基于供需关系的武汉都市圈生态系统服务包权衡与协同效应空间异质性研究

IF 8.4 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Ying Chen, Ruolin Meng, Kejun Li
{"title":"基于供需关系的武汉都市圈生态系统服务包权衡与协同效应空间异质性研究","authors":"Ying Chen, Ruolin Meng, Kejun Li","doi":"10.1093/inteam/vjaf066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Understanding the trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services (ESs) is crucial for multi-objective management and ecosystem sustainability. However, limited research has focused on identifying ecosystem service bundles (ESBs) through ES supply-demand relationships and analyzing the internal trade-offs and synergies within each bundle. To address this gap, this study used the Wuhan Metropolitan Area (WMA) in 2021 as a case study to evaluate the supply and demand of six ESs at both the raster and county scales, using the InVEST model and multisource data including geospatial and statistical datasets. The spatial distribution of ESB was identified at different scales through agglomerative hierarchical clustering. Furthermore, the trade-offs and synergies among ES supply across ESBs were analyzed using the Spearman correlation coefficient. The conclusions indicated that, first, ES deficits were predominantly concentrated in urban core areas, whereas surplus areas were distributed variably. Provisioning service surplus areas were primarily located in the central and western parts of the WMA, regulating and maintenance service surplus areas were mainly distributed in the eastern forested mountainous regions, and cultural service surplus areas were typically distributed on the outskirts of urban built-up areas. Second, at both scales, ESB types were relatively similar, categorized as agricultural production bundles, urbanization control bundles, and forest protection bundles. The differences lie in that, due to cumulative effects, ES distribution differences at smaller scales were often spatially averaged, leading to diminished distinctions among ESBs. This underscores the significance of implementing ecosystem management at multiple scales. Third, trade-offs and synergies among ES supply across ESBs exhibited distinct spatial heterogeneity. In conclusion, this work provides an important reference for taking ESBs as the basic management unit in multi-objective ecosystem management.</p>","PeriodicalId":13557,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","volume":" ","pages":"1025-1038"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the spatial heterogeneity of trade-offs and synergies across ecosystem service bundles based on supply and demand relationships in the Wuhan Metropolitan Area.\",\"authors\":\"Ying Chen, Ruolin Meng, Kejun Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/inteam/vjaf066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Understanding the trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services (ESs) is crucial for multi-objective management and ecosystem sustainability. However, limited research has focused on identifying ecosystem service bundles (ESBs) through ES supply-demand relationships and analyzing the internal trade-offs and synergies within each bundle. To address this gap, this study used the Wuhan Metropolitan Area (WMA) in 2021 as a case study to evaluate the supply and demand of six ESs at both the raster and county scales, using the InVEST model and multisource data including geospatial and statistical datasets. The spatial distribution of ESB was identified at different scales through agglomerative hierarchical clustering. Furthermore, the trade-offs and synergies among ES supply across ESBs were analyzed using the Spearman correlation coefficient. The conclusions indicated that, first, ES deficits were predominantly concentrated in urban core areas, whereas surplus areas were distributed variably. Provisioning service surplus areas were primarily located in the central and western parts of the WMA, regulating and maintenance service surplus areas were mainly distributed in the eastern forested mountainous regions, and cultural service surplus areas were typically distributed on the outskirts of urban built-up areas. Second, at both scales, ESB types were relatively similar, categorized as agricultural production bundles, urbanization control bundles, and forest protection bundles. The differences lie in that, due to cumulative effects, ES distribution differences at smaller scales were often spatially averaged, leading to diminished distinctions among ESBs. This underscores the significance of implementing ecosystem management at multiple scales. Third, trade-offs and synergies among ES supply across ESBs exhibited distinct spatial heterogeneity. In conclusion, this work provides an important reference for taking ESBs as the basic management unit in multi-objective ecosystem management.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13557,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1025-1038\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/inteam/vjaf066\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/inteam/vjaf066","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

了解生态系统服务(ES)之间的权衡和协同作用对于多目标管理和生态系统可持续性至关重要。然而,有限的研究集中于通过ES供需关系识别生态系统服务包(ESB),并分析每个包的内部权衡和协同作用。为了解决这一差距,本研究以武汉都市区(WMA)为例,利用InVEST模型和多源数据(包括地理空间和统计数据集),在栅格和县域尺度上评估了6种ES的供需。通过聚类分层聚类方法,确定了ESB在不同尺度下的空间分布。此外,使用Spearman相关系数分析了跨ESB的ES供应之间的权衡和协同作用。结果表明:(1)ES赤字区主要集中在城市核心区,剩余区分布不均匀;供给服务剩余区主要分布在西部和中部,调节和维护服务剩余区主要分布在东部森林山区,文化服务剩余区主要分布在城市建成区的郊区。(2)在两个尺度上,ESB类型较为相似,分别为农业生产束(APB)、城镇化控制束(UCB)和森林保护束(FPB)。不同之处在于,由于累积效应,较小尺度上的ES分布差异通常是空间平均的,从而减少了ESB之间的差异。这强调了在多个尺度上实施生态系统管理的重要性。(3) ESB间ES供给的权衡与协同表现出明显的空间异质性。本研究为在多目标生态系统管理中采用ESB作为基本管理单元提供了重要参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring the spatial heterogeneity of trade-offs and synergies across ecosystem service bundles based on supply and demand relationships in the Wuhan Metropolitan Area.

Understanding the trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services (ESs) is crucial for multi-objective management and ecosystem sustainability. However, limited research has focused on identifying ecosystem service bundles (ESBs) through ES supply-demand relationships and analyzing the internal trade-offs and synergies within each bundle. To address this gap, this study used the Wuhan Metropolitan Area (WMA) in 2021 as a case study to evaluate the supply and demand of six ESs at both the raster and county scales, using the InVEST model and multisource data including geospatial and statistical datasets. The spatial distribution of ESB was identified at different scales through agglomerative hierarchical clustering. Furthermore, the trade-offs and synergies among ES supply across ESBs were analyzed using the Spearman correlation coefficient. The conclusions indicated that, first, ES deficits were predominantly concentrated in urban core areas, whereas surplus areas were distributed variably. Provisioning service surplus areas were primarily located in the central and western parts of the WMA, regulating and maintenance service surplus areas were mainly distributed in the eastern forested mountainous regions, and cultural service surplus areas were typically distributed on the outskirts of urban built-up areas. Second, at both scales, ESB types were relatively similar, categorized as agricultural production bundles, urbanization control bundles, and forest protection bundles. The differences lie in that, due to cumulative effects, ES distribution differences at smaller scales were often spatially averaged, leading to diminished distinctions among ESBs. This underscores the significance of implementing ecosystem management at multiple scales. Third, trade-offs and synergies among ES supply across ESBs exhibited distinct spatial heterogeneity. In conclusion, this work provides an important reference for taking ESBs as the basic management unit in multi-objective ecosystem management.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESTOXICOLOGY&nbs-TOXICOLOGY
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM) publishes the science underpinning environmental decision making and problem solving. Papers submitted to IEAM must link science and technical innovations to vexing regional or global environmental issues in one or more of the following core areas: Science-informed regulation, policy, and decision making Health and ecological risk and impact assessment Restoration and management of damaged ecosystems Sustaining ecosystems Managing large-scale environmental change Papers published in these broad fields of study are connected by an array of interdisciplinary engineering, management, and scientific themes, which collectively reflect the interconnectedness of the scientific, social, and environmental challenges facing our modern global society: Methods for environmental quality assessment; forecasting across a number of ecosystem uses and challenges (systems-based, cost-benefit, ecosystem services, etc.); measuring or predicting ecosystem change and adaptation Approaches that connect policy and management tools; harmonize national and international environmental regulation; merge human well-being with ecological management; develop and sustain the function of ecosystems; conceptualize, model and apply concepts of spatial and regional sustainability Assessment and management frameworks that incorporate conservation, life cycle, restoration, and sustainability; considerations for climate-induced adaptation, change and consequences, and vulnerability Environmental management applications using risk-based approaches; considerations for protecting and fostering biodiversity, as well as enhancement or protection of ecosystem services and resiliency.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信