IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i4p2044-d747541.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of Priority Conservation Areas for Natural Heritage Sites Integrating Landscape Ecological Risks and Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in the Bogda, China

Author

Listed:
  • Tian Wang

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Xiaodong Chen

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Xin Zheng

    (University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Yayan Lu

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Fang Han

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Zhaoping Yang

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

The conservation of World Natural Heritage Sites has become a global concern. The identification of priority conservation areas can preserve the value of heritage sites while promoting sustainable development, which is important for balancing the conservation and development of heritage sites. This paper proposes an integrated framework for the identification of priority conservation areas for natural heritage sites based on landscape ecological risks (LERs) and ecosystem services (ESs), taking the Bogda heritage site in Xinjiang, China as a case study. The innovative approach combined the natural and cultural elements of natural heritage sites and included the following steps: (1) the LER index, Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model and questionnaire method were adopted to assess the LERs and ESs of Bogda heritage sites during 1990–2018; (2) ordered weighted averaging (OWA) was used to identify conservation priorities by weighing LERs and ESs; and (3) the optimal priority conservation area was determined by comparing the conservation efficiencies under different scenarios. The results revealed that the LER, carbon storage (CS), habitat quality (HQ), aesthetic value (AV), and recreational value (RV) showed significant spatiotemporal variation. The most suitable priority conservation area was located at the central forestlands and high-coverage grasslands, with conservation efficiencies of 1.16, 2.91, 1.96, 1.03, and 1.21 for LER, CS, HQ, AV, and RV, respectively. Our study demonstrated that integrating LERs and ESs is a comprehensive and effective approach to identifying conservation priorities for heritage sites. The results can provide decision support for the conservation of the Bogda heritage site and a methodological reference for identifying conservation priorities for natural heritage sites. Furthermore, this study is also an effective application of LERs and ESs in identifying priority conservation areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Tian Wang & Xiaodong Chen & Xin Zheng & Yayan Lu & Fang Han & Zhaoping Yang, 2022. "Identification of Priority Conservation Areas for Natural Heritage Sites Integrating Landscape Ecological Risks and Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in the Bogda, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:2044-:d:747541
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2044/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2044/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lei Kang & Zhaoping Yang & Fang Han, 2021. "The Impact of Urban Recreation Environment on Residents’ Happiness—Based on a Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, May.
    2. James E. M. Watson & Nigel Dudley & Daniel B. Segan & Marc Hockings, 2014. "The performance and potential of protected areas," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 67-73, November.
    3. Hui Shi & Tiange Shi & Fang Han & Qin Liu & Zhi Wang & Hulan Zhao, 2019. "Conservation Value of World Natural Heritage Sites’ Outstanding Universal Value via Multiple Techniques—Bogda, Xinjiang Tianshan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-27, October.
    4. Hermes, Johannes & Albert, Christian & von Haaren, Christina, 2018. "Assessing the aesthetic quality of landscapes in Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 296-307.
    5. Qun Liu & Zhaoping Yang & Fang Wang, 2017. "Conservation Policy-Community Conflicts: A Case Study from Bogda Nature Reserve, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Wei, Hejie & Liu, Huiming & Xu, Zihan & Ren, Jiahui & Lu, Nachuan & Fan, Weiguo & Zhang, Peng & Dong, Xiaobin, 2018. "Linking ecosystem services supply, social demand and human well-being in a typical mountain–oasis–desert area, Xinjiang, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 44-57.
    7. Peña, Lorena & Casado-Arzuaga, Izaskun & Onaindia, Miren, 2015. "Mapping recreation supply and demand using an ecological and a social evaluation approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 108-118.
    8. Jian Peng & Minli Zong & Yi'na Hu & Yanxu Liu & Jiansheng Wu, 2015. "Assessing Landscape Ecological Risk in a Mining City: A Case Study in Liaoyuan City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-23, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yanping Lan & Jianjun Chen & Yanping Yang & Ming Ling & Haotian You & Xiaowen Han, 2023. "Landscape Pattern and Ecological Risk Assessment in Guilin Based on Land Use Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-19, January.

    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. Barbara Sowińska-Świerkosz & Malwina Michalik-Śnieżek, 2020. "The Methodology of Landscape Quality (LQ) Indicators Analysis Based on Remote Sensing Data: Polish National Parks Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Qinqin Shi & Hai Chen & Di Liu & Tianwei Geng & Hang Zhang, 2022. "Identifying the Spatial Imbalance in the Supply and Demand of Cultural Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Tran, Duy X. & Pearson, Diane & Palmer, Alan & Gray, David & Lowry, John & Dominati, Estelle J., 2022. "A comprehensive spatially-explicit analysis of agricultural landscape multifunctionality using a New Zealand hill country farm case study," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    4. Uta Schirpke & Rocco Scolozzi & Riccardo Da Re & Mauro Masiero & Davide Pellegrino & Davide Marino, 2020. "Enhancing outdoor recreation and biodiversity through payments for ecosystem services: emerging potentials from selected Natura 2000 sites in Italy," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 2045-2067, March.
    5. Zhengxin Ji & Yueqing Xu & Hejie Wei, 2020. "Identifying Dynamic Changes in Ecosystem Services Supply and Demand for Urban Sustainability: Insights from a Rapidly Urbanizing City in Central China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-23, April.
    6. Thiele, Julia & Albert, Christian & Hermes, Johannes & von Haaren, Christina, 2020. "Assessing and quantifying offered cultural ecosystem services of German river landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    7. Chunrong Mi & Liang Ma & Mengyuan Yang & Xinhai Li & Shai Meiri & Uri Roll & Oleksandra Oskyrko & Daniel Pincheira-Donoso & Lilly P. Harvey & Daniel Jablonski & Barbod Safaei-Mahroo & Hanyeh Ghaffari , 2023. "Global Protected Areas as refuges for amphibians and reptiles under climate change," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Ming-Kuang Chung & Dau-Jye Lu & Bor-Wen Tsai & Kuei-Tien Chou, 2019. "Assessing Effectiveness of PPGIS on Protected Areas by Governance Quality: A Case Study of Community-Based Monitoring in Wu-Wei-Kang Wildlife Refuge, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, August.
    9. Tingting Zhang & Dan He & Tian Kuang & Ke Chen, 2022. "Effect of Rural Human Settlement Environment around Nature Reserves on Farmers’ Well-Being: A Field Survey Based on 1002 Farmer Households around Six Nature Reserves in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-18, May.
    10. Hermes, Johannes & von Haaren, Christina & Schmücker, Dirk & Albert, Christian, 2021. "Nature-based recreation in Germany: Insights into volume and economic significance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    11. González-García, Alberto & Palomo, Ignacio & González, José A. & López, César A. & Montes, Carlos, 2020. "Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    12. Víctor García-Díez & Marina García-Llorente & José A. González, 2020. "Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Madrid: Insights for Landscape Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Xiaohuan Xie & Yinrong Li & Ruobing Wang & Zhonghua Gou, 2023. "Park Recreation Intention and Satisfaction of Blue-Collar Workers Based on the ACSI Model: A Case Study of Anning Industrial Park in Yunnan," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-26, March.
    14. Thomas Campagnaro & Giovanni Trentanovi & Tommaso Sitzia, 2018. "Identifying Habitat Type Conservation Priorities under the Habitats Directive: Application to Two Italian Biogeographical Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    15. Susan C. Cook-Patton & C. Ronnie Drever & Bronson W. Griscom & Kelley Hamrick & Hamilton Hardman & Timm Kroeger & Pablo Pacheco & Shyla Raghav & Martha Stevenson & Chris Webb & Samantha Yeo & Peter W., 2021. "Protect, manage and then restore lands for climate mitigation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(12), pages 1027-1034, December.
    16. Dong Chen & Kangning Xiong & Juan Zhang, 2022. "Progress on the Integrity Protection in the Natural World Heritage Site and Agroforestry Development in the Buffer Zone: An Implications for the World Heritage Karst," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Gregor Schwerhoff & Ottmar Edenhofer & Marc Fleurbaey, 2020. "Taxation Of Economic Rents," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 398-423, April.
    18. Ziqi Meng & Jinwei Dong & Erle C. Ellis & Graciela Metternicht & Yuanwei Qin & Xiao-Peng Song & Sara Löfqvist & Rachael D. Garrett & Xiaopeng Jia & Xiangming Xiao, 2023. "Post-2020 biodiversity framework challenged by cropland expansion in protected areas," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 758-768, July.
    19. Adam Pawlewicz & Wojciech Gotkiewicz & Katarzyna Brodzińska & Katarzyna Pawlewicz & Bartosz Mickiewicz & Paweł Kluczek, 2022. "Organic Farming as an Alternative Maintenance Strategy in the Opinion of Farmers from Natura 2000 Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-22, March.
    20. Sponagel, Christian & Bendel, Daniela & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Weber, Tobias Karl David & Gayler, Sebastian & Streck, Thilo & Bahrs, Enno, 2022. "Integrated assessment of regional approaches for biodiversity offsetting in urban-rural areas – A future based case study from Germany using arable land as an example," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:2044-:d:747541. 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.