Identifying the Impact of Landscape Pattern on Ecosystem Services in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Data Sources
2.3. Methodology
2.3.1. Ecosystem Services Value Measurement
2.3.2. Landscape Pattern Index
2.3.3. Spatial Autocorrelation Test
2.3.4. Spatial Regression Analysis
3. Results and Analysis
3.1. Ecosystem Services Value in the MRYRUA
3.2. Landscape Pattern Indexes in the MRYRUA
3.3. Spatial Regression Analysis
3.3.1. Specification of Variables
3.3.2. Bivariate Spatial Correlation Test between the Ecosystem Services Value and Landscape Pattern Metrics in the MRYRUA
3.3.3. Impact of the Landscape Pattern on Ecosystem Services in the MRYRUA
4. Discussion and Policy Implications
4.1. Impact of the Landscape Pattern on the Ecosystem Services Value
4.2. Policy Implications
4.3. Limitations and Future Directions
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lambin, E.F.; Turner, B.L.; Geist, H.J.; Agbola, S.B.; Angelsen, A.; Bruce, J.W.; Coomes, O.T.; Dirzo, R.; Fischer, G.; Folke, C.; et al. The causes of land-use and land-cover change: Moving beyond the myths. Global Environ. Chang. 2001, 11, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, W.X.; Li, J.F.; Zeng, J.; Ran, D.; Yang, B. Spatial heterogeneity and formation mechanism of eco-environmental effect of land use change in China. Geogr. Res. 2019, 38, 2173–2187. [Google Scholar]
- Chi, G.; Ho, H.C. Population stress: A spatiotemporal analysis of population change and land development at the county level in the contiguous United States, 2001–2011. Land Use Policy 2018, 70, 128–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gerland, P.; Raftery, A.E.; Sevcikova, H.; Li, N.; Gu, D.; Spoorenberg, T.; Alkema, L.; Fosdick, B.K.; Chunn, J.; Lalic, N.; et al. World population stabilization unlikely this century. Science 2014, 346, 234–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Fang, C.; Cui, X.; Li, G.; Bao, C.; Wang, Z.; Ma, H.; Sun, S.; Liu, H.; Luo, K.; Ren, Y. Modeling regional sustainable development scenarios using the urbanization and eco-environment Coupler: Case study of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 689, 820–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Falkenmark, M. Growing water scarcity in agriculture: Future challenge to global water security. Philos. T. R. Soc. A. 2013, 371, 20120410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Olivia, F.; Richard, W. Livestock and food security: Vulnerability to population growth and climate change. Global Change Biol. 2014, 20, 3092–3102. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, W.; Chi, G.; Li, J. The spatial aspect of ecosystem services balance and its determinants. Land Use Policy 2020, 90, 104263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, W.; Zhao, H.; Li, J.; Zhu, L.; Wang, Z.; Zeng, J. Land use transitions and the associated impacts on ecosystem services in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Economic Belt in China based on the geo-informatic Tupu method. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 701, 134690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lubchenco, J. Entering the century of the environment: A new social contract for science. Science 1998, 279, 491–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Turner, M.G. Landscape ecology: The effect of pattern on process. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1989, 20, 171–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, W.; Wang, G.; Deng, W. Advance in research of the relationship between landscape patterns and ecological processes. Prog. Geog. 2008, 27, 18–24. [Google Scholar]
- Mitchell, M.G.E.; Suarez-Castro, A.F.; Martinez-Harms, M.; Maron, M.; McAlpine, C.; Gaston, K.J.; Johansen, K.; Rhodes, J.R. Reframing landscape fragmentation’s effects on ecosystem services. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2015, 30, 190–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hao, R.F.; Yu, D.Y.; Liu, Y.P.; Liu, Y.; Qiao, J.; Wang, X.; Du, J. Impacts of changes in climate and landscape pattern on ecosystem services. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 579, 718–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kertész, Á.; Nagy, L.A.; Balázs, B. Effect of land use change on ecosystem services in Lake Balaton Catchment. Land Use Policy 2019, 80, 430–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGarigal, K.S.C.A. Fragstats: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical and Continuous Maps. Computer Software Program Produced by the Authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Available online: http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html (accessed on 10 July 2020).
- Zhao, W.; Liu, Y.; Feng, Q.; Wang, Y.; Yang, S. Ecosystem services for coupled human and environment systems. Prog. Geog. 2018, 37, 139–151. [Google Scholar]
- Xie, G.; Zhang, C.; Zhen, L.; Zhang, L. Dynamic changes in the value of China’s ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 2017, 26, 146–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, S.; Costanza, R.; Troy, A.; DAagostino, J.; Mates, W. Valuing New Jersey’s ecosystem services and natural capital: A spatially explicit benefit transfer approach. Environ. Manag. 2010, 45, 1271–1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, W.; Chi, G.; Li, J. Ecosystem services and their driving forces in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costanza, R.; D’Arge, R.; DeGroot, R.; Farber, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; Limburg, K.; Naeem, S.; ONeill, R.V.; Paruelo, J.; et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387, 253–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Dai, E.; Yin, L.; Ma, L. Land use/land cover change and the effects on ecosystem services in the Hengduan Mountain region, China. Ecosyst. Serv. 2018, 34, 55–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, F.; Zhang, S.; Yang, J.; Chang, L.; Yang, H.; Bu, K. Effects of land use change on ecosystem services value in West Jilin since the reform and opening of China. Ecosyst. Serv. 2018, 31, 12–20. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, D.; Ding, X. Assessing the impact of desertification dynamics on regional ecosystem service value in North China from 1981 to 2010. Ecosyst. Serv. 2018, 30, 172–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Liu, D.; Gong, J.; Ma, X.C.; Cao, E. Study on the effect of landscape fragmentation in the basin on soil conservation service—A case study in Bailong River Basin in Gansu Province. Resour. Sci. 2018, 40, 1866–1877. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, W.; Chi, G.; Li, J. The spatial association of ecosystem services with land use and land cover change at the county level in China, 1995–2015. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 669, 459–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hou, L.; Wu, F.; Xie, X. The spatial characteristics and relationships between landscape pattern and ecosystem services value along an urban-rural gradient in Xi’an city, China. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 108, 105720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zang, Z.; Zou, X.; Zuo, P.; Song, Q.; Wang, C.; Wang, J. Impact of landscape patterns on ecological vulnerability and ecosystem service values: An empirical analysis of Yancheng Nature Reserve in China. Ecol. Indic. 2017, 72, 142–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anselin, L. A test for spatial autocorrelation in seemingly unrelated regressions. Econ. Lett. 1988, 28, 335–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anselin, L. Lagrange multiplier test diagnostics for spatial dependence and spatial heterogeneity. Geogr. Anal. 1988, 20, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bodin, Ö. Collaborative environmental governance: Achieving collective action in social-ecological systems. Science 2017, 357, 659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chen, W.; Ye, X.; Li, J.; Fan, X.; Liu, Q.; Dong, W. Analyzing requisition–compensation balance of farmland policy in China through telecoupling: A case study in the middle reaches of Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations. Land Use Policy 2019, 83, 134–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ning, J.; Liu, J.; Kuang, W.; Xu, X.; Zhang, S.; Yan, C.; Li, R.; Wu, S.; Hu, Y.; Du, G.; et al. Spatiotemporal patterns and characteristics of land-use change in China during 2010–2015. J. Geogr. Sci. 2018, 28, 547–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Xu, X. The Annually Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) Spatial Distribution Datasets for China; Data Registration and Publishing System of the Resource and Environmental Science Data Center of the Chinese Academy of Sciences: Beijing, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Yi, H.; Güneralp, B.; Filippi, A.M.; Kreuter, U.P.; Güneralp, İ. Impacts of land change on ecosystem services in the San Antonio River Basin, Texas, from 1984 to 2010. Ecol. Econ. 2017, 135, 125–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeng, J.; Chen, T.; Yao, X.; Chen, W. Do protected areas improve ecosystem services? A case study of Hoh Xil Nature Reserve in Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Costanza, R.; de Groot, R.; Sutton, P.; van der Ploeg, S.; Anderson, S.J.; Kubiszewski, I.; Farber, S.; Turner, R.K. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environ. Chang. 2014, 26, 152–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, G.; Lin, Z.; Lu, C.; Xiao, Y.; Chen, C. Expert knowledge based valuation method of ecosystem services in China. J. Nat. Resour. 2008, 23, 911–919. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, W.X.; Li, J.F.; Zhu, L.J. Spatial heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis of ecosystem service value in the middle Yangtze River region. J. Nat. Resour. 2019, 34, 325–337. [Google Scholar]
- Su, S.; Xiao, R.; Jiang, Z.; Zhang, Y. Characterizing landscape pattern and ecosystem service value changes for urbanization impacts at an eco-regional scale. Appl. Geogr. 2012, 34, 295–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yushanjiang, A.; Zhang, F.; Yu, H.; Kung, H. Quantifying the spatial correlations between landscape pattern and ecosystem service value: A case study in Ebinur Lake Basin, Xinjiang, China. Ecol. Eng. 2018, 113, 94–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anselin, L.; Rey, S.J. Modern Spatial Econometrics in Practice: A Guide to GeoDa, GeoDaSpace and PySAL; GeoDa Press LLC: Chicago, IL, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, G.; Chen, Y. On the spatial relationship between ecosystem services and urbanization: A case study in Wuhan, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 637–638, 780–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chi, G.; Zhu, J. Spatial regression models for demographic analysis. Popul. Res. Policy Rev. 2008, 27, 17–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chi, G. The impacts of highway expansion on population change: An integrated spatial approach. Rural Sociol. 2010, 75, 58–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, S.; Hu, S.; Qu, S. Topographic gradient effects of ecosystem service value in the middle Yangtze River region. China. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 2018, 29, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Y.; Long, H. Study on spatial-temporal patterns of land use transition and its impact on ecological service function of the Middle of Yangtze River Economic Belt. Econ. Geogr. 2017, 37, 161–170. [Google Scholar]
