IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i12p2130-d1292905.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Spatial Protection and Governance of Territories Based on the Ecological Product Supply: A Case Study in Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, China

Author

Listed:
  • Wenying Peng

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Xiaojuan Yuchi

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Yue Sun

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Ziyi Shan

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China)

Abstract

Territory space is an ecological resource carrier and place for human development. Human activities and ecological systems are the basis of ecological product supply. Promoting territories’ spatial protection and governance by improving the supply of ecological products is very important. In this study, we established an ecological product supply capacity evaluation index system involving three types of ecological products, i.e., ecological environmental products, ecological material products, and ecological cultural products. For the case of the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region, we comprehensively used principal component analysis, the equivalent factor method, and the entropy method to evaluate the supply capacity of ecological products from 2011 to 2021. Then, we analyzed the spatio-temporal pattern, combining the natural breakpoint and quantile classification methods, and analyzed the obstacle factors using the obstacle degree model of ecological supply. The results show that the supply capacity of different ecological products in each city are closely related to their ecological resource endowment. The supply capacity of ecological products exhibited an upward trend, with the highest ecological environmental product supply being relatively smaller than the ecological material product supply, while the largest growth rate was for ecological cultural product supply. The supply capacity of different ecological products varied across cities over time and displayed noticeable spatial differentiation. The main obstacle factors included eco-land, eco-tourism, eco-leisure, park green space, and fishery products, although there were variations among cities. Finally, based on the level, spatial-temporal pattern, and obstacle factors of ecological product supply, we proposed strategies for territory spatial protection and governance from the perspectives of the integrated protection of elements, structural regulation, and systematic governance. The results reflected the ecological functional heterogeneity of the territory space, which can provide spatial planning guidance for sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenying Peng & Xiaojuan Yuchi & Yue Sun & Ziyi Shan, 2023. "The Spatial Protection and Governance of Territories Based on the Ecological Product Supply: A Case Study in Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-21, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:12:p:2130-:d:1292905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/12/2130/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/12/2130/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yang Zhang & Zijun Ma & Meng Sun & Jianing Song & Yang Yang & Qiang Li & Ying Jing, 2023. "Quantitatively Evaluating the Ecological Product Value of Nine Provinces in the Yellow River Basin from the Perspective of the Dual-Carbon Strategy," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    3. Beery, Thomas & Stålhammar, Sanna & Jönsson, K. Ingemar & Wamsler, Christine & Bramryd, Torleif & Brink, Ebba & Ekelund, Nils & Johansson, Michael & Palo, Thomas & Schubert, Per, 2016. "Perceptions of the ecosystem services concept: Opportunities and challenges in the Swedish municipal context," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 123-130.
    4. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Jiayi Zhou & Kangning Xiong & Qi Wang & Jiuhan Tang & Li Lin, 2022. "A Review of Ecological Assets and Ecological Products Supply: Implications for the Karst Rocky Desertification Control," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-20, August.
    7. Henry Kaiser, 1970. "A second generation little jiffy," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 35(4), pages 401-415, December.
    8. Wen Zhou & Yantao Xi & Liang Zhai & Cheng Li & Jingyang Li & Wei Hou, 2023. "Zoning for Spatial Conservation and Restoration Based on Ecosystem Services in Highly Urbanized Region: A Case Study in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, March.
    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. Maczka, Krzysztof & Chmielewski, Piotr & Jeran, Agnieszka & Matczak, Piotr & van Riper, Carena J., 2019. "The ecosystem services concept as a tool for public participation in management of Poland’s Natura 2000 network," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 173-183.
    2. Stephen ES Crook & Arielle Levine & David Lopez-Carr, 2021. "Perceptions and Application of the Ecosystem Services Approach among Pacific Northwest National Forest Managers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, January.
    3. 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).
    4. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    5. Anna M. Hansson & Eja Pedersen & Niklas P. E. Karlsson & Stefan E. B. Weisner, 2023. "Barriers and drivers for sustainable business model innovation based on a radical farmland change scenario," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8083-8106, August.
    6. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    7. Makovníková Jarmila & Pálka Boris & Kološta Stanislav & Flaška Filip & Orságová Katarína & Spišiaková Mária, 2020. "Non-Monetary Assessment and Mapping of the Potential of Agroecosystem Services in Rural Slovakia," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 12(2), pages 257-276, June.
    8. Jones, Sarah K. & Boundaogo, Mansour & DeClerck, Fabrice A. & Estrada-Carmona, Natalia & Mirumachi, Naho & Mulligan, Mark, 2019. "Insights into the importance of ecosystem services to human well-being in reservoir landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    9. Chen, Haojie & Costanza, Robert & Kubiszewski, Ida, 2022. "Legitimacy and limitations of valuing the oxygen production of ecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Heinze, Alan & Bongers, Frans & Ramírez Marcial, Neptalí & García Barrios, Luis & Kuyper, Thomas W., 2020. "The montane multifunctional landscape: How stakeholders in a biosphere reserve derive benefits and address trade-offs in ecosystem service supply," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    12. Heinze, Alan & Bongers, Frans & Ramírez Marcial, Neptalí & García Barrios, Luis E. & Kuyper, Thomas W., 2022. "Farm diversity and fine scales matter in the assessment of ecosystem services and land use scenarios," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Martin-Ortega, Julia & Young, Dylan M. & Glenk, Klaus & Baird, Andy J. & Jones, Laurence & Rowe, Edwin C. & Evans, Chris D. & Dallimer, Martin & Reed, Mark S., 2021. "Linking ecosystem changes to their social outcomes: Lost in translation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    15. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    16. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Spatial dynamics of biophysical trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services in the Himalayas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    17. Pei, Sha & Zhang, Chunxiao & Liu, Chunlan & Liu, Xiaona & Xie, Gaodi, 2019. "Forest ecological compensation standard based on spatial flowing of water services in the upper reaches of Miyun Reservoir, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    18. Stępniewska, Małgorzata & Lupa, Piotr & Mizgajski, Andrzej, 2018. "Drivers of the ecosystem services approach in Poland and perception by practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PA), pages 59-67.
    19. Gutiérrez-Arellano, Claudia & Mulligan, Mark, 2020. "Small-sized protected areas contribute more per unit area to tropical crop pollination than large protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    20. Jaung, Wanggi & Carrasco, L. Roman & Bae, Jae Soo, 2019. "Integration of ecosystem services as public values within election promises: evidence from the 2018 local elections in Korea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(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:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:12:p:2130-:d:1292905. 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.