IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i5p949-d1131384.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiscale Analysis of the Effects of Landscape Pattern on the Trade-Offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Southern Zhejiang Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Lilian Ding

    (College of Environmental & Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
    Zhejiang Development & Planning Institute, Hangzhou 310030, China)

  • Yan Liao

    (Zhejiang Development & Planning Institute, Hangzhou 310030, China)

  • Congmou Zhu

    (Department of Land Resources Management, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou 310018, China)

  • Qiwei Zheng

    (Zhejiang Development & Planning Institute, Hangzhou 310030, China)

  • Ke Wang

    (College of Environmental & Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

Abstract

Identifying the trade-offs and synergies (TOSs) of ecosystem services (ESs) and their responses to landscape patterns at various scales, especially in mountainous areas, could benefit the strategies of ES management and landscape optimization. In this study, the southern Zhejiang Province, a hilly region in eastern China, was chosen as the study area. Five ESs, including food production (FP), carbon sequestration (CS), flood mitigation (FM), water conservation (WC), and soil retention (SR) in 2020 were quantified. The TOSs of these ESs were identified at four spatial scales (i.e., grid, watershed, town, and county scales) through Pearson correlation analysis and the spatial overlay method. The effects of landscape patterns on the TOSs of ESs were analyzed by applying a logistic regression model. Results showed that FP and other ESs were trade-offs, while the other ES pairs were synergies. Spatial overlay results showed that weak synergies increased significantly, while strong synergies decreased significantly with the increase of the scale. The direction of the influence of landscape pattern on TOSs did not change, but the magnitudes of the impacts were scale-dependent. Landscape composition (i.e., cropland%, forest%, construction land%) had more significant effects on the trade-offs of ESs than spatial configuration (i.e., LSI, PD, COHE, and SHDI). The magnitudes of impact of landscape composition were strengthened at larger scales, while the effects of landscape configuration on the TOSs of ESs became complex as the scale changed. The results of this study could contribute to understanding how landscape patterns affect TOSs across scales, which will promote the hierarchical governance of ESs in mountainous areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Lilian Ding & Yan Liao & Congmou Zhu & Qiwei Zheng & Ke Wang, 2023. "Multiscale Analysis of the Effects of Landscape Pattern on the Trade-Offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Southern Zhejiang Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:5:p:949-:d:1131384
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/5/949/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/5/949/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fatemeh Mohammadyari & Ardavan Zarandian & Mir Mehrdad Mirsanjari & Jurate Suziedelyte Visockiene & Egle Tumeliene, 2023. "Modelling Impact of Urban Expansion on Ecosystem Services: A Scenario-Based Approach in a Mixed Natural/Urbanised Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Wenbo Cai & Wanting Peng, 2021. "Exploring Spatiotemporal Variation of Carbon Storage Driven by Land Use Policy in the Yangtze River Delta Region," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, October.
    3. Xiaoke Zhao & Xuhui Ding & Liang Li, 2021. "Research on Environmental Regulation, Technological Innovation and Green Transformation of Manufacturing Industry in the Yangtze River Economic Belt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-15, September.
    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. Chisholm, Ryan A., 2010. "Trade-offs between ecosystem services: Water and carbon in a biodiversity hotspot," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1973-1987, August.
    6. Meseret B. Addisie & Gashaw Molla & Menberu Teshome & Gebiaw T. Ayele, 2022. "Evaluating Biophysical Conservation Practices with Dynamic Land Use and Land Cover in the Highlands of Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Wu, Yinyin & Wang, Ping & Liu, Xin & Chen, Jiandong & Song, Malin, 2020. "Analysis of regional carbon allocation and carbon trading based on net primary productivity in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    8. Lilian Ding & Qiyao Li & Jianjun Tang & Jiangfei Wang & Xin Chen, 2019. "Linking Land Use Metrics Measured in Aquatic–Terrestrial Interfaces to Water Quality of Reservoir-Based Water Sources in Eastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    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. 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).
    2. Hearnshaw, Edward J.S. & Cullen, Ross, 2010. "The Sustainability and Cost-Effectiveness of Water Storage Projects on Canterbury Rivers: The Opihi River Case," 2010 Conference, August 26-27, 2010, Nelson, New Zealand 97265, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    4. Haoran Zhang & Rongxia Zhang & Guomin Li & Wei Li & Yongrok Choi, 2020. "Has China’s Emission Trading System Achieved the Development of a Low-Carbon Economy in High-Emission Industrial Subsectors?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-20, July.
    5. Brunet, Lucas & Tuomisaari, Johanna & Lavorel, Sandra & Crouzat, Emilie & Bierry, Adeline & Peltola, Taru & Arpin, Isabelle, 2018. "Actionable knowledge for land use planning: Making ecosystem services operational," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 27-34.
    6. Gerd Lupp & Bernhard Förster & Valerie Kantelberg & Tim Markmann & Johannes Naumann & Carolina Honert & Marc Koch & Stephan Pauleit, 2016. "Assessing the Recreation Value of Urban Woodland Using the Ecosystem Service Approach in Two Forests in the Munich Metropolitan Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    7. Ping Shen & Lijuan Wu & Ziwen Huo & Jiaying Zhang, 2023. "A Study on the Spatial Pattern of the Ecological Product Value of China’s County-Level Regions Based on GEP Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-18, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Brendan Fisher & Stephen Polasky & Thomas Sterner, 2011. "Conservation and Human Welfare: Economic Analysis of Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 151-159, February.
    10. Bhatta, Arun & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2011. "Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115350, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    11. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Tobias D. Ketterer, 2012. "Do Local Amenities Affect The Appeal Of Regions In Europe For Migrants?," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 535-561, October.
    12. Mohamed A. M. Abd Elbasit & Jasper Knight & Gang Liu & Majed M. Abu-Zreig & Rashid Hasaan, 2021. "Valuation of Ecosystem Services in South Africa, 2001–2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    13. Lamprinakis, L. & Rodriguez, D. G. P. & Prestvik, A. S. & Veidal, A. & Klimek, B., 2017. "31 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18461/pfsd.2017.1705 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON FOOD SYSTEM DYNAMICS A Mixed Methods Approach Towards Mapping and Economic Valuation of the Divici-Pojejena Wetland Ecosystem," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276889, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    14. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    15. Stapleton, L.M. & Hanna, P. & Ravenscroft, N. & Church, A., 2014. "A flexible ecosystem services proto-typology based on public opinion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 83-90.
    16. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    17. Vahid Amini Parsa & Esmail Salehi & Ahmad Reza Yavari & Peter M van Bodegom, 2019. "An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, August.
    18. Matzek, Virginia & Wilson, Kerrie A. & Kragt, Marit, 2019. "Mainstreaming of ecosystem services as a rationale for ecological restoration in Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 79-86.
    19. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.
    20. Bieling, Claudia & Plieninger, Tobias & Pirker, Heidemarie & Vogl, Christian R., 2014. "Linkages between landscapes and human well-being: An empirical exploration with short interviews," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 19-30.

    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:5:p:949-:d:1131384. 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.