IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i7p1073-d862215.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Land-Use Change on the Pollination Services for Litchi and Longan Orchards: A Case Study of Huizhou, China

Author

Listed:
  • Qinhua Ke

    (School of Public Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Shuang Chen

    (School of Public Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Dandan Zhao

    (School of Public Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Minting Li

    (School of Public Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Chuanzhun Sun

    (School of Public Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China
    Key Laboratory of Natural Resources Monitoring in Tropical and Subtropical Area of South China, Ministry of Natural Resources, Guangzhou 510815, China)

Abstract

Land-use change has a significant impact on the structure and function of ecosystems and is an important reason for the imbalance between the supply and demand of ecosystem services. Pollination services are indispensable functions of ecosystems. In recent years, land-use change has caused a decline in the abundance of pollinators, thereby affecting the supply of pollination services, which has been a major concern for governments and scholars. Currently, there is an insufficient exploration of the impact mechanism of land-use change on pollination services. The application of a pollination service evaluation model based on land-use data uses a large amount of empirical data, which greatly affects the accuracy of regional evaluation results. This study uses Huizhou as a representative example. Remote sensing images from 2015 and 2019 were used to interpret the land-use data of the region, and the spatiotemporal changes in the land use were then analyzed. Due to their high pollination dependence, litchi and longan were selected as the research objects. Basic data such as the main pollinator species of litchi and longan and floral plant species were obtained through field sampling surveys. The InVEST model was used to evaluate the abundance of pollinators in litchi and longan orchards, and the abundance of pollinators was used to represent the value of pollination services in litchi and longan orchards. Then, the Hotspot analysis method was used to analyze the change in the spatial pattern of the pollinator abundance in litchi and longan orchards. The main influencing factors of pollination service in litchi and longan orchards were analyzed by a Geographical detector. Finally, we have explored the impact mechanism of land-use change on pollination services. The following are the results of this research. The pollinator abundance in the orchards of litchi and longan and their buffer zones in Huizhou decreased by 6.64% and 13.94% from 2015 to 2019, respectively. The wild bee abundance in forest land and rainfed cropland decreased by varying degrees. The spatial aggregation characteristics of pollinator abundance in litchi and longan orchards demonstrated an increase in cold spots, whereas the hot spots decreased and were more dispersed. In the study area, the area change and land-use change of natural or semi-natural habitats, such as forest land, rainfed cropland, and grassland, affected the pollination services for litchi and longan orchards. Within the types of changing land-use, the change of forest land has the greatest impact on litchi and longan pollination services. The impact degrees of Forest land area, rainfed cropland area, area under litchi and longan orchards, and forest landscape fragmentation on the pollination services for litchi and longan orchards were 0.20, 0.16, 0.21, and 0.26, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Qinhua Ke & Shuang Chen & Dandan Zhao & Minting Li & Chuanzhun Sun, 2022. "Effects of Land-Use Change on the Pollination Services for Litchi and Longan Orchards: A Case Study of Huizhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:7:p:1073-:d:862215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/7/1073/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/7/1073/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grazia Zulian & Joachim Maes & Maria Luisa Paracchini, 2013. "Linking Land Cover Data and Crop Yields for Mapping and Assessment of Pollination Services in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    3. Xue Zhang & Lingyun Liao & Zhengduo Xu & Jiayu Zhang & Mengwei Chi & Siren Lan & Qiaochun Gan, 2022. "Interactive Effects on Habitat Quality Using InVEST and GeoDetector Models in Wenzhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-19, April.
    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. Io Carydi & Athanasios Koutsianas & Marios Desyllas, 2023. "People, Crops, and Bee Farming: Landscape Models for a Symbiotic Network in Greece," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-25, February.

    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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. repec:dgr:rugcds:200218 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Barbara Langlois & Vincent Martinet, 2023. "Defining cost-effective ways to improve ecosystem services provision in agroecosystems," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 123-165, June.
    6. 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.
    7. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    8. Shrestha, Ram K. & Seidl, Andrew F. & Moraes, Andre S., 2002. "Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 289-299, August.
    9. Hendriksen, Astrid & Jouanneau, Charlène & Koss, Rebecca & Raakjaer, Jesper, 2014. "Fishing for opinions: Stakeholder views on MSFD implementation in European Seas," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 353-363.
    10. Sinden, John Alfred & Griffith, Garry, 2007. "Combining economic and ecological arguments to value the environmental gains from control of 35 weeds in Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 396-408, March.
    11. Larson, Silva & Stoeckl, Natalie & Neil, Barbara & Welters, Riccardo, 2013. "Using resident perceptions of values associated with the Australian Tropical Rivers to identify policy and management priorities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 9-18.
    12. Fan, Fan & Henriksen, Christian Bugge & Porter, John, 2016. "Valuation of ecosystem services in organic cereal crop production systems with different management practices in relation to organic matter input," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 117-127.
    13. Vorstius, Anne Carolin & Spray, Christopher J., 2015. "A comparison of ecosystem services mapping tools for their potential to support planning and decision-making on a local scale," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 75-83.
    14. Weesie, Peter & Andel, J. van, 2003. "On biodiversity and its valuation," CDS Research Reports 200218, University of Groningen, Centre for Development Studies (CDS).
    15. Giulia Capotorti & Simone Valeri & Arianna Giannini & Valerio Minorenti & Mariagrazia Piarulli & Paolo Audisio, 2023. "On the Role of Natural and Induced Landscape Heterogeneity for the Support of Pollinators: A Green Infrastructure Perspective Applied in a Peri-Urban System," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-29, January.
    16. Natacha LASKOWSKI, 2013. "Optimal allocation of wetlands: Study on conflict between agriculture and fishery," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2013-07, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    17. Xichen Ge & Liang Sun & Jiongzhen Chen & Shuangrong Cai, 2022. "Land Utilization, Landscape Pattern, and Ecological Efficiency: An Empirical Analysis of Discrimination and Overlap from Suining, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    18. Haojun Xiong & Haozhi Hu & Pingyang Han & Min Wang, 2023. "Integrating Landscape Ecological Risks and Ecosystem Service Values into the Ecological Security Pattern Identification of Wuhan Urban Agglomeration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-21, February.
    19. Ruijs, A. & Wossink, A. & Kortelainen, M. & Alkemade, R. & Schulp, C.J.E., 2013. "Trade-off analysis of ecosystem services in Eastern Europe," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 82-94.
    20. Alexander H DeGolia & Elizabeth H T Hiroyasu & Sarah E Anderson, 2019. "Economic losses or environmental gains? Framing effects on public support for environmental management," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, July.
    21. 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.

    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:11:y:2022:i:7:p:1073-:d:862215. 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.