IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8271-d856950.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying Co-Benefits and Trade-Offs between Forest Ecosystem Services in the Gan River Basin of South China

Author

Listed:
  • Erfu Dai

    (Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Xiaoli Wang

    (Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    National Marine Data and Information Service Center, Tianjin 300171, China)

  • Jianjia Zhu

    (College of Horticulture Science and Technology, Hebei Normal University of Science and Technology, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Qing Tian

    (Department of Computational Social Science, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA)

Abstract

Forest ecosystem services are intrinsically linked. We design a spatially explicit approach to quantify and analyze the co-benefits and trade-offs between the main forest ecosystem services. Our goal is to develop criteria for forest management that include ecosystem service interactions. Chinese fir and pine plantations provide the largest portion of the overall ecosystem services currently provided. They are volume stock and water yield service hotspots, but these have negative effects on soil retention and carbon storage, causing environmental problems. The natural forests (broad-leaf and bamboo forests) are carbon storage and volume stock hotspots and show the lowest erosion modulus. Thus, their protection, combined with expanding the plantation area under forest management should be considered in order to increase ecosystem service synergies. In contrast, an increased area of broad-leaf plantations reduces water yield service due to their lower water production capacity, in comparison with plantations of fast-growing species. Our study shows that the inclusion of ecosystem services as part of forest management could provide opportunities for optimal allocation of forest resources and sustainable utilization. Management based only on economically beneficial ecosystem services can be detrimental to the forest ecosystem and can cause environmental problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Erfu Dai & Xiaoli Wang & Jianjia Zhu & Qing Tian, 2022. "Quantifying Co-Benefits and Trade-Offs between Forest Ecosystem Services in the Gan River Basin of South China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8271-:d:856950
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8271/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8271/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George A Dyer & Robin Matthews & Patrick Meyfroidt, 2012. "Is There an Ideal REDD+ Program? An Analysis of Policy Trade-Offs at the Local Level," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Chisholm, Ryan A., 2010. "Trade-offs between ecosystem services: Water and carbon in a biodiversity hotspot," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1973-1987, August.
    3. Watson, Keri B. & Galford, Gillian L. & Sonter, Laura J. & Ricketts, Taylor H., 2020. "Conserving ecosystem services and biodiversity: Measuring the tradeoffs involved in splitting conservation budgets," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(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. Mohamed A. M. Abd Elbasit & Jasper Knight & Gang Liu & Majed M. Abu-Zreig & Rashid Hasaan, 2021. "Valuation of Ecosystem Services in South Africa, 2001–2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Courtney M. Regan & Jeffery D. Connor & Md Sayed Iftekhar, 2023. "An economic assessment of options for operating within plantation forestry water entitlements and tightening cap and trade policy," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(2), pages 303-322, April.
    3. Jin, Ming & Han, Xulong & Li, Mingyu, 2023. "Trade-offs of multiple urban ecosystem services based on land-use scenarios in the Tumen River cross-border area," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 482(C).
    4. Yumeng Zhang & Jing Li & Zixiang Zhou, 2019. "Exploring Expedient Protected Area for Ecosystem Services: Decision-Making Method with a New Algorithm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    5. Peng, Jian & Hu, Xiaoxu & Wang, Xiaoyu & Meersmans, Jeroen & Liu, Yanxu & Qiu, Sijing, 2019. "Simulating the impact of Grain-for-Green Programme on ecosystem services trade-offs in Northwestern Yunnan, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    6. Lilian Ding & Yan Liao & Congmou Zhu & Qiwei Zheng & Ke Wang, 2023. "Multiscale Analysis of the Effects of Landscape Pattern on the Trade-Offs and Synergies of Ecosystem Services in Southern Zhejiang Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-18, April.
    7. Maes, Joachim & Egoh, Benis & Willemen, Louise & Liquete, Camino & Vihervaara, Petteri & Schägner, Jan Philipp & Grizzetti, Bruna & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Notte, Alessandra La & Zulian, Grazia & Bour, 2012. "Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 31-39.
    8. Bryan, Brett Anthony & Crossman, Neville David, 2013. "Impact of multiple interacting financial incentives on land use change and the supply of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 60-72.
    9. Qian Li & Xuefeng Zhang & Qingfu Liu & Yang Liu & Yong Ding & Qing Zhang, 2017. "Impact of Land Use Intensity on Ecosystem Services: An Example from the Agro-Pastoral Ecotone of Central Inner Mongolia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-11, June.
    10. Aijun Guo & Yongnian Zhang & Fanglei Zhong & Daiwei Jiang, 2020. "Spatiotemporal Patterns of Ecosystem Service Value Changes and Their Coordination with Economic Development: A Case Study of the Yellow River Basin, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-17, November.
    11. Rhys Jones & Alexandra Macmillan & Papaarangi Reid, 2020. "Climate Change Mitigation Policies and Co-Impacts on Indigenous Health: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-18, December.
    12. Qiang Feng & Siyan Dong & Baoling Duan, 2021. "The Effects of Land-Use Change/Conversion on Trade-Offs of Ecosystem Services in Three Precipitation Zones," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, December.
    13. Coria, Jessica & Robinson, Elizabeth & Smith, Henrik G. & Sterner, Thomas, 2012. "Biodiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Services Provision: Tale of Confused Objectives, Multiple Market Failures and Policy Challenges," Working Papers in Economics 546, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    14. Qingfu Liu & Yanyun Zhao & Xuefeng Zhang & Alexander Buyantuev & Jianming Niu & Xiaojiang Wang, 2018. "Spatiotemporal Patterns of Desertification Dynamics and Desertification Effects on Ecosystem Services in the Mu Us Desert in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-19, February.
    15. Lorena Peña & Miren Onaindia & Beatriz Fernández de Manuel & Ibone Ametzaga-Arregi & Izaskun Casado-Arzuaga, 2018. "Analysing the Synergies and Trade-Offs between Ecosystem Services to Reorient Land Use Planning in Metropolitan Bilbao (Northern Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, November.
    16. Nguyen, Minh Duc & Ancev, Tiho & Randall, Alan, 2020. "Forest governance and economic values of forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    17. Keyu Qin & Jing Li & Xiaonan Yang, 2015. "Trade-Off and Synergy among Ecosystem Services in the Guanzhong-Tianshui Economic Region of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, November.
    18. Bin Fu & Naiwen Li, 2019. "Tradeoff between Hydropower and River Visual Landscape Services in Mountainous Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, October.
    19. Bénédicte Niel & Yann Laurans & Renaud Lapeyre & Pascale Combes Motel & Jean-Louis Combes, 2019. "Why do anti-deforestation policies succeed or fail? Review of the Theory of Change emerging from the existing literature," CERDI Working papers halshs-02090658, HAL.
    20. Kocur-Bera, Katarzyna, 2018. "A safe space of rural areas in the context of the occurrence of extreme weather events—A case study covering a part of the Euroregion Baltic," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 518-529.

    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:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8271-:d:856950. 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.