IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i21p8802-d433493.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Enhanced Management of Water Resources Improves Ecosystem Services in a Typical Arid Basin

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Guo

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Urumqi 830011, China
    Xinjiang Aksu Oasis Agro-Ecosystem Observation and Experiment Station, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Hailiang Xu

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Urumqi 830011, China
    Xinjiang Aksu Oasis Agro-Ecosystem Observation and Experiment Station, Urumqi 830011, China)

  • Guangpeng Zhang

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Urumqi 830011, China
    Xinjiang Aksu Oasis Agro-Ecosystem Observation and Experiment Station, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Kaiye Yuan

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Urumqi 830011, China
    Xinjiang Aksu Oasis Agro-Ecosystem Observation and Experiment Station, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Hongbo Ling

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Urumqi 830011, China
    Xinjiang Aksu Oasis Agro-Ecosystem Observation and Experiment Station, Urumqi 830011, China)

Abstract

Ecosystem services (ES) are essential for human well-being. However, few studies have investigated the optimization of the management of water resources based on trade-offs of ES in arid areas. In order to solve this problem, four important ES that affect the carbon cycle and water cycle were selected from the regulating ecosystem services (carbon storage (CAS), evapotranspiration (ET)), the supporting ecosystem services (soil drought index (TVDI)) and the provisioning ecosystem services (groundwater depth (GWD)) in arid areas. The spatiotemporal distribution of these four ES were quantitatively analyzed—using related models—in the Tarim River, situated in a typical arid inland basin, in 2000, 2010, and 2018, in order to determine the fundamental driving factors of change in ES. The results showed that CAS was mainly affected by changes in land use, while ET, TVDI, and GWD were mainly affected by changes in water volume. The unified management of water resources improved the regulating ecosystem services (an initial increase in CAS, followed by a decrease; ET continued to grow from 2000 to 2018), the supporting ecosystem services (TVDI was maintained at 0.69–0.74), and the provisioning ecosystem services (GWD rose 5.77% in 2000–2010, and stabilized at 3.05 m in 2018). The trade-off/synergy relationships of the four ES were further analyzed at different geographical scales through correlation analysis and the trade-off index (RMSD). In different river sections, the ES that affect carbon and water cycles were highly dependent on each other. In areas with high CAS, the groundwater depth was low, and the soil moisture and ET were high. With different land use types, there was a synergistic relationship between CAS and GWD in woodland and grassland areas, and between ET and GWD in farmland areas. This showed that there was still strong competition between natural vegetation and groundwater, represented by woodland and grassland, and the ineffective loss of water resources such as ET through expansion of farmland. Finally, this study innovatively incorporated the results of trade-offs of ES into water resource management. In order to reduce the trade-offs between ES, and to improve ES, to achieve the ecological protection and restoration of desert riparian forests, and to optimize the water resource management in arid areas, different ecological water regulation and control measures were proposed in the high-flow years and the low-flow years of arid areas. This study can provide important scientific references for the improvement of ES and the optimization of the management of water resources in other similar river basins in arid areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Guo & Hailiang Xu & Guangpeng Zhang & Kaiye Yuan & Hongbo Ling, 2020. "The Enhanced Management of Water Resources Improves Ecosystem Services in a Typical Arid Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:21:p:8802-:d:433493
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/8802/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/8802/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francesca Palomba & Giorgio Cesari & Remo Pelillo & Andrea Petroselli, 2018. "An Empirical Model for River Ecological Management with Uncertainty Evaluation," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(3), pages 897-912, February.
    2. Shijin Wang & Yanqiang Wei, 2019. "Water resource system risk and adaptive management of the Chinese Heihe River Basin in Asian arid areas," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 24(7), pages 1271-1292, October.
    3. Pan, Ying & Xu, Zengrang & Wu, Junxi, 2013. "Spatial differences of the supply of multiple ecosystem services and the environmental and land use factors affecting them," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 4-10.
    4. Stephen Gibbons & Susana Mourato & Guilherme Resende, 2014. "The Amenity Value of English Nature: A Hedonic Price Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(2), pages 175-196, February.
    5. Francesca Palomba & Giorgio Cesari & Remo Pelillo & Andrea Petroselli, 2018. "Correction to: An Empirical Model for River Ecological Management with Uncertainty Evaluation," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(5), pages 1931-1931, March.
    6. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    7. Jones, Sarah K. & Boundaogo, Mansour & DeClerck, Fabrice A. & Estrada-Carmona, Natalia & Mirumachi, Naho & Mulligan, Mark, 2019. "Insights into the importance of ecosystem services to human well-being in reservoir landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    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. Zhengxin Ji & Hejie Wei & Dong Xue & Mengxue Liu & Enxiang Cai & Weiqiang Chen & Xinwei Feng & Jiwei Li & Jie Lu & Yulong Guo, 2021. "Trade-Off and Projecting Effects of Land Use Change on Ecosystem Services under Different Policies Scenarios: A Case Study in Central China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-23, March.
    2. Hua Xing & Shuhong Mo & Xiaoyan Liang & Ying Li, 2021. "Water Resources Allocation Based on Complex Adaptive System Theory in the Inland River Irrigation District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-19, July.
    3. Yiming Wei & Hongwei Wang & Mengqi Xue & Yucong Yin & Tiantian Qian & Fangrui Yu, 2022. "Spatial and Temporal Evolution of Land Use and the Response of Habitat Quality in Wusu, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-21, December.

    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. Shirin Karimi & Bahman Jabbarian Amiri & Arash Malekian, 2019. "Similarity Metrics-Based Uncertainty Analysis of River Water Quality Models," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(6), pages 1927-1945, April.
    2. Mokondoko, Pierre & Manson, Robert H. & Pérez-Maqueo, Octavio, 2016. "Assessing the service of water quality regulation by quantifying the effects of land use on water quality and public health in central Veracruz, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 161-173.
    3. Arts, Bas, 2014. "Assessing forest governance from a ‘Triple G’ perspective: Government, governance, governmentality⁎⁎This article belongs to the Special Issue: Assessing Forest Governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 17-22.
    4. Allan Beltrán & David Maddison & Robert J. R. Elliott, 2018. "Assessing the Economic Benefits of Flood Defenses: A Repeat‐Sales Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(11), pages 2340-2367, November.
    5. Rocío del Pilar Moreno-Sánchez & Jorge H. Maldonado & Camilo Andrés Gutiérrez & Melissa Rubio, 2013. "Valoración de Áreas Marinas Protegidas desde la perspectiva de los usuarios de recursos: conciliando enfoques cuantitativos individuales con enfoques cualitativos colectivos," Documentos CEDE 11936, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    6. Tapsuwan, Sorada & Polyakov, Maksym & Bark, Rosalind & Nolan, Martin, 2015. "Valuing the Barmah–Millewa Forest and in stream river flows: A spatial heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (SHAC) approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 98-105.
    7. 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.
    8. Mengmeng Meng & Weiguo Fan & Jianchang Lu & Xiaobin Dong & Hejie Wei, 2020. "Research on the Influence of Energy Utilization and Economic Development on Human Well-Being in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, December.
    9. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    10. Chen, B. & Chen, G.Q., 2007. "Modified ecological footprint accounting and analysis based on embodied exergy--a case study of the Chinese society 1981-2001," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 355-376, March.
    11. Yoann Verger, 2015. "Sraffa and ecological economics: review of the literature," Working Papers hal-01182894, HAL.
    12. 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.
    13. Mutlu, Asli & Roy, Debraj & Filatova, Tatiana, 2023. "Capitalized value of evolving flood risks discount and nature-based solution premiums on property prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    14. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "The role of urban green space for human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-152.
    15. Nils Droste & Bartosz Bartkowski, 2018. "Ecosystem Service Valuation for National Accounting: A Reply to Obst, Hein and Edens (2016)," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 205-215, September.
    16. Admiraal, Jeroen F. & Wossink, Ada & de Groot, Wouter T. & de Snoo, Geert R., 2013. "More than total economic value: How to combine economic valuation of biodiversity with ecological resilience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 115-122.
    17. Tao, Jieyi & Lu, Yuqi & Ge, Dazhuan & Dong, Ping & Gong, Xiao & Ma, Xiaobin, 2022. "The spatial pattern of agricultural ecosystem services from the production-living-ecology perspective: A case study of the Huaihai Economic Zone, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    18. Olivier Petit & Franck-Dominique Vivien, 2015. "When economists and ecologists meet on Ecological Economics: two science paths around two interdisciplinary concepts," Post-Print halshs-01249774, HAL.
    19. Gibbons, Stephen & Overman, Henry G., 2011. "The future of rural policy: lessons from spatial economics," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59234, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Beça, Pedro & Santos, Rui, 2010. "Measuring sustainable welfare: A new approach to the ISEW," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 810-819, February.

    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:21:p:8802-:d:433493. 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.