Can we have our cake and eat it too? A collaborative pathway for ecological conservation and high-quality development in the river-sea convergence zone of the Yellow River Basin

Abstract

In river-sea confluence zones, where land-sea interactions are highly concentrated, achieving synergy between ecological conservation and high-quality development is essential for regional sustainability. As the only river-sea transition zone in the Yellow River Basin, Shandong Province serves as a critical ecological security barrier while facing increasing pressure from intensive development and resource-environment constraints. Against this backdrop, this study takes Shandong Province as the research area and constructs a multi-level analytical framework integrating ecological conservation and high-quality development. From the dual perspectives of intra-system coordination and inter-system coupling, it evaluates coordination levels and identifies spatial differentiation patterns under land-sea integration. The results show that ecological conservation in Shandong is generally coordinated, forming “acore-periphery” spatial pattern, although uncoordinated areas remain concentrated along major rivers and lake regions. High-quality development remains at a relatively low level overall, with pronounced imbalance among the five development concept subsystems; in particular, innovation exhibits weak coordination with other subsystems and constitutes a key constraint. Moreover, the relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development is dominated by incoordination, with more than 70% of the area classified as uncoordinated, while coordinated regions are mainly distributed in southern Shandong and parts of the Jiaodong Peninsula, showing a fragmented pattern. These findings indicate that the coordination relationship is jointly shaped by resource-environment constraints and land-sea coupling processes. By incorporating a land-sea integrated perspective, this study refines the analytical framework for understanding the interaction between ecological conservation and development, and provides empirical support for differentiated governance and sustainable development in river-sea transitional zones.

1 Introduction

Against the global backdrop of continuous depletion of natural resources and ongoing ecological degradation, achieving long-term protection of natural systems while promoting balanced socio-economic development has become a core issue in global sustainability agendas (Amanda et al., 2026). The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development further emphasizes the need to coordinate ecological conservation with economic and social development. Since entering a new stage of development, China has experienced significant transformations in its development conditions and priorities. Under this context, the coordinated advancement of ecological conservation and high-quality development has become a central task in modernizing the national governance system. High-quality development refers to a development paradigm that emphasizes efficiency, sustainability, innovation, and balanced growth, rather than the sole pursuit of economic expansion speed. It highlights the integration of economic, social, and environmental objectives.

River-sea convergence zones represent key spatial interfaces linking terrestrial, riverine, and marine systems (Meng et al., 2026). These regions are shaped by multiple processes, including runoff transport, sediment migration, and nutrient fluxes. They often support ecologically sensitive systems such as estuaries, deltas, and coastal wetlands (Zhou et al., 2025). At the same time, they are typically characterized by high population density and intensive economic activity. Land-based development generates significant spillover effects on coastal waters, which intensifies the tension between ecological conservation and economic growth (Liu et al., 2025). In particular, nutrients, sediments, and pollutants transported from upstream areas can directly influence marine water quality, biodiversity, and ecosystem stability in marginal seas such as the Bohai Sea and the Yellow Sea. Therefore, understanding the coordination between ecological conservation and high-quality development from a land-sea integrated perspective is of both theoretical and practical importance.

The Yellow River Basin is one of the world’s most sediment-laden river systems (Jiang et al., 2023). Its estuary plays a critical role in regulating sediment discharge, maintaining delta stability, and safeguarding the ecological security of adjacent marine environments (Yin et al., 2022; Li et al., 2026). Located in Shandong Province, the river-sea convergence zone of the Yellow River represents the only estuarine interface within the basin. It is also a strategic region for both ecological conservation and economic development. In recent years, changes in upstream water and sediment regimes, along with intensified coastal development, have reshaped the regional ecological and socio-economic system (Wang et al., 2025). These changes have increased the pressure on ecological systems and amplified the conflict between conservation and development goals (Long et al., 2018; Zhang and Xiang, 2025).

From the perspective of existing research, studies on ecological conservation, high-quality development, and their interactions have gradually expanded. However, their analytical focus and methodological approaches differ.

In ecological conservation research, recent studies have increasingly focused on large-scale ecological restoration and spatial differentiation. By constructing indicator systems covering water conservation, soil retention, windbreak and sand fixation, desertification control, and soil erosion, scholars have assessed regional ecological conservation importance (Liu et al., 2018; Gao et al., 2020; Jin et al., 2018). These studies often identify spatial heterogeneity and delineate priority areas for ecological protection, which supports targeted restoration strategies (Deepa and Jitendra, 2021; Ding and Yao, 2020; Jiang et al., 2020; Fang et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2026). In addition, ecological compensation has been widely discussed as a key policy tool. However, the traditional approach of “pollute first, then remediate” is increasingly considered inadequate. Given the public goods nature of ecosystems, recent studies emphasize the need to strengthen ecological protection based on natural baseline conditions and ecological carrying capacity (Gao et al., 2009; Jin et al., 2019).

Research on high-quality development is more systematic in both theory and empirical measurement. It is generally understood as a multidimensional concept that emphasizes efficiency, structural balance, sustainability, and people-centered development (Gao et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2019). It aims to meet the growing demand for improved living standards and to achieve dynamic balance between supply and demand (Zhang X. T. et al., 2019; Ma et al., 2019). Many studies interpret high-quality development through the framework of the “Five Development Concepts”, namely innovation, coordination, green development, openness, and sharing (Yin, 2023). Based on this framework, scholars have developed multidimensional indicator systems covering economic performance, industrial structure, innovation capacity, environmental quality, and social welfare (Ma et al., 2019; Wei and Li, 2018; Yang and Zhang, 2021; Zhao et al., 2020). Despite the complexity and diversity of these indicator systems, their core content can still be summarized within the framework of the five development concepts. The “Five Development Concepts”—innovation, coordination, green, openness, and sharing—constitute a strategic framework proposed by the Chinese government to guide sustainable and inclusive regional development. To enhance the global relevance of the analytical framework, the “Five Development Concepts” are broadly aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Specifically, innovation corresponds to SDG 9, coordination relates to SDGs 10 and 11, green development aligns with SDGs 13–15, openness reflects SDG 17, and sharing is associated with SDGs 1 and 8. This mapping situates the study within a broader global sustainability discourse. Consequently, some scholars have evaluated the level of high-quality development based on the five development chains and their extended perspectives (Chen et al., 2020).

Research on the relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development includes both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Qualitative studies explore their internal logic and governance pathways, while quantitative studies often use coupling coordination models to measure their interactions (Xu and Wang, 2020; Jin et al., 2019; Lu and Sun, 2019). However, several limitations remain. Ecological conservation assessments tend to emphasize environmental pressures and governance capacity, while paying less attention to natural baseline conditions. High-quality development studies often focus on the realization of the five development concepts, but lack integration with ecological constraints (Cui et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2021). Moreover, most studies are conducted at the scale of the entire Yellow River Basin. This is partly constrained by the unique natural environment of the Yellow River basin and national strategic orientation (Xi, 2019), This makes it difficult to capture the complexity of lan-sea interactions in river-sea convergence zones. A systematic analytical framework that integrates ecological baseline conditions with high-quality development from a land-sea perspective is still lacking. The “Two Mountains” theory, which emphasizes that “lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets”, provides important theoretical support for coordinating ecological conservation and development. It highlights the need to achieve economic growth while maintaining ecological integrity. From this perspective, ecological conservation reflects the spatial allocation of land resources for ecological functions, while high-quality development reflects the level of socio-economic advancement. The two are mutually dependent but may also constrain each other under certain conditions (Liu et al., 2020; Zhu et al., 2022).

