Next Article in Journal
Responses of Soil Organic Carbon Decomposition and Temperature Sensitivity to N and P Fertilization in Different Soil Aggregates in a Subtropical Forest
Previous Article in Journal
Transcriptome Analysis Reveals the Molecular Mechanisms Associated with Flower Color Formation in Camellia japonica ‘Joy Kendrick’
Previous Article in Special Issue
Assessing the Fragmentation, Canopy Loss and Spatial Distribution of Forest Cover in Kakamega National Forest Reserve, Western Kenya
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 14
Issue 1
10.3390/f14010070
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A GIS-Based Study on the Layout of the Ecological Monitoring System of the Grain for Green Project in China

by
Ke Guo
1,2,3,4,
Xiang Niu
2,3,4,* and
Bing Wang
1,2,3,4
1
School of Information Science & Technology, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China
2
Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
3
Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Environment of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
4
Dagangshan National Key Field Observation and Research Station for Forest Ecosystem, Xinyu 336600, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2023, 14(1), 70; https://doi.org/10.3390/f14010070
Submission received: 9 November 2022 / Revised: 19 December 2022 / Accepted: 23 December 2022 / Published: 30 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring, Assessment and Management of Forest Resource)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The Grain for Green Project (GGP) is an essential ecological system protection and restoration measure which can effectively improve the ecological environment. Constructing ecological monitoring system and obtaining ecological parameters can scientifically evaluate the ecological benefits of the GGP, consolidate the existing achievements, take the road of high-quality development, and promote the construction of a national ecological civilization. Firstly, an index system was constructed based on the factors driving forest ecosystem functions, involving climate (thermal and moisture conditions), vegetation types, and typical ecological zones. Then, GIS spatial analysis technology and the merging criteria index method were used to identify GGP ecological function monitoring zones. Finally, according to the scale of the project, the spatial distribution of existing stations, typical ecological zones, and the density of monitoring stations, the eco-efficiency monitoring stations, were arranged in an overall way, which constitutes the GGP ecological monitoring network. The results showed that the ecological function monitoring zones of GGP included 77 divisions, and 99 ecological monitoring stations (20 compatible level-1 stations, 31 compatible level-2 stations, 18 professional level-1 stations, and 30 professional level-2 stations) were arranged. Among them, 83 are located in national major ecosystem protection and restoration engineering areas (NMEPREA), 79 in national ecological fragile areas (NEFA), 41 in national ecological barrier areas (NEBA), and 58 in national key ecological function areas (NKEFA). The proportion of types of NMEPREA, NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA covered by monitoring is 66.7%, 100%, 100%, and 76%, respectively. The ecological monitoring system of GGP can not only meet the monitoring needs of the GGP but also effectively monitor the effectiveness of protection and restoration of typical ecological zones. In addition, this study can provide a methodological basis for other countries or ecological projects to build a more scientific and reasonable ecological monitoring system.

1. Introduction

Since the 1900s, increased human activities have led to a series of natural ecological crises, such as habitat fragmentation [1,2], invasive alien species [3,4], biodiversity loss [5,6], and climate change [7,8,9]. To repair the relationship between human beings and nature, countries around the world have launched large-scale ecological management projects, such as “ Prairie States Forestry Project” in the United States, the “Great Plan to Transform Nature” in Russia, the “Green Dam Project” in five North African countries, and the “Three North shelterbelt Project” “Natural Forest Protection and Restoration Project”, and “ Grain for Green Project (GGP)” in China. Among them, the implementation of GGP has reversed the “deforestation for land reclamation” situation that has lasted for thousands of years in China and greatly promoted the process of land greening and ecological restoration [10,11,12]. Moreover, it has played a significant role in improving the ecological environment [13,14,15], winning the battle against poverty, revitalizing the rural economy, and broadening the channels for farmers to increase their incomes [16,17]. So far, it has been more than 20 years since the implementation of GPP, which has played the ecological service functions of soil and water conservation [18,19,20], carbon sequestration and oxygen release [21,22], purification of the atmospheric environment, and wind prevention and sand fixation [18,20,23,24], with outstanding ecological benefits and steadily improving social and economic benefits [25,26,27]. Currently, at the critical period of the closing of the 13th Five-Year Plan and the opening of the 14th Five-Year Plan, improving the quality and efficiency of the GPP, taking the road of high-quality development, and establishing and improving its ecological product protection compensation system and value realization mechanism are new ideas to cope with the dual pressure of current protection and development, and the coexistence of opportunities and challenges. The realization of new ideas requires an accurate and scientific assessment of the effectiveness of engineering construction, summing up experience, and finding out the weak links in engineering construction management. However, the biggest constraint to the evaluation is the acquisition of basic ecological parameters of the GPP forest ecosystem [12,28,29]. Therefore, constructing an ecological monitoring system for GPP to obtain ecological parameters is an urgent problem to solve. It is of great significance to evaluate the effectiveness of the GPP, consolidate existing achievements, take the road of high-quality development, and contribute to constructing a national ecological civilization.
The ecological monitoring system of the GPP includes two aspects. One is the ecological function monitoring zone of the GPP with clear objectives and scientific rationality; the other is the ecological function monitoring network of the GPP with standardized, scientific, and efficient operation. Ecological zoning studies the division and combination of ecological regions and ecological units [30]. The earliest accurate ecological zoning scheme was the American Ecological Regional Map [31], compiled by American ecologists Bailey according to four grades of territory, region, province, and district. Since then, ecologists from various countries have conducted a lot of research and discussion on the principles, basis, indicators, grades, and methods of ecological zoning and formed multi-angle ecological zoning at global, national, and regional scales [32,33,34,35]. Due to the limitation of scientific research conditions, the research on natural regionalization in China started late, among which “Climate Regionalism in China” marked the beginning of modern natural regionalization in China [36]. Subsequently, many scholars have researched the law of natural geographical differentiation in China and put forward a series of zoning principles and index systems. Among the many divisions, the Integrated Natural Zoning of China [37], the Ecogeographic Regional System of China [38], the Forest Zoning of China [39], and the Vegetation Zoning of China [40,41] are more widely used. At the same time, studies on ecological zoning at different regional scales have sprung up [42,43,44,45], including the ecological zoning of typical areas of the GGP [46], but the ecological function monitoring zoning of the GGP at the national scale has not been reported.
The practice of forest ecology research shows that establishing forest ecosystem positioning observation and research stations and forming a forest ecological function monitoring network with reasonable layout, construction standards, monitoring norms, and coordination and efficiency are the most effective means to carry out forest ecological function monitoring [12]. Long-term ecosystem positioning observations have been carried out in many countries worldwide and gradually developed from individual ecological positioning stations to ecosystem positioning observation research networks. For instance, the United States Long-Term Ecological Research [47], the UK Environmental Change Network [48], the Canadian Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network [49], etc., provide data support for the study of ecology, environmental science, global climate change and impacts, sustainable development, and other essential theories and practices. In the 1950s, China began to conduct long-term ecological positioning observation research. After decades of development, the Chinese Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (CTERN) and the Chinese Ecosystem Research Network (CERN) were formed, which integrated forests, wetlands, deserts, bamboo forests, and urban ecosystems [50]. However, the two are long-term positioning observation studies on the national forest ecosystem. Although they overlap with the ecological monitoring of the GGP, they are not a monitoring network of forest ecological function of the GGP with clear orientation. At present, although the monitoring of ecological benefits of the GGP has a good working basis, it is still facing some outstanding problems, especially the insufficient number of monitoring stations. The distribution is not reasonable enough and the monitoring level is uneven and not closely integrated with the project, which makes the scientific, systematic, and comprehensive monitoring and accurate assessment of ecological benefits of the GGP still a major problem. To fully grasp and evaluate the status and dynamic changes of ecological benefits of the GGP, meet the needs of national ecological civilization construction, respond to the needs of regional policies, the decision-making needs of the Party Central Committee, the State Council and the competent authorities, and consolidate the achievements of the GGP and its high-quality development, it is urgent to plan and construct a specific monitoring network for forest ecological functions of the GGP.
Remote Sensing (RS), Geographic Information systems (GIS), and Global Positioning systems (GPS) form the “3S” technology, which is a comprehensive technology that has been flourishing in recent years [51]. It has powerful advantages in capturing, storing, querying, analyzing, and visualizing spatial data. It can obtain timely, accurate, and dynamic information on the status of resources and their changes, which is widely used in earth sciences [52,53]. Among “3S” technologies, GIS spatial analysis technology is a suitable method for ecogeographic zoning and monitoring station layout, which is of great significance to realizing dynamic monitoring and management, rational planning, and layout of terrestrial ecosystems. Given this, the author takes the implementation area of China’s GGP as the object, based on GIS technology, studies the ecological function monitoring zoning and network layout of the GGP, and constructs the ecological monitoring system of the GGP to meet the urgent needs of consolidating the achievements of the GGP, improving quality and efficiency, and establishing and improving the ecological compensation mechanism. At the same time, it can provide a methodological basis for other countries or ecological projects to build a more scientific and reasonable ecological monitoring system.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Overview of the Grain for Green Project in China

The GGP in China is to protect and improve the ecological environment and stop cultivating the sloping farmland, which can easily cause soil and water loss, in a planned and step-by-step manner. At the same time, according to the principle of suitable arbor and arbor, suitable shrub and shrub, suitable grass and arbor, shrub and grass, afforestation, and grass planting are adapted to local conditions to restore forest and grass vegetation [12]. Since its launch in 1999, it has gone through four stages: pilot model, full-scale launch, improvement of policy, and a new round of returning farmland to forest, covering 25 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) and Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (Figure 1), spanning from north to south across many climate zones such as cold temperate, middle temperate, warm temperate, subtropical and tropical, and widely distributed from west to east in the alpine zone of Qinghai–Tibet, arid and semi-arid areas, low mountain hilly areas, and other topographic regions. It includes rich vegetation types such as trees, shrubs, and grasses, covering three vegetation restoration modes (reforestation of fallow land, forestation of closed mountains, afforestation of desirable wasteland) and three forest species types (ecological forest, economic forest, shrub forest).
By the end of 2019, the total area of vegetation restoration of the GPP had reached 3.19 million hectares. The spatial distribution characteristics of vegetation restoration in various engineering provinces of China are shown in Table 1. The regions with higher vegetation restoration areas were Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi, Gansu, Guizhou, Sichuan, and Yunnan, accounting for 9.49%, 8.55%, 7.26%, 6.85%, 6.81%, and 6.16% of the total vegetation restoration area of the GPP, respectively. Therefore, the provinces mentioned above were the key provincial regions for implementing the GPP, and the layout of the ecological monitoring system of the GPP should be focused on.

2.2. Data Source

In this paper, the selection data of ecological monitoring system zoning layout of the GGP in China mainly include: (1) The county-level data of the implementation area of the GGP come from the National Forestry and Grassland Bureau GGP Management Center; (2) Provincial and county-level administrative division data, from the Chinese Academy of Sciences Resource and Environmental Science Data Center (https://www.resdc.cn/, accessed on 9 November 2022); (3) Ecological geographical regionalization in China, data from Study on Regional System of Ecological Geography in China [38]; (4) Primary forest zoning data from Chinese forests [39]; (5) The national important ecosystem protection and restoration major project(NMEPREA) data, from the national forestry and grassland bureau [54]; (6) The national ecological fragile area (NEFA) data, from Outline of National Ecological Fragile Area Protection Plan [55]; (7) The data of national ecological barrier area (NEBA) and national key ecological function areas (NKEFA) are all from National Major Functional Area Planning [56].

2.3. Research Methods

2.3.1. Index System and Vectorization

The ecological monitoring zoning of the GGP is the basis for scientifically arranging the monitoring stations of the GGP and forming a monitoring system that meets the needs of ecological function monitoring and ecological benefit evaluation of the GGP, the key to which lies in the rationality of the construction of the index system.
  • Climate indicators
Climate is the most critical resource and limiting condition for vegetation growth and geographical distribution [57,58,59]. The climatic factors affecting the forest ecological function of the GGP mainly include two categories, namely heat conditions (annual average temperature, extreme minimum and maximum temperature, January average temperature, July average temperature, frost-free yearly period, accumulated temperature ≥ 10 °C, and accumulated temperature ≥ 10 °C days) and water conditions (annual precipitation, relative humidity). In the heat condition, the accumulated temperature value of ≥10 °C and the accumulated temperature days of ≥10 °C are important for plant growth and development. Therefore, the primary heat indexes selected in this study are the accumulated temperature value of ≥10 °C and the accumulated temperature days of ≥10 °C. Water conditions are affected by annual precipitation and relative humidity and are regulated by evapotranspiration. However, the dry–wet index combines the two factors of regional annual precipitation and evapotranspiration, so it was selected in this study to characterize the water conditions.
China’s eco-geographical regionalization comprehensively reflects the climatic conditions of the whole country [38], and the climatic indicators used in this study are consistent with them. Therefore, the regionalization results also reflect the climatic conditions of the implementation area of the GGP, which can be used as climatic indicators in this study. However, China’s eco-geographical regionalization is raster data. It is necessary to obtain the climate vector layer by defining projection, geometric correction, and vectorization.
2.
Forest vegetation indicators
China Forest Zoning combines the natural distribution of forest types and the characteristics of the natural geographical environment of major forests in China [39], dividing China’s forests into two levels, fully reflecting the regional distribution characteristics of forests in China. The first-class area reflects the large physical geographic area and the consistency of physical geographic, environmental characteristics, and regional forest vegetation in a larger spatial area. The boundary line is a relatively complete geographical area, generally in large geomorphic units as a unit, and the natural boundary of large geomorphology is prioritized. The secondary zone, namely ‘forest region’, reflects the spatial consistency of the smaller and more specific physical geographical environment, generally in natural watersheds or mountain systems, bounded by the boundaries of watersheds and mountain systems. Due to the particularity of the weak correlation between the GGP and regional vegetation, the first-level division of forest zoning in China is more suitable for the ecological function monitoring division of the GGP. It can not only reflect the geographical area where the vegetation of the GGP is located but can also contain the topography and soil distribution characteristics closely related to the growth and development of vegetation.
3.
Typical ecological zones
Typical ecological zones are crucial areas for national ecological security, fragile ecological environment, and urgent restoration, as well as the main implementation areas of the GGP. Therefore, this study selects NMEPREA, NEFA [55], NEBA, and NKEFA [56] as typical ecological zones indicators. Among them, NMEPREA is text-based data, so it is necessary to add “NMEPREA” attribute information based on the national county-level administrative division vector data and obtain the “NMEPREA” vector layer after merging the same attributes. The NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA are raster data which need to be preprocessed by defining projection, geometric correction, and vectorization to obtain the vector layers of NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA.
In addition, due to the spatial overlap of typical ecological zones such as the NMEPREA, NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA, areas with multiple typical ecological zones are prioritized according to the strength of the correlation with the GGP (NMEPREA > NEFA > NEBA > NKEFA).

2.3.2. Methods for Ecological Function Monitoring Zoning of the GGP

  • Overlapping Analysis
Overlay analysis is commonly used to extract spatially implied information based on spatial hierarchy theory, where data layers representing different topics are overlaid to produce a new data level, and the results combine the attributes possessed by elements of multiple levels [60]. In the layout of the ecological monitoring system of the GGP, the basic layer of ecological function monitoring zoning of the GGP is obtained by overlaying and analyzing the vector layers such as climate, primary forest zoning, and typical ecological zones.
2.
Merging Criteria Index Method
The basic layers of ecological monitoring zoning obtained by overlay analysis do not all meet the requirements and conditions of becoming an independent ecological function monitoring area. It is necessary to use the Merging Criteria Index (MCI) to quantitatively determine whether the area is cut or merged into the area adjacent to the longest edge by the principle of long-edge merger [61]. After merging the broken areas, the ecological function monitoring zoning of the GGP was obtained.

2.3.3. Layout Basis of Monitoring Station for the GGP

Based on the ecological function monitoring zone of the GGP, the area of the GGP was taken as an important basis while considering various factors such as the representativeness of the zone, the level of ecological station construction and research, and the spatial layout of ecological stations. The monitoring stations of the GGP were laid out in each ecological function monitoring unit zone. In addition to monitoring the GGP, ecological stations, which also consider national forest ecosystem monitoring and other ecological engineering monitoring tasks, are called compatible monitoring stations. The monitoring station that only monitors the project’s forest ecological function is called the professional monitoring station.
  • Ecological Functional Zoning of the GGP
The ecological function zoning of the GGP reflects the spatial differences of the GGP. Different zones represent different climates, topography, and key ecological functions. Therefore, the layout of the ecological function monitoring station of the zoning must be based on the ecological zoning of the zoning to realize the full coverage of the ecological zoning units in the key areas of the zoning to meet the ecological function monitoring of the GGP in different climatic regions and different ecological functional areas.
2.
Area for the Implementation of GGP
The network layout of the monitoring station for the GGP should be based on the area of the GGP, according to the provincial, municipal, and county level consideration, to achieve full coverage of the province of the GGP monitoring. There is a large gap in the GGP’s area nationwide (Figure 1). Considering the spatial balance of the monitoring station layout, it is not suitable to consider the area of the GGP in China at the same level. Therefore, this layout takes the provincial level as a unit and uses the natural discontinuity point classification method in ArcGIS to divide the county-level GGP in each province into three levels: high-intensity GGP area, medium-intensity GGP area, and low-intensity GGP area (Figure 2, Table 2). According to the ecological zoning of the GGP and the classification results of the GGP intensity of each province, the ecological function monitoring stations of the GGP were arranged. In particular, the provinces, cities, and counties with a large scale of the GGP (the top ranking of the GGP) have a priority layout.
3.
The spatial distribution of the existing ecological stations
The layout is based on the existing ecological stations to select and plan to build the monitoring station of the GPP, so it must be based on the spatial distribution of the existing ecological stations. If the forest ecological station has been built in the ecological division unit of the GPP, the monitoring station of the GPP should be arranged in a suitable region based on the existing ecological station, considering the strength of the GGP and the spatial distance of the built ecological station.
4.
Typical ecological zones
Within the ecological division unit of the GPP, the area of the GPP is large, and it is in the regional key layout of NMEPREA, NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA. In addition, the Yangtze River Basin and the Yellow River Basin are the key areas of the GPP and should focus on layout.
5.
Monitoring station layout density
The layout of monitoring stations for the ecological function of the GPP should also consider the orientation and distance between stations and control the density of stations. That is, if there were multiple high-intensity GPP areas in the ecological division unit of the GPP, the above factors should be comprehensively considered, and the monitoring stations should not be repeated to control the density of stations. Finally, by the implementation area of GGP, the importance of the location, the typicality of the forest ecosystem, the scientific research strength of the ecological station, and other factors in accordance with the importance of the largest to small, compatible monitoring stations, and professional monitoring stations are divided into level-1 stations and level-2 stations. The level-1 stations have strong regional typicality and a certain demonstration and leading role. In addition to satisfying the demand for the observation of ecological parameters, it can follow the frontier of ecological research and answer the major scientific questions of ecological construction; the level-2 stations only need to complete the observation of ecological indicators to obtain ecological parameters.

3. Results

3.1. Ecological Function Monitoring Zoning of the GGP

The ecological function monitoring zoning of the GGP is shown in Figure 3 (See Table 3 for the meaning of codes in legend names), which includes 77 ecological function monitoring unit areas of the GGP. The naming method is the first-level area of forest zoning + climate area + typical ecological zones in China. Among them, there are 8 in Northeast China, 10 in North China, 16 in East central and south China, 2 in Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau, 3 in South China, 6 in the southwest alpine canyon area, 4 in forest-steppe and grassland area in eastern Inner Mongolia, 13 in Meng-Xin desert semi-desert area, and 15 in grassland meadow and the cold desert area of Qinghai–Tibet Plateau.
In addition, among the ecological function monitoring units of the project, 88.31%, 70.13%, 69.53%, and 89.61% are in NMEPREA, NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA, respectively (refers to all or part of the monitoring area of the ecological function of the GGP). Different ecological function monitoring unit areas of the GGP have different climates, topography, and soil conditions, and the ecological functions of forest ecosystems are significantly different. In addition, different typical ecological zones have different ecological needs for regional development. Therefore, the layout of the monitoring station based on this zoning can not only comprehensively monitor the GGP areas with different ecological functions but can also meet the monitoring needs of different typical ecological zones.
Forests 14 00070 g003 550
Figure 3. Ecological function monitoring zone and monitoring station layout of the Grain for Green Project (See Table 3 for the meaning of codes in legend names).
Figure 3. Ecological function monitoring zone and monitoring station layout of the Grain for Green Project (See Table 3 for the meaning of codes in legend names).
Forests 14 00070 g003
Table
Table 3. The meaning of codes in the names of ecological function zones of GGP.
Table 3. The meaning of codes in the names of ecological function zones of GGP.
Code1. NameCode2. Name
ANortheast ChinaFSouthwest alpine canyon area
BEast central and south ChinaGForest steppe and grassland area in eastern Inner Mongolia
CSouth ChinaHSemi-desert area in Meng-Xin desert
DYunnan–Guizhou Plateau areaIGrassland meadow and cold desert area in Qinghai–Tibet Plateau
ESouth China area
ICold temperate zoneVISouth subtropical zone
IIMiddle temperate zoneVIIMarginal tropical zone
IIIWarm temperate zoneVIIIMiddle tropical zone
IVNorth subtropical zoneIXPlateau subtropical zone
VMiddle subtropical zoneXPlateau temperate zone
aHumid zonecSemi-arid zone
bSemi-humid zonedArid zone
1Forest ecological conservation area of Xing’an Mountains in northeast forest belt20Nanling mountain forest and biodiversity conservation area in southern hilly and mountainous belt
2Changbai Mountain forest ecological conservation area in northeast forest belt21Ecologically fragile area of hilly and mountainous red soil in south China
3Protection and restoration area of important wetlands in Sanjiang Plain and Songnen Plain of northeast forest belt22Forest and biodiversity reserve of Wuyi Mountain in southern hilly mountain belt
4Agriculture and pasture interlaced eco-fragile region in north China23Typical coastal wetland ecosystem protection and restoration area of Beibu gulf in the coastal zone
5Ecological protection and restoration area of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei coordinated development in northern sand-prevention belt24Hainan island tropical ecosystem protection and restoration area in the coastal belt
6Comprehensive control area of soil and water loss of Huangtu Plateau in key ecological area of Yellow River25Ecological protection and restoration area of southeast Tibetan Plateau in Qinghai–Tibet Plateau ecological barrier area
7Integrated ecological remediation and restoration area of Yellow Sea and Bohai Sea in coastal zone26Water conservation and biodiversity conservation area in Hengduan mountain area of a key eco-region of the Yangtze River
8Ecological protection and restoration area of lower Yellow River in key ecological areas of Yellow River27Ruoergai-Gannan grassland wetland ecological protection and restoration area in Qinghai–Tibet plateau ecological barrier area
9Ecologically fragile areas in coastal water–land transition zone28Ecological protection and restoration area of Inner Mongolia Plateau in northern sand-prevention belt
10Ecological protection and restoration area of Qinling Mountain in key ecological area of Yellow River29Ecological protection and restoration area of Helan Mountain in key ecological area of Yellow River
11 *Ecological restoration area of water source in South-to-North Water Diversion Project30Forest and grassland reserves of Tianshan and Altai Mountain in northern sand-prevention belt
12biodiversity conservation and ecological restoration Area of the Daba Mountains in key eco-region of the Yangtze River31Ecological protection and restoration area of Hexi Corridor in key ecological area of Yellow River
13Dabieshan-Huangshan soil and water conservation and ecological restoration area in the key ecological region of Yangtze River32Qilian Mountain ecological protection and restoration area in Qinghai–Tibet Plateau ecological barrier area
14Poyang Lake, Dongting Lake, and other river and Lake wetland protection and restoration areas in the key ecological zone of Yangtze River33Ecological protection and restoration area of Qiangtang Plateau-Altun grassland desert in northwest Tibet, ecological barrier area of Qinghai–Tibet Plateau
15Rocky desertification ecologically fragile area in karst southwest China34Ecological restoration area of Tarim River Basin in key ecological area of Yellow River
16Ecological comprehensive control area of three gorges reservoir area in key ecological region of Yangtze River35Northwest desert oasis intersection ecologically fragile area
17Biodiversity protection zone in the Wuling Mountains, a key ecological zone of the Yangtze River36Afforestation and renovation area of ‘Two Rivers and Four Rivers‘ in Tibet, ecological barrier area of Qinghai–Tibet Plateau
18Comprehensive management area of stone desertification in karst areas in the upper and middle reaches of Yangtze River in the key ecological zone of Yangtze River37Ecological protection and restoration area of Sanjiangyuan in Qinghai–Tibet Plateau ecological barrier area
19Comprehensive control area of rocky desertification in Hunan—Guangxi karst area of southern hilly mountainous belt
Note * Represents a special ecological zone.

3.2. Layout of Ecological Monitoring System of the GGP

A total of 99 monitoring stations are arranged in the layout of the ecological monitoring system of the GGP, as shown in Table 4 and Figure 3. Among them, there are 10 in Northeast China, 21 in North China, 27 in East central and south China, 11 in Yunnan–Guizhou plateau, 4 in South China, 8 in the southwest alpine canyon area, 8 in forest and grassland area in eastern Inner Mongolia, 7 in Meng-Xin desert and semi-desert area, and 3 in Qinghai–Tibet plateau meadow and desert area. There are 51 compatible monitoring stations and 48 professional monitoring stations. In compatible monitoring stations, there are 20 level-1 station and 31 level-2 stations. Of the professional monitoring stations, there are 18 level-1 stations and 30 level-2 stations.
In addition, 83 of the ecological monitoring stations of the GGP were in NMEPREA in China, of which 41% were level-1 stations (Figure 4). Overall, 79 monitoring stations were in NEFA, of which 39% were level-1 stations (Figure 5). There were 41 monitoring stations in NEBA, of which 41% were level-1 stations (Figure 6). There were 58 monitoring stations in NKEFA, of which 41% were level-1 stations (Figure 7). Therefore, the layout of the ecological monitoring system of the project can effectively monitor the GGP located in the typical ecological zones.

4. Discussion

4.1. Effectiveness Analysis of Monitoring Station Layout

In this study, the zoning index system of the GGP was constructed by comprehensively considering the factors such as temperature, moisture, topography, soil, vegetation, and ecological function, and the layout method of monitoring stations was put forward according to the factors such as vegetation restoration characteristics of GGP, the spatial distribution of established ecological stations, and location importance. Then, based on the ecological function monitoring zoning and monitoring station layout method of the GGP, the ecological monitoring system of the GGP was constructed using GIS spatial analysis technology.
According to this layout system, the full coverage monitoring of the GGP can be realized. The monitoring stations of the GGP are in the areas with high intensity of the GGP, which highlights the close integration of layout and GGP. The layout number of monitoring stations in the ecological function monitoring area of GGP is consistent with the implementation scale of GGP. The layout monitoring stations in southeast China are the most (27), accounting for 27% of the total number of stations. The number of layout monitoring stations in North China ranked second (21), accounting for 21% of the total number of stations. This was followed by the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau area (11), northeast area (10), southwest alpine canyon area (8), eastern Inner Mongolia forest grassland and grassland area (8), Mongolia–Xinjiang desert semi-desert area (7), South China area (4) and Qinghai–Tibet Plateau grassland meadow and cold desert area (3), accounting for 11%, 10%, 8%, 8%, 7%, 4%, and 3% of the total number of stations.
Among the ecological function monitoring zoning of the GGP, the most layout monitoring stations were DV(a)18, FV(a)26, GII(c)28, BIII(c)6, BIII(b)6, CV(a)17, and AII(b)4, which are 9, 6, 5, 5, 5, 4, and 4, respectively. This is mainly due to the large area of these ecological function monitoring areas, involving multiple provinces, the implementation intensity of the GGP is high (large area), and the importance of ecological location is high (mostly in ecological fragile areas), so the site layout is more.
In the layout of the ecological function monitoring station of the GGP, the construction standard of the level-1 station is the highest, and the monitoring ability is the strongest, which has a leading and radiation effect on the surrounding secondary stations. Therefore, from the level of the monitoring station, the number of the level-1 station should be less than that of the level-2 station, which only needs to meet the monitoring requirements of the basic indicators. From the analysis of the type of monitoring station, the number of professional monitoring stations should be higher than that of compatible monitoring stations in theory. In this layout, there are 38 level-1 stations, accounting for 38%, and 61 level-2 stations, accounting for 62%. There are 51 compatible monitoring stations, accounting for 51%, and 48 professional monitoring stations, accounting for 48%. The proportion of the two is close due to giving full play to the monitoring function of the existing ecological stations, maximizing resources, and saving funds. In addition, the proportion of types of NMEPREA, NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA covered by monitoring is 66.7%, 100%, 100%, and 76%, respectively. Overall, the layout can meet the professional monitoring of the typical ecological areas.

4.2. Prospects for Monitoring Ecological Functions of the GGP

The elements and ecological processes of GGP forest ecosystems are spatially unevenly distributed with complex and variable spatio-temporal sequences. Human activities and their interactions with the ecosystem are characterized by spatial heterogeneity in distribution, resulting in significant spatial heterogeneity in their ecological functions. The ecological function monitoring network of GGP provides the possibility to accurately quantify the spatially heterogeneous characteristics of GGP ecological benefits, which is important for revealing the GGP spatial and temporal variations of ecological benefits and the formulation of vegetation restoration measures and high-quality development policies. In addition, realizing the accurate quantification of GGP eco-efficiency heterogeneity is conducive to local adaptation, differentiated policy application, and classification guidance, in-depth promotion of GGP high-quality development, accurate assessment of regional GGP construction effectiveness, accelerating the transformation of green mountains into golden mountains, and helping ecological poverty alleviation and rural revitalization.
In addition, the GGP ecological function monitoring zone plan divides the national GGP implementation area into heterogeneous ecological monitoring unit zones based on vegetation, climate, soil, and typical ecological zones, which provides the basic boundary range for monitoring the ecological function benefits of GGP in typical ecological zones. The layout of the GGP ecological function monitoring network is based on the priority layout principle of typical ecological zones, which ensures the availability of GGP ecological parameters in typical ecological zones. The layout of the GGP ecological function monitoring network is based on prioritizing the layout of typical ecological zones, ensuring the availability of GGP ecological parameters in typical ecological zones. Thus, it is possible to carry out precise monitoring of ecological function benefits in typical ecological areas, plan and implement GGP according to local conditions in response to the outstanding ecological problems in typical ecological areas and effectively improve the ecological environment problems in typical ecological areas.
GGP plays a significant ecological function in improving global forest cover and plays a vital role in improving the ecological environment and mitigating climate change. China’s 14th Five-Year Plan puts forward the major strategic decision of striving to achieve a carbon peak by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060. Currently, the GGP is in a critical period of consolidating achievements, improving quality and efficiency, and establishing a long-term mechanism with great potential for carbon neutrality. Based on the GGP ecological function monitoring network, we can carry out the monitoring of the neutral carbon capacity of GGP, grasp the characteristics of the spatial and temporal dynamics of its carbon sequestration capacity, formulate measures for the precise enhancement of GGP carbon sinks, establish a positive feedback mechanism between policy and carbon sink enhancement, and better play the role of GGP in the process of carbon neutralization.

5. Conclusions

Based on the monitoring zone index system constructed by climate, vegetation type, and typical ecological zones, the implementation area of GGP is divided into 77 monitoring zones with spatial heterogeneity, among which 88.31%, 70.13%, 67.53%, and 89.61% are located or partially located in NMEPREA, NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA, respectively, which can serve the network layout of ecological monitoring stations of GGP.
The ecological function monitoring network of GGP is laid out with 99 ecological monitoring stations (20 compatible level-1 stations, 31 compatible level-2 stations, 18 professional level-1 stations, and 30 professional level-2 stations). Among them, 83 are in NMESPRE, 79 are in NEFA, 41 are in NEBA, and 58 are in NKEFA. The proportion of types of NMEPREA, NEFA, NEBA, and NKEFA covered by monitoring is 66.7%, 100%, 100%, and 76%, respectively.
The ecological monitoring system of GGP can not only accurately quantify the neutral carbon capacity of GGP and the heterogeneity of its ecological product value but also effectively monitor the effectiveness of protection and restoration of typical ecological zones, promote the high-quality development of GGP, and facilitate the construction of national ecological civilization. In addition, this study can provide a methodological basis for other countries or ecological projects to build a more scientific and reasonable ecological monitoring system.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.G., B.W. and X.N.; methodology, K.G.; software, K.G.; validation B.W. and X.N.; formal analysis, K.G.; investigation, K.G.; resources, K.G.; data curation, K.G.; writing—original draft preparation, K.G.; writing—review and editing, K.G., B.W. and X.N.; visualization, K.G.; supervision, X.N. and B.W.; project administration, X.N. and B.W.; funding acquisition, X.N. and B.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Key Research and Development Plan (No: 2021YFF0703905), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Non-profit Research Institution of CAF (CAFYBB2020ZD002, CAFYBB2020ZE003), the Ecological benefit monitoring of The Grain for Green Project, Forest resources accounting and Forestry Green Development in China.

Acknowledgments

The resource data of the GGP is provided by the State Forestry and grassland administration. We gratefully acknowledge their invaluable cooperation in this work.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sallustio, L.; De Toni, A.; Strollo, A.; Di Febbraro, M.; Gissi, E.; Casella, L.; Geneletti, D.; Munafo, M.; Vizzarri, M.; Marchetti, M. Assessing habitat quality in relation to the spatial distribution of protected areas in Italy. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 201, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Poniatowski, D.; Stuhldreher, G.; Löffler, F.; Fartmann, T. Patch occupancy of grassland specialists: Habitat quality matters more than habitat connectivity. Biol. Conserv. 2018, 225, 237–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Haddad, N.M.; Brudvig, L.A.; Clobert, J.; Davies, K.F.; Gonzalez, A.; Holt, R.D.; Lovejoy, T.E.; Sexton, J.O.; Austin, M.P.; Collins, C.D.; et al. Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth ecosystems. Sci. Adv. 2015, 1, e1500052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Newbold, T.; Hudson, L.N.; Hill, S.L.; Contu, S.; Lysenko, I.; Senior, R.A.; Borger, L.; Bennett, D.J.; Choimes, A.; Collen, B.; et al. Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 2015, 520, 45–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Krauss, J.; Bommarco, R.; Guardiola, M.; Heikkinen, R.K.; Helm, A.; Kuussaari, M.; Lindborg, R.; Ockinger, E.; Partel, M.; Pino, J.; et al. Habitat fragmentation causes immediate and time-delayed biodiversity loss at different trophic levels. Ecol. Lett. 2010, 13, 597–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Wilson, M.C.; Chen, X.; Corlett, R.T.; Didham, R.K.; Ding, P.; Holt, R.D.; Holyoak, M.; Hu, G.; Hughes, A.C.; Jiang, L.; et al. Habitat fragmentation and biodiversity conservation: Key findings and future challenges. Landsc. Ecol. 2015, 31, 219–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Moore, J.W.; Schindler, D.E. Getting ahead of climate change for ecological adaptation and resilience. Science 2022, 376, 1421–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Popkin, G. How much can forests fight climate change? Nature 2019, 565, 280–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Lawrence, D.; Coe, M.; Walker, W.; Verchot, L.; Vandecar, K. The Unseen Effects of Deforestation: Biophysical Effects on Climate. Front. For. Glob. Chang. 2022, 5, 756115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wang, W.; Sun, L.; Luo, Y. Changes in Vegetation Greenness in the Upper and Middle Reaches of the Yellow River Basin over 2000–2015. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zinda, J.A.; Trac, C.J.; Zhai, D.; Harrell, S. Dual-function forests in the returning farmland to forest program and the flexibility of environmental policy in China. Geoforum 2017, 78, 119–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Wang, B.; Gao, P.; Niu, X.; Sun, J. Policy-driven China’s Grain to Green Program: Implications for ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 2017, 27, 38–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Yang, Z.; Han, H.; Zhao, Q. Soil erosion control degree of the project of converting farmland to forest in mountainous areas at China’s southwest border: A case study in Mangshi, Yunnan Province. J. Mt. Sci. 2011, 8, 845–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zhu, L.; Liu, X.; Wu, L.; Tang, Y.; Meng, Y. Long-Term Monitoring of Cropland Change near Dongting Lake, China, Using the LandTrendr Algorithm with Landsat Imagery. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 1234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Hu, T.; Li, X.; Gong, P.; Yu, W.; Huang, X. Evaluating the effect of plain afforestation project and future spatial suitability in Beijing. Sci. China Earth Sci. 2020, 63, 1587–1598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Treacy, P.; Jagger, P.; Song, C.; Zhang, Q.; Bilsborrow, R.E. Impacts of China’s grain for green program on migration and household income. Environ. Manag. 2018, 62, 489–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yue, Y.; Liao, C.; Tong, X.; Wu, Z.; Fensholt, R.; Prishchepov, A.; Jepsen, M.R.; Wang, K.; Brandt, M. Large scale reforestation of farmlands on sloping hills in South China karst. Landsc. Ecol. 2020, 35, 1445–1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhou, Z.C.; Gan, Z.T.; Shangguan, Z.P.; Dong, Z.B. China’s Grain for Green Program has reduced soil erosion in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River and the middle reaches of the Yellow River. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2009, 16, 234–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Deng, L.; Shangguan, Z.p.; Li, R. Effects of the grain-for-green program on soil erosion in China. Int. J. Sediment Res. 2012, 27, 120–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. An, W.; Li, Z.; Wang, S.; Wu, X.; Lu, Y.; Liu, G.; Fu, B. Exploring the effects of the “Grain for Green” program on the differences in soil water in the semi-arid Loess Plateau of China. Ecol. Eng. 2017, 107, 144–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chen, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Wan, C. Carbon sequestration potential of the stands under the Grain for Green Program in Yunnan Province, China. For. Ecol. Manag. 2009, 258, 199–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhang, K.; Dang, H.; Tan, S.; Cheng, X.; Zhang, Q. Change in soil organic carbon following the ‘Grain-for-Green’ programme in China. Land Degrad. Dev. 2010, 21, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Mu, L.; Liang, Y.; Han, R. Assessment of the soil organic carbon sink in a project for the conversion of farmland to forestland: A case study in Zichang county, Shaanxi, China. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e94770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Hayashi, S.; Murakami, S.; Xu, K.Q.; Watanabe, M. Simulation of the reduction of runoff and sediment load resulting from the Gain for Green Program in the Jialingjiang catchment, upper region of the Yangtze River, China. J. Environ. Manag. 2015, 149, 126–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wang, C.; Ouyanga, H.; Maclaren, V.; Yind, Y.; Shao, B.; Boland, A.; Tiana, Y. Evaluation of the economic and environmental impact of converting cropland to forest: A case study in Dunhua county, China. J. Environ. Manag. 2007, 85, 746–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gao, Y.; Liu, Z.; Li, R.; Shi, Z. Long-Term Impact of China’s Returning Farmland to Forest Program on Rural Economic Development. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Shi, W.; Wang, K. Assessment of ecological, economic and social impacts of grain for green on the counties of north Shaanxi in the Loess Plateau, China: A case study of Mizhi County. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2011, 10, 15763–15769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. IUFRO (International Union of Forestry Research Organizations). International Guidelines for Forest Monitoring: 5; IUFRO WorldSeries; IUFRO: Vienna, Austria, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  29. Wang, B.; Niu, X.; Jiang, Y.; Guo, Q.; Liu, S.; Yang, F.; Song, Q. Observation Index System for Long-Term Forest Ecosystem Research (GB/T35377—2017); Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  30. Liu, Y.; Fu, B.; Wang, S.; Zhao, W. Global ecological regionalization: From biogeography to ecosystem services. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2018, 33, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bailey, R.G. Ecoregins of the United States; USDA Forest Service: Ogden, UT, USA, 1976.
  32. Bailey, R.G. Delineation of ecosystem regions. Environ. Manag. 1983, 7, 365–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Bailey, R.G.; Zoltai, S.C.; Wiken, E.B. Ecological Regionalization in Canada and the United States. Geoforum 1985, 16, 265–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Bailey, R.G. Problems with using overlay mapping for planning and their implications for geographic information systems. Environ. Manag. 1988, 12, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zoltai, S.C.; Vitt, D.H. Canadian wetlands: Environmental gradients and classification. Vegetati 1995, 118, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Tu, C.; Lu, W. Climatic regions in China. Acta Geogr. Sin. 1936, 3, 495–528+662. [Google Scholar]
  37. Huang, B. Draft of comprehensive physical regionalization in China. Chin. Sci. Bull. 1959, 18, 594–602. [Google Scholar]
  38. Zheng, D. A Systematic Study of Ecogeographical Regions in China; The Commercial Press: Beijing, China, 2008; pp. 10–295. [Google Scholar]
  39. Wu, Z.L. Forest of China; China Forestry Press: Beijing, China, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  40. Wu, Z.Y. Vegetation of China; Science Press: Beijing, China, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  41. Zhang, X.S. Vegetation of China and Its Geographic Pattern—Illustration of the Vegetation Map of the People’s Republic of China (1:1000,000); Geological Press: Beijing, China, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wu, J.; Bai, H.; Li, J. Research on the land use strategies from ecological perspective. Water Resour. Environ. Prot. Int. Symp. 2011, 4, 2856–2859. [Google Scholar]
