Ecological and carbon footprint based sustainability of traditional polder heritage in Nanxun Huzhou China
Source abstract
Abstract
Traditional polders, which integrate agriculture, water management, and settlement functions, represent valuable cultural heritage. However, their sustainable development faces growing challenges due to global ecological pressures. This study evaluates the sustainability of traditional polder heritage in Nanxun District using an improved ecological footprint (EF) model, incorporating carbon footprint analysis. The Stochastic Impacts by Regression on Population, Affluence, and Technology (STIRPAT) model is used to analyze the drivers of EF changes from 2005 to 2022. Results show a long-standing ecological deficit (ED) from 2005 to 2021, with slight improvement in 2022, but sustainability remains unachieved. Both per capita EF ( ef ) and per capita ecological carrying capacity ( ec ) show a downward trend, with partial recovery in ec after 2019. Population size (PS), agricultural mechanization (AM), and fertilizer usage (FU) drive EF increases, while urbanization rate (UR), gross domestic product (GDP), irrigation machinery power (IMP), and fishery machinery power (FMP) mitigate the effects. The integrated model provides insights for the sustainable conservation of polder heritage.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Environmental Impact and Sustainability · Cultural Heritage Management and Preservation · Land Use and Ecosystem Services
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (58)
Show source-provided references
1. Wang, Y., Pendlebury, J. & Nolf, C. The water heritage of China: the polders of Tai Lake basin as continuing landscape. Plan. Perspect. 38, 949–974 (2023).10.1080/02665433.2022.2135131 ↗
2. Nijhuis, S. Polderscapes: the landscape architecture of the dutch lowlands. Landsc. Archit. 38–57 (2016).
3. Li, Y., Dai, H., Dai, Z. & Zhang, L. The polder systems legacies in the early twentieth century affect the contemporary landscape in the Jianghan Plain of Hubei, China. Herit. Sci. 12, 311 (2024).10.1186/s40494-024-01426-8 ↗
4. Wang, X. A study of the form and development of “enclosing farmlands with embarkments" in taihu district. J. Suzhou Univ. Sci. Technol. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 37–42 (1995).
5. Wang, H., Yu, Y. & Sun, Q. Changes of the polder landscape pattern in the lower yangtze region under the influence of irrigation works: a case study of the middle and lower reaches of taihu lake. J. Archit. Hist. 4, 58–67 (2023).
6. Han, P., Xiong, H., Hu, H., Zhou, J. & Wang, M. Integrating risk-conflict assessment for constructing and optimizing ecological security patterns of polder landscape in the urban-rural fringe. Ecol. Indic. 166, 112256 (2024).10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112256 ↗
7. Lu, D. & Wang, X. Study on the polder systems of lougang and tangpu channels entering lake tai in huzhou. In Compilation of Research Findings on the Polder Systems of Lougang and Tangpu Channels Entering Lake Tai in Huzhou, 4–43 (Huzhou Water Conservancy Society, Huzhou, 2005).
8. Harbiankova, A., Scherbina, E. & Budzevich, M. Exploring the significance of heritage preservation in enhancing the settlement system resilience. Sustainability 15, 15251 (2023).10.3390/su152115251 ↗
9. Schmitz, M. F. & Herrero-Jáuregui, C. Cultural landscape preservation and social-ecological sustainability. Sustainability 13, 2593 (2021).10.3390/su13052593 ↗
10. Ning, K. The polders of the Song dynasty. Journal of Historical Science 21–25 (1958).
11. Ji, D. What are polders? What are their distribution areas and production conditions? Hist. Teach. 8 (1964).
12. Miao, Q. The formation and development of the Tangpu polders in the Taihu Lake region. Agric. Hist. China 12–32 (1982).
13. Zhou, S. A brief discussion on the development of water conservancy farms and landlord ownership in Song Dynasty Jiangnan. Agric. Hist. China 1–11 (1995).
