IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i3p316-d1350041.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Review of Research on Progress in the Theory and Practice of Eco-Product Value Realization

Author

Listed:
  • Jiemin Liu

    (School of Architecture and Urban-Rural Planning, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China)

  • Xuejiao Su

    (School of Architecture and Urban-Rural Planning, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China)

  • Yuanmeng Liu

    (College of Environment and Safety Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China)

  • Wei Shui

    (College of Environment and Safety Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China)

Abstract

The value realization of ecological products is currently a rapidly evolving research topic; however, the definition of its concept, type, and operation mechanism remains relatively ambiguous. Operating in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, this review employs keyword retrieval and screening, utilizing VOSviewer and word cloud mapping for analysis, in order to reveal three primary research domains related to ecological product value realization. Based on thorough screening and the analysis of high-quality literature, this study comprehensively accomplished the following objectives: (1) clarifying the fundamental concepts of ecosystem services and ecological products, their interrelationships, and the scope of research on ecological products; (2) clarifying the basic connotation of realizing the value of ecological products; (3) demonstrating government-led approaches, market-driven approaches and collaborative pathways for realizing the value of ecological products; (4) reviewing international cases related to realizing the value of public ecological products, quasi-public ecological products, and operational ecological products. The academic contributions of this study are (1) expanding the theoretical framework for realizing the value of ecological products; (2) providing a Chinese perspective on global research on pathways to realize value from ecological products; and (3) offering a novel approach to revitalizing regional economies and improving local ecological environments. Based on this research, several shortcomings and future directions in this field are identified: (1) insufficient clarity, standardization, and uniformity in evaluation and measurement methods; (2) the absence of comparison between ecological products and urban economic products; (3) inadequate exploration of multi-stakeholder allocation and coordination mechanisms; (4) limited research on the role of capital markets in allocating ecological product resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiemin Liu & Xuejiao Su & Yuanmeng Liu & Wei Shui, 2024. "A Review of Research on Progress in the Theory and Practice of Eco-Product Value Realization," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-24, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:3:p:316-:d:1350041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/3/316/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/3/316/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tao, Jieyi & Lu, Yuqi & Ge, Dazhuan & Dong, Ping & Gong, Xiao & Ma, Xiaobin, 2022. "The spatial pattern of agricultural ecosystem services from the production-living-ecology perspective: A case study of the Huaihai Economic Zone, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    2. Xiong, Ling & Shen, Bo & Qi, Shaozhou & Price, Lynn & Ye, Bin, 2017. "The allowance mechanism of China’s carbon trading pilots: A comparative analysis with schemes in EU and California," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(P2), pages 1849-1859.
    3. Kiker, Clyde F. & Putz, Francis E., 1997. "Ecolocical certification of forest products: Economic challenges," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 37-51, January.
    4. Wei Liu & Liyuan He & Jie Xu & Dingde Xu, 2023. "Linking Natural Resource Dependence to Sustainable Household Wellbeing: A Case Study in Western China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Qiang He & Xin Deng & Chuan Li & Fangxia Kong & Yanbin Qi, 2021. "Does Land Transfer Improve Farmers’ Quality of Life? Evidence from Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Chang-Jing Ji & Yu-Jie Hu & Bao-Jun Tang, 2018. "Research on carbon market price mechanism and influencing factors: a literature review," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 92(2), pages 761-782, June.
    7. Edward B. Barbier, 2007. "Valuing ecosystem services as productive inputs [‘Valuing groundwater recharge through agricultural production in the Hadejia-Jama’are wetlands in northern Nigeria’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 22(49), pages 178-229.
    8. Hellerstein, Daniel M., 2017. "The US Conservation Reserve Program: The evolution of an enrollment mechanism," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 601-610.
    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. Weng, Zhixiong & Liu, Tingting & Wu, Yufeng & Cheng, Cuiyun, 2022. "Air quality improvement effect and future contributions of carbon trading pilot programs in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    2. Yifei Hua & Feng Dong, 2019. "China’s Carbon Market Development and Carbon Market Connection: A Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-25, May.
    3. Wang, Yongli & Wang, Yudong & Huang, Yujing & Yang, Jiale & Ma, Yuze & Yu, Haiyang & Zeng, Ming & Zhang, Fuwei & Zhang, Yanfu, 2019. "Operation optimization of regional integrated energy system based on the modeling of electricity-thermal-natural gas network," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    4. 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.
    5. Yi Yao & Lixin Tian & Guangxi Cao, 2022. "The Information Spillover among the Carbon Market, Energy Market, and Stock Market: A Case Study of China’s Pilot Carbon Markets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-18, April.
    6. Sedjo, Roger & Swallow, Stephen, 1999. "Eco-Labeling and the Price Premium," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-04, Resources for the Future.
    7. Ngoc, Quach Thi Khanh, 2019. "Assessing the value of coral reefs in the face of climate change: The evidence from Nha Trang Bay, Vietnam," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 99-108.
    8. Darko B. Vuković & Senanu Dekpo-Adza & Vladislav Khmelnitskiy & Mustafa Özer, 2023. "Spillovers across the Asian OPEC+ Financial Market," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-23, September.
    9. McVittie, Alistair & Moran, Dominic, 2010. "Valuing the non-use benefits of marine conservation zones: An application to the UK Marine Bill," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 413-424, December.
    10. Wanlin Yu & Jinlong Luo, 2022. "Impact on Carbon Intensity of Carbon Emission Trading—Evidence from a Pilot Program in 281 Cities in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-19, September.
    11. Tang, Ling & Wu, Jiaqian & Yu, Lean & Bao, Qin, 2017. "Carbon allowance auction design of China's emissions trading scheme: A multi-agent-based approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 30-40.
    12. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    13. Gezi Chen & Zhenhua Hu & Shijin Xiang & Ailan Xu, 2024. "The Impact of Carbon Emissions Trading on the Total Factor Productivity of China’s Electric Power Enterprises—An Empirical Analysis Based on the Differences-in-Differences Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-17, March.
    14. Chu, Junfei & Hou, Tianteng & Li, Feng & Yuan, Zhe, 2024. "Dynamic bargaining game DEA carbon emissions abatement allocation and the Nash equilibrium," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    15. Wang, Sen & Bogle, Tim & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2012. "Forestry and the New Institutional Economics," Working Papers 130818, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    16. Chia-Lin Chang & Te-Ke Mai & Michael Mcaleer, 2018. "Pricing Carbon Emissions In China," Annals of Financial Economics (AFE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(03), pages 1-37, September.
    17. Craig A. Bond, 2017. "Valuing Coastal Natural Capital in a Bioeconomic Framework," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(02), pages 1-26, April.
    18. Yamamoto, Yuki, 2023. "Living under ecosystem degradation: Evidence from the mangrove–fishery linkage in Indonesia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    19. Simonit, Silvio & Perrings, Charles, 2011. "Sustainability and the value of the 'regulating' services: Wetlands and water quality in Lake Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1189-1199, April.
    20. Zheng Liu & Wenzhuo Sun & Bin Hu & Chunjia Han & Petros Ieromonachou & Yuanjun Zhao & Jiazhuo Zheng, 2023. "Research on Supply Chain Optimization Considering Consumer Subsidy Mechanism in the Context of Carbon Neutrality," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-14, March.

    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:3:p:316-:d:1350041. 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.