Translator Disclaimer
29 September 2020 Coupling Land Use Analysis and Ecological Risk Assessment: A Study of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Exploring the ecological response of land use change is important for regional sustainable development and assists in understanding the profound consequences of this change. This paper proposes coupling a study of the evolution of land use with an assessment of ecological risk, based on a typical watershed in the hinterland of China's Three Gorges Reservoir area. Land use data for the Caotangxi watershed derived from Landsat images from 1990, 2000, 2004, and China–Brazil Earth Resource Satellite data from 2010 and 2016 were used to identify ecological risk based on land use changes. The spatial interaction process between land use and ecological risk changes from 2 spatial scales of grid and terrain was analyzed using geographic information system technology and an ecological risk index. The study area's ecological risk index demonstrated at first a worsening trend and then improvement during the period from 1990 to 2016. During 2004, there was a turning point in ecological risk evolution; this was most apparent in zones with a slope of 15–25 and >25°, as well as in the elevation zone between 300 and 1000 m. The proportion of serious-risk areas decreased sharply after 2010, and land function transformation resulted in improvement of ecological risk in the watershed during the 26 years from 1990 to 2016. Our study provides support for evaluating ecological risk trends and the development of land use transition theory in the Three Gorges Reservoir area. It is a typical description of land remediation and ecological restoration in this area.

Introduction

Human activities profoundly affect Earth's surface (Turner et al 2007). Anthropic driving forces on the structure of ecosystems and function of Earth's system have resulted in significant land changes (Pollack 2004), and different utilization patterns are formed at different stages of this evolution (Foley et al 2005). Ecological risk (ER) assessment can assess the potential for harmful ecological effects caused by stress factors associated with human activities (Norton et al 2010). However, current research on ER mainly focuses on analysis of microscale aspects, such as watersheds and wetlands from the perspectives of soil's heavy metal content and changes in hydrological conditions (Pascoe and Dalsoglio 1994; Cook et al 2010; Bai et al 2017; Jiang et al 2017).

Land use change has the most significant impact on terrestrial ecosystems and global biodiversity (Sala and Wall 2000). Some research shows that changes in the ecological environment and ecosystem services (ES) are closely related to land use change (Foley et al 2005; Huang et al 2016; Wang et al 2017). Urbanization development, transformation of cultivated land function, and dynamic change of forest vegetation caused by land use change have far-reaching influences on ecosystems (Ren et al 2007; Zhang and Wang 2012; Galler et al 2015), and change in natural forest led by regeneration and succession, human disturbance, and other factors directly affects the balance and health of terrestrial ecosystems (Alongi 2015). Summarily, land use change is an essential factor affecting ecosystems (Goldstein et al 2012; Lawler et al 2014; Song et al 2015). Land change science has thus become an essential component of global environmental change and sustainable development research (Veldkamp and Verburg 2004; Turner et al 2007; Li et al 2010).

The ecological effects produced by different patterns and intensities of land use have regional and cumulative characteristics, which may directly indicate the structure and composition of the ecosystem (Xu et al 2016). However, for ecologically fragile and stressed regions, the response process of ER to land use change is still poorly understood. The world's largest hydroelectric power project, the Three Gorges Dam, has been controversial since its establishment in 1992 and its construction in 1994. The dam has affected regional biodiversity and ecological processes by destroying and isolating surrounding habitats through its construction, with far-reaching and significant transformation of the area surrounding it (Wu et al 2003; Stone 2008). Meanwhile, it has had a significant impact on the wellbeing of humans (Kittinger et al 2009). Therefore, an approach based on landscape ecology is required to realize the sustainable development of the Three Gorges Reservoir area (TGRA) effectively (Shen and Xie 2004).

With the river closure of the Three Gorges Project in 1997, the resettlement project, and ecological construction policies, the land use of TGRA has changed (Cao et al 2011). Significant variations in land use and land cover change have occurred in TGRA (Zhang et al 2009; Seeber et al 2010; Schönbrodt-Stitt et al 2013). Although the 2007 land use policy stated that farmland with a slope greater than 25° should be transformed into forests or pastures, farmland still accounts for 20% of this area (Zhang and Wang 2012). Nearly 56% of households depend on agriculture (Xu et al 2015). However, despite obstacles such as migration, resettlement plans, and relocation of agricultural areas, the forest area of TGRA increased by 3.6% between 1987 and 2007 (Bieger et al 2015).

Recently, water storage of the Three Gorges Reservoir has resulted in severe droughts downstream of the dam. This has had several impacts on landscape changes (Liu et al 2016). However, there has been no ER assessment at the watershed scale in TGRA based on land use evolution (Zhang et al 2009; Li et al 2010). This study focuses on the Caotangxi watershed throughout the construction, water storage, and operation of the dam. The Caotangxi watershed is located in the hinterland of TGRA, where there is wide distribution of purple shale and limestone. The main objectives of this study were to (1) evaluate the ER of the study watershed, (2) reveal variations and trends of ER in the study watershed from 1990 to 2016, and (3) examine the regional ecological impact of land use transformation in depth. Thus, this study aims to define a sustainable pathway for TGRA's ecological construction, hydrofluctuation belt management, and water environment protection and provide a basis for mountain land use management in developing countries.

Data and methods

Study area

TGRA is a typical mountainous area with a complex geological structure and landforms dominated by mountains and hills (Liang et al 2020). The Caotangxi watershed is located in eastern Fengjie County, which is the hinterland of TGRA. It is located at 108°24′32″–109°14′51″E and 30°35′6″–31°26′36″N. It is also a primary tributary of the Yangtze River, which is 33.3 km in length with a basin area of 210 km2. The area with a slope above 15° accounts for 86.60%, and the zone with an elevation between 500 and 1500 m accounts for 77.38% (Figure 1). The region is in the Central Asian subtropical zone and has a continental monsoon climate, with an annual average temperature of 15°C and an average annual rainfall of 1200 mm. The purple soil (ie a special type of soil in China, which is composed of purple–red sandstone and shale rich in calcium carbonate) is widespread, with substantial soil erosion in some parts. Sloping land is widespread in the study area, and sloping farmland is the primary type of cultivated land, with woodland mostly located on ridges. The Caotangxi watershed is typical of the surrounding areas.

FIGURE 1

Location of the study area. (Map by Xinyuan Liang)

img-z3-2_R1.jpg

The study area also belongs to the Three Gorges immigration area. Three Gorges immigrants are mainly divided into 2 categories, of which 79% are “back to the mountain” and 21% are “emigration.” The former refers to people migrating to mountains where space is still available for settlement, whereas the latter refers to relocation to other areas outside TGRA (Liang and Li 2019). According to the statistical yearbook (Local Chronicle Office of Fengjie County 2018), the permanent population of Fengjie County was 833,000 inhabitants in 1978, 989,800 in 2003, 834,300 in 2010, and 727,900 in 2017. Therefore, migration in Fengjie County is mainly local migration, with people moving back to the mountains. Generally, since the implementation of the immigration project, Fengjie County has had more people and less land, a low economic level, and a poor ecological environment. Because of continuous population growth, the permanent population of Fengjie County increased before and after the completion of the second phase of the Three Gorges Project (in 2003) and did not decrease until 2010, when the population fell because of the attraction of an urban economy. Farmers’ livelihoods in the Caotangxi watershed tended to diversify from 2012 to 2017 (Liang et al 2020; Liang and Li 2019). Because of the large loss in labor force, there is an increasing trend of conversion to farmland–orchards on the sloping farmland in this region. A second land use trend is the abandonment of farmland.

Data sources and processing

The main information source for the study area was remote sensing data, including Landsat images from 1990, 2000, and 2004 and China–Brazil Earth Resource Satellite remote sensing data from 2010 and 2016. ENVI5.2 was used to process the remote sensing images (including format conversion, geometric correction, noise cancellation, and unsupervised classification), in which the geometric correction error was within 1 pixel. A human–computer interaction system was used, and the properties and actual use of land resources in the study area were analyzed, with reference to the land use classification method in the Resources and Environment Data Cloud Platform (IGSNRR 2017). This allowed land use in the study area to be divided into 9 types (Figure 2). Based on 10-m resolution SPOT images of the study area, for 2011 and 2015, the validity of the land use result points in the field was verified twice, in February and May. The statistical interpretation accuracy of each land use was above 91%.

FIGURE 2

Land use maps for 5 periods.

img-z4-2_R1.jpg

The study area was divided into 6 elevations, 0–150, 150–300, 300–500, 500–1000, 1000–1500, and >1500 m, according to the 1:50,000 digital elevation model (DEM). The slope of the study area was divided into 6 levels, 0, 0–3, 3–8, 8–15, 15–25, and >25°, according to the actual situation in the study area and the grading standards for sloping cultivated land (MLR 2007). This was supported by the spatial analysis function of ArcGIS based on DEM data.

Methods

This study aimed to identify the relationship between land use change and ER change. Most international ER assessment methods were based on sampling soil or water quality on a microscale to measure the content of heavy metals or chemical pollutants (Islam et al 2015; Maanan et al 2015; Dudhagara et al 2016). Spatial assessment of ER on the landscape scale within the overall regional context is lacking. This study attempted to understand spatial interaction processes between land use and ER change by defining an ecological risk index (ERI) from a grid scale and different terrain scales using a geographic information system technology platform.

Ecological risk index: Different land uses have different ES values, and land use change (land use patterns and land management) is the main driving force for spatial pattern and supply change of ES (Xu et al 2016). Changes in land use cause variations in corresponding ES, inducing changes of ER; therefore, adjustment of land use structure within a specific spatial unit inevitably leads to transformation of regional ER. To correlate land use and ER, this study used the acreage proportion of the types of land use to build an ERI (Zeng and Liu 1999). It was used to identify the comparative value of comprehensive ER in a piece of sample land to convert the spatial structure to variables of ER through sampling (Bai et al 2011). It was computed using the following equation:

e01_R1.gif

where i is the different types of land use, Ai is the whole acreage of the i land use type in the sample land, A is the total acreage of the sample land, Wi is the weight value of ER reflected from the i land use type.

In addition, based on the actual situation in the Caotangxi watershed and ER levels of different land use types on soil erosion and water environment, the analytic hierarchy process was used to determine Wi, the ER intensity parameter of land. First, a semiquantitative assignment method through expert judgment was used to determine the relative risk level value of each type of land use. Then, the relative importance of each factor (soil, biodiversity, hydrothermal conditions, etc) and the relative importance order of each type of land use to a particular factor were calculated. Finally, the risk intensity parameter value of each type of land use was obtained. The risk weight values of every land use type were as follows: 0.95 for farmland, 0.82 for orchard, 0.12 for forestland, 0.20 for scrubland, 0.32 for open forestland, 0.15 for high coverage grassland, 0.53 for medium coverage grassland, 0.16 for water, and 0.72 for construction land.

Assessment unit setting and index classification: The Caotangxi watershed was divided into 841 risk assessment samples with a size of 500 × 500 m to combine vector evaluation units with grid point evaluation units (Figure 1). Grid distribution data of ERI indicators was acquired through spatial sampling of indicator variables. The actual acreage of grids with an area of less than 500 × 500 m was used to obtain the percentage of all land uses within that grid.

The natural breaks method was used to grade ERI of different evaluation units. ERI values were divided into 5 levels: slight risk (<0.3), light risk (0.3–0.5), medium risk (0.5–0.6), heavy risk (0.6–0.7), and serious risk (>0.7). Furthermore, ERI values in every sample were regarded as the attributive values of their center, and the ordinary Kriging method of the geostatistical module in ArcGIS10.2 software was used to acquire the spatial interpolation of ERI to reflect the visualized spatial distribution of ER in the study area.

Results and analysis

Temporal variation characteristics of ER

In the study area, ER during 1990 to 2016 first deteriorated and then improved (Figure 3). Generally, the proportion of medium-risk, serious-risk, and heavy-risk areas showed a downward trend. ERI average values of the Caotangxi watershed during 1990, 2000, 2004, 2010, and 2016 were 0.3745, 0.4174, 0.4236, 0.3309, and 0.3564, respectively, indicating first a trend of deterioration and then improvement with a change in land use. The overall trend of ecological security was consistent with the change in sloping farmland, indicating that the change in sloping farmland plays a prominent role in changes in the ecological security of the Caotangxi watershed. As shrubbery, open woodland, and medium coverage grassland increased, the ER in the study area gradually decreased.

FIGURE 3

Percentage ER level by acreage from 1990 to 2016 in the study area.

img-z4-6_R1.jpg

Variations in the spatial pattern of ER

In the study area, the spatiotemporal pattern of ER changed significantly from 1990 to 2016 (Figure 4). In 1990, serious-risk areas were mainly distributed in the southwest, northwest, and northeast. In 2000 and 2004, serious-risk areas increasingly extended to places around the water's edge, mainly distributed in southwest, northwest, northeast, and central areas. In 2010, serious-risk areas decreased drastically and were mainly distributed in the southwest part and the mainstream Caotangxi watershed. In 2016, serious-risk areas were concentrated in the residential areas of the northwest of the watershed.

FIGURE 4

Interpolation surface of ERI values using the Kriging method from 1990 to 2016.

img-z5-2_R1.jpg

There was a significant spatial correlation between the distribution pattern of ER and the distribution of farmland, orchard, and areas where water concentrates. The closer it was to water, farmland, or orchard, the higher the ERI; the farther it was from these land use types, the lower the risk. After 2010, rapid development of rural residential land reduced high ERI caused by the growth of construction land in the river valley, which led the serious-risk regional center to deviate. Generally, the risk level was low around the edge of the study area, increasing with proximity to water and construction land.

Changes in ER of different slope zones

The areas of different ER levels corresponding to all slope zones were calculated by superimposing the slope map and ERI values map (Figure 5). The 5 risk levels in the study area were mainly distributed in 3 slope zones, 8–15, 15–25, and >25°, especially in zones with a slope of 15–25 and >25°. Slight-risk, light-risk, and medium-risk areas were mainly distributed in zones with a slope of >25° during 1990–2016. Heavy-risk areas were mainly distributed in zones with a slope of >25° during the period between 1990 and 2004, whereas between 2010 and 2016, they were mainly distributed in the zone with a slope of 15–25°. Serious-risk areas were mainly distributed in the zone with a slope of >25° in 2000, and at other times, they were mainly distributed in the zone with a slope of 15–25°. In terms of quantity, serious-risk areas in the zone with a slope of >25° at first increased and then decreased, falling sharply throughout the period from 1990 to 2016; a turning point was observed in 2004.

FIGURE 5

ER area in different slope zones for 1990, 2000, 2004, 2010, and 2016.

img-z6-2_R1.jpg

Changes in ER of different elevation zones

By superimposing the elevation map and ERI values map, the areas of different ER levels corresponding to different elevation zones were obtained (Figure 6). The 5 risk levels were mainly distributed in 2 elevation zones of 500–1000 and 1000–1500 m, and they constituted more than 70% of the total area of each risk level. Slight-risk areas were mainly distributed in the elevation zone of 100–1500 m from 1990 to 2016. Light-risk areas were mainly distributed in the elevation zone of 1000–1500 m from 1990 to 2004 and shifted to the elevation zone of 500–1000 m during 2010–2016. Medium-risk and heavy-risk areas were mainly distributed in the elevation zone of 500–1000 m. Serious-risk areas were mainly distributed in the elevation zone of 300–500 m in 2010, and at other times, they were mainly distributed in the elevation zone of 500–1000 m. In general, serious-risk areas in the elevation zone of 300–1000 m showed changes in the trend, increasing at first and then decreasing from 1990 to 2016, followed by a sharp decline; a turning point occurred in 2004.

FIGURE 6

ER area in different elevation zones of 1990, 2000, 2004, 2010, and 2016.

img-z7-2_R1.jpg

Discussion

Reasons for changes in ER

Because the previous immigration method was mainly based on the relocation of local people or those living nearby (Wang et al 2016), the arable land in the valley area was inundated after dam filling. The returning immigrants increased regional population pressure on the limited land, prompting deforestation and steep slope planting, which caused further deterioration of the reservoir area's ecological environment.

After dam completion in 2009, China attached more importance to the ecological environment of TGRA and implemented various measures to promote its management, such as the project of returning farmland to forests and the development of orchards. Therefore, traditional agriculture was no longer the preferred livelihood for local farmers (Feng and Xu 2015), and the original sloping farmland ecosystem was transformed into orchards, forestland, and grassland (Figure 7). This improved the ecological environment. In other words, in the context of China's current rural transition, the sloping farmland in TGRA changed from traditional tillage to economic orchard planting. This process of land use transition emphasizes two-part improvement of economic and ecological benefits, thereby accelerating the optimization trends of ER. This supports the “win–win sustainable development strategy” demonstrated by Gao and Mao (2007).

FIGURE 7

Land use transition in the study area. Photographs B and E are the same observation points. Although photographs A, C, and D are different observation points, they show clear long-term evolution of sloping farmland. (Photos by Xinyuan Liang and Yangbing Li)

img-z8-2_R1.jpg

Reflection on research findings

Given the crucial indicative role of ER in regional resource development and ecological construction, ER assessment has become an essential method of macroecological management (Suter et al 2003). Compared with other regional ER studies that focus on the comprehensive superimposition of multiple risks (Landis 2003), ER assessment in this study is mainly based on the perspective of landscape ecology. This approach pays attention to the impact of landscape patterns on ecological processes or functions, regional spatiotemporal heterogeneity and its scale effect, the spatiotemporal differentiation of characteristics of risk, and the risk expression of specific spatial patterns on ecological function and process (Peng et al 2015b). This differs from traditional regional ER assessment, which focuses on quantitative assessment of the overall risk of the ecological environment. Therefore, landscape ER assessment based on land use change can be regarded as an extension of the landscape-scale approach of regional ER assessment (Peng et al 2015a).

Land use change affects the structure and mechanism of ecosystems and can change the supply capacity of ES (Pérez-Soba et al 2008; Verburg et al 2009). As the socioeconomic environment drives the evolution of land use, the level of ER will be reduced, and vice versa. That is, there is a coupling of the evolution of land use change and ER. Therefore, based on a background of greening and land use transition in the mountainous areas of central and western China (Foley et al 2005; Long and Qu 2018; Macias-Fauria 2018), our study suggests the influence of China's multiple driving factors, including construction of the dam, population pressure, immigration policy, urbanization, and social and economic development. A win–win situation from both ecological and economic perspectives could thus be achieved through a rational slope land use conversion process in TGRA. For a long time, excessive emphasis on the quantity of cultivated land protected in China has weakened the focus on other aspects, such as the degradation of quality and extensive management. Moreover, the matching of farmers' core interests with national policy has always been the primary goal of rural development in China. To a certain extent, the transformation of sloping farmland utilization improves the integration of farmers' interests and farmland quality protection policies. On the premise of safeguarding the collective economic interests of farmers, strengthening local enthusiasm for land remediation and adequately dealing with land degradation and soil erosion problems are of great significance for improving the quality and efficiency of land use in mountainous areas and improving rural production and living conditions. The verification process and conclusions of this study provide a useful reference for the optimization and management of mountain land use in developing countries.

In general, effective use and rational transformation of sloping farmland in mountainous areas will help to improve the agricultural economy and living standards of farmers in mountainous rural areas; at the same time, it will avoid the shortcomings of overexploitation of sloping land, such as soil erosion. Especially in developing countries with a large land area in mountainous areas, the mechanization level of agricultural development in mountainous areas is difficult to improve because of restricted access to traffic and complex natural conditions, which result in the rural population emigrating to developed cities in plains areas to pursue higher wages. As a result, the surplus rural labor force mainly comprises the elderly, women, and children. Their working ability is relatively weak and cannot meet a high-intensity farming process. Orchards are long-term income economic forests. Planting orchards not only can improve rural economic development by solving the employment demand for a surplus labor force but also can improve the ecological environment through soil and water conservation. Therefore, choosing orchards suitable for local growth to change the utilization of sloping farmland in mountainous areas has positively affected food security, rural economic improvement, and ecological environment governance in developing countries. Differing from large-scale fruit fields on the plains (site selection requires the investigation of local climate, soil, natural disasters, and topography), orchards in mountainous areas are mostly distributed on sloping farmland around residential areas. Because of the self-supporting planting mode of many small farmers, production and operation are relatively extensive, and local households lack enthusiasm for follow-up management and protection. In later stages, the land manager should fully consider the application of professional technical measures for orchard species, the improvement of infrastructure, and the establishment of a large-scale cultivation base.

Conclusions

This study investigated the evolution of ER in TGRA based on slope land use change through a case study of a typical watershed, the Caotangxi watershed, during the construction, filling, and operation stages of the dam under continual construction. The ER in TGRA during 1990–2016 showed at first a worsening trend and then an improvement, especially in serious-risk areas in the elevation zone of 500–1000 m and slopes of >25°, where the risk decreased sharply; a turning point occurred in 2004. In the study area, the transition of the sloping farmland ecosystem is the vital driving force for spatiotemporal changes in ER. Furthermore, planting suitable orchards changes the utilization mode of sloping farmland in mountainous areas and has economic and ecological benefits. Therefore, slope land use transition has positively affected food security, rural economic improvement, and ecological environment governance in developing countries.

