IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i5p623-d1389191.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Driving Mechanisms of Spatial Differentiation in Ecosystem Service Value in Opencast Coal Mines in Arid Areas: A Case Study in the Zhundong Economic and Technological Development Zone

Author

Listed:
  • Adila Akbar

    (College of Geography and Remote Sensing Sciences, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
    Xinjiang Key Laboratory of Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China)

  • Abudukeyimu Abulizi

    (College of Geography and Remote Sensing Sciences, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
    Xinjiang Key Laboratory of Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
    MNR Technology Innovation Center for Central Asia Geo-Information Exploitation and Utilization, Urumqi 830046, China)

  • Reyilan Erken

    (College of Geography and Remote Sensing Sciences, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
    Xinjiang Key Laboratory of Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China)

  • Tingting Yu

    (College of Geography and Remote Sensing Sciences, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
    Xinjiang Key Laboratory of Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China)

Abstract

The valuation of ecosystem services (ESs) is crucial for preserving ecosystems, assessing natural resources, and making decisions regarding compensation. In this study, we employed the InVEST model’s habitat quality (HQ) module to calculate the HQ and degradation levels in the study area using land use/land cover (LULC) data from 2000 to 2020. Our analysis utilized quantitative methods, including spatial correlation, hotspot analysis, and geo-probing, to determine the value of ESs and identify trends. Furthermore, we examined the spatial and temporal variation in the significance of ESs and their driving factors. The results show the following. (1) The primary LULC types in the Zhundong coalfield from 2000 to 2020 are grassland and barren areas. (2) The average value of the HQ index in the study area exhibited a generally decreasing trend. Between 2000 and 2010, HQ significantly declined, particularly in the region’s large barren industrial and mining zones. However, over time, the proportion of sites with minimal degradation improved steadily, resulting in better overall HQ in the study area by 2020. This pertains to the measures put in place by the local government to safeguard and rehabilitate the ecosystem. (3) The spatial distribution of the ecosystem service value (ESV) aligns with changes in HQ and LULC, with significant hotspots primarily observed in forest and grassland areas, nature reserves, and areas around water sources. (4) LULC, temperature, annual precipitation, and elevation are the main drivers of spatial variation in the ESV in the Zhundong area; the spatial variation in the ESV in the Zhundong coalfield is primarily influenced by the interaction between human factors and natural factors, in which LULC plays a dominant role. This study’s findings can guide the development of rational ecological planning, integrating resource conservation mining with effective zoning management.

Suggested Citation

  • Adila Akbar & Abudukeyimu Abulizi & Reyilan Erken & Tingting Yu, 2024. "Driving Mechanisms of Spatial Differentiation in Ecosystem Service Value in Opencast Coal Mines in Arid Areas: A Case Study in the Zhundong Economic and Technological Development Zone," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-24, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:5:p:623-:d:1389191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/5/623/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/5/623/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    2. Stephen Polasky & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Kris Johnson, 2011. "The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 219-242, February.
    3. Xiao, Wu & Fu, Yanhua & Wang, Tao & Lv, Xuejiao, 2018. "Effects of land use transitions due to underground coal mining on ecosystem services in high groundwater table areas: A case study in the Yanzhou coalfield," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 213-221.
    4. Marcell K. Peters & Andreas Hemp & Tim Appelhans & Joscha N. Becker & Christina Behler & Alice Classen & Florian Detsch & Andreas Ensslin & Stefan W. Ferger & Sara B. Frederiksen & Friederike Gebert &, 2019. "Climate–land-use interactions shape tropical mountain biodiversity and ecosystem functions," Nature, Nature, vol. 568(7750), pages 88-92, 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. Jixuan Yan & Gengxin Zhang & Wenning Wang & Zichen Guo & Jie Li & Xiangdong Yao & Pengcheng Gao & Qiang Li & Meihua Zhang & Miao Song, 2025. "Analysis of Factors Influencing the Ecosystem Service Value in Yuzhong County and Multi-Scenario Predictions," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, 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. Xueqing Wang & Zhongyi Ding & Shaoliang Zhang & Huping Hou & Zanxu Chen & Qinyu Wu, 2022. "Spatial–Temporal Multivariate Correlation Analysis of Ecosystem Services and Ecological Risk in Areas of Overlapped Cropland and Coal Resources in the Eastern Plains, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Ashebir Woldeyohannes & Marc Cotter & Wubneshe Dessalegn Biru & Girma Kelboro, 2020. "Assessing Changes in Ecosystem Service Values over 1985–2050 in Response to Land Use and Land Cover Dynamics in Abaya-Chamo Basin, Southern Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, January.
    3. Robert Costanza & Shuang Liu, 2014. "Ecosystem Services and Environmental Governance: Comparing China and the U.S," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 160-170, January.
    4. Cicelin Rakotomahazo & Jacqueline Razanoelisoa & Nirinarisoa Lantoasinoro Ranivoarivelo & Gildas Georges Boleslas Todinanahary & Eulalie Ranaivoson & Mara Edouard Remanevy & Lalao Aigrette Ravaoarinor, 2021. "Community Perceptions of a Payment for Ecosystem Services Project in Southwest Madagascar: A Preliminary Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Malerba, Daniele, 2020. "Poverty alleviation and local environmental degradation: An empirical analysis in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.
    7. Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, Edward & Boyer, Christopher & English, Burton, 2018. "Targeting Payments for Ecosystem Services Given Ecological and Economic Objectives," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266502, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Min Liu & Jianpeng Fan & Yuanzheng Li & Qizheng Mao, 2023. "Ecosystem Service Optimisation in the Central Plains Urban Agglomeration Based on Land Use Structure Adjustment," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-27, July.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Pan Liu & Yang Zheng & Yukun Yang & Hao Wang & Xuefeng Sang & Siqi Zhang, 2025. "Exploration of Equity Cooperation Concepts in Water Resource Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 39(1), pages 473-502, January.
    12. Mengzhu Liu & Leilei Min & Jingjing Zhao & Yanjun Shen & Hongwei Pei & Hongjuan Zhang & Yali Li, 2021. "The Impact of Land Use Change on Water-Related Ecosystem Services in the Bashang Area of Hebei Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    13. Duy X. Tran & Diane Pearson & Alan Palmer & David Gray, 2020. "Developing a Landscape Design Approach for the Sustainable Land Management of Hill Country Farms in New Zealand," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-29, June.
    14. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    15. Garrett, R.D. & Grabs, J. & Cammelli, F. & Gollnow, F. & Levy, S.A., 2022. "Should payments for environmental services be used to implement zero-deforestation supply chain policies? The case of soy in the Brazilian Cerrado," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    16. Longsheng Huang & Yi Tang & Youtao Song & Jinghui Liu & Hua Shen & Yi Du, 2024. "Identifying and Optimizing the Ecological Security Pattern of the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Urban Agglomeration from 2000 to 2030," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-28, July.
    17. Bennett, Drew E. & Gosnell, Hannah & Lurie, Susan & Duncan, Sally, 2014. "Utility engagement with payments for watershed services in the United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 56-64.
    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. Shengjun Yan & Xuan Wang & Yanpeng Cai & Chunhui Li & Rui Yan & Guannan Cui & Zhifeng Yang, 2018. "An Integrated Investigation of Spatiotemporal Habitat Quality Dynamics and Driving Forces in the Upper Basin of Miyun Reservoir, North China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    20. Cordier, Mateo & Pérez Agúndez, José A. & Hecq, Walter & Hamaide, Bertrand, 2014. "A guiding framework for ecosystem services monetization in ecological–economic modeling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 86-96.

    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:5:p:623-:d:1389191. 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.