An Evaluation Framework for Regional Ecological Security Pattern Quality: A Case Study of the Taihang–Qinling Intersection Zone, China

Le résumé fourni par la source

Scientific evaluation of ecological security pattern (ESP) quality provides a crucial foundation for regional ecological protection and spatial planning. Addressing the problem that current research on ESP quality generally lacks a systematic evaluation framework and excessively relies on qualitative descriptions, this study aims to explore a scientific and quantitative evaluation method for ESP quality. By combining landscape pattern and ecological network analysis, this study develops an evaluation framework for regional ESP quality that encompasses 12 key factors and utilizes parallel coordinate plots for visualization. Applying this framework, this study quantified the spatiotemporal evolution characteristics of ESP quality in the Taihang–Qinling intersection zone, China, from 2000 to 2020. The findings were as follows: (1) Both the number and total area of ecological sources increased markedly, accompanied by heightened spatial heterogeneity of the ecological resistance surface. The number of ecological corridors rose, although their total length decreased. Ecological strategic points increased substantially. (2) Despite the increase in the scale of ecological sources and the number of corridors, considering the comprehensive impact of multiple evaluation factors, the overall ESP quality declined across the region. In particular, the Taihang and Qinling Mountain regions experienced degradation, whereas the Songji Mountains region showed improvement. (3) This study discussed an ecological protection and restoration scheme comprising the Taihang ecological barrier region, the Songji ecological restoration region, and the Qinling ecological conservation region, and formulated region-specific optimization strategies. Overall, the proposed evaluation framework and local quality analysis methods of ESP in this study offer new perspectives for advancing ecological planning research.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.