IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i23p15987-d989097.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic Monitoring of the Ecological Vulnerability for Multi-Type Ecological Functional Areas during 2000–2018

Author

Listed:
  • Xingming Yuan

    (School of Architecture and Information Engineering, Shandong Vocational College of Industry, Zibo 256414, China
    School of Civil Architectural Engineering, Shandong University of Technology, Zibo 255000, China)

  • Bing Guo

    (School of Civil Architectural Engineering, Shandong University of Technology, Zibo 255000, China)

Abstract

Studies that consider both the differences of evaluation systems and index weights among different ecological areas in different study periods for ecological vulnerability evaluation have not been reported yet. In addition, the comparability of vulnerability assessment results among different study areas is poor. This paper proposed a novel quantitative vulnerability evaluation method for multi-type and multi-temporal ecological functional areas using a dynamic weighting method: Three-River Source region grassland–wetland ecological functional area (TRSR), Guiqiandian karst rocky desertification control ecological functional area (GQD), Hunshandake desertification control ecological functional area (HSDK), and Chuandian forest and biodiversity ecological functional area (CD), and then introduced net primary productivity (NPP) to realize the determination of multi-type ecological vulnerability thresholds, which is helpful to compare the vulnerability evaluation results of different ecological functional areas in a unified and comparable level. The proposed novel quantitative vulnerability evaluation method had higher applicability in vulnerability assessment for multi-type ecological functional areas (91.1% for TRSR, 91.9% for HSDK, 91.7% for CD, and 94.2% for GQD) based on the dynamic weight determination method. The determination of vulnerability thresholds based on NPP could provide a comparable level to investigate the spatial distribution patterns of ecological vulnerability in multi-type ecological functional areas for different periods. The average ecological vulnerability of the TRSR, GQD, and CD was classified as mild vulnerability, while that of the HSDK was classified as moderate vulnerability. The research results could provide a novel method for the support of ecological protection for multi-type ecological zones on a national scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Xingming Yuan & Bing Guo, 2022. "Dynamic Monitoring of the Ecological Vulnerability for Multi-Type Ecological Functional Areas during 2000–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-24, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:15987-:d:989097
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/15987/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/15987/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John, Felix & Toth, Russell & Frank, Karin & Groeneveld, Jürgen & Müller, Birgit, 2019. "Ecological Vulnerability Through Insurance? Potential Unintended Consequences of Livestock Drought Insurance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 357-368.
    2. Schmitt, Jonas & Offermann, Frank & Söder, Mareike & Frühauf, Cathleen & Finger, Robert, 2022. "Extreme weather events cause significant crop yield losses at the farm level in German agriculture," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Meng Luo & Shengwei Zhang & Lei Huang & Zhiqiang Liu & Lin Yang & Ruishen Li & Xi Lin, 2022. "Temporal and Spatial Changes of Ecological Environment Quality Based on RSEI: A Case Study in Ulan Mulun River Basin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-19, October.
    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. Qiu, Lei & Wang, Xiaoyang & Wei, Jia, 2023. "Energy security and energy management: The role of extreme natural events," Innovation and Green Development, Elsevier, vol. 2(2).
    2. Pengfei Liu & Lingling Hou & Dongqing Li & Shi Min & Yueying Mu, 2021. "Determinants of Livestock Insurance Demand: Experimental Evidence from Chinese Herders," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 430-451, June.
    3. Wittwer, Raphaël A. & Klaus, Valentin H. & Miranda Oliveira, Emily & Sun, Qing & Liu, Yujie & Gilgen, Anna K. & Buchmann, Nina & van der Heijden, Marcel G.A., 2023. "Limited capability of organic farming and conservation tillage to enhance agroecosystem resilience to severe drought," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    4. Wencun Zhou & Zhengjia Liu & Sisi Wang, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Dynamics of the Cropland Area and Its Response to Increasing Regional Extreme Weather Events in the Farming-Pastoral Ecotone of Northern China during 1992–2020," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Robert Finger, 2023. "Digital innovations for sustainable and resilient agricultural systems," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 50(4), pages 1277-1309.
    6. Hongjun Lei & Jie Yu & Hongwei Pan & Jie Li & Shah Jahan Leghari & Chongju Shang & Zheyuan Xiao & Cuicui Jin & Lili Shi, 2023. "A New Agricultural Drought Disaster Risk Assessment Framework: Coupled a Copula Function to Select Return Periods and the Jensen Model to Calculate Yield Loss," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, February.
    7. Nordmeyer, Eike Florenz, 2023. "German farmers' perceived usefulness of satellite-based index insurance - Insights from a transtheoretical model," 97th Annual Conference, March 27-29, 2023, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 334557, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    8. Xin Dai & Jianping Chen & Chenli Xue, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Patterns and Driving Factors of the Ecological Environmental Quality along the Jakarta–Bandung High-Speed Railway in Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-24, August.
    9. Haibin Dong & Saheed Olaide Jimoh & Yulu Hou & Xiangyang Hou, 2020. "Willingness to Pay for Livestock Husbandry Insurance: An Empirical Analysis of Grassland Farms in Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-13, September.
    10. Nordmeyer, Eike Florenz & Danne, Michael & Musshoff, Oliver, 2023. "Can satellite-retrieved data increase farmers' willingness to insure against drought? – Insights from Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    11. Wilcox, Steven W. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Jensen, Nathaniel & Sun, Ying & Clark, Patrick & Soto, Gerardo E. & Kahiu, Njoki & Fava, Francesco P. & Porter, Benjamin, 2023. "The Environmental Impacts of Microfinance: An Empirical Study of Index-Based Livestock Insurance and East African Rangelands," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 335917, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Nguyen Phuc Canh & Udomsak Wongchoti & Su Dinh Thanh, 2021. "Does economic policy uncertainty matter for insurance development? Evidence from 16 OECD countries," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 46(4), pages 614-648, October.
    13. Meike Will & Jürgen Groeneveld & Karin Frank & Birgit Müller, 2021. "Informal risk-sharing between smallholders may be threatened by formal insurance: Lessons from a stylized agent-based model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, March.
    14. Xiaoyu Li & Jiawei Tang & Chao Feng & Yexiao Chen, 2023. "Can Government Environmental Auditing Help to Improve Environmental Quality? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-21, February.
    15. Williams, T.G. & Guikema, S.D. & Brown, D.G. & Agrawal, A., 2020. "Resilience and equity: Quantifying the distributional effects of resilience-enhancing strategies in a smallholder agricultural system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(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:14:y:2022:i:23:p:15987-:d:989097. 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.