IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v15y2026i1p148-d1837814.html

Exploring the Residents’ Perceptions of Ecosystem Services and Disservices in Three-River-Source National Park

Author

Listed:
  • Aiqing Li

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810016, China
    School of Civil and Transportation Engineering, Qinghai Minzu University, Xining 810016, China)

  • Huaju Xue

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810016, China
    School of Economics and Management (College of Tourism), Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810016, China
    Qinghai Province Key Laboratory of Physical Geography and Environmental Process, School of Geographical Science, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810016, China)

  • Yanqin Wang

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810016, China)

  • Xiaofen Wang

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810016, China)

  • Jinhe Zhang

    (School of Geographical Sciences, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810016, China
    School of Economics and Management (College of Tourism), Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810016, China
    School of Geographical and Ocean Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China)

Abstract

Understanding residents’ perceptions of ecosystem services (ES) and ecosystem disservices (EDS) is crucial for protected areas governance. This study, conducted in China’s Three-River-Source National Park (TNP), employed participatory rural appraisal and household questionnaires to examine local cognitive patterns of ES and EDS, along with their socio-spatial heterogeneity and perceived synergies and trade-offs among them. The key findings are as follows: (1) Cultural services received the highest scores, followed by regulating services, whereas provisioning services, especially food provisioning, were rated as relatively inadequate. Safety threats were considered the most severe EDS. Overall, a Matthew Effect emerged: services with high current perception scores showed an improving trend, while those with low scores deteriorated. (2) Spatially, ES/EDS evaluation scores exhibited a “core zone < general control zone < peripheral zone” gradient. Socio-demographic and economic factors also influenced residents’ perceptions; women and the elderly were especially more concerned about food and energy supply shortages and safety issues. (3) The relationships among the various ES and EDS are primarily synergistic rather than trade-offs. Specifically, gains in regulating services were associated with enhanced cultural services, while declines in provisioning services and intensified safety threats coincided with the deterioration of material EDS. These findings offer a scientific basis for managing protected areas in high-altitude, ecologically fragile regions and provide practical insights for balancing ecological conservation with community development.

Suggested Citation

  • Aiqing Li & Huaju Xue & Yanqin Wang & Xiaofen Wang & Jinhe Zhang, 2026. "Exploring the Residents’ Perceptions of Ecosystem Services and Disservices in Three-River-Source National Park," Land, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:15:y:2026:i:1:p:148-:d:1837814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/15/1/148/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/15/1/148/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:15:y:2026:i:1:p:148-:d:1837814. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.