IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i12p2179-d1301967.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Spatio-Temporal Analysis of the Ecological Compensation for Cultivated Land in Northeast China

Author

Listed:
  • Lu Wang

    (School of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Bonoua Faye

    (School of Public Administration and Law, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Quanfeng Li

    (School of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China
    School of Public Administration and Law, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China
    Land Remote Sensing Big Data Technology Innovation Center, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Yunkai Li

    (School of Public Administration and Law, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

Abstract

Ecological compensation for cultivated land is a prominent means to coordinate the protection and utilization of cultivated land ecosystems. This study assessed the ecological compensation for cultivated land, considering both the ecological footprint and value of ecosystem services. We used the ecological footprint model to calculate the ecological footprint and ecological carrying capacity of cultivated land, combined with the value of its ecosystem services, with a focus on estimating its ecological compensation standard, and we analyzed the temporal and spatial distribution characteristics of Northeast China. We found that the ecological footprint and ecological carrying capacity of cultivated land showed a fluctuating growth trend in Northeast China from 2000 to 2020, increasing by 288.83 × 10 5 ha and 131.37 × 10 5 ha, respectively. The spatial distribution of cultivated land’s ecological footprint and ecological carrying capacity showed growth from the southwest to the northeast. The value of its ecosystem services presented an overall trend of growth over the past 20 years, increasing by CNY 13.64 billion, or an increase of 12.47%. In terms of spatial distribution, the trends of the ecological compensation for cultivated land showed obvious differences. This study mainly focused on black soil cultivated land, and its results are helpful for governments in different countries solving similar problems in terms of the ecological compensation for cultivated land. This study will provide a valuable reference to measure the compensation standard scientifically and to provide policy recommendations for sustainable cultivated land’s protection and utilization.

Suggested Citation

  • Lu Wang & Bonoua Faye & Quanfeng Li & Yunkai Li, 2023. "A Spatio-Temporal Analysis of the Ecological Compensation for Cultivated Land in Northeast China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:12:p:2179-:d:1301967
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/12/2179/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/12/2179/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dang, Yuxuan & Zhao, Zhenting & Kong, Xiangbin & Lei, Ming & Liao, Yubo & Xie, Zhen & Song, Wei, 2023. "Discerning the process of cultivated land governance transition in China since the reform and opening-up-- Based on the multiple streams framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    2. Xiaoyong Zhong & Dongyan Guo & Hongyi Li, 2023. "Quantitative Assessment of Horizontal Ecological Compensation for Cultivated Land Based on an Improved Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study of Jiangxi Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-14, March.
    3. Yi, Zhang & Zhou, Wenwu & Razzaq, Asif & Yang, Yao, 2023. "Land resource management and sustainable development: Evidence from China's regional data," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    4. Xiaojie Chen & Jing Wang, 2021. "Quantitatively Determining the Priorities of Regional Ecological Compensation for Cultivated Land in Different Main Functional Areas: A Case Study of Hubei Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Zhenggen Fan & Ji Liu & Hu Yu & Hua Lu & Puwei Zhang, 2022. "Spatial-Temporal Pattern and Influencing Factors of Land Ecological Carrying Capacity in The National Pilot Zones for Ecological Conservation in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Elofsson, Katarina & Hiron, Matthew & Kačergytė, Ineta & Pärt, Tomas, 2023. "Ecological compensation of stochastic wetland biodiversity: National or regional policy schemes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    7. Wackernagel, Mathis & Onisto, Larry & Bello, Patricia & Callejas Linares, Alejandro & Susana Lopez Falfan, Ina & Mendez Garcia, Jesus & Isabel Suarez Guerrero, Ana & Guadalupe Suarez Guerrero, Ma., 1999. "National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 375-390, June.
    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. Ling Li & Xingming Li & Hanghang Fan & Jie Lu & Xiuli Wang & Tianlin Zhai, 2024. "Quantifying and Zoning Ecological Compensation for Cultivated Land in Intensive Agricultural Areas: A Case Study in Henan Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, October.

    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. Ling Li & Xingming Li & Hanghang Fan & Jie Lu & Xiuli Wang & Tianlin Zhai, 2024. "Quantifying and Zoning Ecological Compensation for Cultivated Land in Intensive Agricultural Areas: A Case Study in Henan Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, October.
    2. Alvarez-Herranz, Agustin & Balsalobre-Lorente, Daniel & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Cantos, José María, 2017. "Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 386-397.
    3. Chen, B. & Chen, G.Q., 2007. "Modified ecological footprint accounting and analysis based on embodied exergy--a case study of the Chinese society 1981-2001," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 355-376, March.
    4. Benjamin Leard, 2011. "Joan Martinez-Alier and Ingo Ropke (eds.): Recent developments in ecological economics (2 vols.)," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 161-178, July.
    5. Maria Serena Mancini & Mikel Evans & Katsunori Iha & Carla Danelutti & Alessandro Galli, 2018. "Assessing the Ecological Footprint of Ecotourism Packages: A Methodological Proposition," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-37, June.
    6. Ella Furness & Harry Nelson, 2016. "Are human values and community participation key to climate adaptation? The case of community forest organisations in British Columbia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 243-259, March.
    7. Małgorzata Stachowiak & Jerzy Śleszyński, 2002. "How Big Is Ecological Footprint of the Polish Economy?," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 8.
    8. Kolcava, Dennis & Nguyen, Quynh & Bernauer, Thomas, 2019. "Does trade liberalization lead to environmental burden shifting in the global economy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 98-112.
    9. Jia, Junsong & Deng, Hongbing & Duan, Jing & Zhao, Jingzhu, 2009. "Analysis of the major drivers of the ecological footprint using the STIRPAT model and the PLS method--A case study in Henan Province, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2818-2824, September.
    10. Hua Liu & Dan-Yang Li & Rong Ma & Ming Ma, 2022. "Assessing the Ecological Risks Based on the Three-Dimensional Ecological Footprint Model in Gansu Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    11. Herendeen, Robert A. & Wildermuth, Todd, 2002. "Resource-based sustainability indicators: Chase County, Kansas, as example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 243-257, August.
    12. Fuyuan Wang & Kaiyong Wang, 2017. "Assessing the Effect of Eco-City Practices on Urban Sustainability Using an Extended Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, September.
    13. Aibin Wu & Yanxia Zhao & Yanjie Qin & Xin Liu & Huitao Shen, 2023. "Analysis of Ecological Environment Quality and Its Driving Factors in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-21, May.
    14. Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert & Franco, Carol & Lawn, Philip & Talberth, John & Jackson, Tim & Aylmer, Camille, 2013. "Beyond GDP: Measuring and achieving global genuine progress," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 57-68.
    15. Warren-Rhodes, Kimberley & Koenig, Albert, 2001. "Ecosystem appropriation by Hong Kong and its implications for sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 347-359, December.
    16. Xiaowei Yao & Zhanqi Wang & Hongwei Zhang, 2016. "Dynamic Changes of the Ecological Footprint and Its Component Analysis Response to Land Use in Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, April.
    17. Gao, Chengkang & Zhu, Sulong & An, Nan & Na, Hongming & You, Huan & Gao, Chengbo, 2021. "Comprehensive comparison of multiple renewable power generation methods: A combination analysis of life cycle assessment and ecological footprint," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    18. Comte, Adrien & Sylvie Campagne, C. & Lange, Sabine & Bruzón, Adrián García & Hein, Lars & Santos-Martín, Fernando & Levrel, Harold, 2022. "Ecosystem accounting: Past scientific developments and future challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    19. Debrupa Chakraborty & Joyashree Roy, 2015. "Ecological footprint of paperboard and paper production unit in India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 909-921, August.
    20. York, Richard & Rosa, Eugene A. & Dietz, Thomas, 2003. "STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 351-365, October.

    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:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:12:p:2179-:d:1301967. 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.