This analysis reveals spatial disparities in ecosystem services in Jiangxi Province, highlighting management zone implications.
Against the backdrop of ongoing degradation of ecosystem services and the increasing demand for sustainable development, the scientific delineation of ecological management zones has become a critical means by which to balance human wellbeing and ecological conservation. This study takes Jiangxi Province as the research area and selects four typical ecosystem services—food production, water supply, carbon storage, and soil retention—to systematically evaluate their supply–demand relationships from both static and dynamic dimensions. By introducing the entropy weight method to construct a comprehensive supply–demand index and integrating a coupling coordination degree model with a four-quadrant dynamic evolution model, this paper proposes a coupled “static–dynamic” analytical framework. The findings reveal significant spatial heterogeneity in various ecosystem services; high-supply areas are concentrated in the southern and peripheral mountainous regions while demand is closely linked to population distribution, exhibiting a pattern of high demand in the central areas and high supply in the peripheral areas. Our supply–demand matching analysis uncovers a distinct gradient distribution characterized by core imbalance and peripheral coordination, with prominent supply–demand conflicts in urban expansion areas and enhanced coordination in peripheral ecological barrier zones. Based on these insights, we divide Jiangxi Province into five types of ecological management zones: Degraded Restoration, Conflict Mitigation, Coordination Enhancement, Potential Development, and Maintenance Conservation, with tailored management strategies proposed for each zone type. As a result, this study not only provides scientific support for regional ecological spatial optimization but also offers a new methodological paradigm for ecosystem services management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhong et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: