Analysis demonstrates carbon sequestration and food security in mountainous areas, highlighting ecological risk assessment methods.
Amid climate change and land-use transformation, the scientific identification of high-quality arable land reserves is critical for safeguarding both cropland quantity and quality. Conventional approaches, largely based on spatial autocorrelation and heterogeneity theories, inadequately capture the multi-scale integration of ecological functions and carbon cycling, particularly in ecologically high-risk areas where systematic identification and mechanism analysis are lacking. To address these challenges, this study introduces a geographically similar “grain-carbon” synergistic framework, paired with a “bidirectional optimization” strategy (negative elimination + positive selection), to overcome the shortcomings of traditional methods and mitigate grain–carbon trade-offs in high-risk areas. Using land-use data from Yunnan’s mountainous areas (2000–2020), integrated with InVEST-PLUS model outputs, multi-source remote sensing, and carbon pool datasets, we developed a dynamic land-use–carbon storage simulation framework under four policy scenarios: natural development, urban expansion, arable land protection, and ecological conservation. High-quality arable lands were identified through a geographic similarity analysis with the Geo detector, incorporating ecological vulnerability and landscape risk indices to delineate priority high-risk zones. Carbon storage degradation trends and land-use pressures were further considered to identify optimal areas for cropland-to-forest conversion, facilitating the implementation of the bidirectional optimization strategy. Multi-scenario simulations revealed an increase of 454.33 km2 in high-quality arable land, with the optimized scenario achieving a maximum carbon storage gain of 23.54 × 106 t, reversing carbon loss trends and enhancing both farmland protection and carbon sequestration. These findings validate the framework’s effectiveness, overcoming limitations of traditional methods and providing a robust strategy for coordinated optimization of carbon storage and arable land conservation in ecologically high-risk regions, with implications for regional carbon neutrality and food security.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ren et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: