Environmental effectiveness

Forest resource data have been collected from each forest farm. Table 5.7 shows the situation of forest resources before the payment schemes²⁷. About half of the forest plots in two forest farms (Pingling and Dayuan) were plantations for timber production before the payment schemes. The stock volume, which is an important indicator for measuring the quality and the capacity of forest to provide ecosystem services, varies to a large extent among forest farms. On average, Dayuan Forest Farm has the highest stock volume, reaching around 10 cubic meters, while the forests in Pingling Forest Farm only have a stock volume of around 3 cubic meters. However, the design of payment schemes neglected the difference of the original forest quality completely. As a result, a uniform payment standard has been applied to all forest plots and forest owners with higher average stock volume suffered from greater economic loss.

Although the government requires the demarcation to comply with standards relating to ecological importance, there is still some space for the forest farms to select less economically profitable plots into the public benefit forests. Generally, the forest farms would like to keep forest plots for timber production on a low slope with good soil quality and less distance to roads. The sample plots show that most of public benefit forests in the 3 forest farms are located on land with over 25-degree slopes, with average soil quality and over 5 kilometers from roads.

According to the interviews, the managers of the forest farms indicated that they had taken economic development of the forest farms into consideration when demarcating and adjusting the public benefit forest. For example, first Huangmian Forest Farm demarcated 46.67 km² of forests for public benefit purpose in 2001. However, after they decided to develop as a commercial type

27 The earliest public benefit forest demarcation started in 1999. All forest plots in Pingling and Dayuan Forest Farm have been demarcated as public benefit forest in 1999. The forest plots in Huangmian Forest Farm have been added into public benefit forests in different periods from 2000 to 2004.

forest farm, the public benefit forest has been reduced to 26.67 km². In the present, they plan to add 13.33 km² of forests to the public benefit forest, which they thought had low economic value and high ecological importance. Similarly, Dayuan Forest Farm also turned some public benefit forest into commercial forest between 2005 and 2008. This flexibility of selecting forest plots for state-owned forest farms brings both advantages and disadvantages. The advantage is that the forest farms can arrange the forest plots in a more efficient way to enhance their economic benefit such as using forests at good locations for timber production and integrating public benefit forest plots into a whole area, which is easier for management, protection and benefits biodiversity.

However, frequent adjustment and too much emphasis on the economic benefit may cause reduced environmental effectiveness of the public benefit forest. Some plots with both important economic and environmental importance will more likely be used for timber production than for ecological restoration.

Table 5.8 shows the changes of forest resources from 1999 to 2008, in terms of usage, tree species and stock volume. Because a severe snow disaster in 2008 imposed huge damage to the Table 5.7. Situation of forest resources before the payment schemes.

Plots¹Area (ha)

Year Main usage

Volume² Type Generation Age Slope Soil quality

Distance to road⁴

PL1 4.7 1999 timber 2.2 Pinus

massoniana

plantation 12 20° average 1 PL2 6.3 1999 timber 2.6 P. massoniana plantation 10 28° average 7

PL3 7.0 1999 timber 3.7 Cunninghamia

lanceolata

plantation 8 15° good 4

PL4 4.2 1999 timber 3.5 broad-leaved natural 40 35° average 8

PL5 6.7 1999 timber 3.6 broad-leaved natural 20 28° average 10 DY1 11.4 1999 timber 14.0 C. lanceolata plantation 28 30° average 1 DY2 35.8 1999 timber 12.0 C. lanceolata plantation 26 30° average 1.5 DY3 84.7 1999 protection 10.0 broad-leaved natural 30 35° average 2.5 DY4 49.2 1999 protection 10.0 broad-leaved natural 40 35° average 8 DY5 108.1 1999 protection 8.8 broad-leaved natural 30 35° average 5 HM1 247.2 2004 protection –³ brush natural 0-15 <25° average 10 HM2 804.2 2000 protection –³ brush natural 0-20 ≥25° average 10 HM3 321.7 2001 protection 4.0 broad-leaved natural 2-45 <25° good 5 HM4 1,277.9 2000 protection 5.0 broad-leaved natural 2-42 ≥25° good 5

1 PL1-5 are the forest plots selected in the Pingling Forest Farm; DY1-5 for the Dayuan Forest Farm;

HM1-4 are the aggregated forest areas of the Huangmian Forest Farm.

2 Volumes are the average stock volume (m³) per 0.067 ha on each forest plots.

3 No data are available for the stock volume of brush in Huangmian Forest Farm.

4 Distance to road indicates the distance of the forest plots from roads available for vehicles, in km.

5. Implementing payment schemes for forest ecological services in a poverty-stricken area 111

forest ecosystem, the whole period is divided into two segments. The first segment from 1999 to 2007 showed the effect of the payment schemes on the quality and structure of public benefit forest.

The last period from 2007 to 2008 demonstrated the impact of the snow storm in 2008, which also reflected some problems in the structure of the public benefit forest. Since the payment schemes started, all forest plots have changed into public benefit forests for water source protection and/

or soil erosion prevention. The tree species on all forest plots stayed the same as before, except for two plots of Dayuan Forest Farm, on which Cunninghamia lanceolata has been harvested for timber and replanted with P. massoniana. From 1999 to 2007, the stock volumes of both Pingling and Dayuan forest farm’s forest plots have increased. Comparably, the plantations have higher growth rates than natural forests and are more than twice their stock volume. The forests (PL4, PL5), which were used for timber production before the payment schemes have grown faster than old protection forests (DY3-5). First, the timber forests started from lower stock volumes with around 3.5 cubic meters, compared with around 10 cubic meters of the protection forests.

Second, the protection forests before the payment schemes have entered into a stable and mature system. This can also be proven by the fact that the plots DY3-5 have a relatively lower loss during

Table 5.8. Change of forest resources from 1999 to 2008.

Plots Main usage¹ Type Age Volume² in

PL2 protection P. massoniana 19 5.2 104 1.5 72

PL3 protection Cunninghamia lanceolata

17 8.6 130 4.3 50

PL4 protection broad-leaved 49 5.0 40 2.3 53

PL5 protection broad-leaved 29 6.4 80 1.9 70

DY1 protection P. massoniana 8 3.0 – 1.5 50

DY2 protection P. massoniana 8 3.0 – 1.5 50

DY3 protection broad-leaved 39 12.0 20 8.0 33

DY4 protection broad-leaved 49 12.0 20 8.0 33

DY5 protection broad-leaved 39 10.0 14 8.0 20

HM1 protection brush 0-19 –³ – – –

HM2 protection brush 0-28 –³ – – –

HM3 protection broad-leaved 2-52 –⁴ – 5.0 –

HM4 protection broad-leaved 2-50 –⁴ – 5.0 –

1 The shadowed cells indicate the plots which have changed in main usage or tree species.

2 Volumes are the average stock volume (m³) per 0.067 ha on each forest plots.

3 No data are available for the stock volume of brush in Huangmian Forest Farm.

4 No data are available for the stock volume of public benefit forest in Huangmian Forest Farm in 2007.

the snow disaster in 2008. In conclusion, the payment schemes changed the usage of the forests and the quality of public benefit forest has been improved since it started.

In early 2008, an unusually severe snow storm occurred over southern China. A total of 18.6 million hectares of forests, about one-tenth of China’s forest resources, have been damaged by the unprecedented snow wreckage in at least five decades, with forests, bamboo and seedlings seriously destroyed in 19 provinces including Guangxi, Hunan, Guizhou, Jiangxi, Hubei, Anhui, and Zhejiang. In Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Guilin (including the 3 forest farms and 2 villages selected in this research) was among the worst-hit regions, with 678.2 thousand hectares of forests damaged, including 347.7 thousand hectares of pine and Cunninghamia, 12.0 thousand hectares of Eucalyptus, 93.0 thousand hectares of bamboo, and 225.5 thousand hectares of other tree species (Hao and Ou, 2008). The value of related losses reached 3.7 billion Yuan RMB.

Besides the loss of timber forest, the snow disaster badly damaged the local forest ecosystem.

According to the estimate of the survey by the SFA, forest coverage in Guangxi decreased 3-4%

and in Guilin, coverage went down by more than 10%. As a result, the ecological function of this region for protecting the water source of the River Li has been badly impacted. Table 5.8 indicates that the stock volumes have fallen sharply from 2007 to 2008. In the Pingling and Dayuan forest farms, the stock volumes of the public benefit forest have been reduced by 20%-70% and became lower than the levels in 1999. For Huangmian Forest Farm, although there are no data available on volume change, the survey of the SFA shows that a large area of its forests at an altitude above 300 meters has been ruined, including 6.67 km² of pine, Cunninghamia, and broadleaf trees, accounting for one-fourth of its public benefit forest.

Five indicators including biodiversity, canopy density, phytocenosis structure, vegetation coverage and depth of litter layer have been chosen to measure the change in ecological functions of the public benefit forest. Table 5.9 shows the change of ecological indicators for the public benefit forest in Pingling Forest Farm from 1999 to 2007. The Pingling Forest Farm demarcated its public benefit forest in 2001. Until 2007, the natural forest plots (PL4 and 5) have been maintained as broadleaf dominated forest and the original plantation plots (PL1-3) have evolved into mixed forest with over 30% of broadleaf trees. The canopy density of all public benefit forest plots also increased to around 0.8 in 2007 and a similar expansion also happened to the shrub and grass coverage. The phytocenosis structure of all public benefit forests has been improved to a complicated level with more than two-tier trees, shrub and grass until 2007. At the same time, the litter layer on the forest has doubled, which makes it better to block raindrops. However, the snow storm in early 2008 wrecked the forest ecosystem and reduced the canopy density and the coverage of shrub and grass on the public benefit forests. The canopy density reduced to a level lower than in 1999 and the coverage of shrub and grass in general returned to the level in 1999.

The litter layer was not affected.

In conclusion, the payment schemes changed forest use practices of forest farms, improved the quality of the forest and enhanced its capacity for providing ecosystem services. The devastating snow storm in 2008 caused vast damage to public benefit forest. Therefore, forest management of the payment schemes should put particular emphasis on optimizing the structure of the forests and strengthening resilience of forest ecosystem in the future.

5. Implementing payment schemes for forest ecological services in a poverty-stricken area 113