IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i12p3252-d239300.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantitative Assessment of Soil Erosion Based on CSLE and the 2010 National Soil Erosion Survey at Regional Scale in Yunnan Province of China

Author

Listed:
  • Guokun Chen

    (Renewable Resources Division, Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Zengxiang Zhang

    (Renewable Resources Division, Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Qiankun Guo

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basins, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing 100048, China
    Research Center of Soil and Water Conservation of the Ministry of Water Resources, Beijing 100048, China)

  • Xiao Wang

    (Renewable Resources Division, Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Qingke Wen

    (Renewable Resources Division, Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

Abstract

Regional soil loss assessment is the critical method of incorporating soil erosion into decision-making associated with land resources management and soil conservation planning. However, data availability has limited its application for mountainous areas. To obtain a clear understanding of soil erosion in Yunnan, a pixel-based estimation was employed to quantify soil erosion rate and the benefits of soil conservation measures based on Chinese Soil Loss Equation (CSLE) and data collected in the national soil erosion survey. Results showed that 38.77% of the land was being eroded at an erosion rate higher than the soil loss tolerance, the average soil erosion rate was found to be 12.46 t∙ha −1 ∙yr −1 , resulting in a total soil loss of 0.47 Gt annually. Higher erosion rates mostly occurred in the downstream areas of the major rivers as compared to upstream areas, especially for the southwest agricultural regions. Rain-fed cropland suffered the most severe soil erosion, with a mean erosion rate of 47.69 t∙ha −1 ∙yr −1 and an erosion ratio of 64.24%. Lands with a permanent cover (forest, shrub, and grassland) were mostly characterized by erosion rates an order of magnitude lower than those from rain-fed cropland, except for erosion from sparse woods, which was noticeable and should not be underestimated. Soil loss from arable land, woodland and grassland accounted for 52.24%, 35.65% and 11.71% of the total soil loss, respectively. We also found significant regional differences in erosion rates and a close relationship between erosion and soil conservation measures adopted. The CSLE estimates did not compare well with qualitative estimates from the National Soil Erosion Database of China (NSED-C) and only 47.77% of the territory fell within the same erosion intensity for the two approaches. However, the CSLE estimates were consistent with the results from a national survey and local assessments under experimental plots. By advocating of soil conservation measures and converting slope cropland into grass/forest and terraced field, policy interventions during 2006–2010 have reduced soil erosion on rain-fed cropland by 20% in soil erosion rate and 32% in total soil loss compared to the local assessments. The quantitative CSLE method provides a reliable estimation, due to the consideration of erosion control measures and is potentially transferable to other mountainous areas as a robust approach for rapid assessment of sheet and rill erosion.

Suggested Citation

  • Guokun Chen & Zengxiang Zhang & Qiankun Guo & Xiao Wang & Qingke Wen, 2019. "Quantitative Assessment of Soil Erosion Based on CSLE and the 2010 National Soil Erosion Survey at Regional Scale in Yunnan Province of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-23, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:12:p:3252-:d:239300
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/12/3252/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/12/3252/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emi Uchida & Jintao Xu & Scott Rozelle, 2005. "Grain for Green: Cost-Effectiveness and Sustainability of China’s Conservation Set-Aside Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    2. Fidele Karamage & Chi Zhang & Felix Ndayisaba & Hua Shao & Alphonse Kayiranga & Xia Fang & Lamek Nahayo & Enan Muhire Nyesheja & Guangjin Tian, 2016. "Extent of Cropland and Related Soil Erosion Risk in Rwanda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-19, June.
    3. David Pimentel & Michael Burgess, 2013. "Soil Erosion Threatens Food Production," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-21, August.
    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. Félicien Majoro & Umaru Garba Wali & Omar Munyaneza & François-Xavier Naramabuye, 2023. "Sustainability Analysis of Soil Erosion Control in Rwanda: Case Study of the Sebeya Watershed," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-22, January.
    2. Félicien Majoro & Umaru Garba Wali, 2022. "Analyzing Various Factors Affecting Farmers’ Willingness to Adopt Soil Erosion Control Measures in the Sebeya Catchment, Rwanda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-16, October.
    3. Hui Wei & Wenwu Zhao & Han Wang, 2021. "Effects of Vegetation Restoration on Soil Erosion on the Loess Plateau: A Case Study in the Ansai Watershed," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-14, June.
    4. Degen Lin & Peijun Shi & Michael Meadows & Huiming Yang & Jing’ai Wang & Gangfeng Zhang & Zhenhua Hu, 2022. "Measuring Compound Soil Erosion by Wind and Water in the Eastern Agro–Pastoral Ecotone of Northern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, May.

    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. Félicien Majoro & Umaru Garba Wali & Omar Munyaneza & François-Xavier Naramabuye, 2023. "Sustainability Analysis of Soil Erosion Control in Rwanda: Case Study of the Sebeya Watershed," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-22, January.
    2. Dawit Samuel Teshome & Mitiku Badasa Moisa & Dessalegn Obsi Gemeda & Songcai You, 2022. "Effect of Land Use-Land Cover Change on Soil Erosion and Sediment Yield in Muger Sub-Basin, Upper Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Jean de Dieu Nambajimana & Xiubin He & Ji Zhou & Meta Francis Justine & Jinlin Li & Dil Khurram & Richard Mind’je & Gratien Nsabimana, 2019. "Land Use Change Impacts on Water Erosion in Rwanda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-23, December.
    4. Albert Poponi Maniraho & Richard Mind’je & Wenjiang Liu & Vincent Nzabarinda & Patient Mindje Kayumba & Lamek Nahayo & Adeline Umugwaneza & Solange Uwamahoro & Lanhai Li, 2021. "Application of the Adapted Approach for Crop Management Factor to Assess Soil Erosion Risk in an Agricultural Area of Rwanda," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-24, October.
    5. GAO Tianming & Anna Ivolga & Vasilii Erokhin, 2018. "Sustainable Rural Development in Northern China: Caught in a Vice between Poverty, Urban Attractions, and Migration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
    6. Liu, Yue & Yao, Shunbo & Lin, Ying, 2018. "Effect of Key Priority Forestry Programs on off-farm employment: Evidence from Chinese rural households," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 24-37.
    7. Folasade Mary OWOADE, 2021. "Effects of Land Use Types on Soil Productivity Parameters: A Case Study of Ogbomoso Agricultural Zone, Southern Guinea Savanna Ecology of Nigeria," Noble International Journal of Scientific Research, Noble Academic Publsiher, vol. 5(4), pages 29-40, December.
    8. repec:gat:wpaper:1509 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Carina Mueller & Christopher West & Mairon G. Bastos Lima & Bob Doherty, 2023. "Demand-Side Actors in Agricultural Supply Chain Sustainability: An Assessment of Motivations for Action, Implementation Challenges, and Research Frontiers," World, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Md. Yamin Kabir & Nasrin Sultana & Md. Abdul Mannan, 2022. "Evaluation Of Nutrient Content Of Composts Made From Water Hyacinth, Kitchen Waste And Manures," Journal of Wastes and Biomass Management (JWBM), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 4(2), pages 96-101, October.
    11. Sylvie Démurger & Haiyuan Wan, 2012. "Payments for ecological restoration and internal migration in China: the sloping land conversion program in Ningxia," IZA Journal of Migration and Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 1(1), pages 1-22, December.
    12. Tiziano Gomiero, 2016. "Soil Degradation, Land Scarcity and Food Security: Reviewing a Complex Challenge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-41, March.
    13. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    14. Katrin Martens & Sebastian Rogga & Jana Zscheischler & Bernd Pölling & Andreas Obersteg & Annette Piorr, 2022. "Classifying New Hybrid Cooperation Models for Short Food-Supply Chains—Providing a Concept for Assessing Sustainability Transformation in the Urban-Rural Nexus," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, April.
    15. Hao Chen & Luuk Fleskens & Simon W. Moolenaar & Coen J. Ritsema & Fei Wang, 2022. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions towards Land Restoration and Its Impacts on Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in the Chinese Loess Plateau," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, November.
    16. Natanael Bolson & Tadeusz Patzek, 2022. "Evaluation of Rwanda’s Energy Resources," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-14, May.
    17. Samaneh Bahrololoum & Mojtaba Mahmood Molaei Kermani & Farzaneh Koohzadi, 2022. "Ecopreneurs and agricultural waste management," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 12(1), pages 47-51, December.
    18. Koiry, Subrata & Huang, Wei, 2023. "Do ecological protection approaches affect total factor productivity change of cropland production in Sweden?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    19. Xueying Yu, 2016. "Central–local conflicts in China’s environmental policy implementation: the case of the sloping land conversion program," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(1), pages 77-96, November.
    20. Xiukang Wang, 2022. "Managing Land Carrying Capacity: Key to Achieving Sustainable Production Systems for Food Security," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, March.
    21. 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.

    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:11:y:2019:i:12:p:3252-:d:239300. 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.