IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i8p1265-d106006.html

Evaluation of Ecological Environmental Quality in a Coal Mining Area by Modelling Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Chaodong Yan

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 211106, China)

  • Hongjun Dai

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 211106, China)

  • Wen Guo

    (Accounting Department, College of Accounting, Nanjing University of Finance & Economics, Nanjing 210046, China)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the effective method of the comprehensive evaluation of ecological environmental quality in a coal mining area. Firstly, we analyzed the ecological environmental effect of the coal mining area according to Pigovian Tax theory and, according to the results of the analysis and the demand for the selection of evaluation indices by the comprehensive evaluation, built the corresponding comprehensive evaluation index system. We then used the correlation function method to determine the relative weights of each index. We determined the basic standards of a comprehensive evaluation of ecological environmental quality in a coal mining area according to the actual situation of ecological environmental quality assessments in coal mining areas in our country and the relevant provisions of the government. On this basis, we built the two-level extension comprehensive evaluation model for the evaluation of ecological environmental quality in mining areas. Finally, we chose a certain coal mining area of Yanzhou Coal Mining Company Limited as the specific case. We used the relevant statistic data, technical and economic indices and the extension evaluation model to do the applied research of the comprehensive evaluation and tested the effectiveness of the comprehensive evaluation model.

Suggested Citation

  • Chaodong Yan & Hongjun Dai & Wen Guo, 2017. "Evaluation of Ecological Environmental Quality in a Coal Mining Area by Modelling Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-13, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:8:p:1265-:d:106006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1265/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1265/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annandale, David, 2000. "Mining company approaches to environmental approvals regulation: a survey of senior environment managers in Canadian firms," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 51-59, March.
    2. A. K. Gorai & Kanchan & A. Upadhyay & P. Goyal, 2014. "Design of fuzzy synthetic evaluation model for air quality assessment," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 456-469, September.
    3. Humphreys, D., 2001. "Sustainable development: can the mining industry afford it?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-7, March.
    4. Kosoy, Nicolas & Martinez-Tuna, Miguel & Muradian, Roldan & Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2007. "Payments for environmental services in watersheds: Insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 446-455, March.
    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. Ming Zhang & Jinpeng Wang & Runjuan Zhou, 2020. "Sustainable effect of coal mining on hydrological drought risk: a case study on Kuye river basin, China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 103(3), pages 2929-2943, September.
    2. Zhao, Lu-Tao & Liu, Zhao-Ting & Cheng, Lei, 2021. "How will China's coal industry develop in the future? A quantitative analysis with policy implications," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    3. Hou, Yanliang & Long, Ruyin & Chen, Hong & Zhang, Linling, 2018. "Research on the sustainable development of China’s coal cities based on lock-in effect," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 479-486.
    4. Ling Shen & Guoxun Jing & Qiang Zeng, 2021. "Online evaluation method of coal mine comprehensive level based on FCE," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(8), pages 1-23, August.
    5. Wu, Huijun & Zeng, Xiaoyu & Zhang, Ling & Liu, Xin & Jiang, Songyan & Dong, Zhanfeng & Meng, Xiangrui & Wang, Qianqian, 2023. "Water-energy nexus embedded in coal supply chain of a coal-based city, China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    6. Gong-Da Wang & Jia-Wen Tang & Chao-Lu Yu & Hui-Yong Niu & Yi-Kang Liu, 2025. "A Comprehensive Cloud Model for Evaluating the Ecological Security Perfection of Shaft Coal Mines Based on DPSIR: A Case Study of Shaanxi Province, China," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2025(1).
    7. Hualin Xie, 2017. "Towards Sustainable Land Use in China: A Collection of Empirical Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-9, November.
    8. Wenbing Guo & Mingjie Guo & Yi Tan & Erhu Bai & Gaobo Zhao, 2019. "Sustainable Development of Resources and the Environment: Mining-Induced Eco-Geological Environmental Damage and Mitigation Measures—A Case Study in the Henan Coal Mining Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-34, August.

    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. Mokhinabonu Mardonova & Yosoon Choi, 2018. "Review of Wearable Device Technology and Its Applications to the Mining Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, March.
    2. Alessandri, Enrico, 2023. "Identifying technological trajectories in the mining sector using patent citation networks," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    4. Bennett, Drew E. & Gosnell, Hannah & Lurie, Susan & Duncan, Sally, 2014. "Utility engagement with payments for watershed services in the United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 56-64.
    5. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    6. David Humphreys, 2020. "Mining productivity and the fourth industrial revolution," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 33(1), pages 115-125, July.
    7. Kisaka, Lily & Obi, Ajuruchukwu, . "Farmers’ Preferences for Management Options as Payment for Environmental Services Scheme," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 18(3), pages 1-22.
    8. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    9. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    10. Vintró, Carla & Fortuny, Jordi & Sanmiquel, Lluís & Freijo, Modesto & Edo, Joaquín, 2012. "Is corporate social responsibility possible in the mining sector? Evidence from Catalan companies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 118-125.
    11. Chapman, Mollie & Satterfield, Terre & Wittman, Hannah & Chan, Kai M.A., 2020. "A payment by any other name: Is Costa Rica’s PES a payment for services or a support for stewards?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    12. Clifton, Julian & Mánez, Kathleen Schwerdtner, 2025. "A framework based on payments for ecosystem services to support the delivery of high integrity carbon and biodiversity credits," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    13. Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Corbera, Esteve & Lapeyre, Renaud, 2019. "Payments for Environmental Services and Motivation Crowding: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 434-443.
    14. Hong-Zhen Zhang & Ling-Yun He & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2023. "Can Transverse Eco-compensation Mechanism Correct Resource Misallocation in Watershed Environmental Governance? A Cost-benefit Analysis of the Pilot Project of Xin’an River in China," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(4), pages 947-973, April.
    15. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Vásquez, William F., 2012. "The viability of local payments for watershed services: Empirical evidence from Matiguás, Nicaragua," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 169-176.
    16. Jia He & Yu Wan & Zhonglin Tang & Xiaodong Zhu & Chuanhao Wen, 2019. "A Developed Framework for the Multi-District Ecological Compensation Standards Integrating Ecosystem Service Zoning in an Urban Area in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.
    17. Montoya-Zumaeta, Javier G. & Wunder, Sven & Tacconi, Luca, 2021. "Incentive-based conservation in Peru: Assessing the state of six ongoing PES and REDD+ initiatives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    18. Singh, Neera M., 2015. "Payments for ecosystem services and the gift paradigm: Sharing the burden and joy of environmental care," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 53-61.
    19. Xiaobing Yu & Chenliang Li & Hong Chen & Zhonghui Ji, 2020. "Evaluate Air Pollution by Promethee Ranking in Yangtze River Delta of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-18, January.
    20. Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron J. & Smetschka, Barbara & Ringhofer, Lisa, 2016. "Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) in Latin America: Analysing the performance of 40 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 24-32.

    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:9:y:2017:i:8:p:1265-:d:106006. 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.