Effects of an ecological conservation and restoration project in the Three-River Source Region, China

doi:10.1007/s11442-017-1371-y

Abstract

Abstract:

The first-stage of an ecological conservation and restoration project in the Three-River Source Region (TRSR), China, has been in progress for eight years. However, because the ecological effects of this project remain unknown, decision making for future project implementation is hindered. Thus, in this study, we developed an index system to evaluate the effects of the ecological restoration project, by integrating field observations, remote sensing, and process-based models. Effects were assessed using trend analyses of ecosystem structures and services. Results showed positive trends in the TRSR since the beginning of the project, but not yet a return to the optima of the 1970s. Specifically, while continued degradation in grassland has been initially contained, results are still far from the desired objective, ‘grassland coverage increasing by an average of 20%-40%’. In contrast, wetlands and water bodies have generally been restored, while the water conservation and water supply capacity of watersheds have increased. Indeed, the volume of water conservation achieved in the project meets the objective of a 1.32 billion m³ increase. The effects of ecological restoration inside project regions was more significant than outside, and, in addition to climate change projects, we concluded that the implementation of ecological conservation and restoration projects has substantially contributed to vegetation restoration. Nevertheless, the degradation of grasslands has not been fundamentally reversed, and to date the project has not prevented increasing soil erosion. In sum, the effects and challenges of this first-stage project highlight the necessity of continuous and long-term ecosystem conservation efforts in this region.

Key words: Three-River Source Region, ecological conservation and restoration, ecosystem monitoring and assessment, ecological effects

Quanqin SHAO, Wei CAO, Jiangwen FAN, Huang Lin, Xinliang XU. Effects of an ecological conservation and restoration project in the Three-River Source Region, China[J].Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2017, 27(2): 183-204.

Figures/Tables 20

Figure 1

Table 1

Index series used for assessment of the ecological effect of the TRSR ecological projection and restoration project"

Category of index	Evaluation index
Category of index	First class indexes	Second class indexes
Ecosystem macrostructure	Ecosystem macrostructure	Ecosystem classification area, rate of change, dynamic degree
Ecosystem macrostructure	Ecosystem macroscopic structural change index
Ecosystem quality	Grassland degradation and recovery	Grassland degradation and recovery classification area, proportion of degraded grassland and recovered grassland, grassland degradation change index
	Vegetation status	Vegetation biomass, vegetation coverage, net primary productivity (NPP), vegetation change condition index
	Macro-ecological situation	Land cover status index, land cover conversion index
	Plant species diversity	Species richness, species importance value, diversity index, evenness index
	Environmental quality	Surface water quality index, soil environmental quality index, air quality index
	Upper limit of permafrost depth
	Ecosystem quality change index
Ecosystem services	Water regulation	River runoff in dry season, water regulation volumes, water regulation service retention, river runoff in summer flood season, runoff adjustment coefficient
	Soil conservation	Sediment concentration, soil erosion, soil retention, soil conservation service
	Forage supply	Grassland yield, grassland theoretical stock-carrying capacity
	Water supply	River runoff, lake area, lake volume, glacier area, ground water resources
	Ecosystem services change index
Ecosystem change factors	Climate change	Temperature, precipitation, wet coefficient
	Human activities	Ecological project, grazing pressure index
	Contributions influenced by ecological project and climate change	Ecosystem project changes influence index
		Contributions to NPP change, water regulation service, soil conservation service, sand fixing service influenced by ecological project
		Contributions to NPP change, water regulation service, soil conservation service, sand fixing service influenced by climate change

Table 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Table 2

Figure 10

Table 3

Table 4

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Table 5

Table 6

Figure 14

References 39

[1]	Abbot M, Dawson T, Clark J et al., 2015. NEON science capability assessment. Clark J et al., 2015. NEON science capability assessment. .
[2]	Bing L F, Shao Q Q, Liu J Y,et al.., 2011. Runoff characteristics in flood and dry seasons in source regions of Yangtze River and Yellow River based on wavelet analysis.Scientia Geographica Sinica, 31(2): 232-238. (in Chinese)
[3]	Bing L F, Shao Q Q, Wang J B, 2012. Heterogeneity and error estimation of grassland biomass based on cyclic sampling approach.Acta Agrestia Sinica, 20(2): 257-267. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1007/s11783-011-0280-z
[4]	Cai B F, 2009. Study on the Monitoring and Evaluation of the Three North Shelterbelt Project. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press. (in Chinese)
[5]	Chen Z Q, Shao Q Q, Liu J Y,et al.., 2012. Analysis of net primary productivity of terrestrial vegetation on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, based on MODIS remote sensing data.Science in China (Earth Sciences). doi: 10.1007/s11430-012-4389-0. (in Chinese)
[6]	China National Environmental Monitoring Centre (CNEMC), 2004. Study on Ecological Environmental Quality Assessment China. Beijing: China Environmental Science Press. (in Chinese)
[7]	Fan J W, Shao Q Q, Liu J Y,et al.., 2010. Dynamic changes of grassland yield in the Three River Headwater Region from 1988 to 2005.Acta Agrestia Sinica, 18(1): 5-10. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1080/00949651003724790
[8]	Fan J W, Shao Q Q, Wang J B,et al.., 2011. An analysis of temporal-spatial dynamics of grazing pressure on grassland in the Three Rivers Headwater Region.Chinese Journal of Grassland, 33(3): 64-72. (in Chinese)
[9]	Fryrear D W, Saleh A, Bilbro J D,et al.., 1998. Revised Wind Erosion Equation (RWEQ). Wind Erosion and Water Conservation Research Unit, Technical Bulletin 1, Southern Plains Area Cropping Systems Research Laboratory, USDA-ARS.
[10]	Gong G L, 2014. Research on the spatial-temporal changes of wind erosion in northern China and the influence factors [D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Sciences. (in Chinese)
[11]	Guo B, Zhou Y, Zhu J F,et al.., 2016. Spatial patterns of ecosystem vulnerability changes during 2001-2011 in the Three-River Source Region of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, China.Journal of Arid Land, 8(1): 23-35.
[12]	Hu Y F, Liu J Y, Qi Y Q,et al.., 2010. Positivist analysis on the effects of ecological projects in the farming-pastoral transition belt of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region.Geographical Research, 29(8): 1452-1460. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11821/yj2010080010
[13]	Li S D, 2006.China Ecological Status Report 2005: Ecological Comprehensive Index & Ecological Status Assessment. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)
[14]	Li S D, 2007. World’s Important Ecological Engineering. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)
[15]	Liu J Y, Shao Q Q, Fan J W, 2009. The integrated assessment indicator system of grassland ecosystem in the Three-River Headwater’s Region.Geographical Research, 28(2): 273-283. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11821/yj2009020001
[16]	Liu J Y, Shao Q Q, Xu X L, 2008. The spatial and temporal characteristics of grassland degradation in the Three-River Headwater’s Region in Qinghai Province.Acta Geographica Sinica, 63(4): 364-376. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1007/s10499-007-9164-4
[17]	Liu J Y, Yue T X, Ju H B et al., 2006. Integrated Ecosystem Assessment in Western China. Beijing: China Meteorological Press. (in Chinese)
[18]	Liu Y, 2006. Study on post-evaluation of theory and application of the forest ecological engineering in China [D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University. (in Chinese)
[19]	Local Standard of Qinghai Province (LSQP), 2014. Technical Specification of Ecological Effects Assessment of Ecosystem Protection and Recovery Projects in Sanjiangyuan Region (DB63/T1342-2015).
[20]	Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA), 2003. Ecosystems and Human Well-being. Washington: Island Press.
[21]	National Standards of the People’s Republic of China, 2009. Evaluation in Project for the Construction of Conversion of Cropland to Forest (GB/T23233-2009). Beijing: Standards Press of China. (in Chinese)
[22]	Renard K G, Foser G R, Weesies G A,et al.., 1997. Predicting soil erosion by water: A guide to conservation planning with the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service.
[23]	Shao Q Q, Liu J Y, Huang L,et al.., 2013. Integrated assessment on the effectiveness of ecological conservation in The TRSR National Nature Reserve.Geographical Research, 32(9): 1645-1656. (in Chinese)
[24]	Shao Q Q, Xiao T, Liu J Y,et al.., 2011. Soil erosion rates and characteristics of a typical alpine meadow using the 137Cs technique in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.Chinese Science Bulletin, 56. doi: 10.1007/s11434-011-4477-0. (in Chinese)
[25]	State Forestry Administration (SFA), 2014. National Report on the Ecological Benefits of Grain for Green Program in 2013. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House. (in Chinese)
[26]	State Forestry Administration (SFA), 2015. Technical Specification on Evaluation of the Three North Shelterbelt Project (LY/T 2411-2015). Beijing: Standards Press of China. (in Chinese)
[27]	Sun W Y, Shao Q Q, Liu J Y,et al.., 2011. The variation characteristics of soil organic carbon of typical alpine slope grasslands and its influencing factors in the ‘Three-River Headwaters’ Region.Journal of Natural Resources, 26(12): 2072-2087. (in Chinese)
[28]	The Environmental Protection Industry Standard of People’s Republic of China (EPIS PRC), 2006. Technical Criterion for Eco-environmental Status Evaluation (HJ/T 192-2006). Beijing: China Environmental Science Press. (in Chinese)
[29]	The People’s Government of Qinghai Province (PGQP), 2005. The General Planning on Ecological Protection and Construction in the TRSR Nature Reserve, Qinghai Province. (in Chinese)
[30]	The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment, 2008. The State of Nation’s Ecosystems 2008: Measuring the Lands, Waters, and Living Resources of the United States. doi: 10.1590/S0034-73292010000300002
[31]	Vaughan H, Brydges T, Fenech A,et al.., 2001. Monitoring long-term ecological changes through the Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network: Science-based and policy relevant.Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 67(1/2): 3-28.
[32]	Wang J B, Liu J Y, Shao Q Q,et al.., 2009. Spatial-temporal patterns of net primary productivity for 1988-2004 based on GLOPEM-CEVSA model in the ‘Three-River Headwaters’ region of Qinghai Province, China.Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 33(2): 254-269. (in Chinese)
[33]	Wang L X, Wang B R, 2000. Forestry Ecological Engineering. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House. (in Chinese)
[34]	Wu D, 2014. Research on water regulation service of the main terrestrial ecosystems in China [D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Sciences. (in Chinese)
[35]	Xiao W F, Huang Z L, Tang W P et al., 2012. Monitoring and Evaluation of Ecological Benefits of National Land Conversion Program in Three Gorges Reservoir Area. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)
[36]	Xu X L, Liu J Y, Shao Q Q,et al.., 2008. The dynamic changes of ecosystem spatial pattern and structure in the Three-River Headwater Region in Qinghai Province during recent 30 years.Geographical Research, 27(4): 829-838. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1007/s10499-007-9164-4
[37]	Xu X Q, 1992. Integrated Evaluation on Synthetically Efficiency of Forests. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House. (in Chinese)
[38]	Yu X X, Gu J C, Yue Y J et al., 2010. Benefit Evaluation on Forestry Ecological Projects. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)
[39]	Zhao Z P, Liu J Y, Shao Q Q, 2010. Characteristic analysis of land cover change in the Nature Reserve of the Three River’s Source Region.Scientia Geographica Sinica, 30(3): 415-420. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1097/MOP.0b013e3283423f35

Period	Regions	Cropland	Forest	Grassland	Wetland	Desert	Others
1990-2004 (before the project)	Nature reserves	-3.22	-12.8	-362.4	-10.8	+387.6	+1.6
1990-2004 (before the project)	Outside nature reserves	+1.32	-0.7	-83.4	-14.7	+43.8	+53.6
2004-2012 (after the project)	Nature reserves	Unchanged	+12.1	+135.2	+104.9	-192.1	-60.1
2004-2012 (after the project)	Outside nature reserves	+7.84	+3.3	-11.4	+181.1	-300.5	+119.7
Comparison after and before the project	Nature reserves	Reduced at first then unchanged	Reduced at first then increased	Reduced at first then increased	Reduced at first then increased	Increased at first then reduced	Increased at first then reduced
	Outside nature reserves	Continuously increased	Reduced first then increased	Continuously reduced	Reduced at first then increased	Increased at first then reduced	Continuously increased
	Comparison of inside and outside	Inside is better than outside	Inside is better than outside	Inside is better than outside	Inside is better than outside	Inside is better than outside	Inside is better than outside

Region	Degraded grassland, 1990-2004		Obviously improved grassland, 2005-2012
Region	Area (km²)	Proportion of degraded grassland in entire area (%)	Area (km²)	Proportion of degraded grassland in each area (%)
Nature reserves	43490.67	49.4	3173.00	7.30
Outside nature reserves	44591.40	50.6	2252.81	5.05
The TRSR	88082.07	100	5425.81	6.16

Period	Region	Vegetation coverage (%)	NPP (g C/m²)
1997-2004	Nature reserves	47.15	246.86
	Outside nature reserves	41.58	200.84
	Difference between inside and outside	5.57	46.02
2005-2012	Nature reserves	50.34	306.23
	Outside nature reserves	44.15	247.37
	Difference between inside and outside	6.19	58.86
Difference between former and latter periods	Nature reserves	3.19	59.37
	Outside nature reserves	2.57	46.53
	Difference between inside and outside	0.62	12.84

Evaluation index	Difference between 1997-2004 and 2005-2012		Contribution rate of ecological project	Contribution rate of climate change
Evaluation index	Real climate conditions	Average climate conditions	Contribution rate of ecological project	Contribution rate of climate change
NPP (g C/m²/yr)	21.79	13.49	61.9%	38.1%
Water conservation (10⁸m³/yr)	22.22	5.34	24%	76%
Soil water erosion (t/yr)	2000	-1600	-80%	180%

Period	Yellow River Basin		Yangtze River Basin
Period	Tangnahai station	Jimai station	Zhimenda station	Tuotuohe station (data from May to October)
1975-1980	221.21	46.26	115.85	4.85
1975-1990	236.10	47.90	131.37	6.14
1975-2004	200.65	39.87	124.29	7.52
1975-2011	201.40	41.90	132.40	9.10
1991-2004	165.20	31.26	116.20	9.11
1997-2004	161.00	30.20	122.10	11.70
2004-2011	197.90	47.30	161.30	13.10