IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i4p773-d1627826.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Supply–Demand Matching and Spatial Flow of Urban Cultural Ecosystem Services: Based on Geospatial Data and User Interaction Data

Author

Listed:
  • Linru Li

    (The School of Land Engineering, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China
    Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Land Consolidation, Xi’an 710054, China)

  • Yu Bai

    (The School of Land Engineering, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China
    Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Land Consolidation, Xi’an 710054, China)

  • Xuefeng Yuan

    (The School of Land Engineering, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China
    Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Land Consolidation, Xi’an 710054, China)

  • Feiyan Li

    (The School of Land Engineering, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China
    Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Land Consolidation, Xi’an 710054, China)

Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services (CESs) reflect the interaction between ecosystems and human well-being. Owing to constraints in data availability and existing methodological limitations, deriving information from non-material ecosystem attributes was inadequate. We took Yulin City, located in the northern Shaanxi Loess Plateau, as a case study. Based on open-source geospatial data and user interaction data from social media, a coupled multi-source model was applied to elucidate the spatial distribution of CESs’ supply–demand flow. The Maxent and LDA model were utilized to quantify CES supply–demand, whereas the breakpoint and gravity model were applied to explain the direction and intensity of CES flow. The results indicated the following: (1) aesthetic was the most perceivable CES in Yulin, with 27% high supply areas and four demand topics. And the perception of the educational CES was the least pronounced, with only 2% of high supply areas and two demand topics. (2) Yulin exhibited a notable mismatching in CES supply–demand, with the supply–demand matching area constituting only approximately 10%. In the center of the city, CESs displayed a spatial pattern of a supply–demand deficit, while areas farther from the city center presented a spatial pattern of a supply–demand surplus. (3) The flow of CESs followed a pattern of movement from peripheral counties to central counties and from less developed counties to more developed counties. We proposed the following targeted recommendations: introducing low-perception CESs to promote the enhancement of ecosystem services (ESs); and alleviating CES supply–demand mismatches by enhancing transportation accessibility and protecting the ecological environment. Simultaneously, attention should be directed towards the developmental disparities between counties, providing differentiated guidance for CES spatial flow. Our study provided a theoretical foundation for understanding CES supply–demand flow and offered scientific insights for the spatial development of urban CES.

Suggested Citation

  • Linru Li & Yu Bai & Xuefeng Yuan & Feiyan Li, 2025. "Assessing the Supply–Demand Matching and Spatial Flow of Urban Cultural Ecosystem Services: Based on Geospatial Data and User Interaction Data," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-25, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:4:p:773-:d:1627826
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/4/773/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/4/773/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Balázsi, Ágnes & Dänhardt, Juliana & Collins, Sue & Schweiger, Oliver & Settele, Josef & Hartel, Tibor, 2021. "Understanding cultural ecosystem services related to farmlands: Expert survey in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    2. Lorilla, Roxanne Suzette & Kalogirou, Stamatis & Poirazidis, Konstantinos & Kefalas, George, 2019. "Identifying spatial mismatches between the supply and demand of ecosystem services to achieve a sustainable management regime in the Ionian Islands (Western Greece)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    3. Yu Pan & Yanbo Qu, 2024. "Cultural Ecosystem Services in Land Use/Land Cover Change: A Literature Review and Prospects for Future Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-19, November.
    4. Jiang, Wei, 2017. "Ecosystem services research in China: A critical review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 10-16.
    5. Hynes, Stephen & Ghermandi, Andrea & Norton, Daniel & Williams, Heidi, 2018. "Marine recreational ecosystem service value estimation: A meta-analysis with cultural considerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 410-419.
    6. Wei, Hejie & Liu, Huiming & Xu, Zihan & Ren, Jiahui & Lu, Nachuan & Fan, Weiguo & Zhang, Peng & Dong, Xiaobin, 2018. "Linking ecosystem services supply, social demand and human well-being in a typical mountain–oasis–desert area, Xinjiang, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 44-57.
    7. Jiaxin Li & Kankan Li & Yanbo Wang & Rui Jiao, 2024. "Comparative Study on the Perception of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Taibai Mountain National Forest Park from Different Stakeholder Perspectives," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    9. Chiara Cortinovis & Grazia Zulian & Davide Geneletti, 2018. "Assessing Nature-Based Recreation to Support Urban Green Infrastructure Planning in Trento (Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Wood, Sylvia L.R. & Jones, Sarah K. & Johnson, Justin A. & Brauman, Kate A. & Chaplin-Kramer, Rebecca & Fremier, Alexander & Girvetz, Evan & Gordon, Line J. & Kappel, Carrie V. & Mandle, Lisa & Mullig, 2018. "Distilling the role of ecosystem services in the Sustainable Development Goals," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 70-82.
    11. Richards, Daniel R. & Tunçer, Bige, 2018. "Using image recognition to automate assessment of cultural ecosystem services from social media photographs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 318-325.
    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. 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).
    2. Wenbo Cai & Wei Jiang & Hongyu Du & Ruishan Chen & Yongli Cai, 2021. "Assessing Ecosystem Services Supply-Demand (Mis)Matches for Differential City Management in the Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-22, July.
    3. Yan, Haiming & Yang, Huicai & Guo, Xiaonan & Zhao, Shuqin & Jiang, Qun'ou, 2022. "Payments for ecosystem services as an essential approach to improving ecosystem services: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    4. Zhang, Ling & Huang, Qingxu & Qiu, Jiangxiao & Liao, Chuan & Liu, Ziwen & He, Chunyang & Bai, Yansong & Chen, Peiyuan & Zhou, Yuchen & Liu, Yimeng & Bryan, Brett A., 2024. "Measuring virtual flows of ecosystem services embedded in traded goods across an urban agglomeration in China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    5. Meng, Shiting & Huang, Qingxu & Zhang, Ling & He, Chunyang & Inostroza, Luis & Bai, Yansong & Yin, Dan, 2020. "Matches and mismatches between the supply of and demand for cultural ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: A case study in the Guanting Reservoir basin, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    6. Huang, Qingxu & Yin, Dan & He, Chunyang & Yan, Jubo & Liu, Ziwen & Meng, Shiting & Ren, Qiang & Zhao, Rui & Inostroza, Luis, 2020. "Linking ecosystem services and subjective well-being in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: Insights from a multilevel linear model," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    7. Schirpke, Uta & Ghermandi, Andrea & Sinclair, Michael & Van Berkel, Derek & Fox, Nathan & Vargas, Leonardo & Willemen, Louise, 2023. "Emerging technologies for assessing ecosystem services: A synthesis of opportunities and challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    8. Yuan Yuan & Gangchun Xu & Nannan Shen & Zhijuan Nie & Hongxia Li & Lin Zhang & Yunchong Gong & Yanhui He & Xiaofei Ma & Hongyan Zhang & Jian Zhu & Jinrong Duan & Pao Xu, 2022. "Valuation of Ecosystem Services for the Sustainable Development of Hani Terraces: A Rice–Fish–Duck Integrated Farming Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-19, July.
    9. Nancy Andrea Ramírez-Agudelo & Roger Porcar Anento & Miriam Villares & Elisabet Roca, 2020. "Nature-Based Solutions for Water Management in Peri-Urban Areas: Barriers and Lessons Learned from Implementation Experiences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-36, November.
    10. Tobias Wulfert & Robert Woroch & Gero Strobel & Thorsten Schoormann & Leonardo Banh, 2024. "E-commerce ecosystems as catalysts for sustainability: A multi-case analysis," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 34(1), pages 1-21, December.
    11. Mostafa Shaaban & Carmen Schwartz & Joseph Macpherson & Annette Piorr, 2021. "A Conceptual Model Framework for Mapping, Analyzing and Managing Supply–Demand Mismatches of Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, January.
    12. Wei-Ling Hsu & Zhicheng Zhuang & Cheng Li & Jie Zhao, 2025. "Optimization of Land Use Patterns in a Typical Coal Resource-Based City Based on the Ecosystem Service Relationships of ‘Food–Carbon–Recreation’," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Pires, Aliny P.F. & Rodriguez Soto, Clarita & Scarano, Fabio R., 2021. "Strategies to reach global sustainability should take better account of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    14. Barbara Vojvodíková & Iva Tichá & Anna Starzewska-Sikorska, 2022. "Implementing Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Spaces in the Context of the Sense of Danger That Citizens May Feel," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-21, October.
    15. Xueling Zhang & Ruoxuan Huang & Yixuan Yang, 2022. "On the Landscape Activity Measure Coupling Ecological Index and Public Vitality Index of UGI: The Case Study of Zhongshan, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-32, October.
    16. Xinmin Zhang & Hualin Xie & Jiaying Shi & Tiangui Lv & Caihua Zhou & Wangda Liu, 2020. "Assessing Changes in Ecosystem Service Values in Response to Land Cover Dynamics in Jiangxi Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-15, April.
    17. Kaiser, Nina N. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Feld, Christian K. & Hershkovitz, Yaron & Palt, Martin & Stoll, Stefan, 2021. "Societal benefits of river restoration – Implications from social media analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    18. Dawei Wen & Song Ma & Anlu Zhang & Xinli Ke, 2021. "Spatial Pattern Analysis of the Ecosystem Services in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area Using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 Imagery Based on Deep Learning Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-16, June.
    19. Yujiang Yan & Jiangui Li & Junli Li & Teng Jiang, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Measurement and Driving Factor Analysis of Ecosystem Service Trade-Offs and Synergy in the Kaidu–Kongque River Basin, Xinjiang, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-14, August.
    20. Shengwang Bao & Wanglai Cui & Fan Yang, 2024. "Future land use prediction and optimization strategy of Zhejiang Greater Bay Area coupled with ecological security multi-scenario pattern," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(4), pages 1-23, April.

    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:14:y:2025:i:4:p:773-:d:1627826. 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.