IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v72y2018icp303-312.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Land use optimization based on ecosystem service assessment: A case study in the Yanhe watershed

Author

Listed:
  • Wu, Xutong
  • Wang, Shuai
  • Fu, Bojie
  • Liu, Yu
  • Zhu, Yuan

Abstract

Regional land use change can significantly change the ecosystem patterns and processes, resulting in changes of ecosystem services supplies. Large-scale ecological restoration programmes have been implemented in China to restore and sustain ecosystem services. We selected the Yanhe watershed on China’s Loess Plateau, which has experienced the Grain for Green Programme (GFGP), as study area, and we used specialized models to quantify four ecosystem services (water provision, soil conservation, carbon sequestration, and agricultural production) under land use scenarios relative to actual land use change from 2000 to 2015. These scenarios were set according to slope, land use type and water constraint of the watershed to improve water quantity, carbon sequestration, soil retention, agricultural production, and sub-watershed water sustainability. The results show that from 2000 to 2015, 66% of farmlands converted to grassland, 12% of farmlands converted to forest, and farmland proportion declined from 42.0% to 5.3%, while water provision and agricultural production services declined by 12% and 87%, and soil conservation and carbon sequestration services increased by 13% and 3%. Furthermore, under five specific scenarios that converted all retired farmland to grassland in the water-short area and maintained farmland at 0–10° slope in the water-adequate area, all four ecosystem services improved compared with 2015 levels. By identifying optimized land use scenario of retired farmland, we refined general principles of future analyses and decision making in ecological restoration. Comprehensively analyzing slope, land use type and water constraint of the watershed when choosing land use scenarios for GFGP can effectively resolve trade-offs among multiple ecosystem services and can promote regional sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • Wu, Xutong & Wang, Shuai & Fu, Bojie & Liu, Yu & Zhu, Yuan, 2018. "Land use optimization based on ecosystem service assessment: A case study in the Yanhe watershed," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 303-312.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:72:y:2018:i:c:p:303-312
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837717312590
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chisholm, Ryan A., 2010. "Trade-offs between ecosystem services: Water and carbon in a biodiversity hotspot," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1973-1987, August.
    2. Vogdrup-Schmidt, Mathias & Strange, Niels & Olsen, Søren B. & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2017. "Trade-off analysis of ecosystem service provision in nature networks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 165-173.
    3. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    4. Mach, Megan E. & Martone, Rebecca G. & Chan, Kai M.A., 2015. "Human impacts and ecosystem services: Insufficient research for trade-off evaluation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 112-120.
    5. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    6. Song, Wei & Deng, Xiangzheng & Yuan, Yongwei & Wang, Zhan & Li, Zhaohua, 2015. "Impacts of land-use change on valued ecosystem service in rapidly urbanized North China Plain," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 245-253.
    7. Jiang, Chong & Zhang, Haiyan & Tang, Zhipeng & Labzovskii, Lev, 2017. "Evaluating the coupling effects of climate variability and vegetation restoration on ecosystems of the Loess Plateau, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 134-148.
    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. 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).
    2. Heinze, Alan & Bongers, Frans & Ramírez Marcial, Neptalí & García Barrios, Luis E. & Kuyper, Thomas W., 2022. "Farm diversity and fine scales matter in the assessment of ecosystem services and land use scenarios," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Henghui Xi & Wanglai Cui & Li Cai & Mengyuan Chen & Chenglei Xu, 2021. "Evaluation and Prediction of Ecosystem Service Value in the Zhoushan Islands Based on LUCC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    4. Falk, Thomas & Spangenberg, Joachim H. & Siegmund-Schultze, Marianna & Kobbe, Susanne & Feike, Til & Kuebler, Daniel & Settele, Josef & Vorlaufer, Tobias, 2018. "Identifying governance challenges in ecosystem services management – Conceptual considerations and comparison of global forest cases," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PB), pages 193-203.
    5. repec:eee:ecoser:v:36:y:2019:i:c:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Yiting Chen & Zhanbin Li & Peng Li & Zipei Zhang & Yixin Zhang, 2021. "Identification of Coupling and Influencing Factors between Urbanization and Ecosystem Services in Guanzhong, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-21, September.
    7. Jaung, Wanggi & Carrasco, L. Roman & Bae, Jae Soo, 2019. "Integration of ecosystem services as public values within election promises: evidence from the 2018 local elections in Korea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    8. Keenan, Rodney J. & Pozza, Greg & Fitzsimons, James A., 2019. "Ecosystem services in environmental policy: Barriers and opportunities for increased adoption," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Aijun Guo & Yongnian Zhang & Fanglei Zhong & Daiwei Jiang, 2020. "Spatiotemporal Patterns of Ecosystem Service Value Changes and Their Coordination with Economic Development: A Case Study of the Yellow River Basin, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-17, November.
    10. Clément Feger & Laurent Mermet, 2017. "A blueprint towards accounting for the management of ecosystems," Post-Print hal-01930913, HAL.
    11. Hugé, J. & Rochette, A.J. & de Béthune, S. & Parra Paitan, C.C. & Vanderhaegen, K. & Vandervelden, T. & Van Passel, S. & Vanhove, M.P.M. & Verbist, B. & Verheyen, D. & Waas, T. & Janssens, I. & Jansse, 2020. "Ecosystem services assessment tools for African Biosphere Reserves: A review and user-informed classification," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Tianhai Zhang & Yaqin Qu & Yang Liu & Guanfeng Yan & Greg Foliente, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Response of Ecosystem Service Values to Land Use Change in Xiamen, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, October.
    14. Shuang Gan & Yu Xiao & Keyu Qin & Jingya Liu & Jie Xu & Yangyang Wang & Yingnan Niu & Mengdong Huang & Gaodi Xie, 2022. "Analyzing the Interrelationships among Various Ecosystem Services from the Perspective of Ecosystem Service Bundles in Shenyang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, April.
    15. Fengjie Gao & Jinfang Cui & Si Zhang & Xiaohui Xin & Shaoliang Zhang & Jun Zhou & Ying Zhang, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Distribution and Driving Factors of Ecosystem Service Value in a Fragile Hilly Area of North China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, December.
    16. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Spatial dynamics of biophysical trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services in the Himalayas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    17. Peng, Jian & Hu, Xiaoxu & Wang, Xiaoyu & Meersmans, Jeroen & Liu, Yanxu & Qiu, Sijing, 2019. "Simulating the impact of Grain-for-Green Programme on ecosystem services trade-offs in Northwestern Yunnan, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    18. Uehara, Takuro & Hidaka, Takeshi & Tsuge, Takahiro & Sakurai, Ryo & Cordier, Mateo, 2021. "An adaptive social-ecological system management matrix for guiding ecosystem service improvements," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    19. Takashi Hayashi & Daisuke Kunii & Masayuki Sato, 2021. "A Practice in Valuation of Ecosystem Services for Local Policymakers: Inclusion of Local-Specific and Demand-Side Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.
    20. Weitzman, Jenny, 2019. "Applying the ecosystem services concept to aquaculture: A review of approaches, definitions, and uses," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 194-206.
    21. Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2022. "Benefits of Stakeholder integration in an ecosystem services assessment of Mount Carmel Biosphere Reserve, Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).

    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:eee:lauspo:v:72:y:2018:i:c:p:303-312. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.