Improving Land Use Planning through the Evaluation of Ecosystem Services: One Case Study of Quyang County

Table 11

Comparison of the value changes of the individual ecological services of land in the study area (yuan, %).

Function	Prior period output	Percentage	Traditional regulations program output	Percentage	Landscape state planning output	Percentage	Traditional mention high value change	Rate of change	Landscape increase change	Rate of change
Gas regulation	1,164,486	11.02	952,462	9.80	1,192,166	10.85	−212,025	−18.21	27,680	2.38
Climate change	1,323,080	12.52	1,225,608	12.61	1,367,822	12.45	−97,472	−7.37	44,742	3.38
Water conservation	1,192,327	11.28	1,015,928	10.45	1,229,113	11.19	−176,399	−14.79	36,786	3.09
Soil formation	2,074,195	19.62	1,949,728	20.06	2,149,198	19.56	−124,467	−6.00	75,003	3.62
Protection
Waste disposal	1,666,090	15.76	1,774,688	18.26	1,745,108	15.89	108,597	6.52	79,018	4.74
Biological diversity	1,380,275	13.06	1,196,874	12.31	1,471,885	13.40	−183,400	−13.29	91,610	6.64
Sexual protection
Food production	860,586	8.14	986,057	10.14	909,174	8.28	125,471	14.58	48,588	5.65
Raw materials	628,588	5.95	439,506	4.52	637,234	5.80	−189,082	−30.08	8,645	1.38
Entertainment culture	279,624	2.65	180,545	1.86	283,599	2.58	−99,079	−35.43	3,975	1.42
Total	10,569,252	100.00	9,721,393	100.00	10,985,299	100.00	−847,858	−8.02	416,047	3.94