IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i17p7222-d408482.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of the Characteristics of Ecological Security Zoning and Its Dynamic Change Pattern: A Case Study of the Weibei Area

Author

Listed:
  • Yue Zhang

    (School of Architecture, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Liyuan Zhang

    (School of Water and Environment, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Kanhua Yu

    (School of Architecture, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Yifan Zou

    (School of Architecture, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710061, China)

Abstract

The development pattern of agriculture and energy exploitation in the southern marginal area of the Loess Plateau is widespread in the northern part of China. As a typical example, the fragile ecological area in the Weibei region is greatly affected by human factors, which makes the local ecological environment and social sustainability disturbed to varying degrees. Taking the Weibei region as the study area, through the comprehensive analysis of social, economic, and climate data, an index system suitable for the ecological security assessment of the Weibei region was constructed. The ecological security of this region was quantitatively evaluated by spatial principal component analysis (SPCA), and its ecological security partition was divided and analyzed. There were five zones at different levels, and I to V represented the development of ecological security from a low level to a high level. The results showed that from 1997 to 2017, the ecological security of different districts and counties in the Weibei region showed different trends. For example, the ecological security index of Tongguan County, Chengcheng County, and Pucheng County continued to decrease, but the overall index value was still high, and the ecological security index of Dali County, Fuping County, and Hancheng County increased. During this period, the ecological security of regions I and II continued to increase, while regions IV and V first decreased and then increased. At the same time, the area of the ecological security buffer region increased year by year. This study can provide a feasible method for assessing ecological security of the current regional model of mixed agriculture and energy extraction industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Yue Zhang & Liyuan Zhang & Kanhua Yu & Yifan Zou, 2020. "Analysis of the Characteristics of Ecological Security Zoning and Its Dynamic Change Pattern: A Case Study of the Weibei Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-12, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:17:p:7222-:d:408482
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/17/7222/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/17/7222/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mike Hodson & Simon Marvin, 2009. "‘Urban Ecological Security’: A New Urban Paradigm?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 193-215, March.
    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. Karolina Isaksson & Satu Heikkinen, 2018. "Sustainability Transitions at the Frontline. Lock-in and Potential for Change in the Local Planning Arena," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    2. Vanesa Castán Broto & Harriet Bulkeley, 2013. "Maintaining Climate Change Experiments: Urban Political Ecology and the Everyday Reconfiguration of Urban Infrastructure," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 1934-1948, November.
    3. Dirk Heinrichs & Kerstin Krellenberg & Michail Fragkias, 2013. "Urban Responses to Climate Change: Theories and Governance Practice in Cities of the Global South," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 1865-1878, November.
    4. Lu, Yanhua & Yan, Lijuan & Li, Jie & Liang, Yunliang & Yang, Chuanjie & Li, Guang & Wu, Jiangqi & Xu, Hua, 2024. "Spatiotemporal evolution of county level ecological security based on an emergy ecological footprint model: The case of Dingxi, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 490(C).
    5. Paul Chatterton, 2013. "Towards an Agenda for Post-carbon Cities: Lessons from Lilac, the UK's First Ecological, Affordable Cohousing Community," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 1654-1674, September.
    6. Hong Ran & Yonggang Ma & Zhonglin Xu, 2022. "Evaluation and Prediction of Land Use Ecological Security in the Kashgar Region Based on Grid GIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Yuan Gao & Chuanrong Zhang & Qingsong He & Yaolin Liu, 2017. "Urban Ecological Security Simulation and Prediction Using an Improved Cellular Automata (CA) Approach—A Case Study for the City of Wuhan in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-20, June.
    8. Joost Moor, 2022. "Prioritizing adaptation and mitigation in the climate movement: evidence from a cross-national protest survey of the Global Climate Strike, 2019," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 1-19, August.
    9. Mark Whitehead, 2013. "Neoliberal Urban Environmentalism and the Adaptive City: Towards a Critical Urban Theory and Climate Change," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(7), pages 1348-1367, May.
    10. Pauline McGuirk & Robyn Dowling & Harriet Bulkeley, 2014. "Repositioning urban governments? Energy efficiency and Australia’s changing climate and energy governance regimes," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(13), pages 2717-2734, October.
    11. Hodson, Mike & Marvin, Simon, 2010. "Can cities shape socio-technical transitions and how would we know if they were?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 477-485, May.
    12. Jonathan Silver, 2015. "Disrupted Infrastructures: An Urban Political Ecology of Interrupted Electricity in Accra," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 984-1003, September.
    13. Xiufeng Cao & Zhaoshun Liu & Shujie Li & Zhenjun Gao, 2022. "Integrating the Ecological Security Pattern and the PLUS Model to Assess the Effects of Regional Ecological Restoration: A Case Study of Hefei City, Anhui Province," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-19, May.
    14. Sylvy Jaglin, 2014. "Urban Energy Policies and the Governance of Multilevel Issues in Cape Town," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(7), pages 1394-1414, May.
    15. Aidan While & Mark Whitehead, 2013. "Cities, Urbanisation and Climate Change," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(7), pages 1325-1331, May.
    16. Simon Marvin & Jonathan Rutherford, 2018. "Controlled environments: An urban research agenda on microclimatic enclosure," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(6), pages 1143-1162, May.
    17. Scott E. Kalafatis, 2017. "Identifying the Potential for Climate Compatible Development Efforts and the Missing Links," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-14, September.
    18. Zhao-Tian Li & Meng-Meng Hu & Miao Li & Meng-Yu Jiao & Bei-Cheng Xia, 2020. "Identification and countermeasures of limiting factors of regional sustainable development: a case study in the Pearl River Delta of China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 4209-4224, June.
    19. Rimjhim M. Aggarwal, 2013. "Strategic Bundling of Development Policies with Adaptation: An Examination of Delhi's Climate Change Action Plan," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 1902-1915, November.
    20. Jonathan Rutherford, 2014. "The Vicissitudes of Energy and Climate Policy in Stockholm: Politics, Materiality and Transition," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(7), pages 1449-1470, May.

    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:12:y:2020:i:17:p:7222-:d:408482. 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.