IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i6p3007-d513985.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on a Biodiversity Conservation Value Assessment Method Based on Habitat Suitability of Species: A Case Study in Gansu Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaojiong Zhao

    (Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    Gansu Academy of Eco-Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China)

  • Jian Wang

    (Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China)

  • Junde Su

    (Gansu Vocational & Technical College of Nonferrous Metallurgy, Jinchang 737100, China)

  • Wei Sun

    (Gansu Academy of Eco-Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China)

  • Haoxian Meng

    (Gansu Academy of Eco-Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China)

Abstract

Quantitative assessment and evaluation of ecological parameters and biodiversity conservation are prime concerns for long-term conservation of rare and endangered species and their associated habitats in any ecological region. In this study, Gansu Province, a biodiversity hotspot, was chosen as the research area. We predicted the distribution patterns of suitable habitats for rare and endangered species. The replacement cost method was adopted to calculate the conservation value of rare and endangered species. The suitable habitat distribution area of rare and endangered wild animals reached 351,607.76 km 2 (without overlapping area), while that of plants reached 72,988.12 km 2 (without overlapping area). The conservation value of rare and endangered wildlife is US $1670.00 million. The high-value areas are mostly concentrated in the south and north of Gansu Province. The conservation value of rare and endangered wild plants is US $56,920.00 million. The high-value areas are mostly concentrated south of Gansu Province. The conservation value is US $58,590.00 million a year, and its distribution trend is gradually decreasing from northeast to southwest, with the highest in the forest area south of Gansu Province, followed by the Qilian Mountain area in the north. These results are of great significance for future improvement of the evaluation index system of ecosystem services and the development of ecosystem services and management strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaojiong Zhao & Jian Wang & Junde Su & Wei Sun & Haoxian Meng, 2021. "Research on a Biodiversity Conservation Value Assessment Method Based on Habitat Suitability of Species: A Case Study in Gansu Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-30, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:6:p:3007-:d:513985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/6/3007/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/6/3007/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norman Myers & Russell A. Mittermeier & Cristina G. Mittermeier & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Jennifer Kent, 2000. "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities," Nature, Nature, vol. 403(6772), pages 853-858, February.
    2. Czech, Brian & Krausman, Paul & Devers, Patrick, 2000. "Economic associations among causes of species endangerment in the United States," MPRA Paper 2306, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Clem Tisdell, 2002. "The Economics of Conserving Wildlife and Natural Areas," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2526.
    4. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Liu, Xuemin, 2008. "Valuing black-faced spoonbill conservation in Macao: A policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 328-335, December.
    5. Loomis, John B. & White, Douglas S., 1996. "Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 197-206, September.
    6. Catherine Chambers & John Whitehead, 2003. "A Contingent Valuation Estimate of the Benefits of Wolves in Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 249-267, October.
    7. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.
    8. Cardoso de Mendonca, Mario Jorge & Sachsida, Adolfo & Loureiro, Paulo R. A., 2003. "A study on the valuing of biodiversity: the case of three endangered species in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 9-18, August.
    9. VanDerWal, Jeremy & Shoo, Luke P. & Graham, Catherine & Williams, Stephen E., 2009. "Selecting pseudo-absence data for presence-only distribution modeling: How far should you stray from what you know?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(4), pages 589-594.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L., 2011. "Identifying the scope effect on a meta-analysis of biodiversity valuation studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 706-724, September.
    2. Lili Reyes Hernandez & Melissa Yepes Tafur, 2013. "Evaluación económica de preservar el Mono Tití Cabeciblanco: Una aplicación del método de valoración contingente," Revista Economía y Región, Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar, vol. 7(1), pages 69-99, June.
    3. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    4. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    5. Fisher, Brendan & Christopher, Treg, 2007. "Poverty and biodiversity: Measuring the overlap of human poverty and the biodiversity hotspots," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 93-101, April.
    6. Ik-Chang Choi & Hyun No Kim & Hio-Jung Shin & John Tenhunen & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2017. "Economic Valuation of the Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation in South Korea: Correcting for the Endogeneity Bias in Contingent Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    7. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2002. "Rural and Urban Attitudes to the Conservation of Asian Elephants in Sri Lanka: Empirical Evidence," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48736, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    8. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Liu, Xuemin, 2008. "Valuing black-faced spoonbill conservation in Macao: A policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 328-335, December.
    9. Boya Wang & Zhicheng Liu & Yuting Mei & Wenjie Li, 2019. "Assessment of Ecosystem Service Quality and Its Correlation with Landscape Patterns in Haidian District, Beijing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-34, April.
    10. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.
    11. Herkt, K. Matthias B. & Barnikel, Günter & Skidmore, Andrew K. & Fahr, Jakob, 2016. "A high-resolution model of bat diversity and endemism for continental Africa," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 9-28.
    12. Sims, Charles & Aadland, David & Finnoff, David & Hochard, Jacob, 2020. "What are the benefits of delisting endangered species and who receives them?: Lessons from the gray wolf recovery in Greater Yellowstone," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    13. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    14. Tuan, Tran Hu & Lindhjem, Henrik, 2008. "Meta-analysis of nature conservation values in Asia & Oceania: Data heterogeneity and benefit transfer issues," MPRA Paper 11470, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Anabeth L Indab, 2007. "Willingness to Pay for Whale Shark Conservation in Sorsogon, Philippines," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper tp200711t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Nov 2007.
    16. Ngouhouo Poufoun, Jonas & Abildtrup, Jens & Sonwa, Dénis Jean & Delacote, Philippe, 2016. "The value of endangered forest elephants to local communities in a transboundary conservation landscape," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 70-86.
    17. Adams, Cristina & Seroa da Motta, Ronaldo & Ortiz, Ramón Arigoni & Reid, John & Ebersbach Aznar, Cristina & de Almeida Sinisgalli, Paulo Antonio, 2008. "The use of contingent valuation for evaluating protected areas in the developing world: Economic valuation of Morro do Diabo State Park, Atlantic Rainforest, São Paulo State (Brazil)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 359-370, June.
    18. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John, 2009. "The total economic value of threatened, endangered and rare species: An updated meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1535-1548, March.
    19. Kawata, Yukichika & Watanabe, Masahide, 2012. "Valuing the mortality risk of wildlife reintroduction: Heterogeneous risk preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 79-86.
    20. Jin Jianjun, 2008. "Economic Valuation of Black-faced Spoonbill Conservation in Macao," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper tp200801t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Jan 2008.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:6:p:3007-:d:513985. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.