IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v79y2018icp94-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Net value of grassland ecosystem services in mainland China

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng, Xinyi
  • Zhang, Junze
  • Cao, Shixiong

Abstract

To understand the difference between the value and the net value of ecosystem services (VES and NES, respectively), we used government statistics and data from published papers about the values and costs of grassland services to calculate their VES and NES in China. We found that when the associated costs (investment in ecological conservation and restoration, reduction of the risk of natural disasters, water consumption, and land rent) are subtracted from this total, the NES of China’s grassland ecosystem services equaled −0.12 × 103 RMB ha−1 yr−1. Except for northeastern China and Inner Mongolia, which have abundant natural resources and lower population and livestock pressure, China’s other seven regions had a negative grassland NES. The pressure on grassland by livestock has increased steeply (by 1066.1%), from 29.2 × 106 sheep units in 1977 to 340.5 × 106 sheep units in 2014. This strongly suggests that China’s grasslands are being heavily overexploited. In contrast with China’s well-funded afforestation programs, the low investments in grassland restoration and management have combined to produce severe degradation of grasslands. China’s government should re-examine the benefits of livestock culture by accounting for the costs of this land use and of various restoration methods, and should take measures to preserve and restore the country’s fragile grasslands. Our results provide a warning for managers of other ecosystems around the world where calculations of grassland VES may be ignoring significant costs of ecological restoration and preservation, leading to overuse and degradation of the ecosystem.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng, Xinyi & Zhang, Junze & Cao, Shixiong, 2018. "Net value of grassland ecosystem services in mainland China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 94-101.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:79:y:2018:i:c:p:94-101
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.07.043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718307701
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.07.043?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. Carl Obst & Lars Hein & Bram Edens, 2016. "National Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Assets and Their Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(1), pages 1-23, May.
    2. David Tilman & Kenneth G. Cassman & Pamela A. Matson & Rosamond Naylor & Stephen Polasky, 2002. "Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices," Nature, Nature, vol. 418(6898), pages 671-677, August.
    3. Zheng, Wei & Shi, Honghua & Chen, Shang & Zhu, Mingyuan, 2009. "Benefit and cost analysis of mariculture based on ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1626-1632, April.
    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. Yang, Qing & Liu, Gengyuan & Giannetti, Biagio F. & Agostinho, Feni & M.V.B. Almeida, Cecília & Casazza, Marco, 2020. "Emergy-based ecosystem services valuation and classification management applied to China’s grasslands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    2. Xia, Chengqi & Liu, Zhexi & Suo, Xinhao & Cao, Shixiong, 2020. "Quantifying the net benefit of land use of fruit trees in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    3. Zilin Zhou & Feng Cheng & Jinliang Wang & Bangjin Yi, 2023. "A Study on the Impact of Roads on Grassland Degradation in Shangri-La City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-16, May.
    4. Sansi Yang & Le Yu & Ganxiao Leng & Huanguang Qiu, 2021. "Livestock farmers’ perception and adaptation to climate change: panel evidence from pastoral areas in China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-24, January.
    5. Tong, Xuanyue & Wu, Pute & Liu, Xufei & Zhang, Lin & Zhou, Wei & Wang, Zhaoguo, 2022. "A global meta-analysis of fruit tree yield and water use efficiency under deficit irrigation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    6. Jing Ning & Jianjun Jin & Foyuan Kuang & Xinyu Wan & Chenyang Zhang & Tong Guan, 2019. "The Valuation of Grassland Ecosystem Services in Inner Mongolia of China and Its Spatial Differences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Cao, Jianjun & Li, Guangdong & Adamowski, Jan F. & Holden, Nicholas M. & Deo, Ravinesh C. & Hu, Zeyong & Zhu, Guofeng & Xu, Xueyun & Feng, Qi, 2019. "Suitable exclosure duration for the restoration of degraded alpine grasslands on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 261-267.
    8. Qinghu Liao & Wenwen Dong & Boxin Zhao, 2023. "A New Strategy to Solve “the Tragedy of the Commons” in Sustainable Grassland Ecological Compensation: Experience from Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-24, June.
    9. Xinmin Zhang & Ronald C Estoque & Hualin Xie & Yuji Murayama & Manjula Ranagalage, 2019. "Bibliometric analysis of highly cited articles on ecosystem services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, February.
    10. Zhiyin Wang & Jiansheng Cao & Chunyu Zhu & Hui Yang, 2020. "The Impact of Land Use Change on Ecosystem Service Value in the Upstream of Xiong’an New Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    11. Fan, Shengyue & He, Miao & Zhang, Tianyu & Huo, Yajing & Fan, Di, 2022. "Credibility measurement as a tool for conserving nature: Chinese herders’ livelihood capitals and payment for grassland ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    12. Xiaodong Jing & Guiliang Tian & Minrui Li & Sohail Ahmad Javeed, 2021. "Research on the Spatial and Temporal Differences of China’s Provincial Carbon Emissions and Ecological Compensation Based on Land Carbon Budget Accounting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-21, December.
    13. Shrestha, Kripa & Shakya, Bandana & Adhikari, Biraj & Nepal, Mani & Shaoliang, Yi, 2023. "Ecosystem services valuation for conservation and development decisions: A review of valuation studies and tools in the Far Eastern Himalaya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    14. Mingyue Li & Pujie Zhao & Lianbei Wu & Kai Chen, 2021. "Effects of Value Perception, Environmental Regulation and Their Interaction on the Improvement of Herdsmen’s Grassland Ecological Policy Satisfaction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-23, March.
    15. Jundong He & Jun Chen & Juan Xiao & Tingting Zhao & Pengxi Cao, 2023. "Defining Important Areas for Ecosystem Conservation in Qinghai Province under the Policy of Ecological Red Line," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-15, March.
    16. Xinhao Suo & Shixiong Cao, 2021. "China’s three north shelter forest program: cost–benefit analysis and policy implications," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 14605-14618, October.
    17. Zhen, Huayang & Qiao, Yuhui & Zhao, Haijun & Ju, Xuehai & Zanoli, Raffaele & Waqas, Muhammad Ahmed & Lun, Fei & Knudsen, Marie Trydeman, 2022. "Developing a conceptual model to quantify eco-compensation based on environmental and economic cost-benefit analysis for promoting the ecologically intensified agriculture," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    18. Lei Chang & Zhibo Zhao & Lixin Jiang & Yuefen Li, 2022. "Quantifying the Ecosystem Services of Soda Saline-Alkali Grasslands in Western Jilin Province, NE China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-21, April.
    19. Zhilei Yu & Tianling Qin & Dengming Yan & Meijian Yang & Hexin Yu & Wanli Shi, 2018. "The Impact on the Ecosystem Services Value of the Ecological Shelter Zone Reconstruction in the Upper Reaches Basin of the Yangtze River in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, October.
    20. Cao, Shixiong & Xia, Chengqi & Suo, Xinhao & Wei, Zhuoran, 2021. "A framework for calculating the net benefits of ecological restoration programs in China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    21. Chengjin He & Huaiyong Shao & Wei Xian, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Variation and Driving Forces Analysis of Eco-System Service Values: A Case Study of Sichuan Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-22, July.

    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. Elisa Morri & Riccardo Santolini, 2021. "Ecosystem Services Valuation for the Sustainable Land Use Management by Nature-Based Solution (NbS) in the Common Agricultural Policy Actions: A Case Study on the Foglia River Basin (Marche Region, It," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, December.
    2. Meya, Jasper N. & Drupp, Moritz A. & Hanley, Nick, 2021. "Testing structural benefit transfer: The role of income inequality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    3. Katarina Arvidsson Segerkvist & Helena Hansson & Ulf Sonesson & Stefan Gunnarsson, 2021. "A Systematic Mapping of Current Literature on Sustainability at Farm-Level in Beef and Lamb Meat Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, February.
    4. Hualin Xie & Yingqian Huang & Qianru Chen & Yanwei Zhang & Qing Wu, 2019. "Prospects for Agricultural Sustainable Intensification: A Review of Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, October.
    5. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    6. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Diriba Shiferaw G., 2017. "Water-Nutrients Interaction: Exploring the Effects of Water as a Central Role for Availability & Use Efficiency of Nutrients by Shallow Rooted Vegetable Crops - A Review," Journal of Agriculture and Crops, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 3(10), pages 78-93, 10-2017.
    8. Sheng Gong & Jason.S. Bergtold & Elizabeth Yeager, 2021. "Assessing the joint adoption and complementarity between in-field conservation practices of Kansas farmers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, December.
    9. Seufert, Verena & Ramankutty, Navin & Mayerhofer, Tabea, 2017. "What is this thing called organic? – How organic farming is codified in regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 10-20.
    10. Kataki, Sampriti & West, Helen & Clarke, Michèle & Baruah, D.C., 2016. "Phosphorus recovery as struvite: Recent concerns for use of seed, alternative Mg source, nitrogen conservation and fertilizer potential," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 142-156.
    11. Alexander D. Chapman & Stephen E. Darby & Hoàng M. Hồng & Emma L. Tompkins & Tri P. D. Van, 2016. "Adaptation and development trade-offs: fluvial sediment deposition and the sustainability of rice-cropping in An Giang Province, Mekong Delta," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 137(3), pages 593-608, August.
    12. Rosa, R.D. & Ramos, T.B. & Pereira, L.S., 2016. "The dual Kc approach to assess maize and sweet sorghum transpiration and soil evaporation under saline conditions: Application of the SIMDualKc model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 77-94.
    13. Chen, Chien-Ming & van Dalen, Jan, 2010. "Measuring dynamic efficiency: Theories and an integrated methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(3), pages 749-760, June.
    14. Ethan Gordon & Federico Davila & Chris Riedy, 2022. "Transforming landscapes and mindscapes through regenerative agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 809-826, June.
    15. Teklewold, Hailemariam & Kassie, Menale & Shiferaw, Bekele & Köhlin, Gunnar, 2013. "Cropping system diversification, conservation tillage and modern seed adoption in Ethiopia: Impacts on household income, agrochemical use and demand for labor," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 85-93.
    16. Hanjra, Munir A. & Qureshi, M. Ejaz, 2010. "Global water crisis and future food security in an era of climate change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 365-377, October.
    17. Horacio Augstburger & Fabian Käser & Stephan Rist, 2019. "Assessing Food Systems and Their Impact on Common Pool Resources and Resilience," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-25, April.
    18. Moritz A. Drupp & Martin C. Hänsel, 2021. "Relative Prices and Climate Policy: How the Scarcity of Nonmarket Goods Drives Policy Evaluation," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 168-201, February.
    19. Samuel I. Haruna & Nsalambi V. Nkongolo, 2020. "Influence of Cover Crop, Tillage, and Crop Rotation Management on Soil Nutrients," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, June.
    20. Aditi Sengupta & Priyanka Kushwaha & Antonia Jim & Peter A. Troch & Raina Maier, 2020. "New Soil, Old Plants, and Ubiquitous Microbes: Evaluating the Potential of Incipient Basaltic Soil to Support Native Plant Growth and Influence Belowground Soil Microbial Community Composition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, May.

    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:lauspo:v:79:y:2018:i:c:p:94-101. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.