IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i5p1079-d1148760.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forage Supply–Demand Assessment and Influencing Factor Analysis from the Perspective of Socio-Ecological System: A Case Study of Altay Prefecture, China

Author

Listed:
  • Zihan Yang

    (School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Bo Li

    (School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Bo Nan

    (College of Eco-Environment, Hebei University, Baoding 071000, China
    Hebei Key Laboratory of Close-to-Nature Restoration Technology of Wetlands, Baoding 071000, China)

  • Yuying Li

    (School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Kai Huang

    (School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Xu Bi

    (College of Resources and Environment, Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, Taiyuan 030006, China)

  • Yirong Fan

    (School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Yao Fan

    (School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China)

Abstract

The provision and utilization of grassland resources connect grassland ecosystems and pastoral society. Revealing the mechanism behind the forage supply–demand relationship and balancing forage supply and demand is essential in pastoral socio-ecological systems. Taking Altay Prefecture as the case study, this study quantified the dynamics of natural forage supply, artificial supplemental forage, and forage demand. The ratio of forage supply to demand was calculated in the traditional grazing scenario and the grazing prohibition and supplemental feeding scenario. The results showed that during 2001–2018, the forage supplied by natural grasslands fluctuated, with the highest and lowest values in 2013 and 2008, respectively. The artificial supplemental forage increased at a higher rate in 2011–2018 than in 2001–2010. The overall trend of forage demand was upward, at approximately 2.98 × 10 4 t/a. The ratio of forage supply to demand decreased in the traditional scenario with an average value of 0.4717 and increased in the grazing prohibition and supplemental feeding scenario with an average value of 0.8289. The influencing factors were analyzed from the perspective of the interactions between the socio-ecological system elements, and the forage supply–demand relationships were conceptualized based on the social–ecological system framework. This study concludes that natural grasslands cannot entirely meet the increasing forage demand without artificial supplemental forage. The increasing artificial supplemental forage has promoted a balance between forage supply and demand, indicating an optimized grassland utilization pattern. The factors that affect forage supply–demand relationships are interrelated, and a holistic perspective should be adopted when implementing management measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Zihan Yang & Bo Li & Bo Nan & Yuying Li & Kai Huang & Xu Bi & Yirong Fan & Yao Fan, 2023. "Forage Supply–Demand Assessment and Influencing Factor Analysis from the Perspective of Socio-Ecological System: A Case Study of Altay Prefecture, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:5:p:1079-:d:1148760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/5/1079/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/5/1079/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Su, Yiqing & Araral, Eduardo & Wang, Yahua, 2020. "The effects of farmland use rights trading and labor outmigration on the governance of the irrigation commons: Evidence from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    2. Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne & Weibel, Bettina, 2020. "Global assessment of mountain ecosystem services using earth observation data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    3. Dai, Xuhuan & Li, Bo & Zheng, Hua & Yang, Yanzheng & Yang, Zihan & Peng, Chenchen, 2023. "Can sedentarization decrease the dependence of pastoral livelihoods on ecosystem services?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    4. Hu, Yuanning & Huang, Jikun & Hou, Lingling, 2019. "Impacts of the Grassland Ecological Compensation Policy on Household Livestock Production in China: An Empirical Study in Inner Mongolia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 248-256.
    5. Shi, Yuxing & Cai, Yu & Zhao, Minjuan, 2021. "Social interaction effect of rotational grazing and its policy implications for sustainable use of grassland: Evidence from pastoral areas in Inner Mongolia and Gansu, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. Qian, Qian & Wang, Junbang & Zhang, Xiujuan & Wang, Shaoqiang & Li, Yingnian & Wang, Qinxue & Watson, Alan E. & Zhao, Xinquan, 2022. "Improving herders’ income through alpine grassland husbandry on Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    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. Wang, Xiaoqi & Zhao, Xueyan, 2023. "Farmers' perception and choice preference of grassland ecosystem services: Evidence from the northeastern region of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    2. Lan, Xiao & Zhang, Qin & Xue, Haili & Liang, Haoguang & Wang, Bojie & Wang, Weijun, 2021. "Linking sustainable livelihoods with sustainable grassland use and conservation: A case study from rural households in a semi-arid grassland area, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Lili Guo & Yuting Song & Mengqian Tang & Jinyang Tang & Bright Senyo Dogbe & Mengying Su & Houjian Li, 2022. "Assessing the Relationship among Land Transfer, Fertilizer Usage, and PM 2.5 Pollution: Evidence from Rural China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-18, July.
    5. Fang Xia & Lingling Hou & Songqing Jin & Dongqing Li, 2020. "Land size and productivity in the livestock sector: evidence from pastoral areas in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 867-888, July.
    6. Fuyu Yang & Jingjing Xu & Xin Zhao & Xuekai Wang & Yi Xiong, 2022. "Assessment of the Grassland Ecological Compensation Policy (GECP) in Qinghai, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-16, September.
    7. Qian, Qian & Wang, Junbang & Zhang, Xiujuan & Wang, Shaoqiang & Li, Yingnian & Wang, Qinxue & Watson, Alan E. & Zhao, Xinquan, 2022. "Improving herders’ income through alpine grassland husbandry on Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    8. Yiran Zhang & Wuriliga & Yong Ding & Fang Li & Yujuan Zhang & Min Su & Shuhui Li & Li Liu, 2022. "Effectiveness of Grassland Protection and Pastoral Area Development under the Grassland Ecological Conservation Subsidy and Reward Policy," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-15, August.
    9. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    10. Mengmeng Liu & Limin Bai & Hassan Saif Khan & Hua Li, 2023. "The Influence of the Grassland Ecological Compensation Policy on Regional Herdsmen’s Income and Its Gap: Evidence from Six Pastoralist Provinces in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Cuizhen Xia & Lihua Zhou & Ya Wang & Xiaodong Pei, 2022. "Tibetan Herders’ Life Satisfaction and Determinants under the Pastureland Rehabilitation Program: A Case Study of Maduo County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    12. Stefano Duglio & Giulia Salotti & Giulia Mascadri, 2023. "Conditions for Operating in Marginal Mountain Areas: The Local Farmer’s Perspective," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, April.
    13. Fu, Hong & Peng, Yanling & Zheng, Linyi & Liu, Qi & Zhou, Li & Zhang, Yuehua & Kong, Rong & Turvey, Calum G., 2022. "Heterogeneous choice in WTP and WTA for renting land use rights in rural china: Choice experiments from the field," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    14. Vera Potopová & Marie Musiolková & Juliana Arbelaez Gaviria & Miroslav Trnka & Petr Havlík & Esther Boere & Tudor Trifan & Nina Muntean & Md Rafique Ahasan Chawdhery, 2023. "Water Consumption by Livestock Systems from 2002–2020 and Predictions for 2030–2050 under Climate Changes in the Czech Republic," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-29, June.
    15. Yayan Lu & Xiaoliang Xu & Junhong Zhao & Fang Han, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Evolution of Mountainous Ecosystem Services in an Arid Region and Its Influencing Factors: A Case Study of the Tianshan Mountains in Xinjiang," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, November.
    16. Lijia Wang & Zeng Tang & Qisheng Feng & Xin Wang, 2022. "Informal Institutions and Herders’ Grazing Intensity Reduction Behavior: Evidence from Pastoral Areas in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Yayan Lu & Junhong Zhao & Jianwei Qi & Tianyu Rong & Zhi Wang & Zhaoping Yang & Fang Han, 2022. "Monitoring the Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Habitat Quality and Its Driving Factors Based on the Coupled NDVI-InVEST Model: A Case Study from the Tianshan Mountains in Xinjiang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, October.
    18. Yinxin Su & Mingzhi Hu & Yuzhe Wu, 2023. "Rural Land Transfer and Urban Settlement Intentions of Rural Migrants: Evidence from a Rural Land System Reform in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-15, February.
    19. Ziyong Su & Zhanqi Wang & Liguo Zhang, 2022. "Spatial-Temporal Characteristics of Ecosystem Service Values of Watershed and Ecological Compensation Scheme Considering Its Realization in Spatial Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-17, July.
    20. Li Yang & Guanghua Qiao, 2023. "Grassland Ecological Compensation, Income Level and Policy Satisfaction: An Empirical Analysis Based on a Survey of Herders in Ecological Protection Redline Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, January.

    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:5:p:1079-:d:1148760. 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.