Journal of Resources and Ecology ›› 2021, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (4): 471-479.DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2021.04.005
• Resource Economy • Previous Articles Next Articles
LIU Moucheng1(), BAI Yunxiao1,2, YANG Lun1,*(
), WANG Bojie1,2
Received:
2021-01-15
Accepted:
2021-03-31
Online:
2021-07-30
Published:
2021-09-30
Contact:
YANG Lun
About author:
LIU Moucheng, E-mail: liumc@igsnrr.ac.cn
Supported by:
LIU Moucheng, BAI Yunxiao, YANG Lun, WANG Bojie. Calculation of Ecological Compensation Standards for the Kuancheng Traditional Chestnut Cultivation System[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2021, 12(4): 471-479.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.jorae.cn/EN/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2021.04.005
Cultivation mode | Chestnut | Chestnut- Maitake | Chestnut- Millet | Chestnut- Chicken | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Output | Chestnut | 5722.7 | 6295.0 | 5150.4 | 5150.4 |
Maitake | - | 35297.5 | - | - | |
Millet | - | - | 3767.4 | - | |
Chicken | - | - | - | 4636.8 | |
Out-of-work | 2240.3 | 0 | 1700.2 | 1700.2 | |
Subtotal | 7963.0 | 41592.5 | 10618.0 | 11487.4 | |
Input | Seeds or chicks | - | 15000.0 | 22.6 | 1008.5 |
Fertilizer and pesticide | 279.0 | 279.0 | 394.9 | 279.0 | |
Tools | 31.7 | 10018.5 | 31.7 | 61.8 | |
Irrigation | 7.7 | 2200.2 | 7.7 | 7.7 | |
Processing fees | - | - | 150.7 | - | |
Labor costs | 2550.2 | 8160.7 | 4335.4 | 3315.3 | |
Subtotal | 2868.6 | 35658.5 | 4943.0 | 4672.3 | |
Income | 5094.4 | 5934.0 | 5675.0 | 6815.0 | |
ROI | 1:2.77 | 1:1.17 | 1:2.15 | 1:2.46 | |
ROI% (%) | 177.6 | 16.6 | 114.8 | 145.9 |
Table 1 Estimated financial income and expenditures for single chestnut cultivation and composite modes (Unit: USD ha-1)
Cultivation mode | Chestnut | Chestnut- Maitake | Chestnut- Millet | Chestnut- Chicken | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Output | Chestnut | 5722.7 | 6295.0 | 5150.4 | 5150.4 |
Maitake | - | 35297.5 | - | - | |
Millet | - | - | 3767.4 | - | |
Chicken | - | - | - | 4636.8 | |
Out-of-work | 2240.3 | 0 | 1700.2 | 1700.2 | |
Subtotal | 7963.0 | 41592.5 | 10618.0 | 11487.4 | |
Input | Seeds or chicks | - | 15000.0 | 22.6 | 1008.5 |
Fertilizer and pesticide | 279.0 | 279.0 | 394.9 | 279.0 | |
Tools | 31.7 | 10018.5 | 31.7 | 61.8 | |
Irrigation | 7.7 | 2200.2 | 7.7 | 7.7 | |
Processing fees | - | - | 150.7 | - | |
Labor costs | 2550.2 | 8160.7 | 4335.4 | 3315.3 | |
Subtotal | 2868.6 | 35658.5 | 4943.0 | 4672.3 | |
Income | 5094.4 | 5934.0 | 5675.0 | 6815.0 | |
ROI | 1:2.77 | 1:1.17 | 1:2.15 | 1:2.46 | |
ROI% (%) | 177.6 | 16.6 | 114.8 | 145.9 |
Production mode | Amount of labor (p d ha-1) | Income difference (USD p-1 d-1) | Opportunity cost (USD ha-1) |
---|---|---|---|
Chestnut | 150 | 6.2 | 927.4 |
Chestnut-Maitake | 480 | 2967.5 | |
Chestnut-Millet | 255 | 1576.5 | |
Chestnut-Chicken | 195 | 1205.6 |
Table 2 Opportunity costs of farmers in four types of chestnut production modes
Production mode | Amount of labor (p d ha-1) | Income difference (USD p-1 d-1) | Opportunity cost (USD ha-1) |
---|---|---|---|
Chestnut | 150 | 6.2 | 927.4 |
Chestnut-Maitake | 480 | 2967.5 | |
Chestnut-Millet | 255 | 1576.5 | |
Chestnut-Chicken | 195 | 1205.6 |
Production mode | Net income | Preference coefficient | Opportunity cost | Net income from conservation | Compensation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chestnut | 5094.4 | 1.2 | 927.4 | 3981.5 | - |
Chestnut-Maitake | 5934.0 | 1.2 | 2967.5 | 2373.0 | 1608.5 |
Chestnut-Millet | 5675.0 | 1.2 | 1576.5 | 3783.2 | 198.3 |
