IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i13p5776-d1430241.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation and Prediction of Carbon Storage in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau by Coupling the GMMOP and PLUS Models

Author

Listed:
  • Li Yuan

    (School of Agricultural and Forestry Economics and Management, Lanzhou University of Finance and Economics, Lanzhou 730101, China)

  • Jing Xu

    (School of Agricultural and Forestry Economics and Management, Lanzhou University of Finance and Economics, Lanzhou 730101, China)

  • Binrui Feng

    (School of Economics, Lanzhou University of Finance and Economics, Lanzhou 730101, China)

Abstract

Land-use alterations exert a profound impact on carbon storage within terrestrial ecosystems. Exploring the spatiotemporal dynamics of regional land use and carbon storage is crucial for optimizing national spatial planning and fostering low-carbon development. For this study, we utilized land-use data spanning from 2000 to 2020 for the Tibetan Plateau and assessed the spatial and temporal variations in carbon storage using the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model. We adjusted the carbon density within the provinces in the study area as a prerequisite. Moreover, we integrated the Grey Multi-objective Decision-making (GMMOP) model with the Patch-generating Land-use Simulation (PLUS) model to forecast carbon storage alterations in 2030 across various scenarios. The findings indicated that between 2000 and 2020, the overall carbon storage witnessed a decrease of 18.94 × 10 8 t. Carbon storage in grassland decreased by 22.10 × 10 8 t, and carbon storage in unused land, forest land, cultivated land, construction land, and water increased by 1.56 × 10 8 t, 0.92 × 10 8 t, 0.66 × 10 8 t, 158.50 × 10 4 t and 26.74 × 10 4 t, respectively. The soil organic carbon pool exhibited the highest average carbon storage of 195.63 × 10 8 t, whereas the litterfall organic carbon pool contained the lowest average carbon stock of 15.07 × 10 8 t. In comparison with the levels observed in 2020, the total carbon storage experienced a reduction of 8.66 × 10 8 t and 5.29 × 10 8 t under the inherent progression and economic growth scenarios, respectively. Conversely, it rose by 11.87 × 10 8 t and 16.21 × 10 8 t under the environmental preservation and holistic progression scenarios, respectively. Under the holistic progression scenario, the belowground biomass organic carbon pool exhibited the highest carbon storage increase of 5.59%. These findings offer valuable insights for the management and enhancement of carbon sinks in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.

Suggested Citation

  • Li Yuan & Jing Xu & Binrui Feng, 2024. "Evaluation and Prediction of Carbon Storage in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau by Coupling the GMMOP and PLUS Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:13:p:5776-:d:1430241
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/13/5776/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/13/5776/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fengjie Gao & Xiaohui Xin & Jianxiang Song & Xuewen Li & Lin Zhang & Ying Zhang & Jiafu Liu, 2023. "Simulation of LUCC Dynamics and Estimation of Carbon Stock under Different SSP-RCP Scenarios in Heilongjiang Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Liu, Dongya & Zheng, Xinqi & Wang, Hongbin, 2020. "Land-use Simulation and Decision-Support system (LandSDS): Seamlessly integrating system dynamics, agent-based model, and cellular automata," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 417(C).
    3. Zhipeng Lai & Chengjing Chen & Jianguo Chen & Zhuo Wu & Fang Wang & Shaoying Li, 2022. "Multi-Scenario Simulation of Land-Use Change and Delineation of Urban Growth Boundaries in County Area: A Case Study of Xinxing County, Guangdong Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Timothy D. Searchinger & Stefan Wirsenius & Tim Beringer & Patrice Dumas, 2018. "Assessing the efficiency of changes in land use for mitigating climate change," Nature, Nature, vol. 564(7735), pages 249-253, December.
    5. Yongjun Du & Xiaolong Li & Xinlin He & Xiaoqian Li & Guang Yang & Dongbo Li & Wenhe Xu & Xiang Qiao & Chen Li & Lu Sui, 2022. "Multi-Scenario Simulation and Trade-Off Analysis of Ecological Service Value in the Manas River Basin Based on Land Use Optimization in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-31, May.
    6. Martin Heimann & Markus Reichstein, 2008. "Terrestrial ecosystem carbon dynamics and climate feedbacks," Nature, Nature, vol. 451(7176), pages 289-292, January.
    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. Wang, Han & Lu, Siying & Lu, Bo & Nie, Xin, 2021. "Overt and covert: The relationship between the transfer of land development rights and carbon emissions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Henrik B. Møller & Peter Sørensen & Jørgen E. Olesen & Søren O. Petersen & Tavs Nyord & Sven G. Sommer, 2022. "Agricultural Biogas Production—Climate and Environmental Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Sabastine Ugbemuna Ugbaje & Thomas F.A. Bishop, 2020. "Hydrological Control of Vegetation Greenness Dynamics in Africa: A Multivariate Analysis Using Satellite Observed Soil Moisture, Terrestrial Water Storage and Precipitation," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, January.
    4. Yang Zhang & Xiaojiang Xia & Jiandong Li & Luge Xing & Chengchao Yang & Haofeng Wang & Xiaoai Dai & Jue Wang, 2024. "Simulation of Urban Growth Boundary under the Guidance of Stock Development: A Case Study of Wuhan City," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, July.
    5. Sophie Saget & Marcela Costa & David Styles & Mike Williams, 2021. "Does Circular Reuse of Chickpea Cooking Water to Produce Vegan Mayonnaise Reduce Environmental Impact Compared with Egg Mayonnaise?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, April.
    6. Elena Tamburini & Mattias Gaglio & Giuseppe Castaldelli & Elisa Anna Fano, 2020. "Is Bioenergy Truly Sustainable When Land-Use-Change (LUC) Emissions Are Accounted for? The Case-Study of Biogas from Agricultural Biomass in Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, April.
    7. Maurer, Rainer, 2023. "Comparing the effect of different agricultural land-use systems on biodiversity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    8. Liudmila Tripolskaja & Asta Kazlauskaite-Jadzevice & Eugenija Baksiene & Almantas Razukas, 2022. "Changes in Organic Carbon in Mineral Topsoil of a Formerly Cultivated Arenosol under Different Land Uses in Lithuania," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-19, March.
    9. Yuanbo Cao & Huijie Xiao & Baitian Wang & Yunlong Zhang & Honghui Wu & Xijing Wang & Yadong Yang & Tingting Wei, 2021. "Soil Respiration May Overestimate or Underestimate in Forest Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Zhiwei Deng & Bin Quan, 2022. "Intensity Characteristics and Multi-Scenario Projection of Land Use and Land Cover Change in Hengyang, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Hao Wang & Yunfeng Hu, 2021. "Simulation of Biocapacity and Spatial-Temporal Evolution Analysis of Loess Plateau in Northern Shaanxi Based on the CA–Markov Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, May.
    12. Yongxia Ding & Siqi Liang & Shouzhang Peng, 2019. "Climate Change Affects Forest Productivity in a Typical Climate Transition Region of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, May.
    13. Debuschewitz, Emil & Sanders, Jürn, 2021. "Bewertung der Umweltwirkungen des ökologischen Landbaus im Kontext der kontroversen wissenschaftlichen Diskurse," 61st Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 22-24, 2021 317076, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    14. Chasia, Stanley & Olang, Luke O. & Sitoki, Lewis, 2023. "Modelling of land-use/cover change trajectories in a transboundary catchment of the Sio-Malaba-Malakisi Region in East Africa using the CLUE-s model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 476(C).
    15. Bellassen Valentin & Drut Marion & Antonioli Federico & Brečić Ružica & Donati Michele & Ferrer-Pérez Hugo & Gauvrit Lisa & Hoang Viet & Knutsen Steinnes Kamilla & Lilavanichakul Apichaya & Majewski E, 2021. "The Carbon and Land Footprint of Certified Food Products," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 113-126, December.
    16. Li Yu & Fengxue Gu & Mei Huang & Bo Tao & Man Hao & Zhaosheng Wang, 2020. "Impacts of 1.5 °C and 2 °C Global Warming on Net Primary Productivity and Carbon Balance in China’s Terrestrial Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, April.
    17. De Leijster, V. & Santos, M.J. & Wassen, M.W. & Camargo García, J.C. & Llorca Fernandez, I. & Verkuil, L. & Scheper, A. & Steenhuis, M. & Verweij, P.A., 2021. "Ecosystem services trajectories in coffee agroforestry in Colombia over 40 years," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    18. Marian Gil & Mariusz Rudy & Paulina Duma-Kocan & Renata Stanisławczyk & Anna Krajewska & Dariusz Dziki & Waleed H. Hassoon, 2024. "Sustainability of Alternatives to Animal Protein Sources, a Comprehensive Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-27, September.
    19. Huang, Suo & Bartlett, Paul & Arain, M. Altaf, 2016. "An analysis of global terrestrial carbon, water and energy dynamics using the carbon–nitrogen coupled CLASS-CTEMN+ model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 336(C), pages 36-56.
    20. Yin Ma & Minrui Zheng & Xinqi Zheng & Yi Huang & Feng Xu & Xiaoli Wang & Jiantao Liu & Yongqiang Lv & Wenchao Liu, 2023. "Land Use Efficiency Assessment under Sustainable Development Goals: A Systematic Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, 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:16:y:2024:i:13:p:5776-:d:1430241. 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.