Human–Land Coupling Relationship in Lushan National Park and Its Surrounding Areas: From an Integrated Ecological and Social Perspective
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Research Methods
2.2.1. Construction of Human–Land Coupling Model
2.2.2. Analysis of the Landscape Pattern
2.2.3. Evaluation of Human Activity Intensity
2.2.4. Correlation Analysis of Human Activity and the Landscape Pattern
2.2.5. Analysis of Driving Factors Based on Geodetector
3. Results
3.1. Spatiotemporal Distribution of Human Activity Intensity
3.2. Analysis of Landscape Pattern
3.3. Spatial Autocorrelation Analysis of Human–Land Coupling
- Correlation analysis of the coordination relationship
- 2.
- Correlation analysis of the antagonistic relationship
- 3.
- Correlation analysis of the gradually antagonistic relationship
- 4.
- Correlation analysis of the gradually coordinated relationship
3.4. Assessment of Coupling between Human Activity Intensity and Landscape Pattern
3.5. Analysis of Factors Driving the Changes in Coupling between Human Activity and the Landscape Pattern
- Correlation analysis of the coordination relationship
- 2.
- Geographic detection analysis of antagonistic regions
- 3.
- Geographic detection analysis of gradually antagonistic regions
- 4.
- Geographic detection analysis of gradually coordinated regions
4. Discussion
4.1. Comparative Analysis of the Internal and External Spaces of Luhsan National Park
- (1)
- The human activity intensity in the surrounding areas of LNP gradually increases with time and shows a trend of expanding to the core protected area. In sharp contrast, the human activity intensity in the internal space of LNP is relatively lower and displays an evident declining trend in recent years, indicating that the current protection measures have achieved certain effects.
- (2)
- Compared with its surrounding areas, LNP has relatively lower landscape diversity, patch density, and shape index, indicating that more rigid protection measures have been implemented in the national park, which have maintained relatively higher ecological integrity and landscape continuity in the short run. In the surrounding areas, there are relatively higher degrees of landscape fragmentation, and both the continuity and integrity of the ecosystem are affected. These phenomena indicate that although a relatively good ecological status is maintained in LNP, the protection strategies for the surrounding areas still require certain adjustments to strengthen supervision so as to reduce the negative impacts on LNP.
- (3)
- Combined with the analysis results of human–land coupling, it can be indicated that the antagonistic and potentially antagonistic regions are geographically expanding towards the internal space of the park, which may be closely related to the intensification of human activity and changes in land use during the urbanization process. These changes intensify the contradiction between humans and nature, posing significant challenges to the protection and ecological safety of LNP. Hence, more effective ecological protection strategies should be taken to alleviate the expansion of antagonistic regions, so as to maintain the ecological balance and sustainable development of LNPSA.
4.2. Optimization of the Zoning Plan of Lushan National Park and Its Surrounding Areas
4.3. Limitations and Future Work
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Fang, X. On the Multi-Perspectives of the Anthropocene. J. Paleogeography (Chin. Ed.) 2024, 26, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, K.; Zhang, J.; Yu, H.; Qian, Z. Spatio-temporal variation and drivers of degree of human disturbance in national park and surrounding areas: A case study of Sanjiangyuan National Park. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2022, 42, 5574–5585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, F.; Wu, J. A Research on the Land Ownership of National Parks and Man-Land Relationship in China. Tour. Sci. 2017, 31, 14–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yi, L.; Chen, J.; Jin, Z.; Quan, Y.; Han, P.; Guan, S.; Jiang, X. Impacts of human activities on coastal ecological environment during the rapid urbanization process in Shenzhen, China. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2018, 154, 121–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kong, X.; Zhou, Z.; Jiao, L. Hotspots of land-use change in global biodiversity hotspots. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 174, 105770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michetti, M.; Zampieri, M. Climate–Human–Land Interactions: A Review of Major Modelling Approaches. Land 2014, 3, 793–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, P.; Cao, W.; Huang, L.; Xiao, T.; Zhai, J. The Impacts of Human Activities on Ecosystems within China’s Nature Reserves. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, K.R.; Venter, O.; Fuller, R.A.; Allan, J.R.; Maxwell, S.L.; Negret, P.J.; Watson, J.E.M. One-Third of Global Protected Land Is under Intense Human Pressure. Science 2018, 360, 788–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tang, F.L.; Yan, Y.; Liu, W.G. Construction Progress of National Park System in China. Biodivers. Sci. 2019, 27, 123–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferretti-Gallon, K.; Griggs, E.; Shrestha, A.; Wang, G. National Parks Best Practices: Lessons from a Century’s Worth of National Parks Management. Int. J. Geoheritage Parks 2021, 9, 335–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Ning, X.; Wang, H.; Zhang, X.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, W. Quantitative Assessment of the Risk of Human Activities on Landscape Fragmentation: A Case Study of Northeast China Tiger and Leopard National Park. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 851 Pt 2, 158413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mombeshora, S.; Le Bel, S. Parks-people conflicts: The case of Gonarezhou National Park and the Chitsa community in south-east Zimbabwe. Biodivers. Conserv. 2009, 18, 2601–2623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mekonen, S. Coexistence between Human and Wildlife: The Nature, Causes, and Mitigations of Human Wildlife Conflict around Bale Mountains National Park, Southeast Ethiopia. BMC Ecol. 2020, 20, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, X.Q.; Zhao, X.Y. Impacts of Human Activities on Ecosystem Services in National Parks: A Case Study of Qilian Mountain National Park. J. Nat. Resour. 2023, 38, 966–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, K.; Liu, H.; Fan, J.; Yu, H. Environmental Stress Intensity of Human Activities and Its Spatial Effects in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau National Park Cluster: A Case Study in Sanjiangyuan Region. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2021, 41, 268–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramirez-Rodriguez, M.; Castro-Salgado, J.C. Estimation of Human-Induced Disturbance of the Environment Associated with 2002, 2008, and 2013 Land Use/Cover Patterns in Mexico. Appl. Geogr. 2016, 66, 22–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duan, Q.T.; Luo, L.H. A Review and Prospect of Spatialization Methods of Human Activity Intensity: Taking the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau as an Example. J. Glaciol. Geocryol. 2021, 43, 1582–1593. [Google Scholar]
- Fu, J.; Dai, L. National Cultural Park Legislation Status Review and Improvement Approach. J. Nat. Resour. 2023, 38, 2332–2344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, T.; Li, X. Identifying the Management System for National Parks in China: Taking the Central Level as an Example. Biodivers. Sci. 2023, 31, 22485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wauchope, H.S.; Jones, J.P.G.; Geldmann, J.; Simmons, B.I.; Amano, T.; Blanco, D.E.; Fuller, R.A.; Johnston, A.; Langendoen, T.; Mundkur, T.; et al. Protected Areas Have a Mixed Impact on Waterbirds, but Management Helps. Nature 2022, 605, 103–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duan, T.L.; Li, N.; Huang, Z.P.; Li, Y.P.; Mu, Y.; Xiao, W. Progress of China’s National Park Construction and Development Prospects. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2024, 44, 4964–4972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Estes, A.B.; Kuemmerle, T.; Kushnir, H.; Radeloff, V.C.; Shugart, H.H. Land-Cover Change and Human Population Trends in the Greater Serengeti Ecosystem from 1984–2003. Biol. Conserv. 