IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2023i1p32-d1307791.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Trade-Offs and Synergies between Ecosystem Services in Guangdong Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Qian Xu

    (School of Public Administration, Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, Guangzhou 510320, China)

  • Ying Yang

    (School of Culture Tourism and Geography, Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, Guangzhou 510320, China)

  • Ren Yang

    (School of Geography and Planning, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China)

  • Li-Si Zha

    (School of Public Administration, Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, Guangzhou 510320, China)

  • Zi-Qing Lin

    (School of Public Administration, Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, Guangzhou 510320, China)

  • Shu-Hao Shang

    (School of Public Administration, Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, Guangzhou 510320, China)

Abstract

The trade-offs between ecosystem services directly affect the quality of the ecological environment and the survival and development of human society, which is of great concern to academia, governments, and non-governmental organizations. Guangdong Province is a strong economic performer in China; hence, we selected it to explore the trade-off and synergy differences between different ecosystem services, and to investigate the mechanisms of their influence in economically developed regions with a large population density. Our results showed three main points: (1) The ecosystem services in Guangdong Province showed clear spatial heterogeneity. In addition, northern Guangdong has high levels of water retention, with a value of 5804.73 × 10 4 m 3 /km 2 and high values for carbon sequestration and soil retention. Western Guangdong is a functional area for food production, and the Pearl River Delta is an economically developed region with low levels of ecosystem services. (2) Overall, in Guangdong Province, three pairs of ecosystem services, namely water retention–soil retention, carbon sequestration–water retention, and carbon sequestration–soil retention, showed a strong positive correlation and good synergistic relationships. The other three pairs of relationships show strong trade-off effects. (3) The relationships between similar ecosystem services show completely different characteristics in different regions. Carbon sequestration and water retention, carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation, water retention and biodiversity conservation, and soil retention and biodiversity conservation were mainly manifested in high–high synergies, particularly in northern Guangdong; carbon sequestration and soil retention and water retention and soil retention, primarily manifested synergies; carbon sequestration and food production, water retention and food production, and soil retention and food production mainly manifested as trade-off relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Qian Xu & Ying Yang & Ren Yang & Li-Si Zha & Zi-Qing Lin & Shu-Hao Shang, 2023. "Spatial Trade-Offs and Synergies between Ecosystem Services in Guangdong Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2023:i:1:p:32-:d:1307791
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/1/32/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/1/32/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    2. Moore, Michael R. & Doubek, Jonathan P. & Xu, Hui & Cardinale, Bradley J., 2020. "Hedonic Price Estimates of Lake Water Quality: Valued Attribute, Instrumental Variables, and Ecological-Economic Benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Vallet, Améline & Locatelli, Bruno & Levrel, Harold & Wunder, Sven & Seppelt, Ralf & Scholes, Robert J. & Oszwald, Johan, 2018. "Relationships Between Ecosystem Services: Comparing Methods for Assessing Tradeoffs and Synergies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 96-106.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Moreno-Llorca, R. & Vaz, A.S. & Herrero, J. & Millares, A. & Bonet-García, F.J. & Alcaraz-Segura, D., 2020. "Multi-scale evolution of ecosystem services’ supply in Sierra Nevada (Spain): An assessment over the last half-century," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    2. Ruiqi Zhang & Chunguang Hu & Yucheng Sun, 2024. "Decoding the Characteristics of Ecosystem Services and the Scale Effect in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomeration: Insights for Planning and Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-26, September.
    3. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    4. Jones, Sarah K. & Boundaogo, Mansour & DeClerck, Fabrice A. & Estrada-Carmona, Natalia & Mirumachi, Naho & Mulligan, Mark, 2019. "Insights into the importance of ecosystem services to human well-being in reservoir landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    5. Raviv, Orna & Shiri, Zemah-Shamir & Ido, Izhaki & Alon, Lotan, 2021. "The effect of wildfire and land-cover changes on the economic value of ecosystem services in Mount Carmel Biosphere Reserve, Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    6. Joly, Frédéric & Benoit, Marc & Martin, Raphael & Dumont, Bertrand, 2021. "Biological operability, a new concept based on ergonomics to assess the pertinence of ecosystem services optimization practices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    7. Feng, Zhe & Jin, Xueru & Chen, Tianqian & Wu, Jiansheng, 2021. "Understanding trade-offs and synergies of ecosystem services to support the decision-making in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Kun Li & Junchen Chen & Jingyu Lin & Huanyu Zhang & Yujing Xie & Zhaohua Li & Ling Wang, 2022. "Identifying Ecosystem Service Trade-Offs and Their Response to Landscape Patterns at Different Scales in an Agricultural Basin in Central China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, August.
    9. Benedek Kiss & Jose Dinis Silvestre & Rita Andrade Santos & Zsuzsa Szalay, 2021. "Environmental and Economic Optimisation of Buildings in Portugal and Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-19, December.
    10. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    11. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    12. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    13. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    14. Robbie Maris & Mark Holmes, 2023. "Economic Growth Theory and Natural Resource Constraints: A Stocktake and Critical Assessment," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(2), pages 255-268, June.
    15. Barbara Langlois & Vincent Martinet, 2023. "Defining cost-effective ways to improve ecosystem services provision in agroecosystems," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 123-165, June.
    16. 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).
    17. Joel C. Creed & Laura Sol Aranda & Júlia Gomes de Sousa & Caio Barros Brito do Bem & Beatriz Sant’Anna Vasconcelos Marafiga Dutra & Marianna Lanari & Virgínia Eduarda de Sousa & Karine M. Magalhães & , 2023. "A Synthesis of Provision and Impact in Seagrass Ecosystem Services in the Brazilian Southwest Atlantic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-19, October.
    18. Wanxu Chen & Guangqing Chi & Jiangfeng Li, 2020. "Ecosystem Services and Their Driving Forces in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-19, May.
    19. O'Sullivan, Jane N., 2020. "The social and environmental influences of population growth rate and demographic pressure deserve greater attention in ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    20. Nicolás Ruiz, Néstor & Suárez Alonso, María Luisa & Vidal-Abarca, María Rosario, 2021. "Contributions of dry rivers to human well-being: A global review for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).

    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:13:y:2023:i:1:p:32-:d:1307791. 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.