14. Nijhuis, S. The Noordoostpolder: A landscape planning perspective on the preservation and development of twentieth-century polder landscapes in the Netherlands. Adapt. Strategies Water Herit. 213 (2020).10.1007/978-3-030-00268-8_11 ↗
15. de Boer, H. P. Europolders a European program on polder landscape, heritage, and innovation. Adapt. Strat. Water Herit. 231 (2020).10.1007/978-3-030-00268-8_12 ↗
16. Winaktoe, W. W., Schultz, B. & Nurhamidah, N. Performance evaluation of Jakarta polder based on the sustainable urban polder model (supm). Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 14 (2024).10.18517/ijaseit.14.3.19028 ↗
17. Sun, J., Wang, Q. & Guo, W. Origin and characteristics of the traditional dike polder human settlement system of xitiaoxi watershed. Landsc. Archit. 31, 64–70 (2024).10.3724/j.fjyl.202306080266 ↗
18. Li, Y., Ye, Y., Fang, X., Zhang, C. & Zhao, Z. Loss of wetlands due to the expansion of polder in the Dongting plain, China, AD 1368–1980. Holocene 30, 646–656 (2020).10.1177/0959683619895574 ↗
19. Santoro, A. et al. From flood control system to agroforestry heritage system: Past, present and future of the mulberry-dykes and fishponds system of Huzhou City, China. Land 11, 1920 (2022).10.3390/land11111920 ↗
20. Ellis, E. C. & Wang, S. Sustainable traditional agriculture in the tai lake region of china. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 61, 177–193 (1997).10.1016/S0167-8809(96)01099-7 ↗
21. United Nations. Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development (2015).
22. Assembly, G. United nations conference on housing and sustainable urban development (habitat iii) regional report for africa: transformational housing and sustainable urban development in africa. In 2015 United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III) regional report for Africa: transformational housing and sustainable urban development in Africa (2015).
23. Nocca, F. The role of cultural heritage in sustainable development: multidimensional indicators as decision-making tool. Sustainability 9, 1882 (2017).10.3390/su9101882 ↗
24. Wackernagel, M. & Rees, W. Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the earth, vol. 9 (New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, 1998).
25. Shi, K., Diao, C., Sun, X. & Zuo, T. Ecological balance between supply and demand in Chongqing City based on cultivated land ecological footprint method. Acta Ecol. Sin. 33, 1872–1880 (2013).10.5846/stxb201211231662 ↗
26. Rees, W. E. Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out. Environ. Urban. 4, 121–130 (1992).10.1177/095624789200400212 ↗
27. Ferng, J.-J. Local sustainable yield and embodied resources in ecological footprint analysis-a case study on the required paddy field in Taiwan. Ecol. Econ. 53, 415–430 (2005).10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.11.010 ↗
28. Dong, H. et al. Natural capital utilization on an international tourism island based on a three-dimensional ecological footprint model: a case study of Hainan province, China. Ecol. Indic. 104, 479–488 (2019).10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.04.031 ↗
29. Chu, X., Deng, X., Jin, G., Wang, Z. & Li, Z. Ecological security assessment based on ecological footprint approach in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China. Phys. Chem. Earth, Parts a/b/c. 101, 43–51 (2017).10.1016/j.pce.2017.05.001 ↗
30. Guo, S. & Wang, Y. Ecological security assessment based on ecological footprint approach in hulunbeir grassland, china. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16, 4805 (2019).10.3390/ijerph16234805 ↗
31. Jin, Y., Liu, Q. & Li, C. Evaluation of cultivated land carrying capacity based on an improved three-dimension ecological footprint model: A case study of Jiangsu province. China Land Sci. 34, 96–104 (2020).
32. Wiedmann, T. & Barrett, J. A review of the ecological footprint indicator-perceptions and methods. Sustainability 2, 1645–1693 (2010).10.3390/su2061645 ↗
33. Hák, T., Janoušková, S. & Moldan, B. Sustainable development goals: A need for relevant indicators. Ecol. Indic. 60, 565–573 (2016).10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.08.003 ↗
34. Wang, K., Yv, F. & Ji, F.Huzhou City Gazetteer (Kunlun Press, Beijing, 1996).
35. Nanxun District, G. Nanxun District land use master plan (2006-2020). (2006). (2024).
36. Zhang, H., Liu, W., Wang, S., Shan, N. & Liang, H. Calculation and analysis of equivalence factor and yield factor of ecological footprint based on sub-national hectare: A case study of zhejiang. J. Nat. Resour. 24, 82–92 (2009).
37. Li, M. et al. Temporal and spatial dynamics in the carbon footprint and its influencing factors of farmland ecosystems in Yunnan Province. Acta Ecol. Sin. 38, 8822–8834 (2018).
38. Qi, X. Analysis of carbon footprint of farmland ecosystem in Dezhou City. J. Yangzhou Univ. (Agric. Life Sci. Ed.) 34, 64–69 (2013).
39. Zhang, H., Liu, W., Lin, Y., Shan, N. & Wang, S. A modified ecological footprint analysis to a sub-national area: the case study of zhejiang province. Acta Ecol. Sin. 29, 2738–2748 (2009).
40. Hua, Y. et al. The assessment of aquatic ecosystem services for polder in Taihu Basin. Acta Ecol. Sin. 35, 5197–5206 (2015).
41. Su, J. & Li, Z. Research on the sustainable utilization of cultivated land based on improved ecological footprint model in Yunnan province. J. Yunnan Agric. Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 36, 124–131 (2021).
42. Zhou, R., You, S., Huang, L. & Wang, K. Spatio-temporal pattern evolution and driving factors of the globally important agricultural heritage system mulberry-dykes and fish-ponds. J. Zhejiang Univ. (Agric. Life Sci.) 50, 200–208 (2024).
43. Cui, W., Jiao, W., Min, Q., Wu, M. & Sun, Y. Environmental impact assessment on traditional agricultural systems based on carbon footprint: a case study of Qingtian rice-fish culture system. Acta Ecol. Sin. 40, 4362–4370 (2020).
44. Zhang, P. et al. Temporal and spatial differences in carbon footprint in farmland ecosystem: a case study of Henan province, China. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 28, 3050–3060 (2017).
45. Cao, Z., Min, Q., Lliu, M. & Bai, Y. Ecosystem-service-based ecological carrying capacity: Concept, content, assessment model and application. J. Nat. Resour. 30, 1–11 (2015).
46. Almond, R. E., Grooten, M. & Peterson, T. Living Planet Report 2020-Bending the curve of biodiversity loss (World Wildlife Fund, Gland, 2020).
47. Luo, Y. Cultivated land resource evaluation based on improved ecological footprint model. Agric. Technol. 42, 101–105 (2022).
48. Dietz, T. & Rosa, E. A. Effects of population and affluence on CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 175–179 (1997).10.1073/pnas.94.1.175 ↗
49. York, R., Rosa, E. A. & Dietz, T. Stirpat, ipat and impact: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts. Ecol. Econ. 46, 351–365 (2003).10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00188-5 ↗
50. Zhong, X. & Long, S. Rethinking the environmental impact of the Ipat model. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 26, 61–68 (2016).
51. Wang, Y., Wang, X., Sun, C. & Lu, X. Research progress on the application of ipat model and its variants. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 26, 949 (2015).
52. Holdren, J. A brief history of Ipat. J. Popul. Sustain. 2, 66–74 (2018).
53. Liu, S., Chen, Y., Xie, B., Pei, T. & Zhou, Y. Analysis driving force for changes in area of cultivated land of Jiuquan City based on pca-stirpat model. Chin. J. Agric. Resour. Reg. Plan. 40, 133–140 (2019).
54. Ma, M., Ma, X., Xie, Y. & Ma, T. Analysis the relationship between ecological footprint (EF) of Ningxia and influencing factors: partial leastsquares regression (PLS). Acta Ecol. Sin. 34, 682–689 (2014).
55. Xingguo, G., Wenjun, J., Yehong, S. & Bin, W. Conservation of the important agricultural heritage systems in the economically developed area: Experiences, problems and solutions-a case study of Zhejiang province. J. Resour. Ecol. 12, 513–521 (2021).
56. Reyes, S. R. C., Miyazaki, A., Yiu, E. & Saito, O. Enhancing sustainability in traditional agriculture: Indicators for monitoring the conservation of globally important agricultural heritage systems (giahs) in Japan. Sustainability 12, 5656 (2020).10.3390/su12145656 ↗
57. Yang, C. & Zhu, Y. Driving force factors of ecological footprint in Hunan province from the perspective of green development. Econ. Geogr. 40, 195–203 (2020).
58. Lin, X. & Ge, Y. Temporal-spatial variation of carbon source-sink of farmland ecosystem in the southwestern China. Jiangsu J. Agric. Sci. 32, 1088–1093 (2016).