IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v504y2025ics0304380025000651.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Synergizing farmland reverting and energy substitution programs in Wolong through agent-based modelling and cost-efficiency analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Keyi
  • Chen, Yufeng
  • Xu, Liyan
  • Zhang, Xiao
  • Wang, Zilin
  • Li, Hailong
  • Yang, Yansheng
  • You, Hong
  • Li, Dihua

Abstract

Balancing human development with conservation necessitates ecological policies that optimize outcomes within limited budgets, highlighting the importance of cost-efficiency and local impact analysis. This study employs the Socio-Econ-Ecosystem Multipurpose Simulator (SEEMS), an Agent-Based Model (ABM) designed for simulating small-scale Coupled Human and Nature Systems (CHANS), to evaluate the cost-efficiency of two major ecology conservation programs: Grain-to-Green (G2G) and Firewood-to-Electricity (F2E). Focusing on China's Wolong National Reserve, a worldwide hot spot for flagship species conservation, the study evaluates the direct benefits of these programs, including reverted farmland area and firewood consumption, along with their combined indirect benefits on habitat quality, carbon emissions, and gross economic benefits. The findings are as follows: (1) The G2G program achieves optimal financial efficiency at approximately 500 CNY/Mu (∼1177.5 USD/ha), with diminishing returns observed beyond 1000 CNY/Mu (∼2355 USD/ha); (2) For the F2E program, the most fiscally cost-efficient option arises when the subsidized electricity price is at 0.4–0.5 CNY/kWh (∼0.063–0.079 USD/kWh), while further reductions of the prices to below 0.1 CNY/kWh (∼0.0157 USD/kWh) result in a diminishing cost-benefit ratio; (3) Comprehensive cost-efficiency analysis reveals no significant link between financial burden and carbon emissions, but a positive correlation with habitat quality and an inverted U-shaped relationship with total economic income; (4) Pareto analysis identifies 18 optimal dual-policy combinations for balancing carbon footprint, habitat quality, and gross economic benefits; (5) Posterior Pareto optimization further refines the selection of a specific policy scheme for a given realistic scenario. The analytical framework of this paper helps policymakers design economically viable and environmentally sustainable policies, addressing global conservation challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Keyi & Chen, Yufeng & Xu, Liyan & Zhang, Xiao & Wang, Zilin & Li, Hailong & Yang, Yansheng & You, Hong & Li, Dihua, 2025. "Synergizing farmland reverting and energy substitution programs in Wolong through agent-based modelling and cost-efficiency analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 504(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:504:y:2025:i:c:s0304380025000651
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2025.111079
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380025000651
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2025.111079?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Hailong & Li, Dihua & Li, Ting & Qiao, Qing & Yang, Jian & Zhang, Hemin, 2010. "Application of least-cost path model to identify a giant panda dispersal corridor network after the Wenchuan earthquake—Case study of Wolong Nature Reserve in China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(6), pages 944-952.
    2. Robinson, D.T. & Brown, D.G. & Currie, W.S., 2009. "Modelling carbon storage in highly fragmented and human-dominated landscapes: Linking land-cover patterns and ecosystem models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(9), pages 1325-1338.
    3. Knetsch, Jack L, 1989. "The Endowment Effect and Evidence of Nonreversible Indifference Curves," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1277-1284, December.
    4. Frederick van der Ploeg & Cees Withagen, 2015. "Global Warming and the Green Paradox: A Review of Adverse Effects of Climate Policies," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(2), pages 285-303.
    5. Gallen, Trevor S., 2021. "Predicting and decomposing why representative agent and heterogeneous agent models sometimes diverge," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. A. Greening, Lorna & Greene, David L. & Difiglio, Carmen, 2000. "Energy efficiency and consumption -- the rebound effect -- a survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6-7), pages 389-401, June.
    7. Maestre Andrés, Sara & Calvet Mir, Laura & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. & Ring, Irene & Verburg, Peter H., 2012. "Ineffective biodiversity policy due to five rebound effects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 101-110.
    8. Meyer, Paul A & Shipley, J J, 1970. "Pareto Optimal Redistribution: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(5), pages 988-990, December.
    9. Williams, Perry J. & Kendall, William L., 2017. "A guide to multi-objective optimization for ecological problems with an application to cackling goose management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 343(C), pages 54-67.
    10. Aydilek, Harun & Aydilek, Asiye, 2020. "Do we really need heterogeneous agent models?," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 147-153.
    11. Massimiliano Piacenza, 2006. "Regulatory Contracts and Cost Efficiency: Stochastic Frontier Evidence from the Italian Local Public Transport," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 257-277, June.
    12. Herring, Horace, 2006. "Energy efficiency—a critical view," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 10-20.
    13. 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.
    14. Emi Uchida & Jintao Xu & Scott Rozelle, 2005. "Grain for Green: Cost-Effectiveness and Sustainability of China’s Conservation Set-Aside Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    15. Paul A. Samuelson, 1956. "Social Indifference Curves," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 1-22.
    16. Li An & Marc Linderman & Jiaguo Qi & Ashton Shortridge & Jianguo Liu, 2005. "Exploring Complexity in a Human–Environment System: An Agent-Based Spatial Model for Multidisciplinary and Multiscale Integration," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 95(1), pages 54-79, March.
    17. Chen, Yufeng & Xu, Liyan & Zhang, Xiao & Wang, Zilin & Li, Hailong & Yang, Yansheng & You, Hong & Li, Dihua, 2023. "Socio-econ-ecosystem multipurpose simulator (SEEMS): An easy-to-apply agent-based model for simulating small-scale coupled human and nature systems in biological conservation hotspots," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 476(C).
    18. Wu, Wanlu & Cheng, Yuanyuan & Lin, Xiqiao & Yao, Xin, 2019. "How does the implementation of the Policy of Electricity Substitution influence green economic growth in China?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 251-261.
    19. Kenneth Chomitz & Charles Griffiths, 2001. "An Economic Analysis and Simulation of Woodfuel Management in the Sahel," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(3), pages 285-304, July.
    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. David Font Vivanco & Jaume Freire‐González & Ray Galvin & Tilman Santarius & Hans Jakob Walnum & Tamar Makov & Serenella Sala, 2022. "Rebound effect and sustainability science: A review," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(4), pages 1543-1563, August.
    2. Cédric Gossart, 2015. "Rebound effects and ICT : a review of the literature," Post-Print hal-01258112, HAL.
    3. Zbigniew Bohdanowicz & Beata Łopaciuk-Gonczaryk & Jarosław Kowalski & Cezary Biele, 2021. "Households’ Electrical Energy Conservation and Management: An Ecological Break-Through, or the Same Old Consumption-Growth Path?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-21, October.
    4. Hans Jakob Walnum & Carlo Aall & Søren Løkke, 2014. "Can Rebound Effects Explain Why Sustainable Mobility Has Not Been Achieved?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-28, December.
    5. Franceschini, Simone & Borup, Mads & Rosales-Carreón, Jesús, 2018. "Future indoor light and associated energy consumption based on professionals' visions: A practice- and network-oriented analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1-11.
    6. Al-Mansour, Fouad, 2011. "Energy efficiency trends and policy in Slovenia," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1868-1877.
    7. Pedro Linares & Xavier Labandeira, 2010. "Energy Efficiency: Economics And Policy," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 573-592, July.
    8. Yan, Xiaoyu & Crookes, Roy J., 2009. "Reduction potentials of energy demand and GHG emissions in China's road transport sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 658-668, February.
    9. Alistair Munro, 2018. "Intra†Household Experiments: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 134-175, February.
    10. Cédric Gossart, 2015. "Rebound effects and ICT : a review of the literature," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01258112, HAL.
    11. Wu, Kuei-Yen & Wu, Jung-Hua & Huang, Yun-Hsun & Fu, Szu-Chi & Chen, Chia-Yon, 2016. "Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects by supply-driven input-output model: A case study of Taiwan's industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 904-913.
    12. Ruzzenenti, F. & Basosi, R., 2008. "The role of the power/efficiency misconception in the rebound effect's size debate: Does efficiency actually lead to a power enhancement?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 3626-3632, September.
    13. Islam, Aminul & Chan, Eng-Seng & Taufiq-Yap, Yun Hin & Mondal, Md. Alam Hossain & Moniruzzaman, M. & Mridha, Moniruzzaman, 2014. "Energy security in Bangladesh perspective—An assessment and implication," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 154-171.
    14. Xu, Dandan & Guo, Dongli & Yue, Pengpeng & Li, Mengshi, 2024. "Household green consumption: Does digital inclusion matter?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    15. Lin, Boqiang & Yang, Fang & Liu, Xia, 2013. "A study of the rebound effect on China's current energy conservation and emissions reduction: Measures and policy choices," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 330-339.
    16. Faran Ahmed & Muhammad Naeem & Muhammad Iqbal, 2017. "ICT and renewable energy: a way forward to the next generation telecom base stations," Telecommunication Systems: Modelling, Analysis, Design and Management, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 43-56, January.
    17. López, Ramón E. & Yoon, Sang W., 2020. "Sustainable development: Structural transformation and the consumer demand," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 22-38.
    18. de Haan, Peter & Mueller, Michel G. & Peters, Anja, 2006. "Does the hybrid Toyota Prius lead to rebound effects? Analysis of size and number of cars previously owned by Swiss Prius buyers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 592-605, June.
    19. Lin, Boqiang & Liu, Xia, 2012. "Dilemma between economic development and energy conservation: Energy rebound effect in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 867-873.
    20. Jeffrey B. Dahmus, 2014. "Can Efficiency Improvements Reduce Resource Consumption?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(6), pages 883-897, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:ecomod:v:504:y:2025:i:c:s0304380025000651. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    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.