IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2020i1p149-d468470.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Landscape Characteristics and Ecological Risk Assessment Based on Multi-Scenario Simulations: A Case Study of Yancheng Coastal Wetland, China

Author

Listed:
  • Peng Tian

    (Department of Geography & Spatial Information Techniques, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China)

  • Luodan Cao

    (Department of Geography & Spatial Information Techniques, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China)

  • Jialin Li

    (Department of Geography & Spatial Information Techniques, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China
    Donghai Institute, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China
    Collaborative Innovation Center for Land and Marine Spatial Utilization and Governance Research, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China)

  • Ruiliang Pu

    (School of Geosciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33620-5250, USA)

  • Hongbo Gong

    (School of Law, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China)

  • Changda Li

    (Marine and Fishery Development Research Center of Dongtou District, Wenzhou 325799, China)

Abstract

Carrying out coastal wetland landscape simulations and current and future ecological risk assessments is conducive to formulating policies for coastal wetland landscape planning and promoting the coordinated development of the social economy and ecological environment. This study used the Cellular Automaton (CA)-Markov model to simulate the landscape data of the study area under different scenarios in 2021 and 2025, and built an ecological risk assessment (ERS) index model to analyze the differences of spatio-temporal characteristics of ecological risks. The results showed that: (1) The test accuracy of the CA–Markov model was 0.9562 after passing through the consistency test. The spatial distribution data of landscapes under current utilization scenarios (CUSs), natural development scenarios (NDSs), and ecological protection scenarios (EPSs) were gained through simulations. (2) During 1991–2025, the landscape types of Yancheng coastal wetlands undertake complicated transfers and have vast transfer regions. Under CUSs and NDSs, a large number of natural wetlands are transferred to artificial wetlands. Under EPSs, the area of artificial wetlands declines and artificial wetlands are mainly transferred to natural wetlands. (3) The ecological risk of Yancheng Coastal Wetland increases, accompanied with significant spatial heterogeneity, which is manifested as low in the north area and high in the south area, and there exist some differences between sea areas and land areas. Ecological risk levels transfer violently.

Suggested Citation

  • Peng Tian & Luodan Cao & Jialin Li & Ruiliang Pu & Hongbo Gong & Changda Li, 2020. "Landscape Characteristics and Ecological Risk Assessment Based on Multi-Scenario Simulations: A Case Study of Yancheng Coastal Wetland, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:149-:d:468470
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1/149/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/1/149/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlson, Matt & Browne, David & Callaghan, Carolyn, 2019. "Application of land-use simulation to protected area selection for efficient avoidance of biodiversity loss in Canada’s western boreal region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 821-831.
    2. Rahel Hamad & Heiko Balzter & Kamal Kolo, 2018. "Predicting Land Use/Land Cover Changes Using a CA-Markov Model under Two Different Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-23, September.
    3. Peng Tian & Jialin Li & Hongbo Gong & Ruiliang Pu & Luodan Cao & Shuyao Shao & Zuoqi Shi & Xiuli Feng & Lijia Wang & Riuqing Liu, 2019. "Research on Land Use Changes and Ecological Risk Assessment in Yongjiang River Basin in Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Jialin Li & Ruiliang Pu & Hongbo Gong & Xu Luo & Mengyao Ye & Baixiang Feng, 2017. "Evolution Characteristics of Landscape Ecological Risk Patterns in Coastal Zones in Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Topping, Christopher J. & Dalby, Lars & Valdez, Jose W., 2019. "Landscape-scale simulations as a tool in multi-criteria decision making to support agri-environment schemes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(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. Pengnan Xiao & Jie Xu & Chong Zhao, 2022. "Conflict Identification and Zoning Optimization of “Production-Living-Ecological” Space," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-27, June.

    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. He Gao & Wei Song, 2022. "Assessing the Landscape Ecological Risks of Land-Use Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Jun Ma & Qiang Yu & Huiyuan Wang & Linzhe Yang & Ruirui Wang & Minzhe Fang, 2022. "Construction and Optimization of Wetland Landscape Ecological Network in Dongying City, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-22, August.
    3. Di Liu & Hai Chen & Hang Zhang & Tianwei Geng & Qinqin Shi, 2020. "Spatiotemporal Evolution of Landscape Ecological Risk Based on Geomorphological Regionalization during 1980–2017: A Case Study of Shaanxi Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-16, January.
    4. Yanping Yang & Jianjun Chen & Yanping Lan & Guoqing Zhou & Haotian You & Xiaowen Han & Yu Wang & Xue Shi, 2022. "Landscape Pattern and Ecological Risk Assessment in Guangxi Based on Land Use Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-20, January.
    5. Lucie Kupková & Ivan Bičík & Leoš Jeleček, 2021. "At the Crossroads of European Landscape Changes: Major Processes of Landscape Change in Czechia since the Middle of the 19th Century and Their Driving Forces," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, January.
    6. Tao Hong & Ningli Liang & Haomeng Li, 2023. "Study on the Spatial and Temporal Evolution Characteristics and Driving Factors of the “Production–Living–Ecological Space” in Changfeng County," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-15, July.
    7. Sri Murniani Angelina Letsoin & David Herak & Fajar Rahmawan & Ratna Chrismiari Purwestri, 2020. "Land Cover Changes from 1990 to 2019 in Papua, Indonesia: Results of the Remote Sensing Imagery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-18, August.
    8. Wafaa Majeed Mutashar Al-Hameedi & Jie Chen & Cheechouyang Faichia & Biswajit Nath & Bazel Al-Shaibah & Ali Al-Aizari, 2022. "Geospatial Analysis of Land Use/Cover Change and Land Surface Temperature for Landscape Risk Pattern Change Evaluation of Baghdad City, Iraq, Using CA–Markov and ANN Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-31, July.
    9. Milad Asadi & Amir Oshnooei-Nooshabadi & Samira-Sadat Saleh & Fattaneh Habibnezhad & Sonia Sarafraz-Asbagh & John Lodewijk Van Genderen, 2022. "Urban Sprawl Simulation Mapping of Urmia (Iran) by Comparison of Cellular Automata–Markov Chain and Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Modeling Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Yaqi Cheng & Xuyang Zhang & Wei Song, 2024. "Ecological Risk Assessment of Land Use Change in the Tarim River Basin, Xinjiang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Li Li & Xiaoping Zhou & Lan Yang & Jinglong Duan & Zhuo Zeng, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Ecological Risk in China’s North–South Transition Zone," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-17, May.
    12. Changqing Sun & Yulong Bao & Battsengel Vandansambuu & Yuhai Bao, 2022. "Simulation and Prediction of Land Use/Cover Changes Based on CLUE-S and CA-Markov Models: A Case Study of a Typical Pastoral Area in Mongolia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-21, November.
    13. Di Liu & Xiaoying Liang & Hai Chen & Hang Zhang & Nanzhao Mao, 2018. "A Quantitative Assessment of Comprehensive Ecological Risk for a Loess Erosion Gully: A Case Study of Dujiashi Gully, Northern Shaanxi Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-16, September.
    14. Yanyan Jia & Xiaolan Tang & Wei Liu, 2020. "Spatial–Temporal Evolution and Correlation Analysis of Ecosystem Service Value and Landscape Ecological Risk in Wuhu City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, April.
    15. Irina Pilvere & Aleksejs Nipers & Agnese Krievina & Ilze Upite & Daniels Kotovs, 2022. "LASAM Model: An Important Tool in the Decision Support System for Policymakers and Farmers," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, May.
    16. Cláudia M. Viana & Jorge Rocha, 2020. "Evaluating Dominant Land Use/Land Cover Changes and Predicting Future Scenario in a Rural Region Using a Memoryless Stochastic Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-28, May.
    17. Huiqing Han & Zhihua Su & Guangbin Yang, 2023. "Variations of Habitat Quality and Ecological Risk and Their Correlations with Landscape Metrics in a Robust Human Disturbed Coastal Region—Case Study: Xinggang Town in Southern China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-20, February.
    18. Botlhe Matlhodi & Piet K. Kenabatho & Bhagabat P. Parida & Joyce G. Maphanyane, 2019. "Evaluating Land Use and Land Cover Change in the Gaborone Dam Catchment, Botswana, from 1984–2015 Using GIS and Remote Sensing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-21, September.
    19. Yanping Lan & Jianjun Chen & Yanping Yang & Ming Ling & Haotian You & Xiaowen Han, 2023. "Landscape Pattern and Ecological Risk Assessment in Guilin Based on Land Use Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-19, January.
    20. Dongchuan Wang & Hua Chai & Zhiheng Wang & Kangjian Wang & Hongyi Wang & Hui Long & Jianshe Gao & Aoze Wei & Sirun Wang, 2022. "Dynamic Monitoring and Ecological Risk Analysis of Lake Inundation Areas in Tibetan Plateau," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-20, October.

    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:13:y:2020:i:1:p:149-:d:468470. 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.