- Tan, R.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; He, Q.; Ming, L.; Tang, S. Urban growth and its determinants across the Wuhan urban agglomeration, Central China. Habitat Int. 2014, 44, 268–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ives, A.R.; Carpenter, S.R. Stability and diversity of ecosystems. Science 2007, 317, 58–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bateman, I.J.; Harwood, A.R.; Mace, G.M.; Watson, R.T.; Abson, D.J.; Andrews, B.; Binner, A.; Crowe, A.; Day, B.H.; Dugdale, S.; et al. Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: Land use in the United Kingdom. Science 2013, 341, 4550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goldstein, J.H.; Caldarone, G.; Duarte, T.K.; Ennaanay, D.; Hannahs, N.; Mendoza, G.; Polasky, S.; Wolny, S.; Daily, G.C. Integrating ecosystem-service tradeoffs into land-use decisions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 7565–7570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- 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]
- Duarte, G.T.; Santos, P.M.; Cornelissen, T.G.; Ribeiro, M.C.; Paglia, A.P. The effects of landscape patterns on ecosystem services: Meta-analyses of landscape services. Landscape Ecol. 2018, 33, 1247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Land Type | PLAND | NP | PD | ED | LSI | AREA_AM | SHAPE_AM | FRAC_AM | IJI | COHESION | DIVISION | SPLIT | AI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forestland | 58.06 | 59,679.00 | 0.11 | 20.17 | 500.22 | 5,559,136.18 | 145.50 | 1.38 | 39.21 | 99.96 | 0.94 | 17.50 | 92.15 |
Grassland | 3.65 | 28,955.00 | 0.05 | 3.22 | 318.38 | 933.42 | 3.86 | 1.15 | 44.59 | 94.89 | 1.00 | 1,659,361.44 | 80.08 |
Cultivated land | 30.14 | 176,274.00 | 0.31 | 21.80 | 746.59 | 472,195.68 | 50.34 | 1.32 | 48.04 | 99.69 | 1.00 | 396.78 | 83.73 |
Construction land | 3.09 | 101,248.00 | 0.18 | 3.83 | 408.82 | 2,522.83 | 3.91 | 1.14 | 45.03 | 92.98 | 1.00 | 723,842.77 | 72.20 |
Water area | 3.95 | 34,555.00 | 0.06 | 3.00 | 283.69 | 266,930.25 | 33.21 | 1.26 | 65.89 | 99.50 | 1.00 | 5,354.71 | 82.95 |
Unused land | 0.02 | 586.00 | 0 | 0.02 | 33.49 | 893.42 | 5.00 | 1.14 | 64.72 | 93.99 | 1.00 | 362,468,475.71 | 70.19 |
Wetland | 1.10 | 8,769.00 | 0.02 | 0.70 | 126.46 | 30,141.46 | 5.79 | 1.17 | 67.50 | 97.53 | 1.00 | 170,671.10 | 85.64 |
Model 1 | PD | ED | LSI | AREA_AM | SHAPE_AM | FRAC_AM | CONTAG | PLADJ | IJI | COHESION | DIVISION | SPLIT | SHDI | SIDI | AI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VIF | 4.86 | 758.36 | 11.89 | 8.90 | 19.55 | 24.04 | 30.38 | 474.51 | 8.71 | 21.00 | 13.02 | 5.20 | 42.40 | 48.50 | 986.40 |
Model 2 | PD | LSI | AREA_AM | IJI | COHESION | DIVISION | SPLIT | SHDI | AI | ||||||
VIF | 4.35 | 6.37 | 3.95 | 4.02 | 6.65 | 6.86 | 3.09 | 5.53 | 6.78 |
Ecosystem Services Type | PD | LSI | AREA_AM | IJI | COHESION | DIVISION | SPLIT | SHDI | AI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ecosystem services | –0.185 *** | 0.328 *** | 0.387 *** | –0.369 *** | 0.373 *** | –0.161 *** | –0.168 *** | –0.293 *** | –0.035 * |
Supply services | –0.176 *** | 0.370 *** | 0.424 *** | –0.505 *** | 0.368 *** | –0.194 *** | –0.189 *** | –0.438 *** | –0.003 |
Regulation services | –0.159 *** | 0.236 *** | 0.273 *** | –0.184 *** | 0.310 *** | –0.090 *** | –0.110 *** | –0.112 *** | 0.056 * |
Support services | –0.176 *** | 0.363 *** | 0.433 *** | –0.488 *** | 0.368 *** | –0.205 *** | –0.198 *** | –0.424 *** | 0.006 |
Cultural services | –0.177 *** | 0.286 *** | 0.368 *** | –0.320 *** | 0.340 *** | –0.165 *** | –0.166 *** | –0.253 *** | 0.049 * |
Variables | Ecosystem Services | Supply Services | Regulation Services | Support Services | Cultural Services |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
PD | −0.343 *** | −0.367 *** | −0.199 *** | −0.408 *** | −0.392 *** |
(0.088) | (0.090) | (0.071) | (0.093) | (0.096) | |
LSI | −0.252 ** | −0.200 * | −0.237 *** | −0.137 | −0.177 |
(0.084) | (0.085) | (0.067) | (0.089) | (0.091) | |
AREA_AM | 0.756 *** | 0.765 *** | 0.527 *** | 0.746 *** | 0.691 *** |
