IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p687-d1020658.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prediction and Evaluation of Ecosystem Service Value Based on Land Use of the Yellow River Source Area

Author

Listed:
  • Zhibo Lu

    (Department of Geological Engineering, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China
    Provincial Key Laboratory of Cenozoic Resources and Environment on the Northern Rim of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China)

  • Qian Song

    (Department of Geological Engineering, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China
    Provincial Key Laboratory of Cenozoic Resources and Environment on the Northern Rim of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China)

  • Jianyun Zhao

    (Department of Geological Engineering, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China
    Provincial Key Laboratory of Cenozoic Resources and Environment on the Northern Rim of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China)

  • Shiru Wang

    (Department of Geological Engineering, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China
    Provincial Key Laboratory of Cenozoic Resources and Environment on the Northern Rim of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, China)

Abstract

Land-use change plays an important role in ecological change; knowing the trends in land-use change can quickly help identify problems in regional ecosystems. In 2000 to 2020, the development of a global economy caused increasing extreme weather events worldwide and lead to exacerbating changes in types of land-use. The Yellow River source area is an important water source and a central part of ecological protection efforts in China. The fragile ecosystems make the area sensitive to environmental changes. Therefore, in protecting the ecological security of the basin, simulating changes in the ecosystem service value under different scenarios is a meaningful procedure. A patch-generating land use simulation model was used to simulate different land use scenarios in 2030, including an ecological protection scenario, a production priority scenario, a carbon neutral scenario and a natural development scenario. The analysis shows that significant progress has been made in water conservation but grassland conservation faces enormous challenges. The rate of development, occupation of farmland and land dedicated to construction has increased. Unused land increased dramatically from 2010–2020 and has not been mitigated by existing policies. Based on the unit area value equivalent coefficients, the ecosystem service value rankings for the seven land use types were as follows: Grassland > Wetland > Water Area > Forest > Farmland > Unused Land > Construction Land; the four types of ecosystem service value are ranked as follows: regulating services > supporting services > supply services > cultural services; the four scenarios of ecosystem service value are ranked as follows: ecological protection scenario > production priority scenario > carbon neutral scenario > natural development scenario. The ecosystem service value of the Yellow River source area would increase by CNY 1.641 billion in 2030 with ecological protection goals and decrease by CNY 1.421 billion with the current of development. This study provides valuable insights and implications for land use, ecological protection and sustainable development by shedding light on watershed change issues and assessing and predicting the ecological status of the Yellow River source area.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhibo Lu & Qian Song & Jianyun Zhao & Shiru Wang, 2022. "Prediction and Evaluation of Ecosystem Service Value Based on Land Use of the Yellow River Source Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:687-:d:1020658
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/687/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/687/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yunfei Zhao & Zhibo Han & Yuanquan Xu, 2022. "Impact of Land Use/Cover Change on Ecosystem Service Value in Guangxi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Stephen Polasky & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Kris Johnson, 2011. "The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 219-242, February.
    3. Qinglong Ding & Yang Chen & Lingtong Bu & Yanmei Ye, 2021. "Multi-Scenario Analysis of Habitat Quality in the Yellow River Delta by Coupling FLUS with InVEST Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-19, March.
    4. Yuanyuan Lou & Dan Yang & Pengyan Zhang & Ying Zhang & Meiling Song & Yicheng Huang & Wenlong Jing, 2022. "Multi-Scenario Simulation of Land Use Changes with Ecosystem Service Value in the Yellow River Basin," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    6. Scholte, Samantha S.K. & van Teeffelen, Astrid J.A. & Verburg, Peter H., 2015. "Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 67-78.
    7. Yingnan Niu & Gaodi Xie & Yu Xiao & Keyu Qin & Shuang Gan & Jingya Liu, 2021. "Spatial and Temporal Changes of Ecosystem Service Value in Airport Economic Zones in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Chen Jun & Yifang Ban & Songnian Li, 2014. "Open access to Earth land-cover map," Nature, Nature, vol. 514(7523), pages 434-434, October.
    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. Shengchun Tong & Guorong Li & Xilai Li & Jinfang Li & Hui Zhai & Jianyun Zhao & Haili Zhu & Yabin Liu & Wenting Chen & Xiasong Hu, 2023. "Soil Water Erosion and Its Hydrodynamic Characteristics in Degraded Bald Patches of Alpine Meadows in the Yellow River Source Area, Western China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, May.

