IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i11p1804-d1511493.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Water-Related Ecosystem Services and Beneficiaries in the Hainan Tropical Rainforest National Park

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey Chiwuikem Chiaka

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Anambra-Imo River Basin Development Authority, Owerri PMB 1301, Nigeria)

  • Qing Yang

    (Advanced Interdisciplinary Institute of Environment and Ecology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Wastewater Information Analysis and Early Warning, Beijing Normal University, Zhuhai 519087, China
    Institute of Hainan National Park, Haikou 570228, China)

  • Yanwei Zhao

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Institute of Hainan National Park, Haikou 570228, China)

  • Feni Agostinho

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Post-graduation Program on Production Engineering, Paulista University (UNIP), Sao Paulo 01504-000, Brazil)

  • Cecília M. V. B. Almeida

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Post-graduation Program on Production Engineering, Paulista University (UNIP), Sao Paulo 01504-000, Brazil)

  • Biagio F. Giannetti

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Post-graduation Program on Production Engineering, Paulista University (UNIP), Sao Paulo 01504-000, Brazil)

  • Hui Li

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Mingwan Wu

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Gengyuan Liu

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Institute of Hainan National Park, Haikou 570228, China)

Abstract

Tropical rainforests are of vital importance to the environment, as they contribute to weather patterns, biodiversity and even human wellbeing. Hence, in the face of tropical deforestation, it becomes exigent to quantify and assess the contribution of ecosystem services associated with tropical rainforests to the environment and especially to the people. This study adopted a nuanced approach, different from traditional economic valuations, to estimate the water-related ecosystem services (WRESs) received by the people from 2010 to 2020 in the Hainan Tropical Rainforest National Park (HTRNP). The study focused on water yield, soil conservation, and water purification using InVEST, the SCS-CN GIS model, and spatial analysis. The results show (1) significant land cover changes within the HTRNP, as forest decreased by 4433 ha and water bodies increased by 4047 ha, indicating the active presence of human activities. However, land cover changes were more pronounced within the 5 km buffer area around the HTRNP, suggesting the effectiveness of the tropical rainforest conservation efforts in place. (2) The water yield of the HTRNP in the years studied decreased by 307.03 km 3 , based on the water yields in 2010 and 2020, which were 5625.7 km 3 and 5318.7 km 3 , respectively. (3) Change detection showed that runoff mitigation in the rainforest has a negative mean (−0.21), indicating a slight overall decrease in soil conservation and runoff mitigation in the rainforest from 2010 to 2020; however, the higher curve number indicates areas susceptible to surface runoff. (4) The ecological effectiveness of water purification to absorb and reduce nitrogen load was better in 2020 (145,529 kg/year), as it was reduced from 506,739 kg/year in 2010, indicating improved water quality. (5) Population growth is more pronounced in areas with high water yields. Overall, the proposed framework has shown that the water yield potential of the HTRNP can meet the water consumption demands of people and industries situated within the buffer area. However, analysis of the study shows that it does not meet the crop water requirements. This study provides insights for decision makers in identifying potential beneficiaries and the essence of effective area-based conservation measures, and the proposed framework can be applied to any area of interest, offering a different approach in ecosystem services assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey Chiwuikem Chiaka & Qing Yang & Yanwei Zhao & Feni Agostinho & Cecília M. V. B. Almeida & Biagio F. Giannetti & Hui Li & Mingwan Wu & Gengyuan Liu, 2024. "Assessment of Water-Related Ecosystem Services and Beneficiaries in the Hainan Tropical Rainforest National Park," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1804-:d:1511493
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1804/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1804/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Troy, Austin & Wilson, Matthew A., 2006. "Mapping ecosystem services: Practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 435-449, December.
    2. James E. M. Watson & Nigel Dudley & Daniel B. Segan & Marc Hockings, 2014. "The performance and potential of protected areas," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 67-73, November.
    3. Katrina Brandon, 2014. "Ecosystem Services from Tropical Forests: Review of Current Science - Working Paper 380," Working Papers 380, Center for Global Development.
    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. Tingtian Wu & Zongzhu Chen & Yiqing Chen & Yukai Chen & Jinrui Lei & Xiaohua Chen & Yuanling Li & Xiaoyan Pan, 2025. "Biomass Characteristics of Tropical Montane Rain Forest in National Park of Hainan Tropical Rainforest," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, March.

    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. Chunrong Mi & Liang Ma & Mengyuan Yang & Xinhai Li & Shai Meiri & Uri Roll & Oleksandra Oskyrko & Daniel Pincheira-Donoso & Lilly P. Harvey & Daniel Jablonski & Barbod Safaei-Mahroo & Hanyeh Ghaffari , 2023. "Global Protected Areas as refuges for amphibians and reptiles under climate change," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Lin Yuan & Siqi Wang & Jingxuan Hou, 2025. "Coexistence of Built Areas and Natural Protected Areas Within Metropolitan Regions in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-22, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Ming-Kuang Chung & Dau-Jye Lu & Bor-Wen Tsai & Kuei-Tien Chou, 2019. "Assessing Effectiveness of PPGIS on Protected Areas by Governance Quality: A Case Study of Community-Based Monitoring in Wu-Wei-Kang Wildlife Refuge, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Tingting Zhang & Dan He & Tian Kuang & Ke Chen, 2022. "Effect of Rural Human Settlement Environment around Nature Reserves on Farmers’ Well-Being: A Field Survey Based on 1002 Farmer Households around Six Nature Reserves in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-18, May.
    7. Grischa Perino & Barnaby Andrews & Andreas Kontoleon & Ian Bateman, 2014. "The Value of Urban Green Space in Britain: A Methodological Framework for Spatially Referenced Benefit Transfer," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(2), pages 251-272, February.
    8. Arki, Vesa & Koskikala, Joni & Fagerholm, Nora & Kisanga, Danielson & Käyhkö, Niina, 2020. "Associations between local land use/land cover and place-based landscape service patterns in rural Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    9. Thomas Campagnaro & Giovanni Trentanovi & Tommaso Sitzia, 2018. "Identifying Habitat Type Conservation Priorities under the Habitats Directive: Application to Two Italian Biogeographical Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    10. Susan C. Cook-Patton & C. Ronnie Drever & Bronson W. Griscom & Kelley Hamrick & Hamilton Hardman & Timm Kroeger & Pablo Pacheco & Shyla Raghav & Martha Stevenson & Chris Webb & Samantha Yeo & Peter W., 2021. "Protect, manage and then restore lands for climate mitigation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(12), pages 1027-1034, December.
    11. Norton, Daniel & Hynes, Stephen, 2015. "Spatial issues arising from a value transfer exercise for environmental quality of marine waters," 150th Seminar, October 22-23, 2015, Edinburgh, Scotland 212663, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Gregor Schwerhoff & Ottmar Edenhofer & Marc Fleurbaey, 2020. "Taxation Of Economic Rents," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 398-423, April.
    13. Ziqi Meng & Jinwei Dong & Erle C. Ellis & Graciela Metternicht & Yuanwei Qin & Xiao-Peng Song & Sara Löfqvist & Rachael D. Garrett & Xiaopeng Jia & Xiangming Xiao, 2023. "Post-2020 biodiversity framework challenged by cropland expansion in protected areas," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 758-768, July.
    14. 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.
    15. Adam Pawlewicz & Wojciech Gotkiewicz & Katarzyna Brodzińska & Katarzyna Pawlewicz & Bartosz Mickiewicz & Paweł Kluczek, 2022. "Organic Farming as an Alternative Maintenance Strategy in the Opinion of Farmers from Natura 2000 Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-22, March.
    16. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.
    17. Rachel Nichols & Satoshi Yamazaki & Sarah Jennings, 2021. "How did a network of marine protected areas impact adjacent fisheries? Evidence from Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(1), pages 119-142, January.
    18. Arturo Sanchez-Porras & María Guadalupe Tenorio-Arvide & Ricardo Darío Peña-Moreno & María Laura Sampedro-Rosas & Sonia Emilia Silva-Gómez, 2018. "Evaluation of the Potential Change to the Ecosystem Service Provision Due to Industrialization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    19. Li, Shicheng & Zhang, Heng & Zhou, Xuewu & Yu, Haibin & Li, Wangjun, 2020. "Enhancing protected areas for biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    20. Patricio Sarmiento-Mateos & Cecilia Arnaiz-Schmitz & Cristina Herrero-Jáuregui & Francisco D. Pineda & María F. Schmitz, 2019. "Designing Protected Areas for Social–Ecological Sustainability: Effectiveness of Management Guidelines for Preserving Cultural Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1804-:d:1511493. 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.