IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i8p1270-d105740.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the Coordinated Development of Ecological and Economic Systems in Hengduan Mountain Area

Author

Listed:
  • Tiantian Chen

    (Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China
    Department of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Li Peng

    (Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Qiang Wang

    (Department of Earth Sciences, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China)

  • Shaoquan Liu

    (Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China)

Abstract

With the expansion of the concept of sustainable development, it has become increasingly important to investigate the means for achieving sustainable eco-economic development. On the basis of Landsat imagery of Hengduan Mountain area of China acquired in 1990, 2000, and 2010, we analyzed the coordination relationships, evolution characteristics, and aggregation modes of the economy and ecology in this region using ecosystem service value (ESV) and ecological economic harmony (eco-economic harmony, EEH) models. The following results were obtained. (1) There was a significant transition in land cover, wherein grassland increased the most and farmland decreased the most, by 1.18 × 10 4 km 2 and 9.41 × 10 3 km 2 , respectively. These trends were related to urban expansion and the implementation of ecological measures; (2) From 1990 to 2000, there was a deterioration in the ecological system, whereas after 2000, the ecosystem improved due to implementation of the Chinese government’s “Returning Farmland to Forest (Grassland)” scheme, thereby illustrating the importance of forest to ecosystem stability; (3) Spatially, the EEH index showed a dual-core structure centered on a low conflict zone and potential crisis zone, which signified that there was a trend of coordinated development between the economy and ecology; however, this was not stable; (4) There were four types of EEH evolution zones—low conflict, potential crisis, slight improvement, and significant improvement zones—of which the improvement zones accounted for 55.15% of the area, thereby indicating that over time the economy has played a positive role in shaping the ecological environment; (5) The spatial aggregation modes of EEH evolution were band coordinated mode, group uncoordinated mode and group improvement mode, which meant the relationship of ecology and economy was always in lowest coordinated state in a banded form, in uncoordinated state and a significant increase in a block form, respectively. These modes were intended to provide a reference for the sustainable development in southwest China.

Suggested Citation

  • Tiantian Chen & Li Peng & Qiang Wang & Shaoquan Liu, 2017. "Measuring the Coordinated Development of Ecological and Economic Systems in Hengduan Mountain Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:8:p:1270-:d:105740
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1270/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1270/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nunez, Daisy & Nahuelhual, Laura & Oyarzun, Carlos, 2006. "Forests and water: The value of native temperate forests in supplying water for human consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 606-616, June.
    2. Costanza, Robert & d'Arge, Ralph & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Stephen & Grasso, Monica & Hannon, Bruce & Limburg, Karin & Naeem, Shahid & O'Neill, Robert V. & Paruelo, Jose, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services: putting the issues in perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 67-72, April.
    3. Geoffrey Glasby, 2002. "Sustainable Development: The Need for a New Paradigm," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 333-345, December.
    4. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    5. Shilong Piao & Jingyun Fang & Philippe Ciais & Philippe Peylin & Yao Huang & Stephen Sitch & Tao Wang, 2009. "The carbon balance of terrestrial ecosystems in China," Nature, Nature, vol. 458(7241), pages 1009-1013, April.
    6. Common, Mick & Perrings, Charles, 1992. "Towards an ecological economics of sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 7-34, July.
    7. Cardoso de Mendonca, Mario Jorge & Sachsida, Adolfo & Loureiro, Paulo R. A., 2003. "A study on the valuing of biodiversity: the case of three endangered species in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 9-18, August.
    8. Kreuter, Urs P. & Harris, Heather G. & Matlock, Marty D. & Lacey, Ronald E., 2001. "Change in ecosystem service values in the San Antonio area, Texas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 333-346, December.
    9. N. D. Hanley & R. J. Ruffell, 1993. "The Contingent Valuation Of Forest Characteristics: Two Experiments," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 218-229, May.
    10. Woodward, Richard T. & Wui, Yong-Suhk, 2001. "The economic value of wetland services: a meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 257-270, May.
    11. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    12. Shafik, Nemat, 1994. "Economic Development and Environmental Quality: An Econometric Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 757-773, Supplemen.
    13. Loomis, John & Kent, Paula & Strange, Liz & Fausch, Kurt & Covich, Alan, 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 103-117, April.
    14. Perrings, Charles, 1986. "Conservation of mass and instability in a dynamic economy-environment system," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 199-211, September.
    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. Le Yin & Erfu Dai & Guopan Xie & Baolei Zhang, 2021. "Effects of Land-Use Intensity and Land Management Policies on Evolution of Regional Land System: A Case Study in the Hengduan Mountain Region," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, May.
    2. Yingchao Lin & Yongle Li & Zhili Ma, 2018. "Exploring the Interactive Development between Population Urbanization and Land Urbanization: Evidence from Chongqing, China (1998–2016)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-28, May.
    3. Shuo Wang & Junnian Song & Xian’En Wang & Wei Yang, 2019. "The Spatial and Temporal Research on the Coupling and Coordinated Relationship between Social Economy and Energy Environment in the Belt and Road Initiatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.

    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. Zhuohang Xin & Chao Li & Haixing Liu & Hua Shang & Lei Ye & Yu Li & Chi Zhang, 2018. "Evaluation of Temporal and Spatial Ecosystem Services in Dalian, China: Implications for Urban Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Tianhong, Li & Wenkai, Li & Zhenghan, Qian, 2010. "Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use changes in Shenzhen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1427-1435, May.
    3. 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.
    4. Ingraham, Molly W. & Foster, Shonda Gilliland, 2008. "The value of ecosystem services provided by the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System in the contiguous U.S," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 608-618, November.
    5. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    6. Foody, G.M., 2015. "Valuing map validation: The need for rigorous land cover map accuracy assessment in economic valuations of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 23-28.
    7. Boya Wang & Zhicheng Liu & Yuting Mei & Wenjie Li, 2019. "Assessment of Ecosystem Service Quality and Its Correlation with Landscape Patterns in Haidian District, Beijing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-34, April.
    8. Yi, Hoonchong & Güneralp, Burak & Filippi, Anthony M. & Kreuter, Urs P. & Güneralp, İnci, 2017. "Impacts of Land Change on Ecosystem Services in the San Antonio River Basin, Texas, from 1984 to 2010," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 125-135.
    9. Bergstrom, John & Holmes, Tom & Huszar, Eric & Kask, Susan, 2001. "Testing a Computer-Assisted Valuation Panel Approach for Valuing Watershed Ecosystem Restoration," Western Region Archives 321683, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    10. Balvanera, Patricia & Uriarte, María & Almeida-Leñero, Lucía & Altesor, Alice & DeClerck, Fabrice & Gardner, Toby & Hall, Jefferson & Lara, Antonio & Laterra, Pedro & Peña-Claros, Marielos & Silva Mat, 2012. "Ecosystem services research in Latin America: The state of the art," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 56-70.
    11. Sophal Chhun & Paul Thorsnes & Henrik Moller, 2013. "Preferences for Management of Near-Shore Marine Ecosystems: A Choice Experiment in New Zealand," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-33, September.
    12. Tianhong Li & Yao Ding, 2017. "Spatial disparity dynamics of ecosystem service values and GDP in Shaanxi Province, China in the last 30 years," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Jackson, Laura E. & Rashleigh, Brenda & McDonald, Michael E., 2012. "Economic Value of Stream Degradation across the Central Appalachians," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 42(3), pages 1-10.
    14. Dacheng Bian & Aaron Benson & Ryan B. Williams, 2013. "An Estimation of the Private Value of Aquifer Recharge from Ephemeral Wetlands on the Texas High Plains," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-17, August.
    15. Fouad Ouardighi & Hassan Benchekroun & Dieter Grass, 2014. "Controlling pollution and environmental absorption capacity," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 220(1), pages 111-133, September.
    16. Wang, Han & Tian, Fuan & Wu, Jianxian & Nie, Xin, 2023. "Is China forest landscape restoration (FLR) worth it? A cost-benefit analysis and non-equilibrium ecological view," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Rodrigues, João & Domingos, Tiago & Conceição, Pedro & Belbute, José, 2005. "Constraints on dematerialisation and allocation of natural capital along a sustainable growth path," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 382-396, September.
    18. repec:dgr:rugcds:200218 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Toman, Michael & Pezzey, John C., 2002. "The Economics of Sustainability: A Review of Journal Articles," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-03, Resources for the Future.
    20. Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Oksana Logvinenko, 2020. "A New Look at the Natural Capital Concept: Approaches, Structure, and Evaluation Procedure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.
    21. Kumar, Pavan & Singh, S.S. & Pandey, A.K. & Singh, Ram Kumar & Srivastava, Prashant Kumar & Kumar, Manoj & Dubey, Shantanu Kumar & Sah, Uma & Nandan, Rajiv & Singh, Susheel Kumar & Agrawal, Priyanshi , 2021. "Multi-level impacts of the COVID-19 lockdown on agricultural systems in India: The case of Uttar Pradesh," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).

    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:8:p:1270-:d:105740. 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.