Abstract
Evaluating the development level of urban logistics can significantly inform policies for the sustainable development of each city in an urban agglomeration. This study analyzed the logistics development of 11 cities in the Guanzhong Plain urban agglomeration (GPUA) of China. Compared to traditional urban logistics evaluation methods considering individual attributes, this study constructed a multi-layer complex logistics network of urban agglomerations (MCLNUA) based on complex network theory, which takes into account the multiple connections between cities. The development levels of logistics in these cities were evaluated from a multi-dimensional perspective of “point–line–surface”, (the “point” represents the node characteristic index of the city, the “line” represents the strength and direction of urban logistics connections between cities, and the “surface” represents the cohesive subgroup of cities). An urban spatial hierarchy and corresponding spatial development plan for urban logistics were also developed. The results show that there are significant differences in logistics levels between different cities. The spatial structure of the overall network connections shows the pattern of being strong in the south and weak in the north, and strong in the east and weak in the west. There are differences in the strength of connections between cohesive subgroups. The research provides a reference for the sustainable development of regional logistics in other urban agglomerations.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.