IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v70y2024ics2212041624000895.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecosystem services and cost-effective benefits from the reclamation of saline sodic land under different paddy field systems

Author

Listed:
  • Zhou, Tairan
  • Hu, Hao
  • Hu, Jiaxin
  • Yang, Ziye
  • Lv, Qilin
  • Wang, Yajun
  • Yan, Binwei
  • Ren, Xueqin
  • Hu, Shuwen

Abstract

Reclamation of saline-sodic soils can unlock vast potential resources, relieve food shortages, and increase valuable ecosystem services. While previous investigations have focused on the current ecosystem service (ES) value of reclaimed paddy fields, the potential long-term costs and benefits of reclamation are still largely unknown. To fill this important research gap, we assessed ES values of reclaimed paddies at the field scale, using primary data collected from 15 different paddy management systems. We assessed the market and non-market benefits, costs, and benefit-cost ratios (BCR) of three different reclamation models and two coculture models across a chronosequence of paddy sites (cultivated for up to 50 years). Our results demonstrate that the addition of cellulose sulfonated modified composite (CSMC) and flue gas desulfurization gypsum (FGDG) substantially increased the net ecosystem service value (NESV) by 16.53 % and 52.21 %, respectively, compared to control paddy cultivation sites. Additionally, integrated rice-crab and rice-fish coculture systems presented great increases in market value (48.48 % and 51.39 %, respectively) compared with that of monoculture systems. Ecosystem provisioning and gas regulating services increased alongside market benefits over longer cultivation periods, indicating potential advantages of long-term paddy cultivation. After 50 years of operation, the cumulative benefit of the CSMC system was approximately 455058.88 ¥ ha−1, which was approximately 1.6 times greater than the control. These results indicate that additional investment in the CSMC system can produce a high margin benefit-cost ratio (MBCR). Given appropriate management models and policies, CSMC inputs and rice-fish co-culture represent the best-performing reclamation system in this study. Our study lays the foundation for associated studies on related government policy, corporate investments, and agricultural production.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhou, Tairan & Hu, Hao & Hu, Jiaxin & Yang, Ziye & Lv, Qilin & Wang, Yajun & Yan, Binwei & Ren, Xueqin & Hu, Shuwen, 2024. "Ecosystem services and cost-effective benefits from the reclamation of saline sodic land under different paddy field systems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:70:y:2024:i:c:s2212041624000895
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101682
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000895
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101682?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    2. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Rasheed, Shenaz & Venkatesh, P. & Singh, Dharam Raj & Renjini, V.R. & Jha, Girish Kumar & Sharma, Dinesh Kumar, 2021. "Ecosystem valuation and eco-compensation for conservation of traditional paddy ecosystems and varieties in Kerala, India," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    4. William Haden Chomphosy & Sofia Varriano & Luke H. Lefler & Varenya Nallur & Maureen R. McClung & Matthew D. Moran, 2021. "Ecosystem services benefits from the restoration of non-producing US oil and gas lands," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 4(6), pages 547-554, June.
    5. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    6. Sumarga, Elham & Hein, Lars & Edens, Bram & Suwarno, Aritta, 2015. "Mapping monetary values of ecosystem services in support of developing ecosystem accounts," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 71-83.
    7. Lin, Wenpeng & Xu, Dan & Guo, Pupu & Wang, Dan & Li, Lubing & Gao, Jun, 2019. "Exploring variations of ecosystem service value in Hangzhou Bay Wetland, Eastern China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Loc, Ho Huu & Thi Hong Diep, Nguyen & Can, Nguyen Trong & Irvine, Kim N. & Shimizu, Yoshihisa, 2017. "Integrated evaluation of Ecosystem Services in Prawn-Rice rotational crops, Vietnam," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 377-387.
    9. Amirhossein Hassani & Adisa Azapagic & Nima Shokri, 2021. "Global predictions of primary soil salinization under changing climate in the 21st century," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Tiecheng Huang & Wenjiang Huang & Kun Wang & Yongkang Li & Zhenhai Li & Yong’an Yang, 2022. "Ecosystem Service Value Estimation of Paddy Field Ecosystems Based on Multi-Source Remote Sensing Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    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. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    4. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    5. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    6. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    7. Frélichová, Jana & Vačkář, David & Pártl, Adam & Loučková, Blanka & Harmáčková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, Eliška, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    8. Chen, Haojie & Costanza, Robert & Kubiszewski, Ida, 2022. "Legitimacy and limitations of valuing the oxygen production of ecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    9. María del Pilar García Pachón, 2016. "Instrumentos Económicos Y Financieros Para La Gestión Ambiental," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 853, May.
    10. Chaikumbung, Mayula & Doucouliagos, Hristos & Scarborough, Helen, 2016. "The economic value of wetlands in developing countries: A meta-regression analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 164-174.
    11. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    12. Zilio, Mariana I. & Alfonso, M. Belén & Ferrelli, Federico & Perillo, Gerardo M.E. & Piccolo, M. Cintia, 2017. "Ecosystem services provision, tourism and climate variability in shallow lakes: The case of La Salada, Buenos Aires, Argentina," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 208-217.
    13. Ho Huu, Loc & Ballatore, Thomas J. & Irvine, Kim N. & Nguyen, Thi Hong Diep & Truong, Thi Cam Tien & Yoshihisa, Shimizu, 2018. "Socio-geographic indicators to evaluate landscape Cultural Ecosystem Services: A case of Mekong Delta, Vietnam," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 527-542.
    14. Anthony Kadoma & Mia Perry & Fabrice G. Renaud, 2025. "Stakeholders’ perceptions of wetland conservation and restoration in Wakiso District, Uganda," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 3177-3200, February.
    15. Lu Xu & Xijing Liu & Andrea Gatto & László Vasa & Xin Zhao, 2025. "Valuation of ecosystem services from forests in Chinese rural areas based on forest resource investment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    16. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    17. Das, Manob & Das, Arijit & Saikh, Selim, 2024. "Estimating supply-demand mismatches for optimization of sustainable land use planning in a rapidly growing urban agglomeration (India)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    18. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2016. "Classification and valuation of soil ecosystem services," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 24-38.
    19. Ochoa, Vivian & Urbina-Cardona, Nicolás, 2017. "Tools for spatially modeling ecosystem services: Publication trends, conceptual reflections and future challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 155-169.
    20. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.

    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:ecoser:v:70:y:2024:i:c:s2212041624000895. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.