IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i9p4138-d1648615.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecological Value Measurement Assessment and Forecasting in Chengdu City, Sichuan Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Ran Li

    (College of Geography and Planning, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China)

  • Wende Chen

    (College of Geography and Planning, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China)

  • Kening Xu

    (College of Geography and Planning, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China)

  • Xuan Qi

    (College of Geography and Planning, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China)

  • Jiali Zhou

    (College of Geography and Planning, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China)

Abstract

This study employs an accounting approach to quantitatively assess Chengdu’s ecological value, focusing on agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, fisheries, climate regulation, water conservation, water quality purification, and air quality improvement. The value of each indicator is calculated and visualized using ArcGIS 10.8, with predictions made for four future time intervals. The analysis reveals the spatial distribution patterns of ecological value across Chengdu. The results indicate the following: (1) From 2015 to 2019, Chengdu’s ecological value indicators demonstrated a positive growth trend, with notable increases in recreation services (CNY 178.5 billion), agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, and fisheries (CNY 32.88 billion), and water conservation (CNY 9.26 billion). Values exhibited a general decrease from the city center outward. (2) Water quality purification, air quality improvement, and pest control values exhibited slight declines in 2015, 2017, and 2019 compared to 2015. (3) Ecological values demonstrate spatial diversity, with lower values in central areas for categories such as soil conservation and a “high-low-high” pattern for water conservation. Recreation services exhibit a “high in the center, low around the edges” pattern. (4) The gray prediction model forecasts that by 2027, the values for agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry and fisheries, water conservation, and soil conservation will double relative to 2015. Climate regulation and air quality improvement values are predicted to triple, while water quality purification exhibits minimal change. Pest control is expected to decline to 67% of its 2015 value, while the value of recreation services will increase to 12 times its 2015 value. The results of this study reveal the evolutionary characteristics of the ecological value volume index in Chengdu, fill a gap in the field of ecological value volume measurement and prediction in the region, and provide scientific support for understanding the evolutionary trajectory of Chengdu’s ecological environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Ran Li & Wende Chen & Kening Xu & Xuan Qi & Jiali Zhou, 2025. "Ecological Value Measurement Assessment and Forecasting in Chengdu City, Sichuan Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:9:p:4138-:d:1648615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/9/4138/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/9/4138/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    2. Daowei Zhang & Anne Stenger, 2015. "Value and valuation of forest ecosystem services," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 129-140, July.
    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. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    2. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    3. Qian Zhou & Feng Gui & Benxuan Zhao & Jingyi Liu & Huiwen Cai & Kaida Xu & Sheng Zhao, 2024. "Examining the Social Costs of Carbon Emissions and the Ecosystem Service Value in Island Ecosystems: An Analysis of the Zhoushan Archipelago," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-19, January.
    4. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    5. Cooke, Benjamin & Corbo-Perkins, Gabriella, 2018. "Co-opting and resisting market based instruments for private land conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-181.
    6. Tracey Osborne & Sylvia Cifuentes & Laura Dev & Seánna Howard & Elisa Marchi & Lauren Withey & Marcelo Santos Rocha da Silva, 2024. "Climate justice, forests, and Indigenous Peoples: toward an alternative to REDD + for the Amazon," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(8), pages 1-28, August.
    7. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    8. Ouellet, F. & Mundler, P. & Dupras, J. & Ruiz, J., 2020. "“Community developed and farmer delivered.” An analysis of the spatial and relational proximities of the Alternative Land Use Services program in Ontario," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    9. Jules Gazeaud & Victor Stephane, 2023. "Productive Workfare? Evidence from Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(1), pages 265-290, January.
    10. Mayer, Alex & Jones, Kelly & Hunt, David & Manson, Robert & Carter Berry, Z. & Asbjornsen, Heidi & Wright, Timothy Max & Salcone, Jacob & Lopez Ramirez, Sergio & Ávila-Foucat, Sophie & Von Thaden Ugal, 2022. "Assessing ecosystem service outcomes from payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz, Mexico: Future deforestation threats and spatial targeting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    11. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    12. Jung, Suhyun & Hajjar, Reem, 2023. "The livelihood impacts of transnational aid for climate change mitigation: Evidence from Ghana," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    13. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    14. Shinichi Kitano, 2021. "Estimation of Determinants of Farmland Abandonment and Its Data Problems," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    15. Trædal, Leif Tore & Vedeld, Pål Olav & Pétursson, Jón Geir, 2016. "Analyzing the transformations of forest PES in Vietnam: Implications for REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 109-117.
    16. J. Carl Ureta & Lucas Clay & Marzieh Motallebi & Joan Ureta, 2020. "Quantifying the Landscape’s Ecological Benefits—An Analysis of the Effect of Land Cover Change on Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-20, December.
    17. Bösch, Matthias & Elsasser, Peter & Wunder, Sven, 2019. "Why do payments for watershed services emerge? A cross-country analysis of adoption contexts," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 111-119.
    18. Fangfang Xun & Yecui Hu & Ling Lv & Jinhui Tong, 2017. "Farmers’ Awareness of Ecosystem Services and the Associated Policy Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-13, September.
    19. Ngoma, Hambulo & Hailu, Amare Teklay & Kabwe, Stephen & Angelsen, Arild, 2020. "Pay, talk or ‘whip’ to conserve forests: Framed field experiments in Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    20. Lili Zhang & Baoqing Hu & Ze Zhang & Gaodou Liang & Simin Huang, 2023. "Comprehensive Evaluation of Ecological-Economic Value of Guangxi Based on Land Consolidation," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-25, March.

    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:17:y:2025:i:9:p:4138-:d:1648615. 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.