Abstract
Ecosystems services (ES) assessment is a significant scientific topic recognized for its potential to address sustainability issues. However, there is an absence of science–policy frameworks in land use planning that lead to the ES science being used in policy. China’s Ecological Redline Policy (ERP) is one of the first national policies utilizing multiple ES, but there is no standardized approach for working across the science–policy interface. We propose a transdisciplinary framework to determine ecological redline areas (ERAs) in Shanghai using: ES, biodiversity and ecologically fragile hotspots, landscape structure, and stakeholder opinions. We determine the five criteria to identify ERAs for Shanghai using multi-temporal, high resolution images (0.5 m) and biophysical models. We examine ERP effectiveness by comparing land use scenarios for 2040. Compared to alternative land uses, ES increase significantly under the ERP. The inclusion of ES in spatial planning led stakeholders to increase terrestrial habitat protection by 174% in Shanghai. Our analysis suggests that strategic planning for ES could reduce tradeoffs between environmental quality and development.
Highlights
Ecosystems services (ES) assessment is a significant scientific topic recognized for its potential to address sustainability issues
When one ES significantly increases from Scenario 1 (S1) to Scenario 4 (S4), we find the other three ES significantly increase across S1–S4 (Fig. 6)
A core objective of the ES approach is to integrate ecosystem management into development decisions to promote sustainability5, the majority of academic recommendations on the advantages of ES assessment are theoretical with minimal evidence of ES assessment leading to more comprehensive planning7,21
Summary
China is the first major economy to formulate a national policy, mandating governments to establish ES assessments in land use planning known as the Ecological Redline Policy (ERP). ERAs represent an attempt at establishing ES assessment standards in land use planning, defined as the “minimum ecological area needed to guarantee and maintain ecological safety and functionality, and biological diversity for national security”. The three objectives of the study are to: [1] present a science–policy framework for ES assessments applicable to ERP; [2] explain methods and ES results for determining ERAs to illustrate possible ES assessment standards; and [3] evaluate the effectiveness of ERP for reducing tradeoffs on ecosystem services
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
