IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i11p6661-d827568.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying the Spatial Imbalance in the Supply and Demand of Cultural Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Qinqin Shi

    (Cooperative Innovation Center for Transition of Resource-Based Economics, Shanxi University of Finance & Economics, Taiyuan 030006, China
    Research Institute of Resource-Based Economics, Shanxi University of Finance & Economics, Taiyuan 030006, China)

  • Hai Chen

    (College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, China)

  • Di Liu

    (School of Culture and Tourism, Ningxia University, Zhongwei 755000, China)

  • Tianwei Geng

    (College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, China)

  • Hang Zhang

    (Institute of Land and Urban-Rural Development, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China)

Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services (CESs) are an important part of ecosystem services (ESs). Correctly understanding the supply and demand relationship of CES is the premise of ES sustainable management and helps to improve human well-being. However, the evaluation and mapping of CES supply and demand represents a significant gap in ES research. Using the Shigou Township of Mizhi County in China as an example, in this study, we evaluated CES supply and demand at the village scale. We first considered three aspects of supply potential, accessibility and quality to construct an indicator system of six types of CES supply, including aesthetic (Aest), sense of place (SP), social relations (SR), cultural heritage (Cult), education (Edu) and recreation (Recr) and obtained demand data through a questionnaire. Then, we identified the imbalance in the supply and demand of CES by Z-score standardization based on the quantification of the CES supply and demand. Secondly, bivariate spatial autocorrelation analysis was used to identify tradeoffs/synergies on the CES supply side, and chi-square tests were used to identify CES demand differences between stakeholder groups. The results indicated that the supply–demand patterns of CES presented evident spatial differences. The low-supply–high-demand patterns of Aest, SR and Recr accounted for the largest proportions, with values of 33.33%, 33.33% and 30.95%, respectively. The low-supply–low-demand patterns of SP and Cult accounted for the largest proportions, with values of 30.95% and 38.10%, respectively. The low-supply–low-demand pattern of Edu accounted for the smallest proportion (21.43%) and was mainly located in the south of Shigou Township. The southwest, northeast and central areas of Shigou Township were the key regions of tradeoffs/synergies of CES supply. There were significant differences in CES demand for SR, Cult and Edu among stakeholder groups. The results could contribute to optimizing regional ecosystem management and provide effective information for improving the imbalance between the supply and demand of CES.

Suggested Citation

  • Qinqin Shi & Hai Chen & Di Liu & Tianwei Geng & Hang Zhang, 2022. "Identifying the Spatial Imbalance in the Supply and Demand of Cultural Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:11:p:6661-:d:827568
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6661/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6661/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ma, Sai & Smailes, Marina & Zheng, Hua & Robinson, Brian E., 2019. "Who is Vulnerable to Ecosystem Service Change? Reconciling Locally Disaggregated Ecosystem Service Supply and Demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 312-320.
    2. Larondelle, Neele & Lauf, Steffen, 2016. "Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 18-31.
    3. Ciftcioglu, Gulay Cetinkaya, 2017. "Social preference-based valuation of the links between home gardens, ecosystem services, and human well-being in Lefke Region of North Cyprus," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 227-236.
    4. Depietri, Yaella & Ghermandi, Andrea & Campisi-Pinto, Salvatore & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2021. "Public participation GIS versus geolocated social media data to assess urban cultural ecosystem services: Instances of complementarity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    5. Shi, Qinqin & Chen, Hai & Liang, Xiaoying & Zhang, Hang & Liu, Di, 2020. "Cultural ecosystem services valuation and its multilevel drivers: A case study of Gaoqu Township in Shaanxi Province, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    6. Wang, Bojie & Tang, Haiping & Xu, Ying, 2017. "Integrating ecosystem services and human well-being into management practices: Insights from a mountain-basin area, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 58-69.
    7. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    8. Di Liu & Xiaoying Liang & Hai Chen & Hang Zhang & Nanzhao Mao, 2018. "A Quantitative Assessment of Comprehensive Ecological Risk for a Loess Erosion Gully: A Case Study of Dujiashi Gully, Northern Shaanxi Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Brown, Greg, 2013. "The relationship between social values for ecosystem services and global land cover: An empirical analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 58-68.
    10. Yoshimura, Nobuhiko & Hiura, Tsutom, 2017. "Demand and supply of cultural ecosystem services: Use of geotagged photos to map the aesthetic value of landscapes in Hokkaido," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 68-78.
    11. Tao, Yu & Wang, Hongning & Ou, Weixin & Guo, Jie, 2018. "A land-cover-based approach to assessing ecosystem services supply and demand dynamics in the rapidly urbanizing Yangtze River Delta region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 250-258.
    12. Zhang, Wei & Kato, Edward & Bhandary, Prapti & Nkonya, Ephraim & Ibrahim, Hassan Ishaq & Agbonlahor, Mure & Ibrahim, Hussaini Yusuf & Cox, Cindy, 2016. "Awareness and perceptions of ecosystem services in relation to land use types: Evidence from rural communities in Nigeria," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 150-160.
    13. Wei, Hejie & Liu, Huiming & Xu, Zihan & Ren, Jiahui & Lu, Nachuan & Fan, Weiguo & Zhang, Peng & Dong, Xiaobin, 2018. "Linking ecosystem services supply, social demand and human well-being in a typical mountain–oasis–desert area, Xinjiang, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 44-57.
    14. Cui, Fengqi & Tang, Haiping & Zhang, Qin & Wang, Bojie & Dai, Luwei, 2019. "Integrating ecosystem services supply and demand into optimized management at different scales: A case study in Hulunbuir, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    15. Peña, Lorena & Casado-Arzuaga, Izaskun & Onaindia, Miren, 2015. "Mapping recreation supply and demand using an ecological and a social evaluation approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 108-118.
    16. Fish, Robert & Church, Andrew & Winter, Michael, 2016. "Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: A novel framework for research and critical engagement," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 208-217.
    17. García-Nieto, Ana P. & Quintas-Soriano, Cristina & García-Llorente, Marina & Palomo, Ignacio & Montes, Carlos & Martín-López, Berta, 2015. "Collaborative mapping of ecosystem services: The role of stakeholders׳ profiles," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 141-152.
    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. Urai Ridho A. M. F. Banarsyadhimi & Paul Dargusch & Fery Kurniawan, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Marine Tourism and Protection on Cultural Ecosystem Services Using Integrated Approach: A Case Study of Gili Matra Islands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-23, September.