Chestnut-Chicken | 6815.1 | 1.2 | 1205.6 | 5368.4 | 0 |
Table 3 Results of the ecological compensation standard of chestnut agroforestry systems (Unit: USD ha-1)
Production mode | Net income | Preference coefficient | Opportunity cost | Net income from conservation | Compensation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chestnut | 5094.4 | 1.2 | 927.4 | 3981.5 | - |
Chestnut-Maitake | 5934.0 | 1.2 | 2967.5 | 2373.0 | 1608.5 |
Chestnut-Millet | 5675.0 | 1.2 | 1576.5 | 3783.2 | 198.3 |
Chestnut-Chicken | 6815.1 | 1.2 | 1205.6 | 5368.4 | 0 |
[1] |
Deng C, Zhang S G, Lu Y C, et al. 2020. Determining the ecological compensation standard based on forest multifunction evaluation and financial net present value analysis: A case study in southwestern Guangxi, China. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 39(7):730-749.
DOI URL |
[2] | Gao G Z. 2010. Research on Castanea intercropping patterns and effect of Huairou District in Beijing. Diss., Beijing, China: Beijing Forest University. (in Chinese) |
[3] | Gao H, Yao S B. 2014. Research on the ecological compensation standard of Sanjiangyuan area in China. Journal of Yunnan University of Finance and Economics, 30(4):10-14. (in Chinese) |
[4] |
Han M, Yu H Z. 2016. Wetland dynamic and ecological compensation of the Yellow River Delta based on RS. Energy Procedia, 104:129-134.
DOI URL |
[5] | He K, Yan A Q, Wang X, et al. 2020. Hot spots, threads and prospects in the researches of agricultural ecological compensation in China from 1996 to 2018. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 34(4):65-71. (in Chinese) |
[6] |
He K, Zhang J B, Wang X T, et al. 2018. A scientometric review of emerging trends and new developments in agricultural ecological compensation. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(17):16522-16532.
DOI URL |
[7] | Hu Z T. 2016. China grassland eco-compensation mechanism: Empirical research in Inner Mongolia and Gansu. Diss., Beijing, China: China Agricultural University. (in Chinese) |
[8] |
Immerzeel W, Stoorvogel J, Antle J. 2008. Can payments for ecosystem services secure the water tower of Tibet? Agricultural Systems, 96(1-3):52-63.
DOI URL |
[9] | Kong D S. 2017. Research on regional eco-compensation mechanism: A case study of Guizhou. Diss., Beijing, China: China Agricultural University. (in Chinese) |
[10] | Li W H, Liu M C. 2010. Several strategic thoughts on China’s eco-compensation mechanism. Resources Science, 32(5):791-796. (in Chinese) |
[11] | Liu D, Hu Z T, Jin L S, et al. 2019a. Study on compensation rate for fallow program in groundwater over-exploited area based on rural households’ willingness to accept. China Population, Resources and Environment, 29(8):130-139. (in Chinese) |
[12] | Liu J Z, Liu W J, Liu J J, et al. 2006. Chestnut three-dimensional cultivation model and its benefits. Friends of the Fruit Farmer, (1):26-27. (in Chinese) |
[13] |
Liu M C, Lun F, Zhang C Q, et al. 2012. Standards of payments for paddy ecosystem services: Using Hani Terrace as case study. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 20(6):703-709 .. (in Chinese)
DOI URL |
[14] |
Liu M C, Min Q W, Yang L. 2018a. Rice pricing during organic conversion of the Honghe Hani Rice Terrace System in China. Sustainability, 10(1):183. DOI: 10.3390/su10010183.
DOI URL |
[15] |
Liu M C, Yang L, Bai Y Y, et al. 2018b. The impacts of farmers’ livelihood endowments on their participation in eco-compensation policies: Globally important Agricultural Heritage Systems case studies from China. Land Use Policy, 77:231-239.
DOI URL |
[16] |
Liu M C, Zhang D, Li W H. 2010. Evaluation of comprehensive benefit of rice-fish agriculture and rice monocropping—A case study of Qingtian County, Zhejiang Province. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 18(1):164-169. (in Chinese)
DOI URL |
[17] | Liu X, Kong X B, Wu F F, et al. 2019b. Farmers’ fallow willingness and compensation standard of different models—A case study in the Northern Foothills Plain of Taihang Mountain and Heilonggang District. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 26(5):328-333. (in Chinese) |
[18] | Liu Y Q, Zhang H B. 2018. Discussion on farmers’ willingness to accept compensation for ecological services and its influential factors based on CVM method: A case study in Yancheng Rare Bird Nature Reserve. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 34(11):982-987. (in Chinese) |
[19] | Miao L J, Yu Y H, Guan C J, et al. 2014. The application of the opportunity cost method in the determination of marine ecological compensation standard. Ocean Development and Management, 31(5):21-26. (in Chinese) |
[20] |
Pei S, Zhang C X, Liu C L, et al. 2019. Forest ecological compensation standard based on spatial flowing of water services in the upper reaches of Miyun Reservoir, China. Ecosystem Services, 39:100983. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100983.
DOI URL |
[21] | Qin Y H, Kang M Y. 2007. A review of ecological compensation and its improvement measures. Journal of Natural Resources, 22(4):557-567. (in Chinese) |
[22] | Wang L. 2011. Study on the sustainable development of agriculture in Kuancheng County based on energy value analysis. Diss., Beijing, China: Minzu University of China. (in Chinese) |
[23] | Wang Y Q, Chen Y Z. 2016. The impacts of labor migration on farm households’ cropping structure. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 37(2):41-48. (in Chinese) |
[24] | Wei H M, He B, Liang Y, et al. 2014. Effects of different Chinese chestnut-crop intercropping patterns on soil physical and chemical properties. Non-wood Forest Research, 32(3):150-153. (in Chinese) |
[25] | Wu Q, Zhang H P. 2017. Study on forest ecological compensation standard system. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 37(9):99-103. (in Chinese) |
[26] |
Wünscher T, Engel S, Wunder S. 2008. Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: A tool for boosting conservation benefits. Ecological Economics, 65(4):822-833.
DOI URL |
[27] | Xiao J W, Yang Y M. 2017. The residents of Xiangjiang River Basin in Hunan Province are willing to pay the WTP empirical study—Based on CVM conditional value method. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 37(8):139-144. (in Chinese) |
[28] | Xu R H, Jiang X C. 2020. Knowledge graph of foreign marine ecological compensation research: Analysis based on Web of Science. Journal of Ocean University of China (Social Sciences), (1):84-93. (in Chinese) |
[29] | Yang Q, Nan Z B, Chen Q Q, et al. 2020. The research progress of ecological compensation of grasslands in China has progressed. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40(7):2489-2495. (in Chinese) |
[30] | Yin X Q. 2017. Implementation performance and suggestions of grassland eco-compensation policies: Based on Urat Back Banner, Inner Mongolia. Ecological Economy, 33(3):39-45. (in Chinese) |
[31] |
Yu B, Xu L Y, Wang X. 2016. Ecological compensation for hydropower resettlement in a reservoir wetland based on welfare change in Tibet, China. Ecological Engineering, 96:128-136.
DOI URL |
[32] | Yu C G, Zhang P, Guo P J, et al. 2019. Quantitative study on compensation standards for ecological damage to fishery in reclaimed areas: A case study from Zhoushan Coast. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(4):1416-1425. (in Chinese) |
[33] | Yuan Z K, Yuan S B, Yao M, et al. 2005. Law of soil loss at agro-forest ecosystem of Castanea mollissima. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 3(4):115-118. (in Chinese) |
[34] | Zhang T, Huang B. 2005. Study on the ecosystem and economic benefits of chestnut garden in Dabie Mountain. Forest Science and Technology, (7):6-8. (in Chinese) |
[35] | Zhang Y Y, Liu M C, Min Q W, et al. 2015. Calculation of price compensation of agriculture products in the period of organic conversion in Agricultural Heritage Sites—Taking Paddy Rice of Hani Terrace in Honghe County of Yunnan Province as an example. Journal of Natural Resources, 30(3):374-383. (in Chinese) |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||