IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i12p1985-d1526549.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Ecosystem Service Values into Urban Planning for Sustainable Development

Author

Listed:
  • Wenbo Cai

    (The Center for Modern Chinese City Studies, Institute of Urban Development, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
    State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environment Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shuangqing Rd. 18, Beijing 100085, China
    The Digital Engineering Technology Innovation Center for Ecological Governance of Land and Space Under the Ministry of Natural Resources, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China)

  • Chengji Shu

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environment Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shuangqing Rd. 18, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Li Lin

    (College of Landscape Architecture and Art, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China)

Abstract

Urbanization, despite driving regional economic growth, has led to significant disparities in development levels among cities. Many studies have made valuable suggestions for ecological conservation in economically underdeveloped regions. However, for medium-level cities with large economic development needs, the question of how to strike a balance between development and conservation in land development patterns is a critical issue to be addressed. By integrating ecosystem services assessment models and land use prediction models, we proposed a framework for guiding future land-use strategies based on ecosystem service values, using Jiaxing City as a case study. Firstly, we assessed and mapped the current status of ecosystem services value. Then, we simulated the land use distribution pattern and ecosystem services value under three development strategies: inertial development, cropland protection, and ecological development. Eventually, we determined the optimal urban land development pattern. The results showed that the total ecosystem service value for Jiaxing is CNY 124.82 billion, with climate regulation, water conservation, and flood mitigation contributing the most. The ecological development strategy yields the highest service value, with a 0.81% increase compared to the current situation, while the cropland protection and inertial development strategies result in decreases of 0.73% and 10.93%, respectively. Furthermore, the ecological strategy expands high-value service areas, concentrated in the northern river network and southern hilly regions. These findings offer valuable insights for urban planners and policymakers in formulating sustainable strategies and integrating ecosystem service values into economic policies to promote urban development.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenbo Cai & Chengji Shu & Li Lin, 2024. "Integrating Ecosystem Service Values into Urban Planning for Sustainable Development," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:12:p:1985-:d:1526549
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/12/1985/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/12/1985/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dorcas Idowu & Wendy Zhou, 2023. "Global Megacities and Frequent Floods: Correlation between Urban Expansion Patterns and Urban Flood Hazards," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Grizzetti, B. & Lanzanova, D. & Liquete, C. & Reynaud, A. & Cardoso, A.C., 2016. "Assessing water ecosystem services for water resource management," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 194-203.
    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. Chengji Shu & Kaiwei Du & Wenbo Cai & Zhengwu Cai & Li Lin, 2025. "Mapping Re-Naturalization Pathways for Urban Ecological Governance: A Spatial Decision-Support Framework Based on Ecosystem Service Valuation," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, April.
    2. Zhenfeng Wei & Dong Chen & Qunying Huang & Qifeng Chen & Chunxia Wei, 2025. "Temporal–Spatial Evolution and Driving Mechanism for an Ecosystem Health Service Based on the GD-MGWR-XGBOOT-SEM Model: A Case Study in Guangxi Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-20, April.

    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. Mingjing Guo & Ziyu Jiang & Yan Bu & Jinhua Cheng, 2019. "Supporting Sustainable Development of Water Resources: A Social Welfare Maximization Game Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Jonathan Fletcher & Nigel Willby & David M. Oliver & Richard S. Quilliam, 2023. "Field-Scale Floating Treatment Wetlands: Quantifying Ecosystem Service Provision from Monoculture vs. Polyculture Macrophyte Communities," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Siyu Yue & Huaien Li & Fengmin Song, 2023. "Temporal–Spatial Variations in the Economic Value Produced by Environmental Flows in a Water Shortage Area in Northwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Ioannis Souliotis & Nikolaos Voulvoulis, 2021. "Natural Capital Accounting Informing Water Management Policies in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-24, October.
    5. Exley, G. & Hernandez, R.R. & Page, T. & Chipps, M. & Gambro, S. & Hersey, M. & Lake, R. & Zoannou, K.-S. & Armstrong, A., 2021. "Scientific and stakeholder evidence-based assessment: Ecosystem response to floating solar photovoltaics and implications for sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    6. Chen, Haojie, 2020. "Complementing conventional environmental impact assessments of tourism with ecosystem service valuation: A case study of the Wulingyuan Scenic Area, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    7. Vera Nikolić & Zlatko Nedić & Dubravka Škraba Jurlina & Vesna Djikanović & Tamara Kanjuh & Ana Marić & Predrag Simonović, 2023. "Status and Perspectives of the Ichthyofauna of the Labudovo okno Ramsar Site: An Analysis of 14 Years of Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-14, June.
    8. Jonathan Higgins & John Zablocki & Amy Newsock & Andras Krolopp & Phillip Tabas & Michael Salama, 2021. "Durable Freshwater Protection: A Framework for Establishing and Maintaining Long-Term Protection for Freshwater Ecosystems and the Values They Sustain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Tatiana Kaletová & Luis Loures & Rui Alexandre Castanho & Elena Aydin & José Telo da Gama & Ana Loures & Amélie Truchy, 2019. "Relevance of Intermittent Rivers and Streams in Agricultural Landscape and Their Impact on Provided Ecosystem Services—A Mediterranean Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-16, July.
    10. Susan Stratton Sayre, 2019. "Pay for the Option to Pay? The Impact of Improved Scientific Information on Payments for Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(2), pages 591-625, June.
    11. Hongfei Zhao & Hongming He & Jingjing Wang & Chunyu Bai & Chuangjuan Zhang, 2018. "Vegetation Restoration and Its Environmental Effects on the Loess Plateau," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    12. Silvia Ronchi & Andrea Arcidiacono, 2018. "Adopting an Ecosystem Services-Based Approach for Flood Resilient Strategies: The Case of Rocinha Favela (Brazil)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Anzaldua, Gerardo & Gerner, Nadine V. & Lago, Manuel & Abhold, Katrina & Hinzmann, Mandy & Beyer, Sarah & Winking, Caroline & Riegels, Niels & Krogsgaard Jensen, Jørgen & Termes, Montserrat & Amorós, , 2018. "Getting into the water with the Ecosystem Services Approach: The DESSIN ESS evaluation framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 318-326.
    14. Li-Chun Peng & Wan-Yu Lien & Yu-Pin Lin, 2020. "How Experts’ Opinions and Knowledge Affect Their Willingness to Pay for and Ranking of Hydrological Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Nápoles-Vértiz, Sonia & Caro-Borrero, Angela, 2024. "Conceptual diversity and application of ecosystem services and disservices: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    16. Ifigenia Kagalou & Dionissis Latinopoulos, 2020. "Filling the Gap between Ecosystem Services Concept and River Basin Management Plans: The Case of Greece in WFD 20+," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-15, September.
    17. Dick, Jan & Turkelboom, Francis & Woods, Helen & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Bezák, Peter & Mederly, Peter & Leone, Michael & Verheyden, Wim & Kelemen, Eszter & Ha, 2018. "Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 552-565.
    18. Ebun Akinsete & Stella Apostolaki & Nikos Chatzistamoulou & Phoebe Koundouri & Stella Tsani, 2019. "The Link between Ecosystem Services and Human Wellbeing in the Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive: Assessing Four River Basins in Europe," DEOS Working Papers 1911, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    19. Claude Meisch & Uta Schirpke & Lisa Huber & Johannes Rüdisser & Ulrike Tappeiner, 2019. "Assessing Freshwater Provision and Consumption in the Alpine Space Applying the Ecosystem Service Concept," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, February.
    20. Hunggul Yudono Setio Hadi Nugroho & Fitri Nurfatriani & Yonky Indrajaya & Tri Wira Yuwati & Sulistya Ekawati & Mimi Salminah & Hendra Gunawan & Subarudi Subarudi & Markus Kudeng Sallata & Merryana Kid, 2022. "Mainstreaming Ecosystem Services from Indonesia’s Remaining Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-39, September.

    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:13:y:2024:i:12:p:1985-:d:1526549. 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.