Search

Conservation of the ecological environment presents scientists with a challenging dilemma because the strategy often leads to negative impacts on impoverished people in the area affected by the project. To consider this problem, we investigated the implications of China's national and regional policies related to the Natural Forest Conservation Program (NFCP) for poverty in the dryland regions of northern Shaanxi Province. We found that 34.9, 47.0, and 59.8% of farmers, livestock grazers, and forest workers respectively, felt that their livelihoods had been adversely affected by the NFCP due to the ban on logging and grazing imposed by this program, and they perceived additional economic losses because they were not adequately compensated for their economic losses under the program. These perceptions are supported by economic data. In addition, our results showed that the poorer the survey respondent, the greater the likelihood they believed that they had suffered from the implementation of the NFCP. Although Chinese citizens have become more favorable towards environmental conservation efforts, the poorest citizens still need considerable help to make it possible for them to participate in both economic development and environmental restoration. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: To restore China''s degraded environment, the government launched an environmental restoration project named the “Grain for Green” Project (GGP) in 1999. From 1999 to 2010, the government will spend US$ 40 billion to convert 147 million ha of farmland into forest and grassland and 173 million ha of wasteland (including abandoned farmland) into forest in 25 provinces. A primary focus is to replace farming and livestock grazing in fragile areas with reforestation and planting of forage crops. Given the project''s tremendous size and number of participants, the attitudes of the affected farmers will strongly influence the GGP''s success. To learn their attitudes, we surveyed 2000 farmers in 2005 to quantify their opinions of the GGP and how it has affected their livelihoods, and we discuss the concerns raised by these attitudes. Farmers appreciated the grain and financial compensation offered by the GGP, but few considered planting of trees (8.9%) or forage species (2.2%) to be a priority. Although only 19.1% felt that their livelihoods had been adversely affected by the GGP and 63.8% supported the project, a large proportion (37.2%) planned to return to cultivating forested areas and grassland once the project''s subsidies end in 2018. Therefore, much of the restored vegetation risks being converted into farmland and rangeland again, compromising the sustainability of the environmental achievements. To succeed, strategies such as the GGP must compensate farmers fairly for their costs, create new agricultural products and techniques for use on more suitable land, and create job and training programs that account for the needs and desires of farmers and give them alternatives to returning to old land-use practices. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

1. China's Grain for Green Project is a rapid landscape-scale shift in ground cover and land use with significant implications for biodiversity. From 1998 to 2005, we carried out field studies to examine the landscape-level impacts of this project, and to provide a practical example of the successes and failures of a large-scale attempt to restore a vulnerable environment. 2. In a northern part of China's Shaanxi Province, our results indicated that the total vegetation cover in areas covered by this project increased from 29·7% in 1998 to 42·2% in 2005. However, we also found evidence that large-scale afforestation in this vulnerable arid and semi-arid region could increase the severity of water shortages, decrease vegetation cover in afforestation plots, and adversely affect the number of species present. The exclusion of livestock from overgrazed areas and the elimination of cultivation in marginal areas had the biggest effects on the restoration of vegetation cover, whereas tree planting had a strong negative effect in vulnerable areas. 3. Synthesis and applications. In practical terms, the destruction of natural vegetation cover during afforestation should be avoided, as this makes the soil surface more vulnerable to erosion and reduces species diversity. Managers should reduce the intensity of farming and grazing on fragile land rather than relying on afforestation as the primary tool for ecological restoration in arid and semi-arid areas. Afforestation remains a valuable tool but should be limited to the planting of native or other species that will not exacerbate soil water shortages such as stable communities of natural desert steppe, maximum water-use efficiency dwarf shrubs, and possibly even lichen species in more severely degraded environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]