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

IF 6.3 2区 经济学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Han Li , Hao Xia
{"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 ,&nbsp;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 ,&nbsp;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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生态区划在增强生物多样性和生态系统服务功能方面得到广泛实施,其环境效应有目可睹。然而,人们对其社会影响知之甚少,特别是在家庭层面。为了缩小这一差距,本文采用“差中差”方法,基于全国生态区划和中国大型两年期面板数据(2011-2019),研究生态区划对居民福利和韧性的长期社会影响及其潜在机制。研究发现,生态区划总体上对居民收入和韧性有正向影响。生态区划引入了限制当地农业和经济活动的工业和土地使用法规。作为回应,家庭通过从事非农业职业和迁移到生态区以外的地区来适应。职业和移民模式的这些变化使家庭能够实现收入来源的多样化,并建立更大的经济复原力。异质性分析进一步表明,生态区划加速了类群分化。与非贫困和生计多样化家庭相比,贫困和纯农业家庭由于适应能力和生计选择有限而陷入困境,其福利和复原力受到负面影响。总体而言,我们的研究结果表明,虽然生态区划可以提高家庭收入和弹性,但它也可能加剧现有的不平等。为确保更具包容性的社会成果,保护政策应纳入支持弱势家庭可持续生计转型的措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.
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 Economics
Ecological Economics 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
5.70%
发文量
313
审稿时长
6 months
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.
×
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