Skip to main content
Log in

Differentiation characteristics and influencing factors of ecological land rent among provinces in China

  • Published:
Journal of Geographical Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ecological land rent is the excess profit produced by resource scarcity, and is also an important indicator for measuring the social and economic effects of resource scarcity. This paper, by calculating the respective ecological land rents of all the provinces in China for the years 2002 and 2007, and with the assistance of the software programs ArcGIS and GeoDA, analyzes the spatial differentiation characteristics of ecological land rent; then, the influencing factors of ecological land rent differentiation among the provinces are examined using the methods of traditional regression and spatial correlation analysis. The following results were obtained: First, ecological land rent per unit of output in China shows stable distribution characteristics of being low in the southwestern and northeastern provinces, and high in Hebei and Henan provinces. There is also an increasing tendency in the central and western provinces, and a decreasing one in the eastern provinces. In general, the spatial distribution of ecological land rent per unit of output in China is quite scattered. Second, the total ecological land rent shows significant spatial aggregation characteristics, in particular the provinces in China possessing high total amounts of ecological land rent tend to be adjacent to one another, as do those with low total amounts, and the spatial difference characteristics of the eastern, central and western provinces are distinguished. The Bohai Rim, Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta are shown to be highly clustering regions of total ecological land rent, while the western provinces have very low ecological land rent in terms of total amount. Third, population distribution, economic level and industrial structure were all important influencing factors influencing ecological land rent differentiation among provinces in China. Furthermore, population density, urbanization level, economic density, per capita consumption level and GDP per capita were all shown to be positively related to total ecological land rent, which indicates that spatial clustering exists between ecological land rent and these factors. However, there was also a negative correlation between ecological land rent and agricultural output percentage, indicating that spatial scattering exists between ecological land rent and agricultural output percentage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdelgalil E A, Cohen S I, 2007. Economic development and resource degradation: Conflicts and policies. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 41(2): 107–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adrian M, 2007. How to make the clean development mechanism sustainable-the potential of rent extraction. Energy Policy, 35(6): 3203–3212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babulo B, Muys B, Nega F et al., 2009. The economic contribution of forest resource use to rural livelihoods in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics, 11(2): 109–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus J G, 1999. Land rents and ecological crisis: The case of the Oder River Valley. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 58(2): 193–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briner S, Elkin C, Huber R et al., 2012. Assessing the impacts of economic and climate changes on land-use in mountain regions: A spatial dynamic modeling approach. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 149: 50–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dong Suocheng, Shi Guangyi, Shen Lei et al., 2010. Progress and its prospects of research on resource economics and world resources in China. Journal of Natural Resources, 25(9): 1432–1444. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao Bo, 2011. The impacts of economic growth on resources and environment in Henan Province. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 11: 810–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoekstra A Y, 2009. Human appropriation of natural capital: A comparison of ecological footprint and water footprint analysis. Ecological Economics, 68(7): 1963–1974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong X N, Ryoichi Y, 2007. Modification of ecological footprint evaluation method to include non-renewable resource consumption using thermodynamic approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 51(4): 870–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justin K, Mathis W, 2009. Answers to common questions in ecological footprint accounting. Ecological Indicators, 9(4): 812–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurt K, 2008. From ecological footprint to ecological rent: An economic indicator for resource constraints. Ecological Economics, 64(3): 507–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long Hualou, Li Tingting, 2012. The coupling characteristics and mechanism of farmland and rural housing land transition in China. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 22(3): 548–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long Kaisheng, Chen Ligen, 2010. The theoretical development and basic category of ecological rent. Environmental Science and Management, 35(10): 137–140. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Long Kaisheng, Chen Ligen, 2011. Analysis on changes of ecological land rent in China from 1997 to 2007. China Population, Resources and Environment, 21(9): 44–50. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Long Kaisheng, Chen Ligen, Zhao Yali, 2011. Analysis on ecological land rent based on ecological footprint. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31(2): 538–546. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathan F, 2008. Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science. Ecological Economics, 67(4): 519–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neverov A, Derevyago I, 2002. Methodological aspects of social-economic evaluation of the ecological resources. Natural Resources, (2): 58–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qu Futian, Kuyvenhoven A, Shi Xiaoping et al., 2011. Sustainable natural resource use in rural China: Recent trends and policies. China Economic Review, 22(4): 444–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samranpong C, Ekasingh B, Ekasingh M, 2009. Economic land evaluation for agricultural resource management in Northern Thailand. Environmental Modelling & Software, 24(12): 1381–1390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siciliano G, 2012. Urbanization strategies, rural development and land use changes in China: A multiple-level integrated assessment. Land Use Policy, 29(1): 165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stijns J C, 2005. Natural resource abundance and economic growth revisited. Resources Policy, 30(2): 107–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomićević J, Shannon M A, Milovanović M, 2010. Socio-economic impacts on the attitudes towards conservation of natural resources: Case study from Serbia. Forest Policy and Economics, 12(3): 157–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsvetnov E V, Shcheglov A I, Tsvetnova O B, 2009. Eco-economic approach to evaluation of agricultural lands polluted by chemicals and radionuclides. Eurasian Soil Science, 42(3): 334–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vačkář D, 2012. Ecological Footprint, environmental performance and biodiversity: A cross-national comparison. Ecological Indicators, 16: 40–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wackernagel M, Rees W E, 1996. Our Ecological Footprint, Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Gabriela Island: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • White J T, 2007. Sharing resources: The global distribution of the Ecological Footprint. Ecological Economics, 64(2): 402–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WWF, 2004, 2008. Living Planet Report (2004, 2008). http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/all_publications/living_planet_report/living_planet_report_timeline, 2011-11-10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakovets Y V, 2003. Rent, Anti-rent and Quasi-rent in a Global-civilizational Dimension. Moscow: Akademkniga.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang Ke, Chen Baiming, Du Hongliang et al., 2011. The contribution of cultivated land occupation by construction to China’s economic growth. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 21(5): 897–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhuang Li, Liu Yang, Liang Jinshe, 2011. Research on national resources scarcity and penetration in China. Geographical Research, 30(8): 1351–1360. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kaisheng Long.

Additional information

Foundation: National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.41001382; No.41201386

Author: Long Kaisheng (1981–), Ph.D and Associate Professor, specialized in resource sustainable use and resource management.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Long, K., Zhao, Y., Zhang, H. et al. Differentiation characteristics and influencing factors of ecological land rent among provinces in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 23, 387–403 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-013-1017-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-013-1017-7

Keywords

Navigation