Exploring Spatial Differences in Habitat Quality and Their Response to Urban Spatial Form, Using Shanghai as an Example

Rapid urbanisation has exacerbated habitat fragmentation and degradation, necessitating urgent improvements to urban habitat quality. However, most current studies lack an analysis of spatial differences in local ecological quality, particularly a systematic exploration of how different urban spatial characteristics drive such differences. Based on this, we use Shanghai as an example, employing the InVEST model to assess habitat quality, and utilise CatBoost machine learning models and the SHAP model to reveal the specific spatial distribution characteristics of the habitat quality spatial differences from a morphological perspective, as well as its response to changes in urban spatial form factors. The results indicate that (1) urban habitat quality exhibits significant spatial differences, with quality differences persisting even within regions of the same habitat grade, demonstrating complex spatial characteristics; (2) density-related indicators such as building density and population density have a significant negative impact on the habitat quality spatial difference value, while configuration-related indicators such as the water ratio and Normalised Difference Vegetation Index have a significant positive effect, with Population Density contributing the most among all variables (20.74%); and (3) the variables exhibit significant nonlinearity and threshold effects. For example, when building density exceeds 0.05, the positive impact becomes a negative impact. The interactions between variables further reveal the multi-dimensional coupling mechanisms underlying habitat quality performance. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the spatial differences of urban habitat quality, providing scientific support for urban ecological zoning management, the optimised allocation of green space resources, and differentiated spatial governance while offering methodological and decision-making references for the construction of high-quality ecological cities.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Forests
Published
2025-08-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/f16081323
Primary Topic
Phosphorus compounds and reactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Exploring Spatial Differences in Habitat Quality and Their Response to Urban Spatial Form, Using Shanghai as an Example

Forests
Phosphorus compounds and reactions
article

Exploring Spatial Differences in Habitat Quality and Their Response to Urban Spatial Form, Using Shanghai as an Example

article en

Abstract

Rapid urbanisation has exacerbated habitat fragmentation and degradation, necessitating urgent improvements to urban habitat quality. However, most current studies lack an analysis of spatial differences in local ecological quality, particularly a systematic exploration of how different urban spatial characteristics drive such differences. Based on this, we use Shanghai as an example, employing the InVEST model to assess habitat quality, and utilise CatBoost machine learning models and the SHAP model to reveal the specific spatial distribution characteristics of the habitat quality spatial differences from a morphological perspective, as well as its response to changes in urban spatial form factors. The results indicate that (1) urban habitat quality exhibits significant spatial differences, with quality differences persisting even within regions of the same habitat grade, demonstrating complex spatial characteristics; (2) density-related indicators such as building density and population density have a significant negative impact on the habitat quality spatial difference value, while configuration-related indicators such as the water ratio and Normalised Difference Vegetation Index have a significant positive effect, with Population Density contributing the most among all variables (20.74%); and (3) the variables exhibit significant nonlinearity and threshold effects. For example, when building density exceeds 0.05, the positive impact becomes a negative impact. The interactions between variables further reveal the multi-dimensional coupling mechanisms underlying habitat quality performance. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the spatial differences of urban habitat quality, providing scientific support for urban ecological zoning management, the optimised allocation of green space resources, and differentiated spatial governance while offering methodological and decision-making references for the construction of high-quality ecological cities.

ForestsVol. 16(8)
Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University (CN)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 46%
Phosphorus compounds and reactions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Exploring Spatial Differences in Habitat Quality and Their Response to Urban Spatial Form, Using Shanghai as an Example · Forests (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS