Socioeconomic and environmental effects of China’s Conversion of Cropland to Forest Program after 15 years: a systematic review protocol

Environmental Evidence

Kun Zhang²  Chen Xie²  Louis Putzel¹  Wen Zhou¹  Nick Hogarth¹  Lucas Gutiérrez Rodríguez¹ 

[1]Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Jalan CIFOR, Situ Gede, Sindang Barang, Bogor 16115, Barat, Indonesia

[2]China National Forestry Economics and Development Research Center, State Forestry Administration, Hepingli Dongjie No. 18, Beijing 100714, China

关键词: Poverty alleviation and Social equity;    Flooding;    Soil erosion;    Afforestation;    Land use change;    Payment for ecosystem services;    Grain for Green;    Sloping Land Conversion Program;    Conversion of Cropland to Forest Program;   

Others  :  1172630
DOI  :  10.1186/s13750-015-0033-8

 received in 2014-06-11, accepted in 2015-02-08,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Agricultural activities on sloping lands have historically led to forest loss and degradation in China which, coupled with industrial pressures on the environment, were deemed responsible for catastrophic flooding events in the late 1990s. After these events, China’s forest policy underwent a significant reorientation towards ecological conservation and rural development, a process epitomized by the Conversion of Cropland to Forest Program (CCFP). Launched in 1999, the CCFP integrates both socioeconomic and environmental objectives with the aim of reforesting smallholder cropland on sloping lands, while compensating farmers with payments for their lost income. Following 15 years of implementation, it is timely to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the state of knowledge about the CCFP’s impacts on human populations and the environment.

Methods/design

The primary research question asks “What socioeconomic and environmental effects has the Conversion of Cropland to Forest Program had on human populations and land resources during its first 15 years in China?” We use a theory of change and a Population-Intervention-Comparator-Outcome (PICO) framework to structure our systematic review, where populations of interest consist of both human populations and land resources targeted by the program, while the intervention of interest is the CCFP as defined by its component activities, including compensatory subsidies, skill-training, and enforcement with field checks. Outcomes are defined as both the socioeconomic and environmental impacts of the program. We will conduct a search for relevant English and Chinese language literature on Scopus, Web of Science, CAB Abstracts, AGRIS (FAO), and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Search results will be screened for relevance in a two stage process (titles and abstracts, followed by full texts) based on predefined eligibility criteria, and then further assessed for potential sources of bias. Extraction of data from those studies that have passed full-text screening will follow a coding protocol based on the PICO framework, and quantitative and qualitative analyses of the extracted data will be conducted and synthesized. Finally, a narrative report will present the findings of the review, alongside a geographic map illustrating the coverage of included studies compared with the actual implementation area of the CCFP.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Gutierrez Rodriguez et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Xi XL, Fan LH, Deng XM: The situation of environmental awareness in China. Analysis of results from a survey of Chinese citizens (In Chinese). Zhongguo gongzhong huanjing yishi zhuangkuang - gongzhong diaocha jieguo pouxi Zhongguo ruan kexue-gongzhong juece-huanjing baohu ji qi chanye zhuanti yantao 1998, 9:24-30.
• [2]Gao YC: Analysis on reasons for the Yellow River’s dry-up and its eco-environmental impacts. J Environ Sci 1998, 10(3):357-64.
• [3]Qian Y, Glantz M: The 1998 Yangtze Floods: the use of short-term forecasts in the context of seasonal to interannual water resource management. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Chang 2005, 10:159-82.
• [4]Yin RS, Xu JT, Li Z, Liu C: China’s Ecological Rehabilitation: The Unprecedented Efforts and Dramatic Impacts of Reforestation and Slope Protection in Western China. China Environment Series 2005, 7:17-32.
• [5]Li WH: Yangtze’s floods and ecological construction (In Chinese). Changjiang hongshui yu shengtai jianshe Ziran ziyuan xuebao 1999, 14(1):1-8.
• [6]Shi DM: Analysis on the relationship between soil erosion and flood disasters in the Yangtze basin (In Chinese). Changjiang liuyu shuitu liushi yu honglao zaihai guanxi pouxi Turang qinshi yu shuitu baochi xuebao 1999, 5(1):1-7.
• [7]Liu C. An economic and environmental evaluation of the Natural Forest Protection Program. China National Forest Economics and Development Research Center (FEDRC), State Forestry Administration (SFA) 2002 (working paper).
• [8]Xu ZG, Xu JT, Deng XZ, Huang JK, Uchida E, Rozelle S: Grain for Green versus Grain: Conflict between Food Security and Conservation Set-Aside in China. World Dev 2006, 34(1):130-48.
• [9]Uchida E, Xu JT, Rozelle S: Grain for Green: Cost-Effectiveness and Sustainability of China’s Conservation Set-Aside Program. Land Econ 2005, 81(2):247-64.
• [10]Gauvin C, Uchida E, Rozelle S, Xu JT, Zhan JY: Cost-Effectiveness of Payments for Ecosystem Services with Dual Goals of Environment and Poverty Alleviation. Environ Manage 2010, 45:488-501.
• [11]China Green Times. 10 years of monitoring, sending our country ‘a postcard of data’. Looking back 10 years of monitoring the socioeconomic benefits of the key forestry programs (In Chinese). Shi nian jiance, jigei zuguo de shuju mingxinpian——linye zhongdian gongcheng shehui jingji xiaoyi jiance shinian huigu. Zhongguo lvse shibao 2014-January-2nd. Retrieved from: http://www.greentimes.com/green/news/zhuanti/lyzdgc/content/2014-01/02/content_242505.htm.
• [12]CCICED: Xu J, Katsigris E, White TA (Eds): Implementing the Natural Forest Protection Program and the Sloping Land Conversion Program: Lessons and policy recommendations In China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development; Western China Forests and Grassland Task Force 2002.
• [13]Bennett M, Xie C, Hogarth N, Peng DL, Putzel L: China’s Conversion of Cropland to Forest Program for Household Delivery of Ecosystem Services: How Important is a Local Implementation Regime to Survival Rate Outcomes? Forests 2014, 5(9):2345-76.
• [14]Song C, Zhang YL, Mei Y, Liu H, Zhang ZQ, Zhang QF, et al.: Sustainability of forests created by China’s sloping land conversion program: a comparison among three sites in Anhui, Hubei and Shanxi. Forest Policy Economics 2014, 38:161-7.
• [15]Delang CO, Wang W: Chinese Forest Policy Reforms After 1998: The Case of the Natural Forest Protection Program and the Slope Land Conversion Program. Int For Rev 2013, 15(3):290-304.
• [16]Zhai DL, Xu JC, Dai ZC, Cannon CH, Grumbine RE: Increasing tree cover while losing diverse natural forests in tropical Hainan, China. Reg Environ Change 2014, 14:611-21.
• [17]Pascual U, Phelps J, Garmendia E, Brown K, Corbera E, Martin A, et al.: Social equity matters in payments for ecosystem services. Bioscience 2014, 64(11):1027-36.
• [18]Collaboration for Environmental Evidence: Guidelines for Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 4.2 [http:/ / environmentalevidence.org/ wp-content/ uploads/ 2014/ 06/ Review-guidelines-version-4.2-final .pdf] webciteEnvironmental Evidence 2013. http://environmentalevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Review-guidelines-version-4.2-final.pdf
• [19]Evidence-Based Forestry. http://www1.cifor.org/ebf/reviews/current-reviews/systematic-reviews/chinas-conversion-of-cropland-to-forest-program-ccfp.html.