IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i8p1366-d106917.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Projecting the CO 2 and Climatic Change Effects on the Net Primary Productivity of the Urban Ecosystems in Phoenix, AZ in the 21st Century under Multiple RCP (Representative Concentration Pathway) Scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Chunbo Chen

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Chi Zhang

    (State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    School of Resources Environment Science and Engineering, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning 437100, China)

Abstract

Urban vegetation provides ecological services that promote both the ecosystem integrity and human well-being of urban areas, and thus is critical to urban sustainability. As a key indicator of ecological health, net primary productivity (NPP) provides valuable information about the performance of urban ecosystem in response to the changes in urban climate and atmosphere in the 21st century. In this study, a process-based urban ecosystem model, HPM-UEM (Hierarchical Patch Mosaic-Urban Ecosystem Model), was used to investigate spatiotemporal dynamics of urban ecosystem NPP in the Phoenix city, AZ under three representative concentration pathway (RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) during the 21st century. The results indicated that, by the end of the 21st century, the urban ecosystem’s NPP would increase by 14% (in RCP2.6), 51% (in RCP4.5) and 99% (in RCP8.5) relative to that in the late 2000s, respectively. Factorial analysis indicated that CO 2 fertilization effect would be the major driver of NPP change, accounting for 56–61% of the NPP increase under the scenarios. Under the RCP2.6 scenario, the strongest NPP increase would be found in the agricultural lands located in the west and southeast of the city. Under the RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 scenarios, the strongest NPP increase would be found in the mesic residential areas that mainly located to the eastern, southern, and southwestern of the Phoenix Mountains Preserve. Although higher ecosystem NPP in the future implies improved ecosystem services that may help to alleviate the heat stress (by providing more shading) and air pollution in the city, this will be at the cost of higher irrigation water usage, probably leading to water shortage in the natural ecosystems in this arid region. Furthermore, this study indicated the rich (such as in mesic residential area) would enjoy more benefits from the improved urban ecosystem services than the poor (such as in xeric residential area).

Suggested Citation

  • Chunbo Chen & Chi Zhang, 2017. "Projecting the CO 2 and Climatic Change Effects on the Net Primary Productivity of the Urban Ecosystems in Phoenix, AZ in the 21st Century under Multiple RCP (Representative Concentration Pathway) Sce," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:8:p:1366-:d:106917
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1366/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1366/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhang, Chi & Wu, Jianguo & Grimm, Nancy B. & McHale, Melissa & Buyantuyev, Alexander, 2013. "A hierarchical patch mosaic ecosystem model for urban landscapes: Model development and evaluation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 81-100.
    2. Yiqi Luo & Shiqiang Wan & Dafeng Hui & Linda L. Wallace, 2001. "Acclimatization of soil respiration to warming in a tall grass prairie," Nature, Nature, vol. 413(6856), pages 622-625, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Teague, A. & Russell, M. & Harvey, J. & Dantin, D. & Nestlerode, J. & Alvarez, F., 2016. "A spatially-explicit technique for evaluation of alternative scenarios in the context of ecosystem goods and services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 15-29.
    5. Matthew Reeves & Adam Moreno & Karen Bagne & Steven Running, 2014. "Estimating climate change effects on net primary production of rangelands in the United States," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 126(3), pages 429-442, October.
    6. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    7. Joeri Rogelj & Malte Meinshausen & Reto Knutti, 2012. "Global warming under old and new scenarios using IPCC climate sensitivity range estimates," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(4), pages 248-253, April.
    8. Kamaljit Banger & Hanqin Tian & Bo Tao & Wei Ren & Shufen Pan & Shree Dangal & Jia Yang, 2015. "Terrestrial net primary productivity in India during 1901–2010: contributions from multiple environmental changes," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 132(4), pages 575-588, October.
    9. Stanley D. Smith & Travis E. Huxman & Stephen F. Zitzer & Therese N. Charlet & David C. Housman & James S. Coleman & Lynn K. Fenstermaker & Jeffrey R. Seemann & Robert S. Nowak, 2000. "Elevated CO2 increases productivity and invasive species success in an arid ecosystem," Nature, Nature, vol. 408(6808), pages 79-82, November.
    10. Peter B. Reich & Jean Knops & David Tilman & Joseph Craine & David Ellsworth & Mark Tjoelker & Tali Lee & David Wedin & Shahid Naeem & Dan Bahauddin & George Hendrey & Shibu Jose & Keith Wrage & Jenny, 2001. "Plant diversity enhances ecosystem responses to elevated CO2 and nitrogen deposition," Nature, Nature, vol. 410(6830), pages 809-810, April.
    11. Costanza, Robert & Fisher, Brendan & Mulder, Kenneth & Liu, Shuang & Christopher, Treg, 2007. "Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multi-scale empirical study of the relationship between species richness and net primary production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 478-491, March.
    12. Lina M. Mercado & Nicolas Bellouin & Stephen Sitch & Olivier Boucher & Chris Huntingford & Martin Wild & Peter M. Cox, 2009. "Impact of changes in diffuse radiation on the global land carbon sink," Nature, Nature, vol. 458(7241), pages 1014-1017, April.
    13. Daniel Wallach & Linda O. Mearns & Alex C. Ruane & Reimund P. Rötter & Senthold Asseng, 2016. "Lessons from climate modeling on the design and use of ensembles for crop modeling," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 551-564, December.
    14. Keane, Robert E. & Cary, Geoffrey J. & Flannigan, Mike D. & Parsons, Russell A. & Davies, Ian D. & King, Karen J. & Li, Chao & Bradstock, Ross A. & Gill, Malcolm, 2013. "Exploring the role of fire, succession, climate, and weather on landscape dynamics using comparative modeling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 266(C), pages 172-186.
    15. C. Ordóñez & P. Duinker, 2015. "Climate change vulnerability assessment of the urban forest in three Canadian cities," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 131(4), pages 531-543, August.
    16. W. A. Obermeier & L. W. Lehnert & C. I. Kammann & C. Müller & L. Grünhage & J. Luterbacher & M. Erbs & G. Moser & R. Seibert & N. Yuan & J. Bendix, 2017. "Reduced CO2 fertilization effect in temperate C3 grasslands under more extreme weather conditions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(2), pages 137-141, February.
    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. Fang, Xia & Chen, Zhi & Guo, Xulin & Zhu, Shihua & Liu, Tong & Li, Chaofan & He, Biao, 2019. "Impacts and uncertainties of climate/CO2 change on net primary productivity in Xinjiang, China (2000–2014): A modelling approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 408(C), pages 1-1.

    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. Mayer, Andreas & Kaufmann, Lisa & Kalt, Gerald & Matej, Sarah & Theurl, Michaela C. & Morais, Tiago G. & Leip, Adrian & Erb, Karl-Heinz, 2021. "Applying the Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production framework to map provisioning ecosystem services and their relation to ecosystem functioning across the European Union," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    2. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    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. repec:dgr:rugcds:200218 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Malone, Thomas C. & DiGiacomo, Paul M. & Gonçalves, Emanuel & Knap, Anthony H. & Talaue-McManus, Liana & de Mora, Stephen, 2014. "A global ocean observing system framework for sustainable development," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 262-272.
    8. 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.
    9. 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).
    10. Hendriksen, Astrid & Jouanneau, Charlène & Koss, Rebecca & Raakjaer, Jesper, 2014. "Fishing for opinions: Stakeholder views on MSFD implementation in European Seas," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PB), pages 353-363.
    11. Sinden, John Alfred & Griffith, Garry, 2007. "Combining economic and ecological arguments to value the environmental gains from control of 35 weeds in Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 396-408, March.
    12. María del Pilar García Pachón, 2016. "Instrumentos Económicos Y Financieros Para La Gestión Ambiental," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 853, October.
    13. Weesie, Peter & Andel, J. van, 2003. "On biodiversity and its valuation," CDS Research Reports 200218, University of Groningen, Centre for Development Studies (CDS).
    14. Natacha LASKOWSKI, 2013. "Optimal allocation of wetlands: Study on conflict between agriculture and fishery," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2013-07, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    15. Ruijs, A. & Wossink, A. & Kortelainen, M. & Alkemade, R. & Schulp, C.J.E., 2013. "Trade-off analysis of ecosystem services in Eastern Europe," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 82-94.
    16. Watson, Stephen C.L. & Paterson, David M. & Queirós, Ana M. & Rees, Andrew P. & Stephens, Nicholas & Widdicombe, Stephen & Beaumont, Nicola J., 2016. "A conceptual framework for assessing the ecosystem service of waste remediation: In the marine environment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 69-81.
    17. 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.
    18. Henghui Xi & Wanglai Cui & Li Cai & Mengyuan Chen & Chenglei Xu, 2021. "Evaluation and Prediction of Ecosystem Service Value in the Zhoushan Islands Based on LUCC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    19. Costanza, Robert & Fisher, Brendan & Mulder, Kenneth & Liu, Shuang & Christopher, Treg, 2007. "Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multi-scale empirical study of the relationship between species richness and net primary production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 478-491, March.
    20. Oksana Sakal, 2016. "Methodological approaches for the evaluation of ecosystem services," Economics of Nature and the Environment, Mykhaylo Khvesyk, pages 71-78.
    21. Parks, Sarah & Gowdy, John, 2013. "What have economists learned about valuing nature? A review essay," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 1-10.

    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:1366-:d:106917. 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.