Evaluates ecological outcomes in Hubei’s conservation areas, highlighting the need for spatial optimization.
China’s Ecological Conservation Redline (ECR) policy represents an innovative spatial planning initiative aimed at reconciling ecological protection and socio-economic development. However, systematic evaluation and spatial optimization of ECR layout remain insufficient. Using Hubei Province as a case study, this study develops a multi-scale “landscape pattern (LP)–ecosystem services (ESs)” framework to assess ECR effectiveness and optimize its spatial configuration. Results show that: (1) From 2010 to 2020, soil conservation (SC), water conservation (WC), and flood regulation (FR) improved significantly. (2) ECR covers only 19.34% of the province but contributes 21.81%∼34.46% of total ESs. At the county scale, ESs contributions exceed area proportions in 95.00% of ECR units for biodiversity maintenance (BM), 63.00% for SC, 47.00% for WC, and 52.00% for FR. At the grid scale, nearly all ECR grids provided higher ESs than their area share, with 82.15% of ESs hotspots located within ECR areas. (3) Landscape composition and configuration jointly regulate ESs. The percentage of landscape (PLAND) occupied by forest was the most influential composition metric, while patch density (PD) and aggregation index (AI) were the key configuration metrics, with stronger association at the county scale. (4) For Hubei Province at the county level, thresholds for connectivity (90.00) and fragmentation (6.50) were identified. (5) Three ECR optimization priority levels were identified at Hubei Province: 11 high-priority, 40 medium-priority, and 49 low-priority counties. This study confirms ECR effectiveness, underscores the necessity of optimizing spatial protection layout and landscape patterns, and provides a quantitative multi-scale framework for improving ECR planning and management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: