Livelihoods as mediators: Unraveling the ecosystem services-human well-being nexus in the desert steppe of inner Mongolia, China

IF 5.6 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Hong Chang , Lei Shi , Yahong Liu , Siyuan Guo , Jianming Niu
{"title":"Livelihoods as mediators: Unraveling the ecosystem services-human well-being nexus in the desert steppe of inner Mongolia, China","authors":"Hong Chang ,&nbsp;Lei Shi ,&nbsp;Yahong Liu ,&nbsp;Siyuan Guo ,&nbsp;Jianming Niu","doi":"10.1016/j.indic.2025.100968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Ecosystem services (ES) and Human well-being (HWB) constitute two fundamental components of sustainable development. However, the intricate interdependence and feedback between them are difficult to quantify. Livelihoods serve as critical mediators between ES and HWB, providing a novel approach to examine their interactions. This study took desert steppe area of Inner Mongolia, China as the study area, by integrating the sustainable livelihood framework, analyzed livelihoods, well-being, and ES at the household scale, revealed the interactions among ES, livelihoods, and HWB at three levels by the path analysis model. Results showed natural and financial capitals were the main constraints on pastoral livelihoods. ES (grass yield, water yield, soil conservation, and carbon storage) increased southward, while firewood supply and carrying capacity of livestock showed spatial heterogeneity. Objective well-being (OWB) remained low despite high subjective well-being (SWB), reflecting material-psychological disparities. Overall, ES enhanced OWB, while livelihood capitals paradoxically degraded ES yet improved OWB. At the subtypes level, regulatory service positively impacted OWB, natural capital negatively affected provisioning and regulatory service. Natural, physical, human, and social capitals improved OWB. At the indicator level, livelihood capitals, such as adult male labor and other factors were identified as critical mediated factors. The study advances ES-HWB theoretical frameworks, offering actionable insights for balancing ecological conservation and pastoral households’ well-being in arid ecosystems.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36171,"journal":{"name":"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators","volume":"28 ","pages":"Article 100968"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665972725003897","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ecosystem services (ES) and Human well-being (HWB) constitute two fundamental components of sustainable development. However, the intricate interdependence and feedback between them are difficult to quantify. Livelihoods serve as critical mediators between ES and HWB, providing a novel approach to examine their interactions. This study took desert steppe area of Inner Mongolia, China as the study area, by integrating the sustainable livelihood framework, analyzed livelihoods, well-being, and ES at the household scale, revealed the interactions among ES, livelihoods, and HWB at three levels by the path analysis model. Results showed natural and financial capitals were the main constraints on pastoral livelihoods. ES (grass yield, water yield, soil conservation, and carbon storage) increased southward, while firewood supply and carrying capacity of livestock showed spatial heterogeneity. Objective well-being (OWB) remained low despite high subjective well-being (SWB), reflecting material-psychological disparities. Overall, ES enhanced OWB, while livelihood capitals paradoxically degraded ES yet improved OWB. At the subtypes level, regulatory service positively impacted OWB, natural capital negatively affected provisioning and regulatory service. Natural, physical, human, and social capitals improved OWB. At the indicator level, livelihood capitals, such as adult male labor and other factors were identified as critical mediated factors. The study advances ES-HWB theoretical frameworks, offering actionable insights for balancing ecological conservation and pastoral households’ well-being in arid ecosystems.
生计作为中介:中国内蒙古荒漠草原生态系统服务与人类福祉关系的揭示
生态系统服务(ES)和人类福祉(HWB)是可持续发展的两个基本组成部分。然而,它们之间错综复杂的相互依赖和反馈是难以量化的。生计是ES和HWB之间的重要中介,为研究它们之间的相互作用提供了一种新的方法。本研究以内蒙古荒漠草原地区为研究区,通过整合可持续生计框架,在家庭尺度上对生计、福祉和生态环境进行分析,并通过路径分析模型揭示生态环境、生计和生态环境在三个层次上的相互作用。结果表明,自然资本和金融资本是制约牧民生计的主要因素。ES(产草量、产水量、水土保持和碳储量)向南增加,而牲畜的薪柴供应和承载能力呈现空间异质性。客观幸福感(OWB)较低,主观幸福感(SWB)较高,反映了物质-心理差异。总体而言,社会服务提高了OWB,而生计资本矛盾地降低了社会服务,却改善了OWB。在亚型水平上,监管服务正向影响企业自有资产,自然资本负向影响供给和监管服务。自然资本、物质资本、人力资本和社会资本改善了企业经营净值。在指标层面,生计资本(如成年男性劳动力)和其他因素被确定为关键的中介因素。该研究提出了ES-HWB的理论框架,为平衡干旱生态系统的生态保护和农户福祉提供了可行的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental and Sustainability Indicators
Environmental and Sustainability Indicators Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.30%
发文量
49
审稿时长
57 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信