IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i13p7755-d847654.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Grain for Green Project in Contiguous Poverty-Stricken Regions of China: A Nature-Based Solution

Author

Listed:
  • Tingyu Xu

    (Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Environment of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
    Dagangshan National Key Field Observation and Research Station for Forest Ecosystem, Xinyu 338033, China)

  • Xiang Niu

    (Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Environment of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
    Dagangshan National Key Field Observation and Research Station for Forest Ecosystem, Xinyu 338033, China)

  • Bing Wang

    (Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
    Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Environment of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
    Dagangshan National Key Field Observation and Research Station for Forest Ecosystem, Xinyu 338033, China)

Abstract

The Grain for Green Project (GGP) is one of many Nature-based Solutions (NbS), which aims to address the challenge of ecological restoration while providing livelihood security for farmers in poverty-dominated regions. Evaluating the success of such a project can prove difficult. Here, we choose the contiguous poverty-stricken regions (CPSR) of China to study the multiple benefits of the GGP in the context of NbS. We collect ecological-monitoring data, forest-resources data, and socioeconomic data and use them in a distributed method with relevant indicators, to evaluate the ecological benefits of the GGP. Additionally, the socioeconomic benefits are evaluated using questionnaire-based surveys. Our results showed that the ecological benefits of the GGP in the CPSR were 5.6 × 10 11 RMB/a in 2017, with the proportion of each ecosystem’s services being 27.1% (water conservation), 21.1% (biodiversity conservation), 18.4% (purification of the atmospheric environment), 13.1% (soil conservation), 12.9% (carbon sequestration and oxygen release), 5.4% (forest protection), and 1.6% (nutrient accumulation). In terms of socioeconomic benefit, the GGP changed the production methods of farmers, which resulted in income growth, with an average increase of 5100 RMB/a per household. In the context of NbS, ecological conservation, and restoration, the accurate and systematic monitoring of the socioeconomic and ecological benefits will become more important for government decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Tingyu Xu & Xiang Niu & Bing Wang, 2022. "The Grain for Green Project in Contiguous Poverty-Stricken Regions of China: A Nature-Based Solution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-14, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7755-:d:847654
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7755/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7755/
    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. Stijn Temmerman & Patrick Meire & Tjeerd J. Bouma & Peter M. J. Herman & Tom Ysebaert & Huib J. De Vriend, 2013. "Ecosystem-based coastal defence in the face of global change," Nature, Nature, vol. 504(7478), pages 79-83, December.
    3. Jin, Gui & Guo, Baishu & Deng, Xiangzheng, 2020. "Is there a decoupling relationship between CO2 emission reduction and poverty alleviation in China?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    4. Wu, Xutong & Wang, Shuai & Fu, Bojie & Zhao, Yan & Wei, Yongping, 2019. "Pathways from payments for ecosystem services program to socioeconomic outcomes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    5. Li, Hua & Yao, Shunbo & Yin, Runsheng & Liu, Guangquan, 2015. "Assessing the decadal impact of China's sloping land conversion program on household income under enrollment and earning differentiation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 95-103.
    6. Peng, Jian & Hu, Xiaoxu & Wang, Xiaoyu & Meersmans, Jeroen & Liu, Yanxu & Qiu, Sijing, 2019. "Simulating the impact of Grain-for-Green Programme on ecosystem services trade-offs in Northwestern Yunnan, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    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. Bingtao Qin & Yongwei Yu & Liming Ge & Le Yang & Yuanguo Guo, 2022. "Does Eco-Compensation Alleviate Rural Poverty? New Evidence from National Key Ecological Function Areas in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-21, September.
    2. He, Juan & Shi, Xueyi & Fu, Yangjun & Yuan, Ye, 2020. "Evaluation and simulation of the impact of land use change on ecosystem services trade-offs in ecological restoration areas, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    3. Liu, Ping & Yin, Runsheng & Zhao, Minjuan, 2019. "Reformulating China's ecological restoration policies: What can be learned from comparing Chinese and American experiences?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 54-61.
    4. Linjing Ren & Jie Li & Cong Li & Shuzhuo Li & Gretchen C. Daily, 2018. "Does Poverty Matter in Payment for Ecosystem Services Program? Participation in the New Stage Sloping Land Conversion Program," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, June.
    5. Wu, Xutong & Liu, Jianguo & Fu, Bojie & Wang, Shuai & Wei, Yongping, 2021. "Integrating multiple influencing factors in evaluating the socioeconomic effects of payments for ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    6. Lu, Gang & Yin, Runsheng, 2020. "Evaluating the Evaluated Socioeconomic Impacts of China's Sloping Land Conversion Program," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. repec:gat:wpaper:1509 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Bu, Yan & Wang, Erda & Möst, Dominik & Lieberwirth, Martin, 2022. "How population migration affects carbon emissions in China: Factual and counterfactual scenario analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    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. Tingting Zhang & Dan He & Tian Kuang & Ke Chen, 2022. "Effect of Rural Human Settlement Environment around Nature Reserves on Farmers’ Well-Being: A Field Survey Based on 1002 Farmer Households around Six Nature Reserves in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-18, May.
    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. Gerald Schernewski & Lars Niklas Voeckler & Leon Lambrecht & Esther Robbe & Johanna Schumacher, 2022. "Building with Nature—Ecosystem Service Assessment of Coastal-Protection Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-18, November.
    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. Wang, Chao & Zhan, Jinyan & Wang, Huihui & Yang, Zheng & Chu, Xi & Liu, Wei & Teng, Yanmin & Liu, Huizi & Wang, Yifan, 2022. "Multi-group analysis on the mechanism of residents' low-carbon behaviors in Beijing, China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    17. Zhang, Hong & Jin, Gui & Zhang, Zhengyu, 2021. "Coupling system of carbon emission and social economy: A review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    18. Ma, Shuai & Wang, Liang-Jie & Chu, Lei & Jiang, Jiang, 2023. "Determination of ecological restoration patterns based on water security and food security in arid regions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    19. Lam Thi Mai Huynh & Jie Su & Quanli Wang & Lindsay C. Stringer & Adam D. Switzer & Alexandros Gasparatos, 2024. "Meta-analysis indicates better climate adaptation and mitigation performance of hybrid engineering-natural coastal defence measures," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Pérez-Maqueo, Octavio & Martínez, M. Luisa & Cóscatl Nahuacatl, Rosendo, 2017. "Is the protection of beach and dune vegetation compatible with tourism?," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 175-183.
    21. Kajikawa, Yuya & Mejia, Cristian & Wu, Mengjia & Zhang, Yi, 2022. "Academic landscape of Technological Forecasting and Social Change through citation network and topic analyses," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    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:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7755-:d:847654. 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.