IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i1p184-d194308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impacts of Strict Cropland Protection on Water Yield: A Case Study of Wuhan, China

Author

Listed:
  • Xinli Ke

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Liye Wang

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Yanchun Ma

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Kunpeng Pu

    (VisionTEK Inc., Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Ting Zhou

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
    Department of Spatial Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Bangyong Xiao

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Jiahe Wang

    (College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

Abstract

Land use and land cover change is a critical factor of ecosystem services, while water yield plays a vital role in sustainable development. The impact of urban expansion on water yield has long been discussed, but water yield change resulting from cropland protection is seldom concerned. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate the impacts of cropland protection on water yield by comparing the water yield in two cropland protection scenarios (i.e., Strict Cropland Protection scenario and No Cropland Protection scenario). Specifically, the LAND System Cellular Automata for Potential Effects (LANDSCAPE) model was employed to simulate land use maps in the two scenarios, while Water Yield module in the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model was used to calculate water yield. The results show water yield would increase by 8.7 × 10 7 m 3 in the No Cropland Protection scenario and 9.4 × 10 7 m 3 in the Strict Cropland Protection scenario. We conclude that implementation of strict cropland protection in rapid urbanizing areas may cause more water yield, which is also a prerequisite of potential urban flooding risk. This study throws that it is not wise to implement strict cropland protection policy in an area of rapid urbanization.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinli Ke & Liye Wang & Yanchun Ma & Kunpeng Pu & Ting Zhou & Bangyong Xiao & Jiahe Wang, 2019. "Impacts of Strict Cropland Protection on Water Yield: A Case Study of Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:1:p:184-:d:194308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/184/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/184/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xie, Gaodi & Zhang, Caixia & Zhen, Lin & Zhang, Leiming, 2017. "Dynamic changes in the value of China’s ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 146-154.
    2. van Vliet, Jasper & Bregt, Arnold K. & Hagen-Zanker, Alex, 2011. "Revisiting Kappa to account for change in the accuracy assessment of land-use change models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(8), pages 1367-1375.
    3. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    4. R White & G Engelen, 1997. "Cellular Automata as the Basis of Integrated Dynamic Regional Modelling," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 24(2), pages 235-246, April.
    5. Tabeau, Andrzej A. & Hatna, E. & Verburg, Peter H., 2010. "Assessing spatial uncertainties of land allocation using the scenario approach and sensitivity analysis," 116th Seminar, October 27-30, 2010, Parma, Italy 95235, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Jing Yu & Yongwei Yuan & Yan Nie & Enjun Ma & Hongji Li & Xiaoli Geng, 2015. "The Temporal and Spatial Evolution of Water Yield in Dali County," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-17, May.
    7. Kovacs, Kent F. & Polasky, Stephen & Keeler, Bonnie & Pennington, Derric & Nelson, Erik & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Taff, Steven J., 2012. "Evaluating the Return in Ecosystem Services from Investment in Public Land Acquisitions," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124660, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    9. Ke, Xinli & van Vliet, Jasper & Zhou, Ting & Verburg, Peter H. & Zheng, Weiwei & Liu, Xiaoping, 2018. "Direct and indirect loss of natural habitat due to built-up area expansion: A model-based analysis for the city of Wuhan, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 231-239.
    10. Kang, Shaozhong & Hao, Xinmei & Du, Taisheng & Tong, Ling & Su, Xiaoling & Lu, Hongna & Li, Xiaolin & Huo, Zailin & Li, Sien & Ding, Risheng, 2017. "Improving agricultural water productivity to ensure food security in China under changing environment: From research to practice," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 5-17.
    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. Liye Wang & Xinli Ke & Assem Abu Hatab, 2020. "Trade-Offs between Economic Benefits and Ecosystem Services Value under Three Cropland Protection Scenarios for Wuhan City in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Yang Zou & Dehua Mao, 2022. "Simulation of Freshwater Ecosystem Service Flows under Land-Use Change: A Case Study of Lianshui River Basin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Shuting Bai & Jiuchun Yang & Yubo Zhang & Fengqin Yan & Lingxue Yu & Shuwen Zhang, 2022. "Evaluating Ecosystem Services and Trade-Offs Based on Land-Use Simulation: A Case Study in the Farming–Pastoral Ecotone of Northern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, July.
    4. Wang, Liye & Zhang, Siyu & Xiong, Qiangqiang & Liu, Yu & Liu, Yanfang & Liu, Yaolin, 2022. "Spatiotemporal dynamics of cropland expansion and its driving factors in the Yangtze River Economic Belt: A nuanced analysis at the county scale," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Ru Chen & Chunbo Huang, 2021. "Landscape Evolution and It’s Impact of Ecosystem Service Value of the Wuhan City, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-21, December.
    6. Feng Yin & Ting Zhou & Xinli Ke, 2021. "Impact of Cropland Reclamation on Ecological Security in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.

