IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i6p899-d837534.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Spatio-Temporal Pattern and Development Characteristics of Regional Ecological Resources for Sustainable Development: A Case Study on Guizhou Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Zhe Cheng

    (School of Public Administration, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an 710055, China)

  • Tianyu Zhao

    (School of Public Administration, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an 710055, China)

  • Tao Song

    (Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Li Cui

    (School of Tourism Sciences, Beijing International Studies University, Beijing 100024, China)

  • Xinfa Zhou

    (School of Economics, Peking University, Beijing 100091, China)

Abstract

Sustainable development is a common challenge for all global economies, and the assessment of the spatial distribution and development process of ecological resources is the basis of sustainable development. Considering the heterogeneity of regional ecological resource endowment, it is necessary to conduct a targeted assessment for different regions. In this study, we selected Guizhou Province, which is rich in ecological resources, but has a fragile environment, as our study area, and cultivated land, woodland, grassland, and water resources were selected as critical evaluation indicators. Notably, we applied Kernel density analysis methods, based on the remote sensing data of 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020, to explore the spatiotemporal distribution characteristics and evolution pattern of regional ecological resources. The results indicated that the evolution of ecological resource development in Guizhou could be divided into three phases: degenerative (2000–2005), recovery (2005–2015), and development (2015–2020). The spatial distribution of Guizhou’s ecological resource was shown to be heterogeneous in the north and south and more homogeneous in the middle regions. Guizhou has diverse land-use types, with obvious regional differences in land-use structure. Notably, even though the development of ecological resources in Guizhou has improved, the development and utilization degree of ecological resources is still low, and the ecological damage is serious. This study can be used as a scientific reference by policymakers and decisionmakers to develop new regulations for ecological resources protection and sustainable development in China. We suggest that different regions should adopt more detailed measures; particularly, it is important to establish a spatial governance system to promote ecological resources development in the context of local conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhe Cheng & Tianyu Zhao & Tao Song & Li Cui & Xinfa Zhou, 2022. "Assessing the Spatio-Temporal Pattern and Development Characteristics of Regional Ecological Resources for Sustainable Development: A Case Study on Guizhou Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:899-:d:837534
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/899/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/899/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yubang Liu & Yunan Yan & Xin Li, 2020. "An Empirical Analysis of an Integrated Accounting Method to Assess the Non-Monetary and Monetary Value of Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    3. Bouwma, Irene & Schleyer, Christian & Primmer, Eeva & Winkler, Klara Johanna & Berry, Pam & Young, Juliette & Carmen, Esther & Špulerová, Jana & Bezák, Peter & Preda, Elena & Vadineanu, Angheluta, 2018. "Adoption of the ecosystem services concept in EU policies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 213-222.
    4. Tian, Li & Liang, Yinlong & Zhang, Bo, 2017. "Measuring residential and industrial land use mix in the peri-urban areas of China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 427-438.
    5. Thais Thiesen & Mahadev G. Bhat & Hong Liu & Roberto Rovira, 2022. "An Ecosystem Service Approach to Assessing Agro-Ecosystems in Urban Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-23, March.
    6. 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.
    7. Dong Wang & Xiang Ji & Cheng Li & Yaxi Gong, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Variations of Landscape Ecological Risks in a Resource-Based City under Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, May.
    8. Frélichová, Jana & Vačkář, David & Pártl, Adam & Loučková, Blanka & Harmáčková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, Eliška, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    9. Scholte, Samantha S.K. & van Teeffelen, Astrid J.A. & Verburg, Peter H., 2015. "Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 67-78.
    10. Can Zhang & Shiming Fang, 2021. "Identifying and Zoning Key Areas of Ecological Restoration for Territory in Resource-Based Cities: A Case Study of Huangshi City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-21, April.
    11. Maund, Phoebe R. & Irvine, Katherine N. & Dallimer, Martin & Fish, Robert & Austen, Gail E. & Davies, Zoe G., 2020. "Do ecosystem service frameworks represent people’s values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    12. Zhaohua Li & Zhiyun Zhu & Shilei Xu, 2021. "Competition and Exploitation for Ecological Capital Embodied in International Trade: Evidence from China and Its Trade Partners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.
    13. Primmer, Eeva & Jokinen, Pekka & Blicharska, Malgorzata & Barton, David N. & Bugter, Rob & Potschin, Marion, 2015. "Governance of Ecosystem Services: A framework for empirical analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 158-166.
    14. Lingling Hou & Fang Xia & Qihui Chen & Jikun Huang & Yong He & Nathan Rose & Scott Rozelle, 2021. "Grassland ecological compensation policy in China improves grassland quality and increases herders’ income," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    15. Stern, David I. & Common, Michael S. & Barbier, Edward B., 1996. "Economic growth and environmental degradation: The environmental Kuznets curve and sustainable development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(7), pages 1151-1160, July.
    16. Aoyang Wang & Zhijun Tong & Walian Du & Jiquan Zhang & Xingpeng Liu & Zhiyi Yang, 2021. "Comprehensive Evaluation of Green Development in Dongliao River Basin from the Integration System of “Multi-Dimensions”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, April.
    17. Zhenci Xu & Sophia N. Chau & Xiuzhi Chen & Jian Zhang & Yingjie Li & Thomas Dietz & Jinyan Wang & Julie A. Winkler & Fan Fan & Baorong Huang & Shuxin Li & Shaohua Wu & Anna Herzberger & Ying Tang & De, 2020. "Assessing progress towards sustainable development over space and time," Nature, Nature, vol. 577(7788), pages 74-78, January.
    18. Silvio Franco & Barbara Pancino & Angelo Martella, 2021. "Mapping National Environmental Sustainability Distribution by Ecological Footprint: The Case of Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-14, August.
    19. Haoran Wang & Mengdi Zhang & Chuanying Wang & Kaiyue Wang & Chen Wang & Yang Li & Xiuling Bai & Yunkai Zhou, 2022. "Spatial and Temporal Changes of Landscape Patterns and Their Effects on Ecosystem Services in the Huaihe River Basin, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Hualin Xie & Yanwei Zhang & Yongrok Choi & Fengqin Li, 2020. "A Scientometrics Review on Land Ecosystem Service Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-23, 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. Dong Li & Chongyang Huan & Jun Yang & Hanlong Gu, 2022. "Temporal and Spatial Distribution Changes, Driving Force Analysis and Simulation Prediction of Ecological Vulnerability in Liaoning Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-25, July.
    2. Hao Mei & Jin Yang & Mingshun Xiang & Xiaofeng Yang & Chunjian Wang & Wenheng Li & Suhua Yang, 2022. "Evaluation and Optimization Model of Rural Settlement Habitability in the Upper Reaches of the Minjiang River, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-18, November.
    3. Zhe Cheng & Tianyu Zhao & Yixin Zhu & Hanshi Li, 2022. "Evaluating the Coupling Coordinated Development between Regional Ecological Protection and High-Quality Development: A Case Study of Guizhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, October.

    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. Ingrid Nesheim & Line Barkved, 2019. "The Suitability of the Ecosystem Services Framework for Guiding Benefit Assessments in Human-Modified Landscapes Exemplified by Regulated Watersheds—Implications for a Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Sara Khoshkar & Monica Hammer & Sara Borgström & Berit Balfors, 2020. "Ways Forward for Advancing Ecosystem Services in Municipal Planning—Experiences from Stockholm County," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Qikang Zhong & Zhe Li & Yujing He, 2023. "Coupling Evaluation and Spatial–Temporal Evolution of Land Ecosystem Services and Economic–Social Development in a City Group: The Case Study of the Chengdu–Chongqing City Group," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-29, March.
    4. Beichen Ge & Congjin Wang & Yuhong Song, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Mannetti, Lelani M. & Göttert, Thomas & Zeller, Ulrich & Esler, Karen J., 2017. "Expanding the protected area network in Namibia: An institutional analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 207-218.
    6. Hérivaux, Cécile & Grémont, Marine, 2019. "Valuing a diversity of ecosystem services: The way forward to protect strategic groundwater resources for the future?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 184-193.
    7. Shrestha, Kripa & Shakya, Bandana & Adhikari, Biraj & Nepal, Mani & Shaoliang, Yi, 2023. "Ecosystem services valuation for conservation and development decisions: A review of valuation studies and tools in the Far Eastern Himalaya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    8. Sarkki, Simo & Karjalainen, Timo P., 2015. "Ecosystem service valuation in a governance debate: Practitioners' strategic argumentation on forestry in northern Finland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 13-22.
    9. Verburg, René & Selnes, Trond & Verweij, Pita, 2016. "Governing ecosystem services: National and local lessons from policy appraisal and implementation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 186-197.
    10. Báliková, Klára & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2022. "Are silvicultural subsidies an effective payment for ecosystem services in Slovakia?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    11. 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).
    12. 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.
    13. Correa, Alicia & Forero, Jorge & Marco Renau, Jorge & Lizarazo, Ivan & Mulligan, Mark & Codato, Daniele, 2023. "Advancing spatial decision-making in a transboundary catchment through multidimensional ecosystem services assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    14. Xingxing Jin & Luyao Wei & Yi Wang & Yuqi Lu, 2021. "Construction of ecological security pattern based on the importance of ecosystem service functions and ecological sensitivity assessment: a case study in Fengxian County of Jiangsu Province, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 563-590, January.
    15. Yanru Zhou & Zhe Feng & Kaiji Xu & Kening Wu & Hong Gao & Peijia Liu, 2023. "Ecosystem Service Flow Perspective of Urban Green Land: Spatial Simulation and Driving Factors of Cooling Service Flow," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-16, August.
    16. Steger, Cara & Hirsch, Shana & Evers, Cody & Branoff, Benjamin & Petrova, Maria & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Wardropper, Chloe & van Riper, Carena J., 2018. "Ecosystem Services as Boundary Objects for Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 153-160.
    17. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    18. Claudia Kettner-Marx & Angela Köppl & Sigrid Stagl, 2014. "Towards an Operational Measurement of Socio-ecological Performance. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 52," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47154, April.
    19. 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.
    20. Koushik Chowdhury & Bhagirath Behera, 2020. "Traditional water bodies and ecosystem services: Empirical evidence from West Bengal, India," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(3), pages 219-235, August.

    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:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:899-:d:837534. 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.