IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i9p5013-d546344.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity of Ecological Policy Compromises Human Well-Being and Giant Panda Habitat Conservation in Giant Panda National Park

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Zhu

    (Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China
    Chengdu Institute of Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, No. 19A Yuquan Road, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Degang Yang

    (Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China)

Abstract

Identifying how policy, socioeconomic factors, and environmental factors influence changes in human well-being (HWB) and conservation efficiency is important for ecological management and sustainable development, especially in the Giant Panda National Park (GPNP). In this study, we systematically analyzed the differences in the conservation status of the giant panda habitat and changes in HWB over 15 years in the GPNP, which includes six mountain sites, Minshan (MS), Qionglai (QLS), Xiaoxiangling (XXL), Liangshan (LS), Qinling (QL), and Daxiangling (DXL). Redundancy analyses were used to determine the factors contributing (policy, socioeconomic factors, and environmental factors) to HWB and giant panda habitat conservation (HC). In addition, using a structural equation model (SEM), we investigated the relationship between the aforementioned three factors and their direct and indirect effects on HWB and HC. The results indicated that there was spatiotemporal heterogeneity of HWB and HC in our study area. There was an increasing number of plant species as well as an increased number of giant panda in GPNP. Generally, HWB in 2015 showed an increasing trend compared with that in 2000. Socioeconomic factors (23.6%) have the biggest influence on HWB and HC, followed by policy (23.2%) and environmental factors (19.4%). Conservation policy had a significantly positive influence on HWB (0.52), while it negatively influenced HC (−0.15). Socioeconomic factors significantly negatively influenced HWB (−0.38). The formulation and implementation of policies to promote economic development will contribute to the protection of giant pandas and their habitat. Our results provide insight on the conservation status of the giant panda habitat, HWB, and factors influencing them in different mountain sites in the GPNP, as well as having implications for the future management of the GPNP.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Zhu & Degang Yang, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity of Ecological Policy Compromises Human Well-Being and Giant Panda Habitat Conservation in Giant Panda National Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5013-:d:546344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5013/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5013/
    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. Wang, Xuechao & Dong, Xiaobin & Liu, Huiming & Wei, Hejie & Fan, Weiguo & Lu, Nachuan & Xu, Zihan & Ren, Jiahui & Xing, Kaixiong, 2017. "Linking land use change, ecosystem services and human well-being: A case study of the Manas River Basin of Xinjiang, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 113-123.
    3. Yang, Hongbo & Dietz, Thomas & Yang, Wu & Zhang, Jindong & Liu, Jianguo, 2018. "Changes in Human Well-being and Rural Livelihoods Under Natural Disasters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 184-194.
    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. Yuanjie Deng & Lei Jia & Yajun Guo & Hua Li & Shunbo Yao & Liqi Chu & Weinan Lu & Mengyang Hou & Binbin Mo & Yameng Wang & Haiyu Yang & Tongyue Zhang, 2022. "Evaluation of the Ecological Effects of Ecological Restoration Programs: A Case Study of the Sloping Land Conversion Program on the Loess Plateau, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-20, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Manjiang Shi & Qi Cao & Baisong Ran & Lanyan Wei, 2021. "A Conceptual Framework Integrating “Building Back Better” and Post-Earthquake Needs for Recovery and Reconstruction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-16, May.
    4. 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.
    5. repec:gat:wpaper:1509 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Kibria, Abu SMG & Costanza, Robert & Soto, José R, 2022. "Modeling the complex associations of human wellbeing dimensions in a coupled human-natural system: In contexts of marginalized communities," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 466(C).
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Giefer, Madeline M. & An, Li & Chen, Xiaodong, 2021. "Normative, livelihood, and demographic influences on enrollment in a payment for ecosystem services program," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    13. Zhengxu Zhou & Ziyu Jia & Nian Wang & Ming Fang, 2018. "Sustainable Mountain Village Construction Adapted to Livelihood, Topography, and Hydrology: A Case of Dong Villages in Southeast Guizhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-24, December.
    14. Shaofeng Yuan & Congmou Zhu & Lixia Yang & Fenghua Xie, 2019. "Responses of Ecosystem Services to Urbanization-Induced Land Use Changes in Ecologically Sensitive Suburban Areas in Hangzhou, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-14, March.
    15. Wang, Weiwen & Gong, Jian & Wang, Ying & Shen, Yang, 2021. "Exploring the effects of rural site conditions and household livelihood capitals on agricultural land transfers in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    16. Bennett, Michael T., 2008. "China's sloping land conversion program: Institutional innovation or business as usual?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 699-711, May.
    17. Jing Gong & Hongyan Du & Zhi Wang, 2022. "Analysis of the Influences of Ecological Compensation Projects on Transfer Employment of Rural Labor from the Perspective of Capability," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, September.
    18. Qiaoqiao Gong & Piling Sun & Qingguo Liu & Junxiong Mo, 2022. "Topographical Gradient Characteristics of Land-Use Changes in the Agro-Pastoral Ecotone of Northern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.
    19. Xuehong Wang & Jeff Bennett, 2008. "Policy analysis of the Conversion of Cropland to Forest and Grassland Program in China," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 9(2), pages 119-143, June.
    20. Tu, Qin & Mol, Arthur P.J. & Zhang, Lei & Ruben, Ruerd, 2011. "How do trust and property security influence household contributions to public goods?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 499-511.
    21. Nancy Chau & Ravi Kanbur & Yu Qin, 2014. "Do public work schemes deter or encourage outmigration? Empirical evidence from China," IZA Journal of Labor & Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 3(1), pages 1-20, December.

    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:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5013-:d:546344. 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.