(0.086) | (0.088) | (0.069) | (0.091) | (0.094) | |
IJI | −0.212 | −0.210 ** | −0.149 ** | −0.203 ** | −0.215 ** |
(0.068) | (0.070) | (0.055) | (0.073) | (0.075) | |
COHESION | 0.463 *** | 0.331 *** | 0.443 *** | 0.251 ** | 0.318 ** |
(0.088) | (0.090) | (0.071) | (0.094) | (0.097) | |
DIVISION | 0.294 *** | 0.386 *** | 0.196 ** | 0.300 *** | 0.179 * |
(0.083) | (0.085) | (0.067) | (0.088) | (0.090) | |
SPLIT | 0.080 | 0.038 | 0.099 | 0.003 | 0.035 |
(0.068) | (0.069 | (0.055) | (0.072) | (0.074) | |
SHDI | 0.089 | −0.551 *** | 0.364 *** | −0.421 *** | 0.223 * |
(0.090) | (0.092) | (0.072) | (0.096) | (0.098) | |
AI | −0.448 *** | −0.747 *** | −0.167 * | −0.689 *** | −0.355 ** |
(0.105) | (0.108) | (0.085) | (0.112) | (0.115) | |
Constant | 0.441 *** | 0.916 *** | 0.024 | 0.914 *** | 0.452 *** |
(0.124) | (0.127) | (0.100) | (0.132) | (0.136) | |
Moran’s I (error) | 0.349 *** | 0.421 *** | 0.311 *** | 0.438 *** | 0.371 *** |
LM (lag) | 165.066 *** | 216.568 *** | 120.282 *** | 227.081 *** | 163.825 *** |
Robust LM (lag) | 64.488 *** | 79.676 *** | 40.185 *** | 76.445 *** | 49.755 *** |
LM (error) | 100.916 *** | 147.320 *** | 80.170 *** | 159.537 *** | 114.453 *** |
Robust LM (error) | 0.338 | 10.428 *** | 0.073 | 8.902 ** | 0.384 |
Lagrange multiplier (SARMA) | 165.404 *** | 226.996 *** | 120.355 *** | 235.983 *** | 164.208 *** |
Heteroscedasticity test | |||||
Breusch−Pagan test | 87.919 *** | 90.855 *** | 89.060 *** | 80.464 *** | 75.053 *** |
Koenker−Bassett test | 64.657 *** | 51.939 *** | 49.313 *** | 49.842 *** | 56.861 *** |
Measures of fit | |||||
Log likelihood | 233.542 | 226.648 | 303.811 | 213.697 | 204.816 |
AIC | −447.083 | −433.296 | −587.622 | −407.395 | −389.631 |
SC | −409.245 | −395.458 | −549.784 | −369.557 | −351.793 |
R2 | 0.606 | 0.720 | 0.502 | 0.680 | 0.510 |
N | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 |
Explanatory Variables | Ecosystem Services | Supply Services | Regulation Services | Support Services | Cultural Services | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SLM | SEM | SEMLD | SLM | SEM | SEMLD | SLM | SEM | SEMLD | SLM | SEM | SEMLD | SLM | SEM | SEMLD | |
PD | −0.206 ** | −0.404 *** | −0.138 * | −0.178 ** | −0.362 *** | −0.195 *** | −0.140 * | −0.260 *** | −0.093 * | −0.207 *** | −0.409 *** | −0.201 *** | −0.249 *** | −0.436 *** | −0.157 ** |
(0.063) | (0.077) | (0.056) | (0.056) | (0.065) | (0.058) | (0.055) | (0.067) | (0.049) | (0.057) | (0.067) | (0.058) | (0.070) | (0.085) | (0.060) | |
LSI | −0.112 | −0.162 ** | −0.077 | −0.096 | −0.120 * | −0.090 | −0.117 * | −0.146 ** | −0.075 | −0.052 | −0.093 | −0.044 | −0.070 | −0.120 | −0.036 |
(0.059) | (0.063) | (0.056) | (0.052) | (0.052) | (0.053) | (0.053) | (0.056) | (0.049) | (0.054) | (0.054) | (0.054) | (0.066) | (0.069) | (0.060) | |
AREA_AM | 0.353 *** | 0.412 *** | 0.233 *** | 0.284 *** | 0.291 *** | 0.241 *** | 0.296 *** | 0.332 *** | 0.193 *** | 0.266 *** | 0.289 *** | 0.209 *** | 0.334 *** | 0.384 *** | 0.194 ** |
(0.064) | (0.068) | (0.062) | (0.057) | (0.057) | (0.059) | (0.056) | (0.059) | (0.054) | (0.058) | (0.059) | (0.060) | (0.070) | (0.075) | (0.066) | |
IJI | −0.172 *** | −0.086 | −0.178 *** | −0.165 *** | −0.085 | −0.143 *** | −0.125 ** | −0.062 | −0.129 ** | −0.159 *** | −0.076 | −0.144 *** | −0.173 ** | −0.085 | −0.179 *** |
(0.048) | (0.053) | (0.045) | (0.043) | (0.044) | (0.043) | (0.043) | (0.047) | (0.040) | (0.044) | (0.045) | (0.044) | (0.054) | (0.059) | (0.049) | |
COHESION | 0.247 *** | 0.273 *** | 0.191 *** | 0.210 *** | 0.182 ** | 0.195 *** | 0.244 *** | 0.277 *** | 0.167 ** | 0.141 * | 0.123 | 0.125 * | 0.145 * | 0.172 * | 0.094 |
(0.063) | (0.076) | (0.058) | (0.056) | (0.063) | (0.058) | (0.057) | (0.066) | (0.053) | (0.057) | (0.066) | (0.058) | (0.070) | (0.083) | (0.062) | |
DIVISION | 0.086 | 0.138 * | 0.029 | 0.105 * | 0.111 * | 0.080 | 0.079 | 0.114 * | 0.035 | 0.051 | 0.077 | 0.022 | 0.031 | 0.084 | −0.019 |
(0.059) | (0.062) | (0.056) | (0.053) | (0.051) | (0.053) | (0.052) | (0.055) | (0.049) | (0.054) | (0.053) | (0.054) | (0.066) | (0.069) | (0.060) | |
SPLIT | 0.099 * | 0.083 | 0.108 * | 0.113 ** | 0.079 | 0.113 ** | 0.078 | 0.074 | 0.071 | 0.088 * | 0.057 | 0.095 ** | 0.060 | 0.050 | 0.076 |
(0.048) | (0.051) | (0.045) | (0.043) | (0.042) | (0.043) | (0.042) | (0.045) | (0.040) | (0.043) | (0.043) | (0.043) | (0.053) | (0.056) | (0.049) | |
SHDI | 0.155 * | 0.058 | 0.194 *** | −0.186 ** | −0.340 *** | −0.206 *** | 0.277 *** | 0.246 *** | 0.242 *** | −0.098 | −0.252 *** | −0.085 | 0.229 ** | 0.141 | 0.248 *** |
(0.064) | (0.075) | (0.058) | (0.060) | (0.062) | (0.060) | (0.056) | (0.066) | (0.052) | (0.061) | (0.064) | (0.060) | (0.071) | (0.083) | (0.063) | |
AI | −0.127 *** | −0.293 *** | −0.021 | −0.230 *** | −0.401 *** | −0.221 ** | −0.045 | −0.128 | 0.006 | −0.183 ** | −0.367 *** | −0.140 | −0.085 | −0.225 * | 0.026 |
(0.077) | (0.088) | (0.071) | (0.070) | (0.074) | (0.072) | (0.067) | (0.077) | (0.061) | (0.071) | (0.076) | (0.072) | (0.085) | (0.097) | (0.075) | |
Constant | 0.046 | 0.619 *** | −0.094 | 0.262 ** | 0.719 *** | 0.268 ** | −0.107 | 0.240 * | −0.169 * | 0.258 ** | 0.772 *** | 0.209 * | 0.090 | 0.595 *** | −0.071 |
(0.091) | (0.115) | (0.081) | (0.084) | (0.112) | (0.089) | (0.079) | (0.099) | (0.069) | (0.085) | (0.112) | (0.088) | (0.100) | (0.125) | (0.085) | |
Spatial lag term | 0.693 *** | 0.894 *** | 0.710 *** | 0.762 *** | 0.639 *** | 0.909 *** | 0.740 *** | 0.825 *** | 0.697 *** | 0.948 *** | |||||
(0.037) | (0.041) | (0.029) | (0.039) | (0.044) | (0.049) | (0.029) | (0.038) | (0.039) | (0.041) | ||||||
Spatial error term | 0.812 *** | −0.255 *** | 0.960 *** | 0.239 ** | 0.718 *** | −0.284 ** | 0.947 *** | 0.127 *** | 0.788 *** | −0.346 *** | |||||
(0.036) | (0.094) | (0.013) | (0.080) | (0.046) | (0.094) | (0.016) | (0.084) | (0.038) | (0.094) | ||||||
Measures of fit | |||||||||||||||
Log likelihood | 322.999 | 299.697 | 349.978 | 360.402 | 339.2448 | 386.346 | 365.005 | 350.530 | 389.438 | 350.695 | 330.045 | 378.271 | 287.152 | 271.201 | 317.570 |
AIC | −623.999 | −579.393 | −677.955 | −698.804 | −658.49 | −750.692 | −708.011 | −681.061 | −756.877 | −679.39 | −640.091 | −734.542 | −552.304 | −522.402 | −613.141 |
SC | −582.377 | −541.555 | −636.333 | −657.182 | −620.651 | −709.07 | −666.389 | −643.222 | −715.255 | −637.768 | −602.253 | −692.920 | −510.682 | −484.563 | −571.518 |
R2 | 0.798 | 0.781 | 0.810 | 0.892 | 0.898 | 0.896 | 0.689 | 0.671 | 0.710 | 0.880 | 0.884 | 0.884 | 0.738 | 0.724 | 0.760 |
N | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 | 325 |
© 2020 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
Liu, L.; Chen, X.; Chen, W.; Ye, X. Identifying the Impact of Landscape Pattern on Ecosystem Services in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5063. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145063
Liu L, Chen X, Chen W, Ye X. Identifying the Impact of Landscape Pattern on Ecosystem Services in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(14):5063. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145063
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Luwen, Xingrong Chen, Wanxu Chen, and Xinyue Ye. 2020. "Identifying the Impact of Landscape Pattern on Ecosystem Services in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 14: 5063. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145063