A new framework for eco-compensation funds allocation in China based on multi-attribute decision-making method

A fair and reasonable allocation of compensation funds is key to effectively implementing the eco-compensation (EC) policy. However, as existing studies ignored social stability, technological innovation, and livelihood development, and failed to consider time, cognitive differences, and ambiguities in the subjective judgments of stakeholders on the final decision-making, EC policies had difficulties in achieving the desired goals. This paper constructs an EC funds allocation (ECFA) multi-dimensional index system integrating ecological state, environmental governance, economic development, social equity, technological level, and livelihood security. Furthermore, it incorporates the dimensions of time and expert opinion into the calculation of indicator weights. By introducing the Triangular Fuzzy Number, a new multi-attribute decision-making framework, the “subjective-objective integrated weights + decision-making model”, is proposed to determine an ECFA scheme with high acceptability. The results show that: (1) The proposed ECFA index system, which takes into account society, technology, and people's livelihood, has allocation results among regions that are not too disparate and more acceptable to local governments. (2) The weights of ecological state, environmental management, economic development, social equity, technology level, and livelihood security are 0.28, 0.17, 0.14, 0.15, 0.13, and 0.13, respectively, with the water resource per capita having the greatest impact on ECFA, and the annual rainfall impacts the smallest. (3) ECFA standards for China in 2022 were high in the west and low in the east; Tibet received the highest fund quota (11.28 billion CNY), while Jiangsu was allocated the lowest quota (less than 0.03 billion CNY). (4) Compared to the actual EC funds issued by the central government, based on the decision-making model proposed in this study, 16 regions obtain higher quotas. Tibet has the largest difference between the two allocations (up to 7.59 billion CNY). This paper provides a reference for countries to optimize the design of the ECFA scheme and improve the EC mechanism.