IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i10p1084-d655834.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Expansion or Regulation more Critical for Existing Protected Areas? A Case Study on China’s Eco-Redline Policy in Chongqing Capital

Author

Listed:
  • Benhui Zhu

    (Graduate School of Agriculture and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8654, Japan)

  • Shizuka Hashimoto

    (Graduate School of Agriculture and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8654, Japan)

Abstract

Protecting areas of important ecological value is one of the main approaches to safeguarding the Earth’s ecosystems. However, the long-term effectiveness of protected areas is often uncertain. Focusing on China’s ecological conservation redline policy (Eco-redline policy) introduced in recent years, this study attempted to examine the effectiveness of alternative policy interventions and their implications on future land-use and land-cover (LULC) patterns. A scenario analysis was employed to elucidate the implications of different policy interventions for Chongqing capital, one of the most representative cities in China. These interventions considered the spatial extent of Eco-redline areas (ERAs) and the management intensity within these areas. LULC data for two different periods from 2000 (first year) to 2010 (end year) were derived from satellite images and then used for future (2050) LULC projections, incorporating the various policy interventions. Furthermore, several landscape indices, including the shape complexity, contrast, and aggregation of forest patches were calculated for each scenario. After comparing the scenarios, our analysis suggests that the current extent of ERAs may not be sufficient, although their management intensity is. Therefore, we suggest that during the optimization of the Eco-redline policy, ERAs are gradually increased while maintaining their current management intensity.

Suggested Citation

  • Benhui Zhu & Shizuka Hashimoto, 2021. "Is Expansion or Regulation more Critical for Existing Protected Areas? A Case Study on China’s Eco-Redline Policy in Chongqing Capital," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-25, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:10:p:1084-:d:655834
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/10/1084/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/10/1084/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guo, Xudong & Chang, Qing & Liu, Xiao & Bao, Huimin & Zhang, Yuepeng & Tu, Xueying & Zhu, Chunxia & Lv, Chunyan & Zhang, Yanyu, 2018. "Multi-dimensional eco-land classification and management for implementing the ecological redline policy in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 15-31.
    2. James E. M. Watson & Nigel Dudley & Daniel B. Segan & Marc Hockings, 2014. "The performance and potential of protected areas," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 67-73, November.
    3. Palomo, Ignacio & Martín-López, Berta & Potschin, Marion & Haines-Young, Roy & Montes, Carlos, 2013. "National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: Mapping ecosystem service flows," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 104-116.
    4. Chenxi Li & Xing Gao & Bao-Jie He & Jingyao Wu & Kening Wu, 2019. "Coupling Coordination Relationships between Urban-industrial Land Use Efficiency and Accessibility of Highway Networks: Evidence from Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, March.
    5. Chuansheng Wang & Guiyan Sun & Lijuan Dang, 2015. "Identifying Ecological Red Lines: A Case Study of the Coast in Liaoning Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-17, July.
    6. Zimu Jia & Bingran Ma & Jing Zhang & Weihua Zeng, 2018. "Simulating Spatial-Temporal Changes of Land-Use Based on Ecological Redline Restrictions and Landscape Driving Factors: A Case Study in Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, April.
    7. Zhanyu Zhang & Liting Sheng & Jie Yang & Xiao-An Chen & Lili Kong & Bakhtawar Wagan, 2015. "Effects of Land Use and Slope Gradient on Soil Erosion in a Red Soil Hilly Watershed of Southern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-17, October.
    8. Yang Bai & Christina P. Wong & Bo Jiang & Alice C. Hughes & Min Wang & Qing Wang, 2018. "Developing China’s Ecological Redline Policy using ecosystem services assessments for land use planning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. repec:rri:bkchap:17 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Chao Zhang & Dayi Lin & Lixia Wang & Haiguang Hao & Yuanyuan Li, 2022. "The Effects of the Ecological Conservation Redline in China: A Case Study in Anji County," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Ziqi Meng & Jinwei Dong & Erle C. Ellis & Graciela Metternicht & Yuanwei Qin & Xiao-Peng Song & Sara Löfqvist & Rachael D. Garrett & Xiaopeng Jia & Xiangming Xiao, 2023. "Post-2020 biodiversity framework challenged by cropland expansion in protected areas," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 758-768, July.
    3. Bo Jiang & Yuanyuan Chen & Yang Bai & Xibao Xu, 2019. "Supply–Demand Coupling Mechanisms for Policy Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-8, October.
    4. Jiang, Bo & Bai, Yang & Wong, Christina P. & Xu, Xibao & Alatalo, Juha M., 2019. "China’s ecological civilization program–Implementing ecological redline policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 111-114.
    5. Vassiliki Vlami & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & Stamatis Zogaris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2020. "Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Natura 2000 Network: Introducing Proxy Indicators and Conflict Risk in Greece," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-27, December.
    6. Liang, Xinyuan & Jin, Xiaobin & He, Jie & Wang, Xiaorui & Xu, Cuilan & Qiao, Guoliang & Zhang, Xiaolin & Zhou, Yinkang, 2022. "Impacts of land management practice strategy on regional ecosystems: Enlightenment from ecological redline adjustment in Jiangsu, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    7. Roux, Dirk J. & Smith, M. Kyle S. & Smit, Izak P.J. & Freitag, Stefanie & Slabbert, Liandi & Mokhatla, Mohlamatsane M. & Hayes, Jessica & Mpapane, Nelsiwe P., 2020. "Cultural ecosystem services as complex outcomes of people–nature interactions in protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    8. Minghui Yang & Yu Xie, 2021. "Spatial Pattern Change and Ecosystem Service Value Dynamics of Ecological and Non-Ecological Redline Areas in Nanjing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Xie, Yu & Chen, Zhen & Boadu, Francis & Tang, HongJuan, 2022. "How does digital transformation affect agricultural enterprises’ pro-land behavior: The role of environmental protection cognition and cross-border search," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    10. Hongwei Guo & Ji Han & Lili Qian & Xinxin Long & Xiaoyin Sun, 2022. "Assessing the Potential Impacts of Urban Expansion on Hydrological Ecosystem Services in a Rapidly Urbanizing Lake Basin in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, April.
    11. Shakya, Bandana & Uddin, Kabir & Yi, Shaoliang & Bhatta, Laxmi Dutt & Lodhi, Mahendra Singh & Htun, Naing Zaw & Yang, Yongping, 2021. "Mapping of the ecosystem services flow from three protected areas in the far-eastern Himalayan Landscape: An impetus to regional cooperation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    12. Chung, Min Gon & Dietz, Thomas & Liu, Jianguo, 2018. "Global relationships between biodiversity and nature-based tourism in protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 11-23.
    13. Chunrong Mi & Liang Ma & Mengyuan Yang & Xinhai Li & Shai Meiri & Uri Roll & Oleksandra Oskyrko & Daniel Pincheira-Donoso & Lilly P. Harvey & Daniel Jablonski & Barbod Safaei-Mahroo & Hanyeh Ghaffari , 2023. "Global Protected Areas as refuges for amphibians and reptiles under climate change," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    14. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    15. Ming-Kuang Chung & Dau-Jye Lu & Bor-Wen Tsai & Kuei-Tien Chou, 2019. "Assessing Effectiveness of PPGIS on Protected Areas by Governance Quality: A Case Study of Community-Based Monitoring in Wu-Wei-Kang Wildlife Refuge, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, August.
    16. Cao, Jianjun & Wei, Chen & Adamowski, Jan F. & Zhou, Junju & Liu, Chunfang & Zhu, Guofeng & Dong, Xiaogang & Zhang, Xiaofang & Zhao, Huijun & Feng, Qi, 2020. "Could arid and semi-arid abandoned lands prove ecologically or economically valuable if they afford greater soil organic carbon storage than afforested lands in China’s Loess Plateau?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    17. Tingting Zhang & Dan He & Tian Kuang & Ke Chen, 2022. "Effect of Rural Human Settlement Environment around Nature Reserves on Farmers’ Well-Being: A Field Survey Based on 1002 Farmer Households around Six Nature Reserves in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-18, May.
    18. Mengzhu Liu & Leilei Min & Jingjing Zhao & Yanjun Shen & Hongwei Pei & Hongjuan Zhang & Yali Li, 2021. "The Impact of Land Use Change on Water-Related Ecosystem Services in the Bashang Area of Hebei Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    19. González-García, Alberto & Palomo, Ignacio & González, José A. & López, César A. & Montes, Carlos, 2020. "Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    20. Víctor García-Díez & Marina García-Llorente & José A. González, 2020. "Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Madrid: Insights for Landscape Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.

    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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:10:p:1084-:d:655834. 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.