| 摘要: |
| 在全面推进乡村振兴与国土空间
规划体系实施的背景下，构建科学有效的
乡村活力分析方法，对识别乡村发展潜
力、优化国土空间资源配置具有重要理论
与实践意义。本文系统梳理了国内外乡村
活力的理论演进与实践经验，针对当前研
究在制度衔接、层级传导与测度方法上的
不足，提出一个与国土空间规划体系深度
耦合的乡村活力分析框架。该框架采
用“宏观—微观”双层级结构：宏观层面
以区县为单元，重点评估外部发展环境，
识别区域潜力与约束，为区域政策制定与
资源配置提供依据；微观层面以村庄为单
元，着力诊断内部发展潜力，精细刻画人
口、土地、产业与治理等要素，支撑村庄
分类与差异化振兴。研究进一步明确了指
标体系、综合赋权模型与分级测度方法，
并系统阐述了评价结果在村庄分类、空间
整治与动态监测等方面的应用路径。本框
架旨在实现乡村活力评价与国土空间规划
在目标、机制与应用层面的制度性衔接，
为规划的科学编制、精准实施与持续优化
提供系统性方法论支撑。 |
| 关键词: 乡村活力 国土空间规划 分析
框架 测度方法 国际比较 |
| DOI：10.13791/j.cnki.hsfwest.20250711001 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金面上项目（52078479） |
|
| An analysis framework and measurement method for rural vitality in China’s territorialspatial planning system |
|
FENG Xu,PAN Chuanyang,WANG Kai
|
| Abstract: |
| In the context of comprehensively advancing rural revitalization and implementing China’s
territorial spatial planning system, establishing a scientific and operational analytical framework for rural
vitality is of significant theoretical and practical importance for identifying rural development potential
and optimizing the allocation of territorial spatial resources. As China enters a new stage of urbanization
characterized by quality-oriented development, many rural areas are experiencing structural challenges
such as population outmigration, industrial decline, and spatial inefficiency, which have weakened
endogenous development momentum. Meanwhile, the territorial spatial planning system, characterized
by the integration of multiple plans and a five-level hierarchical transmission mechanism, provides an
institutional framework for coordinating spatial governance and implementing rural revitalization
strategies. However, a key challenge remains in translating strategic objectives into operational spatial
policies and measurable planning tools. Addressing this issue requires an analytical framework capable of
diagnosing rural development conditions while aligning with the institutional logic of territorial spatial
planning. Based on a systematic review of the theoretical evolution and practical experiences of rural
vitality research both domestically and internationally, this study identifies several limitations in existing
research, including insufficient institutional linkage with planning systems, limited hierarchical analytical
structures, and methodological constraints in measurement approaches. To address these gaps, the paper
proposes a rural vitality analytical framework and measurement method closely coupled with the
territorial spatial planning system and constructs a dual-level analytical structure that distinguishes
between external development environments and internal development potentials, thereby enabling the
hierarchical transmission of planning objectives from macro strategic governance to micro-level rural
development. At the macro level, counties or districts are adopted as analytical units to assess the external
conditions shaping rural development, including policy support, regional economic foundations, natural
resource endowments, and infrastructure accessibility. Although largely exogenous to individual villages,
these factors determine regional development opportunities and constraints, and the evaluation results can
support policy formulation, regional coordination, and strategic resource allocation. At the micro level,
villages serve as the core analytical units, with the evaluation focusing on internal development potential
and operational dynamics, including population structure and mobility, land-use efficiency, industrial
development capacity, income conditions, residential environment quality, and grassroots governance
effectiveness. Through the systematic assessment of these endogenous elements, the framework identifies
village-level strengths, weaknesses, and key drivers of rural vitality, thereby providing a scientific basis
for village classification and differentiated revitalization strategies in county-level territorial spatial
planning. On this basis, the study constructs a hierarchical indicator system aligned with the dual
development objectives of residential sustainability and industrial prosperity, which represent the
fundamental requirements for maintaining rural settlement viability and strengthening economicfoundations. At the macro level, the indicator system emphasizes natural environment, infrastructure support, social vitality, agricultural development, and
regional economic dynamics, while at the micro level it focuses on population structure, governance capacity, location conditions, residential environment
quality, land resource security, income levels, and industrial development potential. Although the indicators differ in specific dimensions due to spatial scale
differences, they maintain conceptual consistency in reflecting the core objectives of rural development. Methodologically, the study adopts a hybrid weighting
approach that integrates subjective and objective techniques, in which the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) determines the weights of major dimensions based
on expert judgment and policy priorities, while the entropy method calculates objective weights for individual indicators according to data variability; these
weights are subsequently integrated to generate comprehensive indicator weights, and a linear weighted aggregation model is used to calculate rural vitality
scores for each evaluation unit. To enhance the interpretability and policy relevance of the results, the vitality scores are further classified using the natural
breaks method, and K-means clustering is employed to identify different rural vitality types based on the structural characteristics of sub-dimensional
indicators. Finally, the study outlines several practical application pathways for integrating rural vitality evaluation into territorial spatial planning, including
supporting scientific village classification and differentiated revitalization strategies, guiding the targeted implementation of spatial governance tools such as
land consolidation, infrastructure improvement, and rural environmental enhancement, and serving as a dynamic monitoring instrument for evaluating planning
implementation. By linking rural vitality indicators with the monitoring platform of territorial spatial planning, the framework helps establish a governance
cycle integrating evaluation, planning, implementation, monitoring, and policy adjustment. Overall, the study develops a systematic analytical framework and
measurement method for rural vitality that aligns with the institutional structure of China’s territorial spatial planning system, providing methodological
support for evidence-based rural planning and the effective implementation of rural revitalization strategies. |
| Key words: rural vitality territorial spatial planning analytical framework measurement method international comparison |
