IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i6p1301-d1681933.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supply–Demand Assessment of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Urban Parks of Plateau River Valley City: A Case Study of Lhasa

Author

Listed:
  • Shouhang Zhao

    (School of Landscape Architecture, Beijing Forestry University, No. 35 Qinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
    National Engineering Research Center for Forestry and Grassland Landscape Architecture, No. 35 Qinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Yuqi Li

    (School of Landscape Architecture, Beijing Forestry University, No. 35 Qinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
    National Engineering Research Center for Forestry and Grassland Landscape Architecture, No. 35 Qinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Ziqian Nie

    (School of Landscape Architecture, Beijing Forestry University, No. 35 Qinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
    National Engineering Research Center for Forestry and Grassland Landscape Architecture, No. 35 Qinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Yunyuan Li

    (School of Landscape Architecture, Beijing Forestry University, No. 35 Qinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
    National Engineering Research Center for Forestry and Grassland Landscape Architecture, No. 35 Qinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100084, China)

Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services (CES) in urban parks, as a vital component of urban ecosystem services (ES), are increasingly recognized as an important tool for advancing urban sustainability and implementing nature-based solutions (NbS). The supply–demand relationship of CES in urban parks is strongly shaped by sociocultural and spatial geographic factors, playing a crucial role in optimizing urban landscape structures and enhancing residents’ well-being. However, current research generally lacks adaptive evaluation frameworks and quantitative methods, particularly for cities with significant spatial and cultural diversity. To address this gap, this study examines the central district of Lhasa as a case study to develop a CES supply–demand evaluation framework suitable for plateau river valley cities. The study adopts the spatial integration analysis method to establish an indicator system centered on “recreational potential–recreational opportunities” and “social needs–material needs,” mapping the spatial distribution and matching characteristics of supply and demand at the community scale. The results reveal that: (1) in terms of supply–demand balance, 25.67% of communities experience undersupply, predominantly in the old city cluster, while 16.22% experience oversupply, mainly in key development zones, indicating a notable supply–demand imbalance; (2) in terms of supply–demand coupling coordination, 55.11% and 38.14% of communities are in declining and transitional stages, respectively. These communities are primarily distributed in near-mountainous and peripheral urban areas. Based on these findings, four urban landscape optimization strategies are proposed: culturally driven urban park development, demand-oriented park planning, expanding countryside parks along mountain ridges, and revitalizing existing parks. These results provide theoretical support and decision-making guidance for optimizing urban park green space systems in plateau river valley cities.

Suggested Citation

  • Shouhang Zhao & Yuqi Li & Ziqian Nie & Yunyuan Li, 2025. "Supply–Demand Assessment of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Urban Parks of Plateau River Valley City: A Case Study of Lhasa," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-28, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:6:p:1301-:d:1681933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/6/1301/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/6/1301/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiao, Lan & Haiping, Tang & Haoguang, Liang, 2017. "A theoretical framework for researching cultural ecosystem service flows in urban agglomerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 95-104.
    2. Pert, Petina L. & Hill, Rosemary & Maclean, Kirsten & Dale, Allan & Rist, Phil & Schmider, Joann & Talbot, Leah & Tawake, Lavenie, 2015. "Mapping cultural ecosystem services with rainforest aboriginal peoples: Integrating biocultural diversity, governance and social variation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 41-56.
    3. Isabel Holland & Nicole V. DeVille & Matthew H. E. M. Browning & Ryan M. Buehler & Jaime E. Hart & J. Aaron Hipp & Richard Mitchell & Donald A. Rakow & Jessica E. Schiff & Mathew P. White & Jie Yin & , 2021. "Measuring Nature Contact: A Narrative Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-15, April.
    4. Panaro, Simona & Delabre, Izabela & Marshall, Fiona, 2025. "Cultural ecosystem services and opportunities for inclusive and effective nature-based solutions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    5. Liangjian Yang & Kaijun Cao, 2022. "Cultural Ecosystem Services Research Progress and Future Prospects: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    6. Wen Wu & Kewei Ding, 2022. "Optimization Strategy for Parks and Green Spaces in Shenyang City: Improving the Supply Quality and Accessibility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-13, April.
    7. Aibo Jin & Yunyu Ge & Shiyang Zhang, 2024. "Spatial Characteristics of Multidimensional Urban Vitality and Its Impact Mechanisms by the Built Environment," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-22, July.
    8. Schirpke, Uta & Meisch, Claude & Marsoner, Thomas & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2018. "Revealing spatial and temporal patterns of outdoor recreation in the European Alps and their surroundings," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 336-350.
    9. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    10. Elliot, T. & Torres-Matallana, J.A. & Goldstein, B. & Babí Almenar, J. & Gómez-Baggethun, E. & Proença, V. & Rugani, B., 2022. "An expanded framing of ecosystem services is needed for a sustainable urban future," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    11. Yuehong Long & Jianxin Qin & Yang Wu & Ke Wang, 2023. "Analysis of Urban Park Accessibility Based on Space Syntax: Take the Urban Area of Changsha City as an Example," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, May.
    12. Fischer, L.K. & Honold, J. & Botzat, A. & Brinkmeyer, D. & Cvejić, R. & Delshammar, T. & Elands, B. & Haase, D. & Kabisch, N. & Karle, S.J. & Lafortezza, R. & Nastran, M. & Nielsen, A.B. & van der Jag, 2018. "Recreational ecosystem services in European cities: Sociocultural and geographical contexts matter for park use," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 455-467.
    13. Andersson, Erik & Tengö, Maria & McPhearson, Timon & Kremer, Peleg, 2015. "Cultural ecosystem services as a gateway for improving urban sustainability," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 165-168.
    14. Dingwei Niu & Lucang Wang & Fuwei Qiao & Wei Li, 2022. "Analysis of Landscape Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Residential Areas on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau: A Case Study of Tibet, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-20, November.
    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. Busch, Christin & Specht, Kathrin & Inostroza, Luis & Falke, Matthias & Zepp, Harald, 2024. "Disentangling cultural ecosystem services co-production in urban green spaces through social media reviews," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. Tandarić, Neven & Ives, Christopher D. & Watkins, Charles, 2022. "From city in the park to “greenery in plant pots”: The influence of socialist and post-socialist planning on opportunities for cultural ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "A systematic review on subjective well-being benefits associated with cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    4. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Li-Pei Peng & Wei-Ming Wang, 2020. "Hybrid Decision-Making Evaluation for Future Scenarios of Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Ospina-Alvarez, A. & Villasante, S. & Pita, P. & Maya-Jariego, I. & de Juan, S., 2020. "Using graph theory and social media data to assess cultural ecosystem services in coastal areas: Method development and application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    8. Xiangnan Fan & Yuning Cheng, 2023. "Assessing a Tourism City from an Ecosystem Services Perspective: The Evaluation of Tourism Service in Liyang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-22, November.
    9. Yawen Sun & Shaohua Tan & Qixiao He & Jize Shen, 2022. "Influence Mechanisms of Community Sports Parks to Enhance Social Interaction: A Bayesian Belief Network Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-22, January.
    10. Grzyb, Tomasz, 2024. "Mapping cultural ecosystem services of the urban riverscapes: the case of the Vistula River in Warsaw, Poland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    11. Pistón, Nuria & Silva Filho, Dario S.E. & Dias, André T.C., 2022. "Social inequality deeply affects people’s perception of ecosystem services and disservices provided by street trees," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    12. Fox, Nathan & Graham, Laura J. & Eigenbrod, Felix & Bullock, James M. & Parks, Katherine E., 2021. "Enriching social media data allows a more robust representation of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    13. Wang, Lijuan & Zheng, Hua & Chen, Yongzhe & Ouyang, Zhiyun & Hu, Xiaofei, 2022. "Systematic review of ecosystem services flow measurement: Main concepts, methods, applications and future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    14. Jieyuan Zhu & Huiting Lu & Tianchen Zheng & Yuejing Rong & Chenxing Wang & Wen Zhang & Yan Yan & Lina Tang, 2020. "Vitality of Urban Parks and Its Influencing Factors from the Perspective of Recreational Service Supply, Demand, and Spatial Links," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-17, March.
    15. Calcagni, Fulvia & Nogué Batallé, Júlia & Baró, Francesc & Langemeyer, Johannes, 2022. "A tag is worth a thousand pictures: A framework for an empirically grounded typology of relational values through social media," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    16. Xiaosi Zhang & Jizhong Shao, 2024. "Evaluation of the Suitability of Street Vending Planning in Urban Public Space in the Post-COVID-19 Era," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, April.
    17. Cong Li & Yajuan Zhou & Manfei Wu & Jiayue Xu & Xin Fu, 2025. "Exploring Nonlinear Threshold Effects and Interactions Between Built Environment and Urban Vitality at the Block Level Using Machine Learning," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-25, June.
    18. 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.
    19. Phi-Yen Nguyen & Thomas Astell-Burt & Hania Rahimi-Ardabili & Xiaoqi Feng, 2021. "Green Space Quality and Health: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-38, October.
    20. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:6:p:1301-:d:1681933. 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.