IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i2p704-d479485.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing and Predicting the Impact of Multi-Scenario Land Use Changes on the Ecosystem Service Value: A Case Study in the Upstream of Xiong’an New Area, China

Author

Listed:
  • Zhiyin Wang

    (Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
    College of Advanced Agricultural Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Jiansheng Cao

    (Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China)

Abstract

The evaluation of ecosystem service value has become the basis of ecological protection, ecological regionalization, and ecological compensations. Land use changes have taken place due to several natural and anthropogenic reasons, significantly influencing the ecosystem services value (ESV). In this study, we used an interactive coupling model that simulates future land use changes and the equivalent coefficient table method to predict and evaluate the ecosystem service value in the upstream of Xiong’an New Area in 2035, and we quantitatively calculated the impact of land use changes on the ecosystem service value under four future scenarios. The results indicate that from 2015 to 2035, the ecosystem service value in the production scenario and life scenario decreased significantly by CNY 1635.39 million and 561.95 million, respectively, and the areas where the ESV decreased mainly appeared in river banks and surrounding areas of towns. The conversion of forest land to cultivated land and the conversion of grassland to construction land are the main reasons for the reduction of the ecosystem service value in the production scenario and life scenario, respectively. The ecosystem service value in the ecological scenario increased significantly by CNY 2550.59 million, and the conversion of grassland to waters is the main reason for the increase in ecosystem service value, with a contribution rate of 73.89%. Moreover, due to the trade-off between ecosystem services, the overall change of ecosystem service value in the current scenario is not obvious. In conclusion, strictly controlling the scale of construction land, strengthening the management and protection of water resources, and expanding the afforestation scale may improve the ecosystem service value of the upstream Xiong’an New Area in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhiyin Wang & Jiansheng Cao, 2021. "Assessing and Predicting the Impact of Multi-Scenario Land Use Changes on the Ecosystem Service Value: A Case Study in the Upstream of Xiong’an New Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:704-:d:479485
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/704/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/704/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yuluan Zhao & Xiubin Li, 2016. "Spatial Correlation between Type of Mountain Area and Land Use Degree in Guizhou Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Xiaoqing Lin & Chunyan Lu & Kaishan Song & Ying Su & Yifan Lei & Lianxiu Zhong & Yibin Gao, 2020. "Analysis of Coupling Coordination Variance between Urbanization Quality and Eco-Environment Pressure: A Case Study of the West Taiwan Strait Urban Agglomeration, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Zhiyin Wang & Jiansheng Cao & Chunyu Zhu & Hui Yang, 2020. "The Impact of Land Use Change on Ecosystem Service Value in the Upstream of Xiong’an New Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    4. Wang, Yahui & Dai, Erfu & Yin, Le & Ma, Liang, 2018. "Land use/land cover change and the effects on ecosystem services in the Hengduan Mountain region, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 55-67.
    5. Vass, Miriam Münnich & Elofsson, Katarina, 2016. "Is forest carbon sequestration at the expense of bioenergy and forest products cost-efficient in EU climate policy to 2050?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 82-105.
    6. Zhang, Hongjuan & Gao, Yan & Hua, Yawei & Zhang, Yue & Liu, Kang, 2019. "Assessing and mapping recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services in the Qinling Mountains, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    7. Narimah Samat & Mohd Amirul Mahamud & Mou Leong Tan & Mohammad Javad Maghsoodi Tilaki & Yi Lin Tew, 2020. "Modelling Land Cover Changes in Peri-Urban Areas: A Case Study of George Town Conurbation, Malaysia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Gao, Yuan & Tian, Li & Cao, Yandong & Zhou, Lin & Li, Zhibin & Hou, Deyi, 2019. "Supplying social infrastructure land for satisfying public needs or leasing residential land? A study of local government choices in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    9. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    10. Xia Li & Guangzhao Chen & Xiaoping Liu & Xun Liang & Shaojian Wang & Yimin Chen & Fengsong Pei & Xiaocong Xu, 2017. "A New Global Land-Use and Land-Cover Change Product at a 1-km Resolution for 2010 to 2100 Based on Human–Environment Interactions," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(5), pages 1040-1059, September.
    11. Song, Wei & Deng, Xiangzheng & Yuan, Yongwei & Wang, Zhan & Li, Zhaohua, 2015. "Impacts of land-use change on valued ecosystem service in rapidly urbanized North China Plain," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 245-253.
    12. Zhang, Junze & Yin, Nan & Wang, Shuai & Yu, Jianping & Zhao, Wenwu & Fu, Bojie, 2020. "A multiple importance–satisfaction analysis framework for the sustainable management of protected areas: Integrating ecosystem services and basic needs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    13. Min Cao & Yanhui Zhu & Guonian Lü & Min Chen & Weifeng Qiao, 2019. "Spatial Distribution of Global Cultivated Land and Its Variation between 2000 and 2010, from Both Agro-Ecological and Geopolitical Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, February.
    14. Clements, Hayley S. & De Vos, Alta & Bezerra, Joana Carlos & Coetzer, Kaera & Maciejewski, Kristine & Mograbi, Penelope J. & Shackleton, Charlie, 2021. "The relevance of ecosystem services to land reform policies: Insights from South Africa," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    15. Verburg, René & Selnes, Trond & Verweij, Pita, 2016. "Governing ecosystem services: National and local lessons from policy appraisal and implementation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 186-197.
    16. Hongmi Koo & Janina Kleemann & Christine Fürst, 2020. "Integrating Ecosystem Services into Land-Use Modeling to Assess the Effects of Future Land-Use Strategies in Northern Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-24, October.
    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. Zhengxin Ji & Hejie Wei & Dong Xue & Mengxue Liu & Enxiang Cai & Weiqiang Chen & Xinwei Feng & Jiwei Li & Jie Lu & Yulong Guo, 2021. "Trade-Off and Projecting Effects of Land Use Change on Ecosystem Services under Different Policies Scenarios: A Case Study in Central China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-23, March.
    2. Shuping Fan & Peng Li & Qi He & Jiaru Cheng & Mingfeng Zhang & Nan Wu & Song Yang & Shidong Pan, 2022. "Study on the Spatial-Temporal Evolution of Land Use Ecosystem Service Value and Its Zoning Management and Control in the Typical Alpine Valley Area of Southeast Tibet—Empirical Analysis Based on Panel," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.
    3. Jingeng Huo & Zhenqin Shi & Wenbo Zhu & Hua Xue & Xin Chen, 2022. "A Multi-Scenario Simulation and Optimization of Land Use with a Markov–FLUS Coupling Model: A Case Study in Xiong’an New Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-20, February.
    4. Yongjun Du & Xiaolong Li & Xinlin He & Xiaoqian Li & Guang Yang & Dongbo Li & Wenhe Xu & Xiang Qiao & Chen Li & Lu Sui, 2022. "Multi-Scenario Simulation and Trade-Off Analysis of Ecological Service Value in the Manas River Basin Based on Land Use Optimization in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-31, May.

    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. Yanru Wang & Xiaojuan Zhang & Peihao Peng, 2021. "Spatio-Temporal Changes of Land-Use/Land Cover Change and the Effects on Ecosystem Service Values in Derong County, China, from 1992–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Henghui Xi & Wanglai Cui & Li Cai & Mengyuan Chen & Chenglei Xu, 2021. "Evaluation and Prediction of Ecosystem Service Value in the Zhoushan Islands Based on LUCC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Lintao Liu & Shouchao Yu & Hengjia Zhang & Yong Wang & Chao Liang, 2023. "Analysis of Land Use Change Drivers and Simulation of Different Future Scenarios: Taking Shanxi Province of China as an Example," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-19, January.
    5. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    6. Jiaojiao Luo & Wei Wang & Yuzhe Wu & Yi Peng & Linlin Zhang, 2021. "Analysis of an Urban Development Boundary Policy in China Based on the IAD Framework," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Muhammad Zaman-ul-Haq & Ambrina Kanwal & Akber Abid Gardezi & Hina Fatima & Zafeer Saqib & Syed Atif Bokhari & Emad Abouel Nasr & Shafiq Ahmad & Muhammad Shafiq, 2022. "Assessing Spatial-Temporal Changes in Monetary Values of Urban Ecosystem Services through Remotely Sensed Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    8. Samuel Kaheesi Kusiima & Anthony Egeru & Justine Namaalwa & Patrick Byakagaba & David Mfitumukiza & Paul Mukwaya & Sylvanus Mensah & Robert Asiimwe, 2022. "Interconnectedness of Ecosystem Services Potential with Land Use/Land Cover Change Dynamics in Western Uganda," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-26, November.
    9. Honglei Jiang & Xia Xu & Mengxi Guan & Lingfei Wang & Yongmei Huang & Yinghui Liu, 2019. "Simulation of Spatiotemporal Land Use Changes for Integrated Model of Socioeconomic and Ecological Processes in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-18, July.
    10. Xiaoqing Lin & Chunyan Lu & Kaishan Song & Ying Su & Yifan Lei & Lianxiu Zhong & Yibin Gao, 2020. "Analysis of Coupling Coordination Variance between Urbanization Quality and Eco-Environment Pressure: A Case Study of the West Taiwan Strait Urban Agglomeration, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, March.
    11. Yuejuan Yang & Kun Wang & Di Liu & Xinquan Zhao & Jiangwen Fan & Jinsheng Li & Xiajie Zhai & Cong Zhang & Ruyi Zhan, 2019. "Spatiotemporal Variation Characteristics of Ecosystem Service Losses in the Agro-Pastoral Ecotone of Northern China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-23, April.
    12. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    13. Wang, Han & Tian, Fuan & Wu, Jianxian & Nie, Xin, 2023. "Is China forest landscape restoration (FLR) worth it? A cost-benefit analysis and non-equilibrium ecological view," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    14. Rodrigues, João & Domingos, Tiago & Conceição, Pedro & Belbute, José, 2005. "Constraints on dematerialisation and allocation of natural capital along a sustainable growth path," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 382-396, September.
    15. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    16. Nunes, P.A.L.D. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Biodiversity: Economic perspectives," Serie Research Memoranda 0002, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    17. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    18. repec:dgr:rugcds:200218 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Toman, Michael & Pezzey, John C., 2002. "The Economics of Sustainability: A Review of Journal Articles," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-03, Resources for the Future.
    20. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    21. Jiayu Xia & Duyuzheng Ren & Xuhui Wang & Bo Xu & Xingyao Zhong & Yajiang Fan, 2023. "Ecosystem Quality Assessment and Ecological Restoration in Fragile Zone of Loess Plateau: A Case Study of Suide County, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-32, May.

    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:13:y:2021:i:2:p:704-:d:479485. 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.