Measurement of Urban Economic Gravity of China’s Three Major Agglomerations and Its Implications for the Coordinated Development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region

Yang Weizhong, Mei Guohui, Yu Jian, Tao Yana, Li Kang, and Yang Xiaoxuan

Abstract: This paper adopts the perspective of urban economic linkage and the modified urban economic gravity model to conduct a comparative analysis of the economic gravity among cities in China’s three major urban agglomerations,including the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the Yangtze River Delta, and the Pearl River Delta. The results show that, despite the ever-tightening economic linkages among cities in the urban agglomerations, the development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region falls behind that of the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta in terms of coordination, closeness, and balance. The economic linkages among cities in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region are not as cohesive as they could be and display a significant “siphon effect” through Beijing and Tianjin as well as a prominently unidirectional economic flow.This study suggests that efforts should be put into directing the orderly flow of resources from Beijing and Tianjin to cities in Hebei and promoting a balanced economic flow among cities, thus facilitating the coordination of regional development.

Keywords: urban agglomeration, measure of urban economic gravity, coordinated development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, Xiongan New Area

With the development of economic productivity and the acceleration of industrialization and urbanization, several cities in some regions have formed “urban agglomerations” due to short spatial distance, close economic linkages, and orderly assignment of urban functions. Such agglomerations are conducive to optimizing resource allocations on a larger scale for the benefit of realizing mutually beneficial cooperation and integrated economic development. As a high-level type of regional development and industrial layout, urban agglomerations are an important economic formation supporting the rapid development of the national economy. With their economies of scale,such agglomerations have become a major manifestation of urbanization in developed countries,including the Atlantic coast urban agglomeration in northeastern United States, the London-Liverpool urban agglomeration in the United Kingdom, Japan’s Pacific coast urban agglomeration, the northwestern European urban agglomeration, and North America’s Great Lakes urban agglomeration.

Since its reform and opening up, China has experienced the largest and fastest urbanization process in world history, and gradually formed a new urbanization development model with urban agglomeration as the main form. Among them, Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei, the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta,the three largest urban agglomerations in China’s economy, have become the main drivers and important growth poles leading the country’s regional economic development. Judging from the current development of the three major urban agglomerations, the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta have a relatively higher level of economic development and more balanced growth; whereas the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region has larger discrepancies in terms of levels of economic and financial development, industrial structure, and people’s income. Hebei’s “C-type” poverty belt①Among the 108 counties in Hebei, there are 64 national and provincial-level poor counties; Hebei has a large poverty-stricken area (accounting for 60.1% of the province), a large number of poor people (32.6% of the province’s population), and the poverty here is severe. Among these, 39 national-level poor counties constitute the C-type poverty zone, which is mainly distributed in a C-shaped strip outside Beijing and Tianjin, covering such places as Chengde, Zhangjiakou and Baoding in Hebei.surrounding Beijing and Tianjin constitutes a prominent problem, and the level of coordinated development in the region is low. The report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China endorses urban agglomeration as the main body around which to construct a coordinated urban development pattern encompassing large, medium and small cities as well as small towns, and specifically proposes taking advantage of the diffusion of Beijing’s non-capital functions for the sake of coordinated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei. The visionary planning and the highstandard construction of Xiongan New Area provide an important solution to the insufficient, unbalanced growth in the region in favor of better-coordinated regional development.

The concept of urban agglomeration originated from the “Megalopolis” theory proposed by French geographer Jean Gottmann in Megalopolis in 1957, which was used to describe the sprawling functional areas comprising many cities on the northeastern coast of the United States. Thenceforth, many scholars,most prominent among whom were J. Vernon Henderson, a scholar of urban economy, and new economic geographers such as Paul Krugman, carried out a systematic study on the formation mechanism, model characteristics and development path of urban agglomerations. Detailed research was also conducted from the perspective of globalization (Friedmann and Wolf, 1982), industrialization (Sohn, 2004),informationization (Warf, 1995) to study the spatial connections, industrial agglomerations, and structural evolution of urban agglomerations. China’s research on urban agglomerations started relatively late. Since Yu and Ning (1983) first introduced the “Megalopolis” theory to China, it triggered a theoretical and empirical research boom among domestic urban agglomerations scholars. First, there was research on the conceptual division and overall distribution of Chinese urban agglomerations, examples of which include Miao and Wang (2005), Yao, Chen, Ye, and Chen (2015), and Huang, Gao, and Wei (2016). Second, there was research on the formation mechanisms and development models of China’s urban agglomerations,including studies by Zhao (2009) and Wu (2012). Third, there was an empirical study of the spatial structures of economic and industrial clustering in specific urban agglomerations in China. Zhang and Ning (2011), Mei, Xu, Ouyang, and Shi (2012), Wang, Zhai, Zhang, and You (2015) and many others have conducted many empirical studies on various Chinese urban agglomerations, including the Yangtze River Delta, the Pearl River Delta, and the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei area.

So far, most of the theoretical research on the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration has tended to focus on the regional productivity layout and spatial structure. Discussions have mainly looked at the discrepancies and complementarities in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei economic and financial development.An analysis framework for the spatial transfer of industries in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region has been constructed on the basis of the industrial development positioning and resource endowments from the perspective of industrial gradient theory (Xu Yongli, 2013), new economic geography (Sun and Yao, 2015),and comparative advantage theory (Yu and Tao, 2016), among others. In terms of regional spatial layout,many scholars have used the gravity model to measure the spatial structure of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration (Guan and Liu, 2014; He and Wang, 2015), or adopted social network analysis methods to study the economic development of urban agglomerations (Hou, Liu, and Yue, 2009; Lu, Yang, and Liu,2015).

This paper uses the modified urban economic gravity model to calculate and analyze the economic gravitation of cities in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta from the perspective of mutual economic relations between cities, and to explore the characteristics of economic linkages between various urban agglomerations, to serve as a policy-making reference for the coordinated development of Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei. The main innovations and contributions of this study are as follows: First, in terms of model construction, this paper makes distinct corrections to the economic distance and gravitational coefficients in the traditional gravity model based on the research of Sun and Luo (2016), which makes it easier to capture the longitudinal changes in the dynamics of one particular agglomeration over time, and to achieve a horizontal comparison between different urban agglomerations to better understand the asymmetry of the economic linkages between cities. Second, in terms of empirical analysis, existing literature on gravity models has yet to make a comparative analysis between different urban agglomerations; besides, there is an absence of analysis on the economic flows between Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei. This paper uses the modified gravitational model to measure the mutual economic gravitation between cities in China’s three major urban agglomerations and draws a map of economic linkages to calculate the siphon effect and spillover effects of each city, as well as the economic flows between any two cities. Such intuitive and in-depth comparisons of the economic attractiveness, linkages and balance of flows between cities within urban agglomerations will serve to reveal the inadequacies and problems in the development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region.

Urban Economic Gravity Model and the Modification Thereof

Urban Economic Gravity Model

In the study on the spatial structures of urban agglomerations, the urban economic gravity model is a classic method used to study the degrees of economic linkages between cities. The urban economic gravity model is derived from the mathematical formula of Newton’s law of universal gravitation and can be traced back to Carey’s Principles of Social Science, which was written in 1858 and directly used the law of universal gravitation to explain social phenomena. It was not until the 1930s and 1940s that geographers and economists began to adopt gravity models on a large scale in theoretical analyses of regionalspatial linkages and in empirical research. From this starting point, an often-used basic gravity model in regional science and location theory gradually improved and finally took shape. The gravitational model argues that cities have an impact on the surrounding areas, with intensity of the impact being directly proportional to the “quality” of the city but showing an inverse correlation to the distance from the city. In turn, the surrounding areas can also exert an impact on the city (Reilly, 1931; Isard, 1958). Tinbergen (1962)and Pòyhònen (1963) further developed a trade gravity model to study and analyze international bilateral trade flows and concluded that the scale of bilateral trade is directly proportional to their economic aggregate and inversely proportional to the distance between the two countries. Domestic research on regional-spatial linkages started relatively late, and mainly occurred after the 1990s, with research mainly focused on the connections between a certain city and the region it resides in or the entire country.

The basic form of the urban economic gravity model is represented as:

In formula (1), Ri,j is the economic gravity of city i to city j, Mi and Mj are the economic quality of the two cities, di, j the economic distance between the two cities, and Ki, j is the economic gravity coefficient.The strength of economic gravitation can reflect the degree of economic ties between two regions and such economic ties are usually manifested as activities such as movement of people, commercial activities,transportation, investment and consumption between the regions.

It is worth noting that the gravity model assumes that inter-city economic activities and economic linkages are similar; and that inter-city elements can flow freely without major institutional or geographical barriers. But in reality, such assumptions are not wholly tenable in most cases. Therefore,the economic gravity in formula (1) largely holds a mere theoretical or potential value. However, given the complexity of economic exchanges between cities and the limited availability of actual data, it is difficult to accurately measure the true economic relationships of cities. Many studies still analyze the potential spatial economic relationship by the economic gravitational value calculated by (1) as the basis for regional coordinated development and the elimination of regional economic barriers. In addition, economic linkages between cities may be directional: large cities exert a siphon effect, absorbing elements such as human resources and capital, which flow in from other areas, whereas flows in the opposite direction may be scarce. This is reflected in formula (1) as the difference between the gravitational coefficients Ki, j and Kj, i (Wang, Wu, and Wang, 2006). Therefore, economic gravity Ri, j also reflects the siphon effect of city i on city j, or the spillover effect of city j towards city i.

Model Modification

In order to better fit the model to reality for the sake of improving its reliability and effectiveness, it is necessary to make modifications to the calculation methods of urban economic quality Mi, economic distance di, j, and economic gravity coefficient Ki, j in formula (1), to better reflect the economic interrelationships between cities.

First, in terms of urban economic quality, comprehensive indicators such as population and GDP are usually used to measure the overall situation of the city (Sun, Xu, and Tian, 2011). The economic quality of a city is usually calculated by, where Pi is the number of permanent residents of a city,and GDPi is calculated at the constant price of each city.

Second, there is no uniform definition of the economic distance between cities. Straight-line distance,land transportation distance and temporal distance are among the methods most commonly used. Straightline distance refers to the shortest distance between the two cities on the map and remains constant;land transportation distance and temporal distance change dynamically along with the development of technology and transportation, and are more in line with the actual development of economic linkages.Since it is difficult to obtain the longitudinal data of inter-city land transportation distance and temporal distance, this paper will use straight-line distance and urban road density①Highway density = road mileage / city area.to measure the economic distance between cities. Generally, when the terrain is not particularly complex, economic distance should be positively correlated with straight-line distance. For adjacent cities, the greater the road density, the better the accessibility between cities, and the shorter the economic distance (Luo, 2003). Thus, economic distance is defined as:

In formula (2), Li, j represents the straight-line distance between cities, andρi andρj represent the road density②The exponential function is used in equation (2) to indicate that as road density increases, the speed at which economic distance approaches straight-line distance decelerates.of the two cities, respectively. Here, the change in economic distance along the vertical axis of time is reflected as the change in urban highway density over time.

Further, gravitational coefficient Ki, j reflects the direction and extent of inter-city economic forces.A Ki, j ＞1 indicates that the gravitational pull of city i on city j is predominant, and there is a net flow of factors from city j to city i; a Ki, j=1 indicates that the gravitation pull of the two cities is equivalent, and the economic flow is at equilibrium; a Ki, j＜1 indicates that there is a net flow of elements from city i to city j. Sun and Luo (2016) define Ki, j as the ratio of the urbanization rate of the two cities. In view of this,this paper intends to comprehensively measure the gravitational coefficient by looking at differences in the two cities’ GDP growth rate (gi, gj), urbanization rate (ui, uj), and per capita disposable income (bi, bj)of urban residents; namely:

In formula (3), GDP growth rate is indicative of urban economic vitality and future development potential, and is a key factor in attracting investment; urbanization rate is an important symbol for measuring urban economic development stage, urban production efficiency, social organization level,public service and administration level; per capita disposable income of urban residents reflects the people’s living standards and is an important factor in attracting labor, employment and consumption. The relative value of the two cities in these three dimensions can reflect the relative attractiveness of the city to such production factors as capital, technology and manpower.

Substituting formulae (2) and (3) into (1), a modified gravity model can be expressed as:

The overall economic attractiveness of city i is defined as:

which is also the sum of the gravitational pull of city i on other cities in the region. The overall spillover effect of city j is defined as:

or the sum of gravitational draw that city j receives in the area. The net economic flow of city i is:

In formula (7), ΔRi = Ri, j - Rj, i, represents the net economic inflow of city i from city j.

China’s Three Major Urban Agglomerations and An Analysis of the Urban Economic Gravitation of the Xiongan New Area

From the modified model of urban economic gravity (4), the mutual economic gravitational value①The Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region covers 13 cities: Beijing, Tianjin, Shijiazhuang, Tangshan, Qinhuangdao, Handan, Xingtai, Baoding, Zhangjiakou, Chengde,Zhangzhou, Langfang and Hengshui (“Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Collaborative Development Plan”, 2015); the Xiongan New Area includes the 3 counties of Xiongxian, Rongcheng and Anxin in Baoding. The Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration consists of 26 cities, namely Shanghai, Jiangsu’s Nanjing, Wuxi,Changzhou, Suzhou, Nantong, Yancheng, Yangzhou, Zhenjiang, Taizhou, Zhejiang’s Hangzhou, Ningbo, Jiaxing, Huzhou, Shaoxing, Jinhua, Zhoushan,Taizhou, and Anhui’s Hefei, Wuhu, Ma’anshan, Tongling, Anqing, Chuzhou, Chizhou, and Xuancheng (“Yangtze Delta Urban Agglomeration Development Plan”, 2016). The Pearl River Delta urban agglomeration refers to nine cities in Guangdong Province, i.e., Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Foshan, Dongguan,Zhongshan, Jiangmen, Zhaoqing and Huizhou (“National Main Functional Area Planning”, 2010). After reviewing the China Statistical Yearbook and the Statistical Communiquéof the People’s Republic of China on the 2016 National Economic and Social Development, indicator data such as resident population (in 10 000 persons), GDP (2016 constant price, in 100 million yuan), road density, GDP growth rate, urbanization rate and per capita disposable income of urban residents have been obtained; Google Maps was used to calculate the straight-line distance between the centers of two cities. As the 2017 data for some cities has not been fully published, the model uses data available as of 2016 in its estimation.of the three major urban agglomerations was calculated and compared. We found that from 2010-2016,the average economic gravitational values of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, the Yangtze River Delta, and the Pearl River Delta urban agglomerations witnessed significant increases, growing by a factor of 1.96, 1.83,and 1.88, respectively, indicating that regional economic ties were becoming increasingly close. Further,according to the size and direction of the gravitational pull between cities, the synergy, closeness and balance②Here the paper demonstrates the analytical results of a horizontal comparison between the three major urban agglomerations in 2016. A 2010-2015 comparison has shown similar results.in the development of each urban agglomeration can be compared and analyzed.

From the Perspective of the Strength of Economic Gravity, the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region Lags Behind the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta in Terms of Overall Developmental Synergy

Among the three major urban agglomerations, the Pearl River Delta showed the strongest average economic gravity and the highest economic connectedness in 2016 (with a regional average economic gravitation value of 1,112); the average economic gravitational value of the Yangtze River Delta (Jiangsu,Zhejiang and Shanghai) was 247, and that of the eight cities in Anhui Province was 49; the average economic gravitational value of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region was 146, and that of the 11 cities in Hebei Province was just 41.

A comparison of the main economic indicators of the three major urban agglomerations indicates that there are considerable discrepancy and significant differentiation within the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region in terms of regional development levels. There is an obvious gap between Hebei and the cities of Beijing and Tianjin. In comparison, the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta are more balanced and show higher overall economic development. In 2016, Hebei’s per capita GDP, per capita fiscal revenue,per capita fiscal expenditure, and per capita disposable income of urban residents were only 37%, 16%,29%, and 49% of those of Beijing, respectively, and 37%, 22%, 34% and 59% of those of Tianjin; all four indicators of Hebei were below the national average. The urbanization rates of Beijing and Tianjin were 86.5% and 82.9%, respectively, while that of Hebei was only 53.3%, again lower than the national average of 57.4%. Excluding Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang, the Yangtze River Delta region scored well in all major indicators. The eight cities of Anhui, which had only been newly included in the Yangtze River Delta Plan, still trailed behind. The indicators of the Pearl River Delta were also at the upper-middle level,with an urbanization rate of 84.9% (see Table 1).

Therefore, in terms of the average economic gravitational value and major economic indicators of the three major urban agglomerations, the overall synergy of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region still lags the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta.

The Network Diagram of Urban Economic Connections Shows that the Economic Linkage Between Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei Lags that in the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta

In order to reflect the economic ties of the three major urban agglomerations more intuitively, further study was conducted based on the network diagram of urban economic connections. According to the estimated inter-city gravity values in 2016, the economic relationships between cities was divided into four groups: very close (the mutual economic gravitational value is greater than or equal to 400), close(100 [inclusive] - 400), neutral (40 [inclusive] - 100 [inclusive]), and not close (less than 40); afterwards,the economic linkages of the three major urban agglomerations were plotted into a network diagram (see Figure 1). The economic linkages within the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region lag those of the Yangtze and the Pearl River Deltas, which have well-developed regional economic networks and vibrant economic activities.

Among the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei regional economic network, there are very close economic ties between Beijing, Tianjin, Langfang and Tangshan. Tangshan has the highest GDP in Hebei Province;Langfang lies closest to Beijing and Tianjin and has a relatively fast economic growth rate. Baoding,Shijiazhuang and Zhangzhou have also established relatively close ties with Beijing and Tianjin. Hengshui itself has less of a gravitational pull and is only weakly connected to its neighboring cities. Xingtai and Handan have developed close ties due to their close distance and similar economic conditions.Zhangjiakou at the northernmost tip of Hebei, Chengde and Qinhuangdao have only flimsy economic attraction, and are isolated spots with feeble linkages with other cities.

Table 1 Economic Indicators of the Three Major Urban Agglomerations in the Year 2016

Source: National Bureau of Statistics of China, provincial and municipal statistics bureaus

Jiangsu, Zhejiang and Shanghai in the Yangtze River Delta have established very close or close economic ties, especially between Shanghai, Suzhou, Wuxi, Changzhou, Nantong, Jiaxing, Hangzhou,Ningbo, Shaoxing and Huzhou, as well as in the area covering Nanjing, Yangzhou, Zhenjiang and Taizhou. These cities have achieved coordinated economic development and common prosperity. Lying further away from Jiangsu, Zhejiang and Shanghai, cities in Anhui perform relatively worse in these economic indicators and have weaker economic linkages.

The Pearl River Delta region boasts the closest economic ties. Among them, the economic linkages between Guangzhou, Foshan, Jiangmen, Zhongshan, Shenzhen and Dongguan are especially prominent;and there are close or very close ties between any two cities. As the two economic poles in the region,Guangzhou and Shenzhen are a significant driving force of economic vitality for neighboring cities.However, the interconnection between such strips as Zhaoqing-Jiangmen-Zhuhai still have room for further improvement.

From the Perspective of Economic Flows, the Regional Development Balance of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Lags that of the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta

From the perspective of overall attractiveness and spillover effects of the cities in the three major urban agglomerations (see Figure 2), Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei shows the most asymmetry; especially, the attraction of Beijing and Tianjin in the region far outweighs their spillover effects. Economic inflows and outflows between the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta cities are roughly balanced, and there is a high level of synergy in development. Within the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, Beijing, Tianjin and Langfangare most prominent. Langfang is close to Beijing and Tianjin,two cities with the highest economic output, and receives a considerable spillover from the two cities. In Qinhuangdao,Zhangjiakou, Chengde and Hengshui, however, economic attractiveness and spillover effects are diminished, and these cities lack vitality in terms of economic activities.In the Yangtze River Delta region, the attractiveness and spillover effects of many cities, including Shanghai and those in Jiangsu and Zhejiang,are heightened. Economic development here is not an exclusive affair and there is good balance between cities in terms of economic attraction and spillover effects with an elevated extent of economic circulation. The economic attractiveness and spillover of cities in Anhui are lower overall. In the Pearl River Delta, regional economic flows are relatively balanced, reflecting a high degree of coordinated development. Guangzhou and Foshan have the highest economic gravitational values, which fully reflects the impact of proximity on economic gravity. Then there are Dongguan, Shenzhen, and Zhongshan, among which Dongguan, lying between Guangzhou and Shenzhen, enjoys abundant economic spillovers from both cities while the economic attractiveness and spillover effects of Zhuhai, Jiangmen, Zhaoqing and Huizhou are relatively weak.

Figure 1. Networks of economic ties between cities in the three major urban agglomerations in the year 2016.

Among the core cities in urban agglomerations, the overall attractiveness of Beijing and Tianjin is 1.6 and 1.3 times their spillover effects, respectively and the same ratio of Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen is 1.2, 1.1 and 1.3 respectively. Estimations have shown that Beijing’s net economic inflows have had a significant upward trend in recent years and the same is also true for Tianjin, while the net economic outflows of Langfang, Tangshan, Baoding and Zhangzhou are growing. Rather than playing an exemplary and stimulating role, Beijing and Tianjin have a considerable siphon effect on Hebei. From the perspective of economic flows between pairs of cities in each region, those with an attractiveness-spillover ratio between 1-1.2 and which have more or less balanced economic flows are enumerated as follows:

Figure 2. Overall economic attractiveness and spillover effects of cities in the three major urban agglomerations in 2016

Among the three major urban agglomerations, the Yangtze River Delta is not only economically vibrant but also has balanced economic flows between city pairs. There is considerable unbalance in the economic flows between cities in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region.

The Spillover from Beijing and Tianjin to Xiongan New Area Will Help Stimulate Development in Hebei

As a “a strategy crucial for a millennium to come,” Xiongan New Area is an important starting point for the coordinated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei. Using the revised gravitational model, it is possible to arrive at the mutual economic attraction between three Xiongan counties and cities within the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region in 2016. The overall attractiveness of the three counties in Xiongan is 136, and overall spillover effect is 394,showing a high economic outflow.From the perspective of economic ties,the economic links between the three counties of Xiongan and other cities in region (excluding Baoding) are not close,reflecting a low level of development in the Xiongan New Area and great development potential.

After further analysis of the attractiveness and spillovers of the 3 counties of Xiongan and cities in the region of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei (see Figure 3), we found that the 3 Xiongan counties’ inflows from and outflows to Beijing, Tianjin and Baoding are relatively large, and mainly take the form of outflows to Beijing and Tianjin. There are also certain economic links with neighboring Langfang, Zhangzhou,Shijiazhuang, Tangshan and Hengshui.

As the destination for the relocation of Beijing’s non-capital functions, Xiongan New Area provides a new path for exploring new models of development optimization in this highly populated areas with dense economic activities and for adjusting and optimizing the spatial layout and structure of social productivity. With the planning and construction of Xiongan and the relocation of Beijing’s non-capital functions to the New Area, the siphon effect of Beijing and Tianjin will be transformed into a spillover effect, which will stimulate growth in Hebei and play a vital role in creating a new pole of growth in the region to promote the coordinated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei.

The development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration is dual-structured and factor resources are not allocated effectively within the region. Synergy, linkage and balance of regional development are all lagging the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta. The development gap in the region should be narrowed for the sake of improving overall competitiveness by promoting integration and balanced development in the urban cluster to achieve overall synergy in regional development. In view of the issue of balanced growth in the region, it is necessary to seize the opportunity of construction in Xiongan and the relocation of Beijing’s non-capital functions in the short term during which more comprehensive methods and preferential policies should be developed and adopted to give full play to the leading role of Beijing’s urban sub-center and Xiongan New Area to expand spillovers from Beijing and Tianjin that will stimulate the development of Hebei. Regarding synergy and linkage, it is necessary to rely on the double wheels of markets and policies over the long term to eliminate shortcomings in Hebei’s development and enhance the economic ties and coordinated development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region.

Figure 3. Economic attraction and spillover effects of the 3 counties of Xiongan and cities in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region in 2016

To build Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Into a World-Class Urban Agglomeration and Highlight Beijing’s Role as “Core” to Galvanize the Urban Sub-center and Xiongan New Area as “Two Wings,” Thereby Setting Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei as an Example for Coordinated Development

We should strengthen the cooperation and connections between Beijing and Tianjin, enhance the closeness of regional economic ties, build the pair into central points in a world-class urban agglomeration participating in global competition, further promote the high-end leading role of Beijing and Tianjin in regional coordinated development, allowing the two cities to act as an impetus driving the improvement of comprehensive carrying capacity and service capabilities in nexus cities in the region,and foster multilayered and multi-type urban fulcrums to make rapid transitions to a world-class urban agglomeration. To accomplish this we need to rely on the double wheels of markets and policies, set a high bar for the construction of Beijing’s urban sub-center and Hebei’s Xiongan New Area as, expand Beijing and Tianjin’s spillover effects, set a good example in relocating Beijing’s non-capital functions, enhance the overall competitiveness of the “one core and two wings,” and promote integration and balanced development in the urban agglomeration to achieve overall synergy in regional development.

In Combination with the Relocation of Non-capital Functions and the Implementation of Poverty Alleviation Strategies, We Must Promote the Integration of Factor Markets and the Sharing of Basic Public Services to Eliminate Imbalances in the Regional Development in Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei

To increase preferential policies for Hebei, especially for the C-shaped poverty belt around Beijing and Tianjin we should make concerted efforts in the promotion of regional economic development levels,urban system construction, environmental and ecological protections and basic public services while striving to bridge the regional development gap. Efforts should be made to break down regional market barriers, optimize urban spatial and industrial layouts and promote the orderly flow and optimal allocation of capital, technology, property rights, talents, labor and other production factors by taking the overall layout of productivity as the starting point. In particular, as Xiongan New Area is the main destination for the relocation of Beijing’s non-capital functions, construction should be accelerated to establish key industry cooperation platforms including the Caofeidian Cooperative Development Demonstration Zone,the Zhangcheng Ecological Function Zone, the Tianjin Binhai-Zhongguancun Science Park, etc.; and active efforts should be made to promote the spillover of Zhongguancun’s pilot policies for independent innovation into well-prepared places in Tianjin and Hebei to create a new plateau for regional innovation and development.

Improve transportation infrastructure and build an efficient, dense and well-equipped “big traffic” pattern with orderly connections and convenient linkages

Improving the transportation infrastructure and enhancing the integrated transport capacity in the region will help reduce the capital and time costs of coordinated development, attract investment,promote economic and trade exchanges, shorten the economic distance between cities, and improve economic ties. It is necessary to build a main axis for the development of cities in the region based on the existing transportation layout to expedite the transformation of the “single-center radial” pattern to an interconnected and three-dimensional layout with “four vertical passages, four horizontal passages and one ring road.”①“Four vertical passages” refers to the coastal passage, the Beijing-Shanghai passage, the Beijing-Kowloon passage, the Jingcheng-Jingguang passage; and the“four-horizontal passages” include the Qinchengzhang passage, Jingqin-Jingzhang passage, Jinbao passage and Shicang passage. “One ring” is the ring road circling the capital region.At the same time, efforts should be made to accelerate the construction of a group of modern ports in Tianjin and Hebei and build a world-class aviation hub to shorten the spatial and temporal distance between cities, promote inter-city connections, and effectively support and guide the regional adjustments of spatial layouts and industrial transformations and general upgrading in the region. Transportation construction should be accelerated both within the more remote cities in Hebei,including Zhangjiakou, Chengde, Qinhuangdao, Xingtai, and Handan, and between these cities and their surrounding areas to improve their urbanization rates and economic ties with the outside world.