IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v74y2018icp15-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-dimensional eco-land classification and management for implementing the ecological redline policy in China

Author

Listed:
  • Guo, Xudong
  • Chang, Qing
  • Liu, Xiao
  • Bao, Huimin
  • Zhang, Yuepeng
  • Tu, Xueying
  • Zhu, Chunxia
  • Lv, Chunyan
  • Zhang, Yanyu

Abstract

The ecological civilization characterized by the ecological redline policy (ERP) has been a new long-term national development strategy in China. The ERP emphasizes the need to define ecological baseline areas to provide ecosystem services and guarantee the national ecological safety. Eco-land units delineated by the individual spatial boundaries of ecosystems may facilitate an understanding of ecosystem patterns and the associated ecological processes at the landscape level. An eco-land classification system may help to identify and manage ecological baseline areas. In this study, a multi-dimensional eco-land classification system was designed to show how eco-land types could provide a reliable work platform for implementing the ERP and land management. Based on previous studies of eco-land types, we extracted three characteristics comprising the scale dependence, functional dominance, and adaptability of management. These three features were then integrated with the existing land use classification to develop a hierarchical eco-land classification system with four primary classes (fundamental eco-land, auxiliary eco-land, productive eco-land, and daily-life eco-land), 11 secondary classes, and 21 sub-secondary classes. Using a performance index based on spatial overlay analysis, we found that the fundamental eco-land covered up to 65% of the ecological redlining areas at the national scale, but not in some physical geographical regions. Thus, productive eco-land, auxiliary eco-land, and daily-life eco-land were also classified to fill the national level gaps among fundamental eco-lands, where the percentage cover of eco-land types at both the regional and urban scales could exceed 65% of the ecological redlining areas at the corresponding scale. Therefore, the disconnected fundamental eco-lands within ecological redlining areas at the national scale might be linked together as a conterminous green infrastructure if productive, auxiliary, and daily-life eco-land types located in strategic gap sites can be identified and protected at regional and urban scales. The eco-land classification system developed in this study may provide a useful land management framework for implementing the new ERP in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Guo, Xudong & Chang, Qing & Liu, Xiao & Bao, Huimin & Zhang, Yuepeng & Tu, Xueying & Zhu, Chunxia & Lv, Chunyan & Zhang, Yanyu, 2018. "Multi-dimensional eco-land classification and management for implementing the ecological redline policy in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 15-31.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:74:y:2018:i:c:p:15-31
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837716314235
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.033?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. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    2. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    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. Minghui Yang & Yu Xie, 2021. "Spatial Pattern Change and Ecosystem Service Value Dynamics of Ecological and Non-Ecological Redline Areas in Nanjing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Rongxi Peng & Guangzhong Cao & Tao Liu, 2022. "Neighboring Effects on Ecological Functions: A New Approach and Application in Urbanizing China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-21, June.
    3. Jia Xu & Dawei Xu & Chen Qu, 2022. "Construction of Ecological Security Pattern and Identification of Ecological Restoration Zones in the City of Changchun, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Yiming Fu & Yaoping Cui & Yaochen Qin & Nan Li & Liangyu Chen & Haoming Xia, 2019. "Continued Hydrothermal and Radiative Pressure on Changed Cropland in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-14, July.
    5. Cao, Jianjun & Wei, Chen & Adamowski, Jan F. & Zhou, Junju & Liu, Chunfang & Zhu, Guofeng & Dong, Xiaogang & Zhang, Xiaofang & Zhao, Huijun & Feng, Qi, 2020. "Could arid and semi-arid abandoned lands prove ecologically or economically valuable if they afford greater soil organic carbon storage than afforested lands in China’s Loess Plateau?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    6. Benhui Zhu & Shizuka Hashimoto, 2021. "Is Expansion or Regulation more Critical for Existing Protected Areas? A Case Study on China’s Eco-Redline Policy in Chongqing Capital," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-25, October.
    7. Shuhan Liu & Guoping Lei & Dongyan Wang & Hong Li & Wenbo Li & Jia Gao, 2020. "Reoccupying Ecological Land for Excessively Expanded Rust Belt Cities in Traditional Grain Bases: An Eco-Economic Trade-Off Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, August.
    8. Shuhan Liu & Dongyan Wang & Guoping Lei & Hong Li & Wenbo Li, 2019. "Elevated Risk of Ecological Land and Underlying Factors Associated with Rapid Urbanization and Overprotected Agriculture in Northeast China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-18, November.
    9. Xie, Yu & Chen, Zhen & Boadu, Francis & Tang, HongJuan, 2022. "How does digital transformation affect agricultural enterprises’ pro-land behavior: The role of environmental protection cognition and cross-border search," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    10. Le Yin & Erfu Dai & Guopan Xie & Baolei Zhang, 2021. "Effects of Land-Use Intensity and Land Management Policies on Evolution of Regional Land System: A Case Study in the Hengduan Mountain Region," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, May.
    11. Lei, Yayuan & Flacke, Johannes & Schwarz, Nina, 2021. "Does Urban planning affect urban growth pattern? A case study of Shenzhen, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    12. Liang, Xinyuan & Jin, Xiaobin & He, Jie & Wang, Xiaorui & Xu, Cuilan & Qiao, Guoliang & Zhang, Xiaolin & Zhou, Yinkang, 2022. "Impacts of land management practice strategy on regional ecosystems: Enlightenment from ecological redline adjustment in Jiangsu, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    13. Zhe Zhao & Yuping Bai & Xiangzheng Deng & Jiancheng Chen & Jian Hou & Zhihui Li, 2020. "Changes in Livestock Grazing Efficiency Incorporating Grassland Productivity: The Case of Hulun Buir, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-13, November.
    14. Zhe Zhao & Xiangzheng Deng & Fan Zhang & Zhihui Li & Wenjiao Shi & Zhigang Sun & Xuezhen Zhang, 2022. "Scenario Analysis of Livestock Carrying Capacity Risk in Farmland from the Perspective of Planting and Breeding Balance in Northeast China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, March.
    15. Jiang, Bo & Bai, Yang & Wong, Christina P. & Xu, Xibao & Alatalo, Juha M., 2019. "China’s ecological civilization program–Implementing ecological redline policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 111-114.
    16. Jie Liu & Lang Zhang & Qingping Zhang, 2019. "The Development Simulation of Urban Green Space System Layout Based on the Land Use Scenario: A Case Study of Xuchang City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    17. Rong Guo & Tong Wu & Mengran Liu & Mengshi Huang & Luigi Stendardo & Yutong Zhang, 2019. "The Construction and Optimization of Ecological Security Pattern in the Harbin-Changchun Urban Agglomeration, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-18, April.
    18. Chao Zhang & Dayi Lin & Lixia Wang & Haiguang Hao & Yuanyuan Li, 2022. "The Effects of the Ecological Conservation Redline in China: A Case Study in Anji County," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-13, June.
    19. Hongwei Guo & Ji Han & Lili Qian & Xinxin Long & Xiaoyin Sun, 2022. "Assessing the Potential Impacts of Urban Expansion on Hydrological Ecosystem Services in a Rapidly Urbanizing Lake Basin in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, April.

