Cost-benefit analysis of ecosystem services in China

被引:9
|
作者
Cao, Shixiong [1 ,2 ]
Yu, Zhongqi [3 ]
Zhang, Junze [4 ]
Feng, Fei [1 ]
Xu, Duanyang [5 ]
Mu, Xingmin [6 ]
机构
[1] Yanan Univ, Sch Econ & Management, 580 Shengdi Rd, Yanan City 716000, Peoples R China
[2] Minzu Univ China, Sch Econ, 27 Zhongguancun South St, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
[3] Tsinghua Univ, Sch Publ Policy & Management, 30 Shuangqing Rd, Beijing 100084, Peoples R China
[4] Beijing Normal Univ, Fac Geog Sci, 19 Xinjiekouwai St, Beijing 100875, Peoples R China
[5] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Geog Sci & Nat Resources Res, Beijing 100101, Peoples R China
[6] Northwest A&F Univ, Inst Soil & Water Conservat, 26 Xinong Rd, Yangling 712100, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
来源
ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING | 2018年 / 125卷
关键词
Ecosystem services; Cost-benefit analysis; Environmental conservation; Land management; Ecological restoration; ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION; LAND-USE; BIODIVERSITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.10.022
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Environmental protection can maintain ecosystem health, improve the provision of ecosystem services, and increase human welfare. However, traditional calculations of the value of ecosystem services (VES) exclude their cost, thereby undermining plans to achieve a combination of environmental protection with sustainable socioeconomic development. To understand the difference between VES and the net value after accounting for costs (NES), we evaluated the evolution of the main ecosystem services in China. When costs are accounted for (i. e., when they are subtracted from VES), NES averaged 10.0 x 10(3) RMB.ha(-1).yr(-1) for China as a whole (35.1% of VES), with values of 39.0 x 10(3), -0.7 x 10(3), 27.7 x 10(3), and 13.0 x 10(3) RMB.ha(-1).yr(-1) for wetland, grassland, farmland, and forest ecosystems, respectively. These values represent decreases of 36.4, 114.9, 52.7, and 70.6% from the corresponding VES values. To achieve sustainable development and ecological restoration, China's government must base decisions on NES, not VES, to ensure that they account for the associated costs. Applying the present results in China and elsewhere in the world should increase the net benefits of ecological restoration while still permitting socioeconomic development.
引用
收藏
页码:143 / 148
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cost-benefit analysis of ecological networks assessed through spatial analysis of ecosystem services
    Newton, Adrian C.
    Hodder, Kathy
    Cantarello, Elena
    Perrella, Lorretta
    Birch, Jennifer C.
    Robins, James
    Douglas, Sarah
    Moody, Christopher
    Cordingley, Justine
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, 2012, 49 (03) : 571 - 580
  • [2] COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND PERSONAL SOCIAL SERVICES
    RATCLIFF.D
    [J]. POLICY AND POLITICS, 1974, 2 (03): : 237 - 247
  • [3] COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND WITHDRAWAL OF RAILWAY SERVICES
    ELSE, PK
    HOWE, M
    [J]. JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT ECONOMICS AND POLICY, 1969, 3 (02) : 178 - 194
  • [4] Intergenerational cost-benefit analysis and marine ecosystem restoration
    Sumaila, UR
    [J]. FISH AND FISHERIES, 2004, 5 (04) : 329 - 343
  • [5] A cost-benefit analysis for the economic growth in China
    Wen, Zongguo
    Chen, Jining
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2008, 65 (02) : 356 - 366
  • [6] Cost-benefit analysis in the context of ecosystem services for human well-being: A multidisciplinary critique
    Wegner, Giulia
    Pascual, Unai
    [J]. GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS, 2011, 21 (02): : 492 - 504
  • [7] Using ecosystem services to underpin cost-benefit analysis: Is it a way to protect finite soil resources?
    Greenhalgh, S.
    Samarasinghe, O.
    Curran-Cournane, F.
    Wright, W.
    Brown, P.
    [J]. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES, 2017, 27 : 1 - 14
  • [8] A cost-benefit analysis of ecosystem services from restoring degraded soils to forest ecosystems in the Sahel
    Kabore, Sibiry Albert
    Quillerou, Emmanuelle
    Maiga-Yaleu, Stephanie
    Kaire, Maguette
    Moussa, Ibrahim Bouzou
    Issa, Oumarou Malam
    Hauswirth, Damien
    Nacro, Hassan Bismarck
    [J]. JOURNAL FOR NATURE CONSERVATION, 2024, 81
  • [9] Cost-benefit analysis of poison center phone services
    Michels, J. E.
    Blizzard, J. C.
    Holstege, C. P.
    Richardson, W. H.
    [J]. CLINICAL TOXICOLOGY, 2006, 44 (05): : 726 - 726
  • [10] Cost-benefit analysis of ecosystem modeling to support fisheries management
    Holden, Matthew H.
    Plaganyi, Eva E.
    Fulton, Elizabeth A.
    Campbell, Alexander B.
    Janes, Rachel
    Lovett, Robyn A.
    Wickens, Montana
    Adams, Matthew P.
    Botelho, Larissa Lubiana
    Dichmont, Catherine M.
    Erm, Philip
    Helmstedt, Kate J.
    Heneghan, Ryan F.
    Mendiolar, Manuela
    Richardson, Anthony J.
    Rogers, Jacob G. D.
    Saunders, Kate
    Timms, Liam
    [J]. JOURNAL OF FISH BIOLOGY, 2024, 104 (06) : 1667 - 1674