Village-Level Implementation of Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP) in China: Institutional Innovation and Practical Pathways
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/tyjcnf76Keywords:
Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP), Village-Level Governance, Eco-empowered Village Companies, Ecological Assets, Rural Economic Development, Market-Based MechanismsAbstract
Gross Ecosystem Product is a measure that shows ecological value in forms that allow economic assessment. China uses this approach across different levels of development. The approach provides a method for including ecological factors in development that occurs in areas with significant ecological resources. These areas show patterns where ecological value exists but economic development remains limited. This work examines the development of Gross Ecosystem Product in China and considers how this measure applies at the level of individual communities. The analysis uses cases from Zhejiang Province and from Lishui. These cases show arrangements that include organizations described as Two-Mountain Cooperatives and companies that operate with ecological resources. The arrangements also include approaches that use trading of ecological resources and financial mechanisms that use Gross Ecosystem Product measures as a basis for providing support. The study compares cases from China with cases from other contexts. The comparison includes Findhorn and Cloughjordan. These cases show different approaches but similar issues that relate to maintaining ecological conditions while supporting local development. The comparison reveals that the approach in China uses ecological assessment in combination with collective organization and market-based operation. This represents a particular pathway that differs from approaches in other contexts. The findings indicate that Gross Ecosystem Product at the community level provides more than a method for assessment of ecological conditions. The measure also provides a mechanism that affects how communities organize development and manage resources. The approach offers insights for areas that seek to include ecological value in local systems of development. The mechanism shows how ecological resources can provide a basis for economic activity in communities where ecological conditions represent a significant form of value but where economic development has been limited by other factors.
Downloads
References
[1] Ouyang, Z., Zhu, C., Yang, G., Xu, W., Zheng, H., Zhang, Y., & Xiao, Y. (2013). Gross ecosystem product: Concept, accounting framework and case study. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(21), 6747–6761. https://doi.org/10. 5846/stxb 201310092 428.
[2] Zhang, L., Hao, C., Yang, S., Wentao, Z., Yuhua, H., & Tian, L. (2022). Basic principles of gross ecosystem product (GEP) accounting. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 13(3). https:// doi. org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2022.03.014.
[3] Ouyang, Z., Song, C., Zheng, H., Polasky, S., Xiao, Y., Bateman, I. J., Liu, J., Ruckelshaus, M., Shi, F., Xiao, Y., Xu, W., Zou, Z., & Daily, G. C. (2020). Using gross ecosystem product (GEP) to value nature in decision making. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(25), 14593–14601. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1911439117.
[4] Yang, H., Gou, X., Ma, W., & Xue, B. (2023). Research and application of GEP: China’s experience in natural capital accounting. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1106654. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1106654.
[5] Hein, L., Obst, C., Edens, B., & Remme, R. P. (2015). Progress and challenges in the development of ecosystem accounting as a tool to analyse ecosystem capital. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 86–92. https://doi.org/10. 1016/ j.cosust.2015.04.002.
[6] Zou, Z., Wu, T., Xiao, Y., Song, C., Wang, K., & Ouyang, Z. (2020). Valuing natural capital amidst rapid urbanization: Assessing the gross ecosystem product (GEP) of China’s “Chang-Zhu-Tan” megacity. Environmental Research Letters, 15(12), 124019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abc2f8.
[7] Zhang, Z., Xiong, K., Chang, H., Zhang, W., & Huang, D. (2022). A review of eco-product value realization and ecological civilization and its enlightenment to karst protected areas. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(10), 5892. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/ ijerph 19105892.
[8] Zhou, J., Xiong, K., Wang, Q., Tang, J., & Lin, L. (2022). A review of ecological assets and ecological products supply. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(16), 10168. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/ ijerph1916 10168.
[9] Gao, X., Xu, W., Hou, Y., & Ouyang, Z. (2020). Market-based instruments for ecosystem services: Framework and case study in Lishui City, China. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 6(1), e1835445. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/ 20964129. 2020. 1835445.
[10] Tang, Y., Tang, J., Yu, X., Qiu, L., Wang, J., Hou, X., & Chen, D. (2022). Land ecological protection policies improve ecosystem services: A case study of Lishui, China. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 973524. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/ fenvs. 2022.973524.
[11] Lishui Development and Reform Commission. (2021). Research report on Eco-empowered Village Companies in Lishui (2021). Lishui Municipal Government.
[12] Government Disclosure. (2025). Annual reports of 12 Eco-empowered Village Companies in Lishui. Lishui Market Supervision Bureau.
[13] Qingtian County Agricultural and Rural Affairs Bureau. (2020). Issued the nation’s first “GEP loan” of 5 million yuan. China Environmental Journalists Association.
[14] China News Service. (2025). First transaction of region-specific ecological product value rights concluded for 9.38 million yuan. https://www.chinanews.com.cn/cj/2025/07-15/ 10398922.shtml.
[15] Lishui Municipal Government. (2025). Entire-village “bundled” sale of ecological product rights for 9.38 million yuan: The nation’s first VEP transaction successfully completed. https://www.lishui.gov.cn/art/2025/7/10/art_1229218391_57379114.html.
[16] Xinhua Zhejiang / People’s Daily Online. (2025). Zhejiang (Lishui) Ecological Product Trading Platform exceeds 10 billion yuan in cumulative transactions.
[17] Du, Y., Wang, J., & Li, J. (2024). How can ecological product value realization sustainably enhance the well-being of farmers? A case study of Xingyuan Village in China. Forests, 15(8), 1457. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15081457.
[18] Liu, Y., Dai, L., Long, H., Woods, M., & Fois, F. (2022). Rural vitalization promoted by industrial transformation under globalization: The case of Tengtou village in China. Journal of Rural Studies, 95, 241–255. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/ j. jrurstud. 2022.09.020.
[19] Su, S., Ji, X., Su, Z., & Chen, A. (2024). Public sector design efficacy in rural development: A case study of the Future Village project in Changdai village, China. International Journal of Design. https://doi.org/10.57698/V18I3.06.
[20] Xiao, Y., Liu, S., Zuo, J., Yin, N., Wu, J., & Xie, W. (2022). Farmer households’ livelihood resilience in ethnic tourism villages: A case study of the Wuling Mountain area, China. Sustainability, 15(1), 662. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010662.
[21] Hao, A., Hou, Y., & Tan, J. (2022). How does digital village construction influence carbon emission? The case of China. PLOS ONE, 17(12), e0278533. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journal. pone.0278533.
[22] Lennon, A., & Berg, N. G. (2022). Alternative places for alternative people? A changing ecovillage discourse from Othered lifestyle to another rurality. Journal of Rural Studies, 95, 302–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.09.024.
[23] Temesgen, A. K. (2020). Building an island of sustainability in a sea of unsustainability? A study of two ecovillages. Sustainability, 12(24), 10585. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/ su1224 10585.
[24] Copeland, C., MacKerron, G., & Foxon, T. J. (2023). Futures for Findhorn: Exploring challenges for achieving net zero in an ecological intentional community. Futures, 149, 103155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2023.103155.
[25] East, M. (2018). Current thinking on sustainable human habitat: The Findhorn Ecovillage case. Ecocycles, 4(1), 68–72. https://doi.org/10.19040/ecocycles.v4i1.107.
[26] Cunningham, P. A., & Wearing, S. L. (2014). The politics of consensus: An exploration of the Cloughjordan Ecovillage, Ireland. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 7(2), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHMA-05-2013-0026.
[27] Kirby, P. (2016). Cloughjordan Ecovillage: Modelling the transition to a low-carbon society. In Transitioning to a Post-Carbon Society: Degrowth, Austerity and Wellbeing (pp. 183–205). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94889-5_8.
[28] Kirby, P. (2020). Cloughjordan Ecovillage: Community-led transitioning to a low-carbon future. In D. Robbins, D. Torney, & P. Brereton (Eds.), Ireland and the Climate Crisis (pp. 287–303). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47587-1_16.
[29] Kress, M. (2023). Exploring the role of eco-communities in fostering environmental stewardship: A study of volunteer tourism at Cloughjordan EcoVillage (Master’s thesis). Linnaeus University.
[30] United Nations Statistics Division. (2023). Global assessment of environmental-economic accounting and supporting statistics 2023. https://seea.un.org/news/findings-2023-global-assessment-environmental-economic-accounting.
[31] Stanford Natural Capital Project. (2025). Gross ecosystem product (GEP) (China). https:// naturalcapitalproject. stanford. edu/ research/projects/gross-ecosystem-product.
[32] Liang, L.-N., Siu, W. S., Wang, M.-X., & Zhou, G.-J. (2021). Measuring gross ecosystem product of nine cities within the Pearl River Delta of China. Environmental Challenges, 4, 100105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2021.100105.
[33] Lin, Z., Wu, T., Rao, E., Xiao, Y., & Ouyang, Z. (2024). Using gross ecosystem product to harmonize biodiversity conservation and economic development in Southwestern China. People and Nature, 6(5), 1838–1848. https://doi. org/ 10. 1002/pan3.10686.
[34] Wang, H., Wu, N., Han, G., Li, W., Batunacun, & Bao, Y. (2024). Analysis of spatial-temporal variations of grassland gross ecosystem product based on machine learning algorithm and multi-source remote sensing data: A case study of Xilinhot, China. Global Ecology and Conservation, 51, e02942. https:// doi. org/10.1016/j.gecco.2024.e02942.
[35] Zang, Z., Ren, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Analysis of the spatial adaptability of gross ecosystem production, gross domestic production, and population density in China's mainland. Land, 11(8), 1295. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081295.
[36] Liu, K., Jin, M., & Cheng, L. (2025). County green transformation: How does gross ecosystem product assessment promote common prosperity? Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-04330-5.
[37] Zhu, Z., Wu, K., Zhou, S., Wang, Z., & Chen, W. (2024). Multi-scale gross ecosystem product (GEP) valuation for wetland ecosystems: A case study of Lishui City. Water, 16(24), 3554. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16243554.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Academic Journal of Management and Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
