Between Law and Landscape: Rethinking Legal Responses to Urban Heat Islands in Guangzhou, China
Description
Research hypothesis: China's legal frameworks recognise urban heat islands (UHIs) yet fail to mitigate them because of "legal ambivalence"—vague statutory language, fragmented mandates and weak penalties. Data and method: A doctrinal analysis of 12 national and 8 local legal instruments (1989–2025), combined with a review of 54 peer-reviewed articles, applied policy coherence analysis and legal mapping against four UHI mitigation pathways. Secondary spatial data from Duan et al. (2025) quantified green space loss. Findings: Guangzhou lost 168.05 km² of urban green space (1990–2020), 61% during 2000–2010, while built-up density fell from 293.91 to 76 persons per hectare, indicating sprawl. Only 20% of instruments mandated cooling infrastructure and 30% addressed enforcement. Maximum green-space fines (CNY 10,000–30,000) represent under 0.05% of typical project budgets. Article 17 of the Urban and Rural Planning Law lacks quantifiable standards. Interpretation: The data are documentary and spatial, not empirical enforcement records; findings are inferential. They nonetheless show that statutory recognition without measurable standards, designated lead agencies or deterrent penalties produces legal ambivalence, enabling continued green space loss.