IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i6p725-d1399665.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Land Use and Climate Change on Streamflow: An Assessment Using a Semi-Empirical Model in the Guishui Watershed of North China

Author

Listed:
  • Chunni Gao

    (Jinyun Forest Ecosystem Station, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China
    ELKH-BME Water Research Group, Eötvös Loránd Research Network, 1111 Budapest, Hungary
    Changjiang Institute of Survey, Planning, Design and Research (CISPDR), Wuhan 430010, China)

  • Mark Honti

    (ELKH-BME Water Research Group, Eötvös Loránd Research Network, 1111 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Jinhua Cheng

    (Jinyun Forest Ecosystem Station, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Tao Wang

    (Jinyun Forest Ecosystem Station, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

Abstract

Land-use change may significantly influence streamflow. The semi-empirical model PhosFate was used to analyze the impact of land use and climate change on streamflow by choosing the Guishui watershed as a pilot site and then expanding, applying it to all of North China. The Guishui watershed (North Beijing, China) has experienced a dramatic decline in its streamflow in recent decades. Parallel to this, significant land-use change has happened in this area; afforestation programs have increased forest cover from 41% (1980) to 59% (2013) and a similar increase in forest cover can also be observed in North China. Managing flow decline requires separating climatic and direct human-influenced effects. The results showed the following: (1) Afforestation is a major factor that decreased total flow in the Guishui watershed from 1996 to 2014; total flow increased by around 24% more than the actual dataset in the constant scenario (no afforestation) and decreased by 5% more than the actual dataset in the forest scenario (all agriculture land use transferred to forests). (2) When forest coverage increases, the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau and the Loess Plateau are the most sensitive areas regarding total flow in North China; the total flow change rate increased by up to 25% in these two areas when land use shifted from sparse vegetation to mixed forests. After analyzing the contributions of these two factors, we formulated recommendations on future afforestation practices for North China. In the central–north and northwest districts, the annual precipitation is under 520 mm and 790 mm, respectively, and the practice of afforestation should be more carefully planned to prevent severe damage to streams. This research also proved that the PhosFate model can be used in North China, which would be a practical tool for watershed management.

Suggested Citation

  • Chunni Gao & Mark Honti & Jinhua Cheng & Tao Wang, 2024. "Impact of Land Use and Climate Change on Streamflow: An Assessment Using a Semi-Empirical Model in the Guishui Watershed of North China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:725-:d:1399665
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/6/725/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/6/725/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2000. "Climate Change and Forest Sinks: Factors Affecting the Costs of Carbon Sequestration," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 211-235, November.
    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. Robert N. Stavins, 1998. "A Methodological Investigation of the Costs of Carbon Sequestration," Journal of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 231-277, November.
    2. Nijnik, Maria & Pajot, Guillaume & Moffat, Andy J. & Slee, Bill, 2013. "An economic analysis of the establishment of forest plantations in the United Kingdom to mitigate climatic change," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 34-42.
    3. Couture, Stéphane & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Forest management under fire risk when forest carbon sequestration has value," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2002-2011, September.
    4. Jung, Martina, 2003. "The Role of Forestry Sinks in the CDM - Analysing the Effects of Policy Decisions on the Carbon Market," Discussion Paper Series 26293, Hamburg Institute of International Economics.
    5. Dwivedi, Puneet & Bailis, Robert & Stainback, Andrew & Carter, Douglas R., 2012. "Impact of payments for carbon sequestered in wood products and avoided carbon emissions on the profitability of NIPF landowners in the US South," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 63-69.
    6. Michetti, Melania & Parrado, Ramiro, 2012. "Improving Land-use modelling within CGE to assess Forest-based Mitigation Potential and Costs," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 122862, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    7. Guangyue Xu & Peter Schwarz & Xiaojing Shi & Nathan Duma, 2023. "Scenario Paths of Developing Forest Carbon Sinks for China to Achieve Carbon Neutrality," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, June.
    8. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Eagle, Alison J. & Manley, James G. & Smolak, Tara M., 2004. "How Costly Are Carbon Offsets? A Meta-Analysis Of Carbon Forest Sinks," Working Papers 18166, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    9. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Sohngen, Brent, 2007. "Economics of Forest Ecosystem Carbon Sinks: A Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 237-269, September.
    10. Jaeger, William K. & Egelkraut, Thorsten M., 2011. "Biofuel economics in a setting of multiple objectives and unintended consequences," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4320-4333.
    11. Yong Jiang & Won Koo, 2014. "The Short-Term Impact of a Domestic Cap-and-Trade Climate Policy on Local Agriculture: A Policy Simulation with Producer Behavior," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(4), pages 511-537, August.
    12. Hunt, Colin, 2008. "Economy and ecology of emerging markets and credits for bio-sequestered carbon on private land in tropical Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 309-318, June.
    13. de Cara, Stephane & Rozakis, Stelios, 2004. "Carbon sequestration through the planting of multi-annual energy crops: A dynamic and spatial assessment," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 1-17, January.
    14. Renato Rosa & Clara Costa Duarte & Maria A. Cunha-e-Sá, 2009. "The Role of Forests as Carbon Sinks: Land-Use and Carbon Accounting," Working Papers 2009.61, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Latta, Gregory S. & Adams, Darius M. & Bell, Kathleen P. & Kline, Jeffrey D., 2016. "Evaluating land-use and private forest management responses to a potential forest carbon offset sales program in western Oregon (USA)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-8.
    16. Kerchner, Charles D. & Keeton, William S., 2015. "California's regulatory forest carbon market: Viability for northeast landowners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 70-81.
    17. Murphy, Rose & Gross, Dominique M. & Jaccard, Mark, 2018. "Use of revealed preference data to estimate the costs of forest carbon sequestration in Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 41-50.
    18. Wu Yang & Zhang Min & Mingxing Yang & Jun Yan, 2022. "Exploration of the Implementation of Carbon Neutralization in the Field of Natural Resources under the Background of Sustainable Development—An Overview," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-28, October.
    19. Suzi Kerr & Emma Brunton & Ralph Chapman, 2004. "Policy to Encourage Carbon Sequestration in Plantation Forests," Working Papers 04_05, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    20. Robert N. Stavins, 1999. "The Costs of Carbon Sequestration: A Revealed-Preference Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 994-1009, September.

    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:6:p:725-:d:1399665. 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.