Conflict of rights in high-rise underground space development: Comprehensive analysis of legal regulation and biomechanical impact
Abstract
Aiming at the conflict of rights in the development of underground space of high-rise buildings, this paper puts forward a comprehensive analysis framework combining the influence of legal norms and biomechanics. Starting from biomechanics, this paper specifically discusses the rights disputes in three aspects of underground space land transfer fee, the ownership of underground civil air defense project and the ownership of community underground garage, and introduces a biomechanical evaluation model supported by GIS platform to ensure the safety and stability of the project. When considering the underground space land transfer fee, the stability and load-bearing capacity of the soil, which can be analyzed through biomechanical principles, directly affect the feasibility and cost of construction. Just as the skeletal structure of an organism provides the foundation for its movement and survival, the underground geological structure dictates the safety and economic viability of building projects. In the discussion of the ownership of underground civil air defense projects, biomechanical models can be employed to evaluate the potential impact of disasters. By simulating how the structure withstands external forces like earthquakes or explosions, similar to how a creature's body adapts to survive in harsh environments, we can better determine the responsibilities and rights of different parties. Regarding the community underground garage, the layout and design need to conform to human biomechanics. Adequate space for vehicle entry, exit, and pedestrian movement, considering factors such as comfortable walking angles and clear sightlines, ensures convenience and safety, much like how organisms' habitats are optimized for their daily activities. The study found that the municipal government has issued policies to clarify the specific content and scope of underground space use rights, established a unified approval process to strengthen supervision, and promoted the application of biomechanical evaluation models, thereby improving project quality and reducing potential risks. The experimental results show that this comprehensive management strategy effectively alleviates the conflict of rights, promotes the smooth progress of the project, and provides institutional guarantee and technical support for the sustainable development of the city. This paper not only solves the current right conflict problem, but also provides valuable experience for the rational use of urban underground space resources and the maximization of social benefits in the future.
References
1. Lu-chun, LIAO Ying-ze, ZENG Jiao, Jiang Yuan, Wang Guosheng, QIN Boyu, DU Xiu-Li. Research on resilience development strategy of urban underground space [J]. Engineering Science, 2023, 25(01): 38-44.
2. Li, X., Li, L., Lin, M., & Jim, C. Y. (2022). Research on Risk and Resilience Evaluation of Urban Underground Public Space. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23), 15897. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315897
3. Wu W Q. Research on the development and utilization strategy of underground space in Old city based on transportation [J]. Low carbon World, 2022, 12(04): 67-69.
4. Shi, X., Zhao, Y., & Wu, K. (2021). Research on the development and utilization of underground space in Beijing Old City. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 703(1), 012015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/703/1/012015
5. Wang Zhimin, Huang Li. The rights conflict and overall governance strategy of underground space [J]. Public Management,2019,7:145-149.
6. Hámor-Vidó, M., Hámor, T., & Czirok, L. (2021). Underground space, the legal governance of a critical resource in circular economy. Resources Policy, 73, 102171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102171
7. Luo Xiulan. The Rights Conflict of underground Space in high-rise buildings... Regulation and incentive of building underground space development [J]. China Land Science,2015,29(5):70-76.
8. Yang Jianqiang. Basic characteristics and planning suggestions of urban renewal in the new development stage. State Governance, 2021(47): 17-22.
9. Zeng Guohua, Tang Zhili. Connotation, path and suggestion of integrated development of urban underground space [J]. Journal of Underground Space and Engineering, 2022, 18(03): 701-713+778.
10. Liu, S.-C., Peng, F.-L., Qiao, Y.-K., & Dong, Y.-H. (2024). Quantitative evaluation of the contribution of underground space to urban resilience: A case study in China. Underground Space, 17(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2023.11.007
11. Zhang Muyao. On the Construction of the legal model of underground space use right [J]. Law Forum,2020,5(35):106-113.
12. Zhang, Z., Paulsson, J., Gong, J., & Huan, J. (2020). Legal Framework of Urban Underground Space in China. Sustainability, 12(20), 8297. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208297
13. Liu Jianan, Liu Yanfang, Wang Xiang, et al. Evaluation on development and utilization potential of underground space in Wuhan [J]. Science of Surveying and Mapping, 2021, 45(10): 202-211.
14. Yan F W. On the construction of ecological damage relief system in the use of urban underground space of our country [D]. Fuzhou: Fuzhou University,2014,3.
15. Yuan Hong, Zhao Shi-chen, DAI Zhi-zhong. Urban Space attributes and essential significance of underground space [J]. Urban Planning Forum,2013,1:85.
16. Nezarat H, Sereshki F, Ataei M. Ranking of geological risks in mechanized tunneling by using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP)[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2015, 50(1):358-364.
17. Hyun K C, Min S, Choi H, et al. Risk analysis using fault-tree analysis (FTA) and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) applicable to shield TBM tunnels[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2015, 49(Jun):121-129.
18. Lu Z, Wu L, Zhuang X, et al. Quantitative assessment of engineering geological suitability for multilayer Urban Underground Space[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2016(1), 59:65-76.
19. Peng J, Peng F L. A GIS-based evaluation method of underground space resources for urban spatial planning: Part 1 methodology[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2018, 74(1):82-95.
20. Jiang Yun, Wu Lixin, Che Defu, et al. Research on basic unit body of quality assessment of urban underground space resources [J]. Geomand Information Science of Wuhan University, 2007, 32(3):275-278.
21. Ye Jing, Hou Jian-sheng, Deng Dong-cheng, et al. Three-dimensional quality assessment of urban underground space resources based on variable fuzzy sets [J]. Resources Science, 2016,38(11):2147-2156.
22. Durmisevic S, Sariyildiz S. A systematic quality assessment of underground spaces-public transport stations[J]. Cities, 2001, 18(1):13-23.
23. Youssef A M, Pradhan B, Tarabees E. Integrated evaluation of urban development suitability based on remote sensing and GIS techniques: contribution from the analytic hierarchy process[J]. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 2011, 4(3/4):463-473.
Copyright (c) 2025 Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright on all articles published in this journal is retained by the author(s), while the author(s) grant the publisher as the original publisher to publish the article.
Articles published in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International, which means they can be shared, adapted and distributed provided that the original published version is cited.
Submit a Paper
