2030, the conflict level will change gradually from seriously out of control to controllable, and the hot spot of PLES will show a scattering distribution. The cold spot area will be distributed mainly in the southern part of Wuhan, which will be expanded greatly by 2030. Our research indicates that analyzing the reasonable utilization of PLES is of great value by identifying spatial conflicts; differentiated sustainable development strategies should be formulated according to the future spatial and temporal patterns of PLES, which can help in scientific judgments on the spatial matching of land use and provide early warnings of spatial conflicts. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;18:1578-1596. © 2021 SETAC.