IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v15y2026i6p1017-d1963281.html

Delineation of Ecological Management Zones from an Ecological Resilience Perspective: A Case Study of the Yellow River Basin in Shanxi Province

Author

Listed:
  • Hao Sun

    (College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Kaixuan Qian

    (College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Wenhui Fu

    (College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Xiangyun Yang

    (College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Xinyou Li

    (College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Yanbing Qi

    (College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

Abstract

Understanding regional ecological resilience is important for mitigating ecological risks, safeguarding ecological security, and optimizing territorial spatial planning. From the perspective of ecological resilience, this study constructed an ecological management zoning framework based on three dimensions: “resistance–adaptability–recovery”. This framework was used to comprehensively interpret the ecological characteristics of the Yellow River Basin in Shanxi Province and to further develop ecological management zoning. The main results are as follows: (1) The five ecosystem services remained generally stable during the study period. CS and WR increased slightly, whereas HQ, CY, and SC declined. High-value areas were mainly concentrated in mountainous regions such as the Lüliang, Taiyue, and Zhongtiao Mountains, while low-value areas were mainly distributed in the central basins. The OWA-based multi-scenario simulation showed that Scenario 3 achieved a better balance between representing the spatial heterogeneity of ecosystem services and maintaining a balanced weight allocation among services. (2) Landscape indices showed no obvious fluctuations during the study period. SHDI increased slightly, COHESION remained consistently high, and PD changed only marginally. (3) Ecological recovery exhibited significant spatial heterogeneity. Low-recovery areas were mainly concentrated in the Taiyuan and Yuncheng Basins, while relatively high-recovery areas were mainly distributed in the northern Lüliang Mountains and along parts of the Qinhe River. The mean ecological recovery decreased from 0.254 in 2010 to 0.242 in 2015 and further to 0.237 in 2020. (4) Based on the integrated analysis of ecological resistance, ecological adaptability, and ecological recovery, the study area was divided into three ecological management zones: Ecological Restoration Zones, Development Trade-off Zones, and Comprehensive Regulation Zones. Differentiated ecological governance strategies were then proposed for each zone. Overall, this study developed a multidimensional ecological management zoning framework from the perspective of ecological resilience, which can improve the targeting and adaptability of regional ecological governance and provide scientific support for ecological protection, spatial optimization, and coordinated sustainable governance in the Yellow River Basin in Shanxi Province.

Suggested Citation

  • Hao Sun & Kaixuan Qian & Wenhui Fu & Xiangyun Yang & Xinyou Li & Yanbing Qi, 2026. "Delineation of Ecological Management Zones from an Ecological Resilience Perspective: A Case Study of the Yellow River Basin in Shanxi Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-21, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:15:y:2026:i:6:p:1017-:d:1963281
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/15/6/1017/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/15/6/1017/
    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:6:p:1017-:d:1963281. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.