| Literature DB >> 35457431 |
Siyu Sheng1, Bohan Yang1,2, Bing Kuang1,2.
Abstract
The acceleration of global urban expansion constantly occupies high-quality cropland and affects regional food security. The implementation of cropland protection policies has alleviated the pressure of cropland loss worldwide, and thus keeping a dynamic balance of cereal production. Such a displacement of cereal production from the lost cropland to the supplemented cropland has resulted in the massive losses of natural habitats (such as forests, grasslands, and wetlands) as well as ecosystem service values. However, the impact of cereal production displacement caused by different cropland supplement strategies has not been concerned. Therefore, taking China (mainland) as a case, this study used the LANDSCAPE model to simulate cereal production displacement caused by urban expansion and cropland supplement between 2020 and 2040, based on three scales of the Chinese administration system (i.e., the national level, the provincial level, and the municipal level). The natural habitat loss and corresponding ecosystem service value (ESV) loss were assessed. The results show that the national-scale cereal displacement will lead to a large reclamation of cropland in North China, causing the most natural habitat loss (5090 km2), and the least ESV loss (46.53 billion yuan). Cereal production displacement at the provincial and municipal scales will lead to fewer natural habitat losses (4696 km2 and 4954 km2, respectively), but more ESV losses (54.16 billion yuan and 54.02 billion yuan, respectively). Based on the national food security and ecological conservation in China, this study discussed the reasons for the ecological effects of cereal production displacement, direct and indirect natural habitat loss of urban expansion, and cropland protection policies in China. We suggest that China's cropland protection policy should emphasize avoiding large-scale cropland displacement and occupation of natural habitat with high ESV for cropland supplement.Entities:
Keywords: cropland displacement; ecosystem service values; food security; land-use modeling; urban expansion
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35457431 PMCID: PMC9024629 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19084563
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Resistances of each land-use classes.
| Land-Use Class | Cropland | Forest | Grassland | River | Wetland | Urban Land | Rural Settlement | Unused Land |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resistance | 1 | 1.25 | 1.25 | 1.5 | 1.25 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1 |
Figure 1The parameters used for calculating conversion probability.
Ecosystem service values per unit area in China (Yuan/hm2).
| Primary Classification | Secondary Classification | Ecosystem of Cropland | Ecosystem of Forest | Ecosystem of Grassland | Ecosystem of Wetland | Ecosystem of Water | Ecosystem of Unused Land |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supply service | Food production | 3406.50 | 1124.15 | 1464.80 | 1226.34 | 1805.45 | 68.13 |
| Raw material production | 1328.54 | 10,151.37 | 1226.34 | 817.56 | 1192.28 | 136.26 | |
| Regulation service | Gas regulation | 2452.68 | 14,716.08 | 5109.75 | 8209.67 | 1737.32 | 204.39 |
| Climate regulation | 3304.31 | 13,864.46 | 5314.14 | 46,158.08 | 7017.39 | 442.85 | |
| Hydrology regulation | 2623.01 | 13,932.59 | 5177.88 | 45,783.36 | 63,940.01 | 238.46 | |
| Waste treatment | 4735.04 | 5859.18 | 4496.58 | 49,053.60 | 50,586.53 | 885.69 | |
| Support service | Soil conservation | 5007.56 | 13,694.13 | 7630.56 | 6778.94 | 1396.67 | 579.11 |
| Biodiversity | 3474.63 | 15,363.32 | 6370.16 | 12,569.99 | 11,684.30 | 1362.60 | |
| Culture service | Aesthetic landscape | 579.11 | 7085.52 | 2963.66 | 15,976.49 | 15,124.86 | 817.56 |
| total | 26,911.38 | 95,790.8 | 39,753.87 | 186,574 | 154,484.8 | 4735.05 | |
Figure 2Spatial distribution of potential cereal productivity in China (Unit: kg/ha).
Datasets’ sources and descriptions.
| Datasets | Data Source | Data Description |
|---|---|---|
| Land-use data | RESDC | Land-use map in 2000 is used to project urban land demand of 2040 |
| Administrative boundary data | RESDC | The national boundary data are used for scenario |
| Cereal production potential data | GAEZ | Cereal production potential dataset is used as restricted condition of cereal production displacement in LANDSCAPE model |
| Meteorological data | China Meteorological Administration | Data of average annual precipitation in 2018 are used to calculate the conversion probability |
| Terrain data | The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) | DEM data are used to calculate the conversion probability |
| Soil data | Harmonized World Soil Database (HWSD) | Soil type is used to calculate the conversion probability |
| Traffic data | Open Street Map | Euclidean distance to roads of 2020 is used to calculate the conversion probability |
| Population statistic data | RESDC | Total population of the Chinese mainland in 2015 is used to project urban land demand of 2040 |
| GDP | RESDC | The spatial distribution of GDP of China in 2015 is used to calculate the transfer probabilities |
| Nature reserve data | RESDC | Restricted development zones for urban expansion and cropland supplement |
Fine assessment of land-use simulation results (2010–2020).
| Cropland | Forest | Grassland | River | Urban Land | Rural Settlement | Unused Land | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.261 | 0.107 | 0.052 | 0.214 | 0.547 | 0.277 | 0.303 |
|
| 0.470 | 0.327 | 0.433 | 0.454 | 0.587 | 0.313 | 0.434 |
|
| 0.555 | 0.328 | 0.119 | 0.472 | 0.931 | 0.886 | 0.697 |
Figure 3Spatial distribution of cropland loss from 2020 to 2040 (Statistics at the municipal level).
Figure 4Spatial distribution of cropland supplement in the three scenarios from 2020 to 2040. (Statistics at the municipal level. SN: Cereal production balanced for the nation; SP: Cereal production balanced for each province; SM: Cereal production balanced for each municipality).
Figure 5Spatial distribution of cereal production loss from 2020 to 2040 (Statistics at the municipal level).
Figure 6Spatial distribution of cereal production supplement in the three scenarios from 2020 to 2040 (Statistics at the municipal level).
The loss of different natural habitats caused by cereal production displacement in the three scenarios from 2020 to 2040 (unit: km2).
| Natural Habitat Loss | Natural Habitat |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest | 2587 | 1725 | 2467 | |
| Grassland | 1182 | 1040 | 927 | |
| Wetland | 903 | 1792 | 1428 | |
| Unused land | 418 | 139 | 132 | |
| Total | 5090 | 4696 | 4954 |
Figure 7Spatial distribution of natural habitat loss caused by cereal production displacement in the three scenarios from 2020 to 2040 (Statistics at the municipal level).
Figure 8Spatial distribution of ESV loss caused by cereal production displacement in the three scenarios from 2020 to 2040 (Statistics at the municipal level).
Losses of natural habitat and ESV caused by cereal production displacement in the three scenarios from 2020 to 2040.
| Province |
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural Habitat Loss/km2 | ESV Loss/ | Natural Habitat Loss/km2 | ESV Loss/ | Natural Habitat Loss/km2 | ESV Loss/ | |
| Anhui | 138 | 193.55 | 168 | 234.71 | 112 | 153.14 |
| Beijing | 1 | 0.96 | 24 | 25.63 | 18 | 17.16 |
| Chongqing | 184 | 180.19 | 38 | 35.97 | 1 | 0.96 |
| Fujian | 4 | 2.71 | 55 | 51.19 | 8 | 7.8 |
| Gansu | 39 | 19.77 | 23 | 12.85 | 67 | 40.48 |
| Guangdong | 12 | 11.63 | 308 | 323.03 | 73 | 85.76 |
| Guangxi | 174 | 139.97 | 49 | 36.85 | 105 | 94.18 |
| Guizhou | 8 | 5.98 | 17 | 11.24 | 18 | 14.44 |
| Hainan | 8 | 8.01 | 9 | 9.88 | 17 | 18.1 |
| Hebei | 123 | 118.89 | 557 | 501.47 | 370 | 442.42 |
| Heilongjiang | 1454 | 883.85 | 189 | 111.4 | 212 | 135.25 |
| Henan | 125 | 150.62 | 319 | 357.27 | 189 | 186.36 |
| Hubei | 255 | 379.3 | 102 | 155.24 | 306 | 415.71 |
| Hunan | 83 | 108.9 | 69 | 88.79 | 208 | 248.05 |
| Inner Mongolia | 188 | 126.2 | 57 | 36.53 | 86 | 53.37 |
| Jiangsu | 102 | 178.43 | 785 | 1268.19 | 462 | 756.98 |
| Jiangxi | 33 | 41.6 | 100 | 121.61 | 76 | 86.69 |
| Jilin | 283 | 242.86 | 132 | 114.02 | 130 | 119.31 |
| Liaoning | 108 | 120.53 | 215 | 214.29 | 215 | 218.07 |
| Ningxia | 4 | 2.71 | 6 | 3.51 | 8 | 6.89 |
| Qinghai | 2 | 0.8 | 4 | 1.59 | 1 | 0.96 |
| Shaanxi | 96 | 71.74 | 77 | 54.26 | 253 | 149.98 |
| Shandong | 134 | 193.4 | 805 | 1025.56 | 402 | 522.69 |
| Shanghai | 0 | 0 | 22 | 27.56 | 11 | 13.05 |
| Shanxi | 75 | 56.48 | 171 | 128.72 | 160 | 119.67 |
| Sichuan | 1388 | 1351.22 | 110 | 109.54 | 1229 | 1236.79 |
| Tianjin | 3 | 5.6 | 49 | 82.34 | 52 | 84.09 |
| Tibet | 1 | 0.96 | 1 | 0.96 | 1 | 0.96 |
| Xinjiang | 30 | 17.45 | 20 | 8.51 | 21 | 12.69 |
| Yunnan | 21 | 15.77 | 46 | 35.02 | 68 | 56.23 |
| Zhejiang | 14 | 22.49 | 169 | 228.08 | 75 | 103.96 |
| Total | 5090 | 4652.55 | 4696 | 5415.82 | 4954 | 5402.2 |
Figure 9Spatial distribution of direct and indirect losses of natural habitat in three scenarios from 2020 to 2040 (Statistics at the provincial level).