IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i7p1020-d856484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolution Characteristics, Eco-Environmental Response and Influencing Factors of Production-Living-Ecological Space in the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau

Author

Listed:
  • Shuaibing Zhang

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China
    School of Urban Construction and Environment, City College of Dongguan University of Technology, Dongguan 523419, China)

  • Kaixu Zhao

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

  • Shuoyang Ji

    (School of Housing, Building and Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Gelugor 11800, Malaysia)

  • Yafang Guo

    (School of Urban Construction and Environment, City College of Dongguan University of Technology, Dongguan 523419, China)

  • Fengqi Wu

    (Graduate School of Northwest University, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, China)

  • Jingxian Liu

    (School of Urban Construction and Environment, City College of Dongguan University of Technology, Dongguan 523419, China)

  • Fei Xie

    (School of Urban Construction and Environment, City College of Dongguan University of Technology, Dongguan 523419, China)

Abstract

The Qinghai–Tibet Plateau (QTP) is a major “river source” and “ecological source” in China, as well as South Asia and Southeast Asia, and is a typical plateau region. Studying the evolution characteristics and ecological effects of the production-living-ecological space (PLES) of the QTP is of great practical significance and theoretical value for strengthening its ecological construction and environmental protection. Based on 30 m × 30 m land use/cover data of the QTP at five time-points of 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020, this paper investigates the PLES evolution characteristics, transfer characteristics, eco-environmental response, and influencing factors of the eco-environmental quality index (EEQI) in the region of China of the QTP from 1980 to 2020 by land use transfer matrix, eco-environmental response model, hot spot analysis, and geographically weighted regression (GWR). The results show that: (1) from 1980 to 2020, the ecological space of the QTP decreased, while the production and living space saw an increase. The PLES pattern of the QTP showed a clear shift from 2000 to 2010, while there was no significant change from 1980 to 2000 and from 2010 to 2020. (2) From 1980 to 2020, the EEQI of the QTP decreased from 0.5634 in 1980 to 0.5038 in 2010, and then increased to 0.5044 in 2020, showing a changing trend of first decreasing and then increasing; the degradation of grassland ecological space to other ecological space was the main cause leading to ecological environment deterioration. (3) From 1980 to 2000, the EEQI was high in the midwestern and southeastern parts of the QTP, presenting a double-center distribution. From 2010 to 2020, the EEQI decreased in the western part, while the high value area in the eastern part increased significantly, obviously low in the west and high in the east. The spatial variation characteristics of hot and cold spots and EEQI are generally similar. (4) Natural ecological and socioeconomic factors have significant differences on the spatial distribution of EEQI in the QTP, and natural ecological factors are the main driving factors, with topographic relief having the strongest effect on EEQI as a natural ecological factor, and population density having the strongest effect as a socioeconomic factor.

Suggested Citation

  • Shuaibing Zhang & Kaixu Zhao & Shuoyang Ji & Yafang Guo & Fengqi Wu & Jingxian Liu & Fei Xie, 2022. "Evolution Characteristics, Eco-Environmental Response and Influencing Factors of Production-Living-Ecological Space in the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-26, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:7:p:1020-:d:856484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/7/1020/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/7/1020/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hana Skokanová & Marek Havlíček & Roman Borovec & Jaromír Demek & Renata Eremiášová & Zdeněk Chrudina & Peter Mackovčin & Radovana Rysková & Petr Slavík & Tereza Stránská & Josef Svoboda, 2012. "Development of land use and main land use change processes in the period 1836–2006: case study in the Czech Republic," Journal of Maps, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 88-96.
    2. Rennings, Klaus, 2000. "Redefining innovation -- eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 319-332, February.
    3. Yuanyuan Yang & Wenkai Bao & Yuheng Li & Yongsheng Wang & Zongfeng Chen, 2020. "Land Use Transition and Its Eco-Environmental Effects in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Urban Agglomeration: A Production–Living–Ecological Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Arrow, Kenneth & Bolin, Bert & Costanza, Robert & Dasgupta, Partha & Folke, Carl & Holling, C.S. & Jansson, Bengt-Owe & Levin, Simon & Mäler, Karl-Göran & Perrings, Charles & Pimentel, David, 1996. "Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 104-110, February.
    5. Wästfelt, Anders & Zhang, Qian, 2018. "Keeping agriculture alive next to the city – The functions of the land tenure regime nearby Gothenburg, Sweden," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 447-459.
    6. 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.
    7. Costanza, Robert, 1995. "Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 89-90, November.
    8. Turner, B. L. II & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Kuemmerle, Tobias & Müller, Daniel & Chowdhury, Rinku Roy, 2020. "Framing the search for a theory of land use," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 15(4), pages 489-508.
    9. Lin Li & Kaixu Zhao & Xinyu Wang & Sidong Zhao & Xingguang Liu & Weiwei Li, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Driving Mechanism of Urbanization in Small Cities: Case Study from Guangxi," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-34, March.
    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. Zhibo Lu & Qian Song & Jianyun Zhao, 2023. "Evolution of Landscape Ecological Risk and Identification of Critical Areas in the Yellow River Source Area Based on LUCC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-16, June.
    2. Ying Yang & Yawen Liu & Congmou Zhu & Xinming Chen & Yi Rong & Jing Zhang & Bingbing Huang & Longlong Bai & Qi Chen & Yue Su & Shaofeng Yuan, 2022. "Spatial Identification and Interactive Analysis of Urban Production—Living—Ecological Spaces Using Point of Interest Data and a Two-Level Scoring Evaluation Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Jiawei Qi & Yichen Zhang & Jiquan Zhang & Yanan Chen & Chenyang Wu & Chenyu Duan & Zhongshuai Cheng & Zengkai Pan, 2022. "Research on the Evaluation of Geological Environment Carrying Capacity Based on the AHP-CRITIC Empowerment Method," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-17, July.
    4. Yuchen Peng & Qiaolin Luan & Changsheng Xiong, 2023. "Evaluation of Spatial Functions and Scale Effects of “Production–Living–Ecological” Space in Hainan Island," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-15, August.

    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. Kaika, Dimitra & Zervas, Efthimios, 2013. "The environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) theory. Part B: Critical issues," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1403-1411.
    2. Bradford David F. & Fender Rebecca A & Shore Stephen H. & Wagner Martin, 2005. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve: Exploring a Fresh Specification," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-28, June.
    3. Ghimire, Narishwar & Woodward, Richard T., 2013. "Under- and over-use of pesticides: An international analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 73-81.
    4. Jha, Raghbendra & Murthy, K. V. Bhanu, 2003. "An inverse global environmental Kuznets curve," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 352-368, June.
    5. G. Mythili & Shibashis Mukherjee, 2011. "Examining Environmental Kuznets Curve for river effluents in India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 627-640, June.
    6. George Halkos & Iacovos Psarianos, 2016. "Exploring the effect of including the environment in the neoclassical growth model," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 18(3), pages 339-358, July.
    7. Rothman, Dale S., 1998. "Environmental Kuznets curves--real progress or passing the buck?: A case for consumption-based approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 177-194, May.
    8. Andreoni, James & Levinson, Arik, 2001. "The simple analytics of the environmental Kuznets curve," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 269-286, May.
    9. Costantini, Valeria & Monni, Salvatore, 2008. "Environment, human development and economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 867-880, February.
    10. Richard T. Carson, 2010. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve: Seeking Empirical Regularity and Theoretical Structure," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(1), pages 3-23, Winter.
    11. David I. Stern, 2017. "The environmental Kuznets curve after 25 years," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 7-28, April.
    12. Jaeger, William K. & Kolpin, Van, 2008. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve from Multiple Perspectives," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 36760, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    13. Roca, Jordi & Serrano, Monica, 2007. "Income growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: An input-output approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 230-242, June.
    14. Anver C. Sadath & Rajesh H. Acharya, 2019. "Economic growth and environmental degradation: How to balance the interests of developed and developing countries," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(2), pages 25-47.
    15. Luzzati, T. & Orsini, M., 2009. "Investigating the energy-environmental Kuznets curve," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 291-300.
    16. Valeria Costantini & Chiara Martini, 2010. "A Modified Environmental Kuznets Curve for sustainable development assessment using panel data," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1/2), pages 84-122.
    17. Matias Piaggio & Emilio Padilla & Carolina Roman, 2015. "The long-run relationshiop between C02 emissions and economic activity in a small open economy: Uruguay 1882-2010," Working Papers wpdea1506, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
    18. Oparinde, Adewale, 2010. "Investigating the relationship between income, health and biomass consumption: a panel data analysis," MPRA Paper 39305, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Sabuj Kumar Mandal & Devleena Chakravarty, 2017. "Role of energy in estimating turning point of Environmental Kuznets Curve: an econometric analysis of the existing studies," Journal of Social and Economic Development, Springer;Institute for Social and Economic Change, vol. 19(2), pages 387-401, October.
    20. Myo Myo Htike & Anil Shrestha & Makoto Kakinaka, 2022. "Investigating whether the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis holds for sectoral CO2 emissions: evidence from developed and developing countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(11), pages 12712-12739, November.

    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:7:p:1020-:d:856484. 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.