IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i5p1840-d326556.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Prioritized Natural Landscape Conservation Areas for National Park Planning in China

Author

Listed:
  • Ao Du

    (Center of Architecture Research and Design, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China
    State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Weihua Xu

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Yi Xiao

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Tong Cui

    (Center of Architecture Research and Design, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China)

  • Tianyu Song

    (Academy of Forest Inventory and Planning, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100714, China)

  • Zhiyun Ouyang

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

Abstract

Protecting representative natural ecosystems, rich biodiversity, and unique natural landscapes are the main considerations in China’s national park planning. Here, we mapped the distribution of China’s natural landscapes and evaluated their protection values for national park planning and construction. Grading evaluation methods combining standard comparison, inventory method, and expert consultation were used, and four levels of natural landscapes were identified. Furthermore, priority areas for national parks establishment were also proposed. Of all the landscapes evaluated, 76 were extremely important, 481 were important, 2070 were moderately important, and 1213 were slightly important. A total number of 67 priority areas for natural landscapes were identified with a total area of 1,218,000 km 2 . They comprised land and sea areas of 1,148,000 and 69,000 km 2 , respectively. We suggest strengthening natural landscape protection by establishing natural parks in priority areas. Our study will contribute to the effective protection of natural landscapes in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Ao Du & Weihua Xu & Yi Xiao & Tong Cui & Tianyu Song & Zhiyun Ouyang, 2020. "Evaluation of Prioritized Natural Landscape Conservation Areas for National Park Planning in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-12, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:1840-:d:326556
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1840/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/1840/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lucia Filova & Jiri Vojar & Kamila Svobodova & Petr Sklenicka, 2015. "The effect of landscape type and landscape elements on public visual preferences: ways to use knowledge in the context of landscape planning," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(11), pages 2037-2055, November.
    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. Gonghan Sheng & Heyuan Chen & Kalifi Ferretti-Gallon & John L. Innes & Zhongjun Wang & Yujun Zhang & Guangyu Wang, 2020. "Moving toward a Greener China: Is China’s National Park Pilot Program a Solution?," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-23, December.
    2. Haifeng Luo & Bor-Shuenn Chiou, 2021. "Framing the Hierarchy of Cultural Tourism Attractiveness of Chinese Historic Districts under the Premise of Landscape Conservation," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Bo Li & Hao Ouyang & Tong Wang & Tian Dong, 2023. "Coupling Relationship between Rural Settlement Patterns and Landscape Fragmentation in Woodlands and Biological Reserves—A Case of Nanshan National Park," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-25, March.
    4. Hang Shu & Chunwang Xiao & Ting Ma & Weiguo Sang, 2021. "Ecological Health Assessment of Chinese National Parks Based on Landscape Pattern: A Case Study in Shennongjia National Park," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-15, October.

    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. Zhou, Long & Li, Yixin & Cheng, Jialin & Qin, Yu & Shen, Guoqiang & Li, Bin & Yang, Huajie & Li, Sihong, 2023. "Understanding the aesthetic perceptions and image impressions experienced by tourists walking along tourism trails through continuous cityscapes in Macau," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    2. Teisl, Mario F. & Noblet, Caroline L. & Corey, Richard R. & Giudice, Nicholas A., 2018. "Seeing clearly in a virtual reality: Tourist reactions to an offshore wind project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 601-611.
    3. Xulin Huang & Chenping Han & Mingkang Ma, 2022. "Visual preferences for outdoor space along commercial pedestrian streets under the influence of plant characteristics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-16, March.
    4. Rust, Niki A. & Rehackova, Lucia & Naab, Francis & Abrams, Amber & Hughes, Courtney & Merkle, Bethann Garramon & Clark, Beth & Tindale, Sophie, 2021. "What does the UK public want farmland to look like?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    5. Jiaying Shi & Tsuyoshi Honjo & Kaixuan Zhang & Katsunori Furuya, 2020. "Using Virtual Reality to Assess Landscape: A Comparative Study Between On-Site Survey and Virtual Reality of Aesthetic Preference and Landscape Cognition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-16, April.

    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:5:p:1840-:d:326556. 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.