Spatiotemporal simulation of sustainable development based on ecosystem services under climate change

22. Asmus ML, Nicolodi J, Anello LS, Gianuca K. The risk to lose ecosystem services due to climate change: A South American case. Ecological Engineering. 2019; 130:233–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecoleng.2017.12.030 WOS:000463884100024. PLOS ONE Sustainable development simulation under climate change: A spatiotemporal ecosystem services approach PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0316605 February 4, 2025 16 / 19

23. Chanza N, Musakwa W. Indigenous practices of ecosystem management in a changing climate: Pros- pects for ecosystem-based adaptation. Environ Sci Policy. 2021; 126:142–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. envsci.2021.10.005 WOS:000708757200001. 24. Nyangoko BP, Berg H, Mangora MM, Shalli MS, Gullstro¨ m M. Community perceptions of climate change and ecosystem-based adaptation in the mangrove ecosystem of the Rufiji Delta, Tanzania. Clim Dev. 2022; 14(10):896–908. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2021.2022449 WOS:000744709900001. 25. Zhang Y, Wu T, Song CS, Hein L, Shi FQ, Han MC, et al. Influences of climate change and land use change on the interactions of ecosystem services in China’s Xijiang River Basin. Ecosyst Serv. 2022; 58:9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101489 WOS:000874123500002. 26. Graham NT, Hejazi MI, Chen M, Davies EGR, Edmonds JA, Kim SH, et al. Humans drive future water scarcity changes across all Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Environmental Research Letters. 2020; 15(1):10. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab639b WOS:000520423700001. 27. Chen YM, Li X, Huang KN, Luo M, Gao MY. High-Resolution Gridded Population Projections for China Under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Earth Future. 2020; 8(6):18. https://doi.org/10.1029/ 2020ef001491 WOS:000545702400002. 28. Benveniste H, Cuaresma JC, Gidden M, Muttarak R. Tracing international migration in projections of income and inequality across the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Clim Change. 2021; 166(3–4):22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03133-w WOS:001027975000001.

29. Talebian S, Carlsen H, Johnson O, Volkholz J, Kwamboka E. Assessing future cross-border climate impacts using shared socioeconomic pathways. Clim Risk Manag. 2021; 32:18. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.crm.2021.100311 WOS:000663363800006. 30. Peng SY, Liu JY, Geng Y. ASSESSING STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF TEXTILE PRODUCTS IN CHINA UNDER THE SHARED SOCIOECONOMIC PATHWAYS FRAMEWORK. Clim Chang Econ. 2022; 13(01):20. https://doi.org/10.1142/s2010007822400048 WOS:000754547900001. 31. Hoeks S, Tucker MA, Huijbregts MAJ, Harfoot MBJ, Bithell M, Santini L. MadingleyR: An R package for mechanistic ecosystem modelling. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2021; 30(9):1922–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/ geb.13354 WOS:000674301300001. 32. Zhang Y, Liao XY, Sun DQ. A Coupled InVEST-PLUS Model for the Spatiotemporal Evolution of Eco- system Carbon Storage and Multi-Scenario Prediction Analysis. Land. 2024; 13(4):24. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/land13040509 WOS:001210062400001. 33. Shi J, Shi PJ, Wang ZY, Wang LR, Li YL. Multi-Scenario Simulation and Driving Force Analysis of Eco- system Service Value in Arid Areas Based on PLUS Model: A Case Study of Jiuquan City, China. Land. 2023; 12(5):21. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12050937 WOS:000996528400001. 34. Liu K, Zhang CZ, Zhang H, Xu H, Xia W. Spatiotemporal Variation and Dynamic Simulation of Ecosys- tem Carbon Storage in the Loess Plateau Based on PLUS and InVEST Models. Land. 2023; 12(5):18. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12051065 WOS:000997514500001.

35. Chen X, Yang SH, Ding J, Jiang ZW, Sun X. Effects of Biochar Addition on Rice Growth and Yield under Water-Saving Irrigation. Water. 2021; 13(2):11. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13020209 WOS:000611767700001. 36. Li M, Li SS, Liu HC, Zhang JJ. Balancing Water Ecosystem Services: Assessing Water Yield and Purifi- cation in Shanxi. Water. 2023; 15(18):16. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15183261 WOS:001072621000001. 37. Cheng DJ, Zhou XQ, Hu HY, Li ZH, Chen J, Miao L, et al. Electrochemical storage mechanism of sodium in carbon materials: A study from soft carbon to hard carbon. Carbon. 2021; 182:758–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2021.06.066 WOS:000684563200009. 38. Li Q, Xia XL, Kou XM, Niu L, Wan F, Zhu JH, et al. Forest Carbon Storage and Carbon Sequestration Potential in Shaanxi Province, China. Forests. 2023; 14(10):17. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14102021 WOS:001089385500001. 39. Yang N, Shao R, Zhang ZP, Dou ML, Niu J, Wang F. Gelatin-derived carbon: Carbonization mechanism and application in K-ion storage. Carbon. 2021; 178:775–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2021.03. 059 WOS:000648729800072. 40. Regolin AL, Oliveira-Santos LG, Ribeiro MC, Bailey LL. Habitat quality, not habitat amount, drives mam- malian habitat use in the Brazilian Pantanal. Landsc Ecol. 2021; 36(9):2519–33. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10980-021-01280-0 WOS:000660804700002. 41. Zhang HF, Li SD, Liu Y, Xu M. Assessment of the Habitat Quality of Offshore Area in Tongzhou Bay, China: Using Benthic Habitat Suitability and the InVEST Model. Water. 2022; 14(10):17. https://doi.org/

10.3390/w14101574 WOS:000802671500001. PLOS ONE Sustainable development simulation under climate change: A spatiotemporal ecosystem services approach PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0316605 February 4, 2025 17 / 19

42. Li Z, Gao Y, Yu HH, Chen B, Wang L. Soil water retention and hysteresis behaviors of different clayey soils at high suctions. Geomech Eng. 2022; 30(4):373–82. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2022.30.4.373 WOS:000865419400006. 43. Kang MW, Yibeltal M, Kim YH, Oh SJ, Lee JC, Kwon EE, et al. Enhancement of soil physical properties and soil water retention with biochar-based soil amendments. Sci Total Environ. 2022; 836:9. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155746 WOS:000833001100012. PMID: 35525368 44. Shah SM, Liu GY, Yang Q, Wang XQ, Casazza M, Agostinho F, et al. Energy-based valuation of agri- culture ecosystem services and dis-services. J Clean Prod. 2019; 239:17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2019.118019 WOS:000487237100065. 45. Campos P, Alvarez A, Mesa B, Oviedo JL, Ovando P, Caparro´s A. Total income and ecosystem service sustainability index: Accounting applications to holm oak dehesa case study in Andalusia-Spain. Land Use Pol. 2020; 97:41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104692 WOS:000558748500030. 46. Nayak AK, Shahid M, Nayak AD, Dhal B, Moharana KC, Mondal B, et al. Assessment of ecosystem ser- vices of rice farms in eastern India. Ecol Process. 2019; 8(1):16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-019- 0189-1 WOS:000483524300001. 47. Zhu Q, Cai YL. Integrating ecological risk, ecosystem health, and ecosystem services for assessing regional ecological security and its driving factors: Insights from a large river basin in China. Ecol Indic. 2023; 155:11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110954 WOS:001086680700001.

48. Huang SD, Li YJ, Hu HW, Xue PC, Wang J. Assessment of optimal seasonal selection for RSEI con- struction: a case study of ecological environment quality assessment in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region from 2001 to 2020. Geocarto Int. 2024; 39(1):22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2024.2311224 WOS:001162963300001. 49. Chen SY, Chen J, Jiang CQ, Yao RT, Xue JM, Bai YF, et al. Trends in Research on Forest Ecosystem Services in the Most Recent 20 Years: A Bibliometric Analysis. Forests. 2022; 13(7):19. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/f13071087 WOS:000833938200001. 50. Li ZG, Sun ZS, Tian YJ, Zhong JL, Yang WN. Impact of Land Use/Cover Change on Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration Ecosystem Services Value: Temporal-Spatial Patterns and Cold/Hot Spots Ecosystem Services Value Change Brought by Urbanization. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019; 16 (1):18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16010123 WOS:000459111400123. PMID: 30621215 51. Wood SLR, Jones SK, Johnson JA, Brauman KA, Chaplin-Kramer R, Fremier A, et al. Distilling the role of ecosystem services in the Sustainable Development Goals. Ecosyst Serv. 2018; 29:70–82. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.010 WOS:000424282600008. 52. Wang RY, Zhao JS, Lin YL, Qin BG, Chen GP, Bao LY, et al. Study on the response and prediction of SDGs based on different climate change scenarios: The case of the urban agglomeration in central Yunnan. Ecol Indic. 2023; 156:13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111076 WOS:001097770500001.

53. Nylund PA, Brem A, Agarwal N. Innovation ecosystems for meeting sustainable development goals: The evolving roles of multinational enterprises. J Clean Prod. 2021; 281:11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2020.125329 WOS:000609018900010. 54. Cooper HD, Mumba M, Dhyani S, Shen XL, Ma KP, Wynberg R, et al. Priorities for progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 15 ’Life on land’. Nat Ecol Evol. 2023; 7(10):1570–5. https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41559-023-02209-3 WOS:001078762200004. PMID: 37783830 55. Maes MJA, Jones KE, Toledano MB, Milligan B. Mapping synergies and trade-offs between urban eco- systems and the sustainable development goals. Environ Sci Policy. 2019; 93:181–8. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.envsci.2018.12.010 WOS:000457508000019. 56. Cheval S, Dumitrescu A, Adamescu M, Cazacu C. Identifying climate change hotspots relevant for eco- systems in Romania. Clim Res. 2020; 80(3):165–73. https://doi.org/10.3354/cr01603 WOS:000597222700001. 57. Fan ZM, Fan B, Yue TX. Terrestrial ecosystem scenarios and their response to climate change in Eur- asia. Sci China-Earth Sci. 2019; 62(10):1607–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-018-9374-3 WOS:000488857900008. 58. Jiang B, Chen YY, Bai Y, Xu XB. Supply-Demand Coupling Mechanisms for Policy Design. Sustainabil- ity. 2019; 11(20):8. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205760 WOS:000498398900217. 59. Lin JY, Huang JL, Prell C, Bryan BA. Changes in supply and demand mediate the effects of land-use change on freshwater ecosystem services flows. Sci Total Environ. 2021; 763:10. https://doi.org/10.

61. Metzger JP, Villarreal-Rosas J, Suarez-Castro AF, Lopez-Cubillos S, Gonzalez-Chaves A, Runting RK, et al. Considering landscape-level processes in ecosystem service assessments. Sci Total Environ. 2021; 796:15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149028 WOS:000701215700010. PMID: 34328874 62. Rau AL, Burkhardt V, Dorninger C, Hjort C, Ibe K, Kessler L, et al. Temporal patterns in ecosystem ser- vices research: A review and three recommendations. Ambio. 2020; 49(8):1377–93. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s13280-019-01292-w WOS:000499641400001. PMID: 31776967 63. Shi YS, Shi DH, Zhou LL, Fang RB. Identification of ecosystem services supply and demand areas and simulation of ecosystem service flows in Shanghai. Ecol Indic. 2020; 115:14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecolind.2020.106418 WOS:000559801800005. 64. Sun R, Jin XB, Han B, Liang XY, Zhang XL, Zhou YK. Does scale matter? Analysis and measurement of ecosystem service supply and demand status based on ecological unit. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2022; 95:12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106785 WOS:000793470600001. PLOS ONE Sustainable development simulation under climate change: A spatiotemporal ecosystem services approach PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0316605 February 4, 2025 19 / 19