IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i4p2372-d753172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimizing the Compensation Standard of Cultivated Land Protection Based on Ecosystem Services in the Hangzhou Bay Area, China

Author

Listed:
  • Hua Li

    (Department of Land Management, School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Dan Su

    (Department of Land Management, School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Yu Cao

    (Department of Land Management, School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Jiayi Wang

    (Department of Land Management, School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Yu Cao

    (Department of Land Management, School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
    Land Academy for National Development, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

Abstract

The significant positive externality of cultivated land ecosystem services leads to the low comparative benefit of cultivated land utilization and then causes practical problems such as the abandonment and non-agriculturalization of the cultivated land, which poses a threat to China’s food security. The existing protection system only focuses on the quantity requirement and food production service of cultivated land and ignores the multi-function of cultivated land as an ecosystem, resulting in insufficient incentives and poor effect. Therefore, it is necessary to optimize the protection’s economic compensation standard by adding the cultivated land’s ecosystem service value in order to comprehensively assess cultivated land resources and correct for externalities. Taking the area around Hangzhou Bay, where the contradiction between cultivated land protection and economic development is prominent, as an example, the values of six typical cultivated land ecosystem services in 2016 was constructed and calculated, including food production, carbon sequestration and oxygen production, water conservation, soil conservation, biodiversity maintenance, and cultural leisure. Combined with ecosystem services’ values and the quality index, we finally determined the new county-level compensation standard of cultivated land protection in the Hangzhou Bay area. The results show that the value of cultivated land ecosystem services present obvious regional disparities, meaning that there exist significant differences in the sustainable use capacity of cultivated land and the necessity of establishing grading compensation standards in the region. Finally, we analyze the rationality and innovation of the new compensation standard model as well as its role in the protection of cultivated land and look forward to promoting the sustainable use of cultivated land through these new incentives.

Suggested Citation

  • Hua Li & Dan Su & Yu Cao & Jiayi Wang & Yu Cao, 2022. "Optimizing the Compensation Standard of Cultivated Land Protection Based on Ecosystem Services in the Hangzhou Bay Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:4:p:2372-:d:753172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2372/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2372/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    2. Rong Tan & Rongyu Wang & Thomas Sedlin, 2014. "Land-Development Offset Policies in the Quest for Sustainability: What Can China Learn from Germany?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-31, May.
    3. Corbelle-Rico, Eduardo & Sánchez-Fernández, Patricio & López-Iglesias, Edelmiro & Lago-Peñas, Santiago & Da-Rocha, José-María, 2022. "Putting land to work: An evaluation of the economic effects of recultivating abandoned farmland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    4. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    5. B. Delworth Gardner, 1977. "The Economics of Agricultural Land Preservation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 59(5), pages 1027-1036.
    6. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    7. Nan Wang & Jian Zu & Mu Li & Jinyi Zhang & Jinmin Hao, 2020. "Spatial Zoning of Cultivated Land in Shandong Province Based on the Trinity of Quantity, Quality and Ecology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Xie, Hualin & Huang, Yingqian & Choi, Yongrok & Shi, Jiaying, 2021. "Evaluating the sustainable intensification of cultivated land use based on emergy analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    9. Xiao Lu & Yi Qu & Piling Sun & Wei Yu & Wenlong Peng, 2020. "Green Transition of Cultivated Land Use in the Yellow River Basin: A Perspective of Green Utilization Efficiency Evaluation," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-22, November.
    10. Zhang, Wei & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Kremen, Claire & Carney, Karen & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 253-260, December.
    11. Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio & Maldonado, Jorge Higinio & Wunder, Sven & Borda-Almanza, Carlos, 2012. "Heterogeneous users and willingness to pay in an ongoing payment for watershed protection initiative in the Colombian Andes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 126-134.
    12. Hualin Xie & Yanwei Zhang & Yongrok Choi, 2018. "Measuring the Cultivated Land Use Efficiency of the Main Grain-Producing Areas in China under the Constraints of Carbon Emissions and Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-32, June.
    13. Wei Song & Xiangzheng Deng, 2015. "Effects of Urbanization-Induced Cultivated Land Loss on Ecosystem Services in the North China Plain," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-16, June.
    14. Yunxiao Bai & Moucheng Liu & Lun Yang, 2021. "Calculation of Ecological Compensation Standards for Arable Land Based on the Value Flow of Support Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    15. Dan Yu & Dongyan Wang & Wenbo Li & Shuhan Liu & Yuanli Zhu & Wenjun Wu & Yongheng Zhou, 2018. "Decreased Landscape Ecological Security of Peri-Urban Cultivated Land Following Rapid Urbanization: An Impediment to Sustainable Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-16, February.
    16. Claassen, Roger & Cattaneo, Andrea & Johansson, Robert, 2008. "Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs: U.S. experience in theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 737-752, May.
    17. Shan Ma & Scott M. Swinton & Frank Lupi & Christina Jolejole-Foreman, 2012. "Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Payment-for-Environmental-Services Programmes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 604-626, September.
    18. Su, Mo & Guo, Renzhong & Hong, Wuyang, 2019. "Institutional transition and implementation path for cultivated land protection in highly urbanized regions: A case study of Shenzhen, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 493-501.
    19. CAO, Yu & Cao, Yu & Li, Guoyu & Tian, Yuhan & Fang, Xiaoqian & Li, Yan & Tan, Yongzhong, 2020. "Linking ecosystem services trade-offs, bundles and hotspot identification with cropland management in the coastal Hangzhou Bay area of China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    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. Su, Dan & Cao, Yu & Wang, Jiayi & Fang, Xiaoqian & Wu, Qing, 2023. "Toward constructing an eco-account of cultivated land by quantifying the resources flow and eco-asset transfer in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).

    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. Zhen, Huayang & Qiao, Yuhui & Zhao, Haijun & Ju, Xuehai & Zanoli, Raffaele & Waqas, Muhammad Ahmed & Lun, Fei & Knudsen, Marie Trydeman, 2022. "Developing a conceptual model to quantify eco-compensation based on environmental and economic cost-benefit analysis for promoting the ecologically intensified agriculture," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    2. Jie Guo & Tianqi Zhu & Minghao Ou & Fengsong Pei & Xiaoyu Gan & Weixin Ou & Yu Tao, 2018. "A Framework of Payment for Ecosystem Services to Protect Cropland: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Yajuan Chen & Qian Zhang & Wenping Liu & Zhenrong Yu, 2017. "Analyzing Farmers’ Perceptions of Ecosystem Services and PES Schemes within Agricultural Landscapes in Mengyin County, China: Transforming Trade-Offs into Synergies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, August.
    4. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    5. Ina, Porras & Bruce, Alyward & Jeff, Dengel, 2013. "Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries," MPRA Paper 47185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Anna M. Hansson & Eja Pedersen & Niklas P. E. Karlsson & Stefan E. B. Weisner, 2023. "Barriers and drivers for sustainable business model innovation based on a radical farmland change scenario," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8083-8106, August.
    7. Makovníková Jarmila & Pálka Boris & Kološta Stanislav & Flaška Filip & Orságová Katarína & Spišiaková Mária, 2020. "Non-Monetary Assessment and Mapping of the Potential of Agroecosystem Services in Rural Slovakia," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 12(2), pages 257-276, June.
    8. Shuping Zhang & Xuehui Sun & Kun Zhang & Xiaozheng Zhang & Renqing Wang & Jian Liu & Shuping Zhang, 2021. "An Attempt To Identify Cultural Ecosystem Services And Related Land Use Types In Rural Areas Under Urbanization," Environment & Ecosystem Science (EES), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 121-128, September.
    9. Jones, Sarah K. & Boundaogo, Mansour & DeClerck, Fabrice A. & Estrada-Carmona, Natalia & Mirumachi, Naho & Mulligan, Mark, 2019. "Insights into the importance of ecosystem services to human well-being in reservoir landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    10. Sattler, Claudia & Trampnau, Susanne & Schomers, Sarah & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 31-45.
    11. Hengyu Pan & Yong Geng & Ji Han & Cheng Huang & Wenyi Han & Zhuang Miao, 2020. "Emergy Based Decoupling Analysis of Ecosystem Services on Urbanization: A Case of Shanghai, China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    12. Fan, Fan & Henriksen, Christian Bugge & Porter, John, 2016. "Valuation of ecosystem services in organic cereal crop production systems with different management practices in relation to organic matter input," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 117-127.
    13. 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.
    14. Yajuan Wang & Xi Wu & Hongbo Zhu, 2022. "Spatio-Temporal Pattern and Spatial Disequilibrium of Cultivated Land Use Efficiency in China: An Empirical Study Based on 342 Prefecture-Level Cities," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, October.
    15. Xupeng Zhang & Danling Chen & Xinhai Lu & Yifeng Tang & Bin Jiang, 2021. "Interaction between Land Financing Strategy and the Implementation Deviation of Local Governments’ Cultivated Land Protection Policy in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, July.
    16. Pacini, Gaio Cesare & Bruschi, Piero & Ferretti, Lorenzo & Santoni, Margherita & Serafini, Francesco & Gaifami, Tommaso, 2023. "FunBies, a model for integrated assessment of functional biodiversity of weed communities in agro-ecosystem," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 486(C).
    17. Chen, Zhu & Zhang, Anlu & Zhou, Kehao & Huang, Lingxiang, 2021. "Can payment tools substitute for regulatory ones? Estimating the policy preference for agricultural land preservation, Tianjin, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    18. Henghui Xi & Wanglai Cui & Li Cai & Mengyuan Chen & Chenglei Xu, 2021. "Evaluation and Prediction of Ecosystem Service Value in the Zhoushan Islands Based on LUCC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    19. Dang, Yuxuan & Zhao, Zhenting & Kong, Xiangbin & Lei, Ming & Liao, Yubo & Xie, Zhen & Song, Wei, 2023. "Discerning the process of cultivated land governance transition in China since the reform and opening-up-- Based on the multiple streams framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    20. Canales, Elizabeth & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery & Peterson, Jeffrey, 2015. "Estimating farmers’ risk attitudes and risk premiums for the adoption of conservation practices under different contractual arrangements: A stated choice experiment," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205640, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:4:p:2372-:d:753172. 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.