Multifunctional land-use value mapping and space type classification: A case study of Puge County, China
Li Peng
Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu, China
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Xuxi Wang
College of Land and Resource, China West Normal University, Nanchong, China
Correspondence Xuxi Wang, College of Land and Resource, China West Normal University, No 1 Shi Da Road, 637000 Nanchong, China. Email: wangxuxi1985@163
Search for more papers by this authorTiantian Chen
Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu, China
Search for more papers by this authorLi Peng
Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu, China
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Xuxi Wang
College of Land and Resource, China West Normal University, Nanchong, China
Correspondence Xuxi Wang, College of Land and Resource, China West Normal University, No 1 Shi Da Road, 637000 Nanchong, China. Email: wangxuxi1985@163
Search for more papers by this authorTiantian Chen
Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu, China
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Land exhibits diverse functions under the combined influence of natural and human forces. A production–living–ecology functional classification system was constructed by integrating land, ecosystem, and landscape functions. The land functional value was calculated by systematically integrating ecosystem service value assessments. The primary and secondary functions, as well as combinations of different land-use types, were determined using vertical and horizontal comparison methods. The production–living–ecology ranges were then delineated in Puge County, which is a typical mountain county in China. The production–living–ecology functions identified were well connected with the current land-use types. The “production–living–ecology” space in Puge County showed obvious multifunctionality and agglomeration. The function identification system proposed in this paper integrated multiple methods, overcame the difficulty of direct quantitative identification of land functions. The methods used to map and quantify land function will enhance our ability to understand and model land system changes and adequately inform policies and planning.
Summary for Managers
-
The function valuation method constructed in this paper could be used to reflect the multifunctionality and importance of land use and provide guidance and a quantitative basis for regional development planning.
-
The spatial classification results provided in this paper could offer a valuable reference for the land management department to scientifically formulate land use planning.
-
Under the goal of creating a group-type urban development pattern and constructing an ecological protection pattern in Puge County, the hotspot analysis results of this paper can provide decision-making tools and alternative spatial plans.
REFERENCES
- Barthélemy, D., & Nieddu, M. (2007). Non-trade concerns in agricultural and environmental economics: How J.R. Commons and Karl Polanyi can help us. Journal of Economic Issues, 41(2), 519–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2007.11507041
- Brandão, M., Clift, R., Canals, L. M., & Basson, L. (2010). A life-cycle approach to characterising environmental and economic impacts of multifunctional land-use systems: An integrated assessment in the UK. Sustainability, 2(12), 3747–3776. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2123747
10.3390/su2123747 Google Scholar
- Camhi, A. L. (2016). Tradeoffs and compatibilities among ecosystem services: Biological, physical and economic drivers of multifunctionality. Advances in Ecological Research, 54, 207–243.
- Chen, N. W., Li, H. C., & Wang, L. H. (2009). A GIS-based approach for mapping direct use value of ecosystem services at a county scale: Management implications. Ecological Economics, 68(11), 2768–2776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.12.001
- Costanza, R., D'Arge, R., Groot, R. D., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., … den Belt, M. V. (1997). The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital 1. World Environment, 25(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(98)00020-2
- de Groot, R. (2006). Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multi-functional landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 75(3-4), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.02.016
- Deng, W., Fang, Y. P., & Tang, W. (2013). The strategic effect and general directions of urbanization in mountain areas of China. Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, 28, 66–73.
- Du, G. M., Sun, X. B., & Wang, J. Y. (2016). Spatiotemporal patterns of multi-functionality of land use in Northeast China. Progress in Geography, 35(2), 232–244.
- Fagioli, F. F., Rocchi, L., Paolotti, L., Słowiński, R., & Boggia, A. (2017). From the farm to the agri-food system: A multiple criteria framework to evaluate extended multi-functional value. Ecological Indicators, 79, 91–102.
- Fan, J., Zhou, K., & Chen, D. (2013). Innovation and practice of economic geography for optimizing spatial development pattern in construction of ecological civilization. Economic Geography, 33(1), 1–8.
- Gimona, A., & van der Horst, D. (2007). Mapping hotspots of multiple landscape functions: A case study on farmland afforestation in Scotland. Landscape Ecology, 22, 1255–1264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-007-9105-7
- Gren, I. M., Groth, K. H., & Sylvén, M. (1995). Economic values of danube floodplains. Journal of Environmental Management, 45(4), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1995.0080
- Grêt-Regamey, A., Bebi, P., Bishop, I. D., & Schmid, W. A. (2008). Linking GIS-based models to value ecosystem services in an Alpine region. Journal of Environmental Management, 89(3), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.05.019
- de Groot, R., Brander, L., Ploeg, S. V. D., Costanza, R., Bernard, F., & Braat, L. (2012). Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units. Ecosystem Services, 1(1), 50–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.005
- Guo, Z., Xiao, X., Gan, Y., & Zheng, Y. (2001). Ecosystem functions, services and their values—A case study in XIngshan county of China. Ecological Economics, 38(1), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00154-9
- Hein, L., & de Groot, R.S. (2005). Analysis of landscape functions: Typology and sustainability indicators. Internal M3 SENSOR Document, Holland: Wageningen UR.
- Jakobsson, K. M., & Dragun, A. K. (1996). Contingent valuation and endangered species: Methodological issues and applications. British Journal of Industrial Medicine, 66(5), 609–610.
- Julia, S., & Verburg, P. H. (2017). Multifunctionality at what scale? A landscape multifunctionality assessment for the European Union under conditions of land use change. Landscape Ecology, 32(3), 481–500.
- Kienast, F., Bolliger, J., Potschin, M., de Groot, R. S., Verburg, P. H., Heller, I., … Haines-Young, R. (2009). Assessing landscape functions with broad-scale environmental data: Insights gained from a prototype development for Europe. Environmental Management, 44(6), 1099–1120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-009-9384-7
- Kreiger, D. J. (2001). Economic value of forest ecosystem services: A review. Washington DC: The Wilderness Society.
- Kumar, P., Sukhdev, P., & Al E. (2008). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics, 36(6): 34–35.
- Leh, M.D.K., Matlock, M. D., Cummings, E. C., & Nalley, L. L. (2013). Quantifying and mapping multiple ecosystem services change in West Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 165(1751), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2012.12.001
- Li, C., Kong, X., & Sun, X. (2008). Cultivated land resources value system and its evaluation in Beijing. Acta Geographica Sinica, 63(3), 321–329.
- Li, G., Huang, G., Wang, Q., Wang, X., Gao, Z., & Liu, C. (2011). Spatial-temporal distribution of the ecological service value and NPP of cuItivated land on Longdong Loess Plateau. Acta Pratacultuae Sinica, 20(6), 18–25.
- Li, G. D., & Fang, C. L. (2016). Quantitative function identification and analysis of urban ecological-production-living spaces. Acta Geographica Sinica, 71(1), 49–65.
- Li, J., Ren, Z., & Zhou, Z. (2006). Ecosystem services and their values: A case study in the qinba mountains of china. Ecological Research, 21(4), 597–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-006-0148-z
- Lovell, S. T., Desantis, S., Nathan, C. A., Olson, M. B., Ernesto méndez, V., Kominami, H. C., … Morris, W. B. (2010). Integrating agroecology and landscape multifunctionality in vermont: An evolving framework to evaluate the design of agroecosystems. Agricultural Systems, 103(5), 327–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2010.03.003
- Ma, S. F., Huang, H. Y., Cai, Y. M., & Nian P. H. (2014). Theoretical framework with regard to comprehensive sub-areas of China's land spaces based on the functional optimization of production, life and ecology. The Resources Administration and the Legal System, 11: 31–34.
- Ma, Y. Y. (2017). The study on the optimization of "Production-Living-Ecological" space in Puge County. Chengdu, China: Sichuan Normal University, 30.
- Metzger, M. J., Rounsevell, M. D. A., Acosta-Michlik, L., Leemans, R., & Schroter, D. (2006). The vulnerability of ecosystem services to land use change. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 114, 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.11.025
- Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.
- Paracchini, M. L., Pacini, C., Jones, M. L. M., & Pérez-Soba, M. (2017). An aggregation framework to link indicators associated with multifunctional land use to the stakeholder evaluation of policy options. Ecological Indicators, 11(1), 71–80.
- Pérez-Soba, M., Petit, S., Jones, L., Bertrand, N., Briquel, V., & Omodei-Zorini, L. (2008). Land use functions—A multifunctionality approach to assess the impact of land use changes on land use sustainability. Sustainability impact assessment of land use changes, 375–404). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
- Quin, A., Jaramillo, F., & Destouni, G. (2015). Dissecting the ecosystem service of large-scale pollutant retention: The role of wetlands and other landscape features. Ambio, 44(1), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0594-8
- Schößer, B., Helming, K., & Wiggering, H. (2010). Assessing land use change impacts a comparison of the sensor land use function approach with other frameworks. Journal of Land Use Science, 5(2), 159–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423X.2010.485727
10.1080/1747423X.2010.485727 Google Scholar
- Shi, L., Cui, S., Yin, K., & Liu, J. (2010). The impact of land use/cover change on ecosystem service in Xiamen. Acta Geographica Sinica, 65(6), 708–714.
- Slee, B. (2007). Social indicators of multifunctional rural land use: The case of forestry in the UK. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 120(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.03.034
- Su, C. H., Fu, B. J., He, C. S., & Lü, Y. H. (2012). Variation of ecosystem services and human activities: A case study in the Yanhe Watershed of China. Acta Oecologica, 44(2), 46–57.
- Tallis, H., & Polasky, S. (2010). Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and natural-resource management. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1162(1), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04152.x
- Tasser, E., Walde, J., Tappeiner, U., Teutsch, A., & Noggler, W. (2007). Land-use changes and natural reforestation in the eastern central Alps. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 118(1), 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.05.004
- Verburg, P. H., Van de steeg, J., Veldkamp, A., & Willemen, L. (2009). From land cover change to land function dynamics: A major challenge to improve land characterization. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(3), 1327–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.08.005
- Vereijken, P. H. (2001). Multifunctionality: Applying the OECD framework, a review of literature in The Netherlands Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 27.
- Wang, Z. (2017). Research on evaluation model of urban traffic carrying capacity. Beijing, China: China University of Geosciences, 45–50.
- Wiggering, H., Dalchow, C., Glemnitz, M., Helming, K., Müller, K., Schultz, A., … Zander, P. (2006). Indicators for multifunctional land use—Linking socio-economic requirements with landscape potentials. Ecological Indicators, 6(1), 238–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.08.014
- Xue, D. Y. (2000). A valuation study of on the indirect values of forest ecosystems in Chanbaishan Mountain Biosphere Reserve of China. China Environmental Science, 20(2), 141–145.
- Zhang, G., Kang, Y., Han, G., & Sakurai, K. (2015). Effect of climate change over the past half century on the distribution, extent and NPP of ecosystems of Inner Mongolia. Global Change Biology, 17(1), 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02237.x
- Zhen, L., Wei, Y. J., Xie, G. D., Helming, K., Cao, S. Y., Yang, L., … Koenig, H. (2010). Regional analysis of dynamic Land use functions in china. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 30(24), 6749–6761.
- Zhou, G., Wang, Y., Jiang, Y., & Yang, Z. (2002). Estimating biomass and net primary production from forest inventory data: A case study of China's Larix, forests. Forest Ecology & Management, 169(1), 149–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00305-5
- Zhou, Z. X., & Meng, T. (2017). Spatial-temporal change in urban agricultural land use efficiency from the perspective of agricultural multi-functionality: A case study of the Xi'an metropolitan zone. Journal of Geography Sciences, 27(12), 1499–1520.
- Zhu, X. (2013). Evaluation and Prediction of land resources comprehensive carrying capacity—A case study in Shanghai City. Tai'an, China: Shandong Agricultural University, 28–30.