IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i15p4160-d253820.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatiotemporal Differentiation and the Factors of Ecological Vulnerability in the Toutun River Basin Based on Remote Sensing Data

Author

Listed:
  • Qin Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Tiange Shi

    (Department of Economics, Xinjiang University of Finance and Economics, Urumqi 830012, China)

Abstract

Ecological vulnerability assessment increases the knowledge of ecological status and contributes to formulating local plans of sustainable development. A methodology based on remote sensing data and spatial principal component analysis was introduced to discuss ecological vulnerability in the Toutun River Basin (TRB). Exploratory spatial data analysis and a geo-detector were employed to evaluate the spatial and temporal distribution characteristics of ecological vulnerability and detect the driving factors. Four results were presented: (1) During 2003 and 2017, the average values of humidity, greenness, and heat in TRB increased by 49.71%, 11.63%, and 6.51% respectively, and the average values of dryness decreased by 165.24%. However, the extreme differences in greenness, dryness, and heat tended to be obvious. (2) The study area was mainly dominated by a high and extreme vulnerability grade, and the ecological vulnerability grades showed the distribution pattern that the northern desert area was more vulnerable than the central artificial oasis, and the central artificial oasis was more vulnerable than the southern mountainous area. (3) Ecological vulnerability in TRB showed significant spatial autocorrelation characteristics, and the trend was enhanced. The spatial distribution of hot/cold spots presented the characteristics of “hot spot—cold spot—secondary hot spot—cold spot” from north to south. (4) The explanatory power of each factor of ecological vulnerability was temperature (0.5955) > land use (0.5701) > precipitation (0.5289) > elevation (0.4879) > slope (0.3660) > administrative division (0.1541). The interactions of any two factors showed a non-linear strengthening effect, among which, land use type ∩ elevation (0.7899), land use type ∩ precipitation (0.7867), and land use type ∩ temperature (0.7791) were the significant interaction for ecological vulnerability. Overall, remote sensing data contribute to realizing a quick and objective evaluation of ecological vulnerability and provide valuable information for decision making concerning ecology management and region development.

Suggested Citation

  • Qin Liu & Tiange Shi, 2019. "Spatiotemporal Differentiation and the Factors of Ecological Vulnerability in the Toutun River Basin Based on Remote Sensing Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:15:p:4160-:d:253820
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/15/4160/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/15/4160/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Qian Ding & Xun Shi & Dafang Zhuang & Yong Wang, 2018. "Temporal and Spatial Distributions of Ecological Vulnerability under the Influence of Natural and Anthropogenic Factors in an Eco-Province under Construction in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-23, August.
    2. Rashidi, Eghbal & Medal, Hugh & Gordon, Jason & Grala, Robert & Varner, Morgan, 2017. "A maximal covering location-based model for analyzing the vulnerability of landscapes to wildfires: Assessing the worst-case scenario," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1095-1105.
    3. Zhang, Feng & Liu, Xingpeng & Zhang, Jiquan & Wu, Rina & Ma, Qiyun & Chen, Yanan, 2017. "Ecological vulnerability assessment based on multi-sources data and SD model in Yinma River Basin, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 349(C), pages 41-50.
    4. Sartori, Martina & Philippidis, George & Ferrari, Emanuele & Borrelli, Pasquale & Lugato, Emanuele & Montanarella, Luca & Panagos, Panos, 2019. "A linkage between the biophysical and the economic: Assessing the global market impacts of soil erosion," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 299-312.
    5. Luc Anselin & Sergio J. Rey, 2010. "Perspectives on Spatial Data Analysis," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Luc Anselin & Sergio J. Rey (ed.), Perspectives on Spatial Data Analysis, chapter 0, pages 1-20, Springer.
    6. Current Masunungure & Sheona E. Shackleton, 2018. "Exploring Long-Term Livelihood and Landscape Change in Two Semi-Arid Sites in Southern Africa: Drivers and Consequences for Social–Ecological Vulnerability," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, April.
    7. Kuemmerle, Tobias & Erb, Karlheinz & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Müller, Daniel & Verburg, Peter H & Estel, Stephan & Haberl, Helmut & Hostert, Patrick & Jepsen, Martin R. & Kastner, Thomas & Levers, Christi, 2013. "Challenges and opportunities in mapping land use intensity globally," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 5(5), pages 484-493.
    8. Dongli Chen & Degang Yang & Xinhuan Zhang & Yannan Zhao & Yufang Zhang, 2018. "Spatial Suitability Evaluation of an Arid City Based on the Perspective of Major Function Oriented Zoning: A Case Study of Urumqi City in Xinjiang, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Arthur Getis & J. Keith Ord, 2010. "The Analysis of Spatial Association by Use of Distance Statistics," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Luc Anselin & Sergio J. Rey (ed.), Perspectives on Spatial Data Analysis, chapter 0, pages 127-145, Springer.
    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. Yuangang Li & Maohua Sun & Guanghui Yuan & Yujing Liu, 2019. "Evaluation Methods of Water Environment Safety and Their Application to the Three Northeast Provinces of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-16, September.
    2. Biyun Guo & Taiping Xie & M.V. Subrahmanyam, 2019. "The Impact of China’s Grain for Green Program on Rural Economy and Precipitation: A Case Study of Yan River Basin in the Loess Plateau," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-18, September.
    3. Han Li & Wei Song, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Distribution and Influencing Factors of Ecosystem Vulnerability on Qinghai-Tibet Plateau," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-21, June.
    4. Yunxiao Jiang & Yu Shi & Rong Li & Luo Guo, 2021. "A Long-Term Ecological Vulnerability Analysis of the Tibetan Region of Natural Conditions and Ecological Protection Programs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-22, September.

    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. Li, Xiaoliang & Wu, Kening & Yang, Qijun & Hao, Shiheng & Feng, Zhe & Ma, Jinliang, 2023. "Quantitative assessment of cultivated land use intensity in Heilongjiang Province, China, 2001–2015," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    2. Michael Manton & Evaldas Makrickas & Piotr Banaszuk & Aleksander Kołos & Andrzej Kamocki & Mateusz Grygoruk & Marta Stachowicz & Leonas Jarašius & Nerijus Zableckis & Jūratė Sendžikaitė & Jan Peters &, 2021. "Assessment and Spatial Planning for Peatland Conservation and Restoration: Europe’s Trans-Border Neman River Basin as a Case Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-27, February.
    3. Mkondiwa, Maxwell Gibson, 2015. "Whither Broad or Spatially Specific Fertilizer Recommendations?," Master's Theses and Plan B Papers 237344, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    4. Jonatan A. González & Francisco J. Rodríguez-Cortés & Elvira Romano & Jorge Mateu, 2021. "Classification of Events Using Local Pair Correlation Functions for Spatial Point Patterns," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 26(4), pages 538-559, December.
    5. Dong Li & Chongyang Huan & Jun Yang & Hanlong Gu, 2022. "Temporal and Spatial Distribution Changes, Driving Force Analysis and Simulation Prediction of Ecological Vulnerability in Liaoning Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-25, July.
    6. Matthias Eckardt & Jorge Mateu, 2021. "Second-order and local characteristics of network intensity functions," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 30(2), pages 318-340, June.
    7. Ye, Sijing & Song, Changqing & Shen, Shi & Gao, Peichao & Cheng, Changxiu & Cheng, Feng & Wan, Changjun & Zhu, Dehai, 2020. "Spatial pattern of arable land-use intensity in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Li, Zhengpeng & Liu, Shuguang & Zhang, Xuesong & West, Tristram O. & Ogle, Stephen M. & Zhou, Naijun, 2016. "Evaluating land cover influences on model uncertainties—A case study of cropland carbon dynamics in the Mid-Continent Intensive Campaign region," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 176-187.
    9. Mariela González-Narváez & María José Fernández-Gómez & Susana Mendes & José-Luis Molina & Omar Ruiz-Barzola & Purificación Galindo-Villardón, 2021. "Study of Temporal Variations in Species–Environment Association through an Innovative Multivariate Method: MixSTATICO," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-25, May.
    10. F. Marta L. Di Lascio & Andrea Menapace & Roberta Pappadà, 2024. "A spatially‐weighted AMH copula‐based dissimilarity measure for clustering variables: An application to urban thermal efficiency," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(1), February.
    11. Ning Zhang & Ying Mao, 2021. "Spatial Effects of Environmental Pollution on Healthcare Services: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-21, February.
    12. Panos Panagos & Pasquale Borrelli & David Robinson, 2020. "FAO calls for actions to reduce global soil erosion," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 789-790, May.
    13. John I. Carruthers & Selma Hepp & Gerrit-Jan Knaap & Robert N. Renner, 2012. "The American Way of Land Use," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 35(3), pages 267-302, July.
    14. Oumarou Zallé & Idrissa M. Ouédraogo, 2021. "Spillover effects of corruption and democracy on territorial attractiveness of foreign direct investment in sub‐Saharan Africa," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 33(4), pages 756-769, December.
    15. Yue Chen & Kangning Xiong & Xiaodong Ren & Cai Cheng, 2021. "Vulnerability Comparison between Karst and Non-Karst Nature Reserves—With a Special Reference to Guizhou Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-12, February.
    16. Hengrui Zhang & Jianing Zhang & Zhuozhuo Lv & Linjie Yao & Ning Zhang & Qing Zhang, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Assessment of Landscape Ecological Risk and Associated Drivers: A Case Study of the Yellow River Basin in Inner Mongolia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-15, May.
    17. Mehmet Ronael & Tüzin Baycan, 2022. "Place-based factors affecting COVID-19 incidences in Turkey," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 1053-1086, October.
    18. Stephanie D. Maier & Jan Paul Lindner & Javier Francisco, 2019. "Conceptual Framework for Biodiversity Assessments in Global Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-34, March.
    19. Thomas M. Koutsos & Georgios C. Menexes & Andreas P. Mamolos, 2021. "The Use of Crop Yield Autocorrelation Data as a Sustainable Approach to Adjust Agronomic Inputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    20. Cláudia M. Viana & Dulce Freire & Patrícia Abrantes & Jorge Rocha, 2021. "Evolution of Agricultural Production in Portugal during 1850–2018: A Geographical and Historical Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, July.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:15:p:4160-:d:253820. 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.