IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i11p1964-d1525222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Scenario Insights into Spatial Responses and Promotion Under Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Jingya Liu

    (Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    Key Laboratory of Coastal Science and Integrated Management, Ministry of Natural Resources, Qingdao 266061, China
    University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Keyu Qin

    (Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    Key Laboratory of Coastal Science and Integrated Management, Ministry of Natural Resources, Qingdao 266061, China
    University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Yu Xiao

    (Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    Key Laboratory of Coastal Science and Integrated Management, Ministry of Natural Resources, Qingdao 266061, China
    University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Gaodi Xie

    (Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    Key Laboratory of Coastal Science and Integrated Management, Ministry of Natural Resources, Qingdao 266061, China
    University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

The Blue Economic Zone of the Shandong Peninsula is located in the transitional zone between land and sea, with a complex ecological environment. The determination of hot and cold spots in various ecosystem services is crucial for the coordinated development of ecosystem services and the optimization of the spatial pattern of the ecological environment. This study, based on natural and socio-economic data, utilizes various ecological models to simulate water yield (provisioning service), carbon sequestration (regulating service), biodiversity (supporting service), and aesthetic and scientific research values (cultural service). Using a multi-criteria decision-making approach, it identifies hot and cold spots of ecosystem services in different development–conservation scenarios. Combining the protection efficiency of different areas, it proposes a spatial pattern promotion scheme. The research indicates significant spatial differences in ecosystem services without clear trade-offs and synergies. Changes in the weights of ecosystem services in 11 scenarios result in significant differences in hot and cold spots. Compared to the neutral scenario (S6), the distribution of hot and cold spots in protection scenarios (S1–S5) is relatively scattered, while in development scenarios (S7–S11), hot spots show an increasing trend of concentration in the southeast, with cold spots scattered in the west and northwest. Four spatial pattern promotion schemes are proposed based on protection efficiency and policy preferences. Promotion areas should focus on ecological restoration and improvement to raise local ecosystem service levels. Protection areas should emphasize maintaining their existing high-level ecosystem services to achieve a synergistic enhancement of various ecosystem services.

Suggested Citation

  • Jingya Liu & Keyu Qin & Yu Xiao & Gaodi Xie, 2024. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Scenario Insights into Spatial Responses and Promotion Under Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1964-:d:1525222
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1964/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1964/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xinyu Yan & Muyi Huang & Yuru Tang & Qin Guo & Xue Wu & Guozhao Zhang, 2024. "Study on the Dynamic Change of Land Use in Megacities and Its Impact on Ecosystem Services and Modeling Prediction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-28, June.
    2. Keyu Qin & Jing Li & Xiaonan Yang, 2015. "Trade-Off and Synergy among Ecosystem Services in the Guanzhong-Tianshui Economic Region of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Spanò, Marinella & Leronni, Vincenzo & Lafortezza, Raffaele & Gentile, Francesco, 2017. "Are ecosystem service hotspots located in protected areas? Results from a study in Southern Italy," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 52-60.
    4. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    5. Malinga, Rebecka & Gordon, Line J. & Jewitt, Graham & Lindborg, Regina, 2015. "Mapping ecosystem services across scales and continents – A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 57-63.
    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. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. 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).
    3. Pulighe, Giuseppe & Fava, Francesco & Lupia, Flavio, 2016. "Insights and opportunities from mapping ecosystem services of urban green spaces and potentials in planning," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 1-10.
    4. Edoardo Croci & Benedetta Lucchitta & Tommaso Penati, 2021. "Valuing Ecosystem Services at the Urban Level: A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Remme, Roy P. & Meacham, Megan & Pellowe, Kara E. & Andersson, Erik & Guerry, Anne D. & Janke, Benjamin & Liu, Lingling & Lonsdorf, Eric & Li, Meng & Mao, Yuanyuan & Nootenboom, Christopher & Wu, Tong, 2024. "Aligning nature-based solutions with ecosystem services in the urban century," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    6. Tapio Riepponen & Mikko Moilanen & Jaakko Simonen, 2023. "Themes of resilience in the economics literature: A topic modeling approach," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 326-356, April.
    7. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    8. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    9. Yangang Xing & Phil Jones & Iain Donnison, 2017. "Characterisation of Nature-Based Solutions for the Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    10. 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).
    11. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    12. Chiara Cortinovis & Grazia Zulian & Davide Geneletti, 2018. "Assessing Nature-Based Recreation to Support Urban Green Infrastructure Planning in Trento (Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, September.
    13. González-García, Alberto & Palomo, Ignacio & González, José A. & López, César A. & Montes, Carlos, 2020. "Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    14. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    15. Sirakaya, Aysegül & Cliquet, An & Harris, Jim, 2018. "Ecosystem services in cities: Towards the international legal protection of ecosystem services in urban environments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 205-212.
    16. Zengzeng Fan & Yuanyang Wang & Yanchao Feng, 2021. "Ecological Livability Assessment of Urban Agglomerations in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-16, December.
    17. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.
    18. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "The role of urban green space for human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-152.
    19. Arki, Vesa & Koskikala, Joni & Fagerholm, Nora & Kisanga, Danielson & Käyhkö, Niina, 2020. "Associations between local land use/land cover and place-based landscape service patterns in rural Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    20. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.

    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:2024:i:11:p:1964-:d:1525222. 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.