Research on World Agricultural Economy

Quantifying and Assessing Ecosystem Service Values in China's Major Grain‑Producing Regions: A Spatial‑Temporal Analysis

Bai Ke

School of Business and Management, Lincoln University College, Petaling Jaya 47301, Malaysia

Dhakir Abbas Ali

School of Business and Management, Lincoln University College, Petaling Jaya 47301, Malaysia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36956/rwae.v6i4.2351

Received: 19 June 2025 | Revised: 8 July 2025 | Accepted: 16 July 2025 | Published Online: 20 November 2025

---

Abstract

Agricultural intensiϐication in China has created tensions between food security imperatives and ecosystem sustainability, necessitating a comprehensive evaluation of ecological trade‑offs in major grain‑producing regions. This study quantiϐied ecosystem service values (ESV) across 13 provinces during 2008–2023 using an enhanced equivalent factor methodology integrated with the Costanza valuation framework. The spatiotemporal analysis revealed that total ESV increased by 68.4% over the study period, yet signiϐicant regional disparities emerged be‑tween production capacity and ecological functionality. High‑output provinces, including Heilongjiang, Henan, and Shandong, demonstrated persistently low per‑unit ESV (715.5–2492.3 CNY/hm²), remaining 40–50% below ecological leaders such as Jiangsu (3073.0 CNY/hm²). The research identified a paradoxical inverse relationship wherein provinces contributing most to national grain security exhibited the poorest ecological performance, with cropland ESV contribution ratios varying from 3.4% in Inner Mongolia to 29.1% in Henan. Yangtze River Basin provinces emerged as exemplars of balanced development, maintaining 6.8–7.5% annual ESV growth alongside moderate production levels. The spatially differentiated framework developed from these findings suggests targeted interventions could reduce resource consumption by 18–22% in intensive farming regions while enhancing water efficiency by 30–40% in arid zones. This research provides critical evidence for transitioning China's agricultural governance toward integrated ecosystem management that reconciles food production with ecological sustainability.

Keywords: Food Security; Major Grain‑Producing Regions; Ecosystem Service Value; Ecological Security Rationale for Terminology Selection

---

References

[1] Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., De Groot, R., et al., 1997. The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital. Nature. 387, 253–260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0

[2] Brondízio, E.S., Settele, J., Diaz, S., et al., 2019. Global Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES: Bonn, Germany.

[3] Tilman, D., Clark, M., Williams, D.R., et al., 2017. Future Threats to Biodiversity and Pathways to Their Prevention. Nature. 546, 73–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22900

[4] Chen, J., Yu, L., Yan, F., et al., 2020. Ecosystem Service Loss in Response to Agricultural Expansion in the Small Sanjiang Plain, Northeast China: Process, Driver and Management. Sustainability. 12(6), 2430. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062430

[5] Ma, L., Yang, B., Zhang, H., et al., 2024. Evolution of the Spatiotemporal Pattern of China’s Grain Production in the Past 20 Years and Its Driving Mechanism. Plos One. 19(5), e0303258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303258

[6] Hu, Y., Zhang, S., Shi, Y., et al., 2023. Quantifying the Impact of the Grain-for-Green Program on Ecosystem Service Scarcity Value in Qinghai, China. Scientific Reports. 13(1), 2927. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-29937-7

[7] Zhang, S., Chen, W., Wang, Y., et al., 2024. Human Interventions have Enhanced the Net Ecosystem Productivity of Farmland in China. Nature Communications. 15(1), 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-54907-6

[8] Xie, G., Zhang, C., Zhang, L., et al., 2015. Improvement of the Evaluation Method for Ecosystem Service Value Based on Per Unit Area. Journal of Natural Resources. 30(8), 1243–1254. (in Chinese)

[9] Peng, H., Zhang, X., Ren, W., et al., 2023. Spatial Pattern and Driving Factors of Cropland Ecosystem Services in a Major Grain-Producing Region: A Production-Living-Ecology Perspective. Ecological Indicators. 155, 111024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111024

[10] Xie, W., Zhu, A., Ali, T., et al., 2023. Crop Switching can Enhance Environmental Sustainability and Farmer Incomes in China. Nature. 616, 300–305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-05799-x

[11] Altieri, M.A., 1983. Agroecology: The Scientific Basis of Alternative Agriculture. University of California, Division of Biological Control: Berkeley, CA, USA.

[12] de Graaff, M.A., Hornslein, N., Throop, H.L., et al., 2019. Effects of Agricultural Intensification on Soil Biodiversity and Implications for Ecosystem Functioning: A Meta-Analysis. Advances in Agronomy. 155, 1–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.agron.2019.01.001

[13] Swinton, S.M., Lupi, F., Robertson, G.P., et al., 2007. Ecosystem Services and Agriculture: Cultivating Agricultural Ecosystems for Diverse Benefits. Ecological Economics. 64(2), 245–252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.09.020

[14] Fan, M., Chen, L., 2019. Spatial Characteristics of Land Uses and Ecological Compensations Based on Payment for Ecosystem Services Model From 2000 to 2015 in Sichuan Province, China. Ecological Informatics. 50, 162–183. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2019.01.001

[15] Bennett, E.M., Cramer, W., Begossi, A., et al., 2015. Linking Biodiversity, Ecosystem Services, and Human Well-Being: Three Challenges for Designing Research for Sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 14, 76–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.007

[16] Jiang, W., Wu, T., Fu, B., 2021. The Value of Ecosystem Services in China: A Systematic Review for Twenty Years. Ecosystem Services. 52, 101365. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101365

[17] Ouyang, Z., Zheng, H., Xiao, Y., et al., 2016. Improvements in Ecosystem Services From Investments in Natural Capital. Science. 352(6292), 1455–1459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf2295

[18] Xiang, H., 2023. Economic-Ecological Services and Their Trade-Offs or Synergies of Agricultural Landscapes in Xiangxi, central China. Heliyon. 9(8), e19145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19145

[19] Qiao, H., Kang, Y., Niu, Y., 2024. Spatiotemporal Dynamics and Driving Factors of Ecosystem Services Value in Lanzhou City, China. Scientific Reports. 14(1), 26562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-76838-4

[20] Chen, W., Chi, G., Li, J., 2020. The Spatial Aspect of Ecosystem Services Balance and Its Determinants. Land Use Policy. 90, 104263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104263

[21] Song, W., Han, Z., Deng, X., 2016. Changes in Productivity, Efficiency and Technology of China's Crop Production Under Rural Restructuring. Journal of Rural Studies. 47, 563–576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.07.023

[22] Qiu, B., Jian, Z., Yang, P., et al., 2024. Unveiling Grain Production Patterns in China (2005–2020) Towards Targeted Sustainable Intensification. Agricultural Systems. 216, 103878. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2024.103878

[23] Gosz, J.R., Waide, R.B., Magnuson, J.J., 2010. Twenty-Eight Years of the US-LTER Program: Experience, Results, and Research Questions. In: Müller, F., Baessler, C., Schubert, H., et al. (eds.). Long-Term Ecological Research: Between Theory and Application. Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands. pp. 59–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8782-9_5

[24] Power, A.G., 2010. Ecosystem Services and Agriculture: Tradeoffs and Synergies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 365(1554), 2959–2971. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0143

[25] Han, G., Cui, W., Chen, X., et al., 2024. The Sustainability of Grain Production: The Impact of Agricultural Productive Services on Farmers’ Grain Profits. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 8, 1430643. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1430643

[26] Qiu, T., Shi, Y., Peñuelas, J., et al., 2024. Optimizing Cover Crop Practices as a Sustainable Solution for Global Agroecosystem Services. Nature Communications. 15(1), 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-54536-z

[27] Teng, J., Hou, R., Dungait, J.A.J., et al., 2024. Conservation Agriculture Improves Soil Health and Sustains Crop Yields After Long-Term Warming. Nature Communications. 15(1), 8785. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-53169-6

[28] Tamburini, G., Bommarco, R., Wanger, T.C., et al., 2020. Agricultural Diversification Promotes Multiple Ecosystem Services Without Compromising Yield. Science Advances. 6(45), eaba1715. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aba1715

[29] Jiang, X., Xu, J., Sheng, X., et al., 2025. Synergies and Differences Between the China National Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and Action Plan (2023‒2030) and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Biodiversity Science. 33(3), 24575. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17520/biods.2024575

[30] Zuo, L., Zhang, Z., Carlson, K.M., et al., 2018. Progress Towards Sustainable Intensification in China Challenged by Land-Use Change. Nature Sustainability. 1(6), 304–313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0076-2