This analysis uncovers how climate and geomorphology influence ecosystem services in karst forests, suggesting implications for tourism management.
Forest parks are vital terrestrial ecosystems that provide multiple ecosystem services (ESs) to both society and nature, including carbon storage, water conservation, soil retention, and tourism-related cultural services. These services are essential for maintaining ecological security and supporting socio-economic development. However, little is known about how ESs vary across forest parks situated in different karst landforms, and integrated re-search on the combined effects of climate, vegetation, karst surface characteristics, and tourism remains limited. In this study, we examine forest parks in Guizhou Province, China, selecting four key ESs—water conservation, soil retention, carbon storage, and cultural services associated with tourism—and evaluate their levels through a comprehensive ecosystem services index (CES). We apply a structural equation model (PLS-SEM) to disentangle how climate, vegetation, karst surface features, and tourism activities drive spatial heterogeneity in CES. The results reveal significant differences among karst land-form units: carbon storage is relatively low in karst plateaus and gorges, whereas water conservation is highest in non-karst areas. Together, the four categories of driving factors explain 71.6–74.2% of the variance in CES, with climate emerging as the dominant contributor to spatial variation. For individual services, the principal drivers differ: normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and tourist numbers are jointly shaped by karst surface characteristics and climate, while multi-year average spring precipitation is the most influential factor across forest parks. This study provides new evidence of the socio-ecological mechanisms regulating ESs in karst mountain forestscapes and offers a scientific reference for enhancing and regeneratively managing ecosystem services in these fragile regions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: