IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i8p1459-d109042.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing Farmers’ Perceptions of Ecosystem Services and PES Schemes within Agricultural Landscapes in Mengyin County, China: Transforming Trade-Offs into Synergies

Author

Listed:
  • Yajuan Chen

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

  • Qian Zhang

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

  • Wenping Liu

    (College of Horticulture and Forestry Sciences, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Zhenrong Yu

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China
    Beijing Laboratory of Biodiversity and Organic Farming, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China)

Abstract

Researchers aspire to strike a balance between the production and consumption of ecosystem services (ES) in agriculture for long-term farm sustainability. One approach is to provide payments for ecosystem services (PES) through government programs. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate ecosystem services and use the evaluated information to determine what policy designs could effectively induce more services in agricultural landscapes. This research uses a theoretical and analytical framework. In this framework, farmers’ perceptions of the obtained ES, importance of ES, design rules of PES programs and management practices of PES programs are identified in Mengyin County by using surveys. The results show: (1) farmers could possibly recognize the limitations of the obtained ES and reduce their demand appropriately; (2) regulating services (e.g., pollination and biological pest control) provision is central to transforming trade-offs into synergies among ecosystem services; (3) farmers should not only attach great importance to the maintenance of soil fertility and health but also to the maintenance of semi-natural habitat, and the adoption of such an attitude could positively affect their behavior to maximize synergies among ES; and (4) farmers are program implementers; if they have a better understanding of the perceptions of ES and PES programs, the theoretical and analytical framework could help farmers, policy-makers and relevant institutions design effective schemes.

Suggested Citation

  • Yajuan Chen & Qian Zhang & Wenping Liu & Zhenrong Yu, 2017. "Analyzing Farmers’ Perceptions of Ecosystem Services and PES Schemes within Agricultural Landscapes in Mengyin County, China: Transforming Trade-Offs into Synergies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:8:p:1459-:d:109042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1459/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1459/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    2. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    3. Swinton, Scott M. & Lupi, Frank & Robertson, G. Philip & Hamilton, Stephen K., 2007. "Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 245-252, December.
    4. Démurger, Sylvie & Pelletier, Adeline, 2015. "Volunteer and satisfied? Rural households' participation in a payments for environmental services programme in Inner Mongolia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 25-33.
    5. repec:gat:wpaper:1509 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Costanza, Robert & d'Arge, Ralph & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Stephen & Grasso, Monica & Hannon, Bruce & Limburg, Karin & Naeem, Shahid & O'Neill, Robert V. & Paruelo, Jose, 1998. "The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-15, April.
    7. Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Sven Wunder & Paul J. Ferraro, 2010. "Show Me the Money: Do Payments Supply Environmental Services in Developing Countries?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(2), pages 254-274, Summer.
    8. Christian Schleyer & Alexandra Lux & Marion Mehring & Christoph Görg, 2017. "Ecosystem Services as a Boundary Concept: Arguments from Social Ecology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-14, June.
    9. Muradian, Roldan & Rival, Laura, 2012. "Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of governing ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 93-100.
    10. Tian, Qing & Holland, John H. & Brown, Daniel G., 2016. "Social and economic impacts of subsidy policies on rural development in the Poyang Lake Region, China: Insights from an agent-based model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 12-27.
    11. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    12. Guillem, E.E. & Murray-Rust, D. & Robinson, D.T. & Barnes, A. & Rounsevell, M.D.A., 2015. "Modelling farmer decision-making to anticipate tradeoffs between provisioning ecosystem services and biodiversity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 12-23.
    13. Polasky, Stephen, 2008. "What's Nature Done for You Lately: Measuring the Value of Ecosystem Services," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 1-5.
    14. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    15. Chase D. Mendenhall & Daniel S. Karp & Christoph F. J. Meyer & Elizabeth A. Hadly & Gretchen C. Daily, 2014. "Predicting biodiversity change and averting collapse in agricultural landscapes," Nature, Nature, vol. 509(7499), pages 213-217, May.
    16. Jean-Philippe Boussemart & Hervé Leleu & Oluwaseun Ojo, 2016. "Exploring cost dominance in crop farming systems between high and low pesticide use," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 197-214, April.
    17. Zhang, Wei & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Kremen, Claire & Carney, Karen & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 253-260, December.
    18. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    19. Muhamad, Dendi & Okubo, Satoru & Harashina, Koji & Parikesit, & Gunawan, Budhi & Takeuchi, Kazuhiko, 2014. "Living close to forests enhances people׳s perception of ecosystem services in a forest–agricultural landscape of West Java, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 197-206.
    20. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yost, Alexandra & An, Li & Bilsborrow, Richard & Shi, Lei & Chen, Xiaodong & Yang, Shuang & Zhang, Weiyong, 2020. "Mechanisms behind concurrent payments for ecosystem services in a Chinese nature reserve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Jing Gong & Hongyan Du & Zhi Wang, 2022. "Analysis of the Influences of Ecological Compensation Projects on Transfer Employment of Rural Labor from the Perspective of Capability," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, September.
    3. Yaofeng Yang & Yajuan Chen & Zhenrong Yu & Pengyao Li & Xuedong Li, 2020. "How Does Improve Farmers’ Attitudes toward Ecosystem Services to Support Sustainable Development of Agriculture? Based on Environmental Kuznets Curve Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Lima, Flávia Pereira & Bastos, Rogério Pereira, 2019. "Perceiving the invisible: Formal education affects the perception of ecosystem services provided by native areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    5. Dou, Yuehan & Liu, Mengxiao & Bakker, Martha & Yu, Xiubo & Carsjens, Gerrit J. & De Groot, Rudolf & Liu, Junguo, 2021. "Influence of human interventions on local perceptions of cultural ecosystem services provided by coastal landscapes: Case study of the Huiwen wetland, southern China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    6. Dou, Yuehan & Yu, Xiubo & Bakker, Martha & De Groot, Rudolf & Carsjens, Gerrit J. & Duan, Houlang & Huang, Chao, 2020. "Analysis of the relationship between cross-cultural perceptions of landscapes and cultural ecosystem services in Genheyuan region, Northeast China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).

    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. Aguilar-Gómez, Carlos R. & Arteaga-Reyes, Tizbe T. & Gómez-Demetrio, William & à vila-Akerberg, Víctor D. & Pérez-Campuzano, Enrique, 2020. "Differentiated payments for environmental services: A review of the literature," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    2. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    3. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    4. Hejnowicz, Adam P. & Raffaelli, David G. & Rudd, Murray A. & White, Piran C.L., 2014. "Evaluating the outcomes of payments for ecosystem services programmes using a capital asset framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 83-97.
    5. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    6. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    7. Yan, Haiming & Yang, Huicai & Guo, Xiaonan & Zhao, Shuqin & Jiang, Qun'ou, 2022. "Payments for ecosystem services as an essential approach to improving ecosystem services: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    8. Baba, S.H. & Wani, S.A., 2018. "Ecosystem Management Approach for Agricultural Growth in Mountains: Farmers Perception of Ecosystem Services and Dis-Services in Kashmir-India," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277556, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Chen, Cheng & Matzdorf, Bettina & Meyer, Claas & König, Hannes & Zhen, Lin, 2018. "How socioeconomic and institutional conditions at the household level shape the environmental effectiveness of governmental PES: China’s Sloping Land Conversion Program," SocArXiv jzvqh, Center for Open Science.
    10. Farley, Joshua & Schmitt, Abdon & Burke, Matthew & Farr, Marigo, 2015. "Extending market allocation to ecosystem services: Moral and practical implications on a full and unequal planet," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 244-252.
    11. Bremer, Leah L. & Farley, Kathleen A. & Lopez-Carr, David & Romero, José, 2014. "Conservation and livelihood outcomes of payment for ecosystem services in the Ecuadorian Andes: What is the potential for ‘win–win’?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 148-165.
    12. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.
    13. Sattler, Claudia & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "PES in a nutshell: From definitions and origins to PES in practice—Approaches, design process and innovative aspects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 2-11.
    14. Mohebalian, Phillip M. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2016. "Additionality and design of forest conservation programs: Insights from Ecuador's Socio Bosque Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 103-114.
    15. Rosa da Conceição, Hugo & Börner, Jan & Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Why were upscaled incentive programs for forest conservation adopted? Comparing policy choices in Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 243-252.
    16. Hayes, Tanya & Murtinho, Felipe & Wolff, Hendrik, 2015. "An institutional analysis of Payment for Environmental Services on collectively managed lands in Ecuador," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 81-89.
    17. Ola, Oreoluwa & Menapace, Luisa & Benjamin, Emmanuel & Lang, Hannes, 2019. "Determinants of the environmental conservation and poverty alleviation objectives of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) programs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 52-66.
    18. Lliso, Bosco & Pascual, Unai & Engel, Stefanie, 2021. "On the role of social equity in payments for ecosystem services in Latin America: A practitioner perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    19. Raes, Leander & Loft, Lasse & Le Coq, Jean François & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido & Van Damme, Patrick, 2016. "Towards market- or command-based governance? The evolution of payments for environmental service schemes in Andean and Mesoamerican countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 20-32.
    20. Bauchet, Jonathan & Asquith, Nigel & Ma, Zhao & Radel, Claudia & Godoy, Ricardo & Zanotti, Laura & Steele, Diana & Gramig, Benjamin M. & Chong, Andrea Estrella, 2020. "The practice of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) in the Tropical Andes: Evidence from program administrators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).

    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:9:y:2017:i:8:p:1459-:d:109042. 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.