Quantifying the spatial pattern for the importance of natural resource ecosystem services in China

2022 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Ying-di WU ◽  
Ji-jun MENG
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 6795
Author(s):  
Jianxin Geng ◽  
Chengzhi Liang

In this study, we applied gross ecosystem product (GEP) theory in a case study to analyze and explain the natural resource asset value and ecosystem service value of forest resources in Jiaokou County, Shanxi Province, Northern China, in 2018. GEP refers to the total value of various final material products and services provided by ecosystems. In this paper, six service functions of a forest system, including water conservation, soil conservation, carbon fixation and oxygen release, forest nutrients, purification of atmospheric environment, and biodiversity, are valued by three calculation methods: the alternative cost method, market value method, and control cost method. The study revealed the following: (1) There is a parallel relationship between the value of natural resource assets and the value of ecosystem services. GEP includes the market value of natural resource assets, but it is mostly the value of ecosystem services. (2) The measurement of the physical quantity of forest ecosystem services depends on parameter data, and the monetary calculation often has no mature pricing basis, which leads to the large scale and uncertainty surrounding the evaluation results of ecosystem services. (3) The ecosystem service value and natural resource asset value have different practical significance, as well as alternate theoretical bases. The value of natural resource assets can be used as the asset valuation basis of economic transactions, which plays a role in macroeconomic management. The value of ecosystem services can be used as the basis of ecological compensation, providing information for the preparation of the balance sheet of natural resources.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (13) ◽  
pp. 7044
Author(s):  
Dawei Wen ◽  
Song Ma ◽  
Anlu Zhang ◽  
Xinli Ke

Assessment of ecosystem services supply, demand, and budgets can help to achieve sustainable urban development. The Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, as one of the most developed megacities in China, sets up a goal of high-quality development while fostering ecosystem services. Therefore, assessing the ecosystem services in this study area is very important to guide further development. However, the spatial pattern of ecosystem services, especially at local scales, is not well understood. Using the available 2017 land cover product, Sentinel-1 SAR and Sentinel-2 optical images, a deep learning land cover mapping framework integrating deep change vector analysis and the ResUnet model was proposed. Based on the produced 10 m land cover map for the year 2020, recent spatial patterns of the ecosystem services at different scales (i.e., the GBA, 11 cities, urban–rural gradient, and pixel) were analyzed. The results showed that: (1) Forest was the primary land cover in Guangzhou, Huizhou, Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Jiangmen, Zhaoqing, and Hong Kong, and an impervious surface was the main land cover in the other four cities. (2) Although ecosystem services in the GBA were sufficient to meet their demand, there was undersupply for all the three general services in Macao and for the provision services in Zhongshan, Dongguan, Shenzhen, and Foshan. (3) Along the urban–rural gradient in the GBA, supply and demand capacity showed an increasing and decreasing trend, respectively. As for the city-level analysis, Huizhou and Zhuhai showed a fluctuation pattern while Jiangmen, Zhaoqing, and Hong Kong presented a decreasing pattern along the gradient. (4) Inclusion of neighborhood landscape led to increased demand scores in a small proportion of impervious areas and oversupply for a very large percent of bare land.


2017 ◽  
pp. 681-691
Author(s):  
Nilanjan Ghosh ◽  
Somnath Hazra

This chapter compares two quantitative frameworks, namely, Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) and Econometric models to study the impacts of climate change on human economy. However, as is inferred from this chapter, CGE framework is fraught with unrealistic assumptions, and fails to capture impacts of climate change and extreme events on the ecosystem services. On the other hand, econometric framework can be customised and is not based on the unrealistic assumptions like CGE. The various advantages and disadvantages of the two methods have been discussed critically in the process in this chapter in light of the avowed objective of understanding sustainability science.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document