As land use performance undergoes abrupt shifts due to the transition from growth-centric to ecology-focused development, traditional evaluation methods often overlook the catastrophe characteristics of urban complex functions in the process of system evolution, resulting in land governance strategies being unable to adjust rapidly to adapt to regional transformation. To address this limitation, this study develops an ecological priority-oriented performance evaluation system for land use Production–Living–Ecological (PLE) Functions and introduces the Entropy–Catastrophe Progression model to conduct comprehensive measurement and obstacle diagnosis of land use PLE function performance in the Yangtze River Economic Belt of Hubei Province, a typical region, thereby proposing differentiated control strategies. The results show the following: (1) The Entropy–Catastrophe Progression Model can accurately measure the spatiotemporal evolution of land use PLE function performance during the development transition period. (2) The average value of land use PLE function performance presents a fluctuating upward trend, increasing from 0.812 (Poor level) in 2014 to 0.924 (Good level) in 2023. (3) Significant spatial disparities are observed, exhibiting a gradient decrease from provincial capital centers, provincial sub-centers, and ecological economic belts to metropolitan areas. (4) The key obstacles restricting performance improvement include a weak foundation for high-quality tertiary industries, insufficient intensity in environmental purification, and an inadequate supply of high-level living services. These can be addressed by dividing high-quality service optimization zones, green industry enhancement zones, and ecology–economy synergy zones, and establishing differentiated governance mechanisms to improve land use PLE function performance. This study provides theoretical guidance and empirical support for optimizing pathways for urban–rural land use and management.

Local governments are key actors in driving urban renewal. To implement urban renewal initiatives, in-depth research into their policy backgrounds, institutional characteristics, and governance logic is essential. Traditional policy analysis often neglects the value dimension, which undermines the effectiveness of embedding informal institutional values. To complement existing research, this study examines 50 urban renewal policy documents issued in Guangzhou between 1978 and 2025. Using content analysis and grounded theory methods, this study incorporates the value dimension into the traditional “supply–demand–environment” policy analysis framework to examine local governments’ policy preferences in urban renewal, and to interpret its governance logic from the perspective of Williams’ four-level framework. The findings are as follows: (1) Guangzhou’s urban renewal has formed a policy system centered on supply-side policies, supported by environmental policy improvements, with value embedding, demand-driven measures, and multi-dimensional guidance as supplementary components. Local governments show a distinct preference for supply-oriented policy tools. (2) Guangzhou’s urban renewal policies present a pyramid structure with resource allocation at the core and governance structure as the foundation. The policies focus on the optimal allocation of land resources, collaborative actions among government, market, and society, the deep integration of public values, the clarification of property rights rules, and the application of digital technologies. (3) The governance logic of urban renewal forms a four-tier progressive closed-loop: from value anchoring to rule linkage, then to multi-stakeholder collaboration, and finally to factor empowerment, establishing a systematic governance mechanism that balances people-centricity and efficiency. Accordingly, urban renewal should prioritize value embedding and cultural preservation, balance investment in physical assets and human capital, optimize governance structures and policy mixes, coordinate the roles of an effective market and a capable government, improve supply–demand matching and the efficiency of resource allocation, and adjust the complementarity and applicability of policy tools.