Full Text:   <718>

Summary:  <240>

CLC number: Q14

On-line Access: 2018-03-05

Received: 2016-10-08

Revision Accepted: 2017-05-23

Crosschecked: 2018-01-31

Cited: 0

Clicked: 2097

Citations:  Bibtex RefMan EndNote GB/T7714

 ORCID:

Ye-cui Hu

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6747-2163

-   Go to

Article info.
Open peer comments

Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A 2018 Vol.19 No.3 P.240-254

http://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.A1600669


Environmental impact assessment of ecological migration in China: a survey of immigrant resettlement regions


Author(s):  Ye-cui Hu, Wei Zhou, Tao Yuan

Affiliation(s):  School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China; more

Corresponding email(s):   huyc@163.com

Key Words:  Ecological migration, Environmental impact, Ecological footprint (EF), Immigration area, China


Share this article to: More <<< Previous Article|

Ye-cui Hu, Wei Zhou, Tao Yuan. Environmental impact assessment of ecological migration in China: a survey of immigrant resettlement regions[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University Science A, 2018, 19(3): 240-254.

@article{title="Environmental impact assessment of ecological migration in China: a survey of immigrant resettlement regions",
author="Ye-cui Hu, Wei Zhou, Tao Yuan",
journal="Journal of Zhejiang University Science A",
volume="19",
number="3",
pages="240-254",
year="2018",
publisher="Zhejiang University Press & Springer",
doi="10.1631/jzus.A1600669"
}

%0 Journal Article
%T Environmental impact assessment of ecological migration in China: a survey of immigrant resettlement regions
%A Ye-cui Hu
%A Wei Zhou
%A Tao Yuan
%J Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A
%V 19
%N 3
%P 240-254
%@ 1673-565X
%D 2018
%I Zhejiang University Press & Springer
%DOI 10.1631/jzus.A1600669

TY - JOUR
T1 - Environmental impact assessment of ecological migration in China: a survey of immigrant resettlement regions
A1 - Ye-cui Hu
A1 - Wei Zhou
A1 - Tao Yuan
J0 - Journal of Zhejiang University Science A
VL - 19
IS - 3
SP - 240
EP - 254
%@ 1673-565X
Y1 - 2018
PB - Zhejiang University Press & Springer
ER -
DOI - 10.1631/jzus.A1600669


Abstract: 
Implementation of ecological migration (eco-migration) policies may improve the fragile ecological environment of emigration areas; however, it also places enormous pressure on the human-environment systems in immigrant resettlement regions. Via the application of participatory rural appraisal (PRA) methods, ecological footprint (EF), and stochastic impacts by regression on population, affluence, and technology (STIRPAT) models, 21 villages of Huanjiang County in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, china were used in this research as a case study area for the environmental appraisal of eco-migration policies in immigrant resettlement regions. Results show: (1) In the past 20 years of implementing eco-migration policies, the EF per capita constantly increased, the biocapacity (BC) per capita constantly decreased, and the ecological deficit gradually increased, indicating an extremely negative impact of eco-migration projects on the ecological environment in the immigration areas. (2) Cropland and forest land are the most important components of the per-capita EF. The per-capita EF of cropland experienced overall a first increasing and then decreasing trend, and the per-capita EF of forest land constantly increased and showed the most rapid increase among all types of EF in the last two decades. (3) The proportion of per-capita EF of different types of productive land is in the order of forest land > cropland > carbon uptake land > built-up land > grazing land from high to low, and this is a significant change from the original order of cropland > forest land > carbon uptake land > grazing land > built-up land. (4) Because of unequal possession of ecologically productive resources, the overall per-capita EF, overall per-capita BC, overall per-capita ecological deficit of productive land use by migrants, and their component values of different types of productive land use are all lower than the corresponding values of the natives. The ecological deficit of natives is more severe than that of migrants. (5) Whereas population growth and overexploitation of resources lead directly to the increased pressure on the ecological environment in the immigration areas, increasing nonagricultural income and improving the consumption structure can reduce the dependence of farmers on the land, thus inhibiting the increase of EF.

The study provided an interesting field survey on impacts of ecological immigration on environment in China. The immigration situation in China is rather different from other countries due to its specific policy and natural background. The study is valuable for a better understanding on the occurrence and consequent impacts on environment of ecological immigration in China.

生态移民的环境影响研究--以广西移民迁入区为例

目的:生态移民在改善迁出区生态环境的同时,也改变了迁入区资源环境配置格局.客观评价大量生态移民涌入给迁入区造成的生态系统压力,对生态移民政策的可持续推进及新形式下解决脱贫和生态环境保护问题有重要意义.
创新点:从微观农户尺度,采用生产性生态足迹评价移民迁入区生态移民工程的生态环境影响.
方法:1. 基于参与式农户调查方法,获取移民迁入区移民和当地驻民的生态足迹账户、土地利用及农户家庭等基本信息; 2. 采用生产性生态足迹评价移民迁入区生态移民工程的生态环境影响; 3. 构建"STIRPAT"模型,分析移民迁入区生态环境变化的影响因素.
结论:1. 大规模移民的迁入对移民安置区的生态环境造成持续压力; 2. 人口规模扩大、荒草地开垦以及消费需求增长是造成移民迁入区生态环境压力的主要原因; 3. 合理测算移民迁入区人口承载力、促进农户生计转型和增加农户生计多样化可以有效缓解生态移民对生态环境的巨大压力.

