IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i6p1030-d101556.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Land Use Intensity on Ecosystem Services: An Example from the Agro-Pastoral Ecotone of Central Inner Mongolia

Author

Listed:
  • Qian Li

    (School of Ecology and Environment, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, China
    Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha 410125, China)

  • Xuefeng Zhang

    (School of Ecology and Environment, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, China
    Inner Mongolia Key Laboratory of Grassland Ecology, Hohhot 010021, China)

  • Qingfu Liu

    (School of Ecology and Environment, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, China
    Inner Mongolia Key Laboratory of Grassland Ecology, Hohhot 010021, China)

  • Yang Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Ecology and Environment, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, China
    Inner Mongolia Key Laboratory of Grassland Ecology, Hohhot 010021, China)

  • Yong Ding

    (Grassland Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hohhot 010010, China
    Key Laboratory of Grassland Ecology and Restoration of the Ministry of Agriculture, Hohhot 010010, China)

  • Qing Zhang

    (School of Ecology and Environment, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, China
    Inner Mongolia Key Laboratory of Grassland Ecology, Hohhot 010021, China
    Key Laboratory of Grassland Ecology and Restoration of the Ministry of Agriculture, Hohhot 010010, China)

Abstract

Land use intensity is an important indicator of human activities, so we quantified the land use intensity and five ecosystem services (soil conservation, water conservation, carbon storage, net primary productivity (NPP), and crop production) in 13 subbasins of the Tabu River Basin in an agro-pastoral ecotone in central Inner Mongolia. Furthermore, we analyzed the relationships among ecosystem services and the responses of the services to the impact of land use intensity. The primary conclusions were as follows: (1) All five ecosystem services gradually diminished from the upper to the lower reaches of the Tabu River Basin; (2) Water conservation exhibited a trade-off relationship with soil conservation, NPP, and crop production, but it exhibited a synergistic relationship with carbon storage. There were also synergistic relationships between soil conservation, carbon storage, NPP, and crop production; (3) As land use intensity increased, soil conservation, NPP and crop production monotonically increased. In contrast, water conservation exhibited a monotonically decreasing trend, and carbon storage followed a unimodal curve; (4) In this region, suitable ecosystem services were sustained at a land use intensity of approximately 3.95.

Suggested Citation

  • Qian Li & Xuefeng Zhang & Qingfu Liu & Yang Liu & Yong Ding & Qing Zhang, 2017. "Impact of Land Use Intensity on Ecosystem Services: An Example from the Agro-Pastoral Ecotone of Central Inner Mongolia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-11, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:6:p:1030-:d:101556
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/6/1030/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/6/1030/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kareiva, Peter & Tallis, Heather & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Daily, Gretchen C. & Polasky, Stephen (ed.), 2011. "Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199589005.
    2. Fengjiao Ma & A. Egrinya Eneji & Jintong Liu, 2014. "Understanding Relationships among Agro-Ecosystem Services Based on Emergy Analysis in Luancheng County, North China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Tao, Yu & Li, Feng & Liu, Xusheng & Zhao, Dan & Sun, Xiao & Xu, Lianfang, 2015. "Variation in ecosystem services across an urbanization gradient: A study of terrestrial carbon stocks from Changzhou, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 210-216.
    4. Chisholm, Ryan A., 2010. "Trade-offs between ecosystem services: Water and carbon in a biodiversity hotspot," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1973-1987, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Xuefeng Zhang & Jianming Niu & Alexander Buyantuev & Qing Zhang & Jianjun Dong & Sarula Kang & Jing Zhang, 2016. "Understanding Grassland Degradation and Restoration from the Perspective of Ecosystem Services: A Case Study of the Xilin River Basin in Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Nadia Sitas & Heidi E. Prozesky & Karen J. Esler & Belinda Reyers, 2014. "Exploring the Gap between Ecosystem Service Research and Management in Development Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-23, June.
    8. Rosa Rivieccio & Lorenzo Sallustio & Massimo Paolanti & Matteo Vizzarri & Marco Marchetti, 2017. "Where Land Use Changes Occur: Using Soil Features to Understand the Economic Trends in Agricultural Lands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    9. Lester, Sarah E. & Costello, Christopher & Halpern, Benjamin S. & Gaines, Steven D. & White, Crow & Barth, John A., 2013. "Evaluating tradeoffs among ecosystem services to inform marine spatial planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 80-89.
    10. Marcel Aillery & Robbin Shoemaker & Margriet Caswell, 2001. "Agriculture and Ecosystem Restoration in South Florida: Assessing Trade-Offs from Water-Retention Development in the Everglades Agricultural Area," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 183-195.
    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. Libang Ma & Wenjuan Cheng & Jie Bo & Xiaoyang Li & Yuan Gu, 2018. "Spatio-Temporal Variation of Land-Use Intensity from a Multi-Perspective—Taking the Middle and Lower Reaches of Shule River Basin in China as an Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Yuxin Qi & Ruoyu Wang & Peixin Shen & Shu Ren & Yuandong Hu, 2023. "Impacts of Land Use Intensity on Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in Harbin City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-22, October.
    3. Sai Hu & Longqian Chen & Long Li & Ting Zhang & Lina Yuan & Liang Cheng & Jia Wang & Mingxin Wen, 2020. "Simulation of Land Use Change and Ecosystem Service Value Dynamics under Ecological Constraints in Anhui Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-21, June.
    4. Linye Zhu & Mingming Shi & Deqin Fan & Kun Tu & Wenbin Sun, 2023. "Analysis of Changes in Vegetation Carbon Storage and Net Primary Productivity as Influenced by Land-Cover Change in Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Hengrui Zhang & Jianing Zhang & Zhuozhuo Lv & Linjie Yao & Ning Zhang & Qing Zhang, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Assessment of Landscape Ecological Risk and Associated Drivers: A Case Study of the Yellow River Basin in Inner Mongolia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Yaotao Xu & Peng Li & Jinjin Pan & Yi Zhang & Xiaohu Dang & Xiaoshu Cao & Junfang Cui & Zhi Yang, 2022. "Eco-Environmental Effects and Spatial Heterogeneity of “Production-Ecology-Living” Land Use Transformation: A Case Study for Ningxia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-20, August.
    7. Shuting Bai & Jiuchun Yang & Yubo Zhang & Fengqin Yan & Lingxue Yu & Shuwen Zhang, 2022. "Evaluating Ecosystem Services and Trade-Offs Based on Land-Use Simulation: A Case Study in the Farming–Pastoral Ecotone of Northern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, July.
    8. Wenbo Cai & Wei Jiang & Yongli Cai, 2021. "Developing an Ecosystem Services-Based Approach for Land Use Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, April.

    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. Keyu Qin & Jing Li & Xiaonan Yang, 2015. "Trade-Off and Synergy among Ecosystem Services in the Guanzhong-Tianshui Economic Region of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Qingfu Liu & Yanyun Zhao & Xuefeng Zhang & Alexander Buyantuev & Jianming Niu & Xiaojiang Wang, 2018. "Spatiotemporal Patterns of Desertification Dynamics and Desertification Effects on Ecosystem Services in the Mu Us Desert in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Bin Fu & Naiwen Li, 2019. "Tradeoff between Hydropower and River Visual Landscape Services in Mountainous Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    5. Wu Yang & Thomas Dietz & Wei Liu & Junyan Luo & Jianguo Liu, 2013. "Going Beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: An Index System of Human Dependence on Ecosystem Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-9, May.
    6. Abera, Wuletawu & Tamene, Lulseged & Kassawmar, Tibebu & Mulatu, Kalkidan & Kassa, Habtemariam & Verchot, Louis & Quintero, Marcela, 2021. "Impacts of land use and land cover dynamics on ecosystem services in the Yayo coffee forest biosphere reserve, southwestern Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    7. Maes, Joachim & Egoh, Benis & Willemen, Louise & Liquete, Camino & Vihervaara, Petteri & Schägner, Jan Philipp & Grizzetti, Bruna & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Notte, Alessandra La & Zulian, Grazia & Boura, 2012. "Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 31-39.
    8. Divinski, Itai & Becker, Nir & Bar (Kutiel), Pua, 2018. "Opportunity costs of alternative management options in a protected nature park: The case of Ramat Hanadiv, Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 494-504.
    9. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.
    10. Ping Zhang & Liang He & Xin Fan & Peishu Huo & Yunhui Liu & Tao Zhang & Ying Pan & Zhenrong Yu, 2015. "Ecosystem Service Value Assessment and Contribution Factor Analysis of Land Use Change in Miyun County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-24, June.
    11. Fabio Pranovi & Gianluca Sarà & Piero Franzoi, 2013. "Valuing the Unmarketable: An Ecological Approach to the Externalities Estimate in Fishing Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-11, February.
    12. Nguyen, Minh Duc & Ancev, Tiho & Randall, Alan, 2020. "Forest governance and economic values of forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    13. Kaltenborn, Bjørn P. & Linnell, John D.C. & Baggethun, Erik Gómez & Lindhjem, Henrik & Thomassen, Jørn & Chan, Kai M., 2017. "Ecosystem Services and Cultural Values as Building Blocks for ‘The Good life’. A Case Study in the Community of Røst, Lofoten Islands, Norway," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 166-176.
    14. Yanqiong Ye & Jiaen Zhang & Ting Wang & Hui Bai & Xuan Wang & Wei Zhao, 2021. "Changes in Land-Use and Ecosystem Service Value in Guangdong Province, Southern China, from 1990 to 2018," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, April.
    15. Clément Feger & Laurent Mermet, 2017. "A blueprint towards accounting for the management of ecosystems," Post-Print hal-01930913, HAL.
    16. Nekane Castillo-Eguskitza & María F. Schmitz & Miren Onaindia & Alejandro J. Rescia, 2019. "Linking Biophysical and Economic Assessments of Ecosystem Services for a Social–Ecological Approach to Conservation Planning: Application in a Biosphere Reserve (Biscay, Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, May.
    17. Ma, Fengjiao & Gao, Hui & Eneji, A. Egrinya & Jin, Zhanzhong & Han, Lipu & Liu, Jintong, 2016. "An economic valuation of groundwater management for Agriculture in Luancheng county, North China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 28-36.
    18. Rosario Gómez & Julio Aguirre & Luis Oliveros & Renzo Paladines & Néstor Ortiz & Diana Encalada & Dolors Armenteras, 2023. "A Participatory Approach to Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services in Andean Amazonia: Three Country Case Studies for Policy Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, March.
    19. Mach, Megan E. & Martone, Rebecca G. & Chan, Kai M.A., 2015. "Human impacts and ecosystem services: Insufficient research for trade-off evaluation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 112-120.
    20. Jing Zhang & Xueming Li & Alexander Buyantuev & Tongliga Bao & Xuefeng Zhang, 2019. "How Do Trade-Offs and Synergies between Ecosystem Services Change in the Long Period? The Case Study of Uxin, Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-19, 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:9:y:2017:i:6:p:1030-:d:101556. 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.