2012, 147, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kubacka, M.; Zywica, P.; Vila Subirés, J.; Brédka, S.; Macias, A. How Do the Surrounding Areas of National Parks Work in the Context of Landscape Fragmentation? A Case Study of 159 Protected Areas Selected in 11 EU Countries. Land Use Policy 2022, 113, 105910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mingarro, M.; Lobo, J.M. European National Parks Protect Their Surroundings but Not Everywhere: A Study Using Land Use/Land Cover Dynamics Derived from CORINE Land Cover Data. Land Use Policy 2023, 124, 106434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teng, L.; Liao, L.; Fu, T.; Liu, K.; Dong, J. Process and Characteristics of French National Park Brand Value-Addition System Development. World For. Res. 2022, 35, 101–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turner, M.G. Spatial and Temporal Analysis of Landscape Patterns. Landsc. Ecol. 1990, 4, 21–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Queiros, D. People Parks Win-Win Framework: Integrating Components that Can Influence People-Park Relationships. Koedoe-Afr. Prot. Area Conserv. Sci. 2022, 64, 1723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blanco, J.; Bellon, B.; Fabricius, C.; Roque, F.O. Interface Processes between Protected and Unprotected Areas: A Global Review and Ways Forward. Glob. Change Biol. 2020, 26, 1138–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bodin, O.; Alexander, S.M.; Baggio, J.; Barnes, M.L.; Berardo, R.; Cumming, G.S.; Dee, L.E.; Fischer, A.P.; Fischer, M.; Mancilla Garcia, M.; et al. Improving Network Approaches to the Study of Complex Social-Ecological Interdependencies. Nat. Sustain. 2019, 2, 551–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, H.; Chen, L.; Jiang, Y.; Li, C.; Zhou, F.; Wu, J. Landscape Pattern Changes and Analysis for the Integration and Optimization of Natural Protected Areas: A Case Study on Sinan County of Guizhou Province. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2021, 41, 8076–8086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guerrero, A.M.; Bennett, N.J.; Wilson, K.A.; Carter, N.; Gill, D.; Mills, M.; Ives, C.D.; Selinske, M.J.; Larrosa, C.; Bekessy, S.; et al. Achieving the Promise of Integration in Social-Ecological Research: A Review and Prospectus. Ecol. Soc. 2018, 23, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, B.; Zeng, W.; Xie, Y.; Wang, Z.; Hu, G.; Li, Q.; Cao, R.; Zhuo, Y.; Zhang, T. Boundary Delineation and Grading of Functional Zoning of Sanjiangyuan National Park Based on Biodiversity Importance Evaluations. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 825, 154068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhao, J.; Mu, X.M.; Wang, F.; Gao, P.; Zhang, J. A Discussion on the Four-Quadrant Model of Water Resource Value Theory. Res. Soil Water Conserv. 2008, 15, 134–136. [Google Scholar]
- Ma, S.; Xie, F.; Ding, C.; Zhang, B. Spatio-temporal Change of Landscape Ecological Quality and Influencing Factors Based on Four-Quadrant Model in Overlapped Area of Cropland and Coal Production. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. (Trans. CSAE) 2020, 36, 259–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shu, H.; Xiao, C.; Ma, T.; Sang, W. Ecological Health Assessment of Chinese National Parks Based on Landscape Pattern: A Case Study in Shennongjia National Park. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 11487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hu, C.; Wu, W.; Zhou, X.; Wang, Z. Spatiotemporal Changes in Landscape Patterns in Karst Mountainous Regions Based on the Optimal Landscape Scale: A Case Study of Guiyang City in Guizhou Province, China. Ecol. Indic. 2023, 150, 110211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Medeiros, A.; Fernandes, C.; Gonçalves, J.F.; Farinha-Marques, P. A Diagnostic Framework for Assessing Land-Use Change Impacts on Landscape Pattern and Character—A Case-Study from the Douro Region, Portugal. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2022, 228, 104580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, J.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, J.; Li, W.; Li, Y. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Landscape Metrics in Quantifying Spatial Patterns. Ecol. Indic. 2010, 10, 217–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, T.; Sun, Y.; Guan, M.; Kang, J.; Zhang, B. Human Activity Intensity in China under Multi-Factor Interactions: Spatiotemporal Characteristics and Influencing Factors. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanderson, E.W.; Jaiteh, M.; Levy, M.A.; Redford, K.H.; Wannebo, A.V.; Woolmer, G. The Human Footprint and the Last of the Wild. BioScience 2002, 52, 891–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.; Sun, X.; Tang, Q. Land Surface Human Activity Intensity: Concepts, Methods, and Applications. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2015, 70, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, M.; Li, Y.; Xia, C.; Zeng, C.; Zhang, B. Coupling Responses of Landscape Pattern to Human Activity and Their Drivers in the Hinterland of Three Gorges Reservoir Area. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2022, 33, e01992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, M.; Li, Y.; Li, Z.; Chen, S.; Zeng, C.; Zhang, B.; Xia, H. Coupling Response of Human Activity Intensity and Landscape Pattern in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2022, 42, 3959–3973. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, Y.; Liu, L.; Kang, S.; Ao, Y.; Han, L.; Ma, C. Quantitative Analysis of Factors Influencing Spatial Distribution of Soil Erosion Based on Geo-Detector Model under Diverse Geomorphological Types. Land 2021, 10, 604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Xu, D. Geodetector: Principle and Prospective. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2017, 72, 116–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, R.; Li, B.; Zheng, S.; Chen, Y.; Zeng, C.; Xia, C.; Shao, J. Research on Landscape Pattern Transformation Based on Landform Differences: A Case Study of Fengjie County in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2024, 44, 81–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Zhang, X.; Li, D.; Lu, L.; Yu, H. Multi-Scenario Simulation of the Impact of Urban Land Use Change on Ecosystem Service Value in Shenzhen. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2022, 42, 2086–2097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monaco, R.; Negrini, G.; Salizzoni, E.; Soares, A.J.; Voghera, A. Inside-Outside Park Planning: A Mathematical Approach to Assess and Support the Design of Ecological Connectivity between Protected Areas and the Surrounding Landscape. Ecol. Eng. 2020, 149, 105748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manolaki, P.; Zotos, S.; Vogiatzakis, I.N. An Integrated Ecological and Cultural Framework for Landscape Sensitivity Assessment in Cyprus. Land Use Policy 2020, 92, 104336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.; Tang, J.; Zhang, M.; Zhai, Z. A Study on the Dynamic Zoning and Management Strategies of National Parks Abroad. Chin. Landsc. Archit. 2023, 39, 118–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, M.; Tian, J.; Ren, Y.; Li, J.; Liu, W.; Zhu, Y. Functional zoning and space management of Three-River-Source National Park. J. Geogr. Sci. 2019, 29, 2069–2084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.; Huang, X.; Guo, H.; Zhang, Z.; Li, X.; Ge, M. Study on Functional Zoning Method of National Park Based on MCDA: The Case of the Proposed “Ailaoshan-Wuliangshan” National Park. Land 2022, 11, 1882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, Y.; Zhan, L.; Jiang, G.; Ma, W.; Dong, X. How to Address Population Decline and Land Expansion (PDLE) of rural residential areas in the process of Urbanization: A comparative regional analysis of human-land interaction in Shandong Province. Habitat Int. 2021, 117, 102441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, T.; Zha, P.; Yu, M.; Jiang, G.; Zhang, J.; You, Q.; Xie, X. Landscape Pattern Evolution and Its Response to Human Disturbance in a Newly Metropolitan Area: A Case Study in Jin-Yi Metropolitan Area. Land 2021, 10, 767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Xu, M.; Fu, H.; Wang, S. Classification of County Natural Landscape Governance Units: A Case Study of Wusheng County. Acta Sci. Nat. Univ. Pekin. 2020, 56, 553–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, D.; Gao, C.; Li, L.; Van Eetvelde, V. Multi-Scaled Identification of Landscape Character Types and Areas in Lushan National Park and Its Fringes, China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2020, 201, 103844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, J.; Gao, T.; Liu, N.; Gao, C. Landscape Character Assessment for the Integration and Optimization of Regional Protected Areas: A Case Study of the Huangshui Valley in Qinghai Province. Landsc. Archit. 2022, 29, 88–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, J.; Yang, D.; Liu, N.; Gao, C. A local-scale participatory zoning approach to conflict resolution in protected areas. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2023, 232, 104677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Data | Source | Year of Data Access | Spatial Resolution (m) |
---|---|---|---|
Digital Elevation Model (DEM) | Shuttle Radar Topography Mission | 2000–2020 | 30 |
Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) | National Cryosphere Desert Data Center | 2000–2020 | 30 |
Population density | AI Earth | 2000–2020 | 100 |
Boundary of the Lushan National Park | Comprehensive Plan of Lushan Scenic and Historic Interest Area | 2020 | - |
Nighttime lights | Resource and Environmental Science and Data Center of the Chinese Academy of Sciences | 2000–2020 | 1000 |
GDP density | AI Earth | 2000–2020 | 100 |
Township administrative boundaries | Bigmap | 2020 | - |
Village-level administrative boundary | National Earth System Science Data Center | 2020 | - |
Type | Time 1 | Time 2 | Human Activity Intensity | Landscape Pattern | Situation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coordination type | I | I | No obvious change | No obvious change | Always coordinated |
III | III | ||||
I | III | ↓ | ↓ | ||
III | I | ↑ | ↑ | ||
Antagonism type | II | II | No obvious change | No obvious change | Always antagonistic |
IV | IV | ||||
II | IV | ↑ | ↓ | ||
IV | II | ↓ | ↑ | ||
Gradually antagonistic type | I | II | ↓ | No obvious change | From coordination to antagonism |
III | IV | ↑ | |||
I | IV | No obvious change | ↓ | ||
III | II | ↑ | |||
Gradually coordinated type | II | I | ↑ | No obvious change | From antagonism to coordination |
IV | III | ↓ | |||
II | III | No obvious change | ↑ | ||
IV | I | ↓ |
Human Activity Intensity Factor | Weight of Each Factor |
---|---|
Nighttime light index (NTLI) | 0.2213 |
Population density | 0.1721 |
Economic density (ED) | 0.2465 |
Land use intensity (LUI) | 0.2035 |
Impervious surface density (ISD) | 0.1566 |
Type | Driving Factors (Unit) | Serial Number |
---|---|---|
Human activity | Population density (people/km2) | X1 |
NTLI (%) | X2 | |
ISD (%) | X3 | |
Gross domestic product (CNY ten thousand·km2) | X4 | |
Distance to the landscape resource points (km) | X5 | |
Distance to Lushan National Park (km) | X6 | |
Natural conditions | Elevation (m) | X7 |
Slope (degrees) | X8 | |
Vegetation cover (%) | X9 | |
Landscape pattern | Shannon’s Diversity Index (SHDI) | X10 |
Patch density (PD) | X11 | |
Landscape shape index (LSI) | X12 | |
Largest patch index (LPI) | X13 | |
Aggregation index (AI) | X14 |
Intensity Level of Human Activity | 2000 | 2010 | 2020 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Area (km2) | Percentage (%) | Area (km2) | Percentage (%) | Area (km2) | Percentage (%) | |
Extremely low intensity of human activity | 345.28 | 27.89 | 389.1 | 31.43 | 544.1 | 43.95 |
Low intensity of human activity | 653.17 | 52.76 | 543.48 | 43.9 | 354.81 | 28.66 |
General intensity of human activity | 165.15 | 13.34 | 180.5 | 14.58 | 135.93 | 10.98 |
High intensity of human activity | 52.99 | 4.28 | 87.15 | 7.04 | 118.48 | 9.57 |
Extremely high intensity of human activity | 21.54 | 1.74 | 37.76 | 3.05 | 84.68 | 6.84 |
Lushan National Park | Surrounding Areas of Lushan National Park | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | 2010 | 2020 | 2000 | 2010 | 2020 | |
Aggregation index | 96.3039 | 96.4634 | 96.5010 | 91.9661 | 90.9078 | 88.3806 |
Largest patch index | 82.3288 | 83.2958 | 86.6097 | 26.8496 | 26.2077 | 24.0915 |
Landscape shape index | 12.9804 | 12.4804 | 12.3626 | 35.4318 | 39.7723 | 41.9435 |
Patch density | 4.0176 | 3.6587 | 3.7160 | 7.6431 | 8.0905 | 8.3379 |
Shannon diversity index | 0.4560 | 0.4437 | 0.4325 | 1.0981 | 1.1409 | 1.3982 |
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. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhou, Z.; Li, H.; Li, J.; Lu, Y.; Gao, C.; Yang, D. Human–Land Coupling Relationship in Lushan National Park and Its Surrounding Areas: From an Integrated Ecological and Social Perspective. Land 2024, 13, 1240. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081240
Zhou Z, Li H, Li J, Lu Y, Gao C, Yang D. Human–Land Coupling Relationship in Lushan National Park and Its Surrounding Areas: From an Integrated Ecological and Social Perspective. Land. 2024; 13(8):1240. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081240
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhou, Zihang, Haotian Li, Jie Li, Yawen Lu, Chi Gao, and Diechuan Yang. 2024. "Human–Land Coupling Relationship in Lushan National Park and Its Surrounding Areas: From an Integrated Ecological and Social Perspective" Land 13, no. 8: 1240. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081240