Journal of Resources and Ecology ›› 2022, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (3): 501-510.DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2022.03.014

• Some Hot Topics in Ecology and Resources Use (Guest Editors: MIN Qingwen, SHI Peili) • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Basic Principles of Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP) Accounting

ZHANG Linbo1(), HAO Chaozhi2, SONG Yang3, WANG Yiyao4,*(), ZHANG Wentao1,*(), HUANG Yuhua1, LIANG Tian1   

  1. 1. Qingdao Institute of Humanities and Social Science, Shandong University, Qingdao, Shandong 266237, China
    2. School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Qingdao, Shandong 266237, China
    3. School of Life Science, Shandong University, Qingdao, Shandong 266237, China
    4. College of Engineering, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan
  • Received:2021-08-15 Accepted:2021-11-25 Online:2022-05-30 Published:2022-04-18
  • Contact: WANG Yiyao,ZHANG Wentao
  • About author:ZHANG Linbo, E-mail: zhanglb@sdu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    The Projects of Shandong Social Science Planning(21CGLJ19);The Fundamental Research Funds of Shandong University(2020GN107)

Abstract:

Gross ecosystem product (GEP) is the gross value of all ecosystem products and services provided by ecosystems for human society. In practice, GEP measures the ecosystems' contributions to human well-being and constitutes one of the core issues in the construction of ecological civilization systems. Currently, GEP accounting faces a series of problems, such as the inconsistency of accounting subjects and a lack of accounting standards, the result of which is the non-reproducibility and weak applicability of accounting results. In this paper, mainstream models for ecosystem service valuation are summarized in a systematic manner. On this basis, eight basic principles are established for screening accounting indicators: biological productivity, human benefits, production territoriality, current increment, actual effectiveness, physical metrizability, data availability, and harmlessness. Next, a series of ecosystem service subjects are identified that need to be excluded from accounting, and the detailed reasons for their exclusion are presented. Finally, three ideas for improving GEP accounting are offered from the perspectives of the relationship between biological production and human production, the circulation-transport relationship and spatial differences, and harms to the ecosystem carrying capacity. The purpose is to provide positive considerations aimed at promoting the socio-economic applications of accounting and to contribute to the scientific quantification of the values of ecological products.

Key words: gross ecosystem product (GEP), ecosystem services, application of accounting results