    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. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    2. McInnes, R.J. & Everard, M., 2017. "Rapid Assessment of Wetland Ecosystem Services (RAWES): An example from Colombo, Sri Lanka," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 89-105.
    3. Xiao, Lan & Haiping, Tang & Haoguang, Liang, 2017. "A theoretical framework for researching cultural ecosystem service flows in urban agglomerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 95-104.
    4. Liu, Yong & Li, Jinchang & Zhang, Hong, 2012. "An ecosystem service valuation of land use change in Taiyuan City, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 127-132.
    5. Washbourne, Carla-Leanne & Goddard, Mark A. & Le Provost, Gaëtane & Manning, David A.C. & Manning, Peter, 2020. "Trade-offs and synergies in the ecosystem service demand of urban brownfield stakeholders," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    6. Pasimeni, Maria Rita & Petrosillo, Irene & Aretano, Roberta & Semeraro, Teodoro & De Marco, Antonella & Zaccarelli, Nicola & Zurlini, Giovanni, 2014. "Scales, strategies and actions for effective energy planning: A review," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 165-174.
    7. Langemeyer, Johannes & Baró, Francesc & Roebeling, Peter & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2015. "Contrasting values of cultural ecosystem services in urban areas: The case of park Montjuïc in Barcelona," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 178-186.
    8. Abbott, Joshua K. & Klaiber, H. Allen, 2010. "Is all space created equal? Uncovering the relationship between competing land uses in subdivisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 296-307, December.
    9. Shah, Arpit & Garg, Amit, 2017. "Urban commons service generation, delivery, and management: A conceptual framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 280-287.
    10. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    11. Vahid Amini Parsa & Esmail Salehi & Ahmad Reza Yavari & Peter M van Bodegom, 2019. "An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, August.
    12. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.
    13. 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).
    14. Tianhong, Li & Wenkai, Li & Zhenghan, Qian, 2010. "Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use changes in Shenzhen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1427-1435, May.
    15. Mehedi Hasan Mandal & Arindam Roy & Giyasuddin Siddique, 2021. "Spatial dynamics in people-wetland association: an assessment of rural dependency on ecosystem services extended by Purbasthali Wetland, West Bengal," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10831-10852, July.
    16. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    17. Alexander V. Rusanov, 2019. "Dacha dwellers and gardeners: garden plots and second homes in Europe and Russia," Population and Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 3(1), pages 107-124, April.
    18. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    19. Monika Kopecká & Daniel Szatmári & Konštantín Rosina, 2017. "Analysis of Urban Green Spaces Based on Sentinel-2A: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, April.
    20. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(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:74:y:2018:i:c:p:15-31. 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.