IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i5p1346-d210824.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prioritizing Spatially Aggregated Cost-Effective Sites in Natural Reserves to Mitigate Human-Induced Threats: A Case Study of the Qinghai Plateau, China

Author

Listed:
  • Jianxin Yang

    (Department of Land Resource Management, School of Public Administration, China University of Geosciences (Wuhan), 388 Lumo Road, Hongshan District, Wuhan 430074, China
    Center for Applied Geographic Information Science, the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223, USA
    Department of Geography and Earth Sciences, the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Jian Gong

    (Department of Land Resource Management, School of Public Administration, China University of Geosciences (Wuhan), 388 Lumo Road, Hongshan District, Wuhan 430074, China
    Key Labs of Law Evaluation of Ministry of Land and Resources of China, 388 Lumo Road, Hongshan District, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Wenwu Tang

    (Center for Applied Geographic Information Science, the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223, USA
    Department of Geography and Earth Sciences, the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Anthropogenic activities often lead to the degradation of valuable natural habitats. Many efforts have been taken to counteract this degradation process, including the mitigation of human-induced stressors. However, knowing-doing gaps exist in stakeholder’s decision-making of prioritizing sites to allocate limited resources in these mitigation activities in both spatially aggregated and cost-effective manner. In this study, we present a spatially explicit prioritization framework that integrates basic cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) and spatial clustering statistics. The advantages of the proposed framework lie in its straightforward logic and ease of implementation to assist stakeholders in the identification of threat mitigation actions that are both spatially clumped and cost-effective using innovative prioritization indicators. We compared the utility of three local autocorrelation-based clustering statistics, including local Moran’s I , Getis-Ord Gi*, and AMOEBA, in quantifying the spatial aggregation of identified sites under given budgets. It is our finding that the CEA method produced threat mitigation sites that are more cost-effective but are dispersed in space. Spatial clustering statistics could help identify spatially aggregated management sites with only minor loss in cost effectiveness. We concluded that integrating basic CEA with spatial clustering statistics provides stakeholders with straightforward and reliable information in prioritizing spatially clustered cost-effective actions for habitat threat mitigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Jianxin Yang & Jian Gong & Wenwu Tang, 2019. "Prioritizing Spatially Aggregated Cost-Effective Sites in Natural Reserves to Mitigate Human-Induced Threats: A Case Study of the Qinghai Plateau, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:5:p:1346-:d:210824
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/5/1346/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/5/1346/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Polasky & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Kris Johnson, 2011. "The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 219-242, February.
    2. Lewis, David J. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Nelson, Erik & Polasky, Stephen, 2011. "The efficiency of voluntary incentive policies for preventing biodiversity loss," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 192-211, January.
    3. Paul J. Ferraro, 2003. "Assigning priority to environmental policy interventions in a heterogeneous world," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 27-43.
    4. Guang Wan & Enjiang Cheng, 2001. "Effects of land fragmentation and returns to scale in the Chinese farming sector," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 183-194.
    5. Haixiao Huang & Gay Y. Miller & Bruce J. Sherrick & Miguel I. Gómez, 2006. "Factors Influencing Illinois Farmland Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 458-470.
    6. Nick Hanley & Simanti Banerjee & Gareth D. Lennox & Paul R. Armsworth, 2012. "How should we incentivize private landowners to ‘produce’ more biodiversity?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 93-113, Spring.
    7. Balana, Bedru Babulo & Vinten, Andy & Slee, Bill, 2011. "A review on cost-effectiveness analysis of agri-environmental measures related to the EU WFD: Key issues, methods, and applications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1021-1031, April.
    8. Plantinga, Andrew J. & Lubowski, Ruben N. & Stavins, Robert N., 2002. "The effects of potential land development on agricultural land prices," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 561-581, November.
    9. Drechsler, Martin & Wätzold, Frank & Johst, Karin & Shogren, Jason F., 2010. "An agglomeration payment for cost-effective biodiversity conservation in spatially structured landscapes," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 261-275, April.
    10. James Boyd & Rebecca Epanchin-Niell & Juha Siikamäki, 2015. "Conservation Planning: A Review of Return on Investment Analysis," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(1), pages 23-42.
    11. Kovacs, Kent F. & Polasky, Stephen & Keeler, Bonnie & Pennington, Derric & Nelson, Erik & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Taff, Steven J., 2012. "Evaluating the Return in Ecosystem Services from Investment in Public Land Acquisitions," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124660, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Norman Myers & Russell A. Mittermeier & Cristina G. Mittermeier & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Jennifer Kent, 2000. "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities," Nature, Nature, vol. 403(6772), pages 853-858, February.
    13. Boyd, James & Epanchin-Niell, Rebecca & Siikamaki, Juha, 2012. "Conservation Return on Investment Analysis: A Review of Results, Methods, and New Directions," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-01, Resources for the Future.
    14. Kerrie A. Wilson & Marissa F. McBride & Michael Bode & Hugh P. Possingham, 2006. "Prioritizing global conservation efforts," Nature, Nature, vol. 440(7082), pages 337-340, March.
    15. Yaolin Liu & Jinjin Peng & Limin Jiao & Yanfang Liu, 2016. "PSOLA: A Heuristic Land-Use Allocation Model Using Patch-Level Operations and Knowledge-Informed Rules," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-21, June.
    16. Lawley, Chad & Yang, Wanhong, 2015. "Spatial interactions in habitat conservation: Evidence from prairie pothole easements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 71-89.
    17. Gren, Ing-Marie & Baxter, Peter & Mikusinski, Grzegorz & Possingham, Hugh, 2014. "Cost-effective biodiversity restoration with uncertain growth in forest habitat quality," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 77-92.
    18. Li, Shicheng & Zhang, Yili & Wang, Zhaofeng & Li, Lanhui, 2018. "Mapping human influence intensity in the Tibetan Plateau for conservation of ecological service functions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 276-286.
    19. Tony H. Grubesic & Ran Wei & Alan T. Murray, 2014. "Spatial Clustering Overview and Comparison: Accuracy, Sensitivity, and Computational Expense," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 104(6), pages 1134-1156, November.
    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. 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).

    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. Gregory M. Parkhurst & Jason F. Shogren & Thomas Crocker, 2016. "Tradable Set-Aside Requirements (TSARs): Conserving Spatially Dependent Environmental Amenities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 719-744, April.
    2. Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, Edward & Boyer, Christopher & English, Burton, 2018. "Targeting Payments for Ecosystem Services Given Ecological and Economic Objectives," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266502, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    3. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    4. Wätzold, Frank & Drechsler, Martin, 2014. "Agglomeration payment, agglomeration bonus or homogeneous payment?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 85-101.
    5. Claron, Charles & Mikou, Mehdi & Levrel, Harold & Tardieu, Léa, 2022. "Mapping urban ecosystem services to design cost-effective purchase of development rights programs: The case of the Greater Paris metropolis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    6. Shimada, Hideki, 2020. "Do monetary rewards for spatial coordination enhance participation in a forest incentive program?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Polyakov, Maksym & Dempster, Fiona & Park, Geoff & Pannell, David J., 2023. "Joining the dots versus growing the blobs: Evaluating spatial targeting strategies for ecological restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    8. Boyd, James & Epanchin-Niell, Rebecca & Siikamaki, Juha, 2012. "Conservation Return on Investment Analysis: A Review of Results, Methods, and New Directions," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-01, Resources for the Future.
    9. Drechsler, Martin & Wätzold, Frank & Johst, Karin & Shogren, Jason F., 2010. "An agglomeration payment for cost-effective biodiversity conservation in spatially structured landscapes," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 261-275, April.
    10. Wang, Yangyang & Atallah, Shady & Shao, Guofan, 2017. "Spatially explicit return on investment to private forest conservation for water purification in Indiana, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 45-57.
    11. Nguyen, Chi & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Hanley, Nick & Schilizzi, Steven & Iftekhar, Sayed, 2022. "Spatial Coordination Incentives for landscape-scale environmental management: A systematic review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    12. Lewis, David J. & Polasky, Stephen, 2018. "An auction mechanism for the optimal provision of ecosystem services under climate change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 20-34.
    13. Duke, Joshua M. & Dundas, Steven J. & Johnston, Robert J. & Messer, Kent D., 2014. "Prioritizing payment for environmental services: Using nonmarket benefits and costs for optimal selection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 319-329.
    14. Christian Langpap & Joe Kerkvliet & Jason F Shogren, 2018. "The Economics of the U.S. Endangered Species Act: A Review of Recent Developments," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 69-91.
    15. Arora, Gaurav & Feng, Hongli & Hennessy, David A. & Loesch, Charles R. & Kvas, Susan, 2021. "The impact of production network economies on spatially-contiguous conservation– Theoretical model with evidence from the U.S. Prairie Pothole Region," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    16. Brendan Fisher & Stephen Polasky & Thomas Sterner, 2011. "Conservation and Human Welfare: Economic Analysis of Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 151-159, February.
    17. Schilling, Brian J. & Sullivan, Kevin P. & Duke, Joshua M., 2013. "Do Residual Development Options Increase Preserved Farmland Values?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-17.
    18. Kousky, Carolyn & Walls, Margaret, 2014. "Floodplain conservation as a flood mitigation strategy: Examining costs and benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 119-128.
    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. Kousky, Carolyn & Walls, Margaret & Chu, Ziyan, 2013. "Flooding and Resilience: Valuing Conservation Investments in a World with Climate Change," RFF Working Paper Series dp-13-38, Resources for the Future.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:5:p:1346-:d:210824. 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.