IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i16p8356-d609961.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Landscape Dynamics Improved Recreation Service of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China

Author

Listed:
  • Dengyue Zhao

    (Research Center for Spatial Planning and Human-Environment System Simulation, School of Geography and Information Engineering, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430078, China)

  • Mingzhu Xiao

    (School of Arts and Communication, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Chunbo Huang

    (Research Center for Spatial Planning and Human-Environment System Simulation, School of Geography and Information Engineering, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430078, China
    Hubei Engineering Technology Research Center for Forestry Information, College of Horticulture and Forestry Sciences, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Yuan Liang

    (School of Arts and Communication, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Ziyue An

    (Research Center for Spatial Planning and Human-Environment System Simulation, School of Geography and Information Engineering, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430078, China)

Abstract

Spatio-temporal variations of recreation service not only could help to understand the impact of cultural services on human well-being but also provides theoretical and technical support for regional landscape management. However, previous studies have avoided deeply quantifying and analyzing it or have simply focused on assessing recreational service at a single period in time. In this study, we used the InVEST model to evaluate the spatio-temporal variations of recreation service in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area and demonstrated the impact of recreation service on landscape dynamics. The results demonstrated that recreation service increased significantly and presented a significant spatial heterogeneity. Although afforestation and urban expansion both could significantly increase recreation service, the recreation service proxy of the non-vegetation landscape is far higher than that of the vegetation landscape. This finding indicated that human landscape is more attractive to tourists than the natural landscape, so we recommend to strengthen the infrastructure construction for enhancing the accessibility of natural landscapes. Moreover, we propose other constructive suggestions and landscape-design solutions for promoting recreation service. This study shifted the static environmental health assessment to the analysis of recreation service dynamics, bridging the regulatory mechanisms of ecosystem services involved in cultural services.

Suggested Citation

  • Dengyue Zhao & Mingzhu Xiao & Chunbo Huang & Yuan Liang & Ziyue An, 2021. "Landscape Dynamics Improved Recreation Service of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-16, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:16:p:8356-:d:609961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/16/8356/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/16/8356/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heagney, E.C. & Rose, J.M. & Ardeshiri, A. & KovaÄ , M., 2018. "Optimising recreation services from protected areas – Understanding the role of natural values, built infrastructure and contextual factors," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 358-370.
    2. Thiele, Julia & Albert, Christian & Hermes, Johannes & von Haaren, Christina, 2020. "Assessing and quantifying offered cultural ecosystem services of German river landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    3. Prete, Carmelina & Cozzi, Mario & Viccaro, Mauro & Sijtsma, Frans & Romano, Severino, 2019. "Social hotspots mapping: a participatory approach for identifying cultural ecosystem services of forests," 2019 Eighth AIEAA Conference, June 13-14, Pistoia, Italy 300919, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    4. Shoyama, Kikuko & Yamagata, Yoshiki, 2016. "Local perception of ecosystem service bundles in the Kushiro watershed, Northern Japan – Application of a public participation GIS tool," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 139-149.
    5. Malinga, Rebecka & Gordon, Line J. & Jewitt, Graham & Lindborg, Regina, 2015. "Mapping ecosystem services across scales and continents – A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 57-63.
    6. Kosanic, Aleksandra & Petzold, Jan, 2020. "A systematic review of cultural ecosystem services and human wellbeing," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    7. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Mocior, Ewelina & Hibner, Joanna & Tokarczyk, Natalia, 2020. "Human perceptions of cultural ecosystem services of semi-natural grasslands: The influence of plant communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    8. Jun Tu & Shiwei Luo & Yongfeng Yang & Puyan Qin & Pengwei Qi & Qiaoqiao Li, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Evolution and the Influencing Factors of Tourism-Based Social-Ecological System Vulnerability in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    10. Qipeng Liao & Zhe Wang & Chunbo Huang, 2020. "Green Infrastructure Offset the Negative Ecological Effects of Urbanization and Storing Water in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-19, November.
    11. Schirpke, Uta & Scolozzi, Rocco & Dean, Graeme & Haller, Andreas & Jäger, Hieronymus & Kister, Jutta & Kovács, Barbara & Sarmiento, Fausto O. & Sattler, Birgit & Schleyer, Christian, 2020. "Cultural ecosystem services in mountain regions: Conceptualising conflicts among users and limitations of use," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    12. Schägner, Jan Philipp & Brander, Luke & Paracchini, Maria Luisa & Maes, Joachim & Gollnow, Florian & Bertzky, Bastian, 2018. "Spatial dimensions of recreational ecosystem service values: A review of meta-analyses and a combination of meta-analytic value-transfer and GIS," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 395-409.
    13. M. O. Hill, 1974. "Correspondence Analysis: A Neglected Multivariate Method," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 23(3), pages 340-354, November.
    14. Meng, Shiting & Huang, Qingxu & Zhang, Ling & He, Chunyang & Inostroza, Luis & Bai, Yansong & Yin, Dan, 2020. "Matches and mismatches between the supply of and demand for cultural ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: A case study in the Guanting Reservoir basin, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    15. Scholte, Samantha S.K. & van Teeffelen, Astrid J.A. & Verburg, Peter H., 2015. "Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 67-78.
    16. Richards, Daniel R. & Tunçer, Bige, 2018. "Using image recognition to automate assessment of cultural ecosystem services from social media photographs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 318-325.
    17. Dou, Yuehan & Zhen, Lin & De Groot, Rudolf & Du, Bingzhen & Yu, Xiubo, 2017. "Assessing the importance of cultural ecosystem services in urban areas of Beijing municipality," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 79-90.
    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. Menglin Ou & Jingye Li & Xin Fan & Jian Gong, 2022. "Compound Optimization of Territorial Spatial Structure and Layout at the City Scale from “Production–Living–Ecological” Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Menglin Ou & Xiaochun Lai & Jian Gong, 2022. "Territorial Pattern Evolution and Its Comprehensive Carrying Capacity Evaluation in the Coastal Area of Beibu Gulf, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-21, August.
    3. Xin Fan & Haoran Yu & Damien Sinonmatohou Tiando & Yuejing Rong & Wenxu Luo & Chan Eme & Shengya Ou & Jiangfeng Li & Zhe Liang, 2021. "Impacts of Human Activities on Ecosystem Service Value in Arid and Semi-Arid Ecological Regions of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Shuangshuang Liu & Qipeng Liao & Mingzhu Xiao & Dengyue Zhao & Chunbo Huang, 2022. "Spatial and Temporal Variations of Habitat Quality and Its Response of Landscape Dynamic in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Xiangnan Fan & Yuning Cheng, 2023. "Assessing a Tourism City from an Ecosystem Services Perspective: The Evaluation of Tourism Service in Liyang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-22, 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. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "A systematic review on subjective well-being benefits associated with cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    2. Liangjian Yang & Kaijun Cao, 2022. "Cultural Ecosystem Services Research Progress and Future Prospects: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    3. Depietri, Yaella & Ghermandi, Andrea & Campisi-Pinto, Salvatore & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2021. "Public participation GIS versus geolocated social media data to assess urban cultural ecosystem services: Instances of complementarity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    4. Calcagni, Fulvia & Nogué Batallé, Júlia & Baró, Francesc & Langemeyer, Johannes, 2022. "A tag is worth a thousand pictures: A framework for an empirically grounded typology of relational values through social media," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    5. Chowdhury, Koushik & Behera, Bhagirath, 2021. "Traditional water bodies and cultural ecosystem services: Experiences from rural West Bengal, India," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    6. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    7. Manley, Kyle & Nyelele, Charity & Egoh, Benis N., 2022. "A review of machine learning and big data applications in addressing ecosystem service research gaps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    8. Lavorel, Sandra & Rey, Pierre-Louis & Grigulis, Karl & Zawada, Mégane & Byczek, Coline, 2020. "Interactions between outdoor recreation and iconic terrestrial vertebrates in two French alpine national parks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    9. Fontana, Veronika & Ebner, Manuel & Schirpke, Uta & Ohndorf, Markus & Pritsch, Hanna & Tappeiner, Ulrike & Kurmayer, Rainer, 2023. "An integrative approach to evaluate ecosystem services of mountain lakes using multi-criteria decision analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    10. Meng, Shiting & Huang, Qingxu & Zhang, Ling & He, Chunyang & Inostroza, Luis & Bai, Yansong & Yin, Dan, 2020. "Matches and mismatches between the supply of and demand for cultural ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: A case study in the Guanting Reservoir basin, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    11. Richter, Franziska & Jan, Pierrick & El Benni, Nadja & Lüscher, Andreas & Buchmann, Nina & Klaus, Valentin H., 2021. "A guide to assess and value ecosystem services of grasslands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    12. Zhang, Guanshi & Zheng, Duo & Xie, Long & Zhang, Xiu & Wu, Hongjuan & Li, Sen, 2021. "Mapping changes in the value of ecosystem services in the Yangtze River Middle Reaches Megalopolis, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    13. Robert Huber & Robert Finger, 2020. "A Meta‐analysis of the Willingness to Pay for Cultural Services from Grasslands in Europe," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 357-383, June.
    14. Oleksandr Karasov & Stien Heremans & Mart Külvik & Artem Domnich & Igor Chervanyov, 2020. "On How Crowdsourced Data and Landscape Organisation Metrics Can Facilitate the Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services: An Estonian Case Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, May.
    15. Huai, Songyao & Chen, Fen & Liu, Song & Canters, Frank & Van de Voorde, Tim, 2022. "Using social media photos and computer vision to assess cultural ecosystem services and landscape features in urban parks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    16. Wei Jiang & Rainer Marggraf, 2021. "Ecosystems in Books: Evaluating the Inspirational Service of the Weser River in Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, June.
    17. Ebner, Manuel & Fontana, Veronika & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem services of mountain lakes in the European Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    18. Fox, Nathan & Graham, Laura J. & Eigenbrod, Felix & Bullock, James M. & Parks, Katherine E., 2021. "Enriching social media data allows a more robust representation of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    19. Indunee Welivita & Simon Willcock & Amy Lewis & Dilshaad Bundhoo & Tim Brewer & Sarah Cooper & Kenneth Lynch & Sneha Mekala & Prajna Paramita Mishra & Kongala Venkatesh & Dolores Rey Vicario & Paul Hu, 2021. "Evidence of Similarities in Ecosystem Service Flow across the Rural-Urban Spectrum," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-38, April.
    20. Schirpke, Uta & Ghermandi, Andrea & Sinclair, Michael & Van Berkel, Derek & Fox, Nathan & Vargas, Leonardo & Willemen, Louise, 2023. "Emerging technologies for assessing ecosystem services: A synthesis of opportunities and challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(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:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:16:p:8356-:d:609961. 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.