Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.
Sec. Land, Livelihoods and Food Security
Volume 8 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1425738
This article is part of the Research Topic Food System Transformation and the Realization of the UN Sustainable Development Goals View all 24 articles

Ecological Compensation of Agricultural Heritage Conservation: Case of the Mountainous Juglans hopeiensis Planting System in Beijing

Provisionally accepted
Haixia DU Haixia DU 1Guangcai XU Guangcai XU 1*Yusen LIN Yusen LIN 2*
  • 1 Beijing University of Agriculture, Beijing, China
  • 2 Administration and Management Institute of Agriculture and Rural Affairs,Beijing, China, Beijing, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Agricultural heritage, consisting of farmers' livelihood activities, experiential knowledge systems, and rural landscapes, is an integrated regional system with significant historical, cultural, and biodiversity value based on the natural environment and land use. Agricultural heritage is rich in traditional wisdom on the use of natural resources and is of great value in achieving the goals of sustainable agriculture and food security. The protection of agricultural heritage provides a favorable environment for farmers to engage in agricultural production, and provides a wide variety of potential agricultural production processes, thus adopting possibilities for the transformation of sustainable food systems. Ecological compensation can be an effective method for narrowing the development gap caused by heritage conservation. It can improve farmers' livelihoods in heritage sites and stimulate the enthusiasm of farmers to protect the agricultural heritage. Taking the mountainous Juglans hopeiensis planting system in Beijing as a case study, we evaluate the amount of ecological compensation using the contingent valuation method based on statistical data and interviews with farmers by combining with their willingness to accept compensation and income gap with other farmers. In addition, we analyze the factors affecting farmers' willingness to accept compensation. The results show that ecological compensation at a standard of RMB 9823.13 yuan/(hm² • a) can meet the livelihood needs of farmers in heritage sites, thus bridging the income gap between farmers in and around the heritage sites. Whether farmers accept compensation is mainly influenced by five variables: gender, education level, per capita income, household members, and the proportion of therapy walnut income in household income. We suggest that a concrete ecological compensation mechanism should be further constructed to ensure the effective implementation of ecological compensation and the longtime existence and development of agricultural heritage. This study can not only provide a reference for calculation of the ecological compensation amount and the establishment of ecological compensation mechanism for agricultural heritage in Beijing, but it is also crucial for the development of policies to ensure long-lasting conservation of agricultural heritage and continuous enhancement of farmers' livelihoods, and to improve the adaptation of global agricultural systems.

    Keywords: Agricultural heritage, Ecological compensation, CVM, Evaluate, WTA, Beijing

    Received: 30 Apr 2024; Accepted: 23 Aug 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 DU, XU and LIN. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Guangcai XU, Beijing University of Agriculture, Beijing, China
    Yusen LIN, Administration and Management Institute of Agriculture and Rural Affairs,Beijing, China, Beijing, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.