MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412170384 · doi:10.1002/ldr.70051

Linking Relationship of Ecosystem Service Supply and Demand Into Sustainable Development Goals ( <scp>SDGs</scp> )

2025· article· en· W4412170384 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Cheng, Wenqiang Cai, Lunche Wang, Chunbo Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueLand Degradation and Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEcosystem servicesSustainable developmentSupply and demandBusinessUrbanizationLand useEnvironmental resource managementLand developmentSustainabilityNatural resource economicsEcosystemGeographyEcologyEnvironmental scienceEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Ecosystem services (ES) play a crucial role in sustainable development. We systematically assessed the spatial and temporal dynamics of ecosystem service supply (ES‐s) and demand (ES‐d) in China from 1990 to 2020 by using a supply–demand matrix integrated with land use/cover data. The findings indicate that in 2020, grasslands accounted for 28.02% of the land area. Meanwhile, forest land expanded to 23.99% of the total area, primarily composed of close ‐ canopy forests. ES‐s remains relatively stable and high in the eastern coastal regions, whereas the western and northeastern regions face persistent supply shortages. Rapid economic growth and urbanization have driven a substantial increase in ES‐d in the eastern and southern regions, exacerbating supply–demand imbalances. Furthermore, the study highlights the critical role of different land use types—such as forests, cultivated land, and construction land—in supporting multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Based on these findings, we propose targeted policy recommendations to mitigate regional disparities, including the implementation of ecological compensation mechanisms, the development of green infrastructure, and enhanced cross‐regional cooperation. These measures aim to restore the ES‐s and ES‐d balance and advance SDGs progress.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLand Degradation and DevelopmentSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207