IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i22p9395-d443515.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Spatial Valuation of Ecosystem Services into Protected Area Management: A Case Study of the Cangshan Nature Reserve in Dali, China

Author

Listed:
  • Juyi Xia

    (School of Environment and Nature Resources, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China
    State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Ming Cao

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Wen Xiao

    (Institute of Eastern-Himalaya Biodiversity Research, Dali University, Dali 671003, China)

  • Yanpeng Li

    (Institute of Eastern-Himalaya Biodiversity Research, Dali University, Dali 671003, China)

  • Gang Fu

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Wei Wang

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

  • Junsheng Li

    (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

Abstract

Given the importance of protected areas (PAs) in promoting the balance between conservation and sustainable development, it is crucial for planners and decision-makers to focus attention on the core areas that are of priority to PAs. However, few studies have addressed the balance between ecosystem service provision in PAs and regional development demands based on spatial valuation data. Herein, we present an integrated approach using the Cangshan Nature Reserve as a case study with the aim of identifying the core conservation areas of the reserve—the only national nature reserve in the 18-creek watershed of Cangshan—under different urbanization scenarios. The results show that the overall farmland in the watershed decreased and the architectural area increased, but the land use in the nature reserve remained stable from 1995 to 2035. With the increase in demand for water in the watershed, at least 24.3% of the Cangshan Nature Reserve should be designated as core conservation area to ensure the maintenance of sufficient water quantity and quality. This study can be used as a reference for the sustainable management of PAs based on our example of balancing ecosystem service provision and demand in a single watershed.

Suggested Citation

  • Juyi Xia & Ming Cao & Wen Xiao & Yanpeng Li & Gang Fu & Wei Wang & Junsheng Li, 2020. "Integrating Spatial Valuation of Ecosystem Services into Protected Area Management: A Case Study of the Cangshan Nature Reserve in Dali, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:22:p:9395-:d:443515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/22/9395/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/22/9395/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walter V. Reid & Harold A. Mooney & Doris Capistrano & Stephen R. Carpenter & Kanchan Chopra & Angela Cropper & Partha Dasgupta & Rashid Hassan & Rik Leemans & Robert M. May & Prabhu Pingali & Cristiá, 2006. "Nature: the many benefits of ecosystem services," Nature, Nature, vol. 443(7113), pages 749-749, October.
    2. Brown, Greg & Fagerholm, Nora, 2015. "Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 119-133.
    3. Ninan, K.N. & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2016. "Valuing forest ecosystem services and disservices – Case study of a protected area in India," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 1-14.
    4. Morea, Juan Pablo, 2019. "A framework for improving the management of protected areas from a social perspective: The case of Bahía de San Antonio Protected Natural Area, Argentina," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    5. James E. M. Watson & Nigel Dudley & Daniel B. Segan & Marc Hockings, 2014. "The performance and potential of protected areas," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 67-73, November.
    6. Tammi, Ilpo & Mustajärvi, Kaisa & Rasinmäki, Jussi, 2017. "Integrating spatial valuation of ecosystem services into regional planning and development," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 329-344.
    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. Shuping Fan & Peng Li & Qi He & Jiaru Cheng & Mingfeng Zhang & Nan Wu & Song Yang & Shidong Pan, 2022. "Study on the Spatial-Temporal Evolution of Land Use Ecosystem Service Value and Its Zoning Management and Control in the Typical Alpine Valley Area of Southeast Tibet—Empirical Analysis Based on Panel," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Yang Wang & Remina Shataer & Tingting Xia & Xueer Chang & Hui Zhen & Zhi Li, 2021. "Evaluation on the Change Characteristics of Ecosystem Service Function in the Northern Xinjiang Based on Land Use Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-17, August.
    3. Liyu Pan & Wenquan Gan & Jinliu Chen & Kunlun Ren, 2023. "An Integrated Model for Constructing Urban Ecological Networks and Identifying the Ecological Protection Priority: A Case Study of Wujiang District, Suzhou," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-21, March.
    4. Shrestha, Kripa & Shakya, Bandana & Adhikari, Biraj & Nepal, Mani & Shaoliang, Yi, 2023. "Ecosystem services valuation for conservation and development decisions: A review of valuation studies and tools in the Far Eastern Himalaya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).

    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. Ming-Kuang Chung & Dau-Jye Lu & Bor-Wen Tsai & Kuei-Tien Chou, 2019. "Assessing Effectiveness of PPGIS on Protected Areas by Governance Quality: A Case Study of Community-Based Monitoring in Wu-Wei-Kang Wildlife Refuge, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Shakya, Bandana & Uddin, Kabir & Yi, Shaoliang & Bhatta, Laxmi Dutt & Lodhi, Mahendra Singh & Htun, Naing Zaw & Yang, Yongping, 2021. "Mapping of the ecosystem services flow from three protected areas in the far-eastern Himalayan Landscape: An impetus to regional cooperation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Menéndez, Pelayo & Losada, Iñigo J. & Beck, Michael W. & Torres-Ortega, Saul & Espejo, Antonio & Narayan, Siddharth & Díaz-Simal, Pedro & Lange, Glenn-Marie, 2018. "Valuing the protection services of mangroves at national scale: The Philippines," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 24-36.
    4. Chunrong Mi & Liang Ma & Mengyuan Yang & Xinhai Li & Shai Meiri & Uri Roll & Oleksandra Oskyrko & Daniel Pincheira-Donoso & Lilly P. Harvey & Daniel Jablonski & Barbod Safaei-Mahroo & Hanyeh Ghaffari , 2023. "Global Protected Areas as refuges for amphibians and reptiles under climate change," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    5. Lin Yuan & Siqi Wang & Jingxuan Hou, 2025. "Coexistence of Built Areas and Natural Protected Areas Within Metropolitan Regions in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-22, February.
    6. Tingting Zhang & Dan He & Tian Kuang & Ke Chen, 2022. "Effect of Rural Human Settlement Environment around Nature Reserves on Farmers’ Well-Being: A Field Survey Based on 1002 Farmer Households around Six Nature Reserves in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-18, May.
    7. Thomas Campagnaro & Giovanni Trentanovi & Tommaso Sitzia, 2018. "Identifying Habitat Type Conservation Priorities under the Habitats Directive: Application to Two Italian Biogeographical Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    8. Beichen Ge & Congjin Wang & Yuhong Song, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Adam Pawlewicz & Wojciech Gotkiewicz & Katarzyna Brodzińska & Katarzyna Pawlewicz & Bartosz Mickiewicz & Paweł Kluczek, 2022. "Organic Farming as an Alternative Maintenance Strategy in the Opinion of Farmers from Natura 2000 Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-22, March.
    10. Yang Bai & Jian Yang & Thomas O. Ochuodho & Bobby Thapa, 2024. "Impacts of Land Ownership and Forest Fragmentation on Water-Related Ecosystem Services Provision, Dynamics and Their Economic Valuation in Kentucky," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Bernués, Alberto & Alfnes, Frode & Clemetsen, Morten & Eik, Lars Olav & Faccioni, Georgia & Ramanzin, Maurizio & Ripoll-Bosch, Raimon & Rodríguez-Ortega, Tamara & Sturaro, Enrico, 2019. "Exploring social preferences for ecosystem services of multifunctional agriculture across policy scenarios," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    12. Ramel, Cindy & Rey, Pierre-Louis & Fernandes, Rui & Vincent, Claire & Cardoso, Ana R. & Broennimann, Olivier & Pellissier, Loïc & Pradervand, Jean-Nicolas & Ursenbacher, Sylvain & Schmidt, Benedikt R., 2020. "Integrating ecosystem services within spatial biodiversity conservation prioritization in the Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    13. Qiaoqiao Zhan & Katsunori Furuya & Xiaolan Tang & Zhehui Li, 2024. "Policy Development in China’s Protected Scenic and Historic Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, February.
    14. Jacqueline Loos & Henrik Von Wehrden, 2018. "Beyond Biodiversity Conservation: Land Sharing Constitutes Sustainable Agriculture in European Cultural Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-11, May.
    15. Lu Luo & Kangning Xiong & Yi Chen & Wenfang Zhang & Yongyao Li & Dezhi Wang, 2024. "Exploring Trade-Offs and Synergies in Social–Ecological System Services across Ecological Engineering Impact Regions: Insights from South China Karst," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-26, August.
    16. Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Thomas E. Jones, 2022. "Building eco-surplus culture among urban residents as a novel strategy to improve finance for conservation in protected areas," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    17. Alexandra Jiricka-Pürrer & Valeria Tadini & Boris Salak & Karolina Taczanowska & Andrzej Tucki & Giulio Senes, 2019. "Do Protected Areas Contribute to Health and Well-Being? A Cross-Cultural Comparison," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-18, April.
    18. Kulczyk, Sylwia & Woźniak, Edyta & Derek, Marta, 2018. "Landscape, facilities and visitors: An integrated model of recreational ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 491-501.
    19. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    20. Changjun Gu & Pei Zhao & Qiong Chen & Shicheng Li & Lanhui Li & Linshan Liu & Yili Zhang, 2020. "Forest Cover Change and the Effectiveness of Protected Areas in the Himalaya since 1998," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-24, July.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:22:p:9395-:d:443515. 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.