Search

Pagodas and pavilions (ge 閣) are the most popular and representative multi-story buildings since Buddhism was introduced to China. While providing visitors with a new visual experience, they have also largely reshaped the urban space and skyline in medieval China. The former originated from India and Central Asia and was transformed in China, developing a unique style; The latter originated more from the creation of Chinese architects and became a model of typical Chinese-style Buddhist architecture. Briefly, the pagoda matured earlier than the pavilion, and continuously developed while maintaining its basic style; the pavilion-style Buddhist architecture gradually developed later and finally matured after the Tang and Song dynasties (618–1276), partially presenting a different spatial logic from the pagoda, and bringing a new visual experience. In my opinion, although the pavilion may not necessarily be as large as the pagoda in terms of volume and absolute height, it can provide believers with greater visual impact in the internal space for worship, due to the cross-story giant Buddhist statues; the closer integration of Buddha statues and architecture makes it replace or share the core position of the pagoda in some monasteries and even become the visual center of the entire religious space. Due to the existence of the pavilion, viewers can not only worship the Buddhist statues on a two-dimensional plane or by looking up at the statues from the bottom, but have also gained a three-dimensional perspective, to worship directly at the Buddha’s shoulders, neck, and head. In the Buddhist grottoes, the layout of the early single-layer or multi-layer horizontally distribution of caves on cliff was also changed due to the excavation of the cross-layer giant statue grottoes, covered by multi-story pavilion-style buildings, providing viewers with a visual experience similar to that of the pavilions of great statues. Additionally, there is a new visual experience of worshiping the Buddha in a vertical circle, in cases such as Bamiyan and the Leshan Giant Buddha.

This study investigates the potential of agricultural industrial agglomeration to bolster agricultural economic resilience and identifies the underlying pathways. We developed an analytical framework for agricultural economics that integrates the concept of “resilience”. This framework facilitates an examination of the influence of agricultural industrial agglomeration on agricultural economic resilience, focusing on two key aspects: enhancement of income and reduction of costs. Utilizing panel data from 30 provincial-level regions in China covering the period from 2006 to 2021, this research empirically assesses the impact, underlying mechanisms, and regional variations of agricultural industrial agglomeration on agricultural economic resilience. The findings reveal that agricultural industrial agglomeration significantly boosts agricultural economic resilience. This positive influence manifests through two primary channels: firstly, “agricultural industrial agglomeration → enhancement of socialized services → agricultural economic resilience” and secondly, “agricultural industrial agglomeration → improvement of agricultural production efficiency → agricultural economic resilience”. The contribution of agricultural industrial agglomeration to agricultural economic resilience is particularly pronounced in major grain-producing regions, notably enhancing capabilities for reconstruction and reinvention, as well as adjustment and adaptation. The study concludes with recommendations aimed at strengthening agricultural economic resilience. These recommendations emphasize the critical role of agricultural industrial agglomeration in fostering agricultural economic resilience, its contribution to the growth of rural economies and the enhancement of socialized services, and the need to consider regional disparities in the process of developing agricultural economic resilience.

Based on the annual average climate data and economic and social data from 262 prefecture-level cities in China from 2001 to 2019, this paper explores the impact of climate change on urban–rural income inequality and its mechanisms using fixed-effects (FEs) and mediated-effects (MEs) models. This study finds that (1) climate change has an inverted U-shaped relationship with the urban–rural income disparity; (2) climate change can affect the urban–rural income disparity by influencing urban and rural income levels, the regional degree of urbanization, and the labor force employment structure; (3) the impact of climate change on the urban–rural income gap is heterogeneous in East, Center, and West China; and (4) extreme heat can widen the urban–rural income gap, and extreme drought can narrow the urban–rural income gap. Climate change has a significant impact on the urban–rural income gap, and there is a need to continue to promote urbanization and the optimization of the employment structure of the workforce, reduce the vulnerability of rural residents to climate change, and narrow the urban–rural income gap.

Based on the Chinese Family Panel Studies (CFPS) 2010–2018, this article investigates how relative deprivation influences household consumption in rural China. High-dimensional fixed-effects (HDFE), the instrumental variable (IV), and causal mediation analysis (CMA) are leveraged to estimate the causal effect and mechanisms. Results show that relative deprivation reduces survival-oriented consumption of food, development-oriented consumption of transportation, telecommunication, and education, as well as enjoyment-oriented of durable goods, and increases survival-oriented consumption of residence and development-oriented consumption of healthcare and medical services. Mechanism analysis indicates that relative deprivation decreases household consumption through the anticipated effect and increases it through a cognitive trap effect. On the whole, the anticipated effect prevails over the cognitive trap effect.

Buddhist influences on the sacred axis of the capital during Medieval China (220–907) underwent a process of starting with little impact during the era of Eastern Han, Caowei, and Western Jin (220–317) to a more prominent influence from the late Southern and Northern Dynasties (386–589) to early Tang (618–907), peaked during the reign of Wu Zetian (690–705), and roughly returned to the layout patterns from the late Southern and Northern Dynasties to early Tang after the death of Wu Zetian. As maintained below, the process appears complex in terms of the interaction between Buddhism and political space throughout early Medieval China. There are roughly two modes of integration and interaction between Buddhist buildings and ritual buildings with Buddhist influences and the political axis of the capital: the first mode can be regarded as a typical mode after its establishment in the late Northern Wei Dynasty. This mode exhibits major Buddhist influences, particularly regarding the huge scale of monasteries and pagodas, and the location of high-rise pagodas as landmarks flanking the political axis of the capital. The second mode should be regarded as an atypical mode occurring during the late period of Emperor Wu of the Liang (464–549, r. 502–549), the period of Northern Qi (550–577), and the reign of Wu Zetian. At this point, Buddhist buildings and imperial ritual buildings with Buddhist characteristics and symbolic meanings were placed directly on the political axis of the capital, close to or located at the core of the palace. This practice was a sign that the influence of Buddhism in the political culture and ideology of the entire empire during these eras of Emperor Wu of the Liang, the Northern Qi, and the reign of Wu Zetian had reached their culmination. Architecture reflected the most intuitive embodiment of an external visual form in presenting the most symbolic image of power. With the decline of political enthusiasm for advocating Buddhism, Buddhist and related buildings no longer occupied the political axis of the capital. Various forces majeure such as natural fires, demolition, and reconstruction by subsequent rulers also led to the demise of Buddhist influence on the pollical axis of capital architecture in subsequent eras.