Revitalization paths for different types of rural settlements in the farming-pastoral ecotone considering “production-living-ecological” functions and vitality

The purpose of this study was to identify the types of the rural settlements in the farming-pastoral ecotone. Differentiated revitalization paths of rural settlements was also formulated to promote the rural revitalization strategy and integrated urban-rural development. The farming-pastoral ecotone was taken as the Kekeyiligeng Town (Ke Town), Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China. The evaluation index system was also constructed on the “production-living-ecological functions” of the rural settlements, according to the concept of natural village area. After that, the “production-living-ecological” functions level was determined in the rural settlements. Firstly, the travel behavior of villagers was collected through field research. The vitality level of the rural settlements was measured with the help of the social network analysis. Secondly, the GeoSOS-FLUS model was used to predict the urban boundary of the County. Tapio decoupling model was combined to divide the optimization types of rural settlements. Finally, the triangular model was used to identify the dominant functions of the rural settlements. The revitalization paths were proposed for the different types of rural settlements. The results showed that: (1) The “production-living-ecological” level was medium or above for the approximately 82% of the rural settlements, while the vitality level was grade II or above for the nearly 86%. But nearly 47% of rural settlements shared the low level of ecological function. The harsh ecological environment was also distributed mainly in the remote mountainous areas of Dashuigedong and Sanshengtai Village. In addition, the vitality level of the rural settlements decreased from the central town to the surrounding area. There were the great differences in the resources, economy and culture on the travel behavior of villagers; (2) There was the generally positive correlation in the “production-living-ecological” functions and vitality of the rural settlements. The stronger vitality was found in the rural settlements with the higher “production-living-ecological” functions. The resource-rich rural settlements were attracted more people to gather. Also, the urban development land was expanded outward. Among them, the 20 rural settlements were identified in the suburban integration. Nine rural settlements were classified as the characteristic protection, most of which were the ancient villages for their historical sites, cultural relics preservation. According to the combination of “production-living-ecological” functions and the vitality, the numbers of agglomeration-upgrading, maintaining, and relocation merge were 42, 53 and 56, respectively. (3) Five types of rural settlements was determined, according to the dominant functions and the travel characteristics of villagers. Various revitalization paths were formulated from the perspectives of the function optimization and vitality improvement: “Guiding land transfer and regulating land acquisition”, “Promoting agricultural transformation using advantageous industries”, “Upgrading the public service level and promoting environmental remediation”, “Integrating land resources and developing large-scale planting industry”, “Relocating small villages and large villages to other places”. The finding can also provide the decision-making on the rural classification in the farming-pastoral ecotones.