Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spatiotemporal characteristics and influencing factors of ecosystem services in Central Asia

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Arid Land Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Land use/land cover (LULC) change and climate change are two major factors affecting the provision of ecosystem services which are closely related to human well-being. However, a clear understanding of the relationships between these two factors and ecosystem services in Central Asia is still lacking. This study aimed to comprehensively assess ecosystem services in Central Asia and analyze how they are impacted by changes in LULC and climate. The spatiotemporal patterns of three ecosystem services during the period of 2000–2015, namely the net primary productivity (NPP), water yield, and soil retention, were quantified and mapped by the Carnegie-Ames-Stanford Approach (CASA) model, Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model, and Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Scenarios were used to determine the relative importance and combined effect of LULC change and climate change on ecosystem services. Then, the relationships between climate factors (precipitation and temperature) and ecosystem services, as well as between LULC change and ecosystem services, were further discussed. The results showed that the high values of ecosystem services appeared in the southeast of Central Asia. Among the six biomes (alpine forest region (AFR), alpine meadow region (AMR), typical steppe region (TSR), desert steppe region (DSR), desert region (DR), and lake region (LR)), the values of ecosystem services followed the order of AFR>AMR>TSR>DSR> DR>LR. In addition, the values of ecosystem services fluctuated during the period of 2000–2015, with the most significant decreases observed in the southeast mountainous area and northwest of Central Asia. LULC change had a greater impact on the NPP, while climate change had a stronger influence on the water yield and soil retention. The combined LULC change and climate change exhibited a significant synergistic effect on ecosystem services in most of Central Asia. Moreover, ecosystem services were more strongly and positively correlated with precipitation than with temperature. The greening of desert areas and forest land expansion could improve ecosystem services, but unreasonable development of cropland and urbanization have had an adverse impact on ecosystem services. According to the results, ecological stability in Central Asia can be achieved through the natural vegetation protection, reasonable urbanization, and ecological agriculture development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akpoti K, Dossou-Yovo E R, Zwart S J, et al. 2021. The potential for expansion of irrigated rice under alternate wetting and drying in Burkina Faso. Agricultural Water Management, 247: 106758, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2021.106758.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen R G, Pereira L S, Raes D, et al. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration - guidelines for computing crop water requirements. In: FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. Rome: FAO, 103–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashrafi S, Kerachian R, Pourmoghim P, et al. 2022. Evaluating and improving the sustainability of ecosystem services in river basins under climate change. Science of The Total Environment, 806: 150702, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150702.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Bai Y, Ochuodho T O, Yang J. 2019. Impact of land use and climate change on water-related ecosystem services in Kentucky, USA. Ecological Indicators, 102: 51–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman I J, Harwood A R, Mace G M, et al. 2013. Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: Land use in the United Kingdom. Science, 341(6141): 45–50.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns J, Niederlehner B R. 1995. Ecosystem health concepts as a management tool. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health, 4: 91–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho R M, Szlafsztein C F. 2019. Urban vegetation loss and ecosystem services: the influence on climate regulation and noise and air pollution. Environmental Pollution, 245: 844–852.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen H, Zhang X P, Abla M, et al. 2018. Effects of vegetation and rainfall types on surface runoff and soil erosion on steep slopes on the Loess Plateau, China. CATENA, 170: 141–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen X, Bai J, Li X Y, et al. 2013. Changes in land use/land cover and ecosystem services in Central Asia during 1990–2009. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(1): 116–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clerici N, Cote-Navarro F, Escobedo F J, et al. 2019. Spatio-temporal and cumulative effects of land use-land cover and climate change on two ecosystem services in the Colombian Andes. Science of the Total Environment, 685: 1181–1192.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, d’Arge R, Groot R, et al. 1998. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Ecological Economics, 25(1): 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, Groot R, Braat L, et al. 2017. Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services, 28: 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covaleda S, Lancho J F G, García-Oliva F, et al. 2011. Land-use effects on the distribution of soil organic carbon within particle-size fractions of volcanic soils in the Transmexican Volcanic Belt (Mexico). Soil Use and Management, 27(2): 186–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng Z H, Wang L Q, Peng Q, et al. 2022. Effect of environmental factors on soil properties under different land use types in a typical basin of the North China Plain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 344: 131084, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131084.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Field C B, Behrenfeld M J, Randerson J T, et al. 1998. Primary production of the biosphere: Integrating terrestrial and oceanic components. Science, 281(5374): 237–240.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2007. Soil Permeability. Rome, Italy. [2022-02-01]. https://www.fao.org/fishery/docs/CDrom/FAO_Training/FAO_Training/General/x6706e/x6706e09.htm.

