Search

The imbalance of atmospheric, terrestrial and aquatic phosphorus budgets remains a research conundrum and global concern. In this work, the uptake, distribution, bioaccumulation and emission of organophosphate esters (OPEs) by clove trees (Syzygium aromaticum), lemon trees (Citrus limon) and cape jasmine trees (Gardenia jasminoides var. fortuniana) was investigated as conduits for phosphorus transfer or sinks and sources. The objective was to assess the role OPEs in soils play as atmospheric phosphorus sources through plant bioaccumulation and emission. Results demonstrated OPEs in experimental soil plots ranging from 0.01 to 81.0 ng g

Sandstorms and soil erosion are serious problems around the world, but particularly in arid northern China. In response to these problems, the Chinese government has implemented the world's largest shelter forest construction project: the Three North Shelter Forest Program (TNSFP). However, we do not know how successful the program has been, because no one has carried out a comprehensive cost–benefit analysis. To analyze the benefits of the different ecological restoration methods implemented under the TNSFP and provide guidance for future ecological restoration efforts, we developed an improved cost–benefit analysis method that considers as many of the benefits and costs (including opportunity costs) as possible, subject to data availability, thereby clarifying the net benefit after accounting for these costs. We found different net benefits for the restoration types implemented under the TNSFP. The lowest net benefit was for afforestation by planting, at − 6.8 × 103 RMB ha−1 year−1, which was negative due to its high costs; in contrast, the highest net benefit was for fruit tree plantations, at 53.3 × 103 RMB ha−1 year−1, and this resulted from its high product value. There were large differences among regions in China, which indicates that the regional governments should adjust the balance among the ecological restoration measures in their region to account for the unique local conditions and maximize the net benefits of ecological restoration.

Information about the costs and benefits of the land use changes that occur during the implementation of ecological conservation programs is still scarce. To obtain more information on these consequences, it’s necessary to compare the costs and benefits before and after project implementation. We have proposed a modification of the framework for calculating this change in the net benefits of ecological engineering, using implementation of China’s primary conservation programs to demonstrate the framework. We found that the annual net benefits created by the Three North Shelter Forest System Project, Natural Forest Conservation Program, and Grain for Green Program in 2017 were 461.7 × 109, 2930.5 × 109, and 530.1 × 109 RMB, respectively; these are equivalent to net benefits per unit area of 6.5 × 103, 17.6 × 103, and 18.2 × 103 RMB·ha−1·yr−1. These values represent rates of return equal to 29.3, 328.9, and 77.0%, respectively, compared with the costs of these investments. Due to the large differences in socioeconomic conditions and resource endowments among China’s diverse regions, it is necessary to account for these regional differences in the design of ecological restoration strategies to ensure that the programs are tailored to local conditions and produce the maximum net benefit. This approach can help governments find an optimal combination of land use and ecological conservation to improve the economic impacts of their restoration programs.

Large-scale afforestation is a primary tool for combatting desertification and global warming. However, the consequences for future ecosystems are complex and poorly understood. To judge the payback from afforestation in arid regions, we assessed the effects of the Three-North Shelter Forest Program, which is the world’s largest ecological restoration program, in predominantly semi-arid to arid regions in China. Our analysis revealed a net loss of 230.8 × 109 RMB annually for afforestation, suggesting that tree planting is a poor choice in much of northern China. However, establishment of fruit tree plantations and protecting vegetation to allow natural recovery produced large annual benefits (235.5 × 109 RMB and 447.43 × 109 RMB, respectively) due to having the highest product value and lowest restoration cost, respectively. Because the net benefits were negative for artificial afforestation, and some net benefits were negative for some restoration programs in some regions, it is essential to change the proportions of the different restoration methods both to improve the restoration success and ensure the survival of the residents in areas affected by the program.

Forests generate a wide range of ecosystem services that support human well-being and socioeconomic development. However, traditional calculations of the value of these services generally failed to account for their costs. To understand the difference between the value (VES) and the net value (NES) of forest ecosystem services, we used government statistics and data from published papers about the values and costs of these services to calculate the NES of China's forest ecosystems. After accounting for the opportunity costs (water consumption and land rent), the investments in conservation and restoration of forests, and the cost of management to prevent natural disasters, China's forest NES averaged 13.3 × 103 RMB ha−1 year−1, which is only 30.1% of the average VES of 44.2 × 103 RMB ha−1 year−1 calculated using the traditional approach. We also found NES was negative in parts of eastern China because of the region's excessive investments in forests. Accounting for the costs to determine the true (net) value of ecosystem services suggests that this region should reconsider the size and nature of its investments to optimize its land use. Our findings provide a reference for the management of other ecosystems in the world where VES calculations may ignore significant costs of ecological restoration and conservation, resulting in inappropriate investments in ecosystems and improper planning of land use. The methods we describe can help restoration managers identify and solve these problems.

Fruit trees are an important forest resource because they simultaneously produce huge ecological and economic benefits. However, many estimates of these benefits have neglected the costs of providing these services, leading to ineffective planting of these trees and, consequently, reduced economic and ecological benefits. To understand the difference between the total and net benefits of ecosystem services, we used government statistics and data from published papers to calculate the total benefits, costs, and net benefits (= total benefits – costs) of land use of fruit trees in China. The fruit trees had a high value of ecosystem services (VES), at 643.2×109 RMB·yr−1, and a high value of products (VP), at 1399.4×109 RMB·yr−1 in 2014, and the total benefits (VES plus VP) of land use of fruit trees totaled 2042.6×109 RMB·yr−1. After accounting for the costs of establishing, maintaining, and protecting the fruit trees, as well as the opportunity costs of not using the land for other purposes, the net benefits provided by the fruit trees were 955.7×109 RMB·yr−1 (53.2% less than the total benefits). Due to regional differences in the geographic and economic environments, the benefits and costs of the fruit trees differed among China’s regions, leading to large differences in the net benefits from the fruit trees. Because fruit tree cultivation is essential to farmer livelihoods, the government must plan the establishment and management of the fruit trees based on the results of cost–benefit analysis to achieve the win-win goal of combining ecological restoration with poverty alleviation.