IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i7p5913-d1110303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

For the Better Protection of Wetland Resources: Net Value of Ecosystem Services after Protective Development of Xixi Wetland in Hangzhou, China

Author

Listed:
  • Shanfeng Zhang

    (School of Design and Architecture, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310014, China)

  • Zhengjun Cheng

    (School of Design and Architecture, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310014, China)

  • Wenfeng Liang

    (Zhejiang Urban and Rural Planning Design Institute Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 310030, China)

  • Liang Ding

    (School of Design and Architecture, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310014, China)

Abstract

Wetlands are valuable urban resources and can provide various ecosystem services for cities. In order to face the continuous urbanization and market economy environment, relevant government-related management, decision-makers, and stakeholders can make objective and comprehensive value judgments and decide the fate of urban wetland resources. Our quantitative approach to the ecosystem services value provided by wetlands produced clear, direct, and persuasive monetization data. The assessment of the net value of ecosystem services (NES) provides one such method. Considering the transition of the Xixi Wetland into the Xixi National Wetland Park in Hangzhou as an example, we first determined the calculation model of its NES. Second, we utilized the equivalent factor, contingent valuation, travel cost, and benefit transfer methods to calculate its value of ecosystem services (VES), service cost, and NES. The results are shown below. In 2016, the VES of Xixi Wetland park was RMB 16.973 billion, NES was RMB 16.938 billion, and service cost was RMB 34.8158 million. The value of cultural services was the main contributor to NES, which accounted for 99.27% of the total. Real estate appreciation, cultural heritage, and recreational value were the main contributors to its cultural service value. Third, through the scenario comparison, we concluded that the NES of the protective development model (the wetland park mode) adopted by Xixi Wetland was RMB 3.186 billion more than that of the protection model. In other words, the protective development model is more practical and sustainable for protecting the Xixi Wetland. Finally, the limitations and shortcomings of the study are summarized.

Suggested Citation

  • Shanfeng Zhang & Zhengjun Cheng & Wenfeng Liang & Liang Ding, 2023. "For the Better Protection of Wetland Resources: Net Value of Ecosystem Services after Protective Development of Xixi Wetland in Hangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:7:p:5913-:d:1110303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/5913/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/7/5913/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    2. Kling, Catherine L. & Bockstael, Nancy & Hanemann, W. Michael, 1987. "Estimating the Value of Water Quality Improvements in a Recreational Demand Framework," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1594, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    3. William G. Brown & Farid Nawas, 1973. "Impact of Aggregation on the Estimation of Outdoor Recreation Demand Functions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 55(2), pages 246-249.
    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. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Giergiczny, Marek & Kronenberg, Jakub & Tryjanowski, Piotr, 2014. "The economic recreational value of a white stork nesting colony: A case of ‘stork village’ in Poland," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 352-360.
    2. Luís Cruz & Paula Simões & Eduardo Barata, 2014. "Combining Observed and Contingent Travel Behaviour: The Best of Both Worlds?," Notas Económicas, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, issue 40, pages 7-25, December.
    3. Lea Tardieu & Sébastien Roussel & Jean-Michel Salles, 2012. "Recreation demand analysis of natural areas: a revealed-preference approach," Post-Print hal-02746734, HAL.
    4. Schuhmann, Peter W. & Mahon, Robin, 2015. "The valuation of marine ecosystem goods and services in the Caribbean: A literature review and framework for future valuation efforts," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 56-66.
    5. Sébastien Roussel & Jean-Michel Salles & Léa Tardieu, 2012. "Recreation Demand Analysis of the "Sensitive Natural Areas" (Hérault District, France) : A Travel Cost Appraisal using Count Data Models," Working Papers 12-30, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Sep 2012.
    6. Phaneuf, Daniel James, 1997. "Generalized corner solution models in recreation demand," ISU General Staff Papers 1997010108000013022, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    8. Stefan Liehr & Julia Röhrig & Marion Mehring & Thomas Kluge, 2017. "How the Social-Ecological Systems Concept Can Guide Transdisciplinary Research and Implementation: Addressing Water Challenges in Central Northern Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, June.
    9. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    10. Breffle, William S. & Muralidharan, Daya & Donovan, Richard P. & Liu, Fangming & Mukherjee, Amlan & Jin, Yongliang, 2013. "Socioeconomic evaluation of the impact of natural resource stressors on human-use services in the Great Lakes environment: A Lake Michigan case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 152-161.
    11. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Parsons, George R. & Jakus, Paul M. & Tomasi, Ted, 1999. "A Comparison of Welfare Estimates from Four Models for Linking Seasonal Recreational Trips to Multinomial Logit Models of Site Choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 143-157, September.
    13. Karavolias, Joanna & House, Lisa A., "undated". "Impact of Producer and Use of Biotechnology on Consumer Willingness to Pay: Discounts Required for Oranges Produced with Biotechnology," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 259981, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Samira F. Oliveira & Rachel B. Prado & Elaine C. C. Fidalgo & Ana P. D. Turetta & Joyce M. G. Monteiro & Bernadete da C. C. G. Pedreira & Gerson J. Y. Antonio & Renato L. de Assis & Sandro R. A. Oitav, 2024. "Climate Change and Ecosystem Services: A Participatory Approach in a Brazilian Mountainous Region," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 17(5), pages 1-1, September.
    15. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    16. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    17. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    19. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    20. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.

    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:15:y:2023:i:7:p:5913-:d:1110303. 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.