Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Case study demonstrates spatial mismatches of ecosystem services in urban areas, highlighting ecological planning needs.
Rapid urbanization in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area has intensified ecological degradation, underscoring the urgent need for integrated spatial planning informed by ecosystem services (ES) assessment. This study developed a dynamic assessment framework to quantify and map five key ES—water conservation, soil retention, stormwater regulation, grain production, and carbon sequestration—from 2000 to 2015. Using the Getis-Ord Gi* spatial statistic, we identified ES hotspots and coldspots and delineated functional zones based on service importance. The results reveal a notable spatial mismatch between ES supply and administrative boundaries, with high-value clusters concentrated in the northern and peripheral regions, while the central urban basin functions as an area of low ES values. Multi-service co-protection zones were identified, particularly in Zhaoqing and eastern Huizhou, which should be prioritized in ecological protection redline delineation. This study demonstrates that ES-based spatial zoning can effectively bridge ecological science and spatial governance, offering a replicable decision-support tool for cross-jurisdictional coordination and sustainable planning in complex urban agglomerations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wenbo Cai (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: