Comparative Analysis of the Evolutionary Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Land and Water Resource Systems in Major Grain-Producing Areas
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Research Area
3. Research Methods
3.1. Constructing Indicator System
3.2. Determination of Indicator Weights
3.3. Identification of Trends in the Evolution of Land and Water Resource Systems
Static Evolution Index: | (6) | |
Dynamic Evolution Index: | (7) | |
(8) | ||
Fourier series fitting: | (9) | |
Gaussian series fitting: | (10) | |
(11) | ||
(12) |
3.4. Data Sources
4. Results Analysis and Discussion
4.1. Comparative Analysis of Factors Influencing Land and Water Resource Systems under Different Conditions
4.2. Characterization of the Evolution of Land and Water Resource Systems under Different Conditions
4.2.1. Static Evolution Index of “Production–Life–Ecology” Functions of Land and Water Resources
4.2.2. Dynamic Evolution Index of the “Production–Life–Ecology” Functions of Land and Water Resources
4.3. Comparative Analysis of the Evolutionary Characteristics of the “Production–Life–Ecology” Functions of Land and Water Resources under Different Conditions
5. Conclusions
- (1)
- Under different conditions, the important indices of “Production–Life–Ecology” functions are different. Among production and ecological functions, there are many indicators with a 2% or more difference in indicator importance, while there is only one indicator with great difference in the index importance of life function. The managers should pay attention to the ability of production and economic development ability of land and water resources, as well as the ecological environmental protection ability of land and water resources.
- (2)
- The static evolution indices of the “Production–Life–Ecology” functions of land and water resources basically show a slow growth trend. During the study period, there are differences between the indicators with large data changes and important indicators, so managers can promote the sustainable development of regional land and water resources from four important indicators: the proportion of tertiary industry to GDP, urban land density, forest coverage, and SO2 emissions per unit area.
- (3)
- The dynamic evolution index of the “Production–Life–Ecology” functions of land and water resources basically shows a fluctuating downward trend. The difference between indicators with large changes and important indicators during the study period is small, so that managers can adjust the evolution mechanism of the land and water resource system in terms of important indicators to produce the best benefit to regional land and water resources.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, Z.Q.; Guo, J.Y.; You, X.Y. A study on spatio-temporal coordination and driving forces of urban land and water resources utilization efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Belt. J. Water Clim. Chang. 2023, 14, 272–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, W.; Ma, Z.; Lei, B. Spatiotemporal Distribution of Irrigation Water Use Efficiency from the Perspective of Water Footprints in Heilongjiang Province. Water 2022, 14, 1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.W.; Feng, J.; Fang, M.; Ye, X.Y. Sources, Influencing Factors, and Pollution Process of Inorganic Nitrogen in Shallow Groundwater of a Typical Agricultural Area in Northeast China. Water 2020, 12, 3292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, F.F.; Dai, Y.; Yu, X.H. Air pollution, food production and food security: A review from the perspective of food system. J. Inst. Agric. 2017, 16, 2945–2962. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, M.; Singh, V.P.; Fu, Q.; Liu, D.; Yang, G.Q. Efficient allocation of agricultural land and water resources for soil environment protection using a mixed optimization-simulation approach under uncertainty. Geoderma 2019, 353, 55–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, Q.X.; He, X.L.; Wang, Z.L.; Wu, Y.X.; Liao, H.Y. Water resources optimal allocation model based on interval multi-stage stochastic planning and its application. Adv. Sci. Tech. Water 2022, 42, 1–7. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, Z.Y.; Li, W.C.; Zhang, Y.Z.; Wang, X. Evaluation of agricultural land and water resources security in Ningxia based on DPSIR model. J. Zhejiang Agric. 2017, 29, 1336–1346. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Fu, Q.; Liu, Y.; Li, T.X.; Cui, S.; Liu, D.; Cheng, K. Analysis of Water Utilization in Grain Production from Water Footprint Perspective in Heilongjiang Province. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 2017, 48, 184–192. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Ren, Y.T.; Xu, D.Y.; Cheng, K. Risk Assessment of Ecological Security of Regional Land and water resources Based on Dynamic Perspective. North. Hortic. 2018, 36, 172–178. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, C.C.; Peng, Q.H.; Ding, T.; Zhou, Z.X. Regional Assessment of Land and Water Carrying Capacity and Utilization Efficiency in China. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wen, Q.; Sun, J.T.; Fan, L.Y.; Li, X.W.; Li, Q.S. Evaluation of Agricultural Soil-Water Resources Carrying Capacity(ASWCC)and Relation Analysis Based on Entropy Weight TOPSIS in Henan Province. Soil Water Conserv. 2022, 29, 333–338. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, F.; Wang, C.; Ye, Y.; Wen, B. An Improved Method for Evaluating Regional Resource Carrying Capacities: A Case Study of the Tarim River Basinin Arid China. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2019, 28, 2415–2428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- He, Y.H.; Wang, Z.R. Water-land resource carrying capacity in China: Changing trends, main driving forces, and implications. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 331, 130003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- You, X.Y.; Xie, X.M.; Sun, S.J.; Wang, H. Review on the present situation and future prospect of water resources deployment models in China. J. China Inst. Water Resour. Hydropower 2004, 2, 131–140. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Singh, A. Optimal allocation of water and land resources for maximizing the farm income and minimizing the irrigation-induced environmental problems. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2017, 31, 1147–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baalousha, H.M.; Tawabini, B.; Seers, T.D. Fuzzy or Non-Fuzzy? A Comparison between Fuzzy Logic-Based Vulnerability Mapping and DRASTIC Approach Using a Numerical Model. A Case Study from Qatar. Water 2021, 13, 1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.Y.; Li, J.; Tolson, B.A. Progress in integrating remote sensing data and hydrologic modeling. Prog. Phys. Geog. 2014, 38, 464–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Koven, C.D.; Lawrence, D.M.; Riley, W.J. Permafrost carbon-climate feedback is sensitive to deep soil carbon decomposability but not deep soil nitrogen dynamics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 3752–3757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, Y.J.; Zhou, H.F.; Zhu, W.; Yao, L.L. Matching patterns of land and water resources in rainfed agricultural areas of Central Asia under future climate change scenarios. Agric. Res. Arid. Reg. 2021, 39, 184–193. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Li, M.; Zhao, L.; Zhang, C.L.; Liu, Y.D.C.; Fu, Q. Optimization of agricultural resources in water-energy-food nexus in complex environment: A perspective on multienergy coordination. Energy Convers. Manag. 2022, 258, 115537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.R.; Qian, L.X.; Zhao, Z.Y.; Wang, Y. Theory and assessment method of water resources risk. J. Hydraul. Eng.-ASCE 2019, 50, 980–989. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, Q.X.; Zhou, Z.M.; Wang, Z.L.; Fu, Q.; Wang, T.; Zhao, Y.Z. Risk assessment and optimization of water resources shortage based on water and land resources coupling. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2017, 33, 136–143. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Li, H.Z.; Pei, Y.Y.; You, J. Ecological risk assessment of combined pollution in watersheds. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2019, 64, 3412–3428. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Sun, L.; Sun, J.; Li, Y.P.; Suo, C.; Liu, J.; Gao, P.P. Development of an ensemble Bayesian inference-based copula approach for bivariate risk evaluation of extreme precipitation under climate change. Int. J. Bioclimatol. 2022, 42, 8755–8776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dana, L.K.; Curtis, L.S. Bayesian inference in probabilistic risk assessment—The current state of the art. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2008, 94, 628–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, B.; Jeanne, H.J.; McBean, E.; Li, Y. Risk assessment of hybrid rain harvesting system and other small drinking water supply systems by game theory and fuzzy logic modeling. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 708, 134436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, L.B.; Hu, Y.N.; Jin, J.L.; Wu, C.J.; Zhou, Y.L.; Cui, Y. Dynamic prediction of water resources carrying capacity of Chaohu Basin and system optimization regulation based on system dynamics simulation. J. Lake Sci. 2021, 33, 242–254. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, Z.Y.; Mei, Z.K.; Xu, X.Y.; Feng, Y.Z.; Ren, G.X. Landscape Ecological Risk Assessment Based on Land Use Change in the Yellow River Basin of Shaanxi, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yi, S.Y.; Li, X.N.; Chen, W.P. A Classification System for the Sustainable Management of Contaminated Sites Coupled with Risk Identification and Value Accounting. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 1470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Georgios, K.; Dionisios, G.; Nymphodora, P.; Loannis, M. Topsoil pollution as ecological footprint of historical mining activities in Greece. Land. Degrad. Dev. 2018, 29, 2025–2035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, H.X.; Pu, S.Y.; He, F.K.; Liu, S.B. Progress of the Application of Remote Sensing Technology in the Soil Pollution Research. Earth Environ. 2020, 48, 622–630. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Ye, M.L.; Yang, M.L.; Liu, C.Y.; Ma, Y.H.; Wang, Q. Application of Hyperspectral Remote Sensing in Monitoring Heavy Metals in Soil. Environ. Monit. Tech. Adm. 2018, 30, 1–5. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Hu, Z.B.; Pang, Y.; Xu, R.C.; Yu, H.; Niu, Y.; Wu, C.G.; Liu, Y. Systematic Evaluation and Influencing Factors Analysis of Water Environmental Carrying Capacity in Taihu Basin, China. Water 2023, 15, 1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, K.; He, K.X.; Sun, N.; Fu, Q. Comprehensive evaluation of eco-environmental resources in the main grain-producing areas of China. Ecol. Inform. 2023, 75, 102059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, X.T.; Li, X.S. Spatio-temporal evolution characteristics and influencing factors of “production-living-ecological” functions in Henan Province, China. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2021, 37, 243–252. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Q.F.; Wang, X.K.; Zhu, Q.; Song, J.P.; Yan, Q.Y.; Zhao, Y. Coupling relationship of water resources carrying capacity system in Tibet Autonomous Region based on “production-living-ecological” function. J. Nat. Resour. 2023, 38, 1618–1631. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nahidul Karim, M.; Daher, B. Evaluating the Potential of a Water-Energy-Food Nexus Approach toward the Sustainable Development of Bangladesh. Water 2021, 13, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shannon, C.E. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1948, 27, 379–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, Y.J.; Wang, Y.Z.; Wang, J.P. Objective Attributes Weights Determining Based on Shannon Information Entropy in Hesitant Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Math. Probl. Eng. 2014, 2014, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Maria, M.B.; Martinez-Del-Rio, J.; Antolin-Lopez, R. Trade-offs among urban sustainability, pollution and livability in European cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 224, 651–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Yu, C.; Chen, T.; Feng, Z.; Wu, K. 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]
Guideline Layer | Indicator Layer | Unit | Indicator Description | Indicator Meaning | Property |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Production function | Effective irrigation rate (A1) | % | Effective irrigated area/Cultivated area | Agricultural production level | + |
Water consumption per unit of output value (A2) | m3/yuan | Total water consumption/Total output | The level of water resources to support the economy | − | |
Water consumption per unit of arable land (A3) | 104 m3/hm2 | Agricultural water consumption/Arable land area | The level of water resources to support agriculture production | − | |
Secondary industry water consumption (A4) | m3/yuan | Industrial water consumption/Industrial output | Level of water resources support for non-agricultural production | − | |
Reclamation rate (A5) | % | Arable land area/Total land area | Agricultural production capacity carried by the land | + | |
Grain yield per unit area (A6) | t/hm2 | Total food production/Arable land area | Level of agricultural production made of land | + | |
The proportion of tertiary industry in GDP (A7) | % | Tertiary industry output/Total output | Non-agricultural production levels | + | |
GDP per unit area (A8) | 104 yuan/hm2 | Total production value/Total land area | Land supports the level of economic development | + | |
Life function | Water resources per capita (B1) | 104 m3/people | Total water resources/Total population | The ability of water resources to support livelihood standards | + |
Domestic water per capita (B2) | 104 m3/people | Domestic water consumption/Total population | Livelihood standards guaranteed by water resources | + | |
Traffic density (B3) | % | Transportation land/Total land area | The ability of land resources to support livelihood standards | + | |
Food production per capita (B4) | t/people | Total food production/Total population | Social level guaranteed by land resources | + | |
Urban land density (B5) | % | Urban land area/Total land area | The level of social development supported by land | + | |
Urbanization level (B6) | % | Urban population/Total population | Social development Level | + | |
Population density (B7) | people/hm2 | Total population/Total land area | The ability of land to secure a standard of livelihood | + | |
Ecology function | Forest coverage rate (C1) | % | Forest area/Total land area | The ability of land and water resources to maintain the ecosystem | + |
Proportion of water for ecological environment (C2) | % | Ecological water use/Total water use | The ability of water resources to maintain the ecosystem | + | |
Unit area of chemical fertilizer and pesticide film use (C3) | t/hm2 | (Fertilizer use + Pesticide use + Film use)/Cultivated land area | The level of land resources carrying ecological risks | − | |
Sewage treatment rate (C4) | % | Wastewater treatment volume/Total discharge volume | The level of water resources carrying ecological risks | + | |
SO2 emissions per unit area (C5) | t/km2 | SO2 Emissions/Town area | Ecological risk level | − | |
Proportion of environmental investment (C6) | % | Total investment in environmental governance/GDP | The level of protection of the ecological environment | + |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 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
Cheng, K.; Fu, Q.; Sun, N.; Wang, Z.; Zhao, Y. Comparative Analysis of the Evolutionary Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Land and Water Resource Systems in Major Grain-Producing Areas. Water 2023, 15, 2553. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15142553
Cheng K, Fu Q, Sun N, Wang Z, Zhao Y. Comparative Analysis of the Evolutionary Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Land and Water Resource Systems in Major Grain-Producing Areas. Water. 2023; 15(14):2553. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15142553
Chicago/Turabian StyleCheng, Kun, Qiang Fu, Nan Sun, Zixin Wang, and Yuxin Zhao. 2023. "Comparative Analysis of the Evolutionary Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Land and Water Resource Systems in Major Grain-Producing Areas" Water 15, no. 14: 2553. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15142553