The net ecosystem services value in mainland China

Cao, Shixiong; Liu, Yujie; Su, Wei; Zheng, Xinyi; Yu, Zhongqi

doi:10.1007/s11430-017-9153-4

Cited by 33 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Turner, Morse‐Jones, and Fisher () emphasized that explicitly incorporating the spatial context into cost–benefit analysis was critical for obtaining estimates of both the costs and the benefits of ecosystem services provision. The inherent properties (e.g., hydrology, soil, and vegetation) of the farmland environment interact with its geographical conditions (e.g., climate) and socioeconomic conditions (e.g., population), and all of these factors and their interactions significantly affect its ecological services value (Cao et al, ; Chang et al, ). For example, we found that the NES per unit area of the Tibetan Plateau was the highest among the nine regions, despite having the lowest total NES .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to limitations on the availability of data, we compiled our data at a provincial scale; in future research, more and higher resolution data should be used to extend our analysis to subprovincial levels, as such data will be necessary to support local‐scale land management. We grouped our provincial‐scale data into nine regions based on China's agricultural classification (Cao et al, ). This approach will also support national‐scale agricultural management planning in China, which is based on these nine regions (Figure ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We can define NES in a way that represents the real benefits (including income) after accounting for all costs (Cao et al, ):

italicNES = italicVES - C,

where C includes the direct costs of the investment in ecological conservation and restoration, plus fertilizer and pesticide costs and other costs such as fuel for tractors ( C d ), the opportunity costs of utilizing the resources ( C o ), and the costs entailed by risks ( C r ), such as the risk of failing to provide adequate ecological conservation or protection against insects and diseases:

C = C_{d} + C_{o} + C_{r} .

…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We then assumed that the water price in Tibet, which has the highest per capita water availability in China, was 0.17 RMB m −3 , which is the lowest price in China (Wang, Xiao, & Wang, ). Similarly, we assumed that the annual land rent was 14,520 RMB·ha −1 in Beijing (Cao et al, ), which has the highest price in China, versus 4,320 RMB·ha −1 in Tibet, which has the lowest price in China (Cao et al, ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scientists have assessed the net service value of different ecosystems, such as oceans (Zheng et al, ), wetlands (Chen et al, ), and forests (Lee et al, ). However, few scholars have evaluated the net value of farmland ecosystem services (Cao, Liu, Su, Zheng, & Yu, ; Chang et al, ). Although Chang et al () assessed the net benefits of vegetable greenhouses, this value cannot represent the entire farmland ecosystem.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Net value of farmland ecosystem services in China

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmland ecosystems are one of the most important landscapes in the world and provide many important ecosystem services for humans. However, most methods of calculating the value of ecosystem services (VES) for these ecosystems have neglected the costs of providing these services or have only considered direct costs. As a result, they have led to the adoption of uneconomical or suboptimal land use and environmental conservation strategies. Because it is increasingly necessary to identify approaches that will produce net benefits both for humans and for the environment that supports us, it is necessary to accurately account for these costs. In this paper, we propose a method for assessing the net value of ecosystem services (NES) for farmland ecosystems, which accounts for both direct and indirect costs, and apply this approach to agriculture in China to provide an improved basis for farmland management. We found that the NES of Chinese farmland decreased from 4.2 × 1012 RMB in 1952 to 3.7 × 1012 RMB in 2014 (1RMB=0.1628USD), in part due to reductions in the area of agricultural land. In addition, the NES in 2014 equaled only 47.4% of the VES, and this percentage would be even lower if more costs could be quantified. Because the direct and indirect costs differ among China's regions, the magnitude of this decrease also varies regionally. To protect China's food security and ecological health, the government will need to adjust farmland management in ways that account for these regional differences to ensure that both humans and our environment benefit.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We can define NES in a way that represents the real benefits (including income) after accounting for all costs (Cao et al, ):

italicNES = italicVES - C,

C = C_{d} + C_{o} + C_{r} .

…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Net value of farmland ecosystem services in China

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Cost–benefit analysis of China's farming system

Suo

Cao

2021

Agronomy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In addition to providing food, farming systems provide ecosystem services such as flood control, water quality control, carbon storage, and waste treatment, as well as cultural services such as scenic beauty, education, recreation, and tourism. However, the value of these services may conceal large costs that have been ignored by scholars. In this study, our goals were to perform a more complete cost-benefit analysis of farmland than has been done in previous research, thereby providing an improved estimate of the net benefits of that land use, and to explore the variation in the net benefits among regions. We used a novel method of quantifying costs and benefits that accounts for more of the associated costs than in previous research, and used China as an example. The annual net benefits of farmland totaled 11.8×10 12 RMB (Renminbi: 1 RMB = US$0.15) in 2017, which amounts to 35.3% of the total national net benefit. However, due to the adverse effects of pesticide pollution and biodiversity reduction, agriculture has a potentially negative impact on sustainable development. The annual cost of farmland in China was 5.0×10 12 RMB, which decreased the total benefit by 29.8%, and the annual cost of ecological protection was 1.1×10 12 RMB. These results demonstrate the importance of a complete assessment of the costs and benefits of farmland to support more sustainable and economically efficient land-use planning. This will both improve the benefits and support sustainable development of farmland, while also improving the enthusiasm of farmers for their occupation. INTRODUCTIONFarmland is a limited resource that is critical to a nation's food supply (Skog, 2018). Agriculture goes beyond crop cultivation to include related activities such as the raising of Abbreviations: C, costs associated with agriculture; C d , direct costs; C e , ecological protection costs; C f , farming costs; C l , land indirect (opportunity) costs; C o , indirect (opportunity) costs that arise from not utilizing agricultural land for other purposes; C w , water indirect (opportunity) costs; MOA, Ministry of Agriculture of the People's Republic of China; NBS, National Bureau of Statistics; P pt , the per capita water availability in province p and year t; VES, value of ecosystem services; VP, value of agricultural products; V pt , the value of water in province p and year t.

show abstract

Assessing the degradation of grassland ecosystems based on the advanced local net production scaling method—The case of Inner Mongolia, China

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The gradual degradation of grasslands on a global scale goes hand‐in‐hand with significant challenges for agriculture and animal husbandry development. Numerous relevant policies and projects have been implemented to protect and restore Chinese ecosystems, but it is still unclear to what degree grassland ecosystems can be recovered. In view of this, we constructed an advanced local net production scaling (ALNS) method by replacing the classification method by self‐organizing feature maps (SOFM) and tailoring the ideal state evaluation method in the LNS method. The ALNS method is used to analyze differences within grassland ecosystems, explore the ideal state of grassland ecosystems, and define degradation as the degree to which the actual state deviates from the ideal state, representing the degree to which grassland ecosystems can be recovered. It thereby quantifies and assesses the overall degradation of such systems in Inner Mongolia. Based on the results, more than 98.5% of the total grassland area failed to reach the ideal state, with the highest levels in the northeast with DN (degraded net primary productivity) values exceeding 200 gc/(m2·yr), followed by the midlands with DN values from 50 to 200 gc/(m2·yr) and the southwest with DN values between 0 and 150 gc/(m2·yr). The ALNS method can efficiently assess grassland ecosystem degradation and can be used to indicate the deviation degrees from ideal states, facilitating the development of protection and restoration programs for grassland ecosystems.

show abstract

The net ecosystem services value in mainland China

Cited by 33 publications

References 28 publications

Net value of farmland ecosystem services in China

Net value of farmland ecosystem services in China

Cost–benefit analysis of China's farming system

Assessing the degradation of grassland ecosystems based on the advanced local net production scaling method—The case of Inner Mongolia, China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About