关键词:生态移民;生态足迹;移民迁入区;广西

Darkslateblue:Affiliate; Royal Blue:Author; Turquoise:Article

Reference

[1]Alix-Garcia JM, Mcintosh C, Sims KRE, et al., 2010. The ecological footprint of poverty alleviation: evidence from Mexico’s Oportunidades program. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 95(2):417-435.

[2]Bachour B, Dong W, 2006. Socioeconomic impact of urban redevelopment in inner city of Ningbo. Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE A, 7(8):1386-1395.

[3]Barbier EB, 2010. Poverty, development, and environment. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 15(12):635-660.

[4]Bates DC, 2002. Environmental refugees classifying human migrations caused by environmental change. Population and Environment, 23(5):465-477.

[5]Becchetti L, Rossetti F, Castriota S, 2010. Real household income and attitude toward immigrants: an empirical analysis. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 39(1):81-88.

[6]Borucke M, Moore D, Cranston G, et al., 2013. Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: the national footprint accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecological Indicators, 24: 518-533.

[7]Cavendish W, 2000. Empirical regularities in the poverty-environment relationship of rural households: evidence from Zimbabwe. World Development, 28(11):1979-2003.

[8]Chang B, Xiong L, 2005. Ecological footprint analysis based on RS and GIS in arid land. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 15(1):44-52.

[9]Chen Y, Ge Y, 2015. Spatial point pattern analysis on the villages in China’s poverty-stricken areas. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 27:98-105.

[10]CPAD (The State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development), 2011. The Outline for Development Oriented Poverty Reduction for China’s Rural Areas (2011-2020). State Council, China.

[11]Duraiappah AK, 1998. Poverty and environmental degradation: a review and analysis of the nexus. World Development, 26(12):2169-2179.

[12]Ehrlich PR, Holdrens JP, 1971. The impact of population growth. Science, 171(3977):1212-1217.

[13]Ezra M, 2003. Environmental vulnerability, rural poverty, and migration in Ethiopia: a contextual analysis. Genus, 59(2):63-91.

[14]Ferng JJ, 2009. Applying input–output analysis to scenario analysis of ecological footprints. Ecological Economics, 69(2):345-354.

[15]Ferrol-Schulte D, Wolff M, Ferse S, et al., 2013. Sustainable livelihoods approach in tropical coastal and marine social–ecological systems: a review. Marine Policy, 42(14):253-258.

[16]Finco MVA, 2009. Poverty-environment trap: a non linear probit model applied to rural areas in the north of Brazil. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Science, 5(4):533-539.

[17]Fox J, Vogler JB, Poffenberger M, 2009. Understanding changes in land and forest resource management systems: Ratanakiri, Cambodia. Tonan Ajia Kenkyu, 47(3):309-329.

[18]Fu W, Zhao JQ, Du GZ, 2013. Ecological safety analysis of the northwest region of China based on the ecological footprint and environmental Kuznets curve. China Population Resources and Environment, 23(5):107-110 (in Chinese).

[19]González-Vallejo P, Marrero M, Solis-Guzman J, 2015. The ecological footprint of dwelling construction in Spain. Ecological Indicators, 52:75-84.

[20]Guo HW, Yan LJ, 2016. The application of city development index and ecological footprint in the assessment of sustainable development of China’s municipalities. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 36(14):1-10.

[21]Hao HG, Zhang JP, Li XB, et al., 2015. Impact of livelihood diversification of rural households on their ecological footprint in agro-pastoral areas of northern China. Journal of Arid Land, 7(5):653-664.

[22]Hou CX, Zhao XY, Wen Y, et al., 2015. Spatial disparities and the peasant household consumption on environment: based on the survey data of Zhangye city in 2010. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(6):2013-2019.

[23]Hrabovszky JP, Miyan K, 1987. Population growth and land use in Nepal ‘the great turnabout’. Mountain Research & Development, 7(3):264-270.

[24]Huang ZH, Lu BX, Chen XX, 2001. Migration of surplus agricultural labor in the process of economic transition. Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE, 2(2):220-226.

[25]Li P, Sun ZB, Fang JP, et al., 2015. The sustainable development assessment in Tibet based on the dynamic analysis of ecological footprint. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 29(6):327-331 (in Chinese).

[26]Li Z, Ju MT, Liu W, et al., 2007. Dynamic measurement of ecological footprint of energy resources and its economic efficiency in last ten years, China. Resources Science, 29(6):54-60 (in Chinese).

[27]Liang LT, Zhai B, 2015. Environmental impacts of farmer households’ land use behaviors via the methods of PRA and LCA. China Land Science, 29(5):84-92 (in Chinese).

[28]Lin D, Hanscom L, Martindill J, et al., 2016. Working Guidebook to the National Footprint Accounts, 2016 Edition. Global Footprint Network, Oakland, USA.