    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. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    2. 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).
    3. Gréta Vrbičanová & Dominika Kaisová & Matej Močko & František Petrovič & Peter Mederly, 2020. "Mapping Cultural Ecosystem Services Enables Better Informed Nature Protection and Landscape Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    4. Steger, Cara & Hirsch, Shana & Evers, Cody & Branoff, Benjamin & Petrova, Maria & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Wardropper, Chloe & van Riper, Carena J., 2018. "Ecosystem Services as Boundary Objects for Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 153-160.
    5. 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.
    6. Wang, Yahui & Dai, Erfu & Yin, Le & Ma, Liang, 2018. "Land use/land cover change and the effects on ecosystem services in the Hengduan Mountain region, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 55-67.
    7. Affek, Andrzej Norbert & Kowalska, Anna, 2017. "Ecosystem potentials to provide services in the view of direct users," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 183-196.
    8. Xueqing Wang & Zhongyi Ding & Shaoliang Zhang & Huping Hou & Zanxu Chen & Qinyu Wu, 2022. "Spatial–Temporal Multivariate Correlation Analysis of Ecosystem Services and Ecological Risk in Areas of Overlapped Cropland and Coal Resources in the Eastern Plains, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Sha Chen & Guan Li & Zhongguo Xu & Yuefei Zhuo & Cifang Wu & Yanmei Ye, 2019. "Combined Impact of Socioeconomic Forces and Policy Implications: Spatial-Temporal Dynamics of the Ecosystem Services Value in Yangtze River Delta, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-22, May.
    10. Wilker, Jost & Rusche, Karsten & Benning, Alexander & MacDonald, Michael A. & Blaen, Phillip, 2016. "Applying ecosystem benefit valuation to inform quarry restoration planning," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 44-55.
    11. Ephias Mugari & Hillary Masundire, 2022. "Consistent Changes in Land-Use/Land-Cover in Semi-Arid Areas: Implications on Ecosystem Service Delivery and Adaptation in the Limpopo Basin, Botswana," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-20, November.
    12. Ishfaq Ahmad Sheergojri & Irfan Rashid & Ishfaq ul Rehman, 2024. "Systematic review of wetland ecosystem services valuation in India: assessing economic approaches, knowledge gaps, and management implications," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 14(1), pages 167-179, March.
    13. Xia, Zheyi & Yuan, Chengcheng & Gao, Yang & Shen, Zhen & Liu, Kui & Huang, Yuwen & Wei, Xue & Liu, Liming, 2023. "Integrating perceptions of ecosystem services in adaptive management of country parks: A case study in peri-urban Shanghai, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Maczka, Krzysztof & Chmielewski, Piotr & Jeran, Agnieszka & Matczak, Piotr & van Riper, Carena J., 2019. "The ecosystem services concept as a tool for public participation in management of Poland’s Natura 2000 network," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 173-183.
    15. Yuan Gong & Mengmeng Cai & Lei Yao & Linsong Cheng & Chunxu Hao & Zheng Zhao, 2022. "Assessing Changes in the Ecosystem Services Value in Response to Land-Use/Land-Cover Dynamics in Shanghai from 2000 to 2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-19, September.
    16. Marina García-Llorente & Antonio J. Castro & Cristina Quintas-Soriano & Elisa Oteros-Rozas & Irene Iniesta-Arandia & José A. González & David García del Amo & Marta Hernández-Arroyo & Izaskun Casado-A, 2020. "Local Perceptions of Ecosystem Services Across Multiple Ecosystem Types in Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-20, September.
    17. Qianning Zhang & Zhu Xu, 2021. "Fully Portraying Patch Area Scaling with Resolution: An Analytics and Descriptive Statistics-Combined Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-21, March.
    18. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chr, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    19. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    20. Hendrawan, Dienda C P & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Oil Palm Smallholder Farmers' Livelihood Resilience and Decision Making in Replanting," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322441, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:15:y:2022:i:1:p:687-:d:1020658. 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.