Evaluation of the Degree of the Value Realization of Ecological Products of the Forest Ecological Bank in Shunchang County
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Framework for Assessing the Degree of the Realization of Ecological Product Values in an FEB
2.2.1. Analysis of Ecological Quality Improvement of the FEB in Shunchang County
- (1)
- Economic forest ecological products:
- (2)
- Public goods and services of forests:
2.2.2. Analysis of the Forest Land Premium Effect of the FEB in Shunchang County
- (1)
- Determination of grading units:
- (i)
- Selection of grading factors:
- (ii)
- Quantification and assignment of indicators:
- (iii)
- Methodology for calculating indicator weights:
- (iv)
- Calculation of the classification index:
- (v)
- Determination of forest land classes:
- (2)
- Benchmark valuation of forest land:
2.2.3. Assessment of the Degree of Realization of the Ecological Product Values of the FEB in Shunchang County
3. Results
3.1. Results of Accounting for the Production Value of Forest Ecosystems in Shunchang County
3.2. Analysis of the Forest Land Premium Effect of Shunchang’s FEB
3.2.1. Results of Forest Land Classification
3.2.2. Results of the Assessment of the Baseline Value of Forest Land
3.3. Results of the Realization Degree of the Ecological Product Value of the FEB
4. Discussion
4.1. Promoting the Integrated Development of Forest Ecological Industries
4.2. Innovating Industrial Transformation and Promoting Industrial Integration
4.3. Clarifying and Improving the Registration of Ecological Products
4.4. Strengthening the Monitoring of Ecological Products
4.5. Limitations
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Calders, K.; Adams, J.; Armston, J.; Bartholomeus, H.; Bauwens, S.; Bentley, L.P.; Chave, J.; Danson, F.M.; Demol, M.; Disney, M.; et al. Terrestrial laser scanning in forest ecology: Expanding the horizon. Remote Sens. Environ. 2020, 251, 112102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Groot, R.S.; Matthew, A.W.; Boumans, R.M.J. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol. Econ. 2002, 41, 393–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ouyang, Z.; Song, C.; Zheng, H.; Polasky, S.; **. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 5245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litvinenko, V.S. Digital economy as a factor in the technological development of the mineral sector. Nat. Resour. Res. 2020, 29, 1521–1541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tiwari, A.V.; Bajpai, N.; Singh, D.; Vyas, V. Antecedents of hedonism affecting memorable tourism experience (MTE) leading to revisit intention in tourists. Int. J. Tour. Cities 2022, 8, 588–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.; Wenwu, Z.; Zhijie, Z. The Practice of Nature-based Solutions in China: Ecosystem Product Value Realization. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2023, 100514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Irfan, K.; Muhammad, W.Z. Assessing environmental quality through natural resources, energy resources, and tax revenues. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 89029–89044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kong, F. A better understanding of the role of new energy and green finance to help achieve carbon neutrality goals, with special reference to China. Sci. Prog. 2022, 105, 00368504221086361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Panagiotis, B.; Stathaki, T.; Kamperidou, V. Monitoring of trees’ health condition using a uav equipped with low-cost digital camera. In Proceedings of the ICASSP 2019–2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Brighton, UK, 12–17 May 2019. [Google Scholar]
First-Level Indicators | Secondary Indicators | Index Characteristics | Index Level | Role Assignment |
---|---|---|---|---|
Natural factors | Soil texture | Loam | 1 | 8.75 |
Clay | 2 | 5.5 | ||
Sand | 3 | 2.75 | ||
Soil thickness/cm | >100 | 1 | 9 | |
51~100 | 2 | 7 | ||
31~50 | 3 | 5 | ||
16~30 | 4 | 3 | ||
≤15 | 5 | 1 | ||
Humus thickness/cm | >20 | 1 | 9 | |
15~20 | 2 | 7 | ||
10~15 | 3 | 5 | ||
5~10 | 4 | 3 | ||
≤5 | 5 | 1 | ||
Altitude/m | H ≤ 500 | 1 | 9 | |
500 < H ≤ 800 | 2 | 7 | ||
800 < H ≤ 1000 | 3 | 5 | ||
1000 < H ≤ 1200 | 4 | 3 | ||
H > 1200 | 5 | 1 | ||
Slope/(°) | Flat slope, gentle slope (≤15°) | 1 | 9 | |
Slope (15°~24°) | 2 | 7 | ||
Steep slope (25°~34°) | 3 | 5 | ||
Steep slope (35°~44°) | 4 | 3 | ||
Dangerous slope (≥45°) | 5 | 1 | ||
Aspect | No slope, north slope | 1 | 9 | |
East slope, northeast slope | 2 | 7 | ||
Northwest slope, southeast slope | 3 | 5 | ||
West slope | 4 | 3 | ||
Southwest slope, south slope | 5 | 1 | ||
Slope position | Flat, all slope | 1 | 9 | |
Valley, downhill | 2 | 7 | ||
Middle slope | 3 | 5 | ||
Uphill | 4 | 3 | ||
Spine | 5 | 1 | ||
Location factor | Skidding distance/km | Grade I (≤2) | 1 | 8.75 |
Grade II (2 < S ≤ 4) | 2 | 5.5 | ||
Grade III (4 < S ≤ 6) | 3 | 2.75 | ||
Transportation distance/m | ≤20 | 1 | 9 | |
21~25 | 2 | 7 | ||
26~30 | 3 | 5 | ||
31~35 | 4 | 3 | ||
>35 | 5 | 1 |
Public Goods and Services | Value Quantities (USD) | Physical Quantities | Physical Quantity Unit |
---|---|---|---|
water conservation | 12,563.49 | 1,046,985,084 | m3/a |
soil conservation | 1721.78 | 4482.40 | million tons/a |
air purification | 72.52 | 526,062.55 | kg/a |
carbon sequestration | 37.85 | 714,501.32 | t·CO2/a |
negative oxygen ion release | 5.96 | 1.31 × 1025 | pcs/a |
cooling regulation | 1138.61 | 5,891,172,027 | kW·h/a |
Oleaginous Seeds (Tons) | Celandine Seeds (Tons) | Oil Tea Seeds (Tons) | Brown Flakes (Tons) | Turpentine (Tons) | Dried Bamboo Shoots (Tons) | Thatch (Tons) | Tree Economic Forest (Tons) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
403 | 118 | 1336 | 12 | 47 | 10,365 | 6617 | 6543.39 |
Forest Land Class | Number of Classes | Percent | Area (Hectares) | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1565 | 37.40% | 55,049.33 | 33.89% |
2 | 1066 | 25.30% | 34,393.33 | 21.17% |
3 | 1677 | 32.80% | 62,905.33 | 38.73% |
4 | 160 | 4.50% | 10,088.67 | 6.21% |
Forest Land Class | Number of Classes | Percent | Area (Hectares) | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2564 | 32.02% | 88,718 | 30.53% |
2 | 2386 | 29.80% | 70,671.33 | 24.32% |
3 | 2847 | 35.56% | 120,162.67 | 41.35% |
4 | 210 | 2.62% | 11,062 | 3.81% |
Forest Land Class | Value of State Owned per sq.km | Value of Non-State Owned per sq.km | Difference |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 378.30 | 247.23 | 131.07 |
2 | 360.28 | 235.46 | 124.82 |
3 | 343.13 | 224.25 | 118.88 |
4 | 326.79 | 213.57 | 113.22 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Xu, D.; Wang, Y.; Wu, L.; Zhang, W. Evaluation of the Degree of the Value Realization of Ecological Products of the Forest Ecological Bank in Shunchang County. Forests 2023, 14, 2269. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14112269
Xu D, Wang Y, Wu L, Zhang W. Evaluation of the Degree of the Value Realization of Ecological Products of the Forest Ecological Bank in Shunchang County. Forests. 2023; 14(11):2269. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14112269
Chicago/Turabian StyleXu, Ding, Yajun Wang, Lianbei Wu, and Weimin Zhang. 2023. "Evaluation of the Degree of the Value Realization of Ecological Products of the Forest Ecological Bank in Shunchang County" Forests 14, no. 11: 2269. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14112269