IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i2p516-d1074565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantitatively Evaluating the Ecological Product Value of Nine Provinces in the Yellow River Basin from the Perspective of the Dual-Carbon Strategy

Author

Listed:
  • Yang Zhang

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China
    Beijing Key Laboratory of Megaregions Sustainable Development Modelling, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Zijun Ma

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China
    Beijing Key Laboratory of Megaregions Sustainable Development Modelling, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Meng Sun

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China
    Beijing Key Laboratory of Megaregions Sustainable Development Modelling, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Jianing Song

    (Human Resource Development Center, Ministry of Natural Resources, Beijing 100860, China)

  • Yang Yang

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China
    Beijing Key Laboratory of Megaregions Sustainable Development Modelling, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Qiang Li

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China
    Beijing Key Laboratory of Megaregions Sustainable Development Modelling, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Ying Jing

    (Business School, Ningbo Tech University, Ningbo 315100, China)

Abstract

At the 75th session of the United Nations General Assembly, China formally proposed the goal of achieving carbon peak by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060, which is called the dual-carbon strategy. In this study, we incorporated the dual-carbon strategy perspective into ecological product value (EPV) evaluation. The EPV is the sum of the final product and service value provided by regional ecosystems for human production and life. A significant uncertainty exists in evaluating the EPV. To bridge this gap, we explored the quantitative evaluation index system of EPV based on the dual-carbon perspective and conducted an empirical analysis relating to four subindexes (ecological protection, ecological products carbon neutral capacity transformation, ecological value, and ecological product value realization safeguard mechanism). The EPV in nine provinces of the Yellow River basin in 2020 was measured. The results showed that the total evaluation score of EPV realization in the Yellow River basin was relatively low, and the average scores of ecological product protection level, carbon neutrality capacity, value transformation level, and value realization guarantee mechanism were all at a low level. Overall, the protection level of ecological products and the guarantee mechanism to realize the EPV were relatively good. However, the carbon neutrality capacity and the value transformation level were relatively poor. From the spatial perspective, the value realization level of ecological products was roughly upstream region > downstream region > midstream region in the Yellow River basin. Finally, corresponding countermeasures and suggestions are put forward according to the comprehensive evaluation index of EPV realization and analysis of the four subindexes.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang Zhang & Zijun Ma & Meng Sun & Jianing Song & Yang Yang & Qiang Li & Ying Jing, 2023. "Quantitatively Evaluating the Ecological Product Value of Nine Provinces in the Yellow River Basin from the Perspective of the Dual-Carbon Strategy," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:2:p:516-:d:1074565
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/2/516/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/2/516/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2019. "Global trend of forest ecosystem services valuation – An analysis of publications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. Yu Hu & Yuanying Chi & Wenbing Zhou & Zhengzao Wang & Yongke Yuan & Ruoyang Li, 2022. "Research on Energy Structure Optimization and Carbon Emission Reduction Path in Beijing under the Dual Carbon Target," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-17, August.
    3. Zhenzhen Zhang & Kangning Xiong & Huanhuan Chang & Wenxiu Zhang & Denghong Huang, 2022. "A Review of Eco-Product Value Realization and Ecological Civilization and Its Enlightenment to Karst Protected Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-14, May.
    4. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, 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. Wenying Peng & Xiaojuan Yuchi & Yue Sun & Ziyi Shan, 2023. "The Spatial Protection and Governance of Territories Based on the Ecological Product Supply: A Case Study in Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-21, December.

    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. Hasan-Basri, Bakti & Samdin, Zaiton & Noor Ghani, Awang, 2020. "Willingness to Pay for Conservation of Mangrove Forest in Kuala Perlis, Malaysia," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 54(3), pages 89-99.
    2. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    3. Frings, Oliver & Abildtrup, Jens & Montagné-Huck, Claire & Gorel, Salomé & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Do individual PES buyers care about additionality and free-riding? A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    4. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Wang, Han & Tian, Fuan & Wu, Jianxian & Nie, Xin, 2023. "Is China forest landscape restoration (FLR) worth it? A cost-benefit analysis and non-equilibrium ecological view," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    6. Rodrigues, João & Domingos, Tiago & Conceição, Pedro & Belbute, José, 2005. "Constraints on dematerialisation and allocation of natural capital along a sustainable growth path," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 382-396, September.
    7. Yi Zhang & Tian Lan & Wei Hu, 2023. "A Two-Stage Robust Optimization Microgrid Model Considering Carbon Trading and Demand Response," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-22, October.
    8. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    9. Nunes, P.A.L.D. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Biodiversity: Economic perspectives," Serie Research Memoranda 0002, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    10. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    11. repec:dgr:rugcds:200218 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Toman, Michael & Pezzey, John C., 2002. "The Economics of Sustainability: A Review of Journal Articles," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-03, Resources for the Future.
    13. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    14. Jiayu Xia & Duyuzheng Ren & Xuhui Wang & Bo Xu & Xingyao Zhong & Yajiang Fan, 2023. "Ecosystem Quality Assessment and Ecological Restoration in Fragile Zone of Loess Plateau: A Case Study of Suide County, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-32, May.
    15. van der Hoff, Richard & Nascimento, Nathália & Fabrício-Neto, Ailton & Jaramillo-Giraldo, Carolina & Ambrosio, Geanderson & Arieira, Julia & Afonso Nobre, Carlos & Rajão, Raoni, 2022. "Policy-oriented ecosystem services research on tropical forests in South America: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    16. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    17. Shrestha, Ram K. & Seidl, Andrew F. & Moraes, Andre S., 2002. "Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 289-299, August.
    18. Tiantian Ma & Qingbai Hu & Changle Wang & Jungang Lv & Changhong Mi & Rongguang Shi & Xiaoli Wang & Yanying Yang & Wenhao Wu, 2022. "Exploring the Relationship between Ecosystem Services under Different Socio-Economic Driving Degrees," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-17, December.
    19. Egor Selivanov & Petra Hlaváčková, 2021. "Methods for monetary valuation of ecosystem services: A scoping review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(11), pages 499-511.
    20. Beichen Ge & Congjin Wang & Yuhong Song, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    21. Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Oksana Logvinenko, 2020. "A New Look at the Natural Capital Concept: Approaches, Structure, and Evaluation Procedure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.

    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:12:y:2023:i:2:p:516-:d:1074565. 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.