IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i11p1888-d1518680.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Review of Value Realization and Rural Revitalization of Eco-Products: Insights for Agroforestry Ecosystem in Karst Desertification Control

Author

Listed:
  • Wanmei Hu

    (School of Karst Science, State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550001, China)

  • Zaike Gu

    (Guizhou Society for Soil and Water Conservation, Guiyang 550002, China
    Guizhou Provincial Soil and Water Conservation Monitoring Station, Guiyang 550002, China)

  • Kangning Xiong

    (School of Karst Science, State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550001, China)

  • Yaoru Lu

    (School of Karst Science, State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550001, China)

  • Zuju Li

    (Guizhou Society for Soil and Water Conservation, Guiyang 550002, China
    Guizhou Provincial Soil and Water Conservation Monitoring Station, Guiyang 550002, China)

  • Min Zhang

    (School of Karst Science, State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550001, China)

  • Liheng You

    (School of Karst Science, State Engineering Technology Institute for Karst Desertification Control, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang 550001, China)

  • Huan Ruan

    (Second Geological Brigade of Hubei Geological Bureau, Enshi 445000, China)

Abstract

Amid global rural decline, the main approach to rural revitalization (RR) is to transform rural ecological resources into development advantages by means of ecological product value realization (EPVR). The fragility of the karst ecological environment limits the development of the karst countryside, and agroforestry is an important way to achieve the ecological protection and economic development of the karst countryside. At present, research on EPVR and RR is rapidly developing. Although there is an increasing number of publications on EPVR and RR separately, the literature on their comprehensive analysis is lacking, and how the karst agroforestry ecosystem can be improved is unclear. The objective of this is to provide an overview of the current research status and challenges of EPVR and RR in order to optimize agroforestry ecosystems in karst desertification control (KDC). This paper systematically analyzed 263 relevant articles on EPVR and RR, and the results are as follows: (1) The number of studies increased exponentially after 2017. The research has primarily focused on the relationship between EPVR and RR, as well as the EPVR and the formation mechanisms of the eco-industry and value accounting of eco-products, which account for 95.53% of the total literature. China has published the most research in this area. At the intercontinental scale, this research is mainly concentrated in East Asia, Europe, and North America. (2) The main progress and landmark achievements in the research on EPVR and RR are summarized. Four key scientific questions that need to be addressed in the future are presented. (3) The above information highlights the three key areas for improving the agroforestry ecosystem in karst desertification control (KDC): the value accounting of eco-products, EPVR, and RR. This study found that EPVR and RR can improve the karst agroforestry ecosystem and further promote rural development, providing significant insights for the overall revitalization of rural areas worldwide and the scientific control of karst desertification.

Suggested Citation

  • Wanmei Hu & Zaike Gu & Kangning Xiong & Yaoru Lu & Zuju Li & Min Zhang & Liheng You & Huan Ruan, 2024. "A Review of Value Realization and Rural Revitalization of Eco-Products: Insights for Agroforestry Ecosystem in Karst Desertification Control," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-25, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1888-:d:1518680
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1888/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1888/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Min Li & Apurbo Sarkar & Yuge Wang & Ahmed Khairul Hasan & Quanxing Meng, 2022. "Evaluating the Impact of Ecological Property Rights to Trigger Farmers’ Investment Behavior—An Example of Confluence Area of Heihe Reservoir, Shaanxi, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, February.
    2. Ntawuruhunga, Donatien & Ngowi, Edwin Estomii & Mangi, Halima Omari & Salanga, Raymond John & Shikuku, Kelvin Mashisia, 2023. "Climate-smart agroforestry systems and practices: A systematic review of what works, what doesn't work, and why," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    3. Zhang, Wei & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Kremen, Claire & Carney, Karen & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 253-260, December.
    4. Tao Cen & Shuping Lin & Qiaoyun Wu, 2022. "How Does Digital Economy Affect Rural Revitalization? The Mediating Effect of Industrial Upgrading," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Sheng, Jichuan & Qiu, Hong & Zhang, Sanfeng, 2019. "Opportunity cost, income structure, and energy structure for landholders participating in payments for ecosystem services: Evidence from Wolong National Nature Reserve, China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 230-238.
    6. Kay, Sonja & Rega, Carlo & Moreno, Gerardo & den Herder, Michael & Palma, João H.N. & Borek, Robert & Crous-Duran, Josep & Freese, Dirk & Giannitsopoulos, Michail & Graves, Anil & Jäger, Mareike & Lam, 2019. "Agroforestry creates carbon sinks whilst enhancing the environment in agricultural landscapes in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 581-593.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dmuchowski, Wojciech & Baczewska-Dąbrowska, Aneta H. & Gworek, Barbara, 2024. "The role of temperate agroforestry in mitigating climate change: A review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    2. Vermunt, D.A. & Wojtynia, N. & Hekkert, M.P. & Van Dijk, J. & Verburg, R. & Verweij, P.A. & Wassen, M. & Runhaar, H., 2022. "Five mechanisms blocking the transition towards ‘nature-inclusive’ agriculture: A systemic analysis of Dutch dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    3. D'Alberto, R. & Targetti, S. & Schaller, L. & Bartolini, F. & Eichhorn, T. & Haltia, E. & Harmanny, K. & Le Gloux, F. & Nikolov, D. & Runge, T. & Vergamini, D. & Viaggi, D., 2024. "A European perspective on acceptability of innovative agri-environment-climate contract solutions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    4. Elisa Morri & Riccardo Santolini, 2021. "Ecosystem Services Valuation for the Sustainable Land Use Management by Nature-Based Solution (NbS) in the Common Agricultural Policy Actions: A Case Study on the Foglia River Basin (Marche Region, It," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, December.
    5. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    6. 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.
    7. Olegas Beriozovas & Dalia Perkumienė & Mindaugas Škėma & Abdellah Saoualih & Larbi Safaa & Marius Aleinikovas, 2024. "Research Advancement in Forest Property Rights: A Thematic Review over Half a Decade Using Natural Language Processing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-28, September.
    8. Hari Wahyu Wijayanto & Kai-An Lo & Hery Toiba & Moh Shadiqur Rahman, 2022. "Does Agroforestry Adoption Affect Subjective Well-Being? Empirical Evidence from Smallholder Farmers in East Java, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-10, August.
    9. Shah, Syed Mahboob & Liu, Gengyuan & Yang, Qing & Casazza, Marco & Agostinho, Feni & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2021. "Sustainability assessment of agriculture production systems in Pakistan: A provincial-scale energy-based evaluation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 455(C).
    10. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Nikolaidis, Nikolaos P. & Giannakis, Georgios V., 2019. "Tools for Sustainable Soil Management: Soil Ecosystem Services, EROI and Economic Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 109-119.
    11. Silva, J.F. & Santos, J.L. & Ribeiro, P.F. & Marta-Pedroso, C. & Magalhães, M.R. & Moreira, F., 2024. "A farming systems approach to assess synergies and trade-offs among ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    12. Ehsan Moradi & Jesús Rodrigo-Comino & Enric Terol & Gaspar Mora-Navarro & Alexandre Marco da Silva & Ioannis N. Daliakopoulos & Hassan Khosravi & Manuel Pulido Fernández & Artemi Cerdà, 2020. "Quantifying Soil Compaction in Persimmon Orchards Using ISUM (Improved Stock Unearthing Method) and Core Sampling Methods," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-18, July.
    13. Ileana Pătru-Stupariu & Andreea Ionescu & Radu Tudor & Alin-Ionuț Pleșoianu & Mioara Clius, 2022. "Online Environment as a Tool to Push Forward the Research: An Example for Landscape Disservices," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-10, February.
    14. Carmen Schwartz & Mostafa Shaaban & Sonoko Dorothea Bellingrath-Kimura & Annette Piorr, 2021. "Participatory Mapping of Demand for Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, November.
    15. Kovacs, Kent F. & Wailes, Eric & West, Grant & Popp, Jennie & Bektemirov, Kuatbay, 2014. "Optimal Spatial-Dynamic Management of Groundwater Conservation and Surface Water Quality with On-Farm Reservoirs," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(4), pages 1-28, November.
    16. Ethan Gordon & Federico Davila & Chris Riedy, 2022. "Transforming landscapes and mindscapes through regenerative agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 809-826, June.
    17. Magrini, Marie-Benoit & Anton, Marc & Cholez, Célia & Corre-Hellou, Guenaelle & Duc, Gérard & Jeuffroy, Marie-Hélène & Meynard, Jean-Marc & Pelzer, Elise & Voisin, Anne-Sophie & Walrand, Stéphane, 2016. "Why are grain-legumes rarely present in cropping systems despite their environmental and nutritional benefits? Analyzing lock-in in the French agrifood system," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 152-162.
    18. Anna M. Hansson & Eja Pedersen & Niklas P. E. Karlsson & Stefan E. B. Weisner, 2023. "Barriers and drivers for sustainable business model innovation based on a radical farmland change scenario," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8083-8106, August.
    19. van Zanten, Boris T. & Zasada, Ingo & Koetse, Mark J. & Ungaro, Fabrizio & Häfner, Kati & Verburg, Peter H., 2016. "A comparative approach to assess the contribution of landscape features to aesthetic and recreational values in agricultural landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 87-98.
    20. Schleyer, Christian & Plieninger, Tobias, 2011. "Identifying obstacles to the design and implementation of payment schemes for ecosystem services provided through farm trees," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115992, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1888-:d:1518680. 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.