WANG Xiaofeng, ZHANG Xinrong, FENG Xiaoming, LIU Shirong, YIN Lichang, CHEN Yongzhe. Trade-offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Karst Area of China Driven by Grain-for-Green Program[J]. Chinese Geographical Science, 2020, 30(1): 101-114. doi: 10.1007/s11769-020-1098-z
Citation: WANG Xiaofeng, ZHANG Xinrong, FENG Xiaoming, LIU Shirong, YIN Lichang, CHEN Yongzhe. Trade-offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Karst Area of China Driven by Grain-for-Green Program[J]. Chinese Geographical Science, 2020, 30(1): 101-114. doi: 10.1007/s11769-020-1098-z

Trade-offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Karst Area of China Driven by Grain-for-Green Program

doi: 10.1007/s11769-020-1098-z
Funds:

Under the auspices of National Key Technology Research and Development Project of China (No. 2018YFC0507301-02), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Strategic Pilot Science and Technology Project (Class A) (No. XDA2002040201), Shaanxi Province Natural Science Basic Research Project (No. 2018JM4016)

  • Received Date: 2019-03-05
  • Rev Recd Date: 2019-06-25
  • As an important means regulating the relationship between human and natural ecosystem, ecological restoration program plays a key role in restoring ecosystem functions. The Grain-for-Green Program (GFGP, One of the world's most ambitious ecosystem conservation set-aside programs aims to transfer farmland on steep slopes to forestland or grassland to increase vegetation coverage) has been widely implemented from 1999 to 2015 and exerted significant influence on land use and ecosystem services (ESs). In this study, three ecological models (InVEST, RUSLE, and CASA) were used to accurately calculate the three key types of ESs, water yield (WY), soil conservation (SC), and net primary production (NPP) in Karst area of southwestern China from 1982 to 2015. The impact of GFGP on ESs and trade-offs was analyzed. It provides practical guidance in carrying out ecological regulation in Karst area of China under global climate change. Results showed that ESs and trade-offs had changed dramatically driven by GFGP. In detail, temporally, SC and NPP exhibited an increasing trend, while WY exhibited a decreasing trend. Spatially, SC basically decreased from west to east; NPP basically increased from north to south; WY basically increased from west to east; NPP and SC, SC and WY developed in the direction of trade-offs driven by the GFGP, while NPP and WY developed in the direction of synergy. Therefore, future ecosystem management and restoration poli-cy-making should consider trade-offs of ESs so as to achieve sustainable provision of ESs.
  • [1] Bennett E M, Peterson G D, Gordon L J, 2009. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecology Letters, 12:1394-1404. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01387.x
    [2] Bennett M T, 2008. China's sloping land conversion program:institutional innovation or business as usual? Ecological Eco-nomics, 65(4):699-711. doi:10.1016/j. ecolecon. 2007.09.017
    [3] CarlsonT N, Arthur S T, 2000.The impact of land use/land cover changes due to urbanization on surface microclimate and hy-drology:a satellite perspective. Global and Planetary Change, 25(1-2):49-65. doi: 10.1016/S0921-8181(00)00021-7
    [4] Cervelli E, Pindozzi S, Sacchi M et al., 2017. Supporting land use change assessment through ecosystem services and wildlife indexes. Land Use Policy, 65:249-265. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.04.011
    [5] Chang R Y, Fu B J, Liu G H et al., 2012. The effects of afforesta-tion on soil organic and inorganic carbon:a case study of the Loess Plateau of China. Catena, 95:145-152. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2012.02.012
    [6] Chen X D, Lupi F, He G M et al., 2009. Factors affecting land recon-version plans following a payment for ecosystem service program. Biological Conservation, 142(8):1740-1747. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.03.012
    [7] Cord A F, Bartkowski B, Beckmann M et al., 2017. Towards sys-tematic analyses of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies:main concepts, methods and the road ahead. Ecosystem Services, 28:264-272. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser. 2017.07.012
    [8] Costanza R, d'Arge R, de Groot R et al., 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(6630):253-260. doi: 10.1038/387253a0
    [9] Costanza R, Groot R D, Braat L et al., 2017. Twenty years of ecosystem services:how far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services, 28:1-16. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.008
    [10] Crist P J, Kohley T W, Oakleaf J, 2000. Assessing land-use im-pacts on biodiversity using an expert systems tool. Landscape Ecology, 15(1):47-62. doi: 10.1023/A:1008117427864
    [11] Dai Erfu, Wang Xiaoli, Zhu Jianjia et al., 2015. Progress and perspective on ecosystem services trade-offs. Advances in Earth Science, 30(11):1250-1259. (in Chinese)
    [12] Dai Erfu, Wang Xiaoli, Zhu Jianjia et al., 2016. Methods, tools and research framework of ecosystem service trade-offs. Geo-graphical Research, 35(6):1005-1016. (in Chinese)
    [13] Daily G C, 1997. Nature's Services:Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Washington DC:Island Press.
    [14] Dallimer M, Davies Z G, Diaz-Porras D F et al., 2015. Historical influences on the current provision of multiple ecosystem ser-vices. Global Environmental Change, 31:307-317. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.015
    [15] Feng Q, Zhao W W, Fu B J et al., 2017. Ecosystem service trade-offs and their influencing factors:a case study in the Lo-ess Plateau of China. Science of the Total Environment, 607-608:1250-1263. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2017.07.079
    [16] Firbank L, Bradbury R B, Mccracken D I et al., 2013. Delivering multiple ecosystem services from Enclosed Farmland in the UK. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 166(66):65-75. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2011.11.014
    [17] Foley J A, DeFries R, Asner G P et al., 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science, 309(5734):570-574. doi: 10.1126/science.1111772
    [18] Fu B J,Su C H,Wei Y P et al., 2011. Double counting in eco-system services valuation:causes and countermeasures. Eco-logical Research, 26(1):1-14. doi: 10.1007/s11284-010-0766-3
    [19] Fu Bojie, Yu Dandan, 2016. Trade-off analyses and synthetic integrated method of multiple ecosystem services. Resource Science, 38(1):1-9. (in Chinese)
    [20] Fu Bojie, Zhou Guoyi, Bai Yongfei et al., 2009. The main terres-trial ecosystem services and ecological security in China. Ad-vances in Earth Science, 4(6):571-576. (in Chinese)
    [21] Hou Y, Lü Y H, Chen W P et al., 2017.Temporal variation and spatial scale dependency of ecosystem service interactions:a case study on the central Loess Plateau of China. Landscape Ecology, 32(6):1201-1217. doi: 10.1007/s10980-017-0497-8
    [22] Islam K R, Weil R R, 2000. Land use effects on soil quality in a tropical forest ecosystem of Bangladesh. Agriculture, Ecosys-tems& Environment, 79(1):9-16. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8809(99)00145-0
    [23] Jia X Q, Fu B J, Feng X M et al., 2014.The tradeoff and synergy between ecosystem services in the Grain-for-Green areas in northern Shaanxi, China. Ecological Indicators, 43(1):103-113. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.02.028
    [24] Kubiszewski I, Costanza R, Anderson S et al, 2017. The future value of ecosystem services:global scenarios and national im-plications. Ecosystem Services, 26:289-301. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.05.004
    [25] Lee H, Lautenbach S, 2016. A quantitative review of relationships between ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators, 66:340-351. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.02.004
    [26] Li Q, Chen D D, Zhao L et al., 2016. More than a century of Grain for Green Program is expected to restore soil carbon stock on alpine grassland revealed by field 13C pulse labeling. Science of the Total Environment, 550:17-26. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.01.060
    [27] Li Y J, Zhang L W, Qiu J X et al., 2017. Spatially explicit quanti-fication of the interactions among ecosystem services. Land-scape Ecology, 32(6):1181-1199. doi: 10.1007/s10980-017-0527-6
    [28] Long H L, Heilig G K, Wang J et al., 2006. Land use and soil erosion in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River:some socio-economic considerations on China's Grain-for-Green Pro-gramme. Land Degradation & Development, 17(6):589-603. doi: 10.1002/Idr.736
    [29] Lü Y H, Fu B J, Feng X M et al., 2012. A policy-driven large scale ecological restoration:quantifying ecosystem services changes in the Loess Plateau of China. PLoS One, 7(2):e31782. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031782
    [30] Lufafa A, Tenywa M M, Isabirye M et al., 2003. Prediction of soil erosion in a Lake Victoria basin catchment using a GIS-based Universal Soil Loss model. Agricultural Systems, 76(3):883-894. doi: 10.1016/S0308-521X(02)00012-4
    [31] Ma Yonghuan, Fan Shengyue, 2005. Ecological-economic effects of Grain to Green Program in desertification areas. Journal of Natural Resources, 20:590-596. (in Chinese)
    [32] MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment), 2005. Ecosystems and HumanWell-being:Current State and Trends:Synthesis. Washington, DC:Island Press, 829-838.
    [33] Mouchet M A, Lamarque P, Martin-Lopez B et al., 2014. An interdisciplinary methodological guide for quantifying associations between ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 28:298-308. doi:10.1016/j.gloenv cha.2014.07.012
    [34] Ouyang Z Y, Zheng H, Xiao Y et al., 2016. Improvements in ecosystem services from investments in natural capital. Science, 352(6292):1455-1459. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf2295
    [35] Pan Jinghu, Li Zhen, 2017. Analysis on trade-offs and synergies of ecosystem services in arid inland river basin. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 33(17):280-289. (in Chinese)
    [36] Parr T W, Sier A R, Battarbee R W et al., 2003. Detecting envi-ronmental change:science and society:perspectives on long-term research and monitoring in the 21st century. Science of The Total Environment, 310(1-3):1-8. doi: 10.1016/S0048-9697(03)00257-2
    [37] Potter C S, Randerson J T, Field C B et al., 1993. Terrestrial eco-system production:a process model based on global satellite and surface data. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 7(4):811-841. doi: 10.1029/93GB02725
    [38] Qian Caiyun, Gong Jie, Zhang Jinxi et al., 2018. Change and tradeoffs-synergies analysis on watershed ecosystem services:a case study of Bailongjiang Watershed, Gansu. Acta Geo-graphica Sinica, 73(5):868-879. (in Chinese)
    [39] Renard K G, Foster G R, Weesies G A et al., 1991. RUSLE:re-vised universal soil loss equation. Soil and Water Conservation, 46(1):30-33.
    [40] Rodríguez J P, Beard T D, Bennett E M et al., 2006. Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecology and Soci-ety, 11(1):709-723. doi: 10.5751/ES-01667-110128
    [41] Sharp R, Tallis H T, Ricketts T et al., 2016. InVEST +VERSION+User's Guide. The Natural Capital Project. Stan-ford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Con-servancy, and World Wildlife Fund.
    [42] Sterling S M, Ducharne A, Polcher J, 2012. The impact of global land-cover change on the terrestrial water cycle. Nature Climate Change, 3(4):35-390. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1690
    [43] Su C H, Fu B J, He C S et al., 2012. Variation of ecosystem ser-vices and human activities:a case study in the Yanhe Watershed of China. Acta Oecologica, 44:46-57. doi: 10.1016/j.actao.2011.11.006
    [44] Tallis H, Kareiva P, Marvier M et al., 2008. An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(28):9457-9464. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0705797105
    [45] Tian H Q, Chen G, Zhang C et al., 2012. Century-scale response of ecosystem carbon storage to multifactorial global change in the Southern United States. Ecosystems, 15(4):674-694. doi: 10.1007/s10021-012-9539-x
    [46] Tian Y C, Wang S J, Bai X Y et al., 2016.Trade-offs among eco-system services in a typical Karst watershed, SW China. Science of the Total Environment, 566-567:1297-1308. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.05.190
    [47] Tomscha S A, Gergel S E, 2016. Ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies misunderstood without landscape history. Ecology and Society, 21(1). doi: 10.5751/ES-08345-210143
    [48] Uchida E, Xu J T, Rozelle S, 2005. Grain for Green cost-effectiveness and sustainability of China's conservation set-aside program. Land Economics, 81(2):247-264. doi:10.3368/le. 81.2.247
    [49] Wang Bei, Zhao Jun, Hu Xiufang, 2018. Analysison trade-offs and synergistic relationships among multiple ecosystem services in the Shiyang River Basin. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(21):7582-7595. (in Chinese)
    [50] Wang J T, Peng J, Zhao M Y et al., 2017. Significant trade-off for the impact of Grain-for-Green Programme on ecosystem ser-vices in North-western Yunnan, China. Science of the Total En-vironment, 574:57-64. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.026
    [51] Wang Pengtao, Zhang Liwei, Li Yingjie et al., 2017. Spa-tio-temporal characteristics of the trade-off and synergy rela-tionships among multiple ecosystem services in the Upper Reaches of Hanjiang River Basin. Acta Geographica Sinica, 72(11):2064-2078. (in Chinese)
    [52] Weber A, Fohrer N, Möller D, 2001. Long-term land use changes in a mesoscale watershed due to socio-economic factors-effects on landscape structures and functions. Ecological Modelling, 140(1-2):125-140. doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(01) 00261-7
    [53] Wu S H, Zhou S L, Chen D X et al., 2014. Determining the con-tributions of urbanisation and climate change to NPP variations over the last decade in the Yangtze River Delta, China. Science of the Total Environment, 472:397-406. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.10.128
    [54] Wu Wenhuan, Peng Jian, Liu Yanxu et al., 2017. Tradeoffs and synergies between ecosystem services in Ordos City. Progress in Geography, 36(12):1571-1581. (in Chinese)
    [55] Xu J T, Yin R S, Li Z et al., 2006. China's ecological rehabilitation:unprecedented efforts, dramatic impacts, and requisite policies. Ecological Economics, 57(4):595-607. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.05.008
    [56] Yang G F, Ge Y, Xue H et al., 2015. Using ecosystem service bundles to detect trade-offs and synergies across urban-rural complexes. Landscape & Urban Planning, 136:110-121. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.12.006
    [57] Yin R S, Yin G P, Li L Y, 2010. Assessing China's ecological restoration programs:what's been done and what remains to be done? Environment Management, 45(3):442-453. doi: 10.1007/s00267-009-9387-4
    [58] Zhang B Q, He C S, Burbham M et al., 2016. Evaluating the cou-pling effects of climate aridity and vegetation restoration on soil erosion over the Loess Plateau in China. Science of the Total Environment. 539:436-449. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2015.08.132
    [59] Zhang Kun, Lü Yihe, Fu Bojie, 2016. Ecosystem service evolution in ecological restoration:trend, process, and evaluation. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 36(20):6337-6344. (in Chinese)
    [60] Zhang L, Dawes W R, Walker G R, 2001. Response of mean an-nual evapotranspiration to vegetation changes at catchment scale. Water Resource Research, 37(3):701-708. doi: 10.1029/2000WR900325
    [61] Zhang L, Hickel K, Dawes W R et al., 2004. A rational function approach for estimating mean annual evapotranspiration. Water Resources Research, 40(2):W02502. doi: 10.1029/2003WR002710
    [62] Zhang Mingyang, Wang Kelin, Liu Huiyu et al., 2011. The re-sponse of ecosystem service values to ambient environment and its spatial scales in typical karst areas of northwest Guangxi, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31(14):3947-3955. (in Chinese)
  • 加载中
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Article Metrics

Article views(65) PDF downloads(91) Cited by()

Proportional views
Related

Trade-offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Karst Area of China Driven by Grain-for-Green Program

doi: 10.1007/s11769-020-1098-z
Funds:

Under the auspices of National Key Technology Research and Development Project of China (No. 2018YFC0507301-02), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Strategic Pilot Science and Technology Project (Class A) (No. XDA2002040201), Shaanxi Province Natural Science Basic Research Project (No. 2018JM4016)

Abstract: As an important means regulating the relationship between human and natural ecosystem, ecological restoration program plays a key role in restoring ecosystem functions. The Grain-for-Green Program (GFGP, One of the world's most ambitious ecosystem conservation set-aside programs aims to transfer farmland on steep slopes to forestland or grassland to increase vegetation coverage) has been widely implemented from 1999 to 2015 and exerted significant influence on land use and ecosystem services (ESs). In this study, three ecological models (InVEST, RUSLE, and CASA) were used to accurately calculate the three key types of ESs, water yield (WY), soil conservation (SC), and net primary production (NPP) in Karst area of southwestern China from 1982 to 2015. The impact of GFGP on ESs and trade-offs was analyzed. It provides practical guidance in carrying out ecological regulation in Karst area of China under global climate change. Results showed that ESs and trade-offs had changed dramatically driven by GFGP. In detail, temporally, SC and NPP exhibited an increasing trend, while WY exhibited a decreasing trend. Spatially, SC basically decreased from west to east; NPP basically increased from north to south; WY basically increased from west to east; NPP and SC, SC and WY developed in the direction of trade-offs driven by the GFGP, while NPP and WY developed in the direction of synergy. Therefore, future ecosystem management and restoration poli-cy-making should consider trade-offs of ESs so as to achieve sustainable provision of ESs.

WANG Xiaofeng, ZHANG Xinrong, FENG Xiaoming, LIU Shirong, YIN Lichang, CHEN Yongzhe. Trade-offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Karst Area of China Driven by Grain-for-Green Program[J]. Chinese Geographical Science, 2020, 30(1): 101-114. doi: 10.1007/s11769-020-1098-z
Citation: WANG Xiaofeng, ZHANG Xinrong, FENG Xiaoming, LIU Shirong, YIN Lichang, CHEN Yongzhe. Trade-offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Karst Area of China Driven by Grain-for-Green Program[J]. Chinese Geographical Science, 2020, 30(1): 101-114. doi: 10.1007/s11769-020-1098-z
Reference (62)

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return