IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i15p9206-d873630.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolution Modes, Types, and Social-Ecological Drivers of Ecologically Critical Areas in the Sichuan–Yunnan Ecological Barrier in the Last 15 Years

Author

Listed:
  • Xinyu Shi

    (School of Earth Sciences, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China)

  • Xiaoqing Zhao

    (School of Earth Sciences, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China)

  • Junwei Pu

    (School of Earth Sciences, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China
    Institute of International Rivers & Eco-Security, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China)

  • Pei Huang

    (School of Earth Sciences, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China
    Institute of International Rivers & Eco-Security, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China)

  • Zexian Gu

    (School of Earth Sciences, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China
    Institute of International Rivers & Eco-Security, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China
    Forest Resource Management Division, Nujiang Forestry and Grassland Administration, Lushui 673100, China)

  • Yanjun Chen

    (School of Earth Sciences, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China)

Abstract

The ecological barrier is a complex ecosystem that couples the human–nature relationship, and the ecologically critical area is an irreplaceable area with a special value in the ecosystem. Therefore, protecting the ecologically critical area is vital for maintaining and improving regional ecological security. Limited research has been conducted on the evolution of ecologically critical areas, and none of the studies have considered the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of the driving factors for different evolution modes and types. Therefore, this research adopts the ecologically critical index, landscape expansion index, and the random forest model to analyze the pattern, driving factors, and its spatial-temporal heterogeneity to the evolution modes and specific types of ecologically critical areas in the Sichuan–Yunnan ecological barrier area in the last 15 years. The results showed that: (1) the ecologically critical areas in the Sichuan–Yunnan ecological barrier have changed dramatically, with the area reduction being 61.06%. Additionally, the spatial distribution characteristics of the ecologically critical area from north to south include planar, point, and linear forms. (2) The evolution trend of the ecologically critical area is ‘degradation–expansion–degradation’. Spread is the predominant type of expansion mode, whereas atrophy is the predominant type of degradation mode, indicating that the evolution mainly occurs at the edge of the original ecologically critical areas. (3) In general, precipitation, area of forest, area of cropland, and GDP have contributed significantly to the evolution of ecologically critical areas. However, the same driving factor has different effects on the expansion and degradation of these areas. Expansion is driven by multiple factors at the same time but is mainly related to human activities and land use change, whereas for degradation, climate and policy are the main driving factors. The present research aimed to quantitatively identify the evolution modes and specific types of ecologically critical areas and explore the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of driving factors. The results can help decision-makers in formulating ecological protection policies according to local conditions and in maintaining and enhancing the regional ecological functions, thereby promoting the sustainable development of society-economy-ecology.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinyu Shi & Xiaoqing Zhao & Junwei Pu & Pei Huang & Zexian Gu & Yanjun Chen, 2022. "Evolution Modes, Types, and Social-Ecological Drivers of Ecologically Critical Areas in the Sichuan–Yunnan Ecological Barrier in the Last 15 Years," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:15:p:9206-:d:873630
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/15/9206/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/15/9206/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norman Myers & Russell A. Mittermeier & Cristina G. Mittermeier & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Jennifer Kent, 2000. "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities," Nature, Nature, vol. 403(6772), pages 853-858, February.
    2. Shrestha, Manish & Piman, Thanapon & Grünbühel, Clemens, 2021. "Prioritizing key biodiversity areas for conservation based on threats and ecosystem services using participatory and GIS-based modeling in Chindwin River Basin, Myanmar," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    3. Hidemichi Fujii & Masayuki Sato & Shunsuke Managi, 2017. "Decomposition Analysis of Forest Ecosystem Services Values," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-14, April.
    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. Zhao, Xiaoqing & Xu, Yifei & Pu, Junwei & Tao, Junyi & Chen, Yanjun & Huang, Pei & Shi, Xinyu & Ran, Yuju & Gu, Zexian, 2024. "Achieving the supply-demand balance of ecosystem services through zoning regulation based on land use thresholds," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).

    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. Laxmi D. Bhatta & Sunita Chaudhary & Anju Pandit & Himlal Baral & Partha J. Das & Nigel E. Stork, 2016. "Ecosystem Service Changes and Livelihood Impacts in the Maguri-Motapung Wetlands of Assam, India," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-14, June.
    2. McLennan, D. & Sharma, R., 2012. "The Delivering Ecological Services Index (DESI)," Working papers 119, Rimisp Latin American Center for Rural Development.
    3. Caviedes, Julián & Ibarra, José Tomás & Calvet-Mir, Laura & Álvarez-Fernández, Santiago & Junqueira, André Braga, 2024. "Indigenous and local knowledge on social-ecological changes is positively associated with livelihood resilience in a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage System," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    4. Maeda, Eduardo Eiji & Clark, Barnaby J.F. & Pellikka, Petri & Siljander, Mika, 2010. "Modelling agricultural expansion in Kenya's Eastern Arc Mountains biodiversity hotspot," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 609-620, November.
    5. Jaiswal, Sreeja & Balietti, Anca & Schäffer, Daniel, 2023. "Environmental Protection and Labor Market Composition," Working Papers 0736, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    6. Chomitz, Kenneth M. & Thomas, Timothy S. & Brandão, Antônio Salazar P., 2005. "The economic and environmental impact of trade in forest reserve obligations: a simulation analysis of options for dealing with habitat heterogeneity," Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural (RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 43(4), January.
    7. Elisa Barbour & Lara Kueppers, 2012. "Conservation and management of ecological systems in a changing California," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 111(1), pages 135-163, March.
    8. Tyler M Harms & Kevin T Murphy & Xiaodan Lyu & Shane S Patterson & Karen E Kinkead & Stephen J Dinsmore & Paul W Frese, 2017. "Using landscape habitat associations to prioritize areas of conservation action for terrestrial birds," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, March.
    9. van der Hoff, Richard & Nascimento, Nathália & Fabrício-Neto, Ailton & Jaramillo-Giraldo, Carolina & Ambrosio, Geanderson & Arieira, Julia & Afonso Nobre, Carlos & Rajão, Raoni, 2022. "Policy-oriented ecosystem services research on tropical forests in South America: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    10. Brannstrom, Christian, 2001. "Conservation-with-Development Models in Brazil's Agro-Pastoral Landscapes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 1345-1359, August.
    11. Brendan Fisher & Stephen Polasky & Thomas Sterner, 2011. "Conservation and Human Welfare: Economic Analysis of Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 151-159, February.
    12. Pütz, S. & Groeneveld, J. & Alves, L.F. & Metzger, J.P. & Huth, A., 2011. "Fragmentation drives tropical forest fragments to early successional states: A modelling study for Brazilian Atlantic forests," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(12), pages 1986-1997.
    13. Paige, Sarah B. & Malavé, Carly & Mbabazi, Edith & Mayer, Jonathan & Goldberg, Tony L., 2015. "Uncovering zoonoses awareness in an emerging disease ‘hotspot’," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 78-86.
    14. Stephanie D. Maier & Jan Paul Lindner & Javier Francisco, 2019. "Conceptual Framework for Biodiversity Assessments in Global Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-34, March.
    15. Sehgal, Shaina & Babu, Suresh, 2021. "Economic Transformation of the Nicobar Islands Post-tsunami: A Material Import–Export Analysis," Ecology, Economy and Society - the INSEE Journal, Indian Society of Ecological Economics (INSEE), vol. 4(02), July.
    16. Poonam Tripathi & Mukund Dev Behera & Partha Sarathi Roy, 2017. "Optimized grid representation of plant species richness in India—Utility of an existing national database in integrated ecological analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-13, March.
    17. Davis, Katrina & Pannell, David J. & Kragt, Marit & Gelcich, Stefan & Schilizzi, Steven, 2014. "Accounting for enforcement is essential to improve the spatial allocation of marine restricted-use zoning systems," Working Papers 195718, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    18. Norman Myers, 2003. "Conservation of Biodiversity: How Are We Doing?," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 9-15, March.
    19. Shah, M., 2018. "Reforming India’s water governance to meet 21st century challenges: practical pathways to realizing the vision of the Mihir Shah Committee," IWMI Working Papers H049192, International Water Management Institute.
    20. Juliana Silveira dos Santos & Fausto Miziara & Hayla da Silva Fernandes & Renato Cezar Miranda & Rosane Garcia Collevatti, 2021. "Technification in Dairy Farms May Reconcile Habitat Conservation in a Brazilian Savanna Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, May.

    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:15:p:9206-:d:873630. 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.