IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i9p7210-d1133363.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatiotemporal Changes of Ecosystem Service Values in Response to Land Cover Dynamics in China from 1992 to 2020

Author

Listed:
  • Jianxiong Bao

    (State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

  • Wen Wang

    (State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

  • Tianqing Zhao

    (State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

Abstract

Global land cover changed significantly in the last several decades due to strong climate warming and intensive human activities, and those changes greatly affected ecosystem services all over the world. Using CCI-LC land cover data from 1992 to 2020, the spatiotemporal characteristics of land cover change in China were investigated, and the annual ecosystem service values (ESVs) were estimated with the equivalent factor method. The results showed that: (1) The overall accuracy and Kappa coefficient of CCI-LC products in China were 71.1% and 0.65, respectively. (2) From 1992 to 2020, the area of cropland in China increased generally first before 2004 then decreased after 2008; the area of forest land decreased before 2003 then increased after 2015; the area of grassland and bare land consistently decreased; and the area of built-up land continuously increased, with a total increase of 113,000 km 2 . The primary characteristics of land cover transitions in China were the mutual conversion of cropland, forestland, and grassland as well as the continuous increase of built-up land. (3) Forest land was the most significant contributor of ESV in China, making 62.9% of the total ESV by multi-year average, followed by grassland (18.5%) and water (10.3%); the ESV was roughly high in the southeast China and low in the northwest. (4) The total ESV in China decreased generally before 2015 and got stable in the last five years. The hot spots with rising ESV were mainly concentrated in the western, northern and southwestern parts of China, while the cold spots with declining ESV were mainly concentrated in the economically developed eastern and southern China. (5) Cropland, forest land, grassland, and water were the positive contributors to ESV change in China, while built-up land and bare land were the negative contributors. The findings provide a theoretical foundation for China’s harmonized socioeconomic and environmental development.

Suggested Citation

  • Jianxiong Bao & Wen Wang & Tianqing Zhao, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Changes of Ecosystem Service Values in Response to Land Cover Dynamics in China from 1992 to 2020," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-28, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7210-:d:1133363
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7210/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7210/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lei Yang & Fenglian Liu, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Driving Factors of Ecosystem Service Value of Urban Agglomeration in Central Yunnan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Na Zhao & Hui Wang & Jingqiu Zhong & Dongqi Sun, 2022. "Assessment of Recreational and Cultural Ecosystem Services Value of Islands," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Grossman, G.M & Krueger, A.B., 1991. "Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement," Papers 158, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Public and International Affairs.
    4. Daowei Zhang & Anne Stenger, 2015. "Value and valuation of forest ecosystem services," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 129-140, July.
    5. Costanza, Robert, 2020. "Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    6. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    7. Ren Yang & Baoqing Qin & Yuancheng Lin, 2021. "Assessment of the Impact of Land Use Change on Spatial Differentiation of Landscape and Ecosystem Service Values in the Case of Study the Pearl River Delta in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    9. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    10. Carson, Richard T & Flores, Nicholas A, 2000. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt75k752s7, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    11. Jing Xiao, 2011. "From the Editor," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 1-3, March.
    12. Thomas G Poder & Jérôme Dupras & Franck Fetue Ndefo & Jie He, 2016. "The Economic Value of the Greater Montreal Blue Network (Quebec, Canada): A Contingent Choice Study Using Real Projects to Estimate Non-Market Aquatic Ecosystem Services Benefits," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, August.
    13. Dimitrios Kalfas & Fotios Chatzitheodoridis & Efstratios Loizou & Katerina Melfou, 2022. "Willingness to Pay for Urban and Suburban Green," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    14. Arthur Getis & J. Keith Ord, 2010. "The Analysis of Spatial Association by Use of Distance Statistics," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Luc Anselin & Sergio J. Rey (ed.), Perspectives on Spatial Data Analysis, chapter 0, pages 127-145, Springer.
    15. Julie Le Gallo, 2004. "Space-Time Analysis of GDP Disparities among European Regions: A Markov Chains Approach," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 27(2), pages 138-163, April.
    16. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    17. Hein, Lars & Remme, Roy P. & Schenau, Sjoerd & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Lof, Marjolein E. & Horlings, Edwin, 2020. "Ecosystem accounting in the Netherlands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    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. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Jie He & Jérôme Dupras & Franck Ndefo & Thomas Poder, 2020. "Payment and provision consequentiality in voluntary contribution mechanism: separate or joint effects?," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 11-36, April.
    4. Jie He & Jérôme Dupras & Thomas G. Poder, 2018. "Payment and Provision Consequentiality in Voluntary Contribution Mechanism: Single or Double “Knife-Edge” Evidence?," Cahiers de recherche 18-02, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    5. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    6. Tokunaga, Kanae & Sugino, Hiroaki & Nomura, Hideaki & Michida, Yutaka, 2020. "Norms and the willingness to pay for coastal ecosystem restoration: A case of the Tokyo Bay intertidal flats," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    7. Marie-Pier Schinck & Chloé L’Ecuyer-Sauvageau & Justin Leroux & Charlène Kermagoret & Jérôme Dupras, 2020. "Risk, Drinking Water and Harmful Algal Blooms: A Contingent Valuation of Water Bans," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(12), pages 3933-3947, September.
    8. Mikhail Miklyaev & Glenn P. Jenkins & Precious P. Adeshina, 2022. "Ex-Post Evaluation of The Algerian SWRO Desalination PPP Program," Development Discussion Papers 2022-14, JDI Executive Programs.
    9. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    10. Pamela Wicker & John C. Whitehead & Bruce K. Johnson & Daniel S. Mason, 2016. "Willingness-To-Pay For Sporting Success Of Football Bundesliga Teams," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(3), pages 446-462, July.
    11. Franz Hackl & Gerald J. Pruckner, 2005. "Warm glow, free‐riding and vehicle neutrality in a health‐related contingent valuation study," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 293-306, March.
    12. Marieka M. Klawitter & C. Leigh Anderson & Mary Kay Gugerty, 2013. "Savings And Personal Discount Rates In A Matched Savings Program For Low-Income Families," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(3), pages 468-485, July.
    13. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    14. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    15. Van Houtven, George L. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Yang, Jui-Chen, 2017. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 126-135.
    16. Jean-Daniel Rinaudo & Stéphanie Aulong, 2014. "Defining Groundwater Remediation Objectives with Cost-benefit Analysis: Does It Work?," Post-Print hal-00934930, HAL.
    17. Ali DOUAI, 2007. "Wealth, Well-being and Value(s): A Proposition of Structuring Concepts for a (real) Transdisciplinary Dialogue within Ecological Economics," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2007-18, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    18. Turpie, Jane K., 2003. "The existence value of biodiversity in South Africa: how interest, experience, knowledge, income and perceived level of threat influence local willingness to pay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 199-216, September.
    19. Dienes, Christian, 2015. "Actions and intentions to pay for climate change mitigation: Environmental concern and the role of economic factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 122-129.
    20. Stenger, Anne & Harou, Patrice & Navrud, Ståle, 2009. "Valuing environmental goods and services derived from the forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 1-14, January.

    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:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7210-:d:1133363. 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.