AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Article Link
Collect
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Article | Open Access

Regional ecological security evaluation with subjective and objective weights model based on multi remote sensing observations

Jianzhong Lua Jianshu Wanga Tianyao Liua Lihua HebNing ZhuaMengyuan Yanga Xinbo Liuc( )
State Key Laboratory of Information Engineering in Surveying, Mapping and Remote Sensing, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
Hubei Provincial Geographic National Conditions Monitoring Center, Wuhan, China
Hubei Key Laboratory of Intelligent Yangtze and Hydroelectric Science, China Yangtze Power Co., Ltd ., Yichang, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

With the rapid development of economy and urban construction, urban ecological security protection has become a prominent issue in the development process. Territorial spatial planning and urban ecological monitoring urgently need the support of a scientific evaluation system of urban ecological security status. To respond the demand of ecological assessment, this study considers a variety of key ecological factors. A generalized assessment framework for ecological security is constructed. According to the data accessibility of the indicators and their representativeness. The 23 indicators centered on the elements of ecological environment change of water, soil, air, forest and grassland were divided into four tasks for detailed review: ecological health, ecological space, ecological economy and ecological life. As for weight allocation, to avoid the irrationality of the weights from the single method, we use a weight integration approach to integrate the subjective weights of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the objective weights of the entropy weight method (EWM). Combining the above, the ecological security comprehensive index (ESCI) for evaluation was finally developed. The method was applied to assess the ecological security of Yichang (YC) in 2021. It was found that Xiling District, the core of the YC, had the highest ESCI, while Xiaoting and Zhijiang have the lowest. However, even Xiling still has room for improvement in terms of ecological space and ecological environment. All other cities also suffer from one or more lagging tasks. This framework reveals the general trend of the need to strengthen spatial and environmental construction in the developed areas, and the need to strengthen living and economic construction in the backward areas in YC. It can provide a comprehensive decision-making basis for ecological restoration decision-making and ecosystem management.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Download File(s)
gsis-29-1-39_ESM.pdf (229.8 KB)

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Geo-Spatial Information Science
Pages 39-58

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
Lu J, Wang J, Liu T, et al. Regional ecological security evaluation with subjective and objective weights model based on multi remote sensing observations. Geo-Spatial Information Science, 2026, 29(1): 39-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2025.2514814

1

Views

0

Crossref

0

Web of Science

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 26 February 2024
Accepted: 28 May 2025
Published: 13 June 2025
© 2025 Wuhan University.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.