## 3 Results
### Spatial Characteristics of the Contributions of LPRO's Elements
#### 3.3.2 Regional Characteristics of the Contributions of LPRO's Elements
For eastern China, in the transfer process, there are negative relationships between the change rate of the transfer scale and LPRO's macro effects and the distance to the city center and LPRO's macro effects, with coefficients of \(-0.021\) and \(-0.055\), respectively, indicating that the greater the fluctuations in the transfer scale and the farther the distance from the city center are, the less beneficial the promotion of LPRO's macro effects. There is a negative \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Northeastern Region**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Eastern Region**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Central Region**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Western Region**} \\
**Term** & **St.** & **St.** & **St.** & **St.** & **St.** & **St.** & **St.** & **St.** \\  & **Error** & **Coefficient** & **Error** & **Coefficient** & **Error** & **Coefficient** & **Error** & **Coefficient** \\ \hline X10 & 0.014 & \(-0.042\) & 0.011 & \(-0.021\) & 0.011 & \(-0.072\) & 0 & 0.109 *** \\ X11 & 0 & 0.024 & 0 & \(-0.084\) *** & 0 & \(-0.063\) *** & 0 & \(-0.064\) *** \\ X12 & 0 & 0.646 *** & 0 & 0.5 *** & 0 & 0.477 *** & 0 & 0.343 *** \\ X13 & 0.015 & 0.016 & 0.027 & 0.003 & 0.017 & 0.037 * & 0.014 & 0.03 * \\ X14 & 0 & 0.395 *** & 0.015 & 0.001 & 0.012 & 0.076 *** & 0.012 & 0.046 * \\ X15 & 0.008 & 0.259 *** & 0.008 & 0.42 *** & 0.006 & 0.174 *** & 0.006 & 0.259 *** \\ X16 & 0 & \(-0.013\) & 0 & \(-0.079\) *** & 0 & 0.007 & 0 & 0.022 \\ X17 & 0.006 & 0.012 & 0.005 & 0.045 * & 0.005 & 0.101 *** & 0.005 & 0.125 *** \\ X18 & 0 & \(-0.057\) * & 0 & 0.014 & 0 & 0.079 *** & 0 & 0.058 *** \\ X19 & 0 & \(-0.036\) & 0 & 0.018 & 0 & 0.01 & 0 & 0.185 *** \\ X20 & 0.014 & 0.154 *** & 0 & 0.104 *** & 0 & \(-0.021\) & 0 & 0.006 \\ X21 & 0 & \(-0.015\) & 0 & \(-0.039\) *** & 0 & \(-0.048\) ** & 0 & \(-0.056\) * \\ \hline R & 0.833 & & 0.915 & 0.832 & & 0.820 & \\ R\({}^{2}\) & 0.694 & & 0.837 & & 0.692 & & 0.673 & \\ Adjusted & 0.68 & & 0.834 & & 0.686 & & 0.668 & \\ R\({}^{2}\) & 0.020331331 & & 0.022511185 & & 0.019048522 & & 0.024009467 \\ Mean & 0.022 & & 0.154 & & 0.046 & & 0.071 \\ squares & F = 52.593; & F = 302.592; & F = 125.749; & F = 121.419; \\ F and Sig. & Sig. = 0.000 & Sig. = 0.000 & Sig. = 0.000 & Sig. = 0.000 & Sig. = 0.000 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: _Cont._inter-relationship between the commercial land scale and LPRO's macro effects, whereas the transportation land scale and residential land percentage display positive correlations, implying that in eastern China, the intensive utilization efficiency of existing commercial land should be strengthened rather than its supply scale being expanded. It is advisable to ensure the supply of LPRs for transportation and residential purposes to strengthen LPRO's macro effects. The scale of low-grade use value and the land price have significant negative and positive effects on LPRO's macro effects, respectively. In the process of utilization, the advanced utilization level helps strengthen LPRO's macro effects. In the supervision link, LPRO's macro effects are significantly promoted by the land marketization level but discouraged by the scale transferred through bidding. In addition, setting lower and upper limits on the FAR is significantly positively and negatively associated with LPRO's macro effects, respectively, indicating that in eastern China, it is appropriate to set a lower limit on the FAR for conservation and intensive management; however, when setting an upper limit on the FAR, setting an excessively high FAR value is not advisable. In the eastern region, six indicators significantly promote LPRO's macro effects, with the contributions of land price (34.54%) > advanced utilization level (28.01%) > land marketization level (6.52%) > setting a lower limit on the FAR (3.65%) > the proportion of residential land (3.20%) > the scale of transportation purposes (1.96%), whereas six factors have significant inhibitory effects on LPRO's macro effects.