Marine ecological and environmental health assessment using the pressure-state-response framework at different spatial scales, China

Yang, Wei; Zhang, Ziyue; Sun, Tao; Liu, Haifei; Shao, Dongdong

doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106965

Cited by 29 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the study showed that about 91% and 9% of the watershed are classified as relatively healthy and relatively unhealthy, and also the results of the ecological security index showed that about 41% of the area is classified as relatively unhealthy. Additionally, Zhang et al (2023) used pressure (P), state (S), and response (R) indices to examine urban ecological resilience. Economic structure (response index), resilience (state index), and morphological resilience (pressure index) were employed in this study to assess resilience.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over 64% and 58% of the watershed's area was in relatively healthy conditions and moderate ecological security, accordingly. Recently, Zhang et al (2023) used the PSR model to assess China's ecological security condition thoroughly. The results revealed that the pressure index was the greatest and the state index was the lowest of the assessment indices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Flood‐oriented watershed health and ecological security conceptual modeling using pressure, state, and response (PSR) approach for the Sharghonj Watershed, South Khorasan Province, Iran

Chamani,

Sadeghi,

Zare

et al. 2023

Natural Resource Modeling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today, watersheds have changed under the influence of various environmental and human factors, and their expected performance has decreased in terms of meeting human needs, providing natural responses, and reducing environmental risks. However, evaluating health status and its impact on various factors has not been given enough attention. To this end, an attempt has been made to evaluate the health and ecological security of the sub‐watersheds of the Sharghonj Watershed using the pressure‐state‐response approach emphasizing flood‐related issues in the region. Towards that, 21 preliminary hydrological, anthropogenic, natural, and climatic criteria were selected. The preliminary variables were then finalized based on the results of the collinearity test and the data availability. The final variables were appropriately allocated to pressure, state, and response indices, and associated health and ecological security indices were determined at the sub‐watershed scale. The results showed that the pressure, state, and response ranged from 0.56 to 0.86, 0.46 to 0.84, and 0.35 to 0.96, respectively. Health and ecological security also varied from 0.53 to 0.83 and 0.27 to 1.01 in different sub‐watersheds. Eventually, the weighted mean pressure, state, and response indices for the Sharghonj Watershed were 0.72, 0.67, and 0.73, respectively. The weighted mean health and ecological security indices were 0.70 and 0.68, respectively. The research results indicated that the dynamic of various variables related to floods considerably affects the health of the Sharghonj Watershed. It could be concluded from the results that the Sharghonj Watershed is highly flood‐susceptible, whose health and ecological security status was mainly controlled by the damages due to the destruction of residences and orchards by floods in the past years. The results of the current study provide an appropriate roadmap to the decision makers and planners for the better management of the watershed resources in the region through allocating adequate financial support and implementation measures to priority sub‐watersheds.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flood‐oriented watershed health and ecological security conceptual modeling using pressure, state, and response (PSR) approach for the Sharghonj Watershed, South Khorasan Province, Iran

Chamani,

Sadeghi,

Zare

et al. 2023

Natural Resource Modeling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is evident that the larger the R * , the higher the resilience of the urban Infrastructure. Meanwhile, based on Maurya et al [38] and Wei Yang et al [53], the U preesure/state/response and R * were divided into five stages by the Non-equidistant division method in this study, as show in Table 1.…”

Section: Three-stage Resilience Level Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Urban Infrastructure Resilience via Pressure-State-Response Framework in Four Chinese Municipalities

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban infrastructure (UI), subject to ever-increasing stresses from artificial activities of human beings and natural disasters due to climate change, assumes a key role in modern cities for maintaining their functional operations. Therefore, understanding UI resilience turns essential. Based on the Pressure-State-Response (PSR) model, this paper built a comprehensive evaluation index system for urban infrastructure resilience evaluation. Four municipalities, including Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing in China, were selected for the case study, given their specific significance in terms of geographical location and urban infrastructure scale. Temporal differences of UI resilience in those four cities during 2002–2018 were explored. The results showed that: (1) The various stages of PSR relative importance for the urban infrastructure resilience development in the four cities were different. The infrastructure status, primarily resource environmental benefit, had the most significant effect on urban infrastructure resilience, accounting for 38.73%. (2) While Shanghai ranked first, the levels of urban infrastructure resilience in four cities were generally poor in 2002–2018 with continuously low resilience. (3) Significant differences were found in the resilience levels associated with the three stages of pressure, state and response failing to form a positive development cycle, with the poorest pressure resilience. This paper puts forward some recommendations for providing scientific support for urban resilient infrastructure development in four municipalities in China.

show abstract

“…Regarding the use of evaluation methods, the current EIA of the ecological restoration system is mainly based on qualitative analysis, and the ecological and economic effects of the project are evaluated through case analysis [ 18 , 19 ]. Compared with impact assessment based on complexity theory [ 20 , 21 ] and the theory of risk society [ 22 ], environmental social impact assessment (ESIA) [ 23 ] and PSR (Pressure, State, Response) [ 24 , 25 ] models, which are widely used in traditional project environmental assessment and planning environmental assessment, are not developed enough due to the lack of studies on ecological restoration effect evaluation and restoration management in ERP.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-Phase Environmental Impact Assessment of Marine Ecological Restoration Project Based on DPSIR-Cloud Model

Wang

Liu

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the environmental impact of ecological restoration projects (ERP) under the current destruction and restoration of coastal ecological areas, this paper takes into account the impact of positive and negative indicators on the environment; analyzes the positive and negative benefits of ERP; and establishes a comprehensive environmental impact index system for marine ERP from ecological, economic, and social perspectives through the DPSIR model. On this basis, the cloud model and Monte Carlo simulation are used to obtain the comprehensive assessment grade of the construction period, short-term operation, and long-term operation in the project life cycle. The results show that the benefits of ERP, considering the impact of negative factors, are significantly reduced, and the benefits of ERP will increase remarkably in the long-term operation period. In engineering practice, the environmental pressure factor caused by excessive human activities during construction and operation periods is a key negative factor affecting the overall benefits of ERP. For project decision makers and other stakeholders, the comprehensive assessment grade considering negative impacts is more practical. At the same time, decision makers should take active response measures in the framework of long-term sustainable development, set a tolerance threshold for negative pressure indicators, and strengthen the management of ERP.

show abstract

Marine ecological and environmental health assessment using the pressure-state-response framework at different spatial scales, China

Cited by 29 publications

References 47 publications

Flood‐oriented watershed health and ecological security conceptual modeling using pressure, state, and response (PSR) approach for the Sharghonj Watershed, South Khorasan Province, Iran

Flood‐oriented watershed health and ecological security conceptual modeling using pressure, state, and response (PSR) approach for the Sharghonj Watershed, South Khorasan Province, Iran

Measuring Urban Infrastructure Resilience via Pressure-State-Response Framework in Four Chinese Municipalities

Multi-Phase Environmental Impact Assessment of Marine Ecological Restoration Project Based on DPSIR-Cloud Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About