IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i9p3715-d1385604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Individual Capabilities on Ecosystem Services and Farmers’ Well-Being: A Case Study of the Loess Plateau, China

Author

Listed:
  • Di Liu

    (School of Tourism, Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, China)

  • Qifei Wang

    (School of Tourism, Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, China)

  • Yayan Lu

    (School of Tourism, Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, China)

  • Qinqin Shi

    (Institute of Resource-Based Economic Transition Development, Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, Taiyuan 030006, China)

  • Jie Zhang

    (College of Urban and Environmental Studies, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, China)

Abstract

Exploring the impact of individual capabilities on ecosystem services and farmers’ well-being is conducive to discovering the complex relationship between ESs and human well-being, and has clear practical value for the sustainable management and improvement of farmers’ well-being in ecologically fragile areas in China. An importance–accessibility index of ESs was constructed and the objective well-being and subjective well-being of farmers were assessed. Subsequently, the relationship among capabilities, ESs, and well-being was elucidated based on a structural equation model. The results showed that fruits, pest control, fuelwood, water conservation, and wild food were the ES types that contributed most to farmers’ well-being. There were some similarities and differences between the dimensions of objective and subjective well-being. For example, farmers with adequate leisure time reported higher leisure satisfaction and farmers with relatively adequate income levels reported the lowest income satisfaction. The direct effect of capabilities on ESs and objective well-being was significant, and the direct effect of capabilities on their subjective well-being was not significant. Their capabilities had a significant indirect impact on their objective well-being by influencing ESs and did not have a significant indirect impact on their subjective well-being by influencing ESs; their capabilities had a significant indirect impact on their subjective well-being by influencing the ESs and objective well-being. Physical health, mental health, and agricultural skills were the key types of capabilities that influenced the farmers’ access to ESs and well-being. Improving these capabilities can enable local farmers to more fully access ESs and improve their well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • Di Liu & Qifei Wang & Yayan Lu & Qinqin Shi & Jie Zhang, 2024. "The Impact of Individual Capabilities on Ecosystem Services and Farmers’ Well-Being: A Case Study of the Loess Plateau, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-23, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:9:p:3715-:d:1385604
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/9/3715/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/9/3715/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chaigneau, Tomas & Brown, Katrina & Coulthard, Sarah & Daw, Tim M. & Szaboova, Lucy, 2019. "Money, use and experience: Identifying the mechanisms through which ecosystem services contribute to wellbeing in coastal Kenya and Mozambique," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Yang, Hongbo & Dietz, Thomas & Yang, Wu & Zhang, Jindong & Liu, Jianguo, 2018. "Changes in Human Well-being and Rural Livelihoods Under Natural Disasters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 184-194.
    3. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    4. Dawson, Neil & Martin, Adrian, 2015. "Assessing the contribution of ecosystem services to human wellbeing: A disaggregated study in western Rwanda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 62-72.
    5. Aguado, Mateo & González, José A. & Bellott, Kr'sna & López-Santiago, César & Montes, Carlos, 2018. "Exploring subjective well-being and ecosystem services perception along a rural–urban gradient in the high Andes of Ecuador," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 1-10.
    6. Nancy Folbre, 2009. "Time Use and Living Standards," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 77-83, August.
    7. Wei, Hejie & Liu, Huiming & Xu, Zihan & Ren, Jiahui & Lu, Nachuan & Fan, Weiguo & Zhang, Peng & Dong, Xiaobin, 2018. "Linking ecosystem services supply, social demand and human well-being in a typical mountain–oasis–desert area, Xinjiang, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 44-57.
    8. Scholte, Samantha S.K. & van Teeffelen, Astrid J.A. & Verburg, Peter H., 2015. "Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 67-78.
    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. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Ndayizeye, Gaëlle & Imani, Gerard & Nkengurutse, Jacques & Irampagarikiye, Rosette & Ndihokubwayo, Noël & Niyongabo, Ferdinand & Cuni-Sanchez, Aida, 2020. "Ecosystem services from mountain forests: Local communities’ views in Kibira National Park, Burundi," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    3. Huang, Qingxu & Yin, Dan & He, Chunyang & Yan, Jubo & Liu, Ziwen & Meng, Shiting & Ren, Qiang & Zhao, Rui & Inostroza, Luis, 2020. "Linking ecosystem services and subjective well-being in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: Insights from a multilevel linear model," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    4. Negev, Maya & Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E. & Zemah Shamir, Shiri & Hassan, Yousef & Amasha, Hani & Raviv, Orna & Fares, Nasrin & Lotan, Alon & Peled, Yoav & Wittenberg, Lea & Izhaki, Ido, 2019. "Using the ecosystem services framework for defining diverse human-nature relationships in a multi-ethnic biosphere reserve," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    5. Dean C. Stronge & Bryan A. Stevenson & Garth R. Harmsworth & Robyn L. Kannemeyer, 2020. "A Well-Being Approach to Soil Health—Insights from Aotearoa New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-12, September.
    6. Xiaoyu Li & Shudan Gong & Qingdong Shi & Yuan Fang, 2023. "A Review of Ecosystem Services Based on Bibliometric Analysis: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-18, November.
    7. Lau, Jacqueline D. & Hicks, Christina C. & Gurney, Georgina G. & Cinner, Joshua E., 2018. "Disaggregating ecosystem service values and priorities by wealth, age, and education," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 91-98.
    8. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    9. Christianson, Anne B. & Montgomery, Rebecca & Fleischman, Forrest & Nelson, Kristen C., 2022. "Exploring wildlife disservices and conservation in the context of ecosystem-based adaptation: A case study in the Mt. Elgon region, Uganda," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    10. Daymond, Tahlia & Andrew, Margaret E. & Kobryn, Halina T., 2023. "Crowdsourcing social values data: Flickr and public participation GIS provide different perspectives of ecosystem services in a remote coastal region," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    11. Picchi, Paolo & van Lierop, Martina & Geneletti, Davide & Stremke, Sven, 2019. "Advancing the relationship between renewable energy and ecosystem services for landscape planning and design: A literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 241-259.
    12. Baraka P. Nyangoko & Håkan Berg & Mwita M. Mangora & Martin Gullström & Mwanahija S. Shalli, 2020. "Community Perceptions of Mangrove Ecosystem Services and Their Determinants in the Rufiji Delta, Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    13. Eszter Tormáné Kovács & Csaba Centeri, 2023. "Assessment of Ecosystem Services at Different Scales," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-5, December.
    14. Lapointe, Marie & Gurney, Georgina G. & Cumming, Graeme S., 2020. "Urbanization alters ecosystem service preferences in a Small Island Developing State," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    15. Ingrid Nesheim & Line Barkved, 2019. "The Suitability of the Ecosystem Services Framework for Guiding Benefit Assessments in Human-Modified Landscapes Exemplified by Regulated Watersheds—Implications for a Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Wangchuk, Jigme & Choden, Kinley & Sears, Robin R. & Baral, Himlal & Yoezer, Dawa & Tamang, Kelly Tobden Dorji & Choden, Thinley & Wangdi, Norbu & Dorji, Shacha & Dukpa, Dorji & Tshering, Kaka & Thinl, 2021. "Community perception of ecosystem services from commercially managed forests in Bhutan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    17. Chaigneau, Tomas & Brown, Katrina & Coulthard, Sarah & Daw, Tim M. & Szaboova, Lucy, 2019. "Money, use and experience: Identifying the mechanisms through which ecosystem services contribute to wellbeing in coastal Kenya and Mozambique," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Assouhan Jonas Atchadé & Madjouma Kanda & Fousseni Folega & Joanes Atela & Marra Dourma & Kperkouma Wala & Koffi Akpagana, 2023. "Urban Ecosystem Services and Determinants of Stakeholders’ Perception for Sustainable Cities Planning in Cotonou (Benin)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-13, June.
    19. Cuni-Sanchez, Aida & Ngute, Alain Senghor K. & Sonké, Bonaventure & Sainge, Moses Nsanyi & Burgess, Neil D. & Klein, Julia A. & Marchant, Rob, 2019. "The importance of livelihood strategy and ethnicity in forest ecosystem services’ perceptions by local communities in north-western Cameroon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    20. Borrello, M. & Cecchini, L. & Vecchio, R. & Caracciolo, F. & Cembalo, L. & Torquati, B., 2022. "Agricultural landscape certification as a market-driven tool to reward the provisioning of cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).

    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:16:y:2024:i:9:p:3715-:d:1385604. 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.