Spatiotemporal Evaluation and Driving Mechanism of Land Ecological Security in Yan’an, a Typical Hill-Gully Region of China’s Loess Plateau, from 2000 to 2018
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Overview of the Study Region
2.2. Establishment of Evaluation System
2.3. Data Source and Processing
2.4. Establishment of Evaluation Level of LES
2.5. Analysis Methods
3. Results
3.1. Evaluation Level of Land Ecological Security (LES)
3.2. Area Variation of Zones with Different Levels of Land Ecological Security
4. Discussion
4.1. Spatiotemporal Pattern of Land Ecological Security
4.2. Driving Mechanism of Land Ecological Security
4.2.1. Response of Primary Driving Variables to Land Ecological Security
4.2.2. Influence Status (Interaction, Explanatory Threshold, Contribution Degree) of Driving Variables on Land Ecological Security
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
LES | land ecological security |
PSR | pressure-state-response model |
S | ecological security index |
DEM | digital elevation model |
NDVI | normalized differential vegetation index |
VC | vegetation coverage |
TP | surface temperature |
ERS | soil erosion |
ESV | value of ecosystem service |
HAI | human disturbance index |
SLP | surface slope |
RDLS | topographic relief |
ECO | the elasticity of ecological environment |
BZ | buffer zone |
RDI | regional development index |
ED | economic density |
GDP | gross domestic product |
LU | degree of land use |
LA | arable land per capita |
WD | water coverage |
PD | density of population |
FP | grain yield |
References
- He, D.; Hou, K.; Wen, J.F.; Wu, S.Q.; Wu, Z.P. A coupled study of ecological security and land use change based on GIS and entropy method—A typical region in Northwest China, Lanzhou. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 8, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moarrab, Y.; Salehi, E.; Amiri, M.J.; Hovidi, H. Spatial–temporal assessment and modeling of ecological security based on land-use/cover changes (case study: Lavasanat watershed). Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 7, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zulu, L. Ultimately, What is Forest Landscape Restoration in Practice? Embodiments in Sub-Saharan Africa and Implications for Future Design. Environ. Manag. 2020, 68, 619–641. [Google Scholar]
- Chazdon, R.L.; Brancalion, P.; Laestadius, L.; Bennett-Curry, A.; Buckingham, K.; Kumar, C.; Moll-Rocek, J.; Vieira, I.C.G.; Wilson, S.J. When is a forest a forest? Forest concepts and definitions in the era of forest and landscape restoration. Ambio 2016, 45, 538–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Laestadius, L.; Buckingham, K.; Maginnis, S.; Saint-Laurent, C. Before bonn and beyond: The history and future of forest landscape restoration. Unasylva Landsc. Restor. 2015, 66, 11–18. [Google Scholar]
- Acharya, R.P.; Maraseni, T.N.; Cockfield, G. An Ecosystem Services Valuation Research Framework for Policy Integration in Developing Countries: A Case Study from Nepal. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pistorius, T.; Carodenuto, S.; Wathum, G. Implementing forest landscape restoration in Ethiopia. Forests 2017, 8, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dave, R.; Saint-Laurent, C.; Murray, L.; Daldegan, G.; Brouwer, R.; Scaramuzza, C.A.D.M.; Raes, L.; Simonit, S.; Catapan, M.; Contreras, G.G.; et al. Second Bonn Challenge Progress Report: Application of the Barometer in 2018; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 1–80. [Google Scholar]
- Pistorius, T.; Freiberg, H. From Target to Implementation: Perspectives for the International Governance of Forest Landscape Restoration. Forests 2014, 5, 482–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chasek, P.; Safriel, U.; Shikongo, S.; Fuhrman, V.F. Operationalizing Zero Net Land Degradation: The next stage in international efforts to combat desertification? J. Arid. Environ. 2015, 112, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borah, B.; Bhattacharjee, A.; Ishwar, N. Bonn Challenge and India: Progress on Restoration Efforts across States and Land-Scapes; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 44–48. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development-SDGs 15; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015; p. 15. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015; p. 116. [Google Scholar]
