基于生态系统服务流的横向生态补偿标准

IF 7 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Chen Chi , Juqin Shen , Xin Gao , Pei Hu , Ping Yi
{"title":"基于生态系统服务流的横向生态补偿标准","authors":"Chen Chi ,&nbsp;Juqin Shen ,&nbsp;Xin Gao ,&nbsp;Pei Hu ,&nbsp;Ping Yi","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The determination of compensation standards is the core of horizontal ecological compensation (HEC). However, existing studies focused on the ecological value stocks of ecosystem services (ESs) within an administrative area but ignored their spatial mobility when determining standards, so the HEC policies had difficulty in achieving the desired goals. This study takes the upper-middle reaches of the Yangtze River as the study area, adopts the gravity model to calculate the ecosystem services flow (ESF) in the eight provinces of the area, and formulates a HEC standard accounting model to determine the compensation standards. The results show that there are inhomogeneous distributions of ESs supply and demand from 2005 to 2020. The ESs supply tends to decline, then increase, whereas the demand continuously increases. The total ESF volume from the ESs-providing areas (ESPAs) to the ESs-benefiting areas (ESBAs) first increases and then decreases. In 2020, Tibet, Qinghai, Chongqing, and Hunan are the ESPAs, with Qinghai obtaining the highest compensation standard of 308.56 million CNY and accounting for more than 50% of the total. The ESBAs include Sichuan, Yunnan, Hubei, and Jiangxi, among which Sichuan is the main source of HEC funds with payments of 375.79 million CNY. This study can provide theoretical references for improving HEC rationality, as well as resolving the contradictions between environmental protection costs and benefits externalities for large-scale regions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"163 ","pages":"Article 112081"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X24005387/pdfft?md5=98bbacfe9e2cc59780f1d8e9c9014b62&pid=1-s2.0-S1470160X24005387-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Horizontal ecological compensation standards based on ecosystem services flow\",\"authors\":\"Chen Chi ,&nbsp;Juqin Shen ,&nbsp;Xin Gao ,&nbsp;Pei Hu ,&nbsp;Ping Yi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112081\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The determination of compensation standards is the core of horizontal ecological compensation (HEC). However, existing studies focused on the ecological value stocks of ecosystem services (ESs) within an administrative area but ignored their spatial mobility when determining standards, so the HEC policies had difficulty in achieving the desired goals. This study takes the upper-middle reaches of the Yangtze River as the study area, adopts the gravity model to calculate the ecosystem services flow (ESF) in the eight provinces of the area, and formulates a HEC standard accounting model to determine the compensation standards. The results show that there are inhomogeneous distributions of ESs supply and demand from 2005 to 2020. The ESs supply tends to decline, then increase, whereas the demand continuously increases. The total ESF volume from the ESs-providing areas (ESPAs) to the ESs-benefiting areas (ESBAs) first increases and then decreases. In 2020, Tibet, Qinghai, Chongqing, and Hunan are the ESPAs, with Qinghai obtaining the highest compensation standard of 308.56 million CNY and accounting for more than 50% of the total. The ESBAs include Sichuan, Yunnan, Hubei, and Jiangxi, among which Sichuan is the main source of HEC funds with payments of 375.79 million CNY. This study can provide theoretical references for improving HEC rationality, as well as resolving the contradictions between environmental protection costs and benefits externalities for large-scale regions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Indicators\",\"volume\":\"163 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112081\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X24005387/pdfft?md5=98bbacfe9e2cc59780f1d8e9c9014b62&pid=1-s2.0-S1470160X24005387-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Indicators\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X24005387\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X24005387","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

补偿标准的确定是横向生态补偿(HEC)的核心。然而,现有研究在确定补偿标准时,只关注行政区域内生态系统服务的生态价值存量,而忽略了其空间流动性,因此横向生态补偿政策难以达到预期目标。本研究以长江中上游为研究区域,采用重力模型计算该区域八省的生态系统服务流量(ESF),并建立 HEC 标准核算模型,确定补偿标准。结果表明,2005 年至 2020 年,生态系统服务供给和需求存在不均匀分布。环境服务设施的供应量呈先下降后上升的趋势,而需求量则持续上升。从环境服务设施提供地区(ESPAs)到环境服务设施受益地区(ESBAs)的ESF总量先增加后减少。2020 年,西藏、青海、重庆和湖南为ESPA,其中青海获得的补偿标准最高,为 3.0856 亿元人民币,占总量的 50%以上。ESBAs包括四川、云南、湖北和江西,其中四川是 HEC 资金的主要来源地,支付了 3.7579 亿元人民币。本研究可为提高 HEC 的合理性提供理论参考,也可为解决大规模地区环保成本与效益外部性之间的矛盾提供理论依据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Horizontal ecological compensation standards based on ecosystem services flow

The determination of compensation standards is the core of horizontal ecological compensation (HEC). However, existing studies focused on the ecological value stocks of ecosystem services (ESs) within an administrative area but ignored their spatial mobility when determining standards, so the HEC policies had difficulty in achieving the desired goals. This study takes the upper-middle reaches of the Yangtze River as the study area, adopts the gravity model to calculate the ecosystem services flow (ESF) in the eight provinces of the area, and formulates a HEC standard accounting model to determine the compensation standards. The results show that there are inhomogeneous distributions of ESs supply and demand from 2005 to 2020. The ESs supply tends to decline, then increase, whereas the demand continuously increases. The total ESF volume from the ESs-providing areas (ESPAs) to the ESs-benefiting areas (ESBAs) first increases and then decreases. In 2020, Tibet, Qinghai, Chongqing, and Hunan are the ESPAs, with Qinghai obtaining the highest compensation standard of 308.56 million CNY and accounting for more than 50% of the total. The ESBAs include Sichuan, Yunnan, Hubei, and Jiangxi, among which Sichuan is the main source of HEC funds with payments of 375.79 million CNY. This study can provide theoretical references for improving HEC rationality, as well as resolving the contradictions between environmental protection costs and benefits externalities for large-scale regions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Indicators
Ecological Indicators 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1163
审稿时长
78 days
期刊介绍: The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published. • All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices. • New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use. • Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources. • Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators. • Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs. • How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes. • Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators. • Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信