EN中文

Journal of Geographical Sciences >

2022 , Vol. 32 >Issue 5: 957 - 980

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-022-1980-y

Research Articles

Evaluation and structural analysis of the functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster

  • CHEN Dongjun , 1, 2 ,
  • ZHONG Linsheng , 1, 3, * ,
  • FAN Jie 1, 3 ,
  • YU Hu 1, 3 ,
  • YANG Ding 1, 3 ,
  • ZENG Yuxi 1, 3
Expand
  • 1. Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
  • 2. School of Tourism and Urban Management, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330013, China
  • 3. College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
* Zhong Linsheng (1971-), PhD and Professor, specialized in ecotourism and geographical tourism, protected area management. E-mail:

Chen Dongjun (1992-), PhD, specialized in natural education of protected area, cultural and tourism geography. E-mail:

Received date: 2021-06-09

  Accepted date: 2021-08-10

  Online published: 2022-07-25

Supported by

The Second Tibetan Plateau Scientific Expedition and Research Program(2019QZKK0401)

Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences(XDA20020302)

Fold

Abstract

National parks are useful entities for looking at coordinated efforts to improve the Tibetan Plateau’s function as an ecological safety barrier and the region’s green development. Research on the characteristics of the function structures of the Tibetan Plateau’s national parks is vital to promoting their systematic and coordinated development. This paper combines the pressure-state-response model, the rank-size rule and a coupling and coordination model to identify and evaluate the functions of national parks on the Tibetan Plateau and to analyze the categories, hierarchy and structures behind those functions. The results indicate the following: (1) The Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster needs to maintain internal and external relations. Internally it needs to rationally allocate resources between ecological protection, recreation and community development, and externally it needs to promote its role as an ecological security barrier and promote regional green development by rationally ranking and organizing the individual national parks, so as to handle their co-evolution of functions at multiple scales. (2) Ecological protection, recreation and community development are the most prominent functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster, but there is scope to develop their scientific research and education functions. The Zipf index shows that their multi-functional level conforms with the rank-size rule, indicating balanced development. Individual national parks need to strengthen their optimal functions according to their characteristic localization. (3) The degree of coupling between the functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is 0.7809, and the degree of coordination is 0.6227, which indicates a very strong coupling and moderate coordination. The coupling strength and degree of coordination between the multiple functions vary greatly among the individual national parks, which reflects their different function structures. There are four function structure types: fully coordinated, optimally developed, moderately developed and moderately underdeveloped. This study contributes to research on evaluating the functions of national park clusters and analyzing their structures, and it serves as a reference on optimizing and sustainably developing the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster.

Key words： national park cluster; function structure; function evaluation; Tibetan Plateau

Cite this article

CHEN Dongjun , ZHONG Linsheng , FAN Jie , YU Hu , YANG Ding , ZENG Yuxi . Evaluation and structural analysis of the functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2022 , 32(5) : 957 -980 . DOI: 10.1007/s11442-022-1980-y

1 Introduction

The Tibetan Plateau, often referred to as “the Roof of the World” and “the Third Pole”, is a unique geographic region (Zhang et al., 2002). It is a biodiversity conservation area of global importance and an important barrier for the stability of the climate systems of China and East Asia. It contains unique ecosystems and rare animal and plant species (Sun et al., 2012), but it also contains China’s largest concentrated contiguous areas of poverty. It is home to concentrations of ethnic minorities and has poor infrastructure and underdeveloped public services, such as education and health (Wang and Ning, 2018). Compared with national parks in other countries, those on the Tibetan Plateau have closer ties in terms of their development and sustainable development. In 2017, Chinese President Xi Jinping stated in his congratulatory letter to the Second Comprehensive Scientific Expedition to the Tibetan Plateau that the expedition aims at “revealing the mechanisms of environmental change in the Tibetan Plateau and optimizing the ecological security barrier system.” He urged the scientists to “focus on problems related to the carrying capacity of resources and the environment, disaster risks, as well as green development on the Plateau.”
Developing a national park cluster is an important means of optimizing the Tibetan Plateau’s role as an ecological barrier and rationally utilizing the region’s natural resources (Zhong and Xiao, 2017). It is also an effective way to optimize its regional economic development model on the premises of achieving green development and prioritizing the environment now that it has moved on from the development stage of being an agricultural society. This will place value on the region’s natural ecological resources and make access to them more equitable and inclusive as well as promote the view among locals that lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets (Fan et al., 2019a). This approach has already received the support of the governments of Qinghai Province and the Tibet Autonomous Region.
The development of a national park cluster requires rationally structured functions. This study evaluates and analyzes the multiple functions of the national park cluster and their structural characteristics, which will improve our understanding, promote the goal of developing the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster and help optimize its functions.
National park clusters are an organizational form for the natural protection of an area, which creates stable functions for a specific geographic unit based on overall coordination of individual characteristics and locational differences. A national park cluster is a giant ecological system suited to large areas. It uses contiguous protection and integrated development to effectively solve the problems of patchwork and fragmented protection, and it can play an important role in protecting the integrity of regional ecosystems and coordinating regional development, as with the Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks cluster.
National park clusters and their development are emerging areas of study, with previous studies having tended to focus on individual parks and few on the functions of groups of national parks or nature reserves. Past studies by overseas scholars have focused on operating and managing national parks (Jagger et al., 2018), the impacts of climate change (Grünewald et al., 2016), developing tourism (Ghoddousi et al., 2018), biodiversity conservation (Van Riper et al., 2017), and other topics. Chinese research, meanwhile, has focused on assessing the ecosystem service value of national parks (Sun et al., 2019), community management (Gao et al., 2017), the sustainable development of tourism (Zhang and Xue, 2018), and function zone management (Yu et al., 2017), all of which have concerned single functions of individual national parks, rather than clusters.
Studies on national park functions tend to focus on the following: First is assessing function effectiveness, which involves analyzing and assessing the effectiveness of a given function by comparing an element of the eco-environment, such as tree diversity or socioeconomic development (Miller et al., 2018; Kulczyk and Bal, 2019), before and after the establishment of a national park or with another (non-national park) area. Second is evaluating a function’s value, which involves assessing the service value of multiple functions, such as recreation value and education value (Hutcheson et al., 2018; He et al., 2019), from the perspective of ecosystem services. Third is function optimization, which usually involves measuring and monitoring the multiple functions of national parks by conducting field surveys and constructing function evaluation models to propose measures to optimize functions (Austin et al., 2016; Slocum and Curtis, 2016).
National parks are a new category of regional function in China’s land space development and protection system. National park clusters have a combination of functions, and integrating and coordinating the development of a two-tier system of individual national parks and a national park cluster can help achieve overall goals more effectively.
The Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is a complex entity that closely integrates natural, human and ecological elements. It is necessary to emphasize the comprehensive relationship between the ecological-protection function, life-supporting function and public-welfare function of the cluster. There is an urgent need for in-depth analysis of the development status of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster as well as its hierarchy and structure to understand its basic characteristics and principles behind the organization.
This study looks at the draft proposal on the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster by the Second Comprehensive Scientific Expedition to the Tibetan Plateau and uses a pressure-state-response (PSR) model to construct a system for evaluating the multiple functions of national parks and comprehensively analyzing their development in the national park cluster. The rank-size rule is then used to explore the hierarchical structure of functions, and a coupling and coordination model is employed to analyze the relationships between the various functions. Finally, we summarize the types of function structures of individual national parks and suggest how to optimize the functions of individual national parks from the cluster’s perspective as well as the overall structure and organization of the national park cluster.

2 The Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster and its functions

2.1 The Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster

A “cluster” is an important concept in human geography. It refers to similar geographic objects creating a particular form of spatial organization and internal links through intermediary channels, such as urban clusters, industrial clusters, port clusters, etc. Clusters are characterized by the spatial agglomeration and interaction of geographic elements (De et al., 2020). In China, the Guiding Opinions on Establishing a System of Protected Natural Areas Composed Mainly of National Parks proposed the construction of “clusters of protected natural areas.” Similar concepts have been proposed overseas, including the development of ecological corridors connecting national parks in the US, ecological networks in Europe and the Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks (Yan et al., 2010). National park clusters consist of individual national park nodes, corridors and networks. They are a tangible manifestation of protection plans under the national park system (Margules and Pressey, 2000), and an important type of spatial organization for reshaping regional functions.
The Second Comprehensive Scientific Expedition to the Tibetan Plateau identified 21 individual national parks and nature reserves that could make up the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster and their potential scopes (Fan et al., 2019a). The proposed Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is based on the unique natural and cultural landscape of the Tibetan Plateau and would combine a series of cross-border and near-border national parks and reserves (Figure 1) (Fan et al., 2017). It is thought it would be an innovative system for, and driver of, ecological security, conservation, social welfare and green industry. The Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster would have the following characteristics (Yu et al., 2021):
Figure 1 Location of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster’s parks and reserves

Note: This map is based on a map (GS (2019) 1838) downloaded from the website of the National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation of China. The base map has not been modified

(1) Diverse regional functions. The cluster would balance the functions of safeguarding nature, developing communities and offering recreational services to the public. Its regional functions would display spatial heterogeneity, temporal variability, diversity and interdependence.
(2) Hierarchical structure. Based on its administrative areas, size, and resource and landscape value, the cluster would be divided into transnational national parks, flagship national parks and general national parks.
(3) Point-line-plane spatial structure. Based on a regional pattern of national parks, the national park cluster superimposes regional corridors and will seek to achieve functional objectives with overall coordination of a point-line-plane spatial structure.

2.2 Functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster

National parks serve the public good and are state-sanctioned and scientific spaces (Chen et al., 2014). They are managed for the purposes of ecological protection, scientific research, education and recreation. In addition to resource utilization, they leave scope for recreation and community development (Yu et al., 2017), and their function zoning balances ecological protection, cultural services and community development (Dong et al., 2019). As such, their functions include ecological protection, scientific research, education, recreation and community development (Gao and Deng, 2019). The development of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is an important model for strengthening the role of China’s western region as an ecological barrier and promoting green development there (Li et al., 2019). The three main objectives of the national park cluster are the primary function of ecological protection; scientific research, education and recreation for public benefit; and community development for local farmers and herdsmen to increase their incomes (Fan et al., 2019a; 2019b). Although ecological protection is the primary function, thought has also been given to the functions of scientific research, education, recreation and community development (Fan et al., 2019a; Gao and Deng, 2019). More details of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster are given below.
(1) Ecological protection. The Tibetan Plateau is a natural ecological and cultural environment that covers a vast area, sits at high elevation and contains extremely fragile ecosystems. It also has natural and human resources and landscapes of national and international significance. The primary function of national parks is ecological protection (Zhong and Xiao, 2017), and it is hoped that there will be low-density development of less than 1% of the land and strict ecological protection of more than 99% of the remaining land space (Fan et al., 2019b).
(2) Social development. The severe climatic conditions of the Tibetan Plateau, including cold, arid, low-oxygen, low accumulated temperatures and strong radiation, are not conducive to social and economic activities, and they are accompanied by a high incidence of natural disasters and deep poverty, with isolated and fragmented contiguous areas of poverty, as well as a lack of effective economic growth poles in the region. The construction of national parks will have a significant impact on the livelihoods and development of communities by reforming the use of land and natural resources as well as capital investment mechanisms, which will promote consistent ecological protection and coordinated socioeconomic development (Nakakaawa et al., 2015; Gao et al., 2017).
(3) Cultural functions, including scientific research, education and recreation. National parks are research objects and experimental sites for scientific research and promote the development of scientific research through the construction of research bases and platforms (Fouke, 2011). Their rich natural and cultural landscapes can host various educational activities to let the public experience nature and provide educational opportunities (Chen et al., 2020a). National parks are derived from the wilderness concept of natural aesthetics, and their recreational function is guaranteed by legislation in the national park systems of various countries (Zhang et al., 2017).

3 Research method and data sources

The multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster are more pronounced than those of ordinary areas. Based on the above analysis, the PSR model, rank-size rule and coupling and coordination model were combined to construct a method of analyzing the development of multiple functions, hierarchical structure and function structure of the national park cluster (Figure 2). First, we used a PSR model to construct a system for evaluating the multiple functions of national parks, which was combined with the entropy method to comprehensively evaluate each function and the natural breakpoint method to determine evaluation levels. Second, based on the function evaluation, we performed a logarithmic simulation with scattered points of the rank and scale (evaluation indicators) of each function to determine the hierarchical structure relationship between the various functions according to the Zipf index. Finally, we used a coupling and coordination model to analyze the coupling strength and degree of coordination of each function and summarize the function structure types of the individual national parks.
Figure 2 Logic diagram of the methods used in this study

3.1 Function evaluation system

3.1.1 PSR evaluation system

The pressure-state-response (PSR) model was originally created to evaluate environmental quality. It was posited that the pressure exerted by human activities and natural disturbance on the ecosystem leads to changes in the health of ecosystems, and an ecosystem's own resistance and restoration mechanisms and human’s subjective will respond to this (Peng et al., 2012). This model clearly explains the causal relationship of sustainable changes in human-nature composite ecosystems, and it has been widely used in regional ecological security (Shen et al., 2020), ecological economic management (Chen et al., 2020b), and other evaluation studies. Based on this model, we constructed a national park function evaluation index to evaluate the development of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster’s multiple functions. The pressure index represents the load caused by natural disturbances or human activities on the various functions of the national park; the state index reflects the current status of each function; and the response index is the countermeasures taken to optimize functions.

3.1.2 Function evaluation index

By combining the PSR evaluation model and the function analysis of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster, and with reference to related research (Tang et al., 2010), 21 indicators, such as the degree of interference by human activities, are selected to create a multi-function evaluation index for the national park cluster (Table 1). The indicators selected are as follows:
Table 1 System for evaluating the multiple functions of national parks
Function Criterion Indicator Indicator analysis and nature of influence Weight
Ecological protection Pressure P1 Human footprint Degree of disturbance of human activities on the ecosystem (-) 0.0703
State P2 Ecological representation Level and number of state-protected species (+) 0.0342
State P3 Normalized difference vegetation index Vegetation coverage and growth (+) 0.0495
Response P4 Ecological elasticity Ability of ecosystem to resist pressure and disturbance (+) 0.0364
Response P5 Awareness and intensity of ecological protection Communities and managers attach importance to ecological protection (+) 0.0221
Scientific research Pressure R1 Research infrastructure Monitoring stations and other scientific research infrastructure (+) 0.0578
State R2 Research value Citation frequency of relevant studies (+) 0.0452
Response R3 Research funding Funding for relevant research (+) 0.0453
Education Pressure E1 Education facilities and services Signs, explanations and other educational services and facilities (+) 0.0382
State E2 Landscape educational value Natural science and social cultural knowledge contained in the landscape (+) 0.0565
Response R3 No. of educational venues Educational venues/total population (+) 0.0446
Recreation Pressure T1 Traffic accessibility Transport mileage/area (+) 0.0481
Pressure T2 Recreational environment suitability Regional average elevation (-) 0.0459
State T3 Tourist density Tourists/area (+) 0.0588
State T4 Tourism economic density Tourism income/area (+) 0.0537
Response T5 Tertiary industry employment percentage Tertiary industry employees/total population (+) 0.0440
Community development Pressure C1 Urban-rural disposable income difference Difference in disposable income of urban and rural residents (-) 0.0474
State C2 Per capita GRP GRP/total population (+) 0.0624
State C3 Level of urbanization County town population/registered household population (+) 0.0507
Response C4 Per capita personal savings Personal savings/total population (+) 0.0395
Response C5 Industrial structure Value-added of primary and secondary industry/GDP (-) 0.0494
(1) Ecological protection function. Human activities are the main factor that puts pressure on ecosystems, so human footprint is used as an indicator to reflect the degree of interfere-ence of human activities on the environment (Liu et al., 2018). National parks protect representative ecosystems and rare species, so the state of ecological protection is reflected by the level and number of state-protected species and the condition of vegetation (Chen et al., 2020c). The ecosystem has the ability to self-regulate when it is disturbed by the outside world, which is known as ecological elasticity. Ecological elasticity and awareness and intensity of ecological protection among communities and managers represent the ecological protection response of the ecosystem itself and human society (Liao et al., 2015).
(2) Scientific research function. Scientific research infrastructure, such as monitoring networks and scientific research equipment, are prerequisites for achieving the scientific research function of a national park, so the current state of scientific research infrastructure represents the pressure on the scientific research function. The citation frequency of scientific research papers is a recognized indicator for evaluating the value of scientific research (Zhang et al., 2015), so citation frequency reflects the state of the scientific research function. The investment of scientific research funds is essential for the realization of the scientific research function, so the total amount of relevant scientific research project funding is used to reflect the response element of the scientific research function (Kong and Zhang, 2015).
(3) Education function. Insufficient educational facilities and services are the main limiting factors on the education function of national parks (Chen and Zhong, 2020). Educational facilities and services represent the pressure on the education function. Scientific knowledge and cultural content contained in resources and landscapes reflect the value of education (Chen et al., 2020a), so the state of the education function is evaluated by relevance to the natural sciences and social culture. The number of educational participants is limited by educational venues, so the number of educational venues is used as the education function’s response.
(4) Recreation function. There is a significant correlation between tourism economy and transportation. Transportation is the main factor restricting tourism in the Tibetan Plateau region (Chen et al., 2016), though altitude sickness impacts tourists’ experience and health, which means the plateau’s environment is another obstacle to domestic tourism (Cha et al., 2016). Transport availability and regional elevation levels are, therefore, used to represent the pressures on the recreation function. Tourist arrivals and tourism income directly reflect the current state of tourism, so tourist and economic density are used to represent the state of the recreation function. Development of tertiary industry creates a favorable economic and industrial environment for developing tourism (Luo et al., 2012), so the percentage of people employed in tertiary industry is used as a measure of the response to the recreation function.
(5) Community development function. The income gap between urban and rural residents leads to social stratification, so the difference in disposable income of urban and rural residents is used to characterize the pressure on the community development function. Gross regional product and urbanization are a reflection of regional socioeconomic development, so per capita GDP and level of urbanization are used to represent the state of community development. Residents’ savings and transformation and upgrading of the industrial structure are conducive to expanding domestic demand and promoting regional economic growth (Yi and Liu, 2015), so per capita personal saving and industrial structure are used to evaluate the response to the community development function.

3.1.3 Indicator weight and evaluation method

The entropy weight method is used to determine index weights based on original information for each indicator. It not only gives the effective value of indicator information but also avoids overlap in information between indicators. It is a relatively objective multi-indicator evaluation method (He et al., 2016). The specific steps of using the entropy weight method to determine the weight of each indicator are as follows.
(1) The original data was standardized using the formulas:
${{{x}'}_{ij}}=\frac{{{x}_{ij}}-\text{min}\ {{x}_{j}}}{\text{max}\ {{x}_{j}}-\text{min}\ {{x}_{j}}}~$
${{{x}'}_{ij}}=\frac{\text{max}\ {{x}_{j}}-{{x}_{ij}}}{\text{max}\ {{x}_{j}}-\text{min}\ {{x}_{j}}}$
where xij is the value of indicator i for national park j; ${{{x}'}_{ij}}$is the result after standardization; and min xj and max xj are the minimum and maximum values of that indicator. Positive indicators use formula (1), and negative indicators use formula (2).
(2) Information entropy is calculated using the formulas:
${{E}_{j}}=-k\underset{i=\text{1}}{\overset{n}{\mathop \sum }}\,{{Y}_{ij}}\ln {{Y}_{ij}}$
${{Y}_{ij}}={{{x}'}_{ij}}/\underset{i=\text{1}}{\overset{n}{\mathop \sum }}\,{{{x}'}_{ij}}$
where Ej is the information entropy; n is the number of national parks; k is the constant and $k=\text{1}/\ln n$; and Yij represents the proportion of indicator j for national park i.
(3) The formula for calculating weights is:
\[{{W}_{j}}=(\text{1}-{{E}_{j}})/\underset{j=\text{1}}{\overset{n}{\mathop \sum }}\,(\text{1}-{{E}_{j}})\]
where Wj is the indicator’s weight. Indicator weights can be obtained using formula (5), with weighted summation performed to obtain the evaluation indicator of each function. The formula is as follows:
$F=\underset{i=\text{1}}{\overset{n}{\mathop \sum }}\,{{W}_{j}}{{{x}'}_{ij}}$
where F is the evaluation indicator of each function. The natural breakpoint method is used to divide each function evaluation into three levels: excellent, good and moderate.

3.2 Rank-size rule

The rank-size rule is generally used to characterize the size distribution law of a country or a region, such as the ideal rectangular hyperbolic relationship that exists between the rank and scale of a city. This law is called Zipf’s law (Li et al., 2016). Studies have shown that Zipf’s law can accurately describe the distribution of city size, which led to further theoretical and empirical applications (Wan et al., 2020). We used this rule to analyze the hierarchical structure of the multiple functions of the national park cluster. The formula is as follows (Jiang et al., 2018):
$\ln {{F}_{i}}=\ln {{F}_{\text{1}}}-q\ln {{R}_{i}}$
where Fi is a single function evaluation indicator of national park i; F1 is the first function evaluation indicator; q is the elasticity coefficient (constant, namely Zipf’s law); and Ri is the function evaluation order of national park i. Based on this formula, it is possible to determine whether each function conforms to the rank-size law.
We put each function evaluation indicator in order, created corresponding rank and size logarithmic scatter plots, performed line fitting on the double logarithmic curve, and calculated the Zipf index. The best fitting curve in the scatter diagram is called the scale-free area, which reflects the rank-size distribution structure, and q reflects the size distribution structure of the various functions. When q=1, q>1 and q<1, the functions of the national park cluster are in optimal distribution, Pareto distribution (centralization), and normal distribution (equalization) modes in their natural state (Guo et al., 2017).

3.3 Function coupling and coordination

The coupling and coordination model is used to calculate and analyze the coupling strength and coordination degree of multiple functions of each national park. The formulas are as follows (Tang, 2015):
$C=\sqrt[\text{5}]{\left( {{P}_{i}}*{{R}_{i}}*{{E}_{i}}*{{T}_{i}}*{{C}_{i}} \right)/{{\left\{ \left( {{P}_{i}}+{{R}_{i}}+{{E}_{i}}+{{T}_{i}}+{{C}_{i}} \right)/\text{5} \right\}}^{\text{5}}}}$
$T=\text{ }\!\!\alpha\!\!\text{ }{{P}_{i}}+\text{ }\!\!\beta\!\!\text{ }{{R}_{i}}+\text{ }\!\!\gamma\!\!\text{ }{{E}_{i}}+\text{ }\!\!\delta\!\!\text{ }{{T}_{i}}+\text{ }\!\!\varepsilon\!\!\text{ }{{C}_{i}}$
$D=\sqrt{C*T}$
where C is the degree of function coupling, $C\in \left( \text{0,1} \right]$; Pi, Ri, Ei, Ti and Ci represent the evaluation indicators of ecological protection, scientific research, education, recreation, and community development of national park i, respectively; T is the comprehensive evaluation index of the multiple functions of the national park; α, β, γ, δ and ε are the weight coefficients of those functions, taking into consideration the order of importance of the multiple functions of the national parks (i.e., ecological protection is the primary, community development is the secondary, scientific research and education, and recreation are the least) (Gao and Deng, 2019). The values are 0.3500, 0.2500, 0.1333, 0.1333, and 0.1333, respectively. D is the degree of function coordination, $D\in \left( \text{0,1} \right]$. The lower the value of D, the worse the coordination between functions. According to the calculated values of functional coupling and coordination, the evaluation grades are divided as shown in Table 2 (Xiao and Zhang, 2019).
Table 2 Coupling and coordination rankings
Coupling Level Coordination Level
(0.00, 0.30) Weak coupling (0.00, 0.20) Severe imbalance
[0.30, 0.50) Antagonistic (moderate) coupling [0.20, 0.40) Borderline imbalance
[0.50, 0.80) Strong coupling [0.40, 0.60) Low-level coordination
[0.80, 1.00] Very strong coupling [0.60, 0.80) Moderate coordination
- - [0.80, 1.00] High-level coordination

3.4 Types of function structure

Following a comprehensive evaluation of multiple functions and coupling and coordination analysis, the following four types of function structures of national parks are identified: fully coordinated, optimally developed, moderately developed and moderately underdeveloped (Table 3).
Table 3 Types of national park function structures
Type Judgement criteria Features
Function evaluation Coordination
Fully coordinated 3 or more functions are optimal ≥0.8 Three or more functions are optimal and all functions are highly coordinated.
Optimally developed 2 functions are optimal ≥0.6 Two functions are optimal and all functions are moderately coordinated.
Moderately developed 1 function is optimal ≥0.6 One function is optimal and all functions are moderately coordinated.
Moderately underdeveloped No functions are optimal <0.6 No functions are optimal or all functions are poorly coordinated.
The next step was to classify the multi-function types and finalize the coupling and coordination analysis. Function structures were divided into three categories based on empirical judgments, relevant research and the multi-function evaluation (Xiao and Zhang, 2019): “full”, “optimal” and “moderate” according to the multi-function evaluation. National parks with three or more optimal functions are classified as “full”; those with two optimal functions are classified as “optimal”; and those with one or no optimal functions are classified as “moderate”. The coordination degree of each function can also be divided into three types: “coordinated”, “developed” and “underdeveloped”. When the coordination degree is ≥0.8, the type is coordinated; when the degree is ≥0.6, it is developed; and when it is <0.6, it is underdeveloped. Based on this, the function structure of national parks can be divided into the following four categories: fully coordinated, optimally developed, moderately developed, and moderately underdeveloped.
The “fully coordinated” type is characterized as having three or more well-developed functions (with “optimal” evaluation results) and a high-level of coordination between all functions (D≥0.8); the “optimally developed” type has two well-developed functions and moderate coordination of all functions (0.6≤D<0.8); the “moderately developed” type has one function that is well developed, and the various functions are moderately coordinated (0.6≤D<0.8); the “moderately underdeveloped” type has no well-developed functions or poor coordination between them (D<0.6).

3.5 Data sources and processing

The research data used in this article consists of the following:
(1) Geographic information. This includes data on the human footprint index, land use, China’s county administrative divisions, and digital elevation models, which were sourced from the IUCN-WDPA database (www.iucn.org), Chinese Academy of Sciences Resource and Environment Science and Data Center (www.resdc.cn), and National Catalogue Service for Geographic Information (www.webmap.cn), respectively. The indicator values of P1, P3, P4, and T2 were calculated based on the above-mentioned geographic data and the calculated area of each national park.
(2) Field survey data. P2, P5, R1, E1, and E2 and other indicators were evaluated by 14 experts and scholars who took part in the scientific expeditions to the Tibetan Plateau, who gave them scores between 1 and 10 based on field surveys.
(3) Economic and social development statistics. These include the China Statistical Yearbook (County Level) (2019), China County Seat Construction Statistical Yearbook (2019) as well as the National Economic and Social Development Statistical Bulletin and the Government Work Report for 2018. As there is no national park statistical data for indicators such as E3, T1, T3-T5, and C1-C5, the counties and districts concerned shall be used as the basis for data collection and replacement. These counties are determined by the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster research team based on the proportion of the national park area in the counties and that are deemed to be representative of the natural ecosystem. Multi-representative counties use their average value as their final indicator value.
In addition, data of indicators R2 and R3 are from China National Knowledge Infrastructure (www.cnki.net) and ScienceNet.cn (www.sciencenet.cn) respectively.

4 Results and analysis

4.1 Function evaluation analysis

Based on the PSR model and entropy method, the function indicators of 21 national parks were obtained, and ArcGIS 10 was used to visualize the evaluation results and obtain the multi-function evaluation results for individual national parks (Figure 3).
Figure 3 Evaluation of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster

Note: This map is based on a map (GS (2019) 1838) downloaded from the website of the National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation of China. The base map has not been modified.

(1) Ecological protection function
The ecological protection function indicator value of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is 1.3188. Looking at individual national parks, those with “optimal” evaluation results include the Giant Panda National Park (NP), Shangrila NP, Western Tianshan Mountains NP, Gongga Mountain NP, Zoige NP, and Qinghai Lake NP, with an average index value of 1.7950. The national parks with “moderate” evaluation results include Holy Mountain and Lakes NP, Zhari Mountain NP, Selincuo Puruogangri NP, Pamir NP, Yangtze River Source NP, Zanda Tulin NP, Kunlun Mountains NP and Semi-submerged Yardang NP, with an average indicator value of 0.9242. The other national parks have “good” evaluation results and had an average indicator value of 1.3615.
Ecological background and human activities affect the ecological protection function. In terms of ecological background, the Western Tianshan Mountains NP protects the largest primitive coniferous forest in western China and the only remaining band of broadleaf forest in the Tianshan Mountains. The Zoige Grassland is one of the three major wetlands in China and one of the three largest areas of grassland in western Sichuan. These two national parks have good ecological background conditions. National parks with poor ecological background conditions include the Zanda Tulin NP and Selincuo Puruogangri NP, which mainly consist of deserts, earth forests and glaciers, giving them poor ecological service functions. In terms of human activities, the Giant Panda NP integrates more than 80 nature reserves, and the Shangrila NP integrates the internationally important wetland of Bitahai Nature Reserve and the Shudu Lake Scenic Area in the Three Parallel Rivers of Yunnan UNESCO World Heritage Site, with relatively complete infrastructure and management systems (Xu et al., 2019; Sun, 2020), giving both parks a good foundation for ecological protection. Parks such as the Holy Mountain and Lakes NP and Semi-submerged Yardang NP are significantly affected by religious activities and tourism activities, which means their ecological protection function has suffered to a certain degree.
(2) Scientific research function
The scientific research function indicator value of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is 0.8808. Looking at individual parks, those with “optimal” evaluation results include the Giant Panada NP, Qilian Mountains NP, Lancang River Source NP, Qinghai Lake NP and Zoige NP, with the exponential mean of 1.2268. The parks with “moderate” evaluation results include the Semi-submerged Yardang NP, Selincuo Puruogangri NP, Zanda Tulin NP, Daocheng Yading NP, Holy Mountain and Lakes NP and Zhari Mountain NP, with an average indicator value of 0.5773. The results of the other national parks are “good”, with an average indicator value of 0.8900.
The national parks on the Tibetan Plateau generally have weak scientific research foundations, with differences in scientific research functions of the various parks mainly reflected by relevant studies and funding support for research projects. National parks with more typical ecosystems and that attract more attention have relatively good research foundations. The giant panda is a species endemic to China, and it is a flagship species of global conservation efforts. The Giant Panda NP covers the habitat of 87.5% of all wild pandas in China. The Qilian Mountains mark the boundary between the first and second steps, or levels, of China’s topography and the 200mm annual precipitation line. The source of the Lancang River is the origins of the transnational Mekong River and the largest contiguous habitat of important Asian flagship species, including snow leopard, and has the most complete Cretaceous Danxia geological landscape on the Tibetan Plateau. Qinghai Lake is China’s largest inland lake. It contains brackish water and is one of China’s seven internationally important wetlands. Zoige is an important water conservation area of the Yellow River and the Yangtze River, and is one of the most ecologically diverse alpine regions in the world. These national parks tend to attract more attention for scientific research, with more funding and papers.
(3) Education function
The indicator value of the education function for the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster as a whole is 0.9484. In terms of individual parks, those with “optimal” results include the Shangrila NP, Holy Mountain and Lakes NP, Yarlung Zangbo Grand Canyon NP, Pamir NP, Qilian Mountains NP, Qinghai Lake NP, Giant Panda NP and Zhari Mountain NP, with an average indicator score of 1.0771. Those with a “moderate” indicator value include the Zoige NP, Gongga Mountain NP, Lancang River Source NP and Semi-submerged Yardang NP, with an average value of 0.7402. The evaluation results of the other national parks are “good”, with an average score of 0.9266.
Although the Tibetan Plateau exists as a unique geographic unit, its natural resources, environment and social and cultural background are of global significance and of great social educational value. Educational facilities and services, including educational venues, of the Tibetan Plateau remain underdeveloped, so the education function has not been effectively utilized. Educational venues, facilities and services are the main factors limiting the education function in the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster.
(4) Recreation function
The recreation function indicator value for the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is 1.3742. Looking at individual parks, those with “optimal” evaluation results are the Gongga Mountain NP, Yading NP, Giant Panda NP and Shangrila NP, with an average indicator value of 1.9355. Those with “moderate” results include Selincuo Puruogangri NP, Lancang River Source NP, Yellow River Source NP, Semi-submerged Yardang NP, and Zhari Mountain NP, with an average score of 0.8860. The results of the other national parks are “good”, with an average score of 1.3906.
The Tibetan Plateau is one of the most unique natural and cultural landscapes in the world, offering recreation and outdoor activity service functions, which are attracting increasing numbers of tourists. Accessibility is the main factor affecting the recreation function. The Gongga Mountain, Yading, Giant Panda, and Shangrila national parks are all well-known tourist destinations in the Sichuan-Tibet region. They are all located on the eastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau and effectively utilize the recreation function of their ecosystems.
(5) Community development function
The community development function indicator score of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is 1.3502. In terms of individual parks, national parks with “optimal” evaluation results are the Kunlun Mountains, Shangrila, Semi-submerged Yardang, Gongga Mountain, Qinghai Lake, Pamir, and Zanda Tulin national parks, which have an average indicator score of 1.7637. National parks with “moderate” values include the Zoige NP and Selincuo Puruogangri NP, with an average score of 0.8242. The results of the other national parks are “good”, with an average score of 1.1966.
The socioeconomic development of the Tibetan Plateau generally lags the rest of China. The contiguous area of extreme poverty that includes three areas in southern Xinjiang, the entire Tibet region, and Tibetan areas in Gansu, Qinghai, Sichuan and Yunnan cover almost the entire Tibetan Plateau. All the region’s national parks suffer from socioeconomic underdevelopment, and the construction of national parks needs to promote regional socioeconomic development.

4.2 Function rank-size analysis

Function rank-size analysis reveals the hierarchical structure of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster. Based on the indicators and positional order of the various functions of the national park cluster, Excel is used to draw a position rank-size scatterplot, and function fitting is performed.

4.2.1 Verifying the hierarchy of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster

The goodness-of-fit value (the larger the value, the better the fit) reflects the hierarchical structure of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster. The results of the rank-size function fitting equation for the functions of ecological protection, scientific research, education, recreation and community development are 0.8586, 0.8639, 0.8084, 0.8329 and 0.8259, respectively. The good fit reflects the suitability of the above function equations to the hierarchy of the multiple functions of the national park cluster and the fact that the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster conform to the rank-size rule.

4.2.2 Hierarchical structure of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster

Based on the judgement that the multiple functions conform to the rank-size rule, the hierarchical structure of the multiple functions is verified further. The Zipf index reflects the scale distribution structure of the various functions. Figure 4 shows that the lines of best fit (i.e., Zipf index) of the functions of ecological protection, scientific research, education, recreation and community development are 0.2605, 0.2530, 0.1069, 0.2239 and 0.2410, respectively. The Zipf index is less than 1, indicating that all the functions present a normal distribution pattern, and the development of the various functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster is in a natural state of equilibrium. Within the context of the poor ecological environment of the Tibetan Plateau and the general socioeconomic underdevelopment of the national park cluster, the development of functions in individual national parks is relatively balanced, and the individual national parks have not achieved absolute optimal development of the functions.
Figure 4 Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster rank-size double logarithm fitting curve and Zipf exponential curve

4.3 Function coupling and coordination analysis

The function coupling and coordination values of the 21 national parks were calculated based on a coupling and coordination model, and ArcGIS 10 is used to visualize the results (Figure 5), which reveals the following characteristics:
Figure 5 Coupling and coordination of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster

Note: This map is based on a map (GS (2019) 1838) downloaded from the website of the National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation of China. The base map has not been modified.

4.3.1 Strong coupling of national park cluster functions and stark differences in function coupling of individual national parks

The average coupling value of each function is 0.7809, which indicates that the functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster are strongly coupled. The range of coupling values is [0.0495, 0.9820], which indicates that the function coupling of the various national parks is quite different. The function coupling values of the Semi-submerged Yardang (0.0495), Zhari Mountain (0.0551), and Selincuo Puruogangri (0.2477) national parks indicate weak coupling. Ongoing development should focus on improving the correlation and synergy of various functions. The function coupling values of other national parks are all higher than 0.5, which indicates strong coupling.

4.3.2 Moderate coordination of national park cluster functions and stark differences in function coordination of individual national parks

The average coordination value of all the functions is 0.6227, which indicates that the functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster are in a state of moderate coordination. The range of coordination values is [0.1186, 0.8976], which indicates that the function coordination of the national parks is quite different. The coordination of the Semi-submerged Yardang NP is the lowest, at 0.1186, which is due to its lagging ecological protection, scientific research, education and recreation functions. The coordination of the Shangrila NP is the highest, at 0.8976, where the development of various functions is in a state of very strong coordination. This can be explained by the fact that the Shangrila NP was one of the first to be established, so its functions are relatively coordinated. The resonance effect has also promoted the coordination and consistent development of its various functions.

4.4 Analysis of function structure types

The above analysis shows that the development of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster conforms to the rank-size rule, showing that it is in a normal and balanced state of development. In terms of the individual national parks, there are certain differences in the development of various functions and the extent of their coupling and coordination, which reflects the different characteristics of the function structures. Based on the above function evaluation and coupling and coordination analysis, and having considered the development of multiple functions in individual national parks as well as their coupling and coordination (Table 3), the function structure types of individual parks are obtained (Table 4). Of the 21 national parks, three (Giant Panda, Qinghai Lake, and Shangrila) are fully coordinated parks; four (Pamir, Gongga Mountain, Qilian Mountains, and Zoige) are optimally developed parks; five (Holy Mountain and Lakes, Yarlung Zangbo Grand Canyon, Daocheng Yading, Kunlun Mountains, and Western Tianshan Mountains) are moderately developed parks; and nine (Mount Qomolangma, Yellow River Source, Selincuo Puruogangri, Yangtze River Source, Dulong River and Three Parallel Rivers, Lancang River Source, Semi-submerged Yardang, Zanda Tulin, and Zhari Mountain) are moderately underdeveloped parks.
Table 4 Function structure types of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster
National park Optimal function(s) Coordination Structure type
Pamir Education, community
development		 Moderate Optimally developed
Mount Qomolangma — Moderate Moderately underdeveloped
Giant Panda Ecological protection, scientific research, education, recreation High-level Fully coordinated
Yellow River Source — Moderate Moderately underdeveloped
Selincuo Puruogangri — Borderline
imbalance		 Moderately underdeveloped
Holy Mountain and Lakes Education Moderate Moderately developed
Yarlung Zangbo Grand Canyon Education Moderate Moderately developed
Yangtze River Source — Low-level Moderately underdeveloped
Daocheng Yading Recreation Moderate Moderately developed
Dulong River and Three
Parallel Rivers		 — Moderate Moderately underdeveloped
Gongga Mountain Ecological protection, recreation, community development Moderate Optimally developed
Qinghai Lake Ecological protection, scientific research, education, community development High-level Fully coordinated
Kunlun Mountains Community development Moderate Moderately developed
Lancang River Source Scientific research Low-level Moderately underdeveloped
Qilian Mountains Scientific research, education Moderate Optimally developed
Zoige Ecological protection, scientific research Moderate Optimally developed
Semi-submerged Yardang Community development Severe imbalance Moderately underdeveloped
Western Tianshan Mountains Ecological protection Moderate Moderately developed
Shangrila Ecological protection, education, recreation, community development High-level Fully coordinated
Zanda Tulin Community development Low-level Moderately underdeveloped
Zhari Mountain Education Severe imbalance Moderately underdeveloped
The national parks with various function structures show obvious spatial distribution characteristics (Figure 6). “Fully coordinated” and “optimally developed” national parks are located on the eastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau; whereas, “moderately developed” and “moderately underdeveloped” national parks are largely located in the plateau’s hinterland and southern region. This again proves the combined impact of environment and socioeconomic conditions on the development of the multiple functions of national parks. The eastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau sits at lower elevations and receives more precipitation due to the eastern monsoon. It is close to the Sichuan-Chongqing urban agglomeration and has good traffic accessibility. Its better environmental and socioeconomic conditions promote the fully coordinated development of the multiple functions of the national parks located there, such as the Giant Panda, Qinghai Lake, Shangrila, Gongga Mountain and Zoige parks. The central and southern parts of the Tibetan Plateau are at higher elevations and receive less precipitation from the eastern and southern monsoons, while poor transport accessibility and poor environmental and socioeconomic conditions have affected the development of the functions of national parks, such as the Zanda Tulin, Selincuo Puruogangri and Lancang River Source parks.
Figure 6 Function structures of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster

Note: This map is based on a map (GS (2019) 1838) downloaded from the website of the National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation of China. The base map has not been modified.

5 Conclusions and discussion

(1) National parks are unique entities that integrate multiple functions, such as ecological protection, scientific research, education, recreation and community development. The development of national parks through the spatial clustering of multiple parks, together with nature reserves, can promote the belt protection of ecological function and encourage the effective use of the cultural and service functions of ecosystems, thereby vitalizing regional economic development and realizing the coordinated development of multiple functions. This is different from most wilderness national parks outside of China, and it reflects the Chinese government’s strategy of guiding the development of national parks as major function zones of great importance in the era of promoting ecological conservation. The Tibetan Plateau has experienced the development stages of modern agriculture and animal husbandry, urbanization and new rural construction, but despite social development and greater urbanization, constraints posed by ecological fragility and poverty remain. The effective use and supply of ecological products within the flexible protection of nature can stimulate local
enthusiasm for development and ensure social equity and public welfare (Fan et al., 2017; Zhong et al., 2016). Establishing a coordinated development model of the various functions of the national park cluster and of individual national parks, and concentrating residential, service and entertainment items in small areas will help achieve a balance between regional socioeconomic development, as well as nationally oriented scientific research, education and recreation functions (Yu et al., 2017). It will also help to protect the fragile eco-environment of the Tibetan Plateau, stabilize its role as a national ecological security barrier (Sun et al., 2012), and promote the region’s green development.
(2) The development of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster conforms to the linear function distribution law of the rank-size rule, indicating a hierarchical structure with a normal distribution and balanced development. We divided function structures into four types: fully coordinated, optimally developed, moderately developed and moderately underdeveloped. Of the 21 national parks covered by this study, 3 are fully coordinated, 4 are optimally developed, 5 are moderately developed and 9 are moderately underdeveloped. A combination of eco-environmental conditions and socioeconomic development affect the functional development and function structures of national parks. The Tibetan Plateau has good ecosystem integrity (Deng et al., 2021), and the proposed area of the national park cluster encompasses a concentration of the most valuable ecosystems and landscape resources on the Tibetan Plateau (Zhong et al., 2021). The overall similarity of its environmental and socioeconomic conditions promotes balance in the function structure of the national park cluster.
With regard to individual national parks, certain eco-environmental and socioeconomic differences distinguish their function structures. National parks with fully coordinated and optimally developed functions are mostly located in natural areas with good eco-environmental conditions, such as coniferous forests or grasslands (Table 5). These include the Gongga Mountain, Shangrila, Giant Panda, Qilian Mountains and Qinghai Lake national parks. Superior eco-environmental conditions will further attract external material, energy and information factors, thereby promoting the community development, scientific research, education and recreation functions of the parks. Socioeconomic development activities also affect the functions of national parks by adjusting related factors. For example, the Dulong River and Three Parallel Rivers and Shangrila national parks, which are located in the deep valleys of a coniferous forest area in the eastern mountains of the Tibetan area of Sichuan, have different function development and structure characteristics, which reflect the impact of socioeconomic development. In this way, the new system of a national park cluster can reconfigure the structure of ecological, production and living spaces of the Tibetan Plateau by coordinating the development of the multiple functions of national parks, so as to establish a rational and orderly relationship between people and the land and realize sustainable development of the region.
Table 5 Correspondence between the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster and natural ecological zones
Ecological zone Code National park (function structure; optimal function(s))
Tianshan Mountains desert, grassland, coniferous forest IID5 Western Tianshan Mountains (moderate development; ecological protection)
Southern flank of Eastern Himalayas-mountain monsoon forest/evergreen broadleaf forest VA6 Yarlung Zangbo Grand Canyon (moderate development; education)
Golog-Nagqu plateau’s alpine shrub and meadows HIB1 Zoige (optimal development; ecological protection and scientific research), Lancang River Source (moderate underdevelopment; scientific research)
Southern Qinghai Plateau wide valley alpine meadow steppe HIC1 Yangtse River Source (moderate underdevelopment), Yellow River Source (moderate underdevelopment)
Qiantang Plateau lake basin alpine steppe HIC2 Selincuo Puruogangri (moderate underdevelopment), Holy Mountain and Lakes (moderate development; education)
Kunlun Mountains plateau and alpine desert HID1 Pamir (optimal development; education and community development)
Coniferous forest in the deep valleys of the eastern mountains of Sichuan and Tibet HIIA/B1 Dulong River and Three Parallel Rivers (moderate underdevelopment), Gongga Mountain (optimal development; ecological protection, recreation, community development), Shangrila (fully coordinated; ecological protection, education, recreation, community development), Daocheng Yading (moderate development; recreation), Giant Panda (fully coordinated; ecological protection, research, education, recreation)
Qilian Mountains basin eastern Qinghai-coniferous forest/steppe HIIC1 Qilian Mountains (optimal development; research, education), Qinghai Lake (fully coordinated; ecological protection, research, education, community development)
Southern Tibet high valley shrubland and steppe HIIC2 Mount Qomolangma (moderate underdevelopment), Zhari Mountain (moderate underdevelopment; education)
Qaidam Basin HIID1 Semi-submerged Yardang (moderate underdevelopment; community development)
Northern flank of Kunlun Mountains-desert HIID2 Kunlun Mountains (moderate development; community development)
Ngari mountain desert HIID3 Zanda Tulin (moderate underdevelopment; community development)
(3) Unlike urban socioeconomic entities, national parks are natural-human complexes whose primary objective is ecological protection but that combines many other functions. The rank-size rule, which essentially reflects the energy distribution result of the self-organization optimization of the urban system (Chen, 2004), is also applicable to the multi-functional analysis of the national park cluster. A national park cluster is a spatial organization with internal links, with individual national park nodes and regional corridors and networks (Margules and Pressey, 2000), which influence the realization of functions, such as ecological protection, within the cluster.
The rank-size rule reflects the self-organization of multiple elements in the national park cluster. Our empirical research has shown that the development of the multiple functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster conforms to the rank-size rule and that the Zipf index score of each function is less than 1, indicating a balanced development between the functions. Balance in the hierarchy of functions is a manifestation of absolute advantage and characteristic functions in individual national parks, which can inspire the selection of dominant functions and the optimal function structure for the national park cluster.
The development of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster should not only identify specific and core items for ecological protection of individual parks, by identifying dominant functions and ensuring coordinated development between functions based on park resources and socioeconomic conditions, but it must also properly handle the relationship between the local and the whole. It should consider the overall functions of the national park cluster as a whole to optimize its function structure and maximize the benefits to all the national parks involved.
(4) This study has the following shortcomings: First, due to limited basic data, it only conducts empirical analysis of cross-sectional data from 2018, which means it lacks comparative analysis of multiple years and a long time series. Future research should be conducted on a longer period of cross-sectional data. Second, due to the provisional identification of the potential boundaries of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster, some indicator data is approximate, and follow-up research should improve the accuracy of the research data. Third, this article aims to reveal and analyze the structure of functions of the Tibetan Plateau National Park Cluster. It has been unable to discuss in depth the formation mechanisms of its function structure. Follow-up research should expand the theoretical discussion on the formation of the multi-function structures of national parks.

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
Austin R, Thompson N, Garrod G, 2016. Understanding the factors underlying partnership working: A case study of Northumberland National Park, England. Land Use Policy, 50: 115-124.

DOI

[2]
Cha R B, Sun G N, Dong Z B et al., 2016. Assessment of atmospheric oxygen practical pressure and plateau reaction of tourists in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 25(1): 92-98. (in Chinese)

[3]
Chen D J, Zhong L S, 2020. Educational use in the global national park: Review and implications. Biodiversity Science, 28(10): 1266-1275. (in Chinese)

DOI

[4]
Chen D J, Zhong L S, Xiao L L, 2020a. Construction and empirical analysis of the suitability evaluation of study travel development in national park. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40(20): 7222-7230. (in Chinese)

[5]
Chen D J, Zhang Y L, Liu Y et al., 2020b. Measure adaptive management and obstacle factors of marine eco-economic system: A case study of Shandong Province. Economic Geography, 40(6): 185-192. (in Chinese)

DOI

[6]
Chen R, Ma Y F, Luo Y M, 2016. Research on the coordinated development of transportation and tourism economy in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau in the past 20 years. Qinghai Social Sciences, (2): 109-114. (in Chinese)

[7]
Chen Y, Hou P, Wang Y et al., 2020c. Evaluation of protection effect of coordinated management of different kinds of nature reserves. Journal of Natural Resources, 35(4): 779-787. (in Chinese)

DOI

[8]
Chen Y G, 2004. Spatial structure of central-place systems: Fractals and scaling laws. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, (4): 626-634. (in Chinese)

[9]
Chen Y H, Huang D, Yan S Q, 2014. Discussions on public welfare, state dominance and scientificity of national park. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 34(3): 257-264. (in Chinese)

[10]
De Pablo C L, Peñalver-Alcázar M, De Agar P M, 2020. Change in landscape and ecosystems services as the basis of monitoring natural protected areas: A case study in the Picos de Europa National Park (Spain). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 192(4): 1-22.

DOI

[11]
Deng R, Shao H Y, Huang B et al., 2021. Remote assessment on ecosystem integrity of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and research on National Parks Group construction sequence. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 41(3): 847-860. (in Chinese)

[12]
Dong X, Deng Y, Gao Y et al., 2019. Characteristics and management classification of community co-management mode in China’s national parks: Based on Social Capital Theory. Environmental Protection, 47(24): 45-49. (in Chinese)

[13]
Fan J, Wang Y F, Liang B, 2019b. The evolution process and regulation of China’s regional development pattern. Acta Geographica Sinica, 74(12): 2437-2454. (in Chinese)

[14]
Fan J, Zhong L S, Huang B et al., 2019a. Territorial function and feasibility of the Earth’s Third Pole national park cluster. Chinese Science Bulletin, 64(27): 2938-2948. (in Chinese)

[15]
Fan J, Zhong L S, Li J P et al., 2017. Third Pole National Park Group construction is scientific choice for implementing strategy of major function zoning and green development in Tibet, China. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 32(9): 932-944. (in Chinese)

[16]
Fouke B W, 2011. Hot-spring Systems Geobiology: abiotic and biotic influences on travertine formation at Mammoth Hot Springs, Yellowstone National Park, USA. Sedimentology, 58(1): 170-219.

DOI

[17]
Gao Y, Deng Y, 2019. The solution to the constraint of land ownership in national parks under the concept of land property bundle. Environmental Protection, 47(Suppl.1): 48-54. (in Chinese)

[18]
Gao Y, Deng Y, Zhang H et al., 2017. Community conflicts of the national park overseas: Performance, tracing origins and enlightenment. Tourism Tribune, 32(1): 111-122. (in Chinese)

[19]
Ghoddousi S, Pintassilgo P, Mendes J et al., 2018. Tourism and nature conservation: A case study in Golestan National Park, Iran. Tourism Management Perspectives, 26: 20-27.

DOI

[20]
Grünewald C, Schleuning M, Böhning-Gaese K, 2016. Biodiversity, scenery and infrastructure: Factors driving wildlife tourism in an African savannah national park. Biological Conservation, 201: 60-68.

DOI

[21]
Guo J K, Chen Y Y, Yu X H et al., 2017. Rank-size distribution and mechanism of port system in the Bohai Rim during the past thirty years. Acta Geographica Sinica, 72(10): 1812-1826. (in Chinese)

[22]
He S Y, Su Y, Wang L et al., 2019. Realisation of recreation in national parks: A perspective of ecosystem services demand and willingness to pay of tourists in Wuyishan Pilot. Journal of Natural Resources, 34(1): 40-53. (in Chinese)

DOI

[23]
He Y B, Huang X J, Di L X et al., 2016. Assessment and influencing factors of social vulnerability to rapid urbanization in urban fringe: A case study of Xi’an. Acta Geographica Sinica, 71(8): 1315-1328. (in Chinese)

[24]
Hutcheson W, Hoagland P, Jin D, 2018. Valuing environmental education as a cultural ecosystem service at Hudson River Park. Ecosystem Services, 31: 387-394.

DOI

[25]
Jagger P, Sellers S, Kittner N et al., 2018. Looking for medium-term conservation and development impacts of community management agreements in Uganda’s Rwenzori Mountains National Park. Ecological Economics, 152: 199-206.

DOI

[26]
Jiang Y Y, Wen X J, Liu Y X, 2018. Evolutionary characteristics of China’s outbound tourism flow in rank-size distribution from 2001 to 2015. Acta Geographica Sinica, 73(12): 2468-2480. (in Chinese)

[27]
Kong D S, Zhang H, 2015. Economic value of wetland ecosystem services in the Heihe National Nature Reserve of Zhangye. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(4): 972-983. (in Chinese)

[28]
Kulczyk-Dynowska A, Bal-Domanska B, 2019. The national parks in the context of tourist function development in territorially linked municipalities in Poland. Sustainability, 11: 1-22.

DOI

[29]
Li T, Cao X S, Yang W Y., 2016. Rank-size distribution and evolution of passenger and freight flows in the Pearl River Delta. Progress in Geography, 35(1): 108-117. (in Chinese)

[30]
Li Z H, Bai Y Q, Sun J L et al., 2019. Ecological civilization construction in ecologically fragile poverty-stricken areas in Western China. Strategic Study of CAE, 21(5): 80-86. (in Chinese)

[31]
Liao L W, Qin J X, Liu Y Q et al., 2015. Study on ecological elasticity of Hunan Province based on land use transition. Economic Geography, 35(9): 16-23. (in Chinese)

[32]
Liu S L, Liu L M, Wu X et al., 2018. Quantitative evaluation of human activity intensity on the regional ecological impact studies. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(19): 6797-6809. (in Chinese)

[33]
Luo W B, Xu F X, He X R, 2012. Study on the dynamic relationship between tourism expansion and economic growth in China (1978-2008): Based on the co-integration test and granger causality test model. Tourism Tribune, 27(10): 20-26. (in Chinese)

[34]
Margules C R, Pressey R L, 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature, 405(6783): 243-253.

DOI

[35]
Miller K M, McGill B J, Mitchell B R et al., 2018. Eastern national parks protect greater tree species diversity than unprotected matrix forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 414: 74-84.

DOI

[36]
Nakakaawa C, Moll R, Vedeld P et al., 2015. Collaborative resource management and rural livelihoods around protected areas: A case study of Mount Elgon National Park, Uganda. Forest Policy and Economics, 57: 1-11.

DOI

[37]
Peng J, Wu J S, Pan Y J et al., 2012. Evaluation for regional ecological sustainability based on PSR Model: Conceptual framework. Progress in Geography, 31(7): 933-940. (in Chinese)

[38]
Shen W, Zheng Z, Qin Y et al., 2020. Spatiotemporal characteristics and driving force of ecosystem health in an important ecological function region in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(14): 1-19. (in Chinese)

DOI

[39]
Slocum S L, Curtis K R, 2016. Assessing sustainable food behaviours of national park visitors: Domestic/on vocation linkages, and their implications for park policies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(1): 153-167.

[40]
Sun H L, Zheng D, Yao T D et al., 2012. Protection and construction of the national ecological security shelter zone on Tibetan Plateau. Acta Geographica Sinica, 67(1): 3-12. (in Chinese)

[41]
Sun X P, Li S, Yu J P et al., 2019. Evaluation of ecosystem service value based on land use scenarios: A case study of Qianjiangyuan National Park pilot. Biodiversity Science, 27(1): 51-63. (in Chinese)

DOI

[42]
Sun Z K, 2020. Ecological civilization education of tourists in Pudacuo National Park. Environmental Engineering, 38(5): 225. (in Chinese)

[43]
Tang F L, Zhang J C, Yang Y M et al., 2010. Study on evaluation system of national park. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 19(12): 2993-2999. (in Chinese)

[44]
Tang Z, 2015. An integrated approach to evaluating the coupling coordination between tourism and the environment. Tourism Management, 46: 11-19.

DOI

[45]
Van Riper C J, Kyle G T, Sherrouse B C et al., 2017. Toward an integrated understanding of perceived biodiversity values and environmental conditions in a national park. Ecological Indicators, 72: 278-287.

DOI

[46]
Wan G, Zhu D, Wang C et al., 2020. The size distribution of cities in China: Evolution of urban system and deviations from Zipf’s law. Ecological Indicators, 111: 106003.

DOI

[47]
Wang Y Z, Ning Y F, 2018. The progress, problems and countermeasures of security: A decisive victory in building a moderately prosperous society in all respects in ethnic areas in a new era. Management World, 34(1): 39-52. (in Chinese)

[48]
Xiao L M, Zhang X P, 2019. Spatio-temporal characteristics of coupling coordination between green innovation efficiency and ecological welfare performance under the concept of strong sustainability. Journal of Natural Resources, 34(2): 312-324. (in Chinese)

DOI

[49]
Xu T Y, Zhao J C, Liu J, 2019. Changes of community tourism management system before and after government intervention: A case study in the Potatso National Park. Rural Economy, (1): 73-79. (in Chinese)

[50]
Yan S Y, Zhao K, Xing Z, 2010. A comparative study on the planning methods of metropolitan eco-corridors among the United States, Europe and China. Urban Planning International, 25(2): 91-96. (in Chinese)

[51]
Yi X, Liu F L, 2015. Financial development, technological innovation and industrial structure transformation: Theoretical analysis framework of multi sector endogenous growth. Management World, (10): 24-39, 90. (in Chinese)

[52]
Yu H, Chen T, Zhong L S et al., 2017. Functional zoning of the Qianjiangyuan National Park system pilot area. Resources Science, 39(1): 20-29. (in Chinese)

[53]
Yu H, Zhong L S, Fan J, 2021. Regional function and spatial structure of National Park Cluster in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 41(3): 823-832. (in Chinese)

[54]
Zhang S L, Gai S S, Liu X L, 2015. Evaluation on effect of National Natural Science Foundation of China and structural features of its research outputs. Studies in Science of Science, 33(4): 507-515. (in Chinese)

[55]
Zhang Y J, Xu Y D, Jia Q, 2017. A study on the cooperative relationship between the ecotourism stakeholders in national parks: A case study of Gongyu Zone in Xianju National Park. Tourism Science, 31(3): 51-64, 74. (in Chinese)

[56]
Zhang Y J, Xue B J, 2018. Discussion on the suitability of ecotourism and recreation activities in national parks. Tourism Tribune, 33(8): 14-16. (in Chinese)

[57]
Zhang Y L, Li B Y, Zheng D, 2002. A discussion on the boundary and area of the Tibetan Plateau in China. Geographical Research, 21(1): 1-8. (in Chinese)

[58]
Zhong L S, Deng Y, Chen T et al., 2016. New regional space: Discussion on construction of national park system. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 31(1): 126-133. (in Chinese)

[59]
Zhong L S, Xiao L L, 2017. Chinese national park system pilot: Establishing path and research issues. Resources Science, 39(1): 1-10. (in Chinese)

[60]
Zhong L S, Zeng Y X, Yu H, 2021. The natural foundation and realization path of the recreation function of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau National Park Group. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 41(3): 861-873. (in Chinese)

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