- Rimal, B.; Keshtkar, H.; Stork, N.; Gijal, S. Forest Cover and Sustainable Development in the Lumbini Province, Nepal: Past, Present and Future. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 4093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, Y.J.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y. Spatially explicit assessment of land ecological security with spatial variables and logistic regression modeling in Shanghai, China. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2017, 31, 2235–2249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, B.; Gao, P.; Niu, X.; Sun, J.N. Policy-driven China’s Grain to Green Program: Implications for ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 2017, 27, 38–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.X.; Yu, C.Y.; Chen, T.Q.; Feng, Z.; Hu, Y.C.; Wu, K.N. Can the establishment of ecological security patterns improve ecological protection? An example of Nanchang, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 740, 140051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yan, J.F.; Wang, M.H.; Su, F.Z.; Zhang, X.X.; Gao, S.S.; Xu, M.R. Changes in land cover and ecological stress in Borneo based on remote sensing and an ecological footprint method. Landsc. Ecol. Eng. 2020, 16, 319–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodarzi, M.; Haghtalab, N.; Saeedi, I.; Moore, N.J. Structural and functional improvement of urban fringe areas: Toward achieving sustainable built–natural environment interactions. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2020, 22, 6727–6754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pilar, M.A.; Marta, O.; Carlos, L.P. A procedure of landscape services assessment based on mosaics of patches and boundaries. J. Environ. Manag. 2016, 180, 214–227. [Google Scholar]
- Sarkodie, S.A. Environmental performance, biocapacity, carbon & ecological footprint of nations: Drivers, trends and mitigation options. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 751, 141912. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Popkova, E.G.; Shakhovskaya, L.S.; Abramov, S.A.; Natsubize, A.S. Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environ-mental safety in developing countries. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2016, 18, 1049–1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, K.; Zhang, X.C.; Liu, J.M.; Wu, Z.F.; Chen, M.; Zhang, K.X.; Chen, Y.Y. Establishment of an integrated decision-making method for planning the ecological restoration of terrestrial ecosystems. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 741, 139852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, Y.J.; Yang, Q.Q.; Tong, X.H.; Chen, L.J. Evaluating land ecological security and examining its relationships with driving factors using GIS and generalized additive model. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 633, 1469–1479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Milovanović, A.; Milovanović Rodić, D.; Maruna, M. Eighty-year review of the evolution of landscape ecology: From a spatial planning perspective. Landsc. Ecol. 2020, 35, 2141–2161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, H.L.; Zhang, Y.W.; Zeng, X.J.; He, Y.F. Sustainable land use and management research: A scientometric review. Landsc. Ecol. 2020, 31, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adegboyega, S.A.; Oloukoi, J.; Olajuyigbe, A.E.; Ajibade, O.E. Evaluation of unsustainable land use/land cover change on ecosystem services in coastal area of Lagos state, Nigeria. Appl. Geomat. 2018, 11, 97–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, X.R.; Tang, J.C. Ecological Security Assessment of Tianjin by PSR Model. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2010, 2, 881–887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hu, X.S.; Xu, H.Q. A new remote sensing index based on the pressure-state-response framework to assess regional ecological change. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 5381–5393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolfslehner, B.; Vacik, H. Evaluating sustainable forest management strategies with the Analytic Network Process in a Pressure-State-Response framework. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 88, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Zeng, C.; Cheng, Y.J. Spatial influence of ecological networks on land use intensity. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 717, 137151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ma, L.B.; Bo, J.; Li, X.Y.; Fang, F.; Cheng, W.J. Identifying key landscape pattern indices influencing the ecological security of inland river basin: The middle and lower reaches of Shule River Basin as an example. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 674, 424–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yu, J.; Li, F.T.; Wang, Y.; Lin, Y.; Peng, Z.W.; Cheng, K. Spatiotemporal evolution of tropical forest degradation and its impact on ecological sensitivity: A case study in Jinghong, Xishuangbanna, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 727, 138678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dong, H.W.; Feng, Z.M.; Yang, Y.Z.; Li, P.; You, Z. Dynamic assessment of ecological sustainability and the associated driving factors in Tibet and its cities. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 759, 143552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gong, J.Z.; Liu, Y.S.; Xia, B.C.; Zhao, G.W. Urban ecological security assessment and forecasting, based on a cellular automata model: A case study of Guangzhou, China. Ecol. Model. 2009, 220, 3612–3620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.T.; Wang, S.; Fu, B.J.; Feng, X.M.; Chen, Y.Z. Socio-ecological changes on the Loess Plateau of China after Grain to Green Program. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 678, 565–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scavarda, A.; Daú, G.; Scavarda, L.F.; Azevedo, B.D.; Korzenowski, A.L. Social and ecological approaches in urban interfaces: A sharing economy management framework. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 713, 134407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adimassu, Z.; Langan, S.; Johnston, R. Understanding determinants of farmers’ investments in sustainable land management practices in Ethiopia: Review and synthesis. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2015, 18, 1005–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, G.Y.; Jiang, C.H.; Du, J.; Jia, Y.P.; Bai, J. Spatial differentiation characteristics of internal ecological land structure in rural settlements and its response to natural and socio-economic conditions in the Central Plains, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 709, 135932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, H.Q.; Zhao, Y.Y.; Zheng, F. The framework of an agricultural land-use decision support system based on ecological en-vironmental constraints. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 717, 137149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xing, L.; Hu, M.S.; Wang, Y. Integrating ecosystem services value and uncertainty into regional ecological risk assessment: A case study of Hubei Province, Central China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 740, 140126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fu, B.J.; Wang, S.; Liu, Y.; LIU, J.B.; Liang, W.; Miao, C.Y. Hydrogeomorphic ecosystem responses to natural and anthropo-genic changes in the Loess Plateau of China. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 2017, 45, 223–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dang, X.H.; Liu, G.B. Emergy measures of carrying capacity and sustainability of a target region for an ecological restoration programme: A case study in Loess Hilly Region, China. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 102, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, L.; Li, P.; Ma, X.-Y. Estimating nonpoint source pollution load using four modified export coefficient models in a large easily eroded watershed of the loess hilly–gully region, China. Environ. Earth Sci. 2016, 75, 1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, B.; Wang, W.L.; Guo, M.M.; Guo, W.Z.; Wang, W.X.; Kang, H.L.; Zhao, M.; Chen, Z.X. Soil erosion of unpaved loess roads subjected to an extreme rainstorm event: A case study of the Jiuyuangou watershed on the Loess Plateau, China. J. Mt. Sci. 2019, 16, 1396–1407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acharya, R.P.; Maraseni, T.N.; Cockfield, G. Local users and other stakeholders’ perceptions of the identification and priori-tization of ecosystem services in fragile mountains: A case study of chure region of Nepal. Forests. 2019, 10, 421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Acharya, R.P.; Maraseni, T.; Cockfield, G. Assessing the financial contribution and carbon emission pattern of provisioning ecosystem services in Siwalik forests in Nepal: Valuation from the perspectives of disaggregated users. Land Use Policy 2020, 95, 104647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, D.; Lan, Z.; Li, W. Construction of land ecological security in Guangdong province from the perspective of ecological demand. J. Ecol. Rural Environ. 2019, 35, 826–835. [Google Scholar]
- Wen, J.F.; Hou, K.; Li, H.H.; Zhang, Y.; He, D.; Mei, R.C. Study on the spatial-temporal differences and evolution of ecological security in the typical area of the Loess Plateau. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 23521–23533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De La Mora, G.D.L.M.; Sánchez-Nupan, L.O.; Castro-Torres, B.; Galicia, l. Sustainable community forest management in Mex-ico: An integrated model of three socio-ecological frameworks. Environ. Manag. 2021, 68, 900–913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Xie, H.L.; He, Y.F.; Choi, Y.P.; Chen, Q.R.; Cheng, H. Warning of negative effects of land-use changes on ecological security based on GIS. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 704, 135427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, W.; Wen, Y.; Xiong, Z. Spatial-temporal dynamics and scenario simulation of land ecological security: A case study of Deyang, Sichuan Province, China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 20209–20221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, T.T.; Lin, W.P.; Chen, G.S.; Guo, P.P.; Zeng, Y. Wetland ecosystem health assessment through integrating remote sensing and inventory data with an assessment model for the Hangzhou Bay, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 566, 627–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gao, C.L.; Li, S.C.; Wang, J.; Li, L.P.; Lin, P. The Risk Assessment of Tunnels Based on Grey Correlation and Entropy Weight Method. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 2017, 36, 1621–1631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, K.; Li, X.; Wang, J.J.; Zhang, J. An analysis of the impact on land use and ecological vulnerability of the policy of returning farmland to forest in Yan’an, China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 4670–4680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stanturf, J.A.; Kleine, M.; Mansourian, S.; Parotta, J.; Madsen, P.; Kant, P.; Burns, J.; Bolte, A. Implementing forest landscape restoration under the Bonn Challenge: A systematic approach. Ann. Forest Sci. 2019, 76, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hua, T.; Zhao, W.W.; Cherubini, F.; Xu, X.P. Sensitivity and future exposure of ecosystem services to climate change on the Tibetan Plateau of China. Landsc. Ecol. 2021, 36, 3451–3471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, S.S.; Li, J.P.; Guan, X.L.; Gao, X.J.; Gu, Y.H.; Zhang, D.H.; Mi, F.; Li, D.D. The evaluation of forestry ecological security in China: Developing a decision support system. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 91, 664–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Sun, X.; Zhu, X.; Cao, H. An early warning method of landscape ecological security in rapid urbanizing coastal areas and its application in Xiamen, China. Ecol. Model. 2010, 221, 2251–2260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, D.R.; Wang, J.M.; Fu, M.C.; Liu, G.C.; Tang, R.B. Spatiotemporal variation and influencing factors of vegetation cover in the ecologically fragile areas of China from 2000 to 2015: A case study in Shaanxi Province. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 28977–28992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, L.F.; Khan, S.U.; Xia, X.L.; Zhang, H.L.; Guo, C.H. Screening of agricultural land productivity and returning farmland to forest area for sensitivity to rural labor outward migration in the ecologically fragile Loess Plateau region. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 26442–26462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, M.; Shibata, H.; Wang, Q. Optimal conservation planning of multiple hydrological ecosystem services under land use and climate changes in Teshio river watershed, northernmost of Japan. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 62, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, B.; Burghe, R.I. Riparian vegetation NDVI dynamics and its relationship with climate, surface water and groundwater. J. Arid Environ. 2015, 113, 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhe, M.; Zhang, X.Q. Time-lag effects of NDVI responses to climate change in the Yamzhog Yumco Basin, South Tibet. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 124, 107431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meng, M.; Ni, J.; Zong, M. Impacts of changes in climate variability on regional vegetation in China: NDVI-based analysis from 1982 to 2000. Ecol. Res. 2011, 26, 421–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Q.; Yang, A.P.; Han, F.; Wang, Z.G.; Wang, C.R. NDVI-based vegetation dynamics and their response to recent climate change: A case study in the Tianshan Mountains, China. Environ. Earth Sci. 2016, 75, 1189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, D.; Lin, Z.L.; Ma, S.L.; Qi, J.M.; Yan, T.T. Assessing an ecological security network for a rapid urbanization region in Eastern China. Land Degrad. Dev. 2021, 32, 2642–2660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, L.L.; Huang, Y.X.; Yang, L.F.; Li, Y.R. Vegetation Restoration in Response to Climatic and Anthropogenic Changes in the Loess Plateau, China. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 2020, 30, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Xin, Z.B.; Xu, J.X.; Zheng, W. Spatiotemporal variations of vegetation cover on the Chinese Loess Plateau (1981–2006): Impacts of climate changes and human activities. Sci. China Ser. D 2007, 37, 1504–1514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.R.; Cao, Z.; Long, H.L. Dynamic analysis of ecological environment combined with land cover and NDVI changes and implications for sustainable urban–rural development: The case of Mu Us Sandy Land, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 697–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, Z.; Li, Y.R.; Liu, Y.S.; Chen, Y.F.; Wang, Y.S. When and where did the Loess Plateau turn ‘green’? Analysis of the tendency and breakpoints of the normalized difference vegetation index. Land Degrad. Dev. 2018, 29, 162–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.F.; Yang, J.; Chen, Y.N. NDVI-based vegetation responses to climate change in an arid area of China. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2016, 126, 213–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, S.; Huang, Q.; Leng, G.; Zhao, M.; Meng, E. Variations in annual water-energy balance and their correlations with vegetation and soil moisture dynamics: A case study in the Wei River Basin, China. J. Hydrol. 2017, 546, 515–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.P.; Gao, J.X.; Zhou, C.P.; Shi, P.L.; Zhao, L.; Shen, W.S.; Wang, W.X. Spatio-temporal changes of NDVI and its relation with climatic variables in the source regions of the Yangtze and Yellow rivers. J. Geogr. Sci. 2011, 21, 979–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guan, Q.Y.; Yang, L.Q.; Guan, W.Q.; Wang, F.F.; Liu, Z.Y.; Xu, C.Q. Assessing vegetation response to climatic variations and human activities: Spatiotemporal NDVI variations in the Hexi Corridor and surrounding areas from 2000 to 2010. Theor. Appl. Clim. 2018, 135, 1179–1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Wang, K.L.; Zhang, M.Y.; Zhang, C.H. Impacts of climate change and human activities on vegetation cover in hilly southern China. Ecol. Eng. 2015, 81, 451–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chu, H.; Venevsky, S.; Wu, C.; Wang, M. NDVI-based vegetation dynamics and its response to climate changes at Amur-Heilongjiang River Basin from 1982 to 2015. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 650, 2051–2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bhattacharjee, R.; Chakraborty, M.K.; Choudhury, L. Venn Diagram with Names of Individuals and Their Absence: A Non-classical Diagram Logic. Log. Univers. 2018, 12, 141–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.G.; Ouyang, Z.Y.; Yang, W.; Xu, W.H.; Li, S.X. Evaluation of Ecosystem Service Policies from Biophysical and Social Perspectives: The Case of China. Encycl. Biodivers. 2013, 372–384. [Google Scholar]
- Acharya, R.P.; Maraseni, T.; Cockfield, G. Global trend of forest ecosystem services valuation–An analysis of publications. Ecosyst. Serv. 2019, 39, 100979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Target Layer | Rule Layer | Index Layer | Trend | Weight |
---|---|---|---|---|
The evaluation of regional ecological security | Regional environmental pressure C1 | x1 Population density (P km−2) C11 | negative | 0.0964 |
x2 Economic density (Yuan km−2) C12 | negative | 0.0576 | ||
x3 Cultivated area per capita (hm2 P−1) C13 | negative | 0.0576 | ||
x4 Human disturbance index C14 | negative | 0.0374 | ||
x5 Town buffer classification C15 | negative | 0.0530 | ||
x6 Degree of land use C16 | negative | 0.0527 | ||
Regional environmental status C2 | x7 Slope C21 | negative | 0.0530 | |
x8 Land Relief C22 | negative | 0.0576 | ||
x9 NDVI C23 | positive | 0.0144 | ||
x10 Vegetation coverage C24 | negative | 0.0577 | ||
x11 Soil erosion sensitivity C25 | negative | 0.0579 | ||
x12 Land surface temperature C26 | negative | 0.1046 | ||
x13 Water coverage C27 | positive | 0.0388 | ||
x14 Value of ecosystem services C28 | positive | 0.0576 | ||
x15 Ecosystem resilience C29 | positive | 0.0576 | ||
Regional human response C3 | x16 GDP per capita (Yuan P−1) C31 | positive | 0.0576 | |
x17 Grain output per capita C33 | positive | 0.0576 | ||
x18 Regional development index C34 | negative | 0.0308 |
Path/Row | Satellite | Acquisition Time | Spatial Resolution | Path/Row | Satellite | Acquisition Time | Spatial Resolution |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
126/034 | Landsat 5 | 27 April 2000 | 30 m | 127/035 | Landsat 5 | 18 April 2000 | 30 m |
Landsat 5 | 12 June 2005 | 30 m | Landsat 5 | 19 June 2005 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 5 | 12 July 2010 | 30 m | Landsat 5 | 17 June 2010 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 8 Jule 2015 | 30 m | Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 1 July 2015 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 29 April 2018 | 30 m | Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 22 May 2018 | 30 m | ||
126/035 | Landsat 5 | 27 April 2000 | 30 m | 128/034 | Landsat 5 | 9 April 2000 | 30 m |
Landsat 5 | 12 June 2005 | 30 m | Landsat 5 | 9 May 2005 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 5 | 12 July 2010 | 30 m | Landsat 5 | 24 June 2010 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 8 June 2015 | 30 m | Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 24 July 2015 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 31 May 2018 | 30 m | Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 29 May 2018 | 30 m | ||
127/034 | Landsat 5 | 5 June 2000 | 30 m | 128/035 | Landsat 5 | 11 May 2000 | 30 m |
Landsat 5 | 3 June 2005 | 30 m | Landsat 5 | 26 June 2005 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 5 | 19 July 2010 | 30 m | Landsat 5 | 24 June 2010 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 1 July 2015 | 30 m | Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 24 July 2015 | 30 m | ||
Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 23 June 2018 | 30 m | Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS | 14 June 2018 | 30 m |
Type I | Type II | Description |
---|---|---|
Cropland | Paddy field | Cultivated land with a water supply and irrigation facilities, which can be irrigated normally in general years for plant aquatic crops. |
Dryland | Cultivated land without irrigation water sources and facilities, growing crops by precipitation; Dry cropland that can be irrigated normally in general years with water and irrigation facilities. | |
Forest land | Forestland | Natural forests and plantations with canopy density > 30%. |
Shrubland | Dwarf woodland and shrubby woodland with canopy density > 40% and height below 2 m. | |
Open forest land | Forest land with 10–30% canopy density. | |
Other forest land | Undeveloped forest land, nurseries, and gardens. | |
Grassland | High coverage grassland (coverage > 50%), high coverage grassland (20% < coverage < 50%), high coverage grassland (5% < coverage < 20%) | |
Water | Graff, lakes, reservoir pits, permanently glacial snow, rhoals, beach. | |
Built-up land | Urban and rural residential land, other construction lands. | |
Unused land | Desert, gobi, saline-alkali soil, wetland, bare land, bare rock. |
Ecological Security Index | S < 0.45 | 0.45–0.55 | 0.55–0.65 | 0.65–0.75 | ≥0.75 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
LES level | Low security | Medium−low security | Medium security | Medium−high security | High security |
Coefficient | ANOVA | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Index | Standardized Coefficient | T | p | R2 | F | p |
(Constant) | 50.045 | 0 | 0.809 | 538.740 | 0 | |
VC | 0.202 | 13.956 | ||||
TP | −0.305 | −23.398 | ||||
HAI | −0.195 | −15.219 | ||||
GDP | −0.049 | −3.756 | ||||
LA | −0.151 | −10.411 | ||||
ESV | 0.045 | 3.556 | ||||
ED | −0.077 | −6.245 | ||||
ECO | 0.061 | 1.700 | ||||
NDVI | 0.527 | 4.589 | ||||
RDI | 0.195 | 2.099 | ||||
LU | 0.085 | 2.090 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
He, Z.; Shang, X.; Zhang, T. Spatiotemporal Evaluation and Driving Mechanism of Land Ecological Security in Yan’an, a Typical Hill-Gully Region of China’s Loess Plateau, from 2000 to 2018. Forests 2021, 12, 1754. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12121754
He Z, Shang X, Zhang T. Spatiotemporal Evaluation and Driving Mechanism of Land Ecological Security in Yan’an, a Typical Hill-Gully Region of China’s Loess Plateau, from 2000 to 2018. Forests. 2021; 12(12):1754. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12121754
Chicago/Turabian StyleHe, Zhaoquan, Xue Shang, and Tonghui Zhang. 2021. "Spatiotemporal Evaluation and Driving Mechanism of Land Ecological Security in Yan’an, a Typical Hill-Gully Region of China’s Loess Plateau, from 2000 to 2018" Forests 12, no. 12: 1754. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12121754