Author
Listed:
- Yaqin Sun
(School of Earth Sciences and Resources, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China
China Aero Geophysical Survey and Remote Sensing Center for Natural Resources, Beijing 100083, China
Key Laboratory of Airborne Geophysics and Remote Sensing Geology, Ministry of Nature Resources, Beijing 100083, China
Technology Innovation Center for Geohazards Identification and Monitoring with Earth Observation System, Ministry of Natural Resources, Beijing 100083, China)
- Jinzhong Yang
(China Aero Geophysical Survey and Remote Sensing Center for Natural Resources, Beijing 100083, China
Key Laboratory of Airborne Geophysics and Remote Sensing Geology, Ministry of Nature Resources, Beijing 100083, China)
- Hao Wang
(China Aero Geophysical Survey and Remote Sensing Center for Natural Resources, Beijing 100083, China)
- Fan Bu
(China Aero Geophysical Survey and Remote Sensing Center for Natural Resources, Beijing 100083, China)
- Ruiliang Wang
(China Aero Geophysical Survey and Remote Sensing Center for Natural Resources, Beijing 100083, China)
Abstract
Ecosystem vulnerability assessment is paramount for local environmental stability and lasting economic progress. This study selects Hubei Province as the research area, applying multi-source spatiotemporal datasets spanning the period 2000–2023. A pressure–state–response (PSR) framework, incorporating 14 distinct indicators, was developed. The selection criteria for these indicators adhered to principles of scientific rigor, all-encompassing scope, statistical representativeness, and practical applicability. The chosen indicators effectively encompass natural, anthropogenic, and socio-economic drivers, aligning with the specific ecological attributes and key vulnerability factors pertinent to Hubei Province. The analytic network process (ANP) method and entropy weighting (EW) method were integrated to ascertain comprehensive weights, thereby computing the ecological vulnerability index (EVI). In the meantime, we analyzed temporal and spatial EVI shifts. Spatial autocorrelation analysis, the geodetic detector, the Theil–Sen median, the Mann–Kendall trend test, and the Grey–Markov model were employed to elucidate spatial distribution, driving factors, and future trends. Results indicate that Hubei Province exhibited mild ecological vulnerability from 2000 to 2023, but with a notable deteriorating trend: extreme vulnerability areas expanded from 0.34% to 0.94%, while moderate and severe vulnerability zones also increased. Eastern regions demonstrate elevated vulnerability, but they were lower in the west, correlating with human activity intensity. The global Moran’s I index ranged from 0.8579 to 0.8725, signifying a significant positive spatial correlation of ecological vulnerability, with the highly vulnerable areas concentrated in regions with intense human activities, while the less vulnerable areas are located in ecologically intact areas. Habitat quality index and carbon sinks emerged as key drivers, possibly stemming from the forest–wetland composite ecosystem’s high dependence on water conservation, biodiversity maintenance, and carbon storage functions. Future projections based on Grey–Markov models indicate that ecological fragility in Hubei Province will exhibit an upward trend, with ecological conservation pressures continuing to intensify. This research offers a preliminary reference basis of grounds for ecological zoning, as well as sustainable regional development in Hubei Province, while also providing a theoretical and practical framework for constructing an ecological security pattern within the Yangtze River Economic Belt (YREB) and facilitating ecological governance in analogous river basins globally, thereby contributing to regional sustainable development goals.
Suggested Citation
Yaqin Sun & Jinzhong Yang & Hao Wang & Fan Bu & Ruiliang Wang, 2026.
"Ecological Vulnerability Assessment in Hubei Province, China: Pressure–State–Response (PSR) Modeling and Driving Factor Analysis from 2000 to 2023,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-29, January.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:3:p:1323-:d:1850898
Download full text from publisher
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:18:y:2026:i:3:p:1323-:d:1850898. 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.