IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i16p5631-d394581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying the Impact of the Grain-for-Green Program on Ecosystem Health in the Typical Agro-Pastoral Ecotone: A Case Study in the Xilin Gol League, Inner Mongolia

Author

Listed:
  • Zhaoyi Wang

    (College of the Life and Environmental Science, Minzu University of China, Beijing 100081, China
    Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117570, Singapore)

  • Qianru Yu

    (College of the Life and Environmental Science, Minzu University of China, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Luo Guo

    (College of the Life and Environmental Science, Minzu University of China, Beijing 100081, China)

Abstract

The Green-for-Grain program (GGP) is the largest environmental restoration program in China. It is effective in controlling land desertification but at the same time is highly affected by regional differences. Ecosystem health, as an important indicator of ecosystem sustainability, can effectively assess the ecological impact of the GGP and provide a basis for follow-up actions. As a typical agro-pastoral ecotone along the Great Wall, the Xilin Gol League has seen increasing land-use intensity, thus, it is crucial to understand the ecological conditions of the region in order to deploy a policy of the GGP in accordance with local conditions. In this study, using remote sensing images and social statistics data from 1990–2015, land-use transformation and the turning point of vegetation coverage was determined. Based on the pressure-state-response (PSR) model, an ecological health evaluation system was constructed to quantify the temporal and spatial variation of ecosystem health. Then, the spatial correlation between the changes in forest and grass coverage, as well as the changes in the ecosystem health index (EHI), was evaluated using GeoDa software. The results showed that (1) grassland was the primary land-use/land-cover (LULC) in the Xilin Gol League. Since 2000, land-use transfer types changed significantly and grassland degradation weakened; landscape connectivity increased, and vegetation coverage increased. (2) Over the past 25 years, the ecosystem in the study area was at a subhealthy level and showed a trend toward a healthy level. (3) The spatial correlation between △Area% (change in forest and grass coverage) and △EHI (change in ecosystem health index) was positive between 2000 and 2015 and the correlation gradually increased, indicating that the GGP did enhance the health of the ecosystem of Xilin Gol. This study provided a specific reference for the evaluation of ecosystem health in the agro-pastoral ecotone of China and a theoretical basis for the implementation of sustainable management policies in the study area.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhaoyi Wang & Qianru Yu & Luo Guo, 2020. "Quantifying the Impact of the Grain-for-Green Program on Ecosystem Health in the Typical Agro-Pastoral Ecotone: A Case Study in the Xilin Gol League, Inner Mongolia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:16:p:5631-:d:394581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/16/5631/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/16/5631/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Appelhans, Tim & Detsch, Florian & Nauss, Thomas, 2015. "remote: Empirical Orthogonal Teleconnections in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 65(i10).
    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. Lei, Quanyong & Qi, Chunjie & Ye, Cong & Fang, Guozhu, 2023. "Health shock, the Green for Grain Program and medical expenses: Empirical Evidence on the well-being of Chinese Farmers," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 406-418.

    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.

      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:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:16:p:5631-:d:394581. 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.