## 3 Results
### Ecological Parameter Changes Considering LUTs  
Previous studies [24; 31; 32; 33; 34] have typically examined the study area as a whole, overlooking the impact of various LUTs on ecological parameters. In our research, we segmented the study area into eight sub-regions based on natural characteristics and administrative boundaries, and subsequently conducted a detailed analysis of ecological parameter variations with respect to LUTs. For instance, the findings from previous studies were primarily applicable to changes in ecological parameters across China and its eight sub-regions. The mean values of the NDVI, EVI, LAI, GPP, and NPP were 0.3058, 0.1845, 1.0291, 706.11 gC\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-2}\), and 316.75 gC\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-2}\) in 2001-2020, with corresponding slopes of 0.0021, 0.0013, 0.0085, 6.30 gC\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-2}\)\(\cdot\)a\({}^{-1}\) and 1.83 gC\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-2}\)\(\cdot\)a\({}^{-1}\) in China, respectively. Research efforts in sub-regions have primarily concentrated on ecologically vulnerable areas like the NWC, NC, and QT, often with a regional focus that does not account for LUTs. For instance, the mean values of the NDVI, EVI, LAI, GPP, and NPP were 0.1677,  
Figure 6: Distribution of land use conversion. (Colors of the columns represent changes in different land use types, and the value represents the area of conversion). 0.1018, 0.4113, 218.19 gC\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-2}\), and 120.84 gC\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-2}\), in the 2001-2020 period in QT, with corresponding slopes of 0.0007, 0.0003, 0.0011, 1.29 gC\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-2}\)\(\cdot\)a\({}^{-1}\), and 0.23 gC\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-2}\)\(\cdot\)a\({}^{-1}\) in QT, respectively. Compared to China as a whole, QT exhibited lower average values and slopes for ecological parameters. In contrast to numerous previous investigations, this study centers on the comparison of ecological parameters' value and slope among various LUTs in different sub-regions (Figure 7). Initially, irrespective of whether considering China as a whole or its sub-regions, forests exhibit the highest ecological parameters, followed by cultivated land and grassland, while water bodies and unutilized land show the lowest ecological parameters. In regions where the forest area exceeds 20%, such as the NEC, SWC, and SC regions, all ecological parameters are only lower than forests and higher than other LUTs. Furthermore, in traditional pastoral areas, like the NWC, NC, and QT regions, the ecological parameters of cultivated land surpass those of grassland, whereas in other regions, this relationship is reversed. As anticipated, in traditional pastoral areas, the ecological parameters of the vegetation areas exceed those of the non-vegetation areas. Constructive land's ecological parameters are higher than those of water bodies and unutilized land. In summary, the ecological parameters of various LUTs can be categorized into two modes: (1) Forest > Whole area > Cultivated land, Grassland > non-vegetation types (including NEC, EC, CC, SC, and SWC), and (2) Forest > Cultivated land, Grassland > Whole area > non-vegetation types (including NWC, NC, and QT). Among all ecological parameters, net primary productivity (NPP) appears to be the ecological indicator that most closely adheres to the regulation, with the order of NPP being Forest > Cultivated land, Grassland > Construction land > Water body, unutilized land. This can be attributed to the NPP's characteristic efficiency in which vegetation captures and converts light energy into compounds. The NPP value is directly linked to vegetation growth conditions and remains unaffected by other factors. The comparison of changes in ecological parameters resulting from various LUTs is a complex process. When considering the entire region and its sub-regions, it can be observed that all ecological parameters exhibit an overall increasing trend, indicating a positive stage of ecological restoration. Specifically, in terms of vegetation types, the ecological parameters of forest decreased in the QT region but increased in other regions.