Author
Listed:
- Shuai Yuan
(Institute of Desertification Studies, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
Forestry and Grassland Monitoring and Planning Institute of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Hohhot 010030, China
Inner Mongolia Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing of Grassland and Emergency Technical Resources, Hohhot 010030, China)
- Lei-Lei Cheng
(Institute of Desertification Studies, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China)
- Jie Xu
(College of Life Science and Technology, Inner Mongolia Normal University, Hohhot 010022, China)
- Qi Lu
(Institute of Desertification Studies, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China)
Abstract
Currently, the internationally recognized land degradation neutrality (LDN) effort is evaluated using three indicators: land use/cover, land productivity, and carbon stocks. However, these three indicators may not completely capture the factors influencing LDN, and some evaluation rules are not in line with the land restoration goals of China. Therefore, this study introduces the ecosystem service value (ESV) indicator, assesses the differences in connotation and evaluation methods between ESV and LDN, and puts forward an evaluation rule that integrates their advantages, so as to carry out an evaluation of LDN in Inner Mongolia. The conclusions are as follows: (a) The ESVs of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region in 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020 were USD 287.49, 286.04, 285.72, 286.38, and 287.90 billion, respectively, which presents a slight trend of decrease and then increase over time. (b) The modified LDN evaluation rule mainly includes the following changes to the LUCC evaluation rule: (1) the original degradation of cropland to grassland is considered as restoration, (2) water bodies participate in the transformation evaluation between land use types, and (3) the evaluation of transformed secondary land use types is added. The evaluation of net primary productivity (NPP) and soil organic carbon (SOC) still follow the method formulated by the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). (c) The proportion of degraded, stable, and restored land area within the LUCC were 11.31%, 77.34%, and 11.35%, respectively. The proportion of restored area is greater than the proportion of degraded land, which indicates that LDN has been achieved in Inner Mongolia according to the LUCC evaluation. The areas of degradation, stability, and restoration for NPP accounted for 0.10%, 40.52%, and 59.38% of the total area, respectively, with the restored area being much larger than the degraded area. The areas of SOC degradation, stability, and restoration accounted for 13.06%, 74.82%, and 12.11% of the total area, respectively, and the degraded area was slightly larger than the restored area. (d) The LDN evaluation results showed that the proportions of degraded, stable, and restored areas were 21.80%, 27.25%, and 50.96%, respectively. From these results, it is clear that Inner Mongolia has achieved the LDN target. Compared with the rules formulated by the UNCCD, for the LDN evaluation results implementing the modified rule, the proportion of degraded land increased by 2.44%, the proportion of stable land decreased by 1.52%, and the proportion of restored land decreased by 0.92%. In the future, Inner Mongolia should strengthen the implementation of a series of ecological restoration projects to obtain greater ecological benefits.
Suggested Citation
Shuai Yuan & Lei-Lei Cheng & Jie Xu & Qi Lu, 2022.
"Evaluation of Land Degradation Neutrality in Inner Mongolia Combined with Ecosystem Services,"
Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, June.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:7:p:971-:d:846985
Download full text from publisher
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:971-:d:846985. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.