Development models matter to the mutual growth of ecosystem services and household incomes in developing rural neighborhoods. (August 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zhang, Kun; Sun, Xuehui; Jin, Yaqi; Liu, Jian; Wang, Renqing; Zhang, Shuping
• Is Part Of: Ecological indicators. Volume 115(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-08
• Subjects: Ecosystem service assessment -- Household income -- Rapid urbanization -- Rural development -- Sustainable development -- Shandong Province; Environmental monitoring -- Periodicals; Environmental management -- Periodicals; Environmental impact analysis -- Periodicals; Environmental risk assessment -- Periodicals; Sustainable development -- Periodicals; 333.71405
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106363
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1470-160X

Abstract

Highlights: The mutual growth of ecosystem services and rural household incomes is achievable. Development models drive ecosystem services by altering land use in rural areas. Rural household incomes can grow in tandem with the value of ecosystem services. Abstract: In the context of rapid urbanization, many rural communities are experiencing dramatic increases in the proportion of construction land, leading to the diminishment of ecosystem services. Conflicting development goals are a primary challenge to sustainable rural development. Increasing household income is a primary rural development concern and harmonizing the relationship between sustaining ecosystem services and increasing household incomes is critical for rural communities. To understand the factors which influence ecosystem services, household income and their mutual growth, an assessment of ecosystem services bound to land-use was carried out in 30 villages in the rapidly developing Shandong Province in eastern China. In this survey the impacts of different land use and development models on the mutual growth of ecosystem services and rural household incomes was analyzed. The results show significant variation in both ecosystem services and household incomes resulting from the implementation of four different development models. The sole ecotourism village in the survey was found to have the highest ecosystem services and household incomes, while ecological protection villages had higher ecosystem services but lower household incomes. Development models may influence ecosystem services by changing land use, and forest cover was the most important influencing factor. It was found that the Type A model, consisting of high forest cover and high marketization of ecosystem services, promoted the mutual growth of ecosystem services and household incomes. These findings suggest that appropriate development models can lead to the harmonious mutual growth of ecosystem services and rural household incomes. We argue that the methods used in this study can help improve rural management in China and elsewhere.