Advertisement

Comprehensive evaluation of ecological compensation effect in the Xiaohong River Basin, China

  • Yu Meng
  • Meng Liu
  • Xinjian GuanEmail author
  • Wenkang Liu
Research Article
  • 38 Downloads

Abstract

Due to the complexity of ecological compensation standards and methods, some problems cannot be expected before compensation, but the evaluation of eco-compensation effect can feedback the implementation effect of eco-compensation policies and provide reference for the improvement of eco-compensation policies. This paper constructed a comprehensive evaluation index system of eco-compensation, which covered social and economic development, pollution discharge and monitoring, and pollution treatment aspects. An eco-compensation comprehensive evaluation model was established, which consisted of the projection pursuit model (PP model) and the chaotic particle swarm optimization algorithm (CPSO algorithm). The Xiaohong River Basin in China was selected as a case study. Before and after the implementation of eco-compensation policy, the compensation effects in the four counties in the basin from 2008 to 2015 were evaluated. The results showed that through the implementation of the basin eco-compensation policies, the comprehensive indicators in the four counties showed an upward trend, which indicated that the eco-compensation of the basin had achieved certain effects. Among them, Xincai was the best, and could provide reference for other counties. The research results can provide new ideas and new methods for the evaluation of eco-compensation effects.

Keywords

Ecological compensation effect Comprehensive evaluation index system Social and economic development Pollution discharge and treatment Projection pursuit model Chaotic particle swarm optimization algorithm 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Zhumadian Water Conservancy Bureau and Statistics Bureau for access to data.

Funding

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51809239 and 51879241) and the National Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2018YFC0407405).

References

  1. Alatas B, Akin E, Ozer B (2009) Chaos embedded particle swarm optimization algorithms. Chaos, Solitons Fractals 40:1715–1734Google Scholar
  2. Bai Y, Xu H, Ling H (2014) Eco-service value evaluation based on eco-economic functional regionalization in a typical basin of northwest arid area, China. Environ Earth Sci 71:3715–3726Google Scholar
  3. Bayat H, Davatgar N, Jalali M (2014) Prediction of CEC using fractal parameters by artificial neural networks. Int Agrophys 28(2):143–152Google Scholar
  4. Costanza R, Andrade F, Antunes P, Den BM, Boersma D (1998) Principles for sustainable governance of the oceans. Science 281:198–199Google Scholar
  5. Dou M, Zhang Y, Li G (2016) Temporal and spatial characteristics of the water pollutant concentration in Huaihe River basin from 2003 to 2012, China. Environ Monit Assess 188:522–540Google Scholar
  6. Engel S, Pagiola S, Wunder S (2008) Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecol Econ 65:663–674Google Scholar
  7. Ezzine-de-Blas D, Wunder S, Ruiz-Perez M, Moreno-Sanchez RP (2016) Global patterns in the implementation of payments for environmental services. PLoS One 11:e0149847.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149847 Google Scholar
  8. Guan X, Liu W, Chen M (2016) Study on the ecological compensation standard for river basin water environment based on total pollutants control. Ecol Indic 69:446–452Google Scholar
  9. Guan X, Liu W, Wang H (2017) Study on the ecological compensation standard for river basin based on a coupling model of TPC-WRV. Water Sci Technol-Water Supply 18(4):1196–1205Google Scholar
  10. Herzog F, Dreier S, Hofer G, Marfurt C, Schupbach B, Spiess M, Walter T (2005) Effect of ecological compensation areas on floristic and breeding bird diversity in Swiss agricultural landscapes. Agric Ecosyst Environ 108(3):189–204Google Scholar
  11. Ingram JC, Wilkie D, Clements T, McNab RB, Nelson F, Baur EH, Sachedina HT, Peterson DD, Foley CAH (2014) Evidence of payments for ecosystem services as a mechanism for supporting biodiversity conservation and rural livelihoods. Ecosyst Serv 7:10–21Google Scholar
  12. Jiang H, Kwong CK, Chen Z, Ysim YC (2012) Chaos particle swarm optimization and T–S fuzzy modeling approaches to constrained predictive control. Expert Syst Appl 39:194–201Google Scholar
  13. Jost F, Gentes I (2014) Payment schemes for environmental services: challenges and pitfalls with respect to effectiveness, efficiency and equity. In: Forests and rural development. Springer, Berlin, pp 241–263Google Scholar
  14. Kent P, Jensen RK, Kongsted A (2014) A comparison of three clustering methods for finding subgroups in MRI, SMS or clinical data: SPSS TwoStep cluster analysis, latent gold and SNOB. BMC Med Res Methodol 14(1):1–14Google Scholar
  15. Koop SHA, Leeuwen CJV (2017) The challenges of water, waste and climate change in cities. Environ Dev Sustain 19:385–418Google Scholar
  16. Kosoy N, Martinez-Tuna M, Muradian R, Martinez-Alier J (2007) Payments for environmental services in watersheds: insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America. Ecol Econ 61:446–455Google Scholar
  17. Lago M, Mysiak J, Gomez CM, Delacamara G, Maziotis A (2015) Defining and assessing economic policy instruments for sustainable water management. Springer International Publishing, ChamGoogle Scholar
  18. Li Y, Li L, Jia T (2012) On establishing the eco-compensation mechanism in China’s financial policy. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu C, Liu W, Lu D, Chen M, Xu M (2017) A study of provincial differences in China’s eco-compensation framework. J Geogr Sci 27(2):240–256Google Scholar
  20. Mcdermott M, Mahanty S, Schreckenberg K (2013) Examining equity: a multidimensional framework for assessing equity in payments for ecosystem services. Environ Sci Pol 33:416–427Google Scholar
  21. Mcintyre O (2015) Benefit-sharing and upstream/downstream cooperation for ecological protection of transboundary waters: opportunities for China as an upstream state. Water Int 40(1):48–70Google Scholar
  22. Meineri E, Deville AS, Gremillet D, Gauthier-Clerc M, Bechet A (2015) Combining correlative and mechanistic habitat suitability models to improve ecological compensation. Biol Rev 90:314–329Google Scholar
  23. Miyoshi T, Nakao K, Ichihashi H, Nagasaka K (1995) Neuro-fuzzy projection pursuit regression. IEEE Computer Society, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  24. Pei W, Fu Q, Liu D, Li T, Cheng K (2016) Assessing agricultural drought vulnerability in the Sanjiang plain based on an improved projection pursuit model. Nat Hazards 82(1):1–19Google Scholar
  25. Plummer ML (2009) Assessing benefit transfer for the valuation of ecosystem services. Front Ecol Environ 1(7):38–45Google Scholar
  26. Poli R, Kennedy J, Blackwell T (2007) Particle swarm optimization. Swarm Intell 1:33–57Google Scholar
  27. Riedl C, Bohmann T, Rosemann M, Krcmar H (2009) Quality management in service ecosystems. Inf Syst E-Bus Manag 7:199–221Google Scholar
  28. Robertson N, Wunder S (2005) Fresh tracks in the forest: assessing incipient payments for environmental services initiatives in Bolivia. CIFOR, BogorGoogle Scholar
  29. Ruan B, Xu F, Zhang C (2008) Review of research and practice of river basin ecological compensation. J Hydraul Eng 39(10):1220–1225 [in Chinese] Google Scholar
  30. Schroter M, Rusch GM, Barton DN, Blumentrath S, Norder B (2014) Ecosystem services and opportunity costs shift spatial priorities for conserving forest biodiversity. PLoS One 9(11):e112557.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112557 Google Scholar
  31. Shang W, Gong Y, Wang Z, Stewardson MJ (2018) Eco-compensation in China: theory, practices and suggestions for the future. J Environ Manag 210:162–170Google Scholar
  32. Shi S, Li H, Lin Q, Dang Z (2009) Study on method for calculating eco-compensation fund sharing in inter-basin water transfer projects. J Hydraul Eng 40(3):268–273 [in Chinese] Google Scholar
  33. Shi Y, Liu J, Shi H, Li H, Li Q (2017) The ecosystem service value as a new eco-efficiency indicator for industrial parks. J Clean Prod 164:597–605Google Scholar
  34. Takatsuka Y, Cullen R, Wilson M, Wratten S (2009) Using stated preference techniques to value four key ecosystem services. Int J Agric Sustain 7(4):279–291Google Scholar
  35. United Nations (2015) World urbanization prospects: the 2015 revision. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Wang H, Dong Z, Xu Y, Ge C (2016) Eco-compensation for watershed services in China. Water Int 41(2):271–289Google Scholar
  37. Xie R, Pang Y, Li Z, Zhang N, Hu F (2013) Eco-compensation in multi-district river networks in North Jiangsu, China. Environ Manag 51(4):874–881Google Scholar
  38. Xu M, Liu X, Liu W (2017) Ecological compensation standard for river basin based on method of pollution treatment cost. Bull Soil Water Conserv 37(4):156–160 [in Chinese] Google Scholar
  39. Yang D, Li G, Cheng G (2007) On the efficiency of chaos optimization algorithms for global optimization. Chaos, Solitons Fractals 34:1366–1375Google Scholar
  40. Zhang C, Dong S (2009) A new water quality assessment model based on projection pursuit technique. J Environ Sci S1:154–157Google Scholar
  41. Zhang N, Bennett MT, Kannan K, Jin L (2009) Payments for ecological services and eco-compensation: practices and innovations in the People’s Republic of China. Asian Development Bank, Mandaluyong CityGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang Q, Lin T, Bennett MT, Jin L (2010) An eco-compensation policy framework for the People’s Republic of China: challenges and oppoutunities. Asian Development Bank, Mandaluyong CityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Water Conservancy and EnvironmentZhengzhou UniversityZhengzhouChina
  2. 2.China Water Resources Beifang Investigation, Design and Research Co. LtdTianjinChina

Personalised recommendations