IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i7p9628-9648d52749.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Payments for Ecosystem Services Programs on the Relationship of Livelihood Capital and Livelihood Strategy among Rural Communities in Northwestern China

Author

Listed:
  • Fei Wang

    (School of Geography Science and Tourism, Xinjiang Normal University, Urumqi 830054, China
    Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China)

  • Degang Yang

    (Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China)

  • Changjian Wang

    (Guangzhou Institute of Geography, Guangzhou 510070, China)

  • Xinhuan Zhang

    (Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China)

Abstract

The security and quality of livelihoods for peasant households is the core issue for rural areas in China. A stable livelihood contributes to the harmonious development of related polices, poverty eradication and sustainable use of resources. In Qinghe County, located in the extremely arid zone of Northwest China, 238 validated surveys were conducted. The analysis focuses on the importance of livelihood capitals for the selection of on- or off-farm livelihood strategies among beneficiaries of different kinds of ecological compensation packages. The goal is to see if different groups of beneficiaries are better able to pursue off-farm livelihoods activity, which reduces pressure on the resource base, and whether specific capitals are especially effective in helping households pursue off-farm livelihoods, which benefits their well-being. The findings show that proportionally more herdsmen (who participated in a pastureland rehabilitation program) were able to pursue off-farm livelihoods than farmers (who participated in the cultivated land reforestation program), and especially agro-pastoralists (who participated in both programs). Further, models of livelihood strategy show that human and financial capitals facilitate off-farm livelihoods, while productive capital tends to lead to on-farm livelihoods. These findings indicate that there is no single determinant of livelihood strategy, and future policies must consciously differentiate among beneficiaries to reach the desired result.

Suggested Citation

  • Fei Wang & Degang Yang & Changjian Wang & Xinhuan Zhang, 2015. "The Effect of Payments for Ecosystem Services Programs on the Relationship of Livelihood Capital and Livelihood Strategy among Rural Communities in Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-21, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:7:p:9628-9648:d:52749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/9628/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/9628/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wunder, Sven & Albán, Montserrat, 2008. "Decentralized payments for environmental services: The cases of Pimampiro and PROFAFOR in Ecuador," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 685-698, May.
    2. Reed, M.S. & Podesta, G. & Fazey, I. & Geeson, N. & Hessel, R. & Hubacek, K. & Letson, D. & Nainggolan, D. & Prell, C. & Rickenbach, M.G. & Ritsema, C. & Schwilch, G. & Stringer, L.C. & Thomas, A.D., 2013. "Combining analytical frameworks to assess livelihood vulnerability to climate change and analyse adaptation options," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 66-77.
    3. Ansoms, An & McKay, Andrew, 2010. "A quantitative analysis of poverty and livelihood profiles: The case of rural Rwanda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 584-598, December.
    4. Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
    5. Worku, Adefires & Pretzsch, Jürgen & Kassa, Habtemariam & Auch, Eckhard, 2014. "The significance of dry forest income for livelihood resilience: The case of the pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in the drylands of southeastern Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 51-59.
    6. Liebenow, Danielle King & Cohen, Matthew J. & Gumbricht, Thomas & Shepherd, Keith D. & Shepherd, Gemma, 2012. "Do ecosystem services influence household wealth in rural Mali?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 33-44.
    7. Zhou, Yan & Xing, Xinpeng & Fang, Kuangnan & Liang, Dapeng & Xu, Chunlin, 2013. "Environmental efficiency analysis of power industry in China based on an entropy SBM model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 68-75.
    8. Yancang Li & Lei Zhao & Juanjuan Suo, 2014. "Comprehensive Assessment on Sustainable Development of Highway Transportation Capacity Based on Entropy Weight and TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(7), pages 1-9, July.
    9. Fan, Jie & Liang, Yu-tian & Tao, An-jun & Sheng, Ke-rong & Ma, Hai-Long & Xu, Yong & Wang, Chuan-Sheng & Sun, Wei, 2011. "Energy policies for sustainable livelihoods and sustainable development of poor areas in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1200-1212, March.
    10. Muñoz-Piña, Carlos & Guevara, Alejandro & Torres, Juan Manuel & Braña, Josefina, 2008. "Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: Analysis, negotiations and results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 725-736, May.
    11. Rong Tan & Rongyu Wang & Thomas Sedlin, 2014. "Land-Development Offset Policies in the Quest for Sustainability: What Can China Learn from Germany?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-31, May.
    12. Liang, Yicheng & Li, Shuzhuo & Feldman, Marcus W. & Daily, Gretchen C., 2012. "Does household composition matter? The impact of the Grain for Green Program on rural livelihoods in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 152-160.
    13. Di Falco, Salvatore & Chavas, Jean-Paul & Smale, Melinda, 2006. "Farmer management of production risk on degraded lands: the role of wheat genetic diversity in Tigray Region, Ethiopia," EPTD discussion papers 153, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Fanbin Kong & Kai Xiong & Ning Zhang, 2014. "Determinants of Farmers’ Willingness to Pay and Its Level for Ecological Compensation of Poyang Lake Wetland, China: A Household-Level Survey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-15, September.
    15. Changjian Wang & Fei Wang, 2015. "Structural Decomposition Analysis of Carbon Emissions and Policy Recommendations for Energy Sustainability in Xinjiang," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-20, June.
    16. Turpie, J.K. & Marais, C. & Blignaut, J.N., 2008. "The working for water programme: Evolution of a payments for ecosystem services mechanism that addresses both poverty and ecosystem service delivery in South Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 788-798, May.
    17. Zbinden, Simon & Lee, David R., 2005. "Paying for Environmental Services: An Analysis of Participation in Costa Rica's PSA Program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 255-272, February.
    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. Jia He & Yi Li & Lianjun Zhang & Junyin Tan & Chuanhao Wen, 2021. "A County-Scale Spillover Ecological Value Compensation Standard of Ecological Barrier Area in China: Based on an Extended Emergy Analysis," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-26, November.
    2. Xie, Jinhua & Yang, Gangqiao & Wang, Ge & Song, Yan & Yang, Fan, 2021. "How do different rural-land-consolidation modes shape farmers’ ecological production behaviors?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    3. Jun Liu & Jianghuan Zhu & Chu Lin & Yunyun Li & Lijun Wu, 2017. "Farming versus tourism," Tourism Economics, , vol. 23(8), pages 1581-1590, December.
    4. Jang-Hwan Jo & Taewoo Roh & Seunguk Shin & Yeo-Chang Youn, 2019. "Sustainable Assets and Strategies Affecting the Forestry Household Income: Empirical Evidence from South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Yueyue He & Tanveer Ahmed, 2022. "Farmers’ Livelihood Capital and Its Impact on Sustainable Livelihood Strategies: Evidence from the Poverty-Stricken Areas of Southwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-24, April.
    6. Hejie Wei & Jiaxin Zheng & Dong Xue & Xiaobin Dong & Mengxue Liu & Yali Zhang, 2022. "Identifying the Relationship between Livelihoods and Land Ecosystem Services Using a Coupled Model: A Case Study in the “One River and Two Tributaries” Region of Tibet," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-23, August.
    7. Jinhai Ma & Jie Zhang & Li Li & Zhanjing Zeng & Jingrong Sun & Qilou (Bill) Zhou & Yuling Zhang, 2018. "Study on Livelihood Assets-Based Spatial Differentiation of the Income of Natural Tourism Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, January.
    8. Wenqiang Ding & Saheed Olaide Jimoh & Yulu Hou & Xiangyang Hou & Weiguo Zhang, 2018. "Influence of Livelihood Capitals on Livelihood Strategies of Herdsmen in Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.

    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. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    2. Ina, Porras & Bruce, Alyward & Jeff, Dengel, 2013. "Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries," MPRA Paper 47185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Duke, Esther Alice & Goldstein, Joshua H. & Teel, Tara L. & Finchum, Ryan & Huber-Stearns, Heidi & Pitty, Jorge & Rodríguez P., Gladys Beatriz & Rodríguez, Samuel & Sánchez, Luis Olmedo, 2014. "Payments for ecosystem services and landowner interest: Informing program design trade-offs in Western Panama," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 44-55.
    4. Alireza Daneshi & Mostafa Panahi & Saber Masoomi & Mehdi Vafakhah & Hossein Azadi & Muhammad Mobeen & Pinar Gökcin Ozuyar & Vjekoslav Tanaskovik, 2021. "Assessment of non-monetary facilities in Urmia Lake basin under PES scheme: a rehabilitation solution for the dry lake in Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10141-10172, July.
    5. Brownson, Katherine & Fowler, Laurie, 2020. "Evaluating how we evaluate success: Monitoring, evaluation and adaptive management in Payments for Watershed Services programs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Pascual, Unai & Muradian, Roldan & Rodríguez, Luis C. & Duraiappah, Anantha, 2010. "Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: A conceptual approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1237-1244, April.
    7. Neitzel, K. Christoph & Caro-Borrero, Angela Piedad & Revollo-Fernandez, Daniel & Aguilar-Ibarra, Alonso & Ramos, Alya & Almeida-Leñero, Lucia, 2014. "Paying for environmental services: Determining recognized participation under common property in a peri-urban context," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 46-55.
    8. Jespersen, Kristjan & Gallemore, Caleb, 2018. "The Institutional Work of Payments for Ecosystem Services: Why the Mundane Should Matter," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 507-519.
    9. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.
    12. Zhang, Jing & Brown, Colin & Qiao, Guanghua & Zhang, Bao, 2019. "Effect of Eco-compensation Schemes on Household Income Structures and Herder Satisfaction: Lessons From the Grassland Ecosystem Subsidy and Award Scheme in Inner Mongolia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 46-53.
    13. Kwayu, Emmanuel J. & Sallu, Susannah M. & Paavola, Jouni, 2014. "Farmer participation in the equitable payments for watershed services in Morogoro, Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 1-9.
    14. Giefer, Madeline M. & An, Li & Chen, Xiaodong, 2021. "Normative, livelihood, and demographic influences on enrollment in a payment for ecosystem services program," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    15. Wünscher, Tobias & Engel, Stefanie & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: A tool for boosting conservation benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 822-833, May.
    16. Wang, Xialin & Nuppenau, Ernst-August, 2021. "Modelling payments for ecosystem services for solving future water conflicts at spatial scales: The Okavango River Basin example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    17. Corbera, Esteve & Soberanis, Carmen González & Brown, Katrina, 2009. "Institutional dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services: An analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 743-761, January.
    18. Nelson Grima & Lisa Ringhofer & Simron J. Singh & Barbara Smetschka & Christian Lauk, 2017. "Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Development Practice: Can the Concept of PES Deliver?," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 17(4), pages 267-281, October.
    19. Song, Conghe & Zhang, Yulong & Mei, Ying & Liu, Hua & Zhang, Zhiqiang & Zhang, Quanfa & Zha, Tonggang & Zhang, Kerong & Huang, Chenglin & Xu, Xiaoniu & Jagger, Pamela & Chen, Xiaodong & Bilsborrow, Ri, 2014. "Sustainability of Forests Created by China's Sloping Land Conversion Program: A comparison among three sites in Anhui, Hubei and Shanxi," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 161-167.
    20. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.

    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:7:y:2015:i:7:p:9628-9648:d:52749. 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.