Regional Carbon Stock Response to Land Use Structure Change and Multi-Scenario Prediction: A Case Study of Hunan Province, China

Abstract

Modifications in land use patterns exert profound influences on the configuration, arrangement, and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems, thereby inducing fluctuations in carbon sequestration. Consequently, precise ecological decision-making and an in-depth exploration of the interplay between land use alterations and carbon storage dynamics assume paramount importance in the pursuit of optimal regional land use configurations. In this investigation, we employed the InVEST model to analyze the spatiotemporal variations in land utilization and carbon storage in Hunan Province, based on comprehensive land use data spanning the period from 2000 to 2020. Additionally, the PLUS model was utilized to project the future spatial distribution of carbon storage in Hunan Province until 2040, encompassing diverse development scenarios. The findings of our study are as follows: (1) Land use changes instantaneously impact carbon storage within the study area. From 2000 to 2020, urban construction land witnessed an expansion of 3542 km2, which accounted for an increase from 1.13% to 2.78% of the total land area. Consequently, there was a decline in arable land, woodlands, and grasslands, resulting in a reduction of 3430.25 tons of carbon storage in Hunan Province. (2) The ecological protection scenario is projected to yield the most substantial increase in carbon storage, with an estimated magnitude of 7.02 × 10⁶ tons by the year 2040. According to the natural evolution scenario, the total amount of carbon storage is anticipated to remain similar to that of 2020, with a marginal increase of 2.81 × 10⁵ tons. Under the arable land protection scenario, carbon storage is predicted to decrease by 1.060 × 10⁷ tons. Conversely, the urban development scenario is expected to result in the most substantial reduction of 2.243 × 10⁷ tons of carbon storage. These findings underscore the efficacy of adopting ecological protection and natural development policies in curbing the decline in carbon storage. (3) The geographic distribution of carbon storage areas exhibits a strong correspondence with that of land use. Regions characterized by elevated carbon storage levels exhibit minimal urban construction land, an abundance of compact and contiguous ecological land, and a higher frequency of such land parcels. To enhance regional carbon storage levels and achieve sustainable development goals, future endeavors should prioritize the implementation of ecological protection and natural development policies.

The comprehensive effects of future multi‐scenario land use change and climate change on water conservation in Northwest China

“…The PLUS model is a comprehensive land use simulation tool that takes into account the environment and social economics in addition to past land use data (Li et al, 2023;Zhao, Wang, et al, 2023;Zhu et al, 2023) sured data in a single plot. Eleven models were selected for evaluation in this study (Table 1).…”

Spatiotemporal Evolution and Prediction of Ecosystem Carbon Storage in the Yiluo River Basin Based on the PLUS-InVEST Model

“…The InVEST model includes modules for assessing habitat quality, water supply, carbon stocks, and more [32]. In the assessment of carbon stocks, the carbon stocks in the ecosystem are divided into four basic carbon pools: above-ground biochar (C above ), below-ground biochar (C below ), soil carbon (C soil ), and dead organic carbon (C soil ).…”

A Simulated Assessment of Land Use and Carbon Storage Changes in the Yanqi Basin under Different Development Scenarios

“…Xu et al [57] used the PLUS model to simulate land expansion in the Hangzhou metropolitan area, with results indicating a simulation accuracy of 84% or higher. The InVEST model is widely used to estimate CS since it has fewer model parameters and requires less data [58]. At present, researchers have adopted quantitative modeling methods to study a series of impacts of LUCC on the carbon cycle, mainly including the "bookkeeping" model; the models allow for the calculation of base carbon stock data but do not allow for a comprehensive consideration of carbon cycling processes and changes in ecosystems [59].…”