Remote Sensing (Jan 2023)

Study on Regional Eco-Environmental Quality Evaluation Considering Land Surface and Season Differences: A Case Study of Zhaotong City

  • Jianwan Ji,
  • Zhanzhong Tang,
  • Linlin Jiang,
  • Tian Sheng,
  • Fei Zhao,
  • Rui Zhang,
  • Eshetu Shifaw,
  • Wenliang Liu,
  • Huan Li,
  • Xinhan Liu,
  • Huiyuan Lu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15030657
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 15, no. 3
p. 657

Abstract

Read online

Timely and quantitatively evaluating regional eco-environmental quality (EEQ) is of great significance for realizing regional sustainable development goals. Especially for cloudy areas, it was a great challenge to construct a regional EEQ dataset with high quality and high resolution. However, existing studies failed to consider the influence of land surface and season elements in evaluating regional EEQ. Therefore, this study aimed to promote an accurate EEQ-evaluating framework for cloudy areas. Zhaotong city, a typical karst and cloudy region, was chosen as the study area. First, we integrated multi-source spatiotemporal datasets and constructed a novel eco-environmental comprehensive evaluation index (ECEI) to assess its EEQ from 2000 to 2020. Next, standard deviation ellipse (SDE) and trend analysis methods were applied to investigate regional EEQ’s change trends. Finally, ecological index (EI) values for different years were calculated to validate the effectivity of the ECEI. The main findings were as follows: (1) The EEQ of Zhaotong showed an upward-fluctuating trend (0.0058 a−1), with average ECEI values of 0.729, 0.693, 0.722, 0.749, and 0.730. (2) The spatial distribution pattern of the EEQ showed high values in the north and low values in the south, with Zhaoyang district having the lowest ECEI value. (3) From 2000 to 2020, the standard deviation of the major axis of the ellipse moved northeast of Zhaotong city with θ of SDE changing from 57.06° to 62.90°, thus, indicating the improvement of northeastern regions’ EEQ. (4) The coefficients of the determinant (R2) between the EI and ECEI were 0.84, which was higher than that of EI–RSEI (R2 = 0.56). This indicated that our promoted framework and the ECEI could acquire more accurate EEQ results and provide suggestions for relevant policymakers.

Keywords