There are some limitations in the study: ER assessment considers only the percentage of land use area and spatial location; it fails to consider fragmentation level, separation degree, connectivity, and other patch characteristics of land use types along the slope. Still, the results of this study objectively reflect ER change and possible impact. In addition, the purpose of this study is to reflect on the evolution of ER characteristics in TGRA through a landscape ecology approach and then provide a new perspective for observing ER evolution in mountain areas. Limited by length and data, the study does not cover the impact of dam construction on the regional cultural landscape, species richness, and other aspects. We will continue to focus on land use and ecological environment change processes of TGRA from a more global perspective in future work.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by the Key Basic Science and Cutting Edge Technology Research Plan of Chongqing (grant number cstc2015jcyjB0439), National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 41261045), National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 41661020), and Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology (grant number cstc2018jcyjAX0539).

REFERENCES

1.

Alongi DM. 2015. The impact of climate change on mangrove forests. Current Climate Change Reports 1(1):30–39.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40641-015-0002-xGoogle Scholar

2.

Bai J, Cui B, Chen B, Zhang K, Deng W, Gao H, Rong X . 2011. Spatial distribution and ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in surface sediments from a typical plateau lake wetland, China. Ecological Modelling 222(2):301–306.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.12.002Google Scholar

3.

Bai T, Ma P, Kan Y, Huang Q . 2017. Ecological risk assessment based on IHA-RVA in the lower Xiaolangdi reservoir under changed hydrological situation. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 100(1):012214.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/100/1/012214Google Scholar

4.

Bieger K, Hörmann G, Fohrer N . 2015. The impact of land use change in the Xiangxi Catchment (China) on water balance and sediment transport. Regional Environmental Change 15(3):485–498.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0429-3Google Scholar

5.

Cao Y, Zhou W, Wamg J, Yuan C . 2011. Spatial–temporal pattern and differences of land use changes in the Three Gorges Reservoir area of China during 1975–2005. Journal of Mountain Science 8(4):551–563.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11629-011-2008-8Google Scholar

6.

Cook RB, Ii GWS, Sain ER . 2010. Ecological risk assessment in a large river-reservoir: 1. Introduction and background. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18(4):581–588.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620180402Google Scholar

7.

Dudhagara DR, Rajpara RK, Bhatt JK, Gosai HB, Sachaniya BK, Dave BP . 2016. Distribution, sources and ecological risk assessment of PAHs in historically contaminated surface sediments at Bhavnagar coast, Gujarat, India. Environmental Pollution 213:338–346.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.02.030Google Scholar

8.

Feng L, Xu J . 2015. Farmers' willingness to participate in the next-stage grain-for-green project in the Three Gorges Reservoir area, China. Environmental Management 56(2):505–518.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-015-0505-1Google Scholar

9.

Foley JA, Defries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Stuart Chapin F, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK , et al. 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science 309(5734):570–574.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772Google Scholar

10.

Galler C, Von HC, Albert C . 2015. Optimizing environmental measures for landscape multifunctionality: Effectiveness, efficiency and recommendations for agri-environmental programs. Journal of Environmental Management 151:243–257.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.12.011Google Scholar

11.

Gao Q, Mao HY . 2007. Ecological restoration, social–economic changes and sustainable development in the Three Gorges Reservoir area: A case study in Yunyang, Chongqing Municipality. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 14(2):174–181.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504500709469717Google Scholar

12.

Goldstein JH, Caldarone G, Duarte TK, Ennaanay D, Hannahs N, Mendoza G, Polasky S, Wolny S, Daily GC . 2012. Integrating ecosystem–service tradeoffs into land-use decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109:7565–7570.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1201040109Google Scholar

13.

Huang C, Zhou Z, Wang D, Dian Y . 2016. Monitoring forest dynamics with multiscale and time series imagery. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 188(5):273.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10661-016-5271-xGoogle Scholar

14.

IGSNRR [Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research]. 2017. Resources and Environment Data Cloud Platform. Beijing, China: Chinese Academy of Sciences.  http://www.resdc.cn/; accessed on 11 April 2017. Google Scholar

15.

Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Raknuzzaman M, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Islam MK . 2015. Heavy metal pollution in surface water and sediment: A preliminary assessment of an urban river in a developing country. Ecological Indicators 48:282–291.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.08.016Google Scholar

16.

Jiang X, Xiong Z, Hui L, Liu G, Liu W . 2017. Distribution, source identification, and ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in wetland soils of a river–reservoir system. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 24(1):436–444.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7775-xGoogle Scholar

17.

Kittinger JN, Coontz KM, Yuan Z, Han D, Zhao X, Wilcox BA . 2009. Toward holistic evaluation and assessment: linking ecosystems and human well-being for the Three Gorges Dam. Ecohealth 6(4):601.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10393-010-0285-2Google Scholar

18.

Landis, WG. 2003. Twenty years before and hence: Ecological risk assessment at multiple scales with multiple stressors and multiple endpoints. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal 9:1317–1326.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10807030390248500Google Scholar

19.

Lawler JJ, Lewis DJ, Nelson E, Plantinga AJ, Polasky S, Withey JC, Helmers DP, Martinuzzi S, Pennington D, Radeloff VC . 2014. Projected land-use change impacts on ecosystem services in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111:7492–7497.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1405557111Google Scholar

20.

Li X, Ma Y, Xu H, Wang J, Zhang D . 2010. Impact of land use and land cover change on environmental degradation in Lake Qinghai Watershed, northeast Qinghai–Tibet Plateau. Land Degradation and Development 20(1):69–83.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ldr.885Google Scholar

21.

Liang X, Li Y . 2019. Spatio-temporal variation of farmland–fruit forest conversion and its enlightenment in Three Gorges Reservoir area: A case study on Caotangxi watershed. Journal of Natural Resources 34(2):385–399.  https://dx.doi.org/10.31497/zrzyxb.20190214Google Scholar

22.

Liang X, Li Y, Shao J, Ran C . 2020. Traditional agroecosystem transition in mountainous area of Three Gorges Reservoir area. Journal of Geographical Sciences 30(2):281–296.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11442-020-1728-5Google Scholar

23.

Liu Y, Wu G, Guo R, Wan R . 2016. Changing landscapes by damming: The Three Gorges Dam causes downstream lake shrinkage and severe droughts. Landscape Ecology 31(8):1–8.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0391-9Google Scholar

24.

Local Chronicle Office of Fengjie County. 2018. Fengjie Yearbook. Beijing, China: Jiuzhou.  https://navi.cnki.net/knavi/YearbookDetail?pcode=CYFD&pykm=YFJNJ; accessed on 21 June 2019. Google Scholar

25.

Long H, Qu Y . 2018. Land use transitions and land management: A mutual feedback perspective. Land Use Policy 74:111–120.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.03.021Google Scholar

26.

Maanan M, Saddik M, Maanan M, Chaibi M, Assobhei O, Zourarah B . 2015. Environmental and ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in sediments of Nador Lagoon, Morocco. Ecological Indicators 48:616–626.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.034Google Scholar

27.

Macias-Fauria M. 2018. Satellite images show China going green. Nature 553(7689):411–413.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-00996-5Google Scholar

28.

MLR [Ministry of Land and Resources of the People's Republic of China]. 2007. Technical Regulations for the Second National Land Survey (TD/T 1014-2007). Beijing, China: MLR. Google Scholar

29.

Norton SB, Rodier DJ, Van der Schalie WH, Wood WP, Slimak MW, Gentile JH . 2010. A framework for ecological risk assessment at the EPA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 11(12):1663–1672.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620111202Google Scholar

30.

Pascoe GA, Dalsoglio JA . 1994. Planning and implementation of a comprehensive ecological risk assessment at the Milltown Reservoir–Clark Fork River Superfund Site, Montana. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 13(12):1943–1956.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620131209Google Scholar

31.

Peng J, Dang W, Liu Y, Zong M, Hu X . 2015a. Review on landscape ecological risk assessment. Acta Geographica Sinica 70(4): 664–677.  https://dx.doi.org/10.11821/dlxb201504013Google Scholar

32.

Peng J, Zong M, Hu Y, Liu Y, Wu J . 2015b. Assessing landscape ecological risk in a mining city: A case study in Liaoyuan City, China. Sustainability 7:8312–8334.  https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su7078312Google Scholar

33.

Pérez-Soba M, Petit S, Jones L, Bertrand N, Briquel V, Omodei-Zorini L, Contini C, Helming K, Farrington JH, Mossello MT , et al. 2008. Land use functions: A multifunctionality approach to assess the impact of land use changes on land use sustainability. In : Helming K, Pérez-Soba M, Tabbush P, editors. Sustainability Impact Assessment of Land Use Changes. Berlin, Germany: Springer, pp 375–404.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78648-1_19Google Scholar

34.

Pollack HN. 2004. Global change and the Earth system. Eos Transactions American Geophysical Union 85:333–333.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2004EO350005Google Scholar

35.

Ren H, Shen WJ, Lu HF, Wen XY, Jian SG . 2007. Degraded ecosystems in China: Status, causes, and restoration efforts. Landscape and Ecological Engineering 3(1):1–13.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11355-006-0018-4Google Scholar

36.

Sala OE, Wall DH . 2000. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287(5459):1770–1774.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.287.5459.1770Google Scholar

37.

Schönbrodt-Stitt S, Behrens T, Schmidt K, Shi X, Scholten T . 2013. Degradation of cultivated bench terraces in the Three Gorges Area: Field mapping and data mining. Ecological Indicators 34(6):478–493.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.06.010Google Scholar

38.

Seeber C, Hartmann H, Wei X, King L . 2010. Land use change and causes in the Xiangxi catchment, Three Gorges Area derived from multispectral data. Journal of Earth Science 21(6):846–855.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12583-010-0136-7Google Scholar

39.

Shen G, Xie Z . 2004. Three Gorges project: Chance and challenge. Science 304(5671):681.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.304.5671.681bGoogle Scholar

40.

Song W, Deng X, Yuan Y, Wang Z, Li Z . 2015. Impacts of land-use change on valued ecosystem service in rapidly urbanized North China Plain. Ecological Modelling 318:245–253.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.01.029Google Scholar

41.

Stone R. 2008. China's environmental challenges. Three Gorges Dam: Into the unknown. Science 321(5889):628–632.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.321.5889.628Google Scholar

42.

Suter GW, Norton SB, Barnthouse LW . 2003. The evolution of frameworks for ecological risk assessment from the Red Book ancestor. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal 9(5):1349–1360.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10807030390240391Google Scholar

43.

Turner BL, Lambin EF, Reenberg A . 2007. The emergence of land change science for global environmental change and sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104(52):20666–20671.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0704119104Google Scholar

44.

Veldkamp A, Verburg PH . 2004. Modelling land use change and environmental impact. Journal of Environmental Management 72(1):1–3.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.04.004Google Scholar

45.

Verburg PH, Steeg JVD, Veldkamp A, Willemen L . 2009. From land cover change to land function dynamics: A major challenge to improve land characterization. Journal of Environmental Management 90(3):1327–1335.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.08.005Google Scholar

46.

Wang J, Hu Q, Wang X, Li X, Yang XJ . 2016. Protecting China's soil by law. Science 354(6312):562.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aal1847Google Scholar

47.

Wang J, Lin Y, Zhai T, He T, Qi Y, Jin Z, Cai Y . 2017. The role of human activity in decreasing ecologically sound land use in China. Land Degradation and Development 29(3):446–460.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ldr.2874Google Scholar

48.

Wu J, Huang J, Han X, Xie Z, Gao X . 2003. Ecology. Three Gorges Dam—Experiment in habitat fragmentation? Science 300(5623):1239.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1083312Google Scholar

49.

Xu D, Zhang J, Rasul G, Liu S, Xie F, Cao M, Liu E . 2015. Household livelihood strategies and dependence on agriculture in the mountainous settlements in the Three Gorges Reservoir area, China. Sustainability 7(5):4850–4869.  https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su7054850Google Scholar

50.

Xu X, Yang G, Tan Y, Zhuang Q, Li H, Wan R, Su W, Zhang J . 2016. Ecological risk assessment of ecosystem services in the Taihu Lake Basin of China from 1985 to 2020. Science of the Total Environment 7:554–555.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.120Google Scholar

51.

Zeng H, Liu GJ . 1999. Analysis of regional ecological risk based on landscape structure. China Environmental Science 19(5):454–457.  https://dx.doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1000-6923.1999.05.017Google Scholar

52.

Zhang JX, Liu ZJ, Sun XX . 2009. Changing landscape in the Three Gorges Reservoir area of Yangtze River from 1977 to 2005: Land use/land cover, vegetation cover changes estimated using multi-source satellite data. International Journal of Applied Earth Observations and Geoinformation 11(6):403–412.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2009.07.004Google Scholar

53.

Zhang L, Wang P . 2012. Patterns and driving forces of cropland changes in the Three Gorges area, China. Regional Environmental Change 12(4):765–776.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10113-012-0291-8Google Scholar
© 2020 Xinyuan Liang et al. This open access article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please credit the authors and the full source.
Xinyuan Liang, Yangbing Li, and Yanjie Zhao "Coupling Land Use Analysis and Ecological Risk Assessment: A Study of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," Mountain Research and Development 40(1), R1-R10, (29 September 2020). https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-19-00003.1
Received: 1 December 2019; Accepted: 1 February 2020; Published: 29 September 2020
JOURNAL ARTICLE
PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
Back to Top