    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. Liye Wang & Xinli Ke & Assem Abu Hatab, 2020. "Trade-Offs between Economic Benefits and Ecosystem Services Value under Three Cropland Protection Scenarios for Wuhan City in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Yingen Hu & Ye Zhang & Xinli Ke, 2018. "Dynamics of Tradeoffs between Economic Benefits and Ecosystem Services due to Urban Expansion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-13, July.
    3. Chen, Chengjing & Liu, Yihua, 2021. "Spatiotemporal changes of ecosystem services value by incorporating planning policies: A case of the Pearl River Delta, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 461(C).
    4. Dai, Xuhuan & Li, Bo & Zheng, Hua & Yang, Yanzheng & Yang, Zihan & Peng, Chenchen, 2023. "Can sedentarization decrease the dependence of pastoral livelihoods on ecosystem services?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    5. Maurizio Sajeva & Marjo Maidell & Jonne Kotta, 2020. "A Participatory Geospatial Toolkit for Science Integration and Knowledge Transfer Informing SDGs Based Governance and Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, September.
    6. Corine Bitossessi Laurenda Sinsin & Alice Bonou & Kolawolé Valère Salako & Rodrigue Castro Gbedomon & Romain Lucas Glèlè Kakaï, 2023. "Economic Valuation of Mangroves and a Linear Mixed Model-Assisted Framework for Identifying Its Main Drivers: A Case Study in Benin," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, May.
    7. Min Zhou & Shukui Tan & Lizao Tao & Xiangbo Zhu & Ghulam Akhmat, 2015. "An interval fuzzy land-use allocation model (IFLAM) for Beijing in association with environmental and ecological consideration under uncertainty," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 2269-2290, November.
    8. Orlov, Sergey & Rovenskaya, Elena, 2022. "Optimal transition to greener production in a pro-environmental society," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    9. Siyu Sheng & Bohan Yang & Bing Kuang, 2022. "Impact of Cereal Production Displacement from Urban Expansion on Ecosystem Service Values in China: Based on Three Cropland Supplement Strategies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-19, April.
    10. Dingrao Feng & Wenkai Bao & Meichen Fu & Min Zhang & Yiyu Sun, 2021. "Current and Future Land Use Characters of a National Central City in Eco-Fragile Region—A Case Study in Xi’an City Based on FLUS Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-25, March.
    11. Liu, Wenjing & Wang, Jingsheng & Li, Chao & Chen, Baoxiong & Sun, Yufang, 2019. "Using Bibliometric Analysis to Understand the Recent Progress in Agroecosystem Services Research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 293-305.
    12. Elliot, Thomas & Bertrand, Alexandre & Babí Almenar, Javier & Petucco, Claudio & Proença, Vânia & Rugani, Benedetto, 2019. "Spatial optimisation of urban ecosystem services through integrated participatory and multi-objective integer linear programming," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 409(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Neill, Andrew M. & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Stout, Jane C., 2022. "Conceptual integration of ecosystem services and natural capital within Irish national policy: An analysis over time and between policy sectors," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    14. Wang, Xiaoqi & Zhao, Xueyan, 2023. "Farmers' perception and choice preference of grassland ecosystem services: Evidence from the northeastern region of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    15. Basse, Reine Maria, 2013. "A constrained cellular automata model to simulate the potential effects of high-speed train stations on land-use dynamics in trans-border regions," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 23-37.
    16. Zhou, Ting & Yang, Xi & Ke, Xinli, 2022. "Delimitation of urban growth boundaries by integratedly incorporating ecosystem conservation, cropland protection and urban compactness," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 468(C).
    17. Xinwei Guo & Bin Yu & Meiyan Yan & Hui Guo & Junhu Ren & Hanxia Zhang & Zonggang Zhang, 2022. "Endogenous Development Models and Paths Selection of Rural Revitalization from the Perspective of Ecological Environment Advantages: A Case Study of Nanshi Village, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-24, September.
    18. Thomas Elliot & Javier Babí Almenar & Samuel Niza & Vânia Proença & Benedetto Rugani, 2019. "Pathways to Modelling Ecosystem Services within an Urban Metabolism Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-22, May.
    19. Wang, Liye & Zhang, Siyu & Tang, Lanping & Lu, Yanchi & Liu, Yanfang & Liu, Yaolin, 2022. "Optimizing distribution of urban land on the basis of urban land use intensity at prefectural city scale in mainland China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    20. Cifuentes-Espinosa, Jaime Andrés & Feintrenie, Laurène & Gutiérrez-Montes, Isabel & Sibelet, Nicole, 2021. "Ecosystem services and gender in rural areas of Nicaragua: Different perceptions about the landscape," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:1:p:184-:d:194308. 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.