    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. Shi, Qinqin & Chen, Hai & Liang, Xiaoying & Zhang, Hang & Liu, Di, 2020. "Cultural ecosystem services valuation and its multilevel drivers: A case study of Gaoqu Township in Shaanxi Province, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Bojie Wang & Haiping Tang & Qin Zhang & Fengqi Cui, 2020. "Exploring Connections among Ecosystem Services Supply, Demand and Human Well-Being in a Mountain-Basin System, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-15, July.
    3. 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).
    4. Gugulica, Madalina & Burghardt, Dirk, 2023. "Mapping indicators of cultural ecosystem services use in urban green spaces based on text classification of geosocial media data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    5. Hattam, Caroline & Broszeit, Stefanie & Langmead, Olivia & Praptiwi, Radisti A. & Ching Lim, Voon & Creencia, Lota A. & Duc Hau, Tran & Maharja, Carya & Wulandari, Prawesti & Mitra Setia, Tatang & Sug, 2021. "A matrix approach to tropical marine ecosystem service assessments in South east Asia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    6. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    7. Tusznio, Joanna & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Rechciński, Marcin & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2020. "Application of the ecosystem services concept at the local level – Challenges, opportunities, and limitations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    8. Tianwei Geng & Hai Chen & Di Liu & Qinqin Shi & Hang Zhang, 2021. "Research on Mediating Mechanisms and the Impact on Food Provision Services in Poor Areas from the Perspective of Stakeholders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-18, October.
    9. Cabana, David & Ryfield, Frances & Crowe, Tasman P. & Brannigan, John, 2020. "Evaluating and communicating cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    10. Yue Wang & Qi Fu & Tinghui Wang & Mengfan Gao & Jinhua Chen, 2022. "Multiscale Characteristics and Drivers of the Bundles of Ecosystem Service Budgets in the Su-Xi-Chang Region, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-26, October.
    11. Chakraborty, Shamik & Gasparatos, Alexandros & Blasiak, Robert, 2020. "Multiple values for the management and sustainable use of coastal and marine ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    12. Havinga, Ilan & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Hein, Lars & Tuia, Devis, 2020. "Defining and spatially modelling cultural ecosystem services using crowdsourced data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    13. Meng, Shiting & Huang, Qingxu & Zhang, Ling & He, Chunyang & Inostroza, Luis & Bai, Yansong & Yin, Dan, 2020. "Matches and mismatches between the supply of and demand for cultural ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: A case study in the Guanting Reservoir basin, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    14. Song Liu & Peiyu Shen & Yishan Huang & Li Jiang & Yongjiu Feng, 2022. "Spatial Distribution Changes in Nature-Based Recreation Service Supply from 2008 to 2018 in Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Huai, Songyao & Chen, Fen & Liu, Song & Canters, Frank & Van de Voorde, Tim, 2022. "Using social media photos and computer vision to assess cultural ecosystem services and landscape features in urban parks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    16. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "A systematic review on subjective well-being benefits associated with cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    17. Garcia, Xavier & Benages-Albert, Marta & Vall-Casas, Pere, 2018. "Landscape conflict assessment based on a mixed methods analysis of qualitative PPGIS data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 112-124.
    18. Zhengxin Ji & Yueqing Xu & Hejie Wei, 2020. "Identifying Dynamic Changes in Ecosystem Services Supply and Demand for Urban Sustainability: Insights from a Rapidly Urbanizing City in Central China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-23, April.
    19. Thiele, Julia & Albert, Christian & Hermes, Johannes & von Haaren, Christina, 2020. "Assessing and quantifying offered cultural ecosystem services of German river landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    20. Wei, Hejie & Fan, Weiguo & Wang, Xuechao & Lu, Nachuan & Dong, Xiaobin & Zhao, Yanan & Ya, Xijia & Zhao, Yifei, 2017. "Integrating supply and social demand in ecosystem services assessment: A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 15-27.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:11:p:6661-:d:827568. 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.