IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i4p561-d1380271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecological Risk Assessment of Land Use Change in the Tarim River Basin, Xinjiang, China

Author

Listed:
  • Yaqi Cheng

    (School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China
    Natural Resources Bureau of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, Urumqi 830000, China)

  • Xuyang Zhang

    (School of Earth and Environment, Anhui University of Science and Technology, Huainan 232001, China)

  • Wei Song

    (Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    Hebei Collaborative Innovation Center for Urban-Rural Integration Development, Shijiazhuang 050061, China)

Abstract

In recent years, global climate change and human alterations to land use have led to a decrease in ecosystem services, making ecosystems more vulnerable. However, unlike the well-established risk assessment frameworks used in natural disaster research, the concept of ecological risks arising from changes in land use is still in its early stages, with its nuances and assessment methodologies yet to be clearly defined. This study proposes a new framework for assessing ecological risks resulting from changes in land use in the Tarim River Basin. The framework employs a coupled PLUS and Invest model to evaluate the ecological risks of land use change under three development scenarios projected for the Tarim River Basin in Xinjiang by 2035. The findings indicate that: (1) Between 2000 and 2020, the predominant land use types in the Tarim River Basin in Xinjiang were primarily unused land, followed by grassland and cropland. Conversely, grassland, water, and construction land were relatively less prevalent. During this period, the area of unused land and cultivated land increased, while grassland, forest land, and water exhibited a declining trend. Moving forward, under the three scenarios from 2020 to 2035, land use changes in the study area are characterized by the expansion of cropland and unused land, coupled with a significant decrease in grassland area, while other land categories demonstrate minor fluctuations. (2) From 2020 to 2035, across various scenarios, the total ecosystem service within the study area demonstrates an overall increasing trend in both the northern and southern marginal zones. Specifically, under the baseline scenario, the total amount of ecosystem services in the study area decreased by 15.247% compared to 2020. Similarly, under the economic development scenario, this decrease amounted to 13.358% compared to 2020. Conversely, under the ecological protection scenario, the decrease reached 19.852% compared to 2020. (3) The structure of ecological risk levels from 2020 to 2035, across multiple scenarios, demonstrates a consistent pattern, characterized by a predominant proportion of moderate risk. Conversely, other risk levels occupy relatively smaller proportions of the area.

Suggested Citation

  • Yaqi Cheng & Xuyang Zhang & Wei Song, 2024. "Ecological Risk Assessment of Land Use Change in the Tarim River Basin, Xinjiang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:561-:d:1380271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/561/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/561/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yanbo Qu & Haining Zong & Desheng Su & Zongli Ping & Mei Guan, 2021. "Land Use Change and Its Impact on Landscape Ecological Risk in Typical Areas of the Yellow River Basin in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-26, October.
    2. Peng Tian & Jialin Li & Hongbo Gong & Ruiliang Pu & Luodan Cao & Shuyao Shao & Zuoqi Shi & Xiuli Feng & Lijia Wang & Riuqing Liu, 2019. "Research on Land Use Changes and Ecological Risk Assessment in Yongjiang River Basin in Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Yaqi Cheng & Wei Song & Hao Yu & Xi Wei & Shuangqing Sheng & Bo Liu & He Gao & Junfang Li & Congjie Cao & Dazhi Yang, 2023. "Assessment and Prediction of Landscape Ecological Risk from Land Use Change in Xinjiang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, April.
    4. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. He Gao & Wei Song, 2022. "Assessing the Landscape Ecological Risks of Land-Use Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Shi, Huai-Long & Zhou, Wei-Xing, 2022. "Factor volatility spillover and its implications on factor premia," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Ho, Ron Yiu-wah & Strange, Roger & Piesse, Jenifer, 2006. "On the conditional pricing effects of beta, size, and book-to-market equity in the Hong Kong market," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 199-214, July.
    4. Muhammad Kashif & Thomas Leirvik, 2022. "The MAX Effect in an Oil Exporting Country: The Case of Norway," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, March.
    5. Michel Fliess & Cédric Join, 2009. "Systematic risk analysis: first steps towards a new definition of beta," Post-Print inria-00425077, HAL.
    6. Barbara Fidanza & Ottorino Morresi, 2021. "Size and Value Anomalies in European Bank Stocks," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(12), pages 227-227, July.
    7. Bo-Hung Chiou & Shen-Ho Chang, 2020. "Influence of Investment Efficiency by Managers and Accounting Conservatism on Idiosyncratic Risks to Investors," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 10(1), pages 1-8.
    8. Constantinos Antoniou & John A. Doukas & Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, 2016. "Investor Sentiment, Beta, and the Cost of Equity Capital," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(2), pages 347-367, February.
    9. Radosław Kurach, 2013. "Does Beta Explain Global Equity Market Volatility – Some Empirical Evidence," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 7(2), June.
    10. Zabolotnyy, Serihiy & Wasilewski, Mirosław, 2018. "Operating and financial leverage as risk measures in agricultural companies," Problems of Agricultural Economics / Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej 276377, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics - National Research Institute (IAFE-NRI).
    11. Shi, Yun & Cui, Xiangyu & Zhou, Xunyu, 2020. "Beta and Coskewness Pricing: Perspective from Probability Weighting," SocArXiv 5rqhv, Center for Open Science.
    12. Abugri, Benjamin A. & Dutta, Sandip, 2014. "Are we overestimating REIT idiosyncratic risk? Analysis of pricing effects and persistence," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 249-259.
    13. Lucie Kupková & Ivan Bičík & Leoš Jeleček, 2021. "At the Crossroads of European Landscape Changes: Major Processes of Landscape Change in Czechia since the Middle of the 19th Century and Their Driving Forces," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, January.
    14. David E. Allen & Michael McAleer & Abhay K. Singh, 2019. "Daily market news sentiment and stock prices," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(30), pages 3212-3235, June.
    15. Sree Vinutha Venkataraman, 2023. "A remark on mean‐semivariance behaviour: Downside risk and capital asset pricing," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(3), pages 2683-2695, July.
    16. Flouris, Triant & Walker, Thomas, 2005. "Financial Comparisons Across Different Business Models in the Canadian Airline Industry," 46th Annual Transportation Research Forum, Washington, D.C., March 6-8, 2005 208157, Transportation Research Forum.
    17. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2256 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Dipankar Mondal & N. Selvaraju, 2022. "Convexity, two-fund separation and asset ranking in a mean-LPM portfolio selection framework," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 44(1), pages 225-248, March.
    19. Anders Johansson, 2009. "An analysis of dynamic risk in the Greater China equity markets," Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 299-320.
    20. Sanchez-Romero, Miguel, 2006. "“Demand for Private Annuities and Social Security: Consequences to Individual Wealth”," Working Papers in Economic Theory 2006/07, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain), Department of Economic Analysis (Economic Theory and Economic History).
    21. Grossman, Richard, 2017. "Stocks for the Long Run: New Monthly Indices of British Equities, 1869-1929," CEPR Discussion Papers 12121, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:561-:d:1380271. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.