4.7 Article

Management of trade-offs between cultivated land conversions and land productivity in Shandong Province

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 142, Issue -, Pages 767-774

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.050

Keywords

Land productivity; Land use; Land conversion; Data fusion

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China for Distinguished Young Scholars [71225005]
  2. Key Project in the National Science and Technology Pillar Program of China [2013BACO3B00]
  3. STS-Network Project of Chinese Academy of Sciences [KFJ-EW-STS-058]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to analyze the trade-offs between cultivated land conversions and land productivity using data fusion. First, 1 -km area percentage data model, which integrates advantages of grid data and vector data, is applied to detect cultivated land conversion in each 1 km x 1 km grid cell in Shandong Province. Then land productivity in the study area is assessed with the Estimation System of Land Production (ESLP) model based on agro-ecological zones, which integrates multi -source data, including land use data, climatic data, radiation parameters, soil properties. Estimation result shows that the average land productivity of the whole study area is 7509 kg hm(-2) during 1985-2010, while land productivity of built-up land and water areas with low vegetation is zero. Furthermore, results of comparative analysis on cultivated land conversion and land productivity shows that land productivity in Shandong Province is unevenly distributed, which is higher in the west part of the study area, and lower in the regions where cultivated land conversion occurs. And the overall trend of land productivity is in a decreasing trend during 2003-2010. The measures of management of this trade-off should be focused on preventing cultivated land conversion. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available