Author
Listed:
- Ke Yan
(Co-Innovation Center for Sustainable Forestry in Southern China, College of Ecology and Environment, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada)
- Bingting Zhao
(Co-Innovation Center for Sustainable Forestry in Southern China, College of Ecology and Environment, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)
- Yuanhui Li
(Northwest Surveying and Planning Institute of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Key Laboratory National Forestry Administration on Ecological Hydrology and Disaster Prevention in Arid Regions, Xi’an 710048, China)
- Xiangfu Wang
(Northwest Surveying and Planning Institute of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Key Laboratory National Forestry Administration on Ecological Hydrology and Disaster Prevention in Arid Regions, Xi’an 710048, China)
- Jiaxin Jin
(College of Hydrology and Water Resources, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)
- Jiang Jiang
(College of Forestry, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)
- Wenting Dong
(Northwest Surveying and Planning Institute of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Key Laboratory National Forestry Administration on Ecological Hydrology and Disaster Prevention in Arid Regions, Xi’an 710048, China)
- Rongnv Wang
(Northwest Surveying and Planning Institute of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Key Laboratory National Forestry Administration on Ecological Hydrology and Disaster Prevention in Arid Regions, Xi’an 710048, China)
- Hongqiang Yang
(College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)
- Tongli Wang
(Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada)
- Weifeng Wang
(Co-Innovation Center for Sustainable Forestry in Southern China, College of Ecology and Environment, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)
Abstract
Ecological engineering (EE) has a profound impact on land-use dynamics, leading to alterations in ecosystem services (ESs). However, an appropriate EE implementation intensity that can balance the tradeoffs associated with altered ESs well has always been a concern for researchers and policymakers. In this study, we set the transition probability of farmland, bare land, and desertification land to forest and natural shrub, with 2010–2020 as the natural implementation scenario, as 10% for the low-intensity implementation scenario (LIS), 30% for the medium-intensity scenario, and 50% for the high-intensity scenario. The patch-generating land-use simulation (PLUS) model was used to project land-use patterns and the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Service and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model was used to simulate changes in the quality of ESs under four EE implementation intensities in 2030. We then performed a quantitative tradeoff analysis on the dominant ESs under four scenarios and used the production possibility frontier (PPF) curve to identify the optimal EE implementation intensity scenario. Our results indicated that an increase in EE implementation intensity would lead to an increase in soil retention, water purification, habitat quality, and carbon storage, but also to a decrease in water yield, aggravating the tradeoffs between water yield and other ESs. In all EE implementation intensity scenarios, the LIS had the lowest tradeoff intensity index and balanced ESs well, and thus was the optimal EE implementation scenario in Qinghai province. Our results provide knowledge to help decision makers select the appropriate EE intensity to maintain sustainable development. The integrated methodology can also be applied in other conservation regions to carry out practical land management.
Suggested Citation
Ke Yan & Bingting Zhao & Yuanhui Li & Xiangfu Wang & Jiaxin Jin & Jiang Jiang & Wenting Dong & Rongnv Wang & Hongqiang Yang & Tongli Wang & Weifeng Wang, 2024.
"Effects of the Implementation Intensity of Ecological Engineering on Ecosystem Service Tradeoffs in Qinghai Province, China,"
Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, June.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:848-:d:1414561
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:13:y:2024:i:6:p:848-:d:1414561. 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.