Precipitation and Anthropogenic Activities Jointly Green the China–Mongolia–Russia Economic Corridor

Abstract

Climate change and anthropogenic activities are widely considered the main factors affecting vegetation growth. However, their relative contributions are under debate. Within the non-climatic impact, detailed human activities, particularly government policy adjustments, are less investigated. In this study, we develop a fractional vegetation coverage (FVC) extraction method based on MODIS-EVI satellite data to analyze the spatiotemporal variation of vegetation and its attributions in the China–Mongolia–Russia Economic Corridor (CMREC). The average FVC has improved, with a general increase of 0.02/10a from 2000 to 2020. We construct a driving factor identification system for FVC change, based on partial and multiple correlation coefficients, and we divide the driving forces of FVC changes into seven climate-driven types and one non-climate-driven type. The results reveal that FVC changes caused by climatic factors account for 28.2% of CMREC. The most prominent greening (19.5%) is precipitation-driven, and is extensively distributed in Khentii Aimag, Mongolia; southeast Inner Mongolia; west Jilin Province; and southwest Heilongjiang Province, China. Moreover, we quantify the relative contribution of climatic and non-climatic factors to significant FVC change using the first-difference multivariate regression method. The results indicate that the effects of non-climatic factors on vegetation change outweigh those of climatic factors in most areas. According to the land cover change and regional policy adjustment, anthropogenic activities such as afforestation, reclamation, and planting structure adjustment explain most vegetation improvement in the Northeast Plain; eastern Inner Mongolia; and the Hetao Irrigation District, China. Meanwhile, both vegetation improvement and degradation disperse concurrently in the Mongolian and Russian parts of CMREC, where climate change and anthropogenic activities positively and negatively affect vegetation change, respectively. Despite the greening in most CMREC, it must be noted that human-induced greening is unsustainable to some degree. The overdevelopment of black soil area and sandy land, adverse effects of afforestation projects, and natural hazards related to weather and climate extremes altogether threaten the local ecological security in the long run. Therefore, governments should develop new desertification countermeasures in accordance with the laws of nature, and enhance international cooperation to guarantee the ecological safety of CMREC.

Modeling Potential Impacts on Regional Climate Due to Land Surface Changes across Mongolia Plateau

“…Our results showed that the two dominant land-use conversions are from sparsely vegetation to grassland and cropland, respectively, across both Mongolia and Inner Mongolia from 1992 to 2018. This conclusion was consistent with previous studies of land use changes in this area [26,39,59]. Besides the land use changes, we also observed wide vegetation cover changes across the Mongolia Plateau, but with significant spatial heterogeneity.…”

“…In contrast to desertification, land surface greening due to vegetation restoration also changed land surface properties and brought opposite effects on regional climate basically, which has also been widely concerned in recent years [26,27]. Based on observation and numerical simulation, some studies indicated that vegetation restoration in semiarid northern China has an overall cooling effect [28,29].…”

Three‐Dimensional Differentiation of the Contribution of Climatic Factors to Vegetation Change in the Pan‐Tibetan Plateau

“…In this formula, $${\mathrm{E}\mathrm{V}\mathrm{I}}_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{l}}$$ and $${\mathrm{E}\mathrm{V}\mathrm{I}}_{\mathrm{v}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{g}}$$ are EVI values in bare soil and pure vegetation areas, replaced with the minimum (−0.04) and the maximum (0.86) in PTP from 2000 to 2020 in this research. To extract the valid minimum and the maximum EVI value, we adopt a filter based on the land cover types and the continuity of the remote sensing data (Li et al., 2022).…”

“…In this formula, 𝐴𝐴 EVIsoil and 𝐴𝐴 EVIveg are EVI values in bare soil and pure vegetation areas, replaced with the minimum (−0.04) and the maximum (0.86) in PTP from 2000 to 2020 in this research. To extract the valid minimum and the maximum EVI value, we adopt a filter based on the land cover types and the continuity of the remote sensing data (Li et al, 2022).…”

Identifying the drivers of vegetation changes in Inner Mongolia based on residual analysis and Hasse diagram technique

“…Mu, Yang, et al (2013) and Mu, Zhou, et al (2013) classified the vegetation in Inner Mongolia from 2001 to 2010 into three categories according to vegetation type and explored the driving factors at different timescales, and the results show that vegetation growth during this time period was more dependent on the combined effects of water and temperature and less correlated with individual climatic factors. Li, Li, et al (2022) and Li, Zhang, et al (2022) studied the natural and anthropogenic factors of vegetation change in temperate drylands and found that the strongest influencing factors of vegetation are precipitation, livestock density, and wind speed, whereas topography and exposure are the weakest. Current research on the drivers of vegetation in Inner Mongolia has made significant achievements, but most of them have been limited to 2015 and lack detailed stripping for human activities.…”