IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i11p2007-d1272915.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study on the Ecosystem Service Supply–Demand Relationship and Development Strategies in Mountains in Southwest China Based on Different Spatial Scales

Author

Listed:
  • Yahui Wang

    (Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China
    Lhasa Plateau Ecosystem Research Station, Key Laboratory of Ecosystem Network Observation and Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Erfu Dai

    (Lhasa Plateau Ecosystem Research Station, Key Laboratory of Ecosystem Network Observation and Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Yue Qi

    (Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Yao Fan

    (Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

Abstract

Mountainous regions typically exhibit a strained relationship between humans and the land, with noticeable spatial differences in the supply and demand of ecosystem services (ESS and ESD, respectively). ESS and ESD display varying characteristics at different spatial scales. Research on ESS and ESD at multiple scales can aid regional development and efficient ecosystem management. However, the current research focuses on ESS and neglects the ES characteristic changes at different scales. This study concentrates on the Hengduan Mountain region in southwest China. It evaluated ESS and ESD, analyzed the spatial matching relationship, and proposed a corresponding development strategy. The results demonstrated four key findings. First, ESS displayed an inverse spatial distribution on the two scales and was lower in the north and higher in the south at the raster scale. Over the period 2000–2020, ESS exhibited a pattern of initial increase, followed by a decrease, albeit with varying spatial patterns. Changes in land use primarily drove these ESS changes. Second, ESD increased from northwest to southeast on both scales and showed a rising trend over time. Third, at the grid scale, the low supply and low demand (L-L) region is primarily situated in the northwestern part, and it is crucial to prevent grassland degradation and manage grazing intensity. The low supply and high demand (L-H) region is located in the southeast, where the protection of cultivated land, along with comprehensive control of rocky desertification and debris flow, should be prioritized. High supply and low demand (H-L) are found in the northern mountain area, where paying attention to soil erosion control is essential. For areas with high supply and high demand (H-H) types, efforts should be directed toward maintaining forest habitat integrity. Fourth, on the county scale, L-H types should focus on realizing the ecosystem service value and implementing ecological agriculture. H-L counties can appropriately develop economic activities. Simultaneously, ecological compensation should be conducted among counties.

Suggested Citation

  • Yahui Wang & Erfu Dai & Yue Qi & Yao Fan, 2023. "Study on the Ecosystem Service Supply–Demand Relationship and Development Strategies in Mountains in Southwest China Based on Different Spatial Scales," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:11:p:2007-:d:1272915
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/11/2007/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/11/2007/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wang, Yahui & Dai, Erfu & Yin, Le & Ma, Liang, 2018. "Land use/land cover change and the effects on ecosystem services in the Hengduan Mountain region, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 55-67.
    2. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    3. Shuai Tong & Jianjie Gao & Fengyu Wang & Xiang Ji, 2023. "Research on Township Industry Development under GEP Accounting—A Case Study of Hanwang Town in Xuzhou City," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, July.
    4. Jin, Ming & Han, Xulong & Li, Mingyu, 2023. "Trade-offs of multiple urban ecosystem services based on land-use scenarios in the Tumen River cross-border area," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 482(C).
    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. Xiaoyu Li & Shudan Gong & Qingdong Shi & Yuan Fang, 2023. "A Review of Ecosystem Services Based on Bibliometric Analysis: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Yiting Chen & Zhanbin Li & Peng Li & Yixin Zhang & Hailiang Liu & Jinjin Pan, 2022. "Impacts and Projections of Land Use and Demographic Changes on Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in the Guanzhong Region, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, March.
    3. Liye Wang & Xinli Ke & Assem Abu Hatab, 2020. "Trade-Offs between Economic Benefits and Ecosystem Services Value under Three Cropland Protection Scenarios for Wuhan City in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, April.
    4. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    5. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    6. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    7. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    8. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    9. Robbie Maris & Mark Holmes, 2023. "Economic Growth Theory and Natural Resource Constraints: A Stocktake and Critical Assessment," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(2), pages 255-268, June.
    10. van der Hoff, Richard & Nascimento, Nathália & Fabrício-Neto, Ailton & Jaramillo-Giraldo, Carolina & Ambrosio, Geanderson & Arieira, Julia & Afonso Nobre, Carlos & Rajão, Raoni, 2022. "Policy-oriented ecosystem services research on tropical forests in South America: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    11. Joel C. Creed & Laura Sol Aranda & Júlia Gomes de Sousa & Caio Barros Brito do Bem & Beatriz Sant’Anna Vasconcelos Marafiga Dutra & Marianna Lanari & Virgínia Eduarda de Sousa & Karine M. Magalhães & , 2023. "A Synthesis of Provision and Impact in Seagrass Ecosystem Services in the Brazilian Southwest Atlantic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-19, October.
    12. Wanxu Chen & Guangqing Chi & Jiangfeng Li, 2020. "Ecosystem Services and Their Driving Forces in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-19, May.
    13. O'Sullivan, Jane N., 2020. "The social and environmental influences of population growth rate and demographic pressure deserve greater attention in ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    14. Nicolás Ruiz, Néstor & Suárez Alonso, María Luisa & Vidal-Abarca, María Rosario, 2021. "Contributions of dry rivers to human well-being: A global review for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    15. Moreno-Llorca, R. & Vaz, A.S. & Herrero, J. & Millares, A. & Bonet-García, F.J. & Alcaraz-Segura, D., 2020. "Multi-scale evolution of ecosystem services’ supply in Sierra Nevada (Spain): An assessment over the last half-century," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    16. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    17. Lau, Jacqueline D. & Hicks, Christina C. & Gurney, Georgina G. & Cinner, Joshua E., 2018. "Disaggregating ecosystem service values and priorities by wealth, age, and education," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 91-98.
    18. Shujun Liu & Xinzhuan Yao & Degang Zhao & Litang Lu, 2021. "Evaluation of the ecological benefits of tea gardens in Meitan County, China, using the InVEST model," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7140-7155, May.
    19. Dai, Xuhuan & Li, Bo & Zheng, Hua & Yang, Yanzheng & Yang, Zihan & Peng, Chenchen, 2023. "Can sedentarization decrease the dependence of pastoral livelihoods on ecosystem services?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    20. Egor Selivanov & Petra Hlaváčková, 2021. "Methods for monetary valuation of ecosystem services: A scoping review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(11), pages 499-511.

    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:12:y:2023:i:11:p:2007-:d:1272915. 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.