IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i3p615-d133758.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Method of Evaluating Ecological Compensation Under Different Property Rights and Stages: A Case Study of the Xiaoqing River Basin, China

Author

Listed:
  • Yuheng Yang

    (College of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, Shandong, China)

  • Xi Zhang

    (College of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, Shandong, China)

  • Leran Chang

    (College of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, Shandong, China)

  • Yufei Cheng

    (College of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, Shandong, China)

  • Shengle Cao

    (College of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, Shandong, China)

Abstract

To solve the problem of unitary ecological compensation standards in river basins by scientifically clarifying the compensation for ecological protection investments and for pollution, this research divided ecological environment property relations between the upstream and downstream into three types: downstream ecological compensation for the upstream, upstream ecological compensation for the downstream and sharing the rights of the ecological environment. The various compensation standards were divided into three stages according to the location quotient and pollutant concentration. Calculation and analysis were performed for the ecological compensation of the Xiaoqing River Basin at the junction of Jinan City and Binzhou City of Shandong Province as an example. The results showed that: (1) the downstream compensations for the three stages were 2.139 billion yuan, 2.349 billion yuan and 2.489 billion yuan when only the downstream ecological compensation for the upstream was considered; (2) the compensations for the three stages were 88 million yuan, 107 million yuan, 124 million yuan when only the upstream ecological compensation for the downstream was considered; and (3) the compensations in the three stages were 2.051 billion yuan, 2.242 billion yuan, 2.365 billion yuan when ecological environment rights were shared. Under this property relation, the ecological compensation standard considering water quality and water yield and the goal of ecological environmental protection are clear and the content of compensation is complete, which is easily accepted by all parties.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuheng Yang & Xi Zhang & Leran Chang & Yufei Cheng & Shengle Cao, 2018. "A Method of Evaluating Ecological Compensation Under Different Property Rights and Stages: A Case Study of the Xiaoqing River Basin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:3:p:615-:d:133758
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/3/615/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/3/615/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    2. Guanghui Yu & Di Liu & Xiuying Liao & Ting Wang & Qianjin Tian & Yan Liao, 2017. "Quantitative Research on Regional Ecological Compensation from the Perspective of Carbon-Neutral: The Case of Hunan Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-12, June.
    3. Vatn, Arild, 2010. "An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1245-1252, April.
    4. Matis, James H. & Kiffe, Thomas R. & van der Werf, Wopke & Costamagna, Alejandro C. & Matis, Timothy I. & Grant, William E., 2009. "Population dynamics models based on cumulative density dependent feedback: A link to the logistic growth curve and a test for symmetry using aphid data," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(15), pages 1745-1751.
    5. Weiping Chen & Yanying Bai & Weiling Zhang & Sidan Lyu & Wentao Jiao, 2015. "Perceptions of Different Stakeholders on Reclaimed Water Reuse: The Case of Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    7. Fanbin Kong & Kai Xiong & Ning Zhang, 2014. "Determinants of Farmers’ Willingness to Pay and Its Level for Ecological Compensation of Poyang Lake Wetland, China: A Household-Level Survey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-15, September.
    8. Sha Pei & Gaodi Xie & Chunlan Liu & Changshun Zhang & Shimei Li & Long Chen, 2015. "Dynamic Changes of Water Conservation Service of Typical Ecosystems in China within a Year Based on Data from CERN," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
    10. Yung-Jaan Lee & Chuan-Ming Tung & Piin-Rong Lee & Shih-Chien Lin, 2016. "Personal Water Footprint in Taiwan: A Case Study of Yunlin County," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-12, October.
    11. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    12. Yin, Runsheng & Zhao, Minjuan, 2012. "Ecological restoration programs and payments for ecosystem services as integrated biophysical and socioeconomic processes—China's experience as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 56-65.
    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. Xuefeng Min & Yang Yu & Rui Zhao & Xin Xiong & Sen Du & Qin Mou & Wenjie Xu, 2023. "System Dynamics-Based Game Theoretical Analysis for Watershed Eco-Compensation Design: A Case Study in Tuojiang River, Sichuan Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Quanxi Wang & Ni Wang & Haodong Wang & Yuan Xiu, 2022. "Study on Influencing Factors and Simulation of Watershed Ecological Compensation Based on Evolutionary Game," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-23, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Dongbin Hu & Mei Lin & Yang Chen, 2022. "Can Horizontal Ecological Compensation Improve the Water Environment in Cross-Provincial Watersheds?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Jia He & Yu Wan & Zhonglin Tang & Xiaodong Zhu & Chuanhao Wen, 2019. "A Developed Framework for the Multi-District Ecological Compensation Standards Integrating Ecosystem Service Zoning in an Urban Area in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.
    6. Cailian Hao & Denghua Yan & Mohammed Gedefaw & Tianling Qin & Hao Wang & Zhilei Yu, 2021. "Accounting of Transboundary Ecocompensation Standards Based on Water Quantity Allocation and Water Quality Control Targets," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(6), pages 1731-1756, April.

    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. Cheng Chen & Hannes J. König & Bettina Matzdorf & Lin Zhen, 2015. "The Institutional Challenges of Payment for Ecosystem Service Program in China: A Review of the Effectiveness and Implementation of Sloping Land Conversion Program," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-28, May.
    2. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.
    3. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.
    4. Alain‐Désiré Nimubona & Jean‐Christophe Pereau, 2022. "Negotiating over payments for wetland ecosystem services," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1507-1538, August.
    5. Pham, Thu Thuy & Loft, Lasse & Bennett, Karen & Phuong, Vu Tan & Dung, Le Ngoc & Brunner, Jake, 2015. "Monitoring and evaluation of Payment for Forest Environmental Services in Vietnam: From myth to reality," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 220-229.
    6. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    7. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    8. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    9. Pascual, Unai & Muradian, Roldan & Rodríguez, Luis C. & Duraiappah, Anantha, 2010. "Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: A conceptual approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1237-1244, April.
    10. Chen, Cheng & Matzdorf, Bettina & Meyer, Claas & König, Hannes & Zhen, Lin, 2018. "How socioeconomic and institutional conditions at the household level shape the environmental effectiveness of governmental PES: China’s Sloping Land Conversion Program," SocArXiv jzvqh, Center for Open Science.
    11. Liu, Zhaoyang & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2018. "Meta-Analysis of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services Programmes in Developing Countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 48-61.
    12. Colman, David & Pascual, Unai & Hodge, Ian, 2010. "Evolution of Land Conservation Policy," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188082, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    13. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Windey, Catherine, 2015. "The frontiers of the debate on Payments for Ecosystem Services: a proposal for innovative future research," IOB Discussion Papers 2015.05, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
    14. Sattler, Claudia & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "PES in a nutshell: From definitions and origins to PES in practice—Approaches, design process and innovative aspects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 2-11.
    15. Chu, Long & Quentin Grafton, R. & Keenan, Rodney, 2019. "Increasing Conservation Efficiency While Maintaining Distributive Goals With the Payment for Environmental Services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 202-210.
    16. Mohebalian, Phillip M. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2018. "Design of tropical forest conservation contracts considering risk of deforestation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 451-462.
    17. Jones, Kelly W. & Powlen, Kathryn & Roberts, Ryan & Shinbrot, Xoco, 2020. "Participation in payments for ecosystem services programs in the Global South: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    18. Di Corato, Luca & Dosi, Cesare & Moretto, Michele, 2018. "Multidimensional auctions for long-term procurement contracts with early-exit options: The case of conservation contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(1), pages 368-380.
    19. Mohebalian, Phillip M. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2016. "Additionality and design of forest conservation programs: Insights from Ecuador's Socio Bosque Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 103-114.
    20. Jingxin Gao & Changzan Duan & Jinbo Song & Xianrui Ma & Yuanping Wang, 2023. "Two-Stage and Three-Party Transboundary Watershed Management Based on Valuation Adjustment Mechanism (VAM) Agreement," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 37(9), pages 3343-3375, July.

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:3:p:615-:d:133758. 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.