IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i8p3290-d1375991.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Construction of the Ecological Security Pattern in Xishuangbanna Tropical Rainforest Based on Circuit Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Mengmeng Yan

    (School of Earth Sciences, East China University of Technology, Nanchang 330013, China)

  • Jilin Duan

    (School of Earth Sciences, East China University of Technology, Nanchang 330013, China)

  • Yubin Li

    (College of Engineering, Tibet University, Lhasa 850000, China)

  • Yang Yu

    (School of Safety Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Yu Wang

    (School of Earth Sciences, East China University of Technology, Nanchang 330013, China)

  • Jiawei Zhang

    (School of Earth Sciences, East China University of Technology, Nanchang 330013, China)

  • Yu Qiu

    (School of Earth Sciences, East China University of Technology, Nanchang 330013, China)

Abstract

Urban modernization and economic globalization have led to significant changes in traditional natural landscapes. The unregulated and large-scale expansion of rubber plantations in Xishuangbanna has resulted in water and scenic forests being replaced by rubber forests and the complex rainforest ecosystem being replaced by simple artificial forests. This has resulted in increasingly prominent ecological problems such as soil erosion, regional microclimate changes, and sharp declines in biodiversity. The ecological security pattern is an important way to protect regional ecological sustainability. Taking the tropical rainforest in Xishuangbanna as an example, this study identified ecological sources through the evaluation of the importance of ecosystem services, constructed resistance surfaces through ecological sensitivity evaluation, and used circuit theory to simulate ecological processes in heterogeneous landscapes by calculating “electricity” or “resistance”, thereby identifying ecological corridors and key ecological nodes. The results identified 31 ecological source areas, 65 key ecological corridors, 7 potential ecological corridors, 37 ecological pinch points, and 99 ecological barriers. The overall distribution of ecological sources was scattered, with higher density in the northwest and southeast regions. Ecological corridors were distributed along high mountains, and both ecological sources and corridors were mainly composed of forest land. Based on circuit theory, this study filled the gap in the MCR model’s inability to identify the true width of corridors due to ignoring the randomness of biological migration. It determined the spatial range of ecological corridors and the specific locations of ecological nodes and barriers, providing a reference for solving ecological problems in Xishuangbanna, such as “rainforest fragmentation”.

Suggested Citation

  • Mengmeng Yan & Jilin Duan & Yubin Li & Yang Yu & Yu Wang & Jiawei Zhang & Yu Qiu, 2024. "Construction of the Ecological Security Pattern in Xishuangbanna Tropical Rainforest Based on Circuit Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-20, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3290-:d:1375991
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3290/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3290/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeff & Louviere, Jordan, 2000. "Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 289-302, November.
    2. Denghui Xu & Xianhua Guo & Teiji Watanabe & Kezhong Liang & Jianing Kou & Xiaolan Jiang, 2023. "Ecological Security Pattern Construction in Rural Settlements Based on Importance and Vulnerability of Ecosystem Services: A Case Study of the Southeast Region of Chongqing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, May.
    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. Martin Van Bueren & Jeff Bennett, 2004. "Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-32, March.
    2. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2008. "Testing for differences in benefit transfer values between state and regional frameworks," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-20.
    3. Chang, Jae Bong & Moon, Wanki & Balasubramanian, Siva K., 2009. "Health Concerns and Consumer Preferences for Soy Foods: Choice Modeling Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49591, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Girma T. Kassie & Awudu Abdulai & Clemens Wollny, 2009. "Valuing Traits of Indigenous Cows in Central Ethiopia," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 386-401, June.
    5. Bethany Cooper & Lin Crase & Darryl Maybery, 2017. "Pushing the Governance Boundaries: Making Transparent the Role of Water Utilities in Managing Urban Waterways," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(8), pages 2429-2446, June.
    6. del Saz Salazar, Salvador & Hernandez Sancho, Francesc & Sala Garrido, Ramon, 2009. "Estimación del valor económico de la calidad del agua de un río mediante una doble aproximación: una aplicación de los principios económicos de la Directiva Marco del Agua," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(01), pages 1-27.
    7. Jonelle Cleland & Abbie McCartney, 2010. "Putting the Spotlight on Attribute Definition: Divergence Between Experts and the Public," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1077, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    8. Lili Du & Yunbing Hou & Shuheng Zhong & Kai Qu, 2023. "Identification of Priority Areas for Ecological Restoration in Coal Mining Areas with a High Groundwater Table Based on Ecological Security Pattern and Ecological Vulnerability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2014. "Valuation framing and attribute scope variation in a choice experiment to asses the impacts of changing land use from agriculture to mining," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Macquarie, Australia 165888, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    10. Ekin Birol & Phoebe Koundouri, 2008. "Choice Experiments Informing Environmental Policy:A European Perspective," DEOS Working Papers 0801, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    11. Birol, Ekin & Karousakis, Katia & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2005. "Using A Choice Experiment To Estimate The Non-Use Values Of Wetlands: The Case Of Cheimaditida Wetland In Greece," Environmental Economy and Policy Research Discussion Papers 31934, University of Cambridge, Department of Land Economy.
    12. Guimarães, Maria Helena & Nunes, Luís Catela & Madureira, Lívia & Santos, José Lima & Boski, Tomasz & Dentinho, Tomaz, 2015. "Measuring birdwatchers preferences: A case for using online networks and mixed-mode surveys," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 102-113.
    13. Martínez-Jauregui, María & White, Piran C.L. & Touza, Julia & Soliño, Mario, 2019. "Untangling perceptions around indicators for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Rai, Rajesh Kumar & Scarborough, Helen, 2012. "Estimating the public benefits of mitigating damages caused by invasive plant species in a subsistence economy," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124421, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    15. Barano Siswa Sulistyawan & Budy P. Resosudarmo & Rene W. Verburg & Pita Verweij & Mia Amalia & Marija Bockarjova, 2022. "Economic valuation of water services related to protected forest management: a case of Bukit Batabuh in the RIMBA corridor, Central Sumatra, Indonesia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(7), pages 9330-9354, July.
    16. Hajkowicz, Stefan, 2006. "Multi-attributed environmental index construction," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 122-139, April.
    17. Kikulwe, Enoch M. & Birol, Ekin & Wesseler, Justus & Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin, 2013. "Benefits, costs, and consumer perceptions of the potential introduction of a fungus-resistant banana in Uganda and policy implications," IFPRI book chapters, in: Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin & Gruère, Guillaume P. & Sithole-Niang, Idah (ed.), Genetically modified crops in Africa: Economic and policy lessons from countries south of the Sahara, chapter 4, pages 99-141, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    18. Useche, Pilar & Blare, Trent, 2014. "The Sustainable Choice: How Gendered Difference in the Importance of Ecological Benefits Affect Production Decisions of Smallholder Cacao Producing Households in Ecuador," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 174285, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    20. Ching-Fu Chen & Pei-Chun Chen, 2012. "Exploring Tourists' Stated Preferences for Heritage Tourism Services – the Case of Tainan City, Taiwan," Tourism Economics, , vol. 18(2), pages 457-464, April.

    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:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3290-:d:1375991. 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.