Integrating Land Use, Ecosystem Service, and Human Well-Being: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Global change, population growth, and urbanization have been exerting a severe influence on the environment, including the social system and ecosystem. To find solutions based on nature, clarifying the complicated mechanisms and feedback among land use/land cover changes, ecosystem services, and human well-being, is increasingly crucial. However, the in-depth linkages among these three elements have not been clearly and systematically illustrated, present research paths have not been summarized well, and the future research trends on this topic have not been reasonably discussed. In this sense, the purpose of this paper is to provide an insight into how land use/land cover changes, ecosystem services, and human well-being are linked, as well as their relationships, interacting ways, applications in solving ecological and socioeconomic problems, and to reveal their future research trends. Here, we use a systematic literature review of the peer-reviewed literature to conclude the state of the art and the progress, emphasize the hotspot, and reveal the future trend of the nexus among the three aspects. Results show that (1) ecosystem services are generally altered by the changes in land use type, spatial pattern, and intensity; (2) the nexus among land use change, ecosystem services, and human well-being is usually used for supporting poverty alleviation, ecosystem health, biodiversity conservation, and sustainable development; (3) future research on land use/land cover changes, ecosystem services, and human well-being should mainly focus on strengthening multiscale correlation, driving force analysis, the correlation among different group characteristics, land use types and ecosystem service preferences, and the impact of climate change on ecosystem services and human well-being. This study provides an enhanced understanding of the nexus among the three aspects and a reference for future studies to mitigate the relevant problems.

Spatio-Temporal Differences in Economic Security of the Prefecture-Level Cities in Qinghai–Tibet Plateau Region of China: Based on a Triple-Dimension Analytical Framework of Economic Geography

“…This paper selects the per capita income of urban residents and rural residents as two secondary indicators. Due to the data availability, instead of health expenditure, the number of local medical and health beds is used to measure the health level [ 47 ].…”

“…As part of human capital, health level affects an individual’s unemployment risk [ 41 , 42 ], the level and stability of his/her household income [ 43 ], expenditure on human capital, and other aspects of human well-being [ 44 ], which consequently becomes a key determinant of regional labor productivity [ 45 ]. Health level can also promote the prosperity of the local economy in various ways [ 46 ], and it is considered a component of human well-being [ 47 ]. Therefore, it deserves attention to guarantee the security and stability of the regional economy.…”

Analysis of the Coupled Assessment of Ecosystem Health and Its Spatial and Temporal Evolution in Fujian China

“…need a new type of environment-friendly ecosystem that is in between the historical ecosystem and the man-made ecosystem to meet the challenges of the coupled social-economic-environmental sustainable development [1]. It is obvious that Lao Tzu's "The Way of Nature" is no longer sufficient to describe the natural world today, and the simple call to return to nature can no longer conceal the impact of human beings on nature [2]. Economic development and ecological protection are equally important, but how to deal with the complex ecological challenges brought about by the process of economic development has also become a key issue that requires attention.…”

“…Since the 1970s, the evaluation of ecosystem health has gradually become a hot topic of research in domestic and international academia, and the number of studies related to ecosystem health has gradually increased, but most of the studies only assessed ecosystem health qualitatively or quantitatively based on a single dimension or a specific dimension, such as the use of Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) [3][4][5], Leaf Area Index (LAI) [6,7] and Net Primary Productivity (NPP) [6,7]. Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) [2,4,5], Leaf Area Index (LAI) [6,7], and Net Primary Productivity (NPP) [8] to assess vegetation growth; urban heat island monitoring based on surface temperature detection in the thermal infrared band of remote sensing images [9]; and construction of various drought indices to assess regional drought conditions [10][11][12]. Due to the complexity of ecosystems, a single index often does not provide a comprehensive and effective assessment and description of ecosystems [13].…”

Socioeconomic outcomes of ecological restoration projects and parallel policies: A case‐study of the agro‐pastoral ecotone in northern China

“…In detail, the implementation of ERPs tends to change rural livelihood assets directly or indirectly, and farmers will respond to changes in livelihood assets in a timely manner by adjusting their livelihood activities, such as changing agricultural activities, migration, and so forth (Lan et al, 2021; Wu et al, 2017). Therefore, the socioeconomic outcomes of ERPs are tied to the rural livelihood stability and wellbeing of the residents (Erbaugh & Oldekop, 2018; Liu et al, 2022; Pritchard, 2021). Moreover, changing rural livelihoods may have further feedback effects on the ecosystem, and such interactive processes in the social‐ecological system are also important for the effectiveness of ERPs (Börner et al, 2017; Qiu & Peng, 2022; Wu, Wang, et al, 2021).…”