IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i5p742-d817475.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local Residents’ Social-Ecological Adaptability of the Qilian Mountain National Park Pilot, Northwestern China

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Li

    (College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China)

  • Guoqiang Ma

    (College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China)

  • Jinghua Feng

    (College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China)

  • Liying Guo

    (College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China)

  • Yinzhou Huang

    (College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
    Key Laboratory of Western China’s Environmental Systems, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China)

Abstract

Protected areas are critical for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services. In the last few years, there has been growing recognition of the role of indigenous peoples and local communities in the management of government designated protected areas, and thus their perceptions and adaptability were paid much attention. Drawing on a survey of 487 residents in the Qilian Mountain National Park Pilot of Northwestern China, this study used the adaptive analysis framework to study the adaptability of local residents. The main contribution of this paper is to select a typical social-ecological system to study the adaptability of local residents, and using Elinor Ostrom’s Social-Ecological System framework to analyze the adaptability mechanism. The results show that different types of residents had different adaptability to environmental change. People whose income mainly depends on work salary with a small part of herding have the highest level of adaptability, while people whose income mostly comes from farming with a small part of herding have the lowest level. This result is related to people’s living location, as people living in the core zone and buffer zone of the reserve mainly earned from grazing, and people living in the experimental zone and peripheral zone earned mainly from outside work. Moreover, people living in the core zone and buffer zone are mostly elders and ethnic groups, while people in the experimental zone and buffer zone are Han people. To improve management effectiveness and to avoid conflict between local residents and managers, this paper suggests that more attention should be paid to these who have lived for a long time in the core zone and buffer zone. They are the most vulnerable groups and show low adaptability in almost all domains. For the long run, education quality should be improved to decrease the population in the reserve.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Li & Guoqiang Ma & Jinghua Feng & Liying Guo & Yinzhou Huang, 2022. "Local Residents’ Social-Ecological Adaptability of the Qilian Mountain National Park Pilot, Northwestern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:5:p:742-:d:817475
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/5/742/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/5/742/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. You, Heyuan & Zhang, Xiaoling, 2017. "Sustainable livelihoods and rural sustainability in China: Ecologically secure, economically efficient or socially equitable?," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-13.
    2. William Nikolakis & R. Quentin Grafton, 2015. "Putting Indigenous water rights to work: the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework as a lens for remote development," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(2), pages 149-163, April.
    3. Huang, Yinzhou & Fu, Jiao & Wang, Wenrui & Li, Jing, 2019. "Development of China’s nature reserves over the past 60 years: An overview," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 224-232.
    4. Bennett, Nathan James & Dearden, Philip, 2014. "Why local people do not support conservation: Community perceptions of marine protected area livelihood impacts, governance and management in Thailand," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 107-116.
    5. Liqi Jia & Junqing Wei & Zibin Wang, 2022. "The Intention of Community Participation in the Qilian Mountain National Park Policy Pilot," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, January.
    6. Jones, P.J.S. & Qiu, W. & De Santo, E.M., 2013. "Governing marine protected areas: Social–ecological resilience through institutional diversity," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 5-13.
    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. Andrea Mast & David Gill & Gabby N Ahmadia & Emily S Darling & Dominic A Andradi-Brown & Jonas Geldman & Graham Epstein & M Aaron MacNeil, 2025. "Shared governance increases marine protected area effectiveness," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(1), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Rasheed, A. Rifaee, 2020. "Marine protected areas and human well-being – A systematic review and recommendations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Radisti A. Praptiwi & Carya Maharja & Matt Fortnam & Tomas Chaigneau & Louisa Evans & Leuserina Garniati & Jito Sugardjito, 2021. "Tourism-Based Alternative Livelihoods for Small Island Communities Transitioning towards a Blue Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-11, June.
    4. Sukuryadi & Nuddin Harahab & Mimit Primyastanto & Bambang Semedi, 2021. "Collaborative-based mangrove ecosystem management model for the development of marine ecotourism in Lembar Bay, Lombok, Indonesia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 6838-6868, May.
    5. Zehua Wang & Fachao Liang & Sheng-Hau Lin, 2023. "Can socially sustainable development be achieved through homestead withdrawal? A hybrid multiple-attributes decision analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Ryan S. Naylor & Carter A. Hunt & Karl S. Zimmerer & B. Derrick Taff, 2021. "Emic Views of Community Resilience and Coastal Tourism Development," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, August.
    7. Lisa Ernoul & Angela Wardell-Johnson & Raphaël Mathevet & Alain Sandoz & Olivier Boutron & Loïc Willm & Stephan Arnassant & Arnaud Béchet, 2021. "Context in Landscape Planning: Improving Conservation Outcomes by Identifying Social Values for a Flagship Species," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-12, June.
    8. Ting Ma & Lizhi Jia & Linsheng Zhong & Xinyu Gong & Yu Wei, 2023. "Governance of China’s Potatso National Park Influenced by Local Community Participation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Evan Artis & Noella J Gray & Lisa M Campbell & Rebecca L Gruby & Leslie Acton & Sarah Bess Zigler & Lillian Mitchell, 2020. "Stakeholder perspectives on large-scale marine protected areas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Qiujin Chen & Yuqi Zhang & Yin Zhang & Mingliang Kong, 2022. "Examining Social Equity in the Co-Management of Terrestrial Protected Areas: Perceived Fairness of Local Communities in Giant Panda National Park, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, September.
    11. Samia Sediri & Michel Trommetter & Nathalie Frascaria-Lacoste & Juan Fernandez-Manjarrés, 2020. "Transformability as a Wicked Problem: A Cautionary Tale?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-19, July.
    12. Tam, Chui-Ling, 2015. "Timing exclusion and communicating time: A spatial analysis of participation failure in an Indonesian MPA," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 122-129.
    13. Chan, Cheryl & Armitage, Derek & Alexander, Steven M. & Campbell, Donovan, 2019. "Examining linkages between ecosystem services and social wellbeing to improve governance for coastal conservation in Jamaica," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    14. Rodríguez-Robayo, Karla Juliana & Ávila-Foucat, V. Sophie & Maldonado, Jorge H., 2016. "Indigenous communities’ perception regarding payments for environmental services programme in Oaxaca Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 163-171.
    15. Yazhou Zhou & Yong Huang & Wenyuan Liu, 2024. "Understanding the Conflict between an Ecological Environment and Human Activities in the Process of Urbanization: A Case Study of Ya’an City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Dang, Yuxuan & Zhao, Zhenting & Kong, Xiangbin & Lei, Ming & Liao, Yubo & Xie, Zhen & Song, Wei, 2023. "Discerning the process of cultivated land governance transition in China since the reform and opening-up-- Based on the multiple streams framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    17. Voyer, Michelle & Gladstone, William & Goodall, Heather, 2015. "Obtaining a social licence for MPAs – influences on social acceptability," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 260-266.
    18. Ghazali, Samane & Zibaei, Mansour & Azadi, Hossein, 2023. "Impact of livelihood strategies and capitals on rangeland sustainability and nomads' poverty: A counterfactual analysis in Southwest Iran," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    19. Zhang, Da & Huang, Qingxu & He, Chunyang & Wu, Jianguo, 2017. "Impacts of urban expansion on ecosystem services in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration, China: A scenario analysis based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 115-130.
    20. Xinyuan Liang & Jie He & Xiaobin Jin & Xiaolin Zhang & Jingping Liu & Yinkang Zhou, 2024. "A new framework for optimizing ecological conservation redline of China: A case from an environment‐development conflict area," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 1616-1633, June.

    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:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:5:p:742-:d:817475. 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.