In the lower reaches of the Yellow River, especially within river–sea interface regions, ecological systems exhibit high sensitivity due to the combined effects of upstream sediment transport, nutrient fluxes, and coastal dynamics (Zhang J. K. et al., 2019). exerting significant influences on marine environmental quality and ecosystem function. In particular, the Bohai Sea and the Yellow Sea are highly sensitive to upstream anthropogenic activities, where changes in terrestrial development patterns can directly affect coastal eutrophication, biodiversity, and overall marine ecological stability (Ma et al., 2019). Recent studies have explored coupling coordination mechanisms using methods such as composite index evaluation, coupling coordination models, and spatial analysis techniques. However, limited attention has been paid to integrating land–ocean interactions and tele-coupling processes into the analytical framework. Incorporating emerging perspectives such as river delta sustainability and land–ocean interactions can provide a more comprehensive understanding of regional development dynamics. Based on the above considerations, this study focuses on Shandong Province as a typical river–sea convergence zone of the Yellow River Basin. It conceptualizes the region as a land–sea coupled system. A multi-level analytical framework is constructed to examine the coordination between ecological conservation and high-quality development. For ecological conservation, the framework evaluates the coordination between actual spatial scale and potential ecological carrying capacity. For high-quality development, it assesses the internal coordination among the five development subsystems. By integrating intra-system and inter-system analyses, this study reveals the spatial interaction patterns between ecological conservation and high-quality development and their implications for regional sustainability.

The contributions of this study are twofold. First, it introduces a land–sea integrated perspective and incorporates ecological baseline conditions into the analysis of ecological conservation. This extends beyond conventional approaches that focus mainly on socio-economic indicators. Second, it develops a multi-level coordination framework that combines intra-system and inter-system relationships. This framework provides a more comprehensive understanding of the interaction between ecological conservation and high-quality development in river–sea convergence zones.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the theoretical framework. Section 3 describes the materials and methods. Section 4 introduces the study area and data sources. Section 5 presents the results. Section 6 discusses the findings and concludes the study.

2 Theoretical framework

Against the backdrop of intensifying resource and environmental constraints, ecological conservation and high-quality development have progressively shifted from parallel objectives to synergistic advancement. The principle that “lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets” fundamentally reveals the intrinsic unity of ecological and economic value, while resource and environmental carrying capacity provides the rigid boundary for their coordination. Within the unique spatial unit of river-sea confluence zones—characterized by high land-sea coupling—the interactive relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development manifests not only as internal regulation within terrestrial systems but also through spillover effects on nearshore marine ecosystems via land-sea factor transmission (Liu et al., 2018). This necessitates a systematic analysis of their relationship under a unified theoretical framework.

From the perspective of the ecological conservation subsystem, its practical manifestation is the spatial allocation of ecological conservation areas at a certain scale. This scale encompasses both existing ecological land use patterns and potential constraints imposed by ecological red lines and ecological carrying capacity boundaries. Ecological conservation does not simply pursue the expansion of protected areas but emphasizes internal coordination between the actual scale of ecological conservation and potential carrying capacity—that is, the matching relationship between ecological supply and human demand (Ma et al., 2019; Wei and Li, 2018). In river-sea convergence zones, an insufficient actual ecological protection scale may weaken the foundational support of ecosystems and their capacity to provide ecological services. Conversely, blindly expanding protection areas beyond carrying capacity boundaries may compress reasonable development space and undermine overall regional efficiency.

From the perspective of the high-quality development subsystem, its core lies in the coordinated interaction among multiple dimensions, including innovation, coordination, green development, openness, and sharing. Its overall level is determined not only by improvements in individual dimensions but also by the internal coherence of its structure, functions, and spatial configuration. When imbalances occur within the development subsystem, they often exert counterproductive pressures on ecosystems through increased resource consumption, higher pollution emissions, and intensified spatial development. Particularly in river-sea convergence zones, such pressures may further propagate to estuarine and nearshore marine ecosystems.

Against this backdrop, ecological conservation and high-quality development interact through positive and negative feedback mechanisms. On one hand, ecological conservation creates essential conditions for high-quality development by providing ecosystem services and foundational support. On the other hand, high-quality development fuels ecological conservation through capital investment, technological advancement, and enhanced governance capabilities (Yang and Zhang, 2021). Simultaneously, pollution emissions, resource consumption, and spatial constraints form the negative boundary conditions for their interaction. Whether a virtuous cycle can emerge depends on the coordination between the scale and carrying capacity of ecological conservation, the internal structure of high-quality development, and their mutual interactions.

Based on this understanding, this paper constructs a multi-level coordination analysis framework for ecological conservation and high-quality development. First, it depicts the internal coordination of the ecological conservation subsystem by examining its actual scale and potential carrying capacity. Second, it measures the internal coordination of the high-quality development subsystem from the perspective of synergistic implementation of the five development concepts. Third, it comprehensively examines the interactive coupling effects between the two, identifying their spatio-temporal differentiation characteristics and barrier factors. Building upon this foundation, the study further categorizes different coordination types and proposes differentiated synergistic optimization pathways, providing a theoretical basis for the coordinated advancement of ecological conservation and high-quality development in river-sea convergence zones.

3 Materials and methods

3.1 Study area

Shandong Province (34°22.9′–38°24.01′N, 114°47.5′–122°42.3′E) is situated in China’s eastern coastal region (Figure 1). It serves as the convergence point of the Yellow River basin and the coastal economic belt, and is the only area where the Yellow River meets the sea, making its geographical position highly significant. Covering 158,000 square kilometers of land, its topography comprises the Western Shandong Plain, Central Shandong Mountains, and Eastern Shandong Hills. With the nation’s longest coastline, the Mount Tai region and the Yellow River estuary are nationally designated key ecological conservation areas. Primarily composed of arable land, Shandong serves as a major national grain and vegetable production base and a leading agricultural province, exhibiting an overall spatial pattern characterized by “one cluster, two cores, two screens, three belts, and three zones with nine fields. “However, Shandong faces significant challenges in balancing ecological conservation with development due to its high land use intensity, rigid ecological protection constraints, and limited reserve development resources. This creates a pronounced conflict between conservation and development, substantially hindering the achievement of high-quality regional development goals. Therefore, clarifying the relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development in Shandong and promoting their coordinated advancement through both intra-system and inter-system coordination holds significant practical importance.

Figure 1

3.2 Data sources

The data types required for this study include natural geographic data such as land resources, water resources, environment, meteorology, disasters, and ecology, as well as socioeconomic data such as population and industry. Specifically, land resource data (including soil, topography, land use types, etc.) is sourced from the Resource and Environment Science and Data Center of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (http://www.resdc.cn). Water resource data originates from official releases by Shandong’s water resources authorities (http://dnr.shandong.gov.cn/). Ecological environment data is derived from official publications by Shandong’s environmental protection department (http://dnr.shandong.gov.cn/). Meteorological data (including solar radiation and disasters) is sourced from official data released by the National Meteorological Science Data Center (http://data.cma.cn/). Data on territorial spatial “red line” controls and geological hazards is sourced from official data released by the Shandong Provincial Department of Natural Resources (http://dnr.shandong.gov.cn/). Data for the high-quality development indicator system primarily comes from the 2021 Shandong Statistical Yearbook, municipal statistical yearbooks, and the Statistical Bulletin on National Economic and Social Development (http://tjj.shandong.gov.cn/tjnj/nj2021/zk/indexce.htm). For missing data, adjacent years’ data were used as substitutes.

3.3 Methodology

3.3.1 Measuring the importance of ecological conservation

The importance of ecological conservation is evaluated based on natural resource baseline elements, referencing the revised Technical Guidelines for Evaluating Resource and Environmental Carrying Capacity and Suitable Development of Territorial Space (Trial), establishing an evaluation indicator system for territorial spatial development suitability. This system comprises three hierarchical levels: target layer, factor layer, and element layer. The target layer focuses on territorial spatial ecological conservation, with supporting factor indicators reflecting the suitability of main functional zones (Table 1). To identify ecosystem service functions and ecologically sensitive or vulnerable areas, the ecological protection factor layer comprises ecosystem service functions and ecological sensitivity. Within the ecological protection importance evaluation indicator system, higher values for factors e1–e4 indicate greater ecosystem service importance, while higher values for e5–e6 signify greater ecological sensitivity, resulting in higher ecological protection importance ratings.

Due to differences between the multifunctional types of national territorial space and the attributes of evaluation factors, different data quantification and graded value assignment methods are required. The importance of ecological protection functions is determined using the stepwise correction method (Equation 1). The results of each factor are classified into three levels using the natural breakpoint method. The highest level among biodiversity maintenance, water conservation, soil and water conservation, windbreak and sand fixation, soil erosion sensitivity, and desertification sensitivity is adopted as the ecological protection importance level, categorized into three grades: extremely important, important, and generally important.

This paper determines the potential carrying capacity for ecological conservation through the following approach: By comprehensively considering the suitability assessment results for urban development and agricultural production, the importance of ecological conservation and the suitability grades for development are coded and combined. Potential conflict types among different functional spaces are then categorized based on the degree of grade differences. Subsequently, the “ecological protection red line, permanent basic farmland protection red line, and urban development boundary” from the national territorial spatial master plan serve as rigid constraints for potential conflict mediation. The long-term evolved status of territorial spatial utilization acts as flexible guidance for conflict mediation. Following the principles of prioritizing protection and favoring the most suitable development grades, different potential conflict types are progressively mediated to derive the resource-environmental carrying capacities for ecological, agricultural, and urban spaces. This paper extracts the carrying capacity of ecological conservation areas as the potential scale. Based on the coordination between the current ecological conservation scale and the potential scale, it investigates whether the current ecological conservation scale exceeds the resource and environmental carrying capacity baseline.

In Equation 2, D represents the coordination index between the current and potential scales of ecological conservation. D_z denotes the resource-environmental carrying capacity, while D_x represents the current scale of ecological space. To establish a relatively reasonable coordination grading system, referencing the decoupling theory’s elasticity value standards, three tiers are defined using 0.8 and 1.2 as thresholds: [0,0.8] indicates a non-coordinated state, where the potential scale of ecological conservation is significantly lower than the actual scale, signifying extensive development in ecological conservation; (0.8,1.2) indicates a basic coordination state, where the potential scale of ecological conservation is close to the actual scale, signifying very limited future development potential for ecological conservation; [1.2,+∞) represents a highly coordinated state, indicating that the potential scale of ecological conservation far exceeds the actual scale, with significant future support for economic and social development.

3.3.2 Measurement of high-quality development level

Based on the preceding analysis, an evaluation index system for high-quality county-level development is constructed from the perspective of the Five Development Concepts. Specifically, five primary indicators—Innovation, Coordination, Green Development, Openness, and Shared Prosperity—along with 24 secondary indicators are selected (Figure 2). Specifically, Innovation encompasses five sub-indicators: R&D expenditure intensity (ratio of internal R&D expenditure to GDP), full-time equivalent R&D personnel, patent applications, fiscal expenditure intensity for science and technology (ratio of science and technology fiscal expenditure to general public budget expenditure), and innovation capacity of high-tech industries (ratio of main business revenue from high-tech industries to GDP). Coordination includes seven sub-indicators: GDP growth rate, per capita GDP, rationalization of industrial structure(share of tertiary industry in regional GDP), registered urbanization rate, fiscal revenue per unit of construction land (reflecting land-production relations), and mechanization level per unit of agricultural land (reflecting human-land relations). Green development encompasses industrial solid waste emissions (sum of industrial wastewater, sulfur dioxide, and industrial smoke/dust emissions), agricultural chemical application volume (sum of pesticide application, fertilizer application in pure form, and agricultural plastic film usage), per capita park green space area, centralized sewage treatment plant coverage rate, proportion of regional ecological conservation space (greenery and water area relative to county size), and air quality compliance rate (annual average number of days with good air quality). Openness includes two sub-indicators: foreign trade dependency (the ratio of total imports and exports to regional GDP) and foreign capital utilization intensity (the ratio of actual foreign direct investment to regional GDP). Sharing includes four sub-indicators: education fiscal expenditure intensity (the ratio of education expenditure to general public fiscal budget expenditure), basic education development (the sum of student-teacher ratios for primary, junior high, and senior high schools), public library book holdings, and medical beds per thousand people. Due to space limitations, some tertiary indicator labels in Figure 2 are abbreviated. A detailed description of all indicators is provided in Table 2.

Figure 2

The high-quality development evaluation indicator system is relatively complex. To eliminate dimensionality, the range method is first applied to standardize the indicator system. Assuming there are n evaluation subjects and m evaluation indicators, the matrix form of the raw data is detailed in Equation 3.

In Equations 3–6, xij represents the raw data of the indicator layer, while max(x · j) and min(x · j) denote the maximum and minimum values of the raw indicator data, respectively. Equations 4, 5 apply to positive and negative indicators, respectively, and Equation 6 denotes the new matrix after standardization.

Subsequently, the weights of the indicator system are determined by calculating the information entropy using the entropy weight method.

In Equations 7–9, is a non-negative constant. When , , the non-negative translation method is applied is the difference coefficient, and wi is the weight of the i-th indicator.

Finally, calculate the comprehensive score for high-quality development.

In Equations 10, 11, y_i denotes the score of the fifth system for high-quality development in county i, Y_i represents the comprehensive evaluation score for high-quality development in county i, r_ij indicates the score of the qth indicator for county p, and W_i signifies the weight of the qth indicator (q=1,2,…,k).

Referencing existing research (Jiang et al., 2017), the coupling coordination degree model for the five high-quality development systems is constructed as follows:

In Equations 12–14, G represents the coupling degree, and L denotes the coupling coordination degree. Since the five development concepts hold equal importance, an equal weighting approach is adopted: β_i. For pairwise coupling coordination, n = 2, β_i = 0.5; for coupling among all five subsystems, n = 5, β_i = 0.2. A higher coupling coordination degree indicates stronger pairwise or overall synergy within high-quality development. Additionally, the overall coordination level of the five systems is categorized into five types using the natural break method: low coordination, low-to-moderate coordination, moderate coordination, moderate-to-high coordination, and high coordination.

3.3.3 Multi-level coordination model for ecological conservation and high-quality development

Based on the aforementioned theoretical framework and incorporating the coordination measurement results between ecological conservation and high-quality development, a conceptual model for multi-level coordination analysis is constructed using a layered structure diagram (Figure 3). This model effectively addresses two critical issues: first, revealing the coordination status between ecological conservation and high-quality development; second, accurately identifying problems and improvement pathways in the process of economic and social development. The former involves permutations and combinations of coordination levels between the ecological utilization scale and high-quality development subsystems. Following the principle of balancing ecological conservation and development, 15 theoretical permutations and combinations are clustered into four coordination levels, with coordination decreasing progressively from Level I to Level IV. Specifically: - Level I: Basic coordination in ecological conservation combined with moderate to high coordination in high-quality development subsystems. - Level II: Basic coordination in ecological conservation combined with moderate coordination in high-quality development subsystems. - Level III: Basic coordination or higher in ecological conservation combined with moderate to high coordination in high-quality development subsystems. - Level IV: All combinations where ecological conservation is uncoordinated. The latter approach targets enhancing high coordination between ecological conservation and high-quality development. Using administrative regions corresponding to different coordination levels as spatial units, it forms two optimized zones—coordination zones and imbalance zones—based on the difficulty of improvement in each unit. Coordination zones can still achieve both ecological conservation and high-quality development, while imbalance zones can only accommodate one or neither.

Figure 3

4 Results

4.1 Ecological conservation analysis

Based on the ecological conservation baseline assessment results (Figure 4a), the areas classified as extremely important, important, and generally important for ecological conservation in Shandong Province increase sequentially, accounting for 18.87%, 19.56%, and 61.57% respectively. This indicates that 38.52% of the area still faces relatively high ecological conservation pressure and demands higher ecological protection requirements. Simultaneously, the spatial distribution of ecological protection importance is significantly influenced by natural geographical location factors, with high-importance areas concentrated along coastlines, mountain ranges, rivers, and lakes. After potential conflict mediation (Figure 4b), the province’s agricultural production space exhibits the largest resource-environmental carrying capacity, followed by ecological conservation space, with urban construction space being the smallest. Their respective proportions are 69.74%, 18.71%, and 11.55%, indicating that ecological conservation space still holds a medium-to-high position among the three functional spaces.

Figure 4

Regarding coordination indices, the ecological conservation space utilization scale in Shandong Province ranges from 0.157 to 4.857, with an average of 1.162. This indicates substantial overall variation while maintaining a fundamentally coordinated state at the mean level. Further spatial analysis reveals a central-peripheral distribution pattern for the coordination index of ecological conservation space utilization (Figure 4c). Coordinated areas dominate Shandong Province, covering 59.56% of its total area. These areas are contiguously distributed across most of northern and central Shandong, as well as the western part of the Jiaodong Peninsula. The remaining counties and districts constitute non-coordinated areas, covering 40.44% of the total area. These areas exhibit a “strip-like” distribution pattern along the Yellow River and its tributaries, the banks of the Yi and Shu Rivers, and the periphery of Weishan Lake, indicating that ecological conservation in these regions still faces severe challenges.

4.2 Analysis of high-quality development

As shown in Figure 5, Shandong Province’s high-quality development level ranges from 0.1115 to 0.4773, with an average of 0.2508. This indicates that overall, there remains significant potential for improvement in high-quality development. Examining the five subsystems, the indices for innovation, coordination, green development, openness, and sharing fall within the ranges of 0.0047 to 0.4562,0.1627 to 0.7070, 0.1603 to 0.7930, 0.0096 to 0.9475, and 0.0655 to 0.1115, respectively, with average values of 0.0701, 0.3618, 0.4069,0.1890, and 0.2262, respectively. This indicates that green development generally achieved the highest level, followed by coordination, while sharing and openness reached moderate levels. Innovation development lagged the most, suggesting that underperforming subsystems dragged down the overall high-quality development level. Regarding peak distribution locations, the coordination index, green index, and high-quality development index peaks were found in Shinan District and Laoshan District of Qingdao City, respectively. The innovation index and openness index peaks were located in Yangxin County and Huimin County of Binzhou City, respectively. The sharing index peak was distributed in the Zhangqiu District of Jinan City. This indicates that Jinan, Qingdao, and Binzhou City lead Shandong Province in high-quality development and its subsystems, serving as regional models for enhancing high-quality development in the province. However, in terms of curve fluctuation, the coordination and green development systems exhibit relatively minor fluctuations, while the remaining three subsystems show significant volatility. Notably, the differences between the peak and average values for the openness and innovation development levels reach as high as 0.3861 and 0.7585, respectively. This indicates that regional imbalances within the subsystems of the five development concepts are particularly pronounced.

Figure 5

From the perspective of coordination between each pair of the five development concepts, they can be categorized into ten combinations: innovation-coordination, innovation-green, innovation-openness, innovation-sharing, coordination-green, coordination-openness, coordination-sharing, green-openness, green-sharing, and openness-sharing. As shown in Figure 6, the average coupling coordination levels for these ten combinations are 0.3588, 0.3674, 0.2810, 0.3158, 0.6114, 0.4731, 0.5253, 0.4858, 0.5386, and 0.4178, respectively. This indicates that the coupling coordination degree between the innovation index and any subsystem combination is relatively low, with the highest coupling coordination observed between coordination and green systems. This indirectly reflects that innovation remains a bottleneck constraining high-quality development across Shandong’s counties and districts. Combined with the preceding analysis, it is evident that coordination and green systems rank highest and second-highest in development levels, respectively, and exhibit strong coupling. This signifies that both coordination and green systems make significant contributions to Shandong’s high-quality development. Meanwhile, the average coupling coordination degree among the five systems is 0.4184, indicating that any shortfall will constrain internal coordination within high-quality development.

Figure 6

Further examining the overall coupling coordination of the five systems, the coupling coordination index ranges from 0.2675 to 0.6191, with an average of 0.4184. This indicates that the overall coordination of Shandong’s high-quality development subsystems is not high, suggesting that counties have not adequately achieved coordinated development across subsystems. Targeted measures are needed to promote inter-system synergy. Based on the classification criteria outlined earlier, Shandong’s high-quality development is divided into five coordination types: administrative units with low coordination account for 14.71%, primarily distributed in Jinan, Zibo, and other areas; units with low-to-moderate coordination constitute 36.03%, mainly located in Dongying, Binzhou, Dezhou, Liaocheng, Tai’an, Jining, and other regions; Moderately coordinated administrative units account for 25.74%, primarily distributed in Heze, Zaozhuang, Weifang, and Yantai; Moderately to highly coordinated administrative units account for 16.18%, primarily distributed in Weihai, Qingdao, and Rizhao; Highly coordinated administrative units account for 7.34%, forming a “G”-shaped distribution in Linyi City. In summary, Shandong Province has the lowest proportion of highly coordinated administrative units and the highest proportion of moderately to low-coordinated units, indicating substantial overall potential for improvement and development. Simultaneously, the spatial distribution of high-quality development (Figure 7) shows a generally connected pattern with distinct regional characteristics: higher in the east and south, lower in the west and north. The coastal areas of eastern Shandong exhibit pronounced regional advantages and more advanced economic development models, while the inland western regions maintain relatively conservative economic development patterns.

Figure 7

4.3 Analysis of coordination between ecological conservation and high-quality development

Building upon the coordination results of ecological conservation scale and high-quality development subsystems in Shandong Province, a comprehensive coordination level between ecological conservation and high-quality development was identified using the concentric zone model (Figure 8). Based on the relative positions of ecological conservation and high-quality development, the study area can be divided into coordination zones and mismatch zones, reflecting differentiated interaction patterns between ecological conditions and development levels.

Figure 8

4.3.1 Ecological conservation–high-quality development coordination zone

Within the coordination zone, ecological conservation and high-quality development exhibit a relatively balanced relationship, with no pronounced trade-offs observed between the two systems. Both objectives can be pursued simultaneously under existing conditions. However, the internal coordination level of high-quality development subsystems remains moderate, indicating that further improvement is still possible.

This zone includes Level I and Level II areas, accounting for 8.82% and 16.91% of all administrative units, respectively. Spatially, Level I areas are scattered across southern Shandong and parts of the Jiaodong Peninsula, while Level II areas are mainly distributed in southwestern Shandong, along the coast of Laizhou Bay, and within the Jiaodong Peninsula. These regions generally possess relatively large existing ecological conservation scales, favorable resource and environmental conditions, and comparatively low ecological governance pressure. At the same time, they show clear or emerging trends of high-quality development, providing a relatively stable foundation for coordinated advancement.

4.3.2 Ecological conservation–high-quality development mismatch zones

Mismatch zones are characterized by pronounced inconsistency between ecological conservation and high-quality development, or by low levels in both dimensions. In these areas, ecological conservation and development exhibit evident trade-offs, making it difficult to advance both simultaneously. Nevertheless, such regions represent the primary space for potential improvement in coordination.

Mismatch zones include Grade III and Grade IV areas, accounting for 47.06% and 27.21% of administrative units, respectively, and display relatively strong spatial connectivity. Grade III areas are widely distributed across Shandong Province. In these regions, high-quality development is often prioritized at the expense of ecological conservation, or ecological conservation is maintained in a manner that constrains development efficiency. As a result, ecological conservation and economic development fail to reinforce each other, leading to persistent coordination bottlenecks.

Grade IV areas are mainly distributed in strip-like patterns in northern and southwestern Shandong and parts of the Jiaodong Peninsula. These regions exhibit weak performance in both ecological conservation and high-quality development, reflecting inefficient interaction among the five development subsystems and limited attention to sustainable development objectives.

Overall, the coordination relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development in the river–sea convergence zone does not manifest as a single imbalance pattern, but rather as a multi-type structure shaped by different dominant constraints. This provides an empirical basis for further typological and mechanism-oriented analysis.

4.4 Analysis of the typological characteristics and mechanisms of the synergistic relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development

From the overall coordination results, ecological conservation and high-quality development in the river-sea confluence zone of the Yellow River Basin in Shandong Province have yet to form a stable, positive synergistic pattern. Significant differences exist across regions in terms of coordination levels, dominant constraints, and evolutionary pathways (Figure 9). These variations not only reflect spatial heterogeneity in ecological baseline conditions and developmental stages but also reveal fundamental differences in the operational mechanisms of ecological conservation and high-quality development across distinct regions. Therefore, it is necessary to deepen the analysis of the relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development by further examining typological classifications and operational mechanisms, building upon the overall coordination analysis.

Figure 9

From the perspective of coordination typology, regions characterized by lagging ecological conservation, lagging high-quality development, and low-level coordination are all present within the study area, with lagging ecological conservation and low-level coordination being the dominant types. This indicates that at the current stage of development, the mismatch between the actual scale of ecological conservation and the potential ecological carrying capacity remains the primary factor constraining the improvement of regional coordination levels. On one hand, economic growth and spatial development in some areas continuously encroach upon ecological spaces, resulting in insufficient actual ecological protection coverage that hinders the effective delivery of ecosystem services. On the other hand, constrained by natural conditions and spatial limitations, certain regions possess high potential ecological carrying capacity but lack adequate protective measures and governance investments, preventing their ecological advantages from being effectively leveraged to support development.

From the overall coordination results, ecological conservation and high-quality development in the river-sea confluence zone of the Yellow River Basin in Shandong Province have yet to form a stable, positive synergistic pattern. Significant differences exist across regions in terms of coordination levels, dominant constraints, and evolutionary pathways. These variations not only reflect Regions lagging in high-quality development are primarily concentrated in areas with relatively favorable ecological foundations, but are also characterized by single-industry economies and insufficient development momentum. While these regions maintain relatively high levels of ecological conservation, they suffer from inadequate innovation capacity, low industrial sophistication, and inefficient factor allocation. This results in weak internal structural coordination for high-quality development. Consequently, the positive supportive effect of ecological conservation on high-quality development remains underutilized, and ecological advantages struggle to translate into sustained economic and social growth drivers. This manifests as a developmental lag within the overall coordination framework.

Low-coordination regions reflect a “dual-low” state of both ecological conservation and high-quality development. These areas often face dual constraints of weak ecological foundations and insufficient development capacity, lacking stable ecological service provision while struggling to obtain sufficient capital, technology, and governance resources through high-quality development to reinvest in ecological conservation. In the context of river-sea convergence zones, such regions may also pose potential risks to downstream estuarine and nearshore marine ecosystems through water-sediment processes and pollutant transport. They represent a critical weak link requiring focused attention in regional collaborative governance.

From the perspective of mechanism, the synergistic relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development is fundamentally the result of dynamic adaptation between the “carrying capacity-constraint” boundary of natural ecosystems and the “structure-efficiency” evolution of socioeconomic systems (Figure 10). On the one hand, ecological conservation constitutes a rigid constraint and value foundation for development. When the actual scale of ecological conservation aligns with the ecosystem’s potential carrying capacity, the ecosystem not only absorbs negative externalities through resilience but also attracts high-end innovation resources as a scarce factor, achieving the value transformation from “lucid waters and lush mountains” to “mountains of gold and silver.” Conversely, once the carrying capacity threshold is exceeded, the surge in environmental regulation costs will forcibly impede economic growth. On the other hand, high-quality development provides structural optimization and reinforcing momentum. Its core lies in achieving a “relative decoupling” between economic growth and resource consumption through innovation-driven development, while leveraging clean technologies and capital accumulation to enhance ecological governance efficiency. Building upon this foundation, significant feedback loops and spatial transmission mechanisms exist between systems. Positive interactions can establish a virtuous closed-loop cycle of “ecological improvement—factor aggregation—structural upgrading—governance feedback.” Conversely, an imbalance in any subsystem not only triggers negative feedback of “resource depletion—development constraints” but also, in the context of river-sea convergence zones, readily generates cross-regional spatial spillover and risk accumulation through sediment transport and pollution diffusion. Therefore, the key to synergy lies in stimulating the system to transition to a higher level of coupling while respecting its carrying capacity boundaries.

Figure 10

Overall, the synergistic state of ecological conservation and high-quality development in the river-sea confluence zone of the Yellow River Basin in Shandong Province exhibits distinct phased and spatially differentiated characteristics. This pattern indicates that enhancing either ecological conservation or economic development in isolation cannot achieve synergistic goals. Only by respecting resource and environmental carrying capacity limits while simultaneously advancing the scale optimization of ecological conservation and structural adjustment for high-quality development can the regional synergistic relationship evolve from low-level imbalance to high-level coordination.

5 Discussion

5.1 A systematic interpretation of the synergistic relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development in river-sea convergence zones

The results of this study indicate that ecological conservation and high-quality development in the river–sea convergence zone of the Yellow River Basin remain predominantly at low coordination or imbalance levels. This outcome is not attributable to deficiencies in a single dimension, but rather to the combined effects of internal coordination within ecological conservation, the structural configuration of high-quality development, and the interaction mechanisms between the two systems.

As a spatial unit where terrestrial, riverine, and marine elements are highly coupled, the river–sea convergence zone is particularly sensitive to overlapping ecosystem carrying capacity constraints and development pressures. Mismatches between the actual scale of ecological conservation and potential ecological carrying capacity weaken ecosystem support functions and amplify development–environment conflicts. Through water–sediment transport and pollutant diffusion, these impacts may further propagate to estuarine and nearshore marine ecosystems, increasing cross-scale ecological risks. At the same time, structural imbalances within high-quality development—especially weak coupling between innovation and green or coordinated development—limit the capacity of economic systems to alleviate resource and environmental pressures through efficiency gains. Under tightening environmental constraints, such development pathways are prone to conflict with ecological conservation objectives, undermining positive feedback between the two systems.

5.2 Interactive mechanisms between ecological conservation and high-quality development from a multi-level coordination perspective

From a multi-level coordination perspective, the synergistic relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development emerges from the dynamic interaction between ecological carrying capacity constraints and the structural evolution of socioeconomic systems. When the actual scale of ecological conservation aligns with ecological carrying capacity, ecosystems can provide both resilience and value-added services, facilitating the transformation of ecological advantages into development momentum. Conversely, exceeding carrying capacity thresholds imposes rigid constraints through rising environmental regulation costs. High-quality development, in turn, enhances ecological governance capacity through innovation-driven growth, clean technology adoption, and capital accumulation, enabling relative decoupling between economic growth and resource consumption. When both systems maintain internal structural coordination, a virtuous cycle of “ecological improvement–factor aggregation–structural upgrading–governance feedback” can emerge. Otherwise, imbalances in either system may trigger negative feedback loops and cross-regional spillover risks, particularly in river–sea convergence zones characterized by strong land–sea linkages.

The empirical results can be further interpreted within the theoretical framework proposed in Figure 11. The spatial differentiation patterns identified in this study are broadly consistent with the hypothesized relationships between ecological conservation and high-quality development. In particular, the coordination between the actual scale of ecological conservation and its potential carrying capacity reflects the role of natural baseline constraints, while the internal coordination among the five development subsystems captures the structural characteristics of high-quality development. Moreover, the observed regional disparities and coupling patterns suggest that the interaction between ecological conservation and high-quality development is not uniform but varies significantly across different spatial contexts. This finding refines the theoretical framework by highlighting the importance of spatial heterogeneity and land–sea interactions in shaping coordination outcomes. It also indicates that the coupling relationship is jointly influenced by natural conditions and socio-economic dynamics, rather than being driven by a single factor. Overall, the empirical analysis not only supports the validity of the proposed framework but also extends its explanatory scope by incorporating region-specific characteristics of river-sea transitional zones.

These findings underscore the necessity of advancing ecological conservation and high-quality development within an integrated land–sea framework, emphasizing coordinated spatial governance and structural optimization rather than unilateral interventions.

5.3 Implications for integrated land–sea governance

5.3.1 Optimize ecological protection spaces

Existing research indicates that after the delineation of ecological redlines, human disturbance has significantly decreased and ecological quality has markedly improved (Huang et al., 2022). Therefore, ecological protection redlines must be strictly enforced to ensure the actual scale of ecological space. From a land-sea integrated governance perspective, particular attention should be given to controlling land-based pollutant discharge into coastal waters. For example, optimizing agricultural fertilizer use, strengthening industrial wastewater treatment, and improving urban sewage management can effectively reduce nutrient inflows into nearshore areas. These measures are critical for mitigating eutrophication risks and protecting ecologically sensitive habitats in the Bohai Sea and Yellow Sea, thereby enhancing marine ecological resilience. In addition, establishing cross-regional coordination mechanisms between upstream and coastal authorities is essential to ensure the effectiveness of integrated lan-sea management. Simultaneously, effective ecological space management strategies combining natural restoration and artificial rehabilitation should be implemented in ecologically fragile areas (Liu et al., 2020). While safeguarding ecological function quality, leveraging inherent advantages to develop eco-tourism can maximize ecological service values such as soil and water conservation, water retention, and landscape recreation. This approach taps ecological potential, using the “quantitative guarantee” of regional ecological space to drive “qualitative enhancement.”

5.3.2 Advancing the five development concepts in tandem to enhance high-quality development capacity

Indicators for Shandong Province’s five development concepts exhibit significant spatial disparities, with heterogeneous shortcomings across counties (districts) that undermine high-quality development. Therefore, it is imperative to address deficiencies in each of the five dimensions simultaneously, advancing high-quality development capabilities in parallel.

First, address the lack of coordination stemming from low innovation levels by restructuring innovation drivers. Effectively identify developmental strengths to form a deeply integrated innovation system characterized by “government leadership, market foundation, and enterprise-led participation.” Reconstruct the dynamic effects of innovation and technology, increase investment in innovation-driven sectors, and prioritize innovative talent and capital to enhance the efficacy of innovative outputs and stimulate comprehensive innovation enthusiasm.

Second, establish a dual-circulation mechanism. Given the volatility in county (district) openness levels caused by fluctuations in foreign investment intensity, achieve international and domestic dual circulation through internal-external linkage. Coordinate regional disparities, reconfigure internal-external dynamics to break existing constraints, and pursue new pathways and patterns for openness. Promote the flow of factors among counties (districts) in Shandong Province to dismantle regional barriers. By establishing a unified domestic and international market, eliminate institutional and regional obstacles to resource mobility. Focus on breaking away from insular development models to foster a robust, open, and competitively orderly dual-circulation economy. Drive the overall opening-up of Heze City through intra-regional and inter-regional circulation. Simultaneously, deepen supply-side structural reforms to enhance the effectiveness of the internal-external linkage and circulation. Address new international challenges and seize emerging opportunities within the context of global economic integration. Build a higher-level open economy for Shandong Province based on international standards, improving both the quantity and quality of supply to forge a new pattern of internal-external openness. The dual circulation system necessitates coordinating regional development disparities. High-density regional development hubs will radiate influence to surrounding areas, fostering new spatial patterns for regional development. Development in central zones will drive upgrades in production and living standards in peripheral regions. Concurrently, optimizing the combination of production factors and rationally allocating various production activities will spur specialized production and integrated exchange and cooperation. This approach highlights regional comparative advantages while removing barriers in non-core functional zones and implementing further optimization.

Finally, steadily enhance people’s well-being. Shared prosperity embodies universal and societal sharing, intrinsically linked to people’s welfare. Steadily enhancing people’s well-being maximizes the level of social sharing. Whether in education, healthcare, or cultural endeavors, none can escape their public and welfare-oriented nature. Market-driven solutions struggle to guarantee universal access, making the enhancement of people’s well-being more reliant on top-down supply systems provided by the government. However, institutional supply is neither instantaneous nor static; it must align with contemporary development trends and existing resource endowment structures. The renewal of shared institutional supply must follow technological transformation, property rights optimization, and equitable distribution. First, technological innovation drives institutional optimization. This stems from the fact that governmental institutional change serves shared actions and exhibits bidirectional interaction. Technological change can both alter relative efficiency within existing institutional frameworks and inject new growth momentum into innovation. Consequently, Shandong Province is constructing a full-chain shared institutional service system, supporting public welfare and public entities, and increasing support for shared initiatives to form a diversified, multi-subject, and multi-model system for universal sharing. Second, optimizing property rights systems involves deeply analyzing regional imbalances and inadequacies in development. By coordinating production relations across sectors and rationally allocating factor market resources, it activates factor supply and entity initiative. This enhances the property rights system provision through a systemic, holistic, and collaborative perspective. Third, sharing must prioritize fairness by optimizing distribution systems. The core of development is the people, and the essence of sharing is universality. Fairness thus serves as the lubricant for resolving social conflicts, embodying the adequacy and balance of the system. Simultaneously, establish and improve a “safety net” mechanism for shared development across society to enhance people’s well-being and advance the realization of shared development.

5.3.3 Resolving regional challenges in balancing ecological conservation and high-quality development

The results reveal that Shandong Province, as a typical river-sea transitional region in the lower reaches of the Yellow River, exhibits pronounced spatial heterogeneity. Inland areas are dominated by agricultural production, where ecological pressure is relatively moderate but resource constraints are becoming increasingly evident. In contrast, coastal regions are characterized by intensive industrial activities and rapid urbanization, which impose greater pressures on marine ecosystems through land-based pollutant discharge and shoreline modification. This uneven spatial pattern, together with the fragmented distribution of ecological conservation and high-quality development zones, makes it difficult to achieve coordinated development through uniform governance approaches. In addition, cross-regional spillover effects—such as air pollution diffusion and resource competition—further complicate the balance between ecological conservation and development.

To address these challenges, a multi-level and network-based governance framework should be established. First, inter-county coordination mechanisms should be strengthened to enhance spatial connectivity and reduce fragmentation. Through regular coordination among government, environmental management, and research institutions, cross-regional issues such as pollution control and ecological restoration can be jointly addressed. This will help form long-term collaborative networks and promote knowledge sharing across regions. Second, demonstration zones for coordinated development can be designated in areas where ecological conservation and high-quality development are relatively well aligned. By leveraging their existing advantages and institutional experience, these zones can serve as pilots for policy innovation and provide replicable models for other regions. The diffusion of such practices can gradually promote coordinated development at a broader spatial scale. Finally, given the strong land–sea interactions in Shandong, a river–sea integrated governance mechanism is essential. Upstream processes, including sediment transport, nutrient input, and pollutant discharge, have direct impacts on estuarine and coastal ecosystems. Therefore, governance efforts should emphasize the coordination between watershed management and coastal ecological restoration. Key measures include controlling land-based pollutant inputs, restoring coastal wetlands and shorelines, and strengthening cross-regional institutional coordination.

Through the combined implementation of network-based governance, demonstration-driven development, and land-sea integrated management, it is possible to enhance the coupling and synergy between ecological conservation and high-quality development in river-sea convergence zones.

5.4 Research limitations

Despite its contributions, this study still has several limitations. First, the analysis relies on statistical and spatial data at the county level, which may not fully capture finer-scale ecological processes and local heterogeneity. Second, the evaluation framework simplifies the complex interactions within the land–sea coupled system, particularly in terms of dynamic feedbacks between upstream watershed processes and coastal ecosystem responses. Third, the study adopts a relatively static analytical perspective, focusing on a single time period, which limits the ability to reveal long-term evolutionary trends. Future research could further improve the robustness of the results by incorporating multi-temporal data, higher-resolution spatial datasets, and dynamic modeling approaches. In addition, comparative studies across different river–sea transitional zones would help to test the generalizability of the proposed framework and provide more comprehensive insights into land–sea integrated governance.

6 Conclusion

Taking Shandong Province—the only river–sea confluence zone in the Yellow River Basin—as a case study, this study examines the internal coordination between ecological conservation and high-quality development, A multi-level coordination model is constructed to evaluate their comprehensive coordination level. The empirical findings can be interpreted within the theoretical framework proposed in Figure 11. The observed spatial differentiation and coordination patterns validate the hypothesized relationships between ecological conservation and high-quality development. Moreover, the results further refine the framework by revealing region-specific variations in coupling dynamics, thereby extending its explanatory power. The results show that ecological conservation coordination dominates most areas, forming contiguous zones across northern and central Shandong and the western Jiaodong Peninsula. However, 40.44% of the region remains uncoordinated, displaying a strip-like pattern along the Yellow River and its tributaries (the Yihe and Shuhe Rivers) as well as the Weishan Lake area.

Figure 11

High-quality development in Shandong has not yet reached an optimal level, with pronounced regional imbalances across the five development dimensions. The strongest coupling coordination is observed between coordination and green development, whereas innovation shows consistently low coordination with other dimensions. Overall, the coupling coordination of the five subsystems remains at a medium-to-low level, exhibiting a spatial pattern of higher levels in the east and south and lower levels in the west and north. Furthermore, the relationship between ecological conservation and high-quality development is largely characterized by incoordination, affecting approximately 74.27% of administrative units. The remaining 25.73% form coordinated zones, mainly concentrated in southern Shandong and the Jiaodong Peninsula.

References

• 1

  AmandaW.JohnN. P.SteveK.GailW. (2026). A process study of evolving paradoxes and cross-sector goals: A partnership to accelerate global sustainability. J. Manage.52, 577–613. doi: 10.1177/01492063241278803

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 2

  ChenJ. H.ChenY.ChenM. M. (2020). China’s high-quality economic development level, regional differences and dynamic evolution of distribution. J. Quantitative Technol. Econ37, 108–126. doi: 10.13653/j.cnki.jqte.2020.12.006

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 3

  CuiP. P.ZhaoY.XiaS. Y.YanJ. Y. (2020). Level measures and temporal and spatial coupling analysis of ecological environment and high quality development in the Yellow River Basin. Economic Geogr.40, 49–57+80. doi: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2020.05.006

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 4

  DeepaJ.JitendraP. (2021). River ecosystem resilience risk index: A tool to quantitatively characterize resilience and critical transitions in human-impacted large rivers. Environ. pollut.268, 115771. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115771. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 5

  DingZ. M.YaoS. B. (2020). Theoretical analysis and model design of search for ecological conservation redlines based on the sensiticity assessment of ecosystem services. Land Use Policy97, 104745. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104745. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 6

  FangY.WangJ.ZhaiT. L. (2020). Determining and identifying key areas of ecosystem preservation and restoration for territorial spatial planning based on ecological security patterns: A case study of Yantai city. J. Natural Resour.35, 190–203. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20200116

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 7

  GaoD. L.DingD.LiuG. Y. (2009). Theories, methods, practices and implications of interest compensation in ecological protection areas in the international context. Macroeconomics (05):67–72+79. doi: 10.16304/j.cnki.11-3952/f.2009.05.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 8

  GaoP. Y.YuanF. H.HuH. G.LiuX. H. (2020). Driving forces, mechanisms and governance of high-quality development. Rev. Economic Res.55, 4–19. doi: 10.16110/j.cnki.issn2095-3151.2020.12.011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 9

  HuangL. Y.WangJ.ChenX. J. (2022). Ecological infrastructure planning of large river basin to promote nature conservation and ecosystem functions. J. Environ. Manage.306, 114482. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114482. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 10

  JiangF.FanD. D.ZhaoQ. H.WuY. J.RenF. H.LiuY.et al. (2023). Comparison of alive and dead benthic foraminiferal fauna off the Changjiang Estuary: Understanding water-mass properties and taphonomic processes. Front. Mar. Sci. doi: 10.3389/FMARS.2023.1114337

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 11

  JiangL.BaiL.WuY. M. (2017). Coupling and coordinating degrees of provincial economy, resources and environment in China. J. Natural Resour.32, 788–799. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.20160512

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 12

  JiangY. X.WangY. Z.ZhouD. M.KeY. H.BaiJ. H.LiW. W.et al. (2020). The impact assessment of hydro-biological connectivity changes on the estuary wetland through the ecological restoration project in the Yellow River Delta, China. Sci. Total Environ.758, 143706. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143706. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 13

  JinB. (2018). Study on the “high-quality development” economics. China Ind. Econ04, 5–18. doi: 10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2018.04.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 14

  JinF. J. (2019). Coordinated promotion strategy of ecological protection and high-quality development in the Yellow River Basin. Reform11, 33–39.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 15

  LiC.XieC. P.WangY. L.WangL. P. (2026). Does ecological product protection compensation have a green effect? Empirical evidence based on the value accounting of ecological products in key ecological functional areas of the Yellow River Basin. J. Cleaner Prod.53, 9147436–147436. doi: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2025.147436. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 16

  LiuP. F.JiangK.TanQ.ChenF. J.JiaR. M.WangC. (2025). Seasonal dynamics of dissolved organic matter in a small tropical estuary-coastal bay continuum: Distribution, transformation, flux, and global perspectives. Front. Mar. Sci.11. doi: 10.3389/FMARS.2024.1511427

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 17

  LiuL. K.LiangL. T.GaoP.FanC. S.WangH. H.WangH. (2021). Coupling relationship and interactive response between ecological protection and high-quality development in the Yellow River Basin. J. Natural Resour.36, 176–195. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20210112. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 18

  LiuJ. H.MaS.GaoJ. X.ZouC. X.WangJ. J.LiuZ. Q.et al. (2018). Delimiting the ecological conservation redline at regional scale: A case study of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. China Environ. Sci.38, 2652–2657. doi: 10.19674/j.cnki.issn1000-6923.2018.0275

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 19

  LiuZ. J.WangJ. Y.WangX. Y.WangY. S. (2020). Understanding the impacts of ‘Grain for Green’ land management practice on land greening dynamics over the Loess Plateau of China. Land Use Policy99, 105084. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105084. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 20

  LongH. L.QuY.TuS. S.LiY. R.GeD. Z.ZhangY. N.et al. (2018). Land use transitions under urbanization and their environmental effects in the farming areas of China: Research progress and prospect. Adv. Earth Sci.33, 455–463. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2018.05.0455

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 21

  LuD. D.SunD. Q. (2019). Development and management tasks of the Yellow River Basin: A preliminary understanding and suggestion. Acta Geographica Sin.74, 2431–2436. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201912001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 22

  MaT. T.LiX. W.BaiJ. H.DingS. Y.ZhouF. W.CuiB. S. (2019). Four decades’ dynamics of coastal blue carbon storage driven by land use/land cover transformation under natural and anthropogenic processes in the Yellow River Delta, China. Sci. Total Environ.655, 741–750. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.28. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 23

  MaR.LuoH.WangH. W.WangT. C. (2019). Study of evaluating high-quality economic development in Chinese regions. China Soft Sci.07, 60–67.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 24

  MengX.TengX.ZhaoQ.ZhangP. P.KangW. C. (2026). Management and practice of multi-use of the sea in China. Front. Mar. Sci.12. doi: 10.3389/FMARS.2025.1740479

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 25

  WangP. P.TsengP. C.FanY. Y.WeiQ. H.QiaoM.LiX. S.et al. (2025). Assessing eco-environmental quality and its drivers in the Shandong section of the Yellow River Basin with an improved remote sensing ecological index. Sci. Rep.15, 44615–44615. doi: 10.1038/S41598-025-31580-3. PMID:

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 26

  WeiM.LiS. H. (2018). Study on the measurement of economic high-quality development level in China in the new era. J. Quantitative Technol. Econ35, 3–20. doi: 10.13653/j.cnki.jqte.2018.11.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 27

  XiJ. P. (2019). Speech at the symposium on ecological protection and high——quality development of the Yellow River Basin. China Water Resour.20, 1–3.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 28

  XuY.WangC. S. (2020). Ecological protection and high-quality development in the Yellow River Basin: Framework, path, and countermeasure. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci.35, 875–883. doi: 10.16418/j.issn.1000-3045.20200425002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 29

  YangY. W.ZhangP. (2021). Logic, measurement and governance in China’s high-quality economic development. Economic Res. J.56, 26–42.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 30

  YinY. L. (2023). Effectively promoting high-quality development: Experience, requirements and tasks. Economic Res. J.58, 32–42.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 31

  YinS. S.GuoJ. K.HanZ. L. (2022). County-level environmental carrying capacity and spatial suitability of coastal resources: A case study of Zhuanghe, China. Front. Mar. Sci. doi: 10.3389/FMARS.2022.1022382

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 32

  ZhangX. T.BiZ. G.CheC. G.TanH. T.LuH. Y. (2019). Research on ecological issues and restoration strategies of degraded coastal wetlands in the Yellow River Delta. J. Anhui Agric. Sci.47(05):84–87+91. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0517-6611.2019.05.023

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 33

  ZhangJ. K.HouY. Z.LiuP. L.HeJ. W.ZhuoX. (2019). The goals and strategy path of high-quality development. J. Manage. World35, 1–7. doi: 10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.20190711.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 34

  ZhangW. B.XiangC. H. (2025). Co-evolutionary and driving factors of ecological protection and high-quality economic development in the Yellow River Basin. Geographical Sci.45, 1710–1719. doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.20240481

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 35

  ZhaoJ. B.ShiD.DengZ. (2019). A framework of China’s high-quality economic development. Res. Econ Manage.40, 15–31. doi: 10.13502/j.cnki.issn1000-7636.2019.11.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 36

  ZhaoT.ZhangZ.LiangS. K. (2020). Digital economy, entrepreneurship, and high-quality economic development: Empirical evidence from urban China. J. Manage. World36, 65–76. doi: 10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2020.0154

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 37

  ZhengY.LuW. H.WangH. F.TaoY. J.LiuZ. Y.AiY. Y. (2026). Embedding ecosystem-based adaptive management in blue carbon markets: A conceptual framework and operational roadmap for China. Front. Mar. Sci.12. doi: 10.3389/FMARS.2025.1702500

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 38

  ZhouY. T.JiangC. H.JiangY. S.ZhuY.JinY.WangX.et al. (2025). A whole process resilience management practice in coastal engineering. Front. Mar. Sci.11. doi: 10.3389/FMARS.2024.1518249

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  ZhuH. S.ZhaiJ.HouP.WangQ.ChenY.JinD. D.et al. (2022). The protection characteristics of key ecological functional zones from the perspective of ecosystem service trade-off and synergy. Acta Geographica Sin.77, 1275–1288. doi: 10.11821/dlxb202205016

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar