A Framework for Regional Ecological Risk Warning Based on Ecosystem Service Approach: A Case Study in Ganzi, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Study Area and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Framework for a Regional Warning System on Ecological Risks
2.2.2. Ecosystem Classification and Quality Assessment
2.2.3. Soil Retention and Soil Erosion Assessment
2.2.4. Sandstorm Prevention and Wind Erosion Assessment
2.2.5. Ecological Problem Assessment and Ecological Risk Warning
2.2.6. Statistical Analysis and Data Source
- (1)
- Ecosystem classification images for the years of 2000 and 2015 were obtained from the Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences. The images are environmental and disaster monitoring and forecasting of small satellite constellation (HJ-1A/B) and Landsat OLI (resolution 90 m) images. The images were classified using object-oriented multi-scale segmentation and decision tree procedures [32]. The ecosystems were categorized into forest, shrub, grassland, wetland, farmland, urban, and barren land.
- (2)
- Data on vegetation cover for the years of 2000 and 2015, in the form of moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) data (250 m resolution), were also obtained from the Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences.
- (3)
- The Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) with the resolution of 90 m [37].
- (4)
- Soil maps (1:1,000,000) and data on associated soil attributes (e.g., the mass percentages of clay, silt, sand, and soil organic matter) were from the Second National Soil Survey of China [38].
- (5)
- Average annual rainfall erosivity data were obtained from Beijing Normal University. Monthly average rainfall, wind speed, and temperature data were obtained from the Chinese Ecosystem Research Network (CERN) (http://www.cnern.org.cn/) and the Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resource Research in China. Spatial interpolation was conducted on the meteorological station data to get weather raster data.
- (6)
- County-level socio-economic and agriculture data were from the Agricultural Information Institute of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. They contained crop yield (e.g., annual grain yield of rice, wheat, maize, and oil from oilseed crops) and the total population in each county in the years of 2000 and 2015 [38].
3. Results
3.1. Ecosystem Type and Quality Changes
3.2. Ecosystem Service and Ecological Problems Assessment
3.3. Ecological Risk Assessment
3.4. Impact Factors of Ecological Risk Changes
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- McNeely, J.A.; Mittermeier, R.A.; Brook, T.M.; Boltz, F.; Ash, A.N. The Wealth of Nature: Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity, and Human Well-Being; Conservation International: Arlington, VA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, X.B.; Yang, G.S.; Tan, Y.; Zhuang, Q.; Li, H.; Wan, R.; Su, W.; Zhang, J. Ecological risk assessment of ecosystem services in the Taihu Lake Basin of China from 1985 to 2020. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 554–555, 7–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lawler, J.J.; Lewis, D.J.; Nelson, E.; Plantinga, A.J.; Polasky, S.; Withey, J.C.; Helmers, D.P.; Martinuzzi, S.; Pennington, D.; Radeloff, V.C. Projected land-use change impacts on ecosystem services in the United States. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 7492–7497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Munns, J.W.R. Assessing risks to wildlife populations from multiple stressors: Overview of the problem and research needs. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment (EPA/630/R-95/002F); Federal Register: Washington, DC, USA, 1998; pp. 26846–26924.
- Moraes, R.; Molander, S. A procedure for ecological tiered assessment of risks (PETAR). Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 2004, 10, 349–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Landis, W.G.; Wiegers, J.K. Ten years of the relative risk model and regional scale ecological risk assessment. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 2007, 13, 25–38. [Google Scholar]
- Bennett, E.M.; Peterson, G.D.; Gordon, L.J. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol. Lett. 2009, 12, 1394–1404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Daily, G.C.; Matson, P.A. Ecosystem services: From theory to implementation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 9455–9456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wong, C.P.; Jiang, B.; Kinzig, A.P.; Kai, N.L.; Ouyang, Z. Linking ecosystem characteristics to final ecosystem services for public policy. Ecol. Lett. 2015, 18, 108–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Galic, N.; Schmolke, A.; Forbes, V.; Baveco, H.; van, P.J. The role of ecological models in linking ecological risk assessment to ecosystem services in agroecosystems. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 415, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Xu, X.B.; Tan, Y.; Chen, S.; Yang, G. Changing patterns and determinants of natural capital in the Yangtze River Delta of China 2000–2010. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 466–467, 326–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dawson, N.; Martin, A. Assessing the contribution of ecosystem services to human wellbeing: A disaggregated study in western Rwanda. Ecol. Econ. 2015, 117, 62–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, C.; Zheng, H.; Li, S.; Chen, X.; Li, J.; Zeng, W.; Liang, Y.; Stephen, P.; Marcus, W.F.; Mary, R.; et al. Impacts of conservation and human development policy across stakeholders and scales. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 7396–7401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gómez-Baggethun, E.; Groot, R.D.; Lomas, P.L.; Montes, C. The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69, 1209–1218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, J. Sand storm. New. Sci. 2018, 237, 35–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pereira, P.; Bogunovic, I.; Muñoz-Rojas, M.; Brevik, E.C. Soil ecosystem services, sustainability, valuation and management. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2018, 5, 7–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, X.; Li, C.; Kuiper, K.F.; Zhang, Z.; Gao, J.; Wijbrans, J.R. Human impact on erosion patterns and sediment transport in the Yangtze River. Glob. Planet. Chang. 2016, 143, 88–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, W.H.; Yang, Y.Y.; Zhang, L.; Xiao, Y.; Wang, X.; Ouyang, Z. Evaluation methods and case study of regional ecological carrying capacity for early-warning. Prog. Geogr. 2017, 36, 306–312. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Groffman, P.; Baron, J.; Blett, T.; Gold, A.J.; Goodman, I.; Gunderson, L.H.; Levinson, B.M.; Palmer, M.A.; Paerl, H.W.; Peterson, G.D.; et al. Ecological thresholds: The key to successful environmental management or an important con-cept with no practical application? Ecosystems 2006, 9, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, W.Z.; Fan, J.R.; Wang, Y.K.; Sheng, X.H.; Tian, B.W. Assessment of biodiversity conservation importance in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River: By taking county area as the basic assessment unit. Acta. Ecol. Sin. 2009, 29, 2603–2611. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Peng, L. The Geographical Pattern of Wild Vertebrate and Assessment for Biodiversity Conservation Priority in Ganzi; Chengdu University of Technology: Chengdu, China, 2014. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, J.H.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, Z.H. Effect of terrace forms on water and tillage erosion on a hilly landscape in the Yangtze River Basin, China. Geomorphology 2014, 216, 114–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tao, Y.; Wang, H.; Ou, W.; Guo, J. A land-cover-based approach to assessing ecosystem services supply and demand dynamics in the rapidly urbanizing Yangtze River Delta region. Land Use Policy 2018, 72, 250–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ouyang, Z.; Zheng, H.; Xiao, Y.; Polasky, S.; Liu, J.; Xu, W.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, L.; Xiao, Y.; Rao, E.; et al. Improvements in ecosystem services from investments in natural capital. Science 2016, 352, 1455–1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jiapaer, G.; Chen, X.; Bao, A. A comparison of methods for estimating fractional vegetation cover in arid regions. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 2011, 151, 1698–1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, W.; Mu, X.; Ruan, G.; Gao, Z.; Li, L.; Yan, G. Estimating fractional vegetation cover and the vegetation index of bare soil and highly dense vegetation with a physically based method. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. 2017, 58, 168–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M.; Lal, R.; Zhao, Y.; Jiang, W.; Chen, Q. Estimating net primary production of natural grassland and its spatio-temporal distribution in China. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 553, 184–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Xiao, Y.; Ouyang, Z.Y.; Wang, L.Y.; Rao, E.; Jiang, L.; Zhang, L. Spatial patterns of ecosystem quality in Inner Mongolia and its driving forces analysis. Acta. Ecol. Sin. 2016, 36, 6019–6030. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Rao, E.; Ouyang, Z.; Yu, X.; Xiao, Y. Spatial patterns and impacts of soil conservation service in China. Geomorphology 2014, 207, 64–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kong, L.; Zheng, H.; Rao, E.; Xiao, Y.; Ouyang, Z.; Li, C. Evaluating indirect and direct effects of eco-restoration policy on soil conservation service in Yangtze River Basin. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 631–632, 887–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fryrear, D.W. Revised Wind Erosion Equation (RWEQ). In Wind Erosion and Water Conservation Research Unit; Technical Bulletin. No. 1; United States Southern Plains Area Cropping Systems Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS: Washington, DC, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Fryrear, D.W.; Chen, W.N.; Lester, C. Revised wind erosion equation. Ann. Arid Zone 2001, 40, 265–279. [Google Scholar]
- Karssenberg, D.; Jong, K.D. Dynamic environmental modeling in GIS: 1. Modelling in three spatial dimensions. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2005, 19, 623–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- China’s Ministry of Water Resources, SL190-2007. Available online: https://wenku.baidu.com/view/486e14214b35eefdc8d333c6.html (accessed on 1 January 2018).
- China Ecosystem Assessment and Ecological Security Database. Available online: http://www.ecosystem.csdb.cn/ (accessed on 1 January 2018).
- Institute of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Available online: http://aii.caas.net.cn/ (accessed on 1 January 2018).
- Qian, S.S. Ecological threshold and environmental management: A note on statistical methods for detecting thresholds. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 38, 192–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, C.J. Identifying ecological thresholds for regulating human activity: Effective conservation or wishful thinking? Biol. Conserv. 2013, 168, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uehara, T. Ecological threshold and ecological economic threshold: Implications from an ecological economic model with adaptation. Ecol. Econ. 2015, 93, 374–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sutton, P.C.; Anderson, S.J.; Costanza, R.A.; Kubiszewski, I. The ecological economics of land degradation: Impacts on ecosystem service values. Ecol. Econ. 2016, 129, 182–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X.Q.; Zhao, L.; Li, Q.; Chen, H.; Zhou, H.; Xu, S.; Dong, Q.; WU, G.; He, Y. Using balance of seasonal herbage supply and demand to inform sustainable grassland management on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Front. Agric. Sci. Eng. 2018, 5, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ecological Risk Grade | Thresholds for Water Erosion (t·km−2·yr−1) | Thresholds for Wind Erosion (t·km−2·yr−1) |
---|---|---|
No | [0, 500] | [0, 200] |
Slight | (500, 1000] | (200, 400] |
Medium | (1000, 1500] | (400, 600] |
High | (1500, 2000] | (600, 800] |
Extremely high | >2000 | >800 |
Independent Variable | Soil Retention Service Increase (t∙km−2) | Sandstorm Prevention Service Increase (t∙km−2) |
---|---|---|
Aboveground forest biomass per unit area in 2000 (t∙km−2) | 0.431 * (0.167) | - |
Aboveground grassland biomass per unit area in 2000 (t∙km−2) | - | 0.735 *** (0.143) |
Proportion of forest area in 2000 (%) | −0.928 ** (0.248) | - |
Proportion of grassland area in 2000 (%) | −1.098 *** (0.202) | −1.08 *** (0.128) |
Changes in proportion of forest area from 2000 to 2015 (%) | - | 0.457 ** (0.105) |
Changes in proportion of shrub area from 2000 to 2015 (%) | −0.513 ***(0.073) | - |
Change in density of agricultural output value (104 Yuan km−2) | - | −0.251 * (0.104) |
R2 | 0.942 | 0.881 |
N | 18 | 18 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Dong, T.; Xu, W.; Zheng, H.; Xiao, Y.; Kong, L.; Ouyang, Z. A Framework for Regional Ecological Risk Warning Based on Ecosystem Service Approach: A Case Study in Ganzi, China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2699. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082699
Dong T, Xu W, Zheng H, Xiao Y, Kong L, Ouyang Z. A Framework for Regional Ecological Risk Warning Based on Ecosystem Service Approach: A Case Study in Ganzi, China. Sustainability. 2018; 10(8):2699. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082699
Chicago/Turabian StyleDong, Tian, Weihua Xu, Hua Zheng, Yang Xiao, Lingqiao Kong, and Zhiyun Ouyang. 2018. "A Framework for Regional Ecological Risk Warning Based on Ecosystem Service Approach: A Case Study in Ganzi, China" Sustainability 10, no. 8: 2699. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082699