| Farmland is one of the most important ecosystems in the world. People reformed the natural ecosystem to survive and meet the food demand for human race by growing crops. With the deepening of research on farmland ecosystem in recent years, it has no longer been seen as a mere production system of agricultural products, but a high efficient semi-natural and semi-artificial ecosystem provides both agricultural products and varied ecosystem services. But due to the neglect and misunderstanding of farmland ecosystem services and it’s great value, the short-term economic interests contributed to the unreasonable development of farmland. The ecological environment was seriously damaged by green-house gas emissions and non-point pollution during the process of food production which will ultimately threaten the sustainable development of agriculture. The paper discussed an analytical framework of ecosystem services in farmland, and the paper employ a case study in Tumen river basin, China. All the ecosystem services were analyzed from 1995-2014 based on the land use changes in this region. The paper explained the efficiency of agricultural management by the determined the synergies, trade-offs losses and cost-benefit ratio of ecosystem services. Finally, the paper will help the government and policy makers reduce the damage of ecosystem services from avoid the short-term economic actions which will make farmland ecosystem to provide greater utility for human survival and sustainable development.The main conclusions are as follows:(1) The paper interpreted 5 satellite images of farmland in Tumen river basin from 1995-2014 and detected the 4 main modes of land use change, the results are as follow:dry farmland-forest (24.5%)> dry farmlands-bare land (21%)> dry farmland-rice paddy (17.6%)> dry farmland-grassland (13.6%). The field investigation and the land use data showed that the massive farmland use changes were caused by the labor force migrations, national environmental policies and agriculture subsidies.(2) The paper established an analytical framework for both dry farmland and rice paddy according to their characteristics,13 kinds of services were taken into account and re divided into 3 kinds of categories named as" economic service", "environmental service" and "environmental costs". The economic value of dry farmland showed that in the year of 1995,2000,2005,2010,2014,the net environmental profits were respectively 142.1%,248.8%,232.2%,197.9%,152.7% of the economic profits, meanwhile the rice paddy shows 97.5%,144.5%,145.8%,120.7%, 119.3% respectively. The farmland ecosystem in Tumen River Basin not only provided the economic profits but also contributed greatly to environment at the same time. We can make a good use of environmental profits as a basis to transform the intensive agriculture to multifunctional agriculture.(3) The cost-benefit analysis indicate for the personal point of a farmer, the cost-benefit ratio of rice paddy was significantly higher than dry farmland from 1995-2014. But for the national scale, the rice paddy showed significantly higher ratio in 1995 and 2014, whereas they were slightly lower during 2000-2010. The paper address both the opportunities and the challenges with the cost-benefit ratio of both dry farmland and rice paddy, but substantially, develop the rice paddy in Tumen river basin has a higher feasibility. The biological and physical structure of rice paddy contribute effectively in reducing the environmental costs and thus to provide a more efficient service for human well-being.(4) The paper discussed a relationship matrix between different kinds of ecosystem services. The relationships were further divided into the following six forms:Synergy(a win-win situation that involves a mutual improvement of both ecosystem services), Win-no change(An improvement in one ecosystem service and no obvious changes in the other), Lose-no change(A decline in one ecosystem service and no obvious changes in the other), Trade-off(A win-lose or lose-win situation that involves losing one ecosystem service in exchange for gaining another), Loss (A mutual loss of ecosystem services), No change(No changes in any of the considered ecosystem services). The paper also established a quantitative calculation method for the relationships. According to the matrix and the calculation method, the paper determined the relationships between "economic service", "Environmental service" and "environmental costs" for both dry farmland and rice paddy. The results showed a great variation in different years.(5) The paper discussed the relationships between "economic service", "environmental service" and "environmental costs" with the employment in 4 main modes of land use change actually occurred in the area, the result showed that the detected land use change of dry farmland change to forest led to synergies of 25.92 between "economic service" and "Environmental service", the change of dry farmland to bare land led to the loss of 1.11 between "economic service" and "Environmental service", the change of dry farmland to grassland led to a trade-off of 143.53 between "economic service" and "Environmental service", and the change of rice paddy to dry farmland led to the loss of 1.75 between "economic service", "Environmental service", but the trade-off of 2.36 between "economic service" and "Environmental costs", while the trade-off of 1.35 between environmental service" and "Environmental costs".(6) The paper proposed the following strategies in farmland planning. Firstly, the intensive agriculture should be changed into multi-functional agriculture. Secondly, we should pay more attention to the rice paddy in agricultural planning and eco-compensation.;Thirdly, we should ensure the current space scale of rice paddy to enhance the ecosystem structure stability; Fourth, optimizing the structure of farmland and other natural ecosystems; Finally, it’s necessary to establish a comprehensive monitoring and early warning system for the potential change of physical conditions to land use. |
PDF Full Text Request