IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i1p199-d194592.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Temporal-Spatial Evolution of the Urban Ecological Footprint Based on Net Primary Productivity: A Case Study of Xuzhou Central Area, China

Author

Listed:
  • Yao Lu

    (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Xiaoshun Li

    (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China
    China Land Problem Research Center, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China)

  • Heng Ni

    (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Xin Chen

    (Department of Land Resources Management, College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100194, China)

  • Chuyu Xia

    (Institute of Land Science and Property, School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
    Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University, Canberra ACT 2614, Australia)

  • Dongmei Jiang

    (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China
    China Land Problem Research Center, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China)

  • Huiping Fan

    (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

Abstract

The urbanization process all over the world has caused serious ecological and environmental problems which have recently become a focus for study. Ecological footprint analysis, which is widely used to assess the sustainability of regional development, can quantitatively measure the human occupation of natural capital. In this study, the ecological footprint based on net primary production (EF-NPP) and MODIS data were used to measure the ecological footprint in Xuzhou central area from 2005 to 2014. The results showed that from 2005 to 2014, the per capita ecological footprint increased from 1.06 to 1.17 hm 2 /person; the per capita ecological capacity decreased from 0.10 to 0.09 hm 2 /person; the per capita ecological deficit increased from −0.96 to −1.09 hm 2 /person; and the ecological pressure index increased from 6.87 to 11.97. The composition of the ecological footprint showed that grassland contributed most to the ecological footprint and deficit, and cultivated land contributed most to the ecological capacity. The spatial distribution of the ecological footprint changed significantly, especially in the expansion of the area of lower value. The ecological capacity and deficit changed little. The ecological situation in Xuzhou central area was unbalanced. Based on this study, Xuzhou city was recommended to control the increase of the ecological footprint, improve the ecological capacity and balance the ecological pattern for sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • Yao Lu & Xiaoshun Li & Heng Ni & Xin Chen & Chuyu Xia & Dongmei Jiang & Huiping Fan, 2019. "Temporal-Spatial Evolution of the Urban Ecological Footprint Based on Net Primary Productivity: A Case Study of Xuzhou Central Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:1:p:199-:d:194592
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/199/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/1/199/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jason Venetoulis & John Talberth, 2008. "Refining the ecological footprint," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 441-469, August.
    2. Kitzes, Justin & Galli, Alessandro & Bagliani, Marco & Barrett, John & Dige, Gorm & Ede, Sharon & Erb, Karlheinz & Giljum, Stefan & Haberl, Helmut & Hails, Chris & Jolia-Ferrier, Laurent & Jungwirth, , 2009. "A research agenda for improving national Ecological Footprint accounts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1991-2007, May.
    3. Niccolucci, V. & Bastianoni, S. & Tiezzi, E.B.P. & Wackernagel, M. & Marchettini, N., 2009. "How deep is the footprint? A 3D representation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(20), pages 2819-2823.
    4. van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M. & Verbruggen, Harmen, 1999. "Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the 'ecological footprint'," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 61-72, April.
    5. Marc L. Imhoff & Lahouari Bounoua & Taylor Ricketts & Colby Loucks & Robert Harriss & William T. Lawrence, 2004. "Global patterns in human consumption of net primary production," Nature, Nature, vol. 429(6994), pages 870-873, June.
    6. Wiedmann, Thomas & Lenzen, Manfred, 2007. "On the conversion between local and global hectares in Ecological Footprint analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 673-677, February.
    7. Mengqiu Lu & Jianquan Cheng & Cheng Jin, 2017. "Assessment of Ecological Assets for Sustainable Regional Development: A Case Study of Deqing County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-18, June.
    8. Yunhe Yin & Xiang Han & Shaohong Wu, 2017. "Spatial and Temporal Variations in the Ecological Footprints in Northwest China from 2005 to 2014," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, April.
    9. Wackernagel, Mathis & Onisto, Larry & Bello, Patricia & Callejas Linares, Alejandro & Susana Lopez Falfan, Ina & Mendez Garcia, Jesus & Isabel Suarez Guerrero, Ana & Guadalupe Suarez Guerrero, Ma., 1999. "National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 375-390, June.
    10. Fiala, Nathan, 2008. "Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 519-525, November.
    11. Chuxiong Deng & Zhen Liu & Rongrong Li & Ke Li, 2018. "Sustainability Evaluation Based on a Three-Dimensional Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Hunan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, November.
    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. Shuhui Zhang & Fuquan Li & Yuke Zhou & Ziyuan Hu & Ruixin Zhang & Xiaoyu Xiang & Yali Zhang, 2022. "Using Net Primary Productivity to Characterize the Spatio-Temporal Dynamics of Ecological Footprint for a Resource-Based City, Panzhihua in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-14, March.
    2. Zhenggen Fan & Ji Liu & Hu Yu & Hua Lu & Puwei Zhang, 2022. "Spatial-Temporal Pattern and Influencing Factors of Land Ecological Carrying Capacity in The National Pilot Zones for Ecological Conservation in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Gong Chen & Qi Li & Fei Peng & Hamed Karamian & Boyuan Tang, 2019. "Henan Ecological Security Evaluation Using Improved 3D Ecological Footprint Model Based on Emergy and Net Primary Productivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Yifei Shi & Xinghang Ge & Xueliang Yuan & Qingsong Wang & Jon Kellett & Fangqiu Li & Kaiming Ba, 2019. "An Integrated Indicator System and Evaluation Model for Regional Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, April.
    5. Siqi Yi & Yong Zhou & Qing Li, 2022. "A New Perspective for Urban Development Boundary Delineation Based on the MCR Model and CA-Markov Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.

    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. Shuhui Zhang & Fuquan Li & Yuke Zhou & Ziyuan Hu & Ruixin Zhang & Xiaoyu Xiang & Yali Zhang, 2022. "Using Net Primary Productivity to Characterize the Spatio-Temporal Dynamics of Ecological Footprint for a Resource-Based City, Panzhihua in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-14, March.
    2. Thomas Wiedmann & John Barrett, 2010. "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-49, June.
    3. Jincheng Li & Xinyue Zhang & Xuexiu Chang & Wei Gao, 2018. "Revising Yield and Equivalence Factors of Ecological Footprints Based on Land-Use Conversion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Jóhannesson, S.E. & Davíðsdóttir, B. & Heinonen, J.T., 2018. "Standard Ecological Footprint Method for Small, Highly Specialized Economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 370-380.
    5. Yunhe Yin & Xiang Han & Shaohong Wu, 2017. "Spatial and Temporal Variations in the Ecological Footprints in Northwest China from 2005 to 2014," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Kitzes, Justin & Galli, Alessandro & Bagliani, Marco & Barrett, John & Dige, Gorm & Ede, Sharon & Erb, Karlheinz & Giljum, Stefan & Haberl, Helmut & Hails, Chris & Jolia-Ferrier, Laurent & Jungwirth, , 2009. "A research agenda for improving national Ecological Footprint accounts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1991-2007, May.
    7. Teixidó Figueras, Jordi & Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio, 2012. "Ecological Footprint Inequality: A methodological review and some results," Working Papers 2072/203168, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    8. Hua Liu & Dan-Yang Li & Rong Ma & Ming Ma, 2022. "Assessing the Ecological Risks Based on the Three-Dimensional Ecological Footprint Model in Gansu Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Xiaowei Yao & Zhanqi Wang & Hongwei Zhang, 2016. "Dynamic Changes of the Ecological Footprint and Its Component Analysis Response to Land Use in Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, April.
    10. White, Thomas J., 2007. "Sharing resources: The global distribution of the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 402-410, December.
    11. Yisong Wang & Jincheng Huang & Shiming Fang, 2019. "Sustainability Assessment of Natural Capital Based on the 3D Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study of the Shennongjia National Park Pilot," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    12. Yue, Dongxia & Xu, Xiaofeng & Hui, Cang & Xiong, Youcai & Han, Xuemei & Ma, Jinhui, 2011. "Biocapacity supply and demand in Northwestern China: A spatial appraisal of sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 988-994, March.
    13. Thomas Kuhn & Radomir Pestow & Anja Zenker, 2019. "An Axiomatic Characterization of a Generalized Ecological Footprint," Chemnitz Economic Papers 033, Department of Economics, Chemnitz University of Technology, revised Aug 2019.
    14. Jin, Wei & Xu, Linyu & Yang, Zhifeng, 2009. "Modeling a policy making framework for urban sustainability: Incorporating system dynamics into the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2938-2949, October.
    15. Xiaoman Liu & Dong Jiang & Qiao Wang & Huiming Liu & Jin Li & Zhuo Fu, 2016. "Evaluating the Sustainability of Nature Reserves Using an Ecological Footprint Method: A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-9, December.
    16. Gu, Qiwei & Wang, Hongqi & Zheng, Yinan & Zhu, Jingwen & Li, Xiaoke, 2015. "Ecological footprint analysis for urban agglomeration sustainability in the middle stream of the Yangtze River," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 86-99.
    17. Mindaugas Staniunas & Marija Burinskiene & Vida Maliene, 2012. "Ecology in Urban Planning: Mitigating the Environmental Damage of Municipal Solid Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(9), pages 1-18, August.
    18. Ferng, Jiun-Jiun, 2014. "Nested open systems: An important concept for applying ecological footprint analysis to sustainable development assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 105-111.
    19. Camilo Martínez-Iglesias & Alevgül H. Sorman & Mario Giampietro & Jesus Ramos-Martin, 2014. "Assessing biophysical limits to the economic development of remote islands: the case of Isabela in the Galapagos Archipelago," Documentos de Trabajo CEPROEC 2014_01, Instituto de Altos Estudios Nacionales, Centro de Prospectiva Estratégica.
    20. Thomas Kuhn & Radomir Pestow & Anja Zenker, 2018. "An Axiomatic Foundation of the Ecological Footprint," Chemnitz Economic Papers 025, Department of Economics, Chemnitz University of Technology.

    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:199-:d:194592. 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.