IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i19p8723-d1760273.html

Assessing Development Opportunity Loss in River Source Area Based on Comparison of Cumulative Growth Rates of Per Capita GDP

Author

Listed:
  • Changfeng Ding

    (College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
    State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing 100038, China)

  • Fulin Cai

    (College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

  • Feng Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing 100038, China)

  • Baiyinbaoligao

    (State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing 100038, China)

  • Fengran Xu

    (State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing 100038, China)

Abstract

River source areas often face stricter environmental protection requirements, leading to external cost and development opportunity losses. Quantifying such losses is essential for designing ecological compensation mechanisms (payment for ecological services). Existing methods often lack scientific rigor and practical feasibility. A method based on the comparison of Cumulative Growth Rates of Per Capita GDP (CGR-PCGDP) is proposed and applied to the water source area of the Middle Route of the South-to-North Water Diversion Project (MR-SNWDP) in China. The method quantifies the fiscal opportunity losses by comparing the CGR-PCGDP between the water source area and a reference area, and deducting growth rate differences before the baseline year. Regions in closer proximity to the Danjiangkou Reservoir—the source point of water diversion—have been found to be more markedly affected by stricter protection policies, resulting in greater development opportunity losses. Shiyan City and Nanyang City experienced annual average fiscal opportunity losses of CNY 569 million and 371 million, respectively, whereas cities farther from the reservoir, such as Hanzhong City, Ankang City, and Shangluo City, incurred lower losses. Compared to traditional approaches, this method avoids overestimation and offers practical, evidence-based results. How factors like geographical location, economic structure, fiscal compensation, and economic transformation capacity affect losses is further discussed, and strategies for balanced development and effective ecological compensation are proposed. The study offers methodological and referential support for the establishment of ecological compensation standards in river source areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Changfeng Ding & Fulin Cai & Feng Liu & Baiyinbaoligao & Fengran Xu, 2025. "Assessing Development Opportunity Loss in River Source Area Based on Comparison of Cumulative Growth Rates of Per Capita GDP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-21, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:19:p:8723-:d:1760273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/19/8723/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/19/8723/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moran, Dominic & McVittie, Alistair & Allcroft, David J. & Elston, David A., 2007. "Quantifying public preferences for agri-environmental policy in Scotland: A comparison of methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 42-53, June.
    2. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    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. Qinxin Guo & Junyi Shen, 2020. "Valuing Rural Residents' Attitude Regarding agri-environmental Policy in China: A Best-worst Scaling Analysis," Discussion Paper Series DP2020-01, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    2. Fuhua Sun & Daoming Pan & Dandan Zhang & Jiayi Guo & Ping Guo & Xiaojie Zhang & Chen Chi & Shengnan Zhang, 2025. "Study on Quantitative Model of Water Resource Ecological Compensation in Yangtze River Basin Based on Water Footprint–Decoupling Analysis Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-30, January.
    3. Yang Gao & Ziyan Han & Yanzhi Cui & Hanbing Zhang & Lulu Liu, 2019. "Determination of the Agricultural Eco-Compensation Standards in Ecological Fragile Poverty Areas Based on Emergy Synthesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Kangas, Johanna & Ollikainen, Markku, 2022. "A PES scheme promoting forest biodiversity and carbon sequestration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    5. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    6. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    7. Ian Hodge & William M. Adams, 2016. "Short-Term Projects versus Adaptive Governance: Conflicting Demands in the Management of Ecological Restoration," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-17, November.
    8. Surun, Clément & Drechsler, Martin, 2018. "Effectiveness of Tradable Permits for the Conservation of Metacommunities With Two Competing Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 189-196.
    9. Galati, Antonino & Crescimanno, Maria & Gristina, Luciano & Keesstra, Saskia & Novara, Agata, 2016. "Actual provision as an alternative criterion to improve the efficiency of payments for ecosystem services for C sequestration in semiarid vineyards," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 58-64.
    10. Frings, Oliver & Abildtrup, Jens & Montagné-Huck, Claire & Gorel, Salomé & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Do individual PES buyers care about additionality and free-riding? A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    11. Cicelin Rakotomahazo & Jacqueline Razanoelisoa & Nirinarisoa Lantoasinoro Ranivoarivelo & Gildas Georges Boleslas Todinanahary & Eulalie Ranaivoson & Mara Edouard Remanevy & Lalao Aigrette Ravaoarinor, 2021. "Community Perceptions of a Payment for Ecosystem Services Project in Southwest Madagascar: A Preliminary Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    12. Cooke, Benjamin & Corbo-Perkins, Gabriella, 2018. "Co-opting and resisting market based instruments for private land conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-181.
    13. Bardsley, Douglas K. & Bardsley, Annette M., 2014. "Organising for socio-ecological resilience: The roles of the mountain farmer cooperative Genossenschaft Gran Alpin in Graubünden, Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 11-21.
    14. McGrath, F.L. & Carrasco, L.R. & Leimona, B., 2017. "How auctions to allocate payments for ecosystem services contracts impact social equity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 44-55.
    15. Xiaorui Wang & Shen Hu, 2024. "How do organizations in Chinese agriculture perceive sustainability certification schemes? An exploratory analysis," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 42(3), May.
    16. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    17. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.
    18. 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.
    19. Mayer, Alex & Jones, Kelly & Hunt, David & Manson, Robert & Carter Berry, Z. & Asbjornsen, Heidi & Wright, Timothy Max & Salcone, Jacob & Lopez Ramirez, Sergio & Ávila-Foucat, Sophie & Von Thaden Ugal, 2022. "Assessing ecosystem service outcomes from payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz, Mexico: Future deforestation threats and spatial targeting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    20. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.

    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:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:19:p:8723-:d:1760273. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.