  43. Li, F.; Xu, M.; Liu, Q.; Wang, Z.; Xu, W. Ecological restoration zoning for a marine protected area: A case study of Haizhouwan National Marine Park, China. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2014, 98, 158–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Liu, X.; Liu, L.; Peng, Y. Ecological zoning for regional sustainable development using an integrated modeling approach in the Bohai Rim, China. Ecol. Model. 2017, 353, 158–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Chen, F.; Li, L.; Niu, J.; Lin, A.; Chen, S.; Hao, L. Evaluating Ecosystem Services Supply and Demand Dynamics and Ecological Zoning Management in Wuhan, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Liu, Z.; Wang, B.; Zhao, Y.; Niu, X. Ecoregion division of Grain for Green Project in the typical region. J. Beijing For. Univ. 2018, 40, 93–100. [Google Scholar]
  47. Hobbie, J.E.; Carpenter, S.R.; Grimm, N.B.; Gosz, J.R.; Seastedt, T.R. The US long term ecological research program. BioScience 2003, 53, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Miller, J.D.; Adamsonb, J.K.; Hirstc, D. Trends in stream water quality in environmental change network upland catchments: The first 5 years. Sci. Total Environ. 2001, 265, 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Vaughan, H.; Brydges, T.; Fenech, A.; Lumb, A. Monitoring long-term ecological changes through the ecological monitoring and assessmentnetwork: Science-based and policy relevant. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2001, 67, 3–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Niu, X.; Wang, B.; Wei, W. Chinese forest ecosystem research network: A plat form for observing and studying sustainable forestry. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2013, 11, 1008–1016. [Google Scholar]
  51. Thakur, J.K.; Singh, S.K.; Ekanthalu, V.S. Integrating remote sensing, geographic information systems and global positioning system techniques with hydrological modeling. Appl. Water Sci. 2016, 7, 1595–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Valjarević, A.; Djekić, T.; Stevanović, V.; Ivanović, R.; Jandziković, B. GIS numerical and remote sensing analyses of forest changes in the Toplica region for the period of 1953–2013. Appl. Geogr. 2018, 92, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Choi, Y.; Baek, J.; Park, S. Review of GIS-Based Applications for Mining: Planning, Operation, and Environmental Management. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 2266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Ministry of Natural Resources; National Development and Reform Commission; People’s Republic of China. Major Projects for the Protection and Restoration of National Important Ecosystems Master Plan (2021–2035). 2020. Available online: https://www.ndrc.gov.cn/xxgk/zcfb/tz/202006/t20200611_1231112.html?code=&state=123 (accessed on 10 February 2021). (In Chinese)
  55. Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China (MEPPRC). Outline of the National Plan for the Protection of Ecologically Fragile Areas. 2008. Available online: http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2008-10/09/content_1116192.htm (accessed on 21 April 2021). (In Chinese)
  56. The State Council of the People’s Republic of China (SCPRC). National Main Functional Zone Planning. 2010. Available online: https://www.neac.gov.cn/seac/zcfg/201611/1074525.shtml (accessed on 13 May 2021). (In Chinese)
  57. Dirnböck, T.; Dullinger, S.; Grabherr, G. A regional impact assessment of climate and land-use change on alpine vegetation. J. Biogeogr. 2003, 30, 401–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Hanson, P.J.; Weltzin, J.F. Drought disturbance from climate change: Response of United States forests. Sci. Total Environ. 2000, 262, 205–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ordoñez, J.C.; Bodegom, P.M.V.; Witte, J.P.M.; Wright, I.J.; Reich, P.B.; Aerts, R. A global study of relationships between leaf traits, climate and soil measures of nutrient fertility. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2009, 18, 137–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Wang, J.; Zhang, T.; Fu, B. A measure of spatial stratified heterogeneity. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 67, 250–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Guo, H.; Wang, B.; Niu, X. A plan for a forest ecosystem observation research network, based on GIS, in Hubei province. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2015, 35, 6829–6837. [Google Scholar]
Forests 14 00070 g001 550
Figure 1. Area of the Grain for Green Project.
Figure 1. Area of the Grain for Green Project.
Forests 14 00070 g001
Forests 14 00070 g002 550
Figure 2. Implementation intensity of the Grain for Green Project.
Figure 2. Implementation intensity of the Grain for Green Project.
Forests 14 00070 g002
Forests 14 00070 g004 550
Figure 4. The layout of monitoring stations in national major ecosystem protection and restoration engineering areas(NMEPREA) (Numbers 1 to 37 represent NMPREA).
Figure 4. The layout of monitoring stations in national major ecosystem protection and restoration engineering areas(NMEPREA) (Numbers 1 to 37 represent NMPREA).
Forests 14 00070 g004
Forests 14 00070 g005 550
Figure 5. The layout of monitoring stations in the eco-fragile areas.
Figure 5. The layout of monitoring stations in the eco-fragile areas.
Forests 14 00070 g005
Forests 14 00070 g006 550
Figure 6. The layout of monitoring stations in the ecological barrier areas.
Figure 6. The layout of monitoring stations in the ecological barrier areas.
Forests 14 00070 g006
Forests 14 00070 g007 550
Figure 7. Layout of monitoring stations in national key ecological function areas (Notes: 1: Altun grassland desertification control ecological function area; 2: Altai mountain forest and grassland ecological function zone; 3: Forest ecological function area of plateau margin in southeast Tibet; 4: Desert ecological function area of Qiangtang Plateau in northwest Tibet; 5: Sichuan–Yunnan forest and biodiversity conservation ecological function zone; 6: Dabie Mountain soil and water conservation ecological function area; 7: Forest ecological function zones in the big and small Xing ‘an Mountains; 8: Gannan Yellow River important water supply ecological function area; 9: Ecological function zone for preventing karst rocky desertification in Guangxi, Guizhou, and Yunnan; 10: Tropical rainforest ecological function zone in central mountainous area of Hainan Island; 11: Hulunbeier grassland meadow ecological function area; 12: Ecological function zone of soil and water conservation in hilly gully of loess Plateau; 13: Hunshandake desertification control ecological function zone; 14: Horqin grassland ecological function area; 15: Nanling mountain forest and biodiversity ecological function zone; 16: Glacier and water conservation function area in Qilian Mountains; 17: Qinling-Daba mountain biodiversity ecological function zone; 18: Ruoergai grassland and wetland ecological function zone; 19: Wetland ecological function zone in Sanjiang Plain; 20: Sanjiangyuan grassland meadow wetland ecological function zone; 21: Water and soil conservation ecological function zone in the Three Gorges Reservoir area; 22: Ecological function zone of desertification control in Talimu River; 23: Biodiversity and soil and water conservation ecological function zone in Wuling Mountain; 24: Grassland ecological function area at the northern foot of Yinshan mountain; 25: Changbai Mountain forest ecological function zone).
Figure 7. Layout of monitoring stations in national key ecological function areas (Notes: 1: Altun grassland desertification control ecological function area; 2: Altai mountain forest and grassland ecological function zone; 3: Forest ecological function area of plateau margin in southeast Tibet; 4: Desert ecological function area of Qiangtang Plateau in northwest Tibet; 5: Sichuan–Yunnan forest and biodiversity conservation ecological function zone; 6: Dabie Mountain soil and water conservation ecological function area; 7: Forest ecological function zones in the big and small Xing ‘an Mountains; 8: Gannan Yellow River important water supply ecological function area; 9: Ecological function zone for preventing karst rocky desertification in Guangxi, Guizhou, and Yunnan; 10: Tropical rainforest ecological function zone in central mountainous area of Hainan Island; 11: Hulunbeier grassland meadow ecological function area; 12: Ecological function zone of soil and water conservation in hilly gully of loess Plateau; 13: Hunshandake desertification control ecological function zone; 14: Horqin grassland ecological function area; 15: Nanling mountain forest and biodiversity ecological function zone; 16: Glacier and water conservation function area in Qilian Mountains; 17: Qinling-Daba mountain biodiversity ecological function zone; 18: Ruoergai grassland and wetland ecological function zone; 19: Wetland ecological function zone in Sanjiang Plain; 20: Sanjiangyuan grassland meadow wetland ecological function zone; 21: Water and soil conservation ecological function zone in the Three Gorges Reservoir area; 22: Ecological function zone of desertification control in Talimu River; 23: Biodiversity and soil and water conservation ecological function zone in Wuling Mountain; 24: Grassland ecological function area at the northern foot of Yinshan mountain; 25: Changbai Mountain forest ecological function zone).
Forests 14 00070 g007
Table
Table 1. Area of Grain for Green Project at the provincial level.
Table 1. Area of Grain for Green Project at the provincial level.
Provincial AreasArea
(104 ha)		ProportionProvincial
Areas		Size
(104 ha)		Proportion
Beijing5.340.17%Guangxi99.873.13%
Tianjin0.780.02%Hainan13.160.41%
Hebei186.265.83%Chongqing161.325.05%
Shanxi186.475.84%Sichuan217.856.82%
Neimenggu303.049.49%Guizhou218.986.86%
Liaoning112.233.51%Yunnan197.176.17%
Jilin64.812.03%Xizang3.800.12%
Heilongjiang112.113.51%Shanxi273.038.55%
Anhui60.201.88%Gansu231.997.26%
Jiangxi75.732.37%Qinghai74.772.34%
Henan109.913.44%Ningxia89.512.80%
Hubei116.373.64%Xinjiang112.063.51%
Hunan143.964.51%Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps23.120.72%
Total---3193.84100.00%
Table
Table 2. Area intensity classification of the Grain for Green Project at the provincial level (unit: 104 ha).
Table 2. Area intensity classification of the Grain for Green Project at the provincial level (unit: 104 ha).
Provincial AreaLow-Intensity AreaMedium-Intensity AreaHigh-Intensity Area
Beijing0.00–0.910.91–1.52-
Tianjin0.00–0.93--
Hebei0.00–1.171.17–3.723.72–7.52
Shanxi0.00–0.910.91–2.062.06–4.58
Neimenggu0.00–1.921.92–4.514.51–8.41
Liaoning0.00–1.001.00–3.573.57–8.79
Jilin0.00–1.411.41–4.704.70–11.39
Heilongjiang0.00–0.570.57–2.002.00–5.39
Anhui0.00–0.360.36–0.980.98–1.68
Jiangxi0.00–0.420.42–1.041.04–2.17
Henan0.00–0.390.39–1.451.45–4.00
Hubei0.00–0.740.74–1.841.84–3.16
Hunan0.00–0.820.82–2.312.31–7.16
Guangxi0.00–0.650.65–1.671.67–3.08
Hainan0.00–0.370.37–1.101.10–2.31
Chongqing0.00–1.371.37–5.735.73–10.72
Sichuan0.00–1.021.02–2.032.03–3.44
Guizhou0.00–1.421.42–3.213.21–6.67
Yunnan0.00–0.820.82–1.781.78–3.57
Xizang0.00–0.120.12–0.290.29–0.49
Shanxi0.00–1.431.43–4.764.76–12.72
Gansu0.00–1.791.79–4.004.00–7.65
Qinghai0.00–0.790.79–2.372.37–6.42
Ningxia0.00–0.400.40–6.696.69–11.73
Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps0.00–0.900.90–2.182.18–4.73
Table
Table 4. The layout of monitoring stations for GGP.
Table 4. The layout of monitoring stations for GGP.
Codes of Ecological
Monitoring Zones		NumberMonitoring StationsStatusTypeLevel
AII(a)11Heihe stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
AII(a)22Caohekou stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Changbaishan stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
AII(a)41Binglashan stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
AII(b)11Arongqi stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
AII(b)31Qiqihar stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
AII(b)44Zhangwu stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Songjiangyuan stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Taonan stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Zhalaiteqi stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
BII(c)52Kangbao stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Weichang stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
BII(c)62Pianguan stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Yanggao stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
BIII(a)71Tianjin stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
BIII(b)41Zhaoyang stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
BIII(b)52Taihangshandongpo stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Yanshan stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
BIII(b)65Qingshui stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Wangwushan stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
ZhongtiaoshanPMSPTLevel-1 station
Pengyang stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Yanan stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
BIII(b)103Luoyang stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Sanmenxia stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Tianshui stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
BIII(c)65Huangtugaoyuan stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Haiyuan stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Qingyang stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Shilou stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Jingbian stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
CIV(a)102Ankang stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Shangluo stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
CIV(a)111Xichuan stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
CIV(a)121Dabashan stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
CIV(a)132Hongan stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Dabieshan stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
CV(a)121Nanjiang stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
CV(a)141Susong stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
CV(a)153Yilong stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Xuanhan stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
Jiangjin stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
CV(a)161Yunyang stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
CV(a)174Fanjingshan stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Wulingshan stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Xiangxi stationEMSPTLevel-1 station
Enshi stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
CV(a)183Wangmo stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Libo stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Anshun stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
CV(a)193Hechi stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Huaihua stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Shaoyang stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
CV(a)201Guilin stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
CV(a)213Hengyang stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Luoxioshanqu stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Wuning stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
CV(a)221Wuyishanxipo stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
DV(a)189Guangnan stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Luquan stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Huze stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
Yiliang stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
Zunyi stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
Shuicheng stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
Bijie stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
Xuyong stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Baise stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
DVI(a)182Honghe stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Lincang stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
EVI(a)231Shiwandashan stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
EVII(a)181Puer stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
EVIII(a)242Changjiang stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Danzhou stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
FV(a)266Lanping stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Yanbian stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Ninglang stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Daliangshan stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
Emeishan stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Qingchuan stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
FX(a/b)101Gannanhuanghe stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
FX(a/b)261Ganzi stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
GII(b)281Horqinzuoyizhongqi stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
GII(c)285Guyang stationPMSPTLevel-1 station
Siziwangqi stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Chifeng stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
Xilinguole stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Erdos stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
GII(d)61Yanchi stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
GII(d)291Helanshan stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
HII(d)303Shihezi stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Fuhai stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
Yili stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
HII(d)311Minqin stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
HII(d)321Sunanyugu stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
HIII(d)341Luntai stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
HIII(d)351Akesu stationEMSCTLevel-2 station
IX(a/b)251Bomi stationEMSCTLevel-1 station
IX(c)371Guinan stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
IX(d)321Delingha stationPMSPTLevel-2 station
Notes: PMS: Proposed monitoring station; EMS: Existing monitoring stations; CT: Compatible type; PT: Professional type.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Guo, K.; Niu, X.; Wang, B. A GIS-Based Study on the Layout of the Ecological Monitoring System of the Grain for Green Project in China. Forests 2023, 14, 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14010070

AMA Style

Guo K, Niu X, Wang B. A GIS-Based Study on the Layout of the Ecological Monitoring System of the Grain for Green Project in China. Forests. 2023; 14(1):70. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14010070

Chicago/Turabian Style

Guo, Ke, Xiang Niu, and Bing Wang. 2023. "A GIS-Based Study on the Layout of the Ecological Monitoring System of the Grain for Green Project in China" Forests 14, no. 1: 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14010070

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop