Role and significance of restoration technologies for vulnerable ecosystems in building an ecological civilization in China

Journal Pre-proof Role and significance of restoration technologies for vulnerable ecosystems in building an ecological civilization in China Lin Zhen, Natarajan Ishwaran, Qi Luo, Yunjie Wei, Qiang Zhang PII:

S2211-4645(19)30286-6

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2020.100494

Reference:

ENVDEV 100494

To appear in:

Environmental Development

Received Date: 25 June 2019 Revised Date:

6 November 2019

Accepted Date: 1 January 2020

Please cite this article as: Zhen, L., Ishwaran, N., Luo, Q., Wei, Y., Zhang, Q., Role and significance of restoration technologies for vulnerable ecosystems in building an ecological civilization in China, Environmental Development (2020), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2020.100494. This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Role and significance of restoration technologies for vulnerable ecosystems in building an ecological civilization in China Lin ZHENa,b∗, Natarajan ISHWARANc, Qi LUOa,b, Yunjie WEIa,b, Qiang ZHANGd a. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China b. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China c. Institute of Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China d. Center for Ecological Civilization Studies, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Beijing 100012, China

∗

Corresponding author at: Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese

Academy of Sciences. No.11A Datun Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing. E-mail address: [email protected] (Lin Zhen), [email protected] (Natarajan Ishwaran), [email protected] (Qi Luo), [email protected] (Yunjie Wei), [email protected] (Qiang Zhang).

1

Abstract

2

Degradation is a key issue facing the world, and the situation is particularly severe in China’s

3

vulnerable ecosystems, where sandy desertification, soil erosions by water and wind, and

4

karst desertification are serious problems. China’s 13th five-year development plan

5

(2016-2020) prioritized the establishment of an ecological civilization to improve the

6

country’s ecological security. In this paper, we analyzed the contribution of ecological

7

restoration technologies (ERTs) to achieving a selected number of ecological civilization

8

targets (ECTs). It is found that there are altogether 17 ECTs defined for the regions under

9

study, the total contribution of ERTs to ECTs is about 27.2%, with contribution to economic

10

targets ranking the highest, followed by ecological, social, and environmental targets. The

11

technologies contributed most to regions affected by soil erosion, followed by regions

12

affected by karst desertification and sandy desertification. Biological technology was the

13

most used restoration technology. These findings are significant for reviewing the

14

effectiveness of restoration technologies, and their ability to achieve the ecological

15

civilization goals.

16

Key words: ecological restoration technology; ecological civilization society; sandy

17

desertification; soil erosion; karst desertification; China.

18 19

1. Introduction

20

Increasingly intensive human activities have resulted in degradation of 15 major

21

ecosystem services, about 60% of the total 24 major ecosystem services, and made the

22

current use of a number of ecosystems unsustainable (UNEP, 2014; MEA, 2005). The land

23

area affected by sandy desertification, soil erosion, and karst desertification accounts for

24

more than one-quarter of the Earth’s total area (Lal et al., 2012). The situation is expected to

25

worsen by 2050, and the total economic loss caused by this land degradation will reach

26

USD23 trillion (UNCCD, 2018). The most severe losses will be in Asia and Africa, where

27

most of the world’s vulnerable populations live. China has some of the most fragile

28

ecosystems in the world, and the land area with fragile ecological conditions accounts for 55%

29

of the total land area (NDRC, 2015). With increasingly intensive human interventions,

30

ecosystem degradation has become serious in these regions, leading to problems such as soil

31

erosion, grassland degradation (often to sandy land), karst or sandy desertification, and

32

mudslides (Liu et al., 2015, 2000). Here, we have defined “karst desertification” as the loss of

33

topsoil to erosion or collapse of the surface in areas with karst topography, leading to the

34

exposure of bedrock. The total land area affected by this degradation amounts to 22% of

35

China’s total land area, and this land has been defined as ecologically vulnerable (NDRC,

36

2015). This threatens the provision of ecosystem services and human well-being, including

37

healthy physical environment (e.g. clean air and water), basic materials for a good life (e.g.

38

enough food at all times), and other determinants of a harmonious coexistence between

39

humans and nature (Zhen et al., 2009; Liu et al., 2006).

40

The extent of anthropogenic change and damage makes ecological restoration an

41

essential survival strategy for the future (Hobbs and Harris, 2001). “Ecological restoration is

42

the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or

43

destroyed” (SER, 2004). Based on this definition, restoration seeks to recover an ecosystem’s

44

ecological structure and function, including its biotic integrity. Higgs (1997) notes that “good

45

ecological restoration entails negotiating the best possible outcome for a specific site based

46

on ecological knowledge and the diverse perspectives of interested stakeholders”. The

47

Chinese government began ecological restoration projects as early as the 1950s, and since

48

then, has funded a large and growing body of research on the degradation mechanisms and

49

restoration technologies in its vulnerable ecosystems, including the dryland areas in the

50

northern and western parts of the country, soil erosion in the Loess Plateau, and karst

51

desertification in southern China. Since China’s implementation of the country’s 10th

52

five-year development plan (2001-2005), hundreds of core technologies and modes (which

53

consists of different technologies suitable for solving specific problems in a specific area) for

54

ecological restoration have been developed and applied in vulnerable ecosystems (Fu et al.,

55

2013; Cheng, 2012). These applications include water and soil conservation, dryland

56

afforestation, grassland and hedgerow establishment, and combinations of engineering and

57

biological technologies, water-saving technology, and integrated crop grown and forest

58

plantations (i.e., agroforestry) to combat desertification and other forms of ecosystem

59

degradation (ETFGC, 2015). These approaches integrate optimal land management principles

60

(Jacobs et al., 2013), bio-suitability (Weeks et al., 2011), and ecological stability (Bullock et

61

al., 2011). Sustainable land management has also been strongly emphasized at an

62

international level. Of the United Nations’ 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs), all, in

63

direct or indirect ways, could be linked to sustainable land use and management, and all

64

suggest that healthy and productive land is essential for economic growth, and to provide

65

livelihoods for billions of people around the world. The UNCCD (2017) developed a

66

conceptual framework for “land degradation neutrality” (i.e., increasing or maintaining the

67

area of land that is required to provide necessary ecosystem services) to achieve the SDGs.

68

To restore vulnerable ecosystems, reduce pollution of the environment, mitigate the

69

constraints of natural resources on socioeconomic development, and improve unbalanced and

70

unsustainable development situations in China, while achieving the Chinese government’s

71

sustainability targets, the government defined a national mission in 2012: to establish an

72

ecological civilization (Zhao et al., 2016; PLA Daily, 2015; Gu et al., 2013). . At the 19th

73

Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2017, the government again addressed the need

74

to establish such a society, and stated that conservation and protection of the country’s natural

75

resources should be prioritized, along with natural rehabilitation of vulnerable ecosystems. It

76

was also proposed that the government should formulate spatial patterns for the country’s

77

industrial structure and production systems characterized by natural resource conservation

78

and environmental protection, supported by green development and ecosystem restoration.

79

The

80

awareness-raising on the importance of this initiative, and of increasing the capacity for

81

ecological conservation.

government

also

emphasized

the

importance

of

citizen

participation,

of

82

The goal of establishing an ecological civilization focuses on directing socioeconomic

83

development to balance the ecological, economic, social, cultural, and political dimensions of

84

change (Ishwaran et al., 2015). This approach emphasizes harmony between humans and

85

nature during development by balancing socioeconomic and environmental considerations.

86

The pathways to achieve the ecological civilization targets include the development of

87

low-carbon, green and recycling systems, resource conservation, and environmental

88

protection. The goal is to secure the social and economic welfare of Chinese citizens (Zhou,

89

2012). If the goal of establishing an ecological civilization is successfully achieved, it will

90

eliminate the root causes of degradation, create a safer living environment for citizens, and

91

contribute to global ecological security. To achieve the ecological civilization targets, it is

92

clear that ecosystem restoration must consider not only how to restore or improve ecosystem

93

services and functions, but also how to account for the role of restoration technologies in

94

establishing an ecologically sustainable society.

95

In this paper, we analyzed the trends in the main ecological restoration technologies that

96

have been adopted to restore China’s ecosystems since the 1940s. Based on this analysis, we

97

explored the relationships between the restoration technologies and the ecological civilization

98

targets that have been defined for the country’s vulnerable ecosystems, and summarize the

99

significance of these technologies for achieving the government’s targets. We believe that our

100

results will provide important insights and support efforts for Chinese government and

101

communities to improve ecosystem protection without sacrificing socioeconomic

102

development of the fragile regions.

103 104

2. Methods

105

2.1 Data Collection Methods:

106

Ecological restoration technologies (ERTs):

107

The stakeholder questionnaire was used to collect ERTs that have been implemented in

108

three types of degraded areas (sandy desertification, soil erosion, and karst desertification).

109

From May to June 2018, the questionnaire was conducted among experts, scholars, and

110

government managers who have been involved in work considering three types of

111

degradation. The questionnaire includes three parts: (i) the personal information of the

112

respondent, (ii) the description of the degradation, and (iii) the ecological restoration

113

technologies that have been implemented. The questionnaire was completed by face to face,

114

mail, and e-mail. A total of 100 questionnaires were distributed, and 97 valid questionnaires

115

were collected, involving 55 institutions in 17 cities. There are 39 questionnaires for sandy

116

desertification, 31 for soil erosion, and 27 for karst desertification. Through the analysis of

117

these questionnaires, there were 35 ERTs described, including 17 for sandy desertification, 16

118

for soil erosion, and 12 for karst desertification.

119

Eco-civilization targets (ECTs):

120

The literature/report analysis method was used to collect the ECTs of the three types of

121

degraded areas (sandy desertification, soil erosion, and karst desertification). The

122

papers/reports/news involving in the construction of ecological civilization in specific area

123

published by experts, scholars, governmental departments, and authoritative organizations

124

were collected. The sources of these papers/reports/news were mainly from China National

125

Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, http://www.cnki.net/), Web of Science (WOS), People’s

126

Daily

127

(http://www.wenming.cn/). We divided these documents to 3 groups according to the

128

degradation types of their study areas (sandy desertification, soil erosion, and karst

129

desertification), then we reviewed and summarized them to find the ECTs of the three types

130

of degraded areas. The selected ECTs should be in line with the conceptual framework of

131

ecological civilization construction, conform to the thoughts of sustainable and green

132

development, and be suitable for one of the three specific degradation problem chosen for

133

this study. Through comprehensive review, and summarization of these documents, 17 ECTs

134

were identified; in each of these three degraded areas 14 of the 17 ECTs were applicable.

135

These ECTs were divided into four groups according to their type: ecological targets,

136

environmental targets, social targets and economic targets (Table 1)

online

(http://www.people.com.cn/),

Ecological Civilization Targets (ECTs) Ecological targets: 1 Control land degradation 2 Ecological balance 3 Conserve soil and water 4 Flood control 5 Increase vegetation cover 6 Reduce sandstorm impacts 7 Conserve biodiversity 8

Efficient use of water resources

Environmental targets: 9 Improve soil quality 10

Improve air quality

11

Improve water quality

Social targets: 12 Poverty alleviation 13 Better livelihood 14

Job opportunities

Economic targets: 15 Green development 16 17

139

Civilization

Network

Table 1. Definitions of the 17 most important targets for establishment of an ecological civilization

137

138

China

Increase income Increase crop yield

Definition Combat human-induced biophysical environmental degradation of land. Keep the ecosystem in a coordinated and unified state. Prevent and control soil erosion and water loss. Prevent the development of floods and reduce their detrimental effects. Increase vegetation cover. Decrease the frequency and damage caused by sandstorms. Protect the variation within species, between species, and between ecosystems. Strengthen water management based on more rational and scientific water use to improve water utilization and avoid waste of water resources. Improve the physical properties, chemical properties and organic matters of soils, such as the soil texture and fertility. Reduce the concentration of air pollutants, such as suspended particles, NO2, SO2, and CO. Improve the physical (e.g., turbidity), chemical (e.g., organic and inorganic compounds), and biological (e.g., microorganism) properties of the water resource. Help people to escape poverty and live a richer and happier life. Improve issues closely related to the quality of life, such as better food, housing, clothing, transportation, and communication. Provide employment opportunities. Achieve economic growth and social development efficiently, harmoniously, and continuously without harming the environment. Raise the income of residents of project areas. Increase production to improve food security and nutrition.

Note: the 17 important targets have been developed based on ECTs defined by the Government.

140

2.2 Calculation of the contributions of restoration technologies to the ecological

141

civilization targets.

142 143 144

Each restoration technology potentially contributes to achieving the ecological civilization targets. To calculate this contribution, we used the following equation:
[ ] = ⁄

(1)

145

Where r is the contribution rate of a particular ERT to addressing specific type of

146

ecological degradation (ED); in EDij, ,i represents the category (sandy desertification, soil

147

erosion, and karst desertification) of degradation and j represents the technology category

148

(biological, agricultural, engineering, and other); X is the total number where a restoration

149

technology has been applied to reach an ecological civilization target (marked with an x in

150

Table 3 to 6); and N is the number of restoration technologies multiplied by the number of

151

ecological civilization targets for each degradation category (Table 3 to 6).

152 153

To ensure that these contributions total 100%, we used the following standardization equation:

154

[ ] =
[ ]⁄∑
[ ]

155

Where R is the standardized contribution of technology j to remedying degradation

156

(2)

category i.

157 158

3. Results

159

3.1 Evolution of ecological restoration strategies in China’s vulnerable ecosystems

160

The governance of China’s ecological management system originated mainly from the

161

country’s soil and water conservation programs, then expanded to include desertification

162

control in arid areas and in karst areas. The associated governance strategies have evolved

163

from single and simple approaches to comprehensive approaches based on ecological

164

harmony (Fig. 1). Soil and water conservation concerns emerged in China during the 1940s,

165

when the Tianshui Soil Erosion Experimental Station was established (Yang and Li, 1998;

166

Liu, 1954), and during the early 1950s, when the study of desertification began (Wang, 2009).

167

From the 1950s to the 1960s, soil erosion and desertification research focused on their

168

prevention and control. China’s land degradation governance began a new stage in the 1970s,

169

when large-scale integrated national projects were implemented, such as the Three-Norths

170

Shelter Forest Program and Sloping Land Conversion Program. This period also saw the

171

establishment of the Chinese Society of Soil and Water Conservation and implementation of

172

the Water and Soil Conservation Law of the People’s Republic of China, which demonstrated

173

the growing maturity and continuous improvement of systems to promote soil and water

174

conservation. Since 2000, there has been increasing recognition of the environmental

175

vulnerability of karst areas, and prevention and control of desertification in these areas began

176

(Yuan, 2008). Under the UNESCO International Geoscience Program (IGCP), China’s Karst

177

Dynamics Laboratory of the former Ministry of Land and Resources (now the Ministry of

178

Natural Resources) has actively engaged in the IGCP299, IGCP379, and IGCP448 projects

179

initiated by IGCP, and has continued to expand this research to achieve a more global vision,

180

and begin a new stage of exploration of restoration technologies (Yuan, 2001).

181 182

Fig.1. Evolution of ecosystem restoration technologies and governance actions in China.

183

Note: Acronyms used stand for: NFPP, Natural Forest Protection Program; RDCCD, Research and

184

Development Center for Combating Desertification; SAC/TC365, National Technical Committee 365 on

185

Desert Prevention and Control of Standardization Administration of China; SLCP, Sloping Land

186

Conversion Program; SWCS, Soil and Water Conservation Society; TNSFP, Three Norths Shelter Forest

187

program; WSC, Water and Soil Conservation.

188 189

In terms of governance, efforts to combat karst desertification were fully integrated

190

within the second Pearl River Shelter Forest Program and Yangtze River Shelter Forest

191

Program in 2001, and the government has relied on the Sloping Land Conversion Program

192

and Small Watershed Management Program to control desertification in karst areas. Local

193

governance has had some successes, and Jia (2011) summarized the karst desertification

194

control technologies and modes. In 2006, China’s Ministry of Water Resources proposed and

195

implemented new requirements for ecologically suitable governance of small watersheds

196

based on the urgent need to balance rapid economic growth with environmental improvement,

197

and expanded the approach from simple ecosystem protection to include human-centered

198

governance (Li et al., 2012). The Three-Norths Shelter Forest Program, National Key

199

Construction Project of Soil and Water Conservation, and Desertification Rehabilitation

200

Program in Karst Areas are the key restoration programs initiated by the central government

201

to combat desertification in northern China, soil erosion in the Loess Plateau, and

202

desertification in karst areas of southwestern China. As shown in Table 2, a range of

203

restoration technologies have been involved in the implementation of these programs, and

204

their use can contribute to meeting a number of sustainable development goals.

205

Table 2. The relationships between major restoration programs, restoration technologies, ecological

206

civilization targets, and sustainable development goals. Programs Three-Norths Shelter Forest Program Biotechnology based; Desertification zones

National Key Construction Project of Soil and Water Conservation Engineering technology; Soil erosion area of the Loess Plateau

Biological

Technology artificial planting, aerial seeding

Agricultural

shelterbelts in farmland

Engineering

sand barrier

Other

Convert farmland to forest or grassland, ecological migration of residents artificial planting, natural recovery contour farming (terraces)

Biological Agricultural Engineering

Other Desertification Treatment Program in Karst Areas Biological and engineering technology; Desertification

Biological Agricultural Engineering

Other

Convert sloping land to terraces, create soil retaining dams and check dams, fish scale pit, cisterns Convert farmland to forest or grassland, ecological compensation payments natural recovery, planting contour farming, conservation tillage exploding stone to build new land, drainage, converting sloping land to terraces chemical water retaining agent

Effectiveness Improve vegetation cover, stabilize topsoil, reduce wind velocity to minimize wind erosion. Improve the microclimate of farmland, increase crop yield. Fix sand to improve its resistance to erosion. Stabilize topsoil, reduce wind velocity

ECTs 1-2, 5-7, 9-10, 13-15, 17

SDGs 1-3, 6-8, 11-13, 15

Improve vegetation cover, conserve land resources, improve soil conditions. Reduce soil erosion and nutrient loss, increase crop yield. Protect water and soil, intercept silt, fix trench bed, supply irrigation to relieve drought, grain production, increase crop yield.

1-5, 7-9, 11-13, 15-17

1-3, 6, 9-11, 13, 15

1-5, 7-9, 11-13, 15-17

1-2, 6-7, 10, 13, 15

Reduce soil erosion, improve soil conditions. Improve vegetation cover, conserve land resources, improve soil conditions. Improve soil conditions, Promote biodiversity. divert slope runoff, Protect soil, increase crop yield. Improve soil moisture status.

207

ECTs: ECT 1 Control land degradation, ECT 2 Ecological balance, ECT 3 Conserve soil and water, ECT 4

208

Flood control, ECT 5 Increase vegetation cover, ECT 6 Reduce sandstorm impacts, ECT 7 Conserve

209

biodiversity, ECT 8 Conserve water, ECT 9 Improve soil quality, ECT 10 Improve air quality, ECT 11

210

Improve water quality, ECT 12 Poverty alleviation, ECT 13 Better livelihood, ECT 14 Job opportunities,

211

ECT 15 Green development, ECT 16 Increase income, ECT 17 Increase crop yield.

212

SDGs: SDG 1 No poverty, SDG 2 Zero hunger, SDG 3 Good health and well-being, SDG 4 Quality

213

education, SDG 5 Gender equality, SDG 6 Clean water and sanitation, SDG 7 Affordable and clean energy,

214

SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth, SDG 9 Industry, innovation and infrastructure, SDG 10

215

Reduced inequalities. , SDG 11 Sustainable cities and communities, SDG 12 Responsible consumption and

216

production, SDG 13 Climate action, SDG 14 Life below water, SDG 15 Life on land, SDG 16 Peace,

217

justice and strong institutions, SDG 17 Partnerships for the goals and communities.

218 219

3.2 Significance of ecological civilization targets and restoration technologies for the

220

establishment of an ecologically civilized society

221

China’s ecologically vulnerable regions account for a high proportion of national

222

territory area, extremely vulnerable regions account for 9.7%, severely vulnerable regions

223

account for 19.8%, moderate vulnerable regions account for 25.5% (Fig. 2). Based on our

224

review of the ecological civilization targets for China’s ecologically vulnerable regions we

225

identified 17 important targets for these regions (Table 1) in terms of their ability to support

226

the establishment of an ecologically sustainable society. These targets cover environmental,

227

social, and economic dimensions of an ecologically sustainable society. They include 8

228

ecological targets, 3 environmental targets, 3 social targets, and 3 economic targets.

229 230

Fig.2. Ecological vulnerability in China

231

Data source: Chinese Academy of Sciences (State Council of P. R. China, 2010)

232 233

Restoration technologies can be classified into four main groups: biological, engineering,

234

agricultural, and “other”. Biological technologies mainly involve plants, animals, or

235

microbiology, and include the establishment of artificial forests, grasslands, and biological

236

soil crusts. Engineering technologies mostly involve physical methods such as creating sand

237

barriers, terraces, and check dams. Agricultural technologies include conservation tillage and

238

agroforestry. “Other” refers mostly to policy and management approaches such as ecological

239

migration (moving residents of degraded areas to new locations) and modifications of

240

livestock management such as grazing exclusion, fallowing, and rotation grazing. In our

241

survey of experts in each of these areas, we identified 35 main restoration technologies that

242

are being used in vulnerable ecosystems where sandy desertification, soil erosion, and karst

243

desertification are occurring. These included 9 biological technologies, 8 agricultural

244

technologies, 10 engineering technologies, and 8 other technologies (Table 3). Biological

245

technologies are mostly used in desertification areas (5 of 9 technologies), whereas

246

agricultural and engineering technologies are mostly used in soil erosion regions (5 of 8 and

247

10 technologies, respectively). Of the 35 restoration technologies, 17 are used in

248

desertification regions, 16 in soil erosion regions, and 12 in karst desertification regions

249

(Table 4 to 6).

250

Table 3. Relationships between ecological restoration technologies (ERTs) and ecological civilization targets (ECTs).

Technology category Artificial forest/grassland Weed control Biological Natural recovery (9) Selected species Pest/disease control Stand improvement Artificial forest/grass Hedgerows to protect roads Biological soil crusts Sub-total Agricultur Agroforestry al (8) Conservation tillage Contour farming Soil improvement Preserve soil moisture Water-saving irrigation Drip irrigation under mulch Ridge and furrow planting Sub-total Engineerin Convert sloping land to terraces g (10) Soil-retaining dams Exploding stone to build land Sand barriers Highway shelter forest Drainage Check dams Fish scale pit Pipe drainage Water conservation Cisterns Sub-total Other (8) Convert farmland to forest or grassland Grazing modification Fencing Ecological compensation payments Livestock-grassland balance Chemical water retaining agents Ecological migration Mixture of trees, shrubs, and grassland Sub-total Total

Control Ecological land balance degradation X x X x X x x X x x X

Conserve soil and water x x

Ecological targets (8) Flood Increase Reduce control vegetation cover sandstorms x x

x

Conserve biodiversity

Conserve water

x x x

x

x x x

X 6 X X

6 x x

3

2

3

x 2

3

0

x X x x x 3

2

x 2 x x

0 x x

0

0 X X

0 x x x

4 x

0

3 x

x x x

0

x x

x x 4 x x

1 x x x

2 x x x

0 x x x

x 2

X x X X

x x

5 14

5 13

x 2 11

2 8

3 7

3 7

3 6

1 6

Sub-t otal 6 3 6 1 3 1 2 1 2 25 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 2 3 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 13 7 6 4 1 1 2 2 1 24 72

Environmental targets (3) Improve soil Improve air Improve water Sub-t quality quality quality otal x x x

x

3 x x

2

x

0 x

x x

4

0

1

x x x 2 x x x

1 x x x

0

3 6

0 1

x x 5 14

2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 2 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 8 21

251

(Continued from previous table) Technology category Artificial forest/grassland Weed control Biological (9) Natural recovery Selected species Pest/disease control Stand improvement Artificial forest/grass Hedgerows to protect roads Biological soil crusts Sub-total Agricultural Agroforestry (8) Conservation tillage Contour farming Soil improvement Preserve soil moisture Water-saving irrigation Drip irrigation under mulch Ridge and furrow planting Sub-total Engineering Convert sloping land to terraces (10) Soil-retaining dams Exploding stone to build land Sand barriers Highway shelter forest Drainage Check dams Fish scale pit Pipe drainage Water conservation Cisterns Sub-total Other (8) Convert farmland to forest or grassland Grazing modification Fencing Ecological compensation payments Livestock-grassland balance Chemical water retaining agents Ecological migration Mixture of trees, shrubs, and grassland Sub-total Total

Social targets (3) Poverty Better alleviation livelihood x x x x x

3 x

Job opportunities x

x x

4

1

x x

3 x x x

0 x x x x x x

0

5

6

3

x

x

1 12

1 11

x x x

x x

0 4

Economic targets (3) Sub-total Green Increase development income 3 x 2 x x 0 x 2 x x 1 0 x x 0 x x 0 x x 0 8 7 5 1 x x 0 x 1 x 1 x 0 0 x x 0 x x 0 x 3 4 6 2 x x 2 3 x 2 2 1 x 1 1 0 0 14 1 3 0 x 0 x 0 x 2 x x 0 x 0 0 0 2 5 1 27 17 15

Increase crop yield x x

2 x x x x

4 x x x x

4

0 10

Sub-total 1 3 1 2 1 2 2 2 0 14 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 14 3 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 8 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 6 42

Total 12 9 9 5 5 3 4 3 2 52 7 5 4 5 3 3 3 2 32 7 6 5 4 4 4 2 3 2 1 38 10 9 7 5 3 3 2 1 40 162

252

Note: The symbols "x" means that the particular restoration technology has been applied to meet the given ecological civilization target; and the blank

253

cells means the restoration technology had not been used for meeting the ecological civilization target.

254

Table 4. Relationships between the ecological restoration technologies and ecological civilization targets for the establishment of an ecologically sustainable

255

society in regions affected by sandy desertification.

Technology category Biological (5)

Artificial forest/grassland Weed control Pest/disease control Artificial forest/grassland Biological soil crusts Sub-total Agricultural(3) Agroforestry Drip irrigation under mulch Water-saving irrigation Sub-total Engineering(4) Sand barriers Highway shelter forests Pipe drainage Water conservation Sub-total Other (5) Grazing modification Ecological compensation payments Fencing Livestock-grasslands balance Ecological migration Sub-total (17) Total

Desertification control X X X X X 5 X

1

Ecological restoration targets (6) Ecological Reduce Increase Conserve Conserve balance sandstorms vegetation water biodiversity cover x x x

x

x x x x

3 x

1

x 2

0 x x

2

0

2

0

x x 2

0

x x

0 X X X X 4 10

0 x x

2 x x

1 x x

1

0 x x

x x 3 7

2 6

2 5

1 4

2 4

Sub-total

4 3 3 2 2 14 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 0 4 5 4 1 2 2 14 36

Environmental targets (2) Improve Improve Sub-total soil air quality quality x x

x

2 x

1

1

0 x

0 x x

1 x x

x 3 6

2 4

2 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 0 5 10

Better livelihood x x x

Social targets (3) Poverty Job Sub-total alleviation opportunity x x

x

3

2 x

1

0 x x

1

0 x x

2

x 1

x

x

1 6

1 5

2

0 3

3 2 1 0 0 6 1 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 2 14

Economic targets (3) Green Increase Increase development income crop yield x x

x

x

x

3 x x x 3

2 x x x 3

2 x

0 x x x

0

0

3 9

1 6

x x

1

x

0 3

Sub-total

1 3 1 2 0 7 3 2 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 4 18

(14 To

9 6 4 2 2 2 4 1 1 6 4 4 1 1 1 7 6 3 3 2 2 6

256

Table 5. Relationships between the ecological restoration technologies and ecological civilization targets for the establishment of an ecologically sustainable

257

society in regions affected by soil erosion.

Technology category Biological (4)

Artificial forest/grassland Natural recovery Stand improvement Selected species Sub-total Agricultural Agroforestry (4) Conservation tillage Contour farming Vegetation ridges Sub-total Engineering Convert sloping land to terraces (5) Soil-retaining dams Check dams Fish scale pit Water conservation Cisterns Sub-total Other (3) Converting farmland to forest or grassland Mixture of trees, shrubs, and grassland Ecological compensation payments Sub-total (16) Total

Ecological restoration targets (5) Soil and Ecological Flood Increased Conserve Sub-total water balance control vegetation biodiversity conservation cover x x x x 4 x x x x x 5 x 1 x 1 2 4 2 2 1 11 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 2 2 0 0 0 4 x x 2 x x 2 x x 2 x 1 x 1 4 x x 2 10

0 x

4 x

0 X

0 x

x 2 8

1 7

X 2 4

x 2 3

8 5 1 3 9 32

Environmental targets (3) Improve Improve Improve Sub-total soil air water quality quality quality x x 2 x x 2 0 0 2 2 0 4 x 1 x x 2 0 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 x 1 0 1 x

0 x

x 2 7

x 2 4

0

0 1

1 2 0 2 4 12

Social targets (3) Poverty Better Job Sub-total alleviation livelihood opportunities x

X

x

x 2 x

X 2

1

x 2 x x x

0 X X

0

4

2

0

0 8

0 4

0 1

x

3 0 0 2 5 1 0 1 0 2 2 2 1 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 13

Economic targets (3) Green Increased Increased Sub-total development income crop yield X 1 X 1 X x 2 X x 2 4 2 0 6 X x x 3 X 1 x x 2 x 1 2 3 2 7 X x x 3 x 1 0 0 0 1 X X 2 9

1

2

0 6

0 4

4 1 0 1 2 19

(14) Total

10 8 3 5 26 6 4 4 2 16 7 5 3 2 2 19 8 1 6 15 76

258

Table 6. Relationships between the ecological restoration technologies and ecological civilization targets for the establishment of an ecologically sustainable

259

society in regions affected by karst desertification.

Technology category

Biological (3)

Natural recovery Selected species Hedgerow Subtotal Agricultural Conservation tillage (3) Contour farming Soil improvement Subtotal Engineering Converting sloping land to terraces (3) Exploding stone to build land Drainage Subtotal Other (3) Converting farmland to forest or grassland Chemical water retaining agents Ecological migration Subtotal (12) Total

Ecological restoration targets (5) Ecological Control of Flood Increased Conserve Sub-total balance desertification control vegetation biodiversity cover x x x x x 5 x 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 6 x x 2 0 x 1 1 2 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 x x x x x 5 x 1 x x 2 3 2 1 1 1 8 6 5 3 2 2 18

Environmental targets (3) Improve Improve Improve Sub-total soil air water quality quality quality x x 2 0 0 1 1 0 2 x x 2 0 x 1 2 0 1 3 0 0 x 1 1 0 0 1 x x 2 x 1 0 2 1 0 3 6 2 1 9

Social targets (3) Poverty Better Job Sub-total alleviation livelihood opportunities

x

x

1

1

0

0

2

0 x x x 3

0 5

0 4

0 1

x x 2 x x

x 1

0 2 0 2 0 1 1 2 2 3 1 6 0 0 0 0 10

Economic targets (3) Green Increase Increase Sub-total development income crop yield x 1 x x 2 x x 2 3 2 0 5 x 1 x x 2 x x 2 1 2 2 5 x x x 3 x x 2 x x 2 1 3 3 7 x 1 x 1 0 2 0 0 2 7 7 5 19

(14) Total

8 5 2 15 5 3 5 13 6 5 4 15 8 3 2 13 56

260

By comparing the relationships between restoration technologies (which we will discuss

261

later in this section) and the ecological civilization targets, we found that 27.2% (Table 3) of

262

the restoration technologies contribute directly to achieving the targets. The contributions

263

varied among the dimensions of sustainability, with the greatest contribution to economic

264

targets (40.0%, for 17 technologies, but only 10 technologies related to crop productivity),

265

followed by ecological targets (about 25.7%, for 14 land degradation control technologies,

266

but only 6 biodiversity protection and water saving technologies), social targets (25.7%, for

267

12 poverty alleviation technologies, but only 4 employment opportunity technologies), and

268

environmental targets (20.0%, for 14 soil quality improvement technologies, but only 1 water

269

quality technologies) (Table 3).The contribution of the restoration technologies to achieving

270

the targets also varied among the different technology categories. Biological technology

271

contributed to the most targets (34.0%), followed by other technologies (listed in Table 3, e.g.

272

convert farmland to forest or grassland, grazing modification, fencing) (29.4%), agricultural

273

technology (23.5%), and engineering technology (22.4%). For example, afforestation and

274

artificial grassland establishment, in the biological technology category, was related to 12

275

targets—the highest total—followed by conversion of farmland to forest or grassland (10

276

targets), agroforestry (7 targets), and conversion of slopes into terraces (7 targets) (Table 3).

277

As we noted earlier, each of the degradation categories has its own targets, so the

278

contributions of different restoration technologies to these targets will vary among the

279

degradation categories (Fig. 3). The ecological restoration technologies contributed most to

280

soil erosion control (36.7% of the technologies, of which the standardized contributions were

281

40.4% for biological technologies, 38.7% for agricultural technologies, 36.9% for other

282

technologies, and 33.6% for engineering technologies). This was followed by karst

283

desertification control (36.0% of the technologies, of which the standardized contributions

284

were 31.0% for biological technologies, 41.9% for agricultural technologies, 32.0% for other

285

technologies, and 44.3% for engineering technologies), and desertification regions (27.3% of

286

the technologies, of which the standardized contributions were 28.6% for biological

287

technologies, 19.4% for agricultural technologies, 31.3% for other technologies, and 22.1%

288

for engineering technologies) (Fig. 3).

Sandy desertification

Type of ERTs

Other

Soil erosion

31.1

Engineering technologies Agricultural technologies

32.0 44.3

38.7

19.4

Biological technologies

28.6

Total

27.3 0.0

36.9 33.6

22.1

41.9 31.0

40.4

36.0

36.7 20.0

Karst desertification

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

Standardized contribution (%)

289 290

Fig. 3. Contribution of the ERTs (different categories) to the ECTs for the three types of vulnerable

291

ecosystems.

292 293

4. Discussion

294

We found that more of the restoration technologies were applicable in sandy

295

desertification regions and soil erosion regions than in karst desertification regions. This is

296

because sandy desertification affects 1 720 000 km2 (17.9% of China’s total land area) (SFA,

297

2015). The total soil erosion area is 2 940 000 km2 (30.6% of China’s total land area) and the

298

situation is particularly severe in the Loess Plateau, where the area affected by soil erosion is

299

about 390 000 km2 (61.0% of the total land in the Loess Plateau), and is having significant

300

impacts on agricultural production whilst also increasing sedimentation in the downstream

301

rivers (Ning, 2017; Gao et al., 2015; Huang et al., 2001). In contrast, the karst desertification

302

area is mostly located in southwestern China, where the total land area affected is 689 000

303

km2, which amounts to only 7.2% of the country’s total land area (Xu et al., 2018). The karst

304

landscape is an important tourist destination due to its natural beauty, so few restoration

305

technologies are used in the area.

306

Managers use restoration technologies to restore vulnerable ecosystems, with the goals

307

of recovering the functions and services that the ecosystem provided before degradation,

308

increasing recycling of resources, improving environmental conditions, and promoting the

309

region’s socioeconomic development (Zhen et al., 2019). In Guyuan, a city in China’s

310

Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, the Sloping Land Conversion Program helped to increase

311

the vegetation cover, release farm workers to seek off-farm employment, promote changes in

312

the balance of crop types and cultivation techniques and increase household income (Wang et

313

al., 2017). This means that the Sloping Land Conversion Program has contributed to regional

314

development in terms of all three dimensions of sustainability (ecological, social, and

315

economic development). The contributions of restoration technologies to the ecological

316

civilization targets vary among the three dimensions, with the contribution highest for

317

economic targets. This indicates that the application of these technologies has prioritized

318

economic dimension over ecological, social, and environmental aspects. However, given the

319

remoteness of these vulnerable ecosystems, and the low income levels of residents relative to

320

the rest of the country, the provision and maintenance of a substantial livelihoods is a

321

necessary condition for ensuring that ecological restoration contributes to the sustainable

322

development of these regions.

323

The contribution of the restoration technologies to the sustainability targets differed

324

among the technology categories. Biological technology ranked highest. This is consistent

325

with the fact that biological technology is widely believed to play a key role in restoring

326

vulnerable ecosystems that are still able to be restored (Dong, 2009; Hobbs and Harris, 2001;

327

Hobbs and Norton, 1996). The main reason for this belief is the long history of application of

328

many of these technologies (Bryan et al., 2018; He et al., 2012); for example, afforestation

329

has been implemented since 1978. Some of the engineering technologies that have been

330

repeatedly promoted have even longer histories; e.g., and the construction of Hani terraces in

331

Yunnan Province has been practiced for more than 2000 years (Jiao et al., 2002), and these

332

terraces were listed as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 2013. On the other hand, some

333

newly developed technologies such as biological soil crusts and the establishment of shrub or

334

grassland belts in sloping farmland are relatively expensive, require technical skills and

335

demand careful experimentation and learning-by-doing; hence they are less frequently used

336

(Jiang, 2013; Yu et al., 2011).

337

The high adoption of biological and agricultural technologies in soil erosion regions lies

338

in the deep soils of the Loess Plateau, which are highly suitable for plant growth; as a result,

339

these technologies can greatly reduce erosion (Li et al., 2017), and maintain biodiversity (An

340

et al., 1997a, b). Agricultural technology is less used in sandy desertification regions because

341

of the poor soil and harsh natural conditions (Wang et al., 2013).

342

The ecological civilization targets (ECTs) provide guidelines and a framework for

343

Chinese development plans (Wei et al., 2018), and it is a commitment of China’s government

344

to the United Nations SDGs. The relationships between the ERTs and ECTs in this paper will

345

help Chinese governments to improve sustainable development programs and policies, and

346

provide examples and experiences for other countries (Sun et al., 2018). Bryan et al. (2018)

347

found that since 1978, China has invested more than USD370 billion across 6.2×106km2 (65%

348

of the country’s total area) through 16 major national sustainability programs. These

349

programs particularly contributed to SDG15 (protecting, restoring and promoting sustainable

350

use of terrestrial ecosystems, USD281.09 billion), SDG2 (ending hunger and promoting

351

sustainable agriculture, USD175.91 billion), SDG1 (ending poverty, USD167.22 billion),

352

SDG13 (combating climate change, USD155.75 billion), and SDG11 (making human

353

settlements inclusive and sustainable, USD153.89 billion). The case of China clearly calls for

354

the need for the UN to recognize the fact that although UN adopted SDGs only in September

355

2015, programs to meet many of the SDGs have perhaps been on-going in many countries

356

since much earlier times. The implementation of these programs has had strong positive

357

impacts: for example, forests now cover more than 22% of China, grasslands have expanded

358

and regenerated, the sediment load of the Yellow River has decreased by 90%, agricultural

359

productivity has grown by an average of 5% annually, and millions of rural people have been

360

lifted out of poverty (Sun et al., 2018). This experience, best practices and lessons learned in

361

achieving a balance between environmental conservation and socioeconomic development

362

could be shared with other countries, particularly those that are partnering with China under

363

its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to facilitate their own efforts to achieve the United Nations

364

sustainable development goals, which can help to move the international scientific

365

cooperation in environmental arena, particularly under Programmes such as the UNESCO,

366

Man and Biosphere (MAB) Programme (Ishwaran et al., 2012).

367 368

5. Conclusions and future perspectives

369

Ecological restoration aims to restore vulnerable ecosystems, but the modern approach

370

recognizes the linkage between poverty and ecosystem degradation; it therefore attempts to

371

promote socioeconomic development in vulnerable ecosystems where sandy desertification,

372

soil erosion, and karst desertification are severe. Currently, 35 main restoration technologies

373

are being used in the vulnerable ecosystems of China, and 17 ecological civilization targets

374

have been defined for these regions. The total contribution of restoration technologies to

375

achieving these targets is close to about 28%, of which the greatest contribution has been to

376

economic targets, followed by ecological, social, and environmental targets. Restoration

377

technologies contributed most to soil erosion regions, followed by karst desertification

378

regions and sandy desertification regions. The biological technologies (e.g., afforestation and

379

artificial grasslands) had the highest contribution, followed by other, agricultural, and

380

engineering technologies.

381 382

For the future, two main issues must be resolved before restoration technologies can be linked to achievement of the sustainability targets in China’s fragile ecological zones:

383

First, there is a high need to develop location-specific restoration strategies and

384

technologies that account for unique local conditions. This will require in-depth research,

385

possibly in the form of pilot projects, combined with evaluation and prioritization of the most

386

suitable technologies. According to the figures released by the Environmental Technology

387

Forecasting Group of China (ETFGC, 2015), China lags behind the United States and

388

European countries by 10 to 15 years in terms of its development and application of

389

technologies for ecosystem monitoring and evaluation, and by 5 to 10 years in the

390

development and application of technologies for the restoration of wetland, forest, and

391

grassland ecosystems. About 80% of the related ecosystem restoration technologies are still

392

being tested in pilot projects, and only 20% is suitable for wide-scale implementation. These

393

rates are 43.7% and 56.3%, respectively, in developed countries (ETFGC, 2015). Therefore, it

394

will be necessary to learn how to develop site-specific restoration technologies that focus on

395

the causes and mechanisms of degradation. Moreover, monitoring and evaluation of the

396

technologies is needed in order to identify the most applicable and effective technologies for

397

specific situations.

398

Second, it is necessary to quantify the relationships between the restoration technologies

399

and the ecological civilization targets. Although the ecological effects of many of these

400

technologies are often well understood, the payback from applying these technologies (i.e.,

401

the progress towards achieving the targets) is not yet clear. More research will be necessary to

402

provide quantitative data and identify the most suitable methodology packages and tools to

403

improve the success of the application of integrated approaches to ecological restoration.

404

Participation of relevant stakeholders who are affected by restoration projects is essential to

405

achieve any long-term success.

406 407

Funding:

408 409 410

This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFC0503700), and the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDA20010202).

411

412

References

413

An, S., Wang, Z. F., Zhu, X. L., Hong, B. G., Zhao, R. L.,1997a. Effects of soil factors on the

414

species diversity of forest community. Journal of Wuhan Botanical Research 15(2),

415

143-150. (In Chinese with English Abstract)

416

An, S. Q., Wang, Z. F., Zhu X. L., Liu, Z. L., Hong, B. G., Zhao, R. L., 1997b. Effects of soil

417

factors on the secondary succession of forest community. Acta Ecologica Sinica 17(1),

418

45-50. (In Chinese with English Abstract)

419

Bryan, B. A., Gao, L., Ye, Y. Q., Sun, X. F., Connor, J. D., Crossman, N. D., Stafford-Smith,

420

M., Wu, J. G., He, C. Y., Yu, D. Y., Liu, Z. F., Li, A., Huang, Q. X., Ren, H., Deng, X. Z.,

421

Zheng, H., Niu, J. M., Han, G. D., Hou, X. Y., 2018. China’s response to a national

422

land-system sustainability emergency. Nature 559(7713), 193.

423

Bullock, J. M., Aronson, J., Newton, A. C., Pywell, R. F., Rey-Benayas, J. M., 2011.

424

Restoration of ecosystem services and biodiversity: conflicts and opportunities. Trends

425

in Ecology & Evolution 26(10): 541–549.

426 427

Cheng, G. D., 2012. Integration of ecological restoration experiment and demonstration research in Western China. Science Press, Beijing. (In Chinese)

428

Dong, S. K., 2009. Restoration Ecology. Beijing: Higher Education Press. (In Chinese)

429

ETFGC (Environmental Technology Forecasting Group in China), 2015. Global Technology

430 431 432

Competition in Environmental Area, Working Paper, Beijing. Fu, B. J, Liu, G. H., Ouyang, Z. Y., 2013. Study on ecological regionalization of China. Science Press, Beijing. (In Chinese)

433

Gao, H. D., Li, Z. B., Jia, L. L., Li, P., Xu, G. C., Ren, Z. P., Pang, G. W., Zhao, B., H., 2015.

434

The capacity of soil loss control in the Loess Plateau based on soil erosion control

435

degree. Acta Geographica Sinica 70(9), 1503-1515. (In Chinese with English Abstract)

436

Gu, S. Z., Hu, Y. J., Zhou, H., 2013. Ecological civilization construction: scientific

437

connotation and basic paths. Resources Science 35(1):2-13. (In Chinese with English

438

Abstract)

439 440 441 442 443

He, G. Z., Lu, Y. L., Mol, A. P. J., Beckers, T., 2012. Changes and challenges: China’s environmental management in transition. Environmental Development 3, 25-38. Higgs, E. S., 1997. What is good ecological restoration? Conservation Biology 11(2), 338-348. Hobbs, R. J., Harris, J. A., 2001. Restoration ecology: repairing the Earth's ecosystems in the

444 445 446

new millennium. Restoration Ecology 9(2), 239-246. Hobbs, R. J., Norton, D. A., 1996. Towards a conceptual framework for restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 4 (2), 93-110.

447

Huang, M. B., Dong, C. Y, Li, Y. S, 2001. On potential grain yield increase in the soil loss

448

region of Loess Plateau. Journal of Natural Resources 16(4), 366-372. (In Chinese with

449

English Abstract)

450

Ishwaran, N., 2012. Science in intergovernmental environmental relations: 40 years of

451

UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme and its future. Environmental

452

Development 1(1), 91-101.

453

Ishwaran, N., Hong, T., Yi, Z., 2015. Building an ecological civilization in China: towards a

454

practice based learning approach. International Journal of Earth Sciences and

455

Engineering 5(6), 349-362.

456

Jacobs, D. F., Dalgleish, H. J., Nelson, C. D., 2013. A conceptual framework for restoration

457

of threatened plants: the effective model of American chestnut (Castanea dentata)

458

reintroduction. New Phytologist 197(2), 378-393.

459 460 461 462

Jia, Z. B., 2011. Reform and Development: Research Reports on China's Major Forestry Issues in 2010. China Forestry Press, Beijing. (In Chinese) Jiang, Z. H., 2013. Best practices for land degradation control in China’s arid regions (2nd Edition). China Forestry Press, Beijing. (In Chinese)

463

Jiao, Y. M., Cheng, G. D, Xiao, D. N., 2002. A study on the cultural landscape of Hani's

464

terrace and its protection. Geographical Research 21(6), 733-741. (In Chinese with

465

English Abstract)

466

Lal, R., Lorenz, K., Hüttl, R. F., Schneider, B. U., Von Braun, J., 2012. Recarbonization of

467

the biosphere: ecosystems and the global carbon cycle. Springer Science & Business

468

Media. Dordrecht, the Netherlands.

469

Li, J. H, Yuan, L., Yu, X. X., Liu, Q. J., 2012. Current situation and prospect of ecological

470

clean small watershed construction. Soil and Water Conservation in China (6), 11-13. (In

471

Chinese with English Abstract)

472

Li, Z., Zhao, Y. J., Song, H. Y., Zhang, J., Tao, J. P., Liu, J. C., 2017. The effect of soil

473

thickness heterogeneity on grassland plant community structure and growth of dominant

474

species in karst area. Pratacultural Science 2017(10), 51-60. (In Chinese with English

475

Abstract)

476

Liu, G. H., Fu, B. J., Chen, L. D., Guo, X. D., 2000. Characteristics and distributions of

477

degraded ecological types in China. Acta Ecologica Sinica 20(1), 13-19. (In Chinese

478

with English Abstract)

479 480 481 482

Liu, J. Y., Yue, T. X., Ju, H. B., 2006. Integrated ecosystem assessment of western China. China Meteorological Press, Beijing. (In Chinese) Liu, S. J., 1954. Preliminary analysis of soil erosion in Tianshui. Yellow River (1), 19-32. (In Chinese)

483

Liu, X. Y., Zhou, S., Qi, S., Yang, B., Chen, Y. H., Huang, R., Du, P. F., 2015. Zoning of rural

484

water conservation in China: a case study at Ashihe River Basin. International Soil

485

Water Conservation Research 3(2), 130-140. (In Chinese with English Abstract)

486

MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment), 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being:

487

Policy Response. Findings of the responses working group. Island Press, Washington,

488

DC.

489 490 491 492

NDRC (National Development and Reform Commission), 2015. The main functional area planning. People’s Publishing House, Beijing. (In Chinese) Ning, D. H., 2017. The situation and development countermeasures of water and soil conservation. Soil and Water Conservation in China 11, 11-13. (In Chinese)

493

PLA Daily (People's Liberation Army Daily), 2015. Opinions of the CPC Central Committee

494

and the State Council on Accelerating the Construction of Ecological Civilization.

495

Bulletin of the State Council of the People's Republic of China (14): 5-14. (In Chinese)

496 497

SER (Society for Ecological Restoration), 2004. The SER international primer on ecological restoration. Tucson, Arizona.

498

SFA (State Forestry Administration, P. R. China), 2015. A Bulletin of Status Quo of

499

Desertification and Sandification in China (the Fifth Time). Bulletin on Desertification

500

and Desertification in China, Beijing. (In Chinese)

501 502

State Council of P. R. China, 2010. Circular on the plan for Major Function Oriented Zoning of China. Beijing. (In Chinese)

503

Sun, X. F., Gao, L., Ren, H., Ye, Y. Q., Li, A., Stafford-Smith, M., Connor, J.D., Wu, J. G.,

504

Bryan, B. A., 2018. China’s progress towards sustainable land development and

505

ecological civilization. Landscape Ecology. 33(10), 1647-1653.

506

UNCCD (United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification), 2017. Scientific

507

Conceptual Framework for Land Degradation Neutrality. UNCCD. Bonn, Germany.

508

UNCCD (United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification), 2018. Poor land use costs

509

countries

510

https://www.unccd.int/news-events/poor-land-use-costs-countries-9-percent-equivalent-t

511

heir-gdp (accessed 9 May 2018)

512 513

9

percent

equivalent

of

their

GDP.

UNCCD.

Bonn,

Germany.

UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme), 2014. UNEP Yearbook 2014: Emerging issue in our global environment. UNEP, Nairobi.

514

Wang, C., Zhen, L., Du, B., 2017. Assessment of the impact of China's Sloping Land

515

Conservation Program on regional development in a typical hilly region of the loess

516

plateau—a case study in Guyuan. Environmental Development 21, 66-67.

517

Wang, L. Y., Li, L. L., Dong, Z., Wang, L. Q., Liu, F. C., 2013. Effect of Salix psammophila

518

checkerboard sand barrier on wind prevention and sand resistance in Kubuqi Desert.

519

Journal of soil and Water Conservation 27(5), 115-118. (In Chinese with English

520

Abstract)

521 522

Wang, T., 2009. The progress of research on aeolian desertification. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences 24(3), 290-296. (In Chinese with English Abstract)

523

Weeks, A. R., Sgro, C. M., Young, A. G., Frankham, R, Mitchell, N. J., Miller, K. A., Byrne,

524

M., Coates, D. J., Eldridge, M. D., Sunnucks, P., Breed, M. F., James, E. A., Hoffmann,

525

A. A., 2011. Assessing the benefits and risks of translocations in changing environments:

526

a genetic perspective. Evolutionary Applications 4(6), 709-725.

527

Wei, Y. Q., Li, X., Gao, F., Huang, C. L., Song, X. Y., Wang, B., Ma, H. Q., Wang, P. L., 2018.

528

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and the response strategies

529

of China. Advances in Earth Science 33(10), 1084-1093. (In Chinese with English

530

Abstract)

531

Xu, J. H., Yan, Z. W., Liu, X. D., 2018. Geomorphic types and formation mechanism of the

532

karst landform in Zecha Stone Forest Geopark. Arid Land Geography 41(5), 1027-1034.

533

(In Chinese with English Abstract)

534

Yang, Q. K., Li, R., 1998. Review of quantitative assessment on soil erosion in China.

535

Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation 18 (5), 13-18. (In Chinese with English

536

Abstract)

537 538 539

Yu, H. B., Chen, L. X., Cai, G. J., 2011. Technology and model of ecological comprehensive control in hilly and gully loess region. Science Press, Beijing. (In Chinese) Yuan, D. X., 2001. World correlation of karst ecosystem: objectives and implementation plan.

540

Advances in Earth Science 16(4), 461-466. (In Chinese with English Abstract)

541

Yuan, D. X., 2008. Global view on karst rock desertification and integrating control measures

542

and experiences of China. Pratacultural Science 25(9), 19-25. (In Chinese with English

543

Abstract)

544

Zhao, Q. G., Huang, G. Q., Ma, Y. Q., 2016. The ecological environment conditions and

545

construction of an ecological civilization in China. Acta Ecologica Sinica 36(19),

546

6328-6335. (In Chinese with English Abstract)

547

Zhen, L., Cao, S. Y., Wei, Y. J., Xie, G. D., Li, F., Yang, L., 2009. Land use functions:

548

conceptual framework and application for China. Resources Science 31(4):544-551. (In

549

Chinese with English Abstract)

550

Zhen, L., Hu, Y. F., Wei, Y. J, Luo, Q., Han, Y. Q., 2019. Trend of ecological degradation and

551

restoration technology requirement in typical ecological vulnerable regions. Resources

552

Science 41(1), 63-74. (In Chinese with English Abstract)

553 554 555 556

Zhou, S. X., 2012. Theoretical innovation and practice of ecological civilization construction with Chinese characteristics. Qiushi 19, 16-19. (In Chinese)

Highlights


Degradation has been a serious issue in ecological vulnerable regions of China




Several restoration technologies have been developed and used for mitigating ecological degradation




Establishing an ecological civilization focuses on harmony between humans and nature during development, and has been addressed by the Government for promoting the nation s development




Restoration technologies have been playing important roles for achieving ecological civilization targets covering ecologic, environmental, economic, and social dimensions.

Author statement

Declaration of interests ☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. ☐The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: