{"title":"生态分区能促进家庭福利和恢复力吗?一个在中国进行的准自然实验","authors":"Han Li , Hao Xia","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Ecological zoning has been widely implemented to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services, with its environmental effects well-documented. Yet, less is known about their social implications, particularly at the household level. To narrow the gap, this paper employs a difference-in-difference approach to examine the long-term social impacts and underlying mechanisms of ecological zoning on household welfare and resilience based on nationwide ecological zoning designations and large-scale biennial panel data (2011–2019) from China. We find that ecological zoning generally had positive effects on household income and resilience. Ecological zoning introduced industry and land-use regulations that limited local agricultural and economic activities. In response, households adapted by pursuing non-agricultural occupations and migrating to areas outside the ecological zones. These changes in occupation and migration patterns enabled households to diversify their income sources and build greater economic resilience. However, heterogeneity analysis further suggests that ecological zoning accelerated group differentiation. Compared to non-poor and livelihood-diversified households, poverty-stricken and purely agricultural households, constrained by their limited adaptive capacity and livelihood options, remained trapped and experienced negative impacts on their welfare and resilience. Overall, our findings indicate that while ecological zoning can enhance household income and resilience, it may also exacerbate existing inequalities. To ensure more inclusive social outcomes, conservation policies should incorporate measures that support sustainable livelihood transitions of disadvantaged households.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51021,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Economics","volume":"240 ","pages":"Article 108825"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does ecological zoning spur household welfare and resilience? A quasi-natural experiment in China\",\"authors\":\"Han Li , Hao Xia\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108825\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Ecological zoning has been widely implemented to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services, with its environmental effects well-documented. Yet, less is known about their social implications, particularly at the household level. To narrow the gap, this paper employs a difference-in-difference approach to examine the long-term social impacts and underlying mechanisms of ecological zoning on household welfare and resilience based on nationwide ecological zoning designations and large-scale biennial panel data (2011–2019) from China. We find that ecological zoning generally had positive effects on household income and resilience. Ecological zoning introduced industry and land-use regulations that limited local agricultural and economic activities. In response, households adapted by pursuing non-agricultural occupations and migrating to areas outside the ecological zones. These changes in occupation and migration patterns enabled households to diversify their income sources and build greater economic resilience. However, heterogeneity analysis further suggests that ecological zoning accelerated group differentiation. Compared to non-poor and livelihood-diversified households, poverty-stricken and purely agricultural households, constrained by their limited adaptive capacity and livelihood options, remained trapped and experienced negative impacts on their welfare and resilience. Overall, our findings indicate that while ecological zoning can enhance household income and resilience, it may also exacerbate existing inequalities. To ensure more inclusive social outcomes, conservation policies should incorporate measures that support sustainable livelihood transitions of disadvantaged households.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Economics\",\"volume\":\"240 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108825\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800925003088\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800925003088","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Does ecological zoning spur household welfare and resilience? A quasi-natural experiment in China
Ecological zoning has been widely implemented to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services, with its environmental effects well-documented. Yet, less is known about their social implications, particularly at the household level. To narrow the gap, this paper employs a difference-in-difference approach to examine the long-term social impacts and underlying mechanisms of ecological zoning on household welfare and resilience based on nationwide ecological zoning designations and large-scale biennial panel data (2011–2019) from China. We find that ecological zoning generally had positive effects on household income and resilience. Ecological zoning introduced industry and land-use regulations that limited local agricultural and economic activities. In response, households adapted by pursuing non-agricultural occupations and migrating to areas outside the ecological zones. These changes in occupation and migration patterns enabled households to diversify their income sources and build greater economic resilience. However, heterogeneity analysis further suggests that ecological zoning accelerated group differentiation. Compared to non-poor and livelihood-diversified households, poverty-stricken and purely agricultural households, constrained by their limited adaptive capacity and livelihood options, remained trapped and experienced negative impacts on their welfare and resilience. Overall, our findings indicate that while ecological zoning can enhance household income and resilience, it may also exacerbate existing inequalities. To ensure more inclusive social outcomes, conservation policies should incorporate measures that support sustainable livelihood transitions of disadvantaged households.
期刊介绍:
Ecological Economics is concerned with extending and integrating the understanding of the interfaces and interplay between "nature''s household" (ecosystems) and "humanity''s household" (the economy). Ecological economics is an interdisciplinary field defined by a set of concrete problems or challenges related to governing economic activity in a way that promotes human well-being, sustainability, and justice. The journal thus emphasizes critical work that draws on and integrates elements of ecological science, economics, and the analysis of values, behaviors, cultural practices, institutional structures, and societal dynamics. The journal is transdisciplinary in spirit and methodologically open, drawing on the insights offered by a variety of intellectual traditions, and appealing to a diverse readership.
Specific research areas covered include: valuation of natural resources, sustainable agriculture and development, ecologically integrated technology, integrated ecologic-economic modelling at scales from local to regional to global, implications of thermodynamics for economics and ecology, renewable resource management and conservation, critical assessments of the basic assumptions underlying current economic and ecological paradigms and the implications of alternative assumptions, economic and ecological consequences of genetically engineered organisms, and gene pool inventory and management, alternative principles for valuing natural wealth, integrating natural resources and environmental services into national income and wealth accounts, methods of implementing efficient environmental policies, case studies of economic-ecologic conflict or harmony, etc. New issues in this area are rapidly emerging and will find a ready forum in Ecological Economics.