IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i8p1522-d1708844.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revealing Ecosystem Carbon Sequestration Service Flows Through the Meta-Coupling Framework: Evidence from Henan Province and the Surrounding Regions in China

Author

Listed:
  • Wenfeng Ji

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450046, China
    Henan Engineering Research Center of Land Consolidation and Ecological Restoration, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450002, China)

  • Siyuan Liu

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450046, China
    Henan Engineering Research Center of Land Consolidation and Ecological Restoration, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450002, China)

  • Yi Yang

    (College of Forestry, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450046, China)

  • Mengxue Liu

    (Lhasa Plateau Ecosystem Research Station, Key Laboratory of Ecosystem Network Observation and Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Hejie Wei

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450046, China
    Henan Engineering Research Center of Land Consolidation and Ecological Restoration, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450002, China)

  • Ling Li

    (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450046, China
    Henan Engineering Research Center of Land Consolidation and Ecological Restoration, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450002, China)

Abstract

Research on ecosystem carbon sequestration services and ecological compensation is crucial for advancing carbon neutrality. As a public good, ecosystem carbon sequestration services inherently lead to externalities. Therefore, it is essential to consider externalities in the flow of sequestration services. However, few studies have examined intra- and inter-regional ecosystem carbon sequestration flows, making regional ecosystem carbon sequestration flows less comprehensive. Against this background, the research objectives of this paper are as follows. The flow of carbon sequestration services between Henan Province and out-of-province regions is studied. In addition, this study clarifies the beneficiary and supply areas of carbon sink services in Henan Province and the neighboring regions at the prefecture-level city scale to obtain a more systematic, comprehensive, and actual flow of carbon sequestration services for scientific and effective eco-compensation and to promote regional synergistic emission reductions. The research methodologies used in this paper are as follows. First, this study adopts a meta-coupling framework, designating Henan Province as the focal system, the Central Urban Agglomeration as the adjacent system, and eight surrounding provinces as remote systems. Regional carbon sequestration was assessed using net primary productivity (NEP), while carbon emissions were evaluated based on per capita carbon emissions and population density. A carbon balance analysis integrated carbon sequestration and emissions. Hotspot analysis identified areas of carbon sequestration service supply and associated benefits. Ecological radiation force formulas were used to quantify service flows, and compensation values were estimated considering the government’s payment capacity and willingness. A three-dimensional evaluation system—incorporating technology, talent, and fiscal capacity—was developed to propose a diversified ecological compensation scheme by comparing supply and beneficiary areas. By modeling the ecosystem carbon sequestration service flow, the main results of this paper are as follows: (1) Within Henan Province, Luoyang and Nanyang provided 521,300 tons and 515,600 tons of carbon sinks to eight cities (e.g., Jiaozuo, Zhengzhou, and Kaifeng), warranting an ecological compensation of CNY 262.817 million and CNY 263.259 million, respectively. (2) Henan exported 3.0739 million tons of carbon sinks to external provinces, corresponding to a compensation value of CNY 1756.079 million. Conversely, regions such as Changzhi, Xiangyang, and Jinzhong contributed 657,200 tons of carbon sinks to Henan, requiring a compensation of CNY 189.921 million. (3) Henan thus achieved a net ecological compensation of CNY 1566.158 million through carbon sink flows. (4) In addition to monetary compensation, beneficiary areas may also contribute through technology transfer, financial investment, and talent support. The findings support the following conclusions: (1) it is necessary to consider the externalities of ecosystem services, and (2) the meta-coupling framework enables a comprehensive assessment of carbon sequestration service flows, providing actionable insights for improving ecosystem governance in Henan Province and comparable regions.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenfeng Ji & Siyuan Liu & Yi Yang & Mengxue Liu & Hejie Wei & Ling Li, 2025. "Revealing Ecosystem Carbon Sequestration Service Flows Through the Meta-Coupling Framework: Evidence from Henan Province and the Surrounding Regions in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:8:p:1522-:d:1708844
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/8/1522/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/8/1522/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leandra Merz & Di Yang & Vanessa Hull, 2020. "A Metacoupling Framework for Exploring Transboundary Watershed Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, March.
    2. Ciara L. Hovis & Yue Dou & Anna Herzberger & Jianguo Liu, 2021. "Through the Lens of Telecoupling and Metacoupling: New Perspectives for Global Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-8, March.
    3. Huilan Jia & Hongmin Chen, 2025. "Spatiotemporal Dynamics and Optimization Management of Ecosystem Service Flows in the Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Anna Herzberger & Min Gon Chung & Kelly Kapsar & Kenneth A. Frank & Jianguo Liu, 2019. "Telecoupled Food Trade Affects Pericoupled Trade and Intracoupled Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, May.
    5. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    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. Yuandong Zou & Xuejing Li & Xuhai Zhao & Zhao Yu & Xiaoyu Hu & Hai Wang & Yanzhi Luo & Yi Zheng & Yingying Li & Liangen Zeng, 2025. "Impact of Farmland Use Transition on Grain Carbon Sink Transfer in Karst Mountainous Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, August.

    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. Laura McKinney & Devin C. Wright, 2021. "Climate Change and Water Dynamics in Rural Uganda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-12, July.
    2. Zhiqiang Zhao & Meng Cai & Thomas Connor & Min Gon Chung & Jianguo Liu, 2020. "Metacoupled Tourism and Wildlife Translocations Affect Synergies and Trade-Offs among Sustainable Development Goals across Spillover Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Merica Slišković & Katja Božić & Jelena Žanić Mikuličić & Ines Kolanović, 2024. "Addressing the Significance of the Union List with a Focus on Marine Invasive Alien Species Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-25, October.
    4. Busch, Christin & Specht, Kathrin & Inostroza, Luis & Falke, Matthias & Zepp, Harald, 2024. "Disentangling cultural ecosystem services co-production in urban green spaces through social media reviews," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Daniela D’Alessandro & Andrea Rebecchi & Letizia Appolloni & Andrea Brambilla & Silvio Brusaferro & Maddalena Buffoli & Maurizio Carta & Alessandra Casuccio & Liliana Coppola & Maria Vittoria Corazza , 2023. "Re-Thinking the Environment, Cities, and Living Spaces for Public Health Purposes, According with the COVID-19 Lesson: The LVII Erice Charter," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    8. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    9. Wang, Shifeng & Wang, Sicong & Smith, Pete, 2015. "Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1424-1428.
    10. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    11. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    12. 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.
    13. Newbold, Stephen C. & Johnston, Robert J., 2020. "Valuing non-market valuation studies using meta-analysis: A demonstration using estimates of willingness-to-pay for water quality improvements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    14. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    15. Jean-François Ruault & Alice Dupré La Tour & André Evette & Sandrine Allain & Jean-Marc Callois, 2022. "A biodiversity-employment framework to protect biodiversity," Post-Print hal-03365820, HAL.
    16. Malte Grossmann & Ottfried Dietrich, 2012. "Integrated Economic-Hydrologic Assessment of Water Management Options for Regulated Wetlands Under Conditions of Climate Change: A Case Study from the Spreewald (Germany)," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(7), pages 2081-2108, May.
    17. Sean Burkholder, 2012. "The New Ecology of Vacancy: Rethinking Land Use in Shrinking Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-19, June.
    18. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.
    19. Alamanos, Angelos & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2022. "Economics of Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Water Resource Planning and Management," MPRA Paper 122046, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Hattam, Caroline & Broszeit, Stefanie & Langmead, Olivia & Praptiwi, Radisti A. & Ching Lim, Voon & Creencia, Lota A. & Duc Hau, Tran & Maharja, Carya & Wulandari, Prawesti & Mitra Setia, Tatang & Sug, 2021. "A matrix approach to tropical marine ecosystem service assessments in South east Asia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).

    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:14:y:2025:i:8:p:1522-:d:1708844. 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.