  • Fu Q, Li B, Hou Y, et al. 2017. Effects of land use and climate change on ecosystem services in Central Asia’s arid regions: a case study in Altay Prefecture, China. Science of the Total Environment, 607–608: 633–646.

    PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier T D. 2001. Detecting trends using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. Environmental Forensics, 2(4): 359–362.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyer R, Chang H. 2014. Assessment of freshwater ecosystem services in the Tualatin and Yamhill basins under climate change and urbanization. Applied Geography, 53: 402–416.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Huxman T E, Snyder K, Tissue D T, et al. 2004. Precipitation pulses and carbon fluxes in semiarid and arid ecosystems. Oecologia, 141(2): 254–268.

    PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Jia G E, Shevliakova P, Artaxo N, et al. 2019. Land-climate interactions. In: Shukla P R, Skea J, Calvo Buendia E, et al. Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. [2022-02-01]. https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/chapter/chapter-2/.

  • Jiao L, An W M, Li Z S, et al. 2020. Regional variation in soil water and vegetation characteristics in the Chinese Loess Plateau. Ecological Indicators, 115: 106399, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jilili A, Ma L. 2015. Overview of Central Asian Environments. Beijing: China Meteorological Press, 18–60. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeler B L, Hamel P, McPhearson T, et al. 2019. Social-ecological and technological factors moderate the value of urban nature. Nature Sustainability, 2: 29–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall M G. 1949. Rank Correlation Methods. London, United Kingdom: Griffin, 140–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lautenbach S, Kugel C, Lausch A, et al. 2011. Analysis of historic changes in regional ecosystem service provisioning using land use data. Ecological Indicators, 11(2): 676–687.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesk C, Rowhani P, Ramankutty N. 2016. Influence of extreme weather disasters on global crop production. Nature, 529(7584): 84–87.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Li G Y, Jiang C H, Zhang Y H, et al. 2021. Whether land greening in different geomorphic units are beneficial to water yield in the Yellow River Basin? Ecological Indicators, 120: 106926, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li J W, Dong S C, Li Y, et al. 2022. Effects of land use change on ecosystem services in the China-Mongolia-Russia economic corridor. Journal of Cleaner Production, 360: 132175, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li J Y, Chen H X, Zhang C. 2020. Impacts of climate change on key soil ecosystem services and interactions in Central Asia. Ecological Indicators, 116: 106490, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li J Y, Chen X, Kurban A, et al. 2021. Coupled SSPs-RCPs scenarios to project the future dynamic variations of water-soil-carbon-biodiversity services in Central Asia. Ecological Indicators, 129: 107936, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107936.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li J Y, Zhang C. 2021. Exploring the relationship between key ecosystem services and socioecological drivers in alpine basins: A case of Issyk-Kul Basin in Central Asia. Global Ecology and Conservation, 29: e01729, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li S X, Liu Y, Yang H, et al. 2021. Integrating ecosystem services modeling into effectiveness assessment of national protected areas in a typical arid region in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 297: 113408, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113408.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li Z H, Deng X Z, Jin G, et al. 2020. Tradeoffs between agricultural production and ecosystem services: A case study in Zhangye, Northwest China. Science of The Total Environment, 707: 136032, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136032.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu C Y, Dong X F, Liu Y Y. 2015. Changes of NPP and their relationship to climate factors based on the transformation of different scales in Gansu, China. CATENA, 125: 190–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu R R, Dong X B, Wang X C, et al. 2021. Study on the relationship among the urbanization process, ecosystem services and human well-being in an arid region in the context of carbon flow: Taking the Manas river basin as an example. Ecological Indicators, 132: 108248, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorencová E, Frélichová J, Nelson E, et al. 2013. Past and future impacts of land use and climate change on agricultural ecosystem services in the Czech Republic. Land Use Policy, 33: 183–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma S, Li Y, Zhang Y H, et al. 2022. Distinguishing the relative contributions of climate and land use/cover changes to ecosystem services from a geospatial perspective. Ecological Indicators, 136: 108645, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann H B. 1945. Nonparametric tests against trend. Econometrica Journal of the Econometric Society, 13: 245–259.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • McCool D K, Foster G R, Mutchler C K, et al. 1989. Revised slope length factor for the universal soil loss equation. Transactions of American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 32(5): 1571–1576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press, 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mo K, Chen Q W, Chen C, et al. 2019. Spatiotemporal variation of correlation between vegetation cover and precipitation in an arid mountain-oasis river basin in northwest China. Journal of Hydrology, 574: 138–147.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Muleta T T, Senbeta F, Abebe T. 2016. Land use/land cover analysis and ecosystem services valuation in the central highlands of Ethiopia. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 26(2): 111–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nearing M A, Pruski F F, O’Neal M R. 2004. Expected climate change impacts on soil erosion rates: A review. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 59(1): 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson E J, Kareiva P, Ruckelshaus M, et al. 2013. Climate change’s impact on key ecosystem services and the human well-being they support in the US. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 11(9): 483–893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olorunfemi F B, Raheem U. 2013. Floods and rainstorms impacts, responses and coping among households in Ilorin, Kwara Stat. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 3(4): 135–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng J, Tian L, Zhang Z M, et al. 2020. Distinguishing the impacts of land use and climate change on ecosystem services in a karst landscape in China. Ecosystem Services, 46: 101199, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira L S, Paredes P, Eholpankulov E D, et al. 2009. Irrigation scheduling strategies for cotton to cope with water scarcity in the Fergana Valley, Central Asia. Agricultural Water Management, 96(5): 723–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrov G N, Normatov I S. 2010. Conflict of interests between water users in the Central Asian region and possible ways to its elimination. Water Resources, 37: 113–120.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Poppenborg P, Koellner T. 2013. Do attitudes toward ecosystem services determine agricultural land use practices? An analysis of farmers’ decision-making in a South Korean watershed. Land Use Policy, 31: 422–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qiu J Q, Huang T, Yu D Y. 2022. Evaluation and optimization of ecosystem services under different land use scenarios in a semiarid landscape mosaic. Ecological Indicators, 135: 108516, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qiu L, Wei X, Zhang X, et al. 2012. Soil organic carbon losses due to land use change in a semiarid grassland. Plant and Soil, 355: 299–309.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rafiei-Sardooi E, Azareh A, Shooshtari S J, et al. 2022. Long-term assessment of land-use and climate change on water scarcity in an arid basin in Iran. Ecologhical Modelling, 467: 109934, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2022.109934.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rai R, Zhang Y, Paudel B, et al. 2018. Land use and land cover dynamics and assessing the ecosystem service values in the trans-boundary Gandaki river basin, Central Himalayas. Sustainability, 10(9): 3052, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093052.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renard K G, Foster G R, Weesies G A, et al. 1997. Predicting soil erosion by water: a guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, 1–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds J F, Kemp P R, Ogle K, et al. 2004. Modifying the ‘pulse-reserve’ paradigm for deserts of North America: Precipitation pulses, soil water, and plant responses. Oecologia, 141(2): 194–210.

    PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Rimal B, Sharma R, Kunwar R, et al. 2019. Effects of land use and land cover change on ecosystem services in the Koshi River Basin, Eastern Nepal. Ecosystem Services, 38: 100963, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sannigrahi S, Zhang Q, Joshi P K, et al. 2020. Examining effects of climate change and land use dynamic on biophysical and economic values of ecosystem services of a natural reserve region. Journal of Cleaner Production, 257: 120424, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shangguan W, Dai Y J, Duan Q Y, et al. 2014. A global soil data set for earth system modeling. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 6(1): 249–263.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp R, Tallis H, Ricketts T, et al. 2014. InVEST User’s Guide. The Natural Capital Project. Stanford: Stanford University. [2022-05-15]. https://naturalcapitalproject.stanford.edu/software/invest.

  • Sharpley A N, Williams J R. 1990. EPIC-Erosion/productivity impact calculator: 1. model documentation. Unites States Department of Agriculture, 1768: 1–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Su S L, Xiao R, Jiang Z L, et al. 2012. Characterizing landscape pattern and ecosystem service value changes for urbanization impacts at an eco-regional scale. Applied Geography, 34: 295–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun J, Du W P. 2017. Effects of precipitation and temperature on net primary productivity and precipitation use efficiency across China’s grasslands. GIScience & Remote Sensing, 54(6): 881–897.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun S S, Liu X P, He Y H, et al. 2020. Responses of physiological characteristics of annual C4 herbs to precipitation and wind changes in semi-arid sandy grassland, Northern China. Polish Journal of Ecology, 68(2): 121–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tao Y, Li F, Wang R S, et al. 2015. Effects of land use and cover change on terrestrial carbon stocks in urbanized areas: a study from Changzhou, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103: 651–657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trumbore S, Brando P, Hartmann H. 2015. Forest health and global change. Science, 349(6250): 814–818.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • van der Knijff J M, Jones R J A, Montanarella L. 2000. Soil erosion risk assessment in Europe. Brussels, Belgium. [2022-02-01]. https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/content/soil-erosion-risk-assessment-europe.

  • Vermeulen S J, Campbell B M, Ingram J S I. 2012. Climate change and food systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 37(1): 195–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek P M, Ehrlich P R, Ehrlich A H, et al. 1986. Human appropriation of the products of photosynthesis. Bioscience, 36(6): 368–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek P M, Mooney H A, Lubchenco J, et al. 1997. Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science, 277(5325): 494–499.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel E, Donat M G, Alexander L V, et al. 2019. The effects of climate extremes on global agricultural yields. Environmental Research Letters, 14(5): 054010, doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab154b.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang J, Rich P M, Price K P. 2003. Temporal responses of NDVI to precipitation and temperature in the central Great Plains, USA. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 24(11): 2345–2364.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S J, Liu Z T, Chen Y X, et al. 2021. Factors influencing ecosystem services in the Pearl River Delta, China: Spatiotemporal differentiation and varying importance. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 168: 105477, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei H J, Fan W G, Wang X C, et al. 2017. Integrating supply and social demand in ecosystem services assessment: a review. Ecosystem Services, 25: 15–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiskopf S R, Rubenstein M A, Crozier L G, et al. 2020. Climate change effects on biodiversity, ecosystems, ecosystem services, and natural resource management in the United States. Science of The Total Environment, 733: 137782, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137782.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Wu D D, Xie X H, Tong J X, et al. 2020. Sensitivity of vegetation growth to precipitation in a typical afforestation area in the Loess Plateau: Plant-Water Coupled Modelling. Ecological Modelling, 430: 109128, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu X L, Liu W, Scanlon B R, et al. 2013. Local and global factors controlling water-energy balances within the Budyko framework. Geophysical Research Letters, 40(23): 6123–6129.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Yang S T, Yu X Y, Ding J L, et al. 2017. A review of water issues research in Central Asia. Acta Geographica Sinica, 72(1): 79–93. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu Y, Chen X, MALIK I, et al. 2021. Spatiotemporal changes in water, land use, and ecosystem services in Central Asia considering climate changes and human activities. Journal of Arid Land, 13(9): 881–890.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yue D X, Zhou Y Y, Guo J J, et al. 2022. Ecosystem service evaluation and optimisation in the Shule River Basin, China. CATENA, 215: 106320, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2022.106320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang H M, Yang Q K, Li R, et al. 2013. Extension of a GIS procedure for calculating the RUSLE equation LS factor. Computers & Geosciences, 52: 177–188.

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y S, Lu X, Liu B Y, et al. 2021. Spatial relationships between ecosystem services and socioecological drivers across a large-scale region: a case study in the Yellow River Basin. Science of The Total Environment, 766: 142480, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142480.

    CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou J, Fu B J, Gao G Y, et al. 2016. Effects of precipitation and restoration vegetation on soil erosion in a semi-arid environment in the Loess Plateau, China. CATENA, 137: 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu W Q, Pan Y Z, Zhang J S. 2007. Estimation of net primary productivity of Chinese terrestrial vegetation based on remote sensing. Journal of Plant Ecology, 31(3): 413–424. (in Chinese)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Pan-Third Pole Environment Study for a Green Silk Road (Pan-TPE) (XDA2004030202).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi, 830011, China

    Xue Yan & Lanhai Li

  2. Ili Station for Watershed Ecosystem Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xinyuan, 835800, China

    Xue Yan & Lanhai Li

  3. CAS Research Centre for Ecology and Environment of Central Asia, Urumqi, 830011, China

    Lanhai Li

  4. Xinjiang Key Laboratory of Water Cycle and Utilization in Arid Zone, Urumqi, 830011, China

    Lanhai Li

  5. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China

    Lanhai Li

Authors
  1. Xue Yan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lanhai Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lanhai Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yan, X., Li, L. Spatiotemporal characteristics and influencing factors of ecosystem services in Central Asia. J. Arid Land 15, 1–19 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-022-0074-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-022-0074-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation