Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Landscape ecological risk (LER) assessment is essential for sustainable land management in ecologically fragile alpine regions, yet existing approaches typically adopt one-way workflows that disconnect landscape simulation, risk assessment, driver analysis, and scenario optimization. This study developed a coupled PLUS–LER–BRT–ABM framework with closed-loop coupling between the landscape-simulation and agent-based modules, and applied it to the Gannan Plateau over 1985–2045. Results showed a persistent northeast–southwest risk gradient, with the high-risk (HighER) share rising from 35.2% in 1985 to 37.8% in 2024. Boosted regression tree (BRT) analysis attributed 38.8% of relative influence to socioeconomic factors and 8.7% to grazing intensity. By 2045, the ecology-priority (EP) and comprehensive-coordination (CC) scenarios reduced mean regional LER by 0.82% and 0.88% relative to the baseline (BL), whereas human-activity control (HC) achieved only 0.05%. In a matched open-loop control, agent actions could not modify the precomputed PLUS trajectory; open and closed paths remained identical before the first 2029 refresh, after which feedback supplied 15.0% and 21.3% of the total EP and CC reductions. Counterfactual separation further showed that FVC recovery dominated the normalized single-channel decomposition, accounting for 86.8% of the summed isolated-channel effects. These results show that five-year feedback changes the simulated risk pathway and that ecology-active regulation outperforms development control alone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: