氣候變遷與快速都市化的衝擊已被證實會顯著影響人類生活空間以及陸域與海洋生態系統服務之穩定性，且土地利用變化所產生的碳排也作為影響生態系統服務的主要因素，其中碳儲存於減緩氣候變遷策略中佔關鍵地位，透過捕捉和儲存碳的功能抵銷大氣中二氧化碳的濃度，減緩全球暖化的惡化，因此，研究藉由土地利用變遷作為碳儲量變化分析的關鍵切入角度，並採用能較全面衡量碳儲存的社會價值之碳社會成本作為碳儲存估值指標。
目前多數關於生態系統碳儲存服務的研究仍存在缺乏時空動態視角的限制，本研究旨在發展跨尺度且兼顧時間動態的分析框架，並導入價值估算使政策落地化。此外，有別於以往單一生態系統範圍之討論，本研究選擇適用於管理碳匯潛力的流域—高屏溪流域作為研究範圍，方法包含三大部分，首先在情境設定，包括不干擾、政策實施與嚴格政策實施情境，透過Terrset軟體的Land Change Modeler模組進行土地利用變遷之預測模擬未來土地利用變化，接著透過 InVEST 模型分析碳儲存於不同情境下時空的變化情形，並依照變化趨勢進行分類，提供相對應的保護管理對策。最後整合DICE模型情境設定的碳社會成本量化碳儲存的經濟價值，分析政策介入對於不同集水區域的碳儲存功能的空間差異性，並透過依碳儲存變化趨勢所劃分之區域類型與價值的變動率，將其轉為政策資源配置與優先順序之依據，回應生態系統管理中之空間異質性問題。
實證分析結果得知，嚴格政策的介入證實對於減少都市擴張與提升林地面積具有正面效益，但部分開發壓力逐漸從林地轉移至草地與農業使用，因此需考量土地使用類型的承受能力與對應的生態價值。此外，碳儲存具備明顯空間群聚特性，且未來轉為較集中的空間型態，一般政策維持局部群聚特性，有效保護核心的碳儲存區域，而高強度政策介入降低群聚程度，但增加碳儲存功能空間韌性，且使價值變化更為穩定，對各集水區碳儲存功能具較穩定的保護效果，最後，針對依照碳儲存變化率之分類區域提出策略，如潛在衰退型區域將優先納入生態補償機制，穩定成長型區域則擴大保育範圍、強化永續管理，並建議在國土計畫的框架下，將碳儲存服務功能的計算作為國土保育地區的劃設參考指標，且在既有績效指標導入空間分布預測成果，作為未來計畫推動預算分配的重要依據。
本研究的整合架構與多情境分析的創新性，也同時強化研究成果與空間治理的應用價值，建立具區域差異化的土地利用與碳儲存管理策略，提升資源配置效率與整體生態系統服務的韌性與效益。

The impacts of climate change and rapid urbanization have been shown to significantly affect the stability of terrestrial and marine ecosystem services. According to the IPCC reports, there is high confidence in the strong relationship between global warming and the rapid increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. This indicates the close linkage between climate change and human activities, suggesting that land-use change can serve as a critical perspective for analyzing changes in carbon storage.
Among ecosystem services, carbon storage plays a crucial role in climate change mitigation strategies. However, in Taiwan, spatial strategies for critical carbon sink areas remain insufficiently defined. To spatially implement carbon storage strategies and provide a scientific basis for decision-making, economic valuation can serve as a standard for measuring contributions to human well-being and help illustrate the importance and utility of ecosystem services.
This study selected the Kaoping River Basin, which is more suitable for managing carbon sink potential, as the study area. First, under multiple scenarios, including the undisturbed scenario, policy implementation scenario, and strict policy implementation scenario, land-use changes were simulated using the ANN-CA-MC model. Second, the InVEST model was applied to analyze the spatiotemporal variations in carbon storage and classify the zone based on carbon storage change trends. Finally, this study integrated the Social Cost of Carbon under the DICE model to quantify the economic value of carbon storage. This study aims to enhance governmental awareness of the importance of carbon storage and serve as a basis for policy resource allocation and prioritization.

1. Aburas, M. M., Ho, Y. M., Ramli, M. F., & Ash’aari, Z. H. (2016). The simulation and prediction of spatio-temporal urban growth trends using cellular automata models: A review. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 52, 380–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2016.07.007
2. Aburas, M. M., Ho, Y. M., Ramli, M. F., & Ash’aari, Z. H. (2017). Improving the capability of an integrated CA-Markov model to simulate spatio-temporal urban growth trends using an Analytical Hierarchy Process and Frequency Ratio. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 59, 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2017.03.006
3. Al-sharif, A. A. A., & Pradhan, B. (2014). Monitoring and predicting land use change in Tripoli Metropolitan City using an integrated Markov chain and cellular automata models in GIS. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 7(10), 4291–4301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-013-1119-7
4. Angel, S., Parent, J., Civco, D. L., Blei, A., & Potere, D. (2011). The dimensions of global urban expansion: Estimates and projections for all countries, 2000–2050. Progress in Planning, 75(2), 53–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2011.04.001
5. Aziz, T., & Van Cappellen, P. (2019). Comparative valuation of potential and realized ecosystem services in Southern Ontario, Canada. Environmental Science & Policy, 100, 105–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.06.014
6. Babbar, D., Areendran, G., Sahana, M., Sarma, K., Raj, K., & Sivadas, A. (2021). Wang. Journal of Cleaner Production, 278, 123333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123333
7. Bagstad, K. J., Semmens, D. J., Waage, S., & Winthrop, R. (2013). A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation. Ecosystem Services, 5, 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.07.004
8. Bai, Y., & Ding, G. (2024). Estimation of changes in carbon sequestration and its economic value with various stand density and rotation age of Pinus massoniana plantations in China. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 16852. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-67307-z
9. Balzter, H. (2000). Markov chain models for vegetation dynamics. Ecological Modelling, 126(2), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00262-3
10. Barrage, L. (2019). The Nobel Memorial Prize for William D. Nordhaus. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 121(3), 884–924. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjoe.12383
11. Barrage, L., & Nordhaus, W. (2024). Policies, projections, and the social cost of carbon: Results from the DICE-2023 model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(13), e2312030121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2312030121
12. Bartkowski, B., Beckmann, M., Drechsler, M., Kaim, A., Liebelt, V., Müller, B., Witing, F., & Strauch, M. (2020). Aligning Agent-Based Modeling With Multi-Objective Land-Use Allocation: Identification of Policy Gaps and Feasible Pathways to Biophysically Optimal Landscapes. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.00103
13. Batty, M., Couclelis, H., & Eichen, M. (1997). Urban Systems as Cellular Automata. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 24(2), 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1068/b240159
14. Braun, P., Faulwasser, T., Grüne, L., Kellett, C. M., Semmler, W., Weller, S. R., Braun, P., Faulwasser, T., Grüne, L., Kellett, C. M., Semmler, W., & Weller, S. R. (2024). On the social cost of carbon and discounting in the DICE model. AIMS Environmental Science, 11(3), Article Environ-11-03-024. https://doi.org/10.3934/environsci.2024024
15. Brown, T. C., Bergstrom, J. C., & Loomis, J. B. (2007). Defining, Valuing, and Providing Ecosystem Goods and Services. Natural Resources Journal, 47(2), 329–376.
16. Calvin, K., Dasgupta, D., Krinner, G., Mukherji, A., Thorne, P. W., Trisos, C., Romero, J., Aldunce, P., Barrett, K., Blanco, G., Cheung, W. W. L., Connors, S., Denton, F., Diongue-Niang, A., Dodman, D., Garschagen, M., Geden, O., Hayward, B., Jones, C., … Péan, C. (2023). IPCC, 2023: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. (First). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647
17. Chen, N., Nie, W., & Fan, W. (2025). Simulation and Analysis of Changes in Carbon Storage and Ecosystem Services Against the Backdrop of Land Transfer: A Case Study in Lvzenong Park. Land, 14(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14040694
18. Cheng, J., Hu, W., Zheng, M., Jin, X., Yao, J., Tong, S., & Guo, F. (2025). Analysis of Carbon Sequestration Capacity and Economic Losses Under Multiple Scenarios in Major Grain-Producing Regions of China: A Case Study of the Urban Agglomeration the Huaihe River Basin. Agriculture, 15(12), 1268. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15121268
19. Cheng, J., & Masser, I. (2003). Urban growth pattern modeling: A case study of Wuhan city, PR China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 62(4), 199–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00150-0
20. Clarke, K. C. (2008). Mapping and Modelling Land Use Change: An Application of the SLEUTH Model. In C. Pettit, W. Cartwright, I. Bishop, K. Lowell, D. Pullar, & D. Duncan (Eds.), Landscape Analysis and Visualisation: Spatial Models for Natural Resource Management and Planning (pp. 353–366). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69168-6_17
21. Conte, M., Nelson, E., Carney, K., Fissore, C., Olwero, N., Plantinga, A. J., Stanley, B., & Ricketts, T. (2011). Terrestrial carbon sequestration and storage. In P. Kareiva, H. Tallis, T. H. Ricketts, G. C. Daily, & S. Polasky (Eds.), Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199588992.003.0007
22. Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P., & van den Belt, M. (1997a). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(6630), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
23. Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P., & van den Belt, M. (1997b). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(6630), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
24. Dai, E., Wu, S., Shi, W., Cheung, C., & Shaker, A. (2005). Modeling Change-Pattern-Value Dynamics on Land Use: An Integrated GIS and Artificial Neural Networks Approach. Environmental Management, 36(4), 576–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0165-z
25. Daily, G. C., Kareiva, P. M., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T. H., Tallis, H., Kareiva, P., Tallis, H., Ricketts, T. H., Daily, G. C., & Polasky, S. (Eds.). (2011). Mainstreaming natural capital into decisions. In Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199588992.003.0001
26. Dietz, S., Gollier, C., & Kessler, L. (2018). The climate beta. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 87, 258–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2017.07.005
27. Du, S., Zhou, Z., Huang, D., Zhang, F., Deng, F., & Yang, Y. (2023). The Response of Carbon Stocks to Land Use/Cover Change and a Vulnerability Multi-Scenario Analysis of the Karst Region in Southern China Based on PLUS-InVEST. Forests, 14(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/f14122307
28. Falloon, P., Jones, C. D., Cerri, C. E., Al-Adamat, R., Kamoni, P., Bhattacharyya, T., Easter, M., Paustian, K., Killian, K., Coleman, K., & Milne, E. (2007). Climate change and its impact on soil and vegetation carbon storage in Kenya, Jordan, India and Brazil. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 122(1), 114–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2007.01.013
29. Fisher, B., Turner, R. K., & Morling, P. (2009). Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics, 68(3), 643–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014
30. Fitawok, M. B., Derudder, B., Minale, A. S., Van Passel, S., Adgo, E., & Nyssen, J. (2020). Modeling the Impact of Urbanization on Land-Use Change in Bahir Dar City, Ethiopia: An Integrated Cellular Automata–Markov Chain Approach. Land, 9(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9040115
31. Flood, S., O’Higgins, T. G., & Lago, M. (2020). The Promise and Pitfalls of Ecosystem Services Classification and Valuation. In T. G. O’Higgins, M. Lago, & T. H. DeWitt (Eds.), Ecosystem-Based Management, Ecosystem Services and Aquatic Biodiversity: Theory, Tools and Applications (pp. 87–103). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45843-0_5
32. Fonstad, M. A. (2006). Cellular automata as analysis and synthesis engines at the geomorphology–ecology interface. Geomorphology, 77(3), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.01.006
33. Foody, G. M. (2020). Explaining the unsuitability of the kappa coefficient in the assessment and comparison of the accuracy of thematic maps obtained by image classification. Remote Sensing of Environment, 239, 111630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.111630
34. Fu, F., Jia, X., Zhao, Q., Tian, F., Wei, D., Zhao, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, J., Hu, X., & Yang, L. (2024). Predicting land use change around railway stations: An enhanced CA-Markov model. Sustainable Cities and Society, 101, 105138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.105138
35. Gaglio, M., Muresan, A. N., Sebastiani, A., Cavicchi, D., Fano, E. A., & Castaldelli, G. (2023). A “reserve” of regulating services: The importance of a remnant protected forest for human well-being in the Po delta (Italy). Ecological Modelling, 484, 110485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110485
36. Geng, Y., Liu, X., & Wu, S. (2025). Assessment and Prediction of Carbon Sink Resource Potential in Arbor Forests: A Case Study of Mentougou District, Beijing, China. Forests, 16(6), 926. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16060926
37. Ghosh, P., Mukhopadhyay, A., Chanda, A., Mondal, P., Akhand, A., Mukherjee, S., Nayak, S. K., Ghosh, S., Mitra, D., Ghosh, T., & Hazra, S. (2017a). Application of Cellular automata and Markov-chain model in geospatial environmental modeling- A review. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 5, 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2017.01.005
38. Ghosh, P., Mukhopadhyay, A., Chanda, A., Mondal, P., Akhand, A., Mukherjee, S., Nayak, S. K., Ghosh, S., Mitra, D., Ghosh, T., & Hazra, S. (2017b). Application of Cellular automata and Markov-chain model in geospatial environmental modeling- A review. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 5, 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2017.01.005
39. Hoyer, R., & Chang, H. (2014). Assessment of freshwater ecosystem services in the Tualatin and Yamhill basins under climate change and urbanization. Applied Geography, 53, 402–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.06.023
40. Hu, Z., & Lo, C. P. (2007). Modeling urban growth in Atlanta using logistic regression. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 31(6), 667–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2006.11.001
41. Huang, J., & Ling, C. X. (2005). Using AUC and accuracy in evaluating learning algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 17(3), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2005.50
42. Huang, Y., & Liao, T.-J. (2019). An integrating approach of cellular automata and ecological network to predict the impact of land use change on connectivity. Ecological Indicators, 98, 149–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.10.065
43. Hunt, E. R., Fahnestock, J. T., Kelly, R. D., Welker, J. M., Reiners, W. A., & Smith, W. K. (2002). Carbon Sequestration from Remotely-Sensed NDVI and Net Ecosystem Exchange. In R. S. Muttiah (Ed.), From Laboratory Spectroscopy to Remotely Sensed Spectra of Terrestrial Ecosystems (pp. 161–174). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1620-8_8
44. Ingraham, M. W., & Foster, S. G. (2008). The value of ecosystem services provided by the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System in the contiguous U.S. Ecological Economics, 67(4), 608–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.01.012
45. Jenkins, W. A., Murray, B. C., Kramer, R. A., & Faulkner, S. P. (2010). Valuing ecosystem services from wetlands restoration in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Ecological Economics, 69(5), 1051–1061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.022
46. Jiang, Y., Alifujiang, Y., Feng, P., Yang, P., & Feng, J. (2024). A Simulated Assessment of Land Use and Carbon Storage Changes in the Yanqi Basin under Different Development Scenarios. Land, 13(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13060744
47. Jun, M.-J. (2023). Simulating Seoul’s greenbelt policy with a machine learning-based land-use change model. Cities, 143, 104580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104580
48. Kamarajugedda, S. A., Johnson, J. A., McDonald, R., & Hamel, P. (2023). Carbon storage and sequestration in Southeast Asian urban clusters under future land cover change scenarios (2015–2050). Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1105759
49. Khoi, D. D., & Murayama, Y. (2010). Forecasting Areas Vulnerable to Forest Conversion in the Tam Dao National Park Region, Vietnam. Remote Sensing, 2(5), 1249–1272. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs2051249
50. Kikstra, J. S., Waidelich, P., Rising, J., Yumashev, D., Hope, C., & Brierley, C. M. (2021). The social cost of carbon dioxide under climate-economy feedbacks and temperature variability. Environmental Research Letters, 16(9). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac1d0b
51. Koomen, E., & Borsboom-van Beurden, J. (Eds.). (2011). Land-Use Modelling in Planning Practice (Vol. 101). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1822-7
52. Lal, R. (2007). Carbon sequestration. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 363(1492), 815–830. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2185
53. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.
54. Lei, J., Zhang, L., Chen, Z., Wu, T., Chen, X., & Li, Y. (2024). The impact of land use change on carbon storage and multi-scenario prediction in Hainan Island using InVEST and CA-Markov models. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2024.1349057
55. Li, L., Zayiti, A., & He, X. (2023). Evaluating the Stand Structure, Carbon Sequestration, Oxygen Release Function, and Carbon Sink Value of Three Artificial Shrubs alongside the Tarim Desert Highway. Forests, 14(11), 2137. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14112137
56. Li, Y., Liu, W., Feng, Q., Zhu, M., Yang, L., Zhang, J., & Yin, X. (2023). The role of land use change in affecting ecosystem services and the ecological security pattern of the Hexi Regions, Northwest China. Science of The Total Environment, 855, 158940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158940
57. Li, Z., Jiang, W., Peng, K., Wang, X., Deng, Y., Yin, X., & Ling, Z. (2024). Comparative analysis of land use change prediction models for land and fine wetland types: Taking the wetland cities Changshu and Haikou as examples. Landscape and Urban Planning, 243, 104975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104975
58. Liao, H., Liu, M., He, H., Yang, W., Guo, L., Liu, Y., Chen, K., & Chen, Z. (2021). Application of Land Use Change and Prediction in Urban Planning Evaluation and Formulation. Journal of Computer and Communications, 09, 230–237. https://doi.org/10.4236/jcc.2021.96015
59. Liao, J., Tang, L., Shao, G., Su, X., Chen, D., & Xu, T. (2016). Incorporation of extended neighborhood mechanisms and its impact on urban land-use cellular automata simulations. Environmental Modelling & Software, 75, 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.10.014
60. Liou, J.-L., & Wu, P. (2021). 臺灣碳社會成本的模擬分析 Country-level Social Cost of Carbon for Taiwan. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.18865.51048
61. Liu, D., Zhang, Z., Liu, Z., & Chi, Y. (2024). A three-class carbon pool system for normalizing carbon mapping and accounting in coastal areas. Ecological Indicators, 158, 111537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111537
62. Long, Y., Liu, X., Luo, S., Luo, T., Hu, S., Zheng, Y., Shao, J., & Liu, X. (2023). Evolution and Prediction of Urban Fringe Areas Based on Logistic–CA–Markov Models: The Case of Wuhan City. Land, 12(10), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12101874
63. Ma, W., Hou, S., Su, W., Mao, T., Wang, X., & Liang, T. (2024). Estimation of carbon stock and economic value of Sanjiangyuan National Park, China. Ecological Indicators, 169, 112856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112856
64. Mengist, W., Soromessa, T., & Feyisa, G. L. (2020). A global view of regulatory ecosystem services: Existed knowledge, trends, and research gaps. Ecological Processes, 9(1), 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-020-00241-w
65. Mengist, W., Soromessa, T., & Feyisa, G. L. (2023). Responses of carbon sequestration service for landscape dynamics in the Kaffa biosphere reserve, southwest Ethiopia. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 98, 106960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106960
66. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Program) (Ed.). (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Island Press.
67. Muller, M. R., & Middleton, J. (1994). A Markov model of land-use change dynamics in the Niagara Region, Ontario, Canada. Landscape Ecology, 9(2), 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00124382
68. Mustafa, A., Rienow, A., Saadi, I., Cools, M., & Teller, J. (2018). Comparing support vector machines with logistic regression for calibrating cellular automata land use change models. European Journal of Remote Sensing, 51(1), 391–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/22797254.2018.1442179
69. Nina Schwarz, D. K. (2012, March 31). ABMland—A Tool for Agent-Based Model Development on Urban Land Use Change [Text.Article]. 2011:45:2; JASSS. https://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/15/2/8.html
70. Nordhaus, W. (2014). Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon: Concepts and Results from the DICE-2013R Model and Alternative Approaches. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 1(1/2), 273–312. https://doi.org/10.1086/676035
71. Nordhaus, W. D. (2007). A Review of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. Journal of Economic Literature, 45(3), 686–702. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.45.3.686
72. Nordhaus, W. D. (2011). Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon: Background and Results from the RICE-2011 Model (Working Paper No. 17540). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w17540
73. Nordhaus, W. D. (2017). Revisiting the social cost of carbon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(7), 1518–1523. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1609244114
74. Noszczyk, T. (2019). A review of approaches to land use changes modeling. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 25(6), 1377–1405. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2018.1468994
75. Olorunfemi, I. E., Fasinmirin, J. T., Olufayo, A. A., & Komolafe, A. A. (2020). Total carbon and nitrogen stocks under different land use/land cover types in the Southwestern region of Nigeria. Geoderma Regional, 22, e00320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2020.e00320
76. Papini, L., & Rabino, G. A. (1997). Urban Cellular Automata: An Evolutionary Prototype. In S. Bandini & G. Mauri (Eds.), ACRI ’96 (pp. 147–157). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0941-9_15
77. Park, S., Jeon, S., Kim, S., & Choi, C. (2011). Prediction and comparison of urban growth by land suitability index mapping using GIS and RS in South Korea. Landscape and Urban Planning, 99(2), 104–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.09.001
78. Patton, D., Bergstrom, J. C., Moore, R., & Covich, A. P. (2015). Economic value of carbon storage in U.S. National Wildlife Refuge wetland ecosystems. Ecosystem Services, 16, 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.017
79. Pechanec, V., Purkyt, J., Benc, A., Nwaogu, C., Štěrbová, L., & Cudlín, P. (2018). Modelling of the carbon sequestration and its prediction under climate change. Ecological Informatics, 47, 50–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2017.08.006
80. Pennypacker J. (2024, March 18). TerrSet: Advancing Geospatial Technology for Sustainable Development. Geospatial Analytics. https://www.clarku.edu/centers/geospatial-analytics/uncategorized/terrset-advancing-geospatial-technology-for-sustainable-development/
81. Pijanowski, B. C., Brown, D. G., Shellito, B. A., & Manik, G. A. (2002). Using neural networks and GIS to forecast land use changes: A Land Transformation Model. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 26(6), 553–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0198-9715(01)00015-1
82. Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., & Williams, R. J. (1985). Learning Internal Representations by Error Propagation (No. ICS8506). Article ICS8506. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/html/tr/ADA164453/
83. Sarkar, T., & Mishra, M. (2018). Soil Erosion Susceptibility Mapping with the Application of Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network. Journal of Geovisualization and Spatial Analysis, 2(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41651-018-0015-9
84. Schulze, J., Müller, B., Groeneveld, J., & Grimm, V. (2017). 基於代理的社會生態系統建模的成就和挑戰. 20(2), 8.
85. Seddon, N., Chausson, A., Berry, P., Girardin, C. A. J., Smith, A., & Turner, B. (2020). Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1794), 20190120. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0120
86. Setiawan, O., Rahayu, A. A. D., Samawandana, G., Tata, H. L., Dharmawan, I. W. S., Rachmat, H. H., Suharti, S., Windyoningrum, A., & Khotimah, H. (2024). Unraveling land use land cover change, their driving factors, and implication on carbon storage through an integrated modelling approach. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Sciences, 27(4), 615–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2024.08.002
87. Song, S., Yu, H., Zhang, Q., Zhang, L., Zhong, Q., & Zhang, G. (2023). Functional regionalization of land resources considering eco-efficiency in Nanjing Metropolitan Area, China. Ecological Indicators, 155, 110964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110964
88. Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order No. 12866. (2013, November 26). Federal Register. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2013/11/26/2013-28242/technical-support-document-technical-update-of-the-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulatory-impact
89. Thompson, T. M. (2018). Modeling the climate and carbon systems to estimate the social cost of carbon. WIREs Climate Change, 9(5), e532. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.532
90. Tobler, W. R. (1979). Cellular Geography. In S. Gale & G. Olsson (Eds.), Philosophy in Geography (pp. 379–386). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9394-5_18
91. Varga, O. G., Pontius, R. G., Singh, S. K., & Szabó, S. (2019). Intensity Analysis and the Figure of Merit’s components for assessment of a Cellular Automata – Markov simulation model. Ecological Indicators, 101, 933–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.01.057
92. Veerkamp, C. J., Loreti, M., Benavidez, R., Jackson, B., & Schipper, A. M. (2023). Comparing three spatial modeling tools for assessing urban ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 59, 101500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101500
93. Vizcaíno-Bravo, Q., Williams-Linera, G., & Asbjornsen, H. (2020). Biodiversity and carbon storage are correlated along a land use intensity gradient in a tropical montane forest watershed, Mexico. Basic and Applied Ecology, 44, 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2019.12.004
94. Wang, T., Teng, F., Deng, X., & Xie, J. (2022). Climate module disparities explain inconsistent estimates of the social cost of carbon in integrated assessment models. One Earth, 5(7), 767–778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.06.005
95. Wang, Y., Liu, J., Zhang, L., Xue, Z., & Yang, Y. (2024). Projecting the response of carbon sink potential to land use/land cover change in ecologically fragile regions. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2024.1380868
96. Watson, L., Straatsma, M. W., Wanders, N., Verstegen, J. A., de Jong, S. M., & Karssenberg, D. (2020). Global ecosystem service values in climate class transitions. Environmental Research Letters, 15(2), 024008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab5aab
97. White, R., & Engelen, G. (2000). High-resolution integrated modelling of the spatial dynamics of urban and regional systems. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 24(5), 383–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0198-9715(00)00012-0
98. Wu, Q., Wang, L., Wang, T., Ruan, Z., & Du, P. (2024). Spatial–temporal evolution analysis of multi-scenario land use and carbon storage based on PLUS-InVEST model: A case study in Dalian, China. Ecological Indicators, 166, 112448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112448
99. Wu, X., Shen, C., Shi, L., Wan, Y., Ding, J., & Wen, Q. (2024). Spatio-temporal evolution characteristics and simulation prediction of carbon storage: A case study in Sanjiangyuan Area, China. Ecological Informatics, 80, 102485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2024.102485
100. Xu, D., Yu, C., Lin, W., Yao, J., & Zhou, W. (2024). Spatiotemporal Evolution and Prediction of Land Use and Carbon Stock in Shanghai. Land, 13(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13030267
101. Xu, T., Gao, J., & Coco, G. (2019). Simulation of urban expansion via integrating artificial neural network with Markov chain – cellular automata. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 33(10), 1960–1983. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2019.1600701
102. Ying, J., Jiang, J., Wang, H., Liu, Y., Gong, W., Liu, B., & Han, G. (2023). Analysis of the Income Enhancement Potential of the Terrestrial Carbon Sink in China Based on Remotely Sensed Data. Remote Sensing, 15(15), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15153849
103. Zhang, G., Huang, X., Hu, H., Zheng, H., & Liu, S. (2024). A Renewed Understanding of Ecosystem Services. In G. Huang, Y. Li, C. Chen, & P. Zhang (Eds.), 14th International Conference on Environmental Science and Development (ICESD2023) (pp. 459–474). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56056-9_38
104. Zhou, X., Wang, J., Tang, L., He, W., & Li, H. (2025). Impact of Land Use Change on Carbon Storage Dynamics in the Lijiang River Basin, China: A Complex Network Model Approach. Land, 14(5), 1042. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14051042
105. 김오석. (2013). Assessing the Metric to Measuring Land-Use Change Suitability. Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea, 16(3), 458–471. https://doi.org/10.23841/EGSK.2013.16.3.458
106. 李俊霖(2008).社經代謝作用與土地利用變遷之整合與空間動態. 國立台北大學都市計劃研究所博士論文, 51-60.
107. 劉哲良, 朱敏嘉, 張耀民, & 潘姿宇. (2019). 轉爐石及焚化再生粒料公共工程應用之成本效益分析. 綠色經濟期刊, 5. https://doi.org/10.6858/GE.201910_5.0001
108. 劉芝麟, & 柳婉郁. (2021). InVEST碳儲存模型與土地利用關聯之研究－以福智教育園區為例. 林業研究季刊, 43(4), 177–194.
109. 周品樺. (2024). 氣候與土地利用變遷下的生態系服務時空熱點與權衡關係—以陳有蘭溪流域為例. 國立臺灣大學生物環境系統工程學系學位論文, 1–122. https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202400030
110. 徐寬, & 柳婉郁. (2017). 考量死亡有機物與木製品碳釋放下之土地期望價值與最適輪伐期. 農業經濟叢刊, 23(2), 73–104. https://doi.org/10.6196/TAER.2017.23.2.3
111. 柳婉郁, 江怡樺, & 林信維. (2020). 考慮碳吸存機會成本下碳權價格之經濟分析. 綠色經濟期刊, 6. https://doi.org/10.6858/GE.202007_6.0002
112. 楊博鈞, 楊心如, 劉滄棽, 張翊庭, & 許健輝. (2024). 利用數位土壤繪圖預測濁水溪流域土壤有機碳儲量. 台灣農業研究, 73(2), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.6156/JTAR.202406_73(2).0006
113. 莊喻淳. (2019). 運用馬可夫鍊細胞自動機模型模擬土地利用變遷-以鳳山溪流域為例. https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/ccd=TspUTc/record?r1=1&h1=1
114. 葉錦紘. (2025). InVEST模型應用於右堆地區土地利用變遷對客庄環境之研究. 屏東科技大學客家文化產業研究所學位論文, 1–91. https://doi.org/10.6346/NPUST202500082
115. 詹為巽, 吳若穎, 林俊成, & 邱祈榮. (2019). 森林生態系服務效益評估工具. 林業研究專訊, 26(4), 45–49.
116. 賴世剛, & 陳志閣. (2006). 分區管制對臺北都會區土地使用變遷的影響：一電腦模擬. 臺灣土地研究, 9(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.6677/JTLR.200605_9(1).0001
117. 邱薏潔. (2024). 氣候變遷與都市發展對洪災危害度之空間區位影響探討-以臺北市為例. https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/ccd=TspUTc/record?r1=1&h1=0
118. 閻克勤, 蔡宜穎, & 紀思寧. (2014). 影響桃園市陂塘土地利用變遷因素之研究. 建築與規劃學報, 15(2 & 3), 193–214.
119. 顧嘉安. (2010). 以馬可夫鍊細胞自動機模型模擬極端洪水對都市土地利用型態之影響─以台北市為例 [Thesis]. https://nckur.lib.ncku.edu.tw/handle/987654321/261919
120. 馮正民, & Min F. C. (2005). 都會區土地使用變遷之網格自動機模型之研究—子計畫三：都會區重大交通建設對土地使用變遷之影響分析(I). https://ir.lib.nycu.edu.tw:443/handle/11536/89991
121. 黃顥宇. (2024). 氣候變遷下曾文水庫集水區氣候變化及碳存量之探討. 屏東科技大學水土保持系所學位論文, 1–95. https://doi.org/10.6346/NPUST202400216