[29]Long AH, Xu ZM, Wang XH, et al., 2006. Impacts of population, affluence and technology on water footprint in China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 26(10):3358-3367.

[30]Morrissey JW, 2013. Understanding the relationship between environmental change and migration: the development of an effects framework based on the case of northern Ethiopia. Global Environmental Change, 23(6):1501-1510.

[31]Mostafa MM, 2010. A Bayesian approach to analyzing the ecological footprint of 140 nations. Ecological Indicators, 10(4):808-817.

[32]Myers N, 1997. Environmental refugees. Population and Environment, 19(2):167-182.

[33]Myers N, 2002. Environmental refugees: a growing phenomenon of the 21st century. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 357(1420):609-613.

[34]Ocello C, Petrucci A, Testa MR, et al., 2014. Environmental aspects of internal migration in Tanzania. Population & Environment, 37(1):1-10.

[35]Ozturk I, Al-Mulali U, Saboori B, 2016. Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: the role of tourism and ecological footprint. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(2):1916-1928.

[36]Pretty J, Ward H, 2001. Social capital and the environment. World Development, 29(2):209-227.

[37]Raleigh C, 2011. The search for safety: the effects of conflict, poverty and ecological influences on migration in the developing world. Global Environmental Change, 21(S1):S82-S93.

[38]Rice J, 2007. Ecological unequal exchange: international trade and uneven utilization of environmental space in the world system. Social Forces, 85(3):1369-1392.

[39]Shackleton CM, Shackleton SE, Buiten E, et al., 2007. The importance of dry woodlands and forests in rural livelihoods and poverty alleviation in South Africa. Forest Policy & Economics, 9(5):558-577.

[40]Shen G, Chen Y, Xue C, et al., 2015. Pollutant emissions from improved coal- and wood-fuelled cookstoves in rural households. Environmental Science & Technology, 49(11):6590-6598.

[41]Thornton A, Ghimire DJ, Mitchell C, 2012. The measurement and prevalence of an ideational model of family and economic development in Nepal. Population Studies, 66(3):329-345.

[42]Trier T, Turashvili M, 2007. Resettlement of Ecologically Displaced Persons Solution of a Problem or Creation of a New Eco-migration in Georgia 1981-2006. ECMI European Centre for Minority Issues, Flensburg, Germany.

[43]Wackernagel M, Onisto L, Bello P, et al., 1999. National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept. Ecological Economics, 29(3):375-390.

[44]Waggoner PE, Ausubel JH, 2002. A framework for sustainability science: a renovated IPAT identity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(12):7860-7865.

[45]Wang W, Zhang M, 2015. Direct and indirect energy consumption of rural households in China. Natural Hazards, 79(3):1693-1705.

[46]Wu XT, Zheng HW, Liu YZ, 2013. Jiangsu’s city-level ecological footprint variance based on energy values. Resources & Industries, 15(5):138-144 (in Chinese).

[47]Xi X, Qiao YB, Wu KP, et al., 2015. The selection of metropolises or towns in urbanization in the perspective of sustainable development: based on the research of the international ecological footprint panel data. China Population Resources and Environment, 25(2):47-56 (in Chinese).

[48]Xiao JH, Wang M, Yu QD, et al., 2015. The evaluation models of ecological compensation standard on the large-scale hydropower engineering construction based on ecological footprint: a case of Three Gorges Project. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(8):2726-2740.

[49]Xie G, Lu C, Cheng S, et al., 2001. Evaluation of natural capital utilization with eco-logical footprint in China. Resources Science, 6:20-23 (in Chinese).

[50]Xu ZM, Cheng GD, Qiu GY, 2005. ImPACTS identity of sustainability assessment. Acta Geographica Sinica, 60(2):198-208.

[51]Yan JZ, Zhang YL, Zhu HY, et al., 2006. Residents’ response to environmental degradation: case studies from three villages in the upper Dadu river watershed. Acta Geographicl Sinica, 61(2):146-156 (in Chinese).

[52]York R, Rosa EA, Dietz T, 2002. Bridging environmental science with environmental policy: plasticity of population, affluence, and technology. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1):18-34.

[53]Yuan SF, Yang LX, Yang GS, et al., 2013. The spatial heterogeneity of socio-economic driving factors land conversion: a case based on STIRPAT and GWR models. Economic Geography, 33(5):137-143 (in Chinese).

[54]Zhao XY, 2013. Environmental impact of different livelihood strategies of farmers: a case of the Gannan plateau. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 33(5):545-552.

[55]Zhao XY, Hou CX, Lu HL, et al., 2012. Analysis of farmer’s social capital characteristics in Tibetan area: a case study in Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture. China Population Resources and Environment, 22(12):101-107 (in Chinese).

Open peer comments: Debate/Discuss/Question/Opinion

<1>

Please provide your name, email address and a comment





Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE, 38 Zheda Road, Hangzhou 310027, China
Tel: +86-571-87952783; E-mail: cjzhang@zju.edu.cn
Copyright © 2000 - Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE