IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i7p2010-d220006.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Spatial Patterns Impact Regulation of Water-Related Ecosystem Services? Insights from a New Town Development in the Yangtze River Delta, China

Author

Listed:
  • Jieqiong Wang

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Siqing Chen

    (Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Parkville VIC 3010, Australia)

  • Min Wang

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

Abstract

Scientists have made efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of ecosystem service valuation and mapping; yet little actual implementation of new ecosystem service knowledge has been delivered in practice. We explored this gap by developing a spatially explicit and semi-qualitative evaluation approach to clarify how the spatial patterns of new town developments impact three types of water-related regulating ecosystem services, namely water flow regulation, flooding mitigation, and water quality regulation. Based on peer-reviewed publications, we identified key indicators with spatial characteristics that practitioners care about and have control of. We investigated the case of Lingang, a satellite city of Shanghai in the Yangtze River Delta, and found that (1) 85.30% of the pre-urban East Lingang with native marshlands performed better holistically while 93.06% of the post-urban East Lingang using the man-made lakeside model performed poorly; (2) 82.47% of the double grids model at West Lingang performed poorly in pre-urban time, while some major waterways were improved by the Hydrological Planning; and (3) a major weakness in the planning process was the ignorance in conserving pre-urban ecological resources, preventing the provision of ecosystem services. Finally, four urban design principles of both large-scale land use considerations and finer-scale design implications were proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jieqiong Wang & Siqing Chen & Min Wang, 2019. "How Do Spatial Patterns Impact Regulation of Water-Related Ecosystem Services? Insights from a New Town Development in the Yangtze River Delta, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-21, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:7:p:2010-:d:220006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/2010/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/2010/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Troy, Austin & Wilson, Matthew A., 2006. "Mapping ecosystem services: Practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 435-449, December.
    2. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    3. Jujnovsky, Julieta & Ramos, Alya & Caro-Borrero, Ángela & Mazari-Hiriart, Marisa & Maass, Manuel & Almeida-Leñero, Lucía, 2017. "Water assessment in a peri-urban watershed in Mexico City: A focus on an ecosystem services approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 91-100.
    4. Yaser Tahmasebi Birgani & Farhad Yazdandoost, 2018. "An Integrated Framework to Evaluate Resilient-Sustainable Urban Drainage Management Plans Using a Combined-adaptive MCDM Technique," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(8), pages 2817-2835, June.
    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. Min Wang & Kexin Wang, 2021. "Exploring Water Landscape Adaptability of Urban Spatial Development Base on Coupling Coordination Degree Model A Case of Caidian District, Wuhan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.

    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. Ramos, Alya & Jujnovsky, Julieta & Almeida-Leñero, Lucía, 2018. "The relevance of stakeholders’ perceptions of ecosystem services in a rural-urban watershed in Mexico City," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 85-95.
    2. Ávila-García, Daniela & Morató, Jordi & Pérez-Maussán, Ana I. & Santillán-Carvantes, Patricia & Alvarado, Jannice & Comín, Francisco A., 2020. "Impacts of alternative land-use policies on water ecosystem services in the Río Grande de Comitán-Lagos de Montebello watershed, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    3. Bin Xue & Bingsheng Liu & Tao Liang & Dong Zhao & Tao Wang & Xingbin Chen, 2022. "A heterogeneous decision criteria system evaluating sustainable infrastructure development: From the lens of multidisciplinary stakeholder engagement," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(4), pages 556-579, August.
    4. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    5. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    6. Grischa Perino & Barnaby Andrews & Andreas Kontoleon & Ian Bateman, 2014. "The Value of Urban Green Space in Britain: A Methodological Framework for Spatially Referenced Benefit Transfer," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(2), pages 251-272, February.
    7. 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).
    8. Norton, Daniel & Hynes, Stephen, 2015. "Spatial issues arising from a value transfer exercise for environmental quality of marine waters," 150th Seminar, October 22-23, 2015, Edinburgh, Scotland 212663, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Frélichová, Jana & Vačkář, David & Pártl, Adam & Loučková, Blanka & Harmáčková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, Eliška, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    10. Alamanos, Angelos & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2022. "Economics of Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Water Resource Planning and Management," MPRA Paper 122046, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.
    12. Arturo Sanchez-Porras & María Guadalupe Tenorio-Arvide & Ricardo Darío Peña-Moreno & María Laura Sampedro-Rosas & Sonia Emilia Silva-Gómez, 2018. "Evaluation of the Potential Change to the Ecosystem Service Provision Due to Industrialization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Pierre Mokondoko & Robert H Manson & Taylor H Ricketts & Daniel Geissert, 2018. "Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, February.
    14. Žiga Malek & Veronica Zumpano & Haydar Hussin, 2018. "Forest management and future changes to ecosystem services in the Romanian Carpathians," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 1275-1291, June.
    15. Richards, Daniel R. & Warren, Philip H. & Moggridge, Helen L. & Maltby, Lorraine, 2015. "Spatial variation in the impact of dragonflies and debris on recreational ecosystem services in a floodplain wetland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 113-121.
    16. Stephen Kankam & Adams Osman & Justice Nana Inkoom & Christine Fürst, 2022. "Implications of Spatio-Temporal Land Use/Cover Changes for Ecosystem Services Supply in the Coastal Landscapes of Southwestern Ghana, West Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-24, August.
    17. Holmes, Thomas P. & Liebhold, Andrew M. & Kovacs, Kent F. & Von Holle, Betsy, 2010. "A spatial-dynamic value transfer model of economic losses from a biological invasion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 86-95, November.
    18. Houdet, Joël & Trommetter, Michel & Weber, Jacques, 2012. "Understanding changes in business strategies regarding biodiversity and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 37-46.
    19. Bujosa Bestard, Angel & Font, Antoni Riera, 2009. "Environmental diversity in recreational choice modelling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2743-2750, September.
    20. Jacobs, Sander & Burkhard, Benjamin & Van Daele, Toon & Staes, Jan & Schneiders, Anik, 2015. "‘The Matrix Reloaded’: A review of expert knowledge use for mapping ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 295(C), pages 21-30.

    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:7:p:2010-:d:220006. 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.