ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019
Local Residents' Perceptions for Ecosystem Services: A Case Study of Fenghe River Watershed.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of air pollution and green spaces on impaired lung function in children: a case-control study.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Civil society's perception of forest ecosystem services. A case study in the Western Alps.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Regional Spatial Management Based on Supply-Demand Risk of Ecosystem Services-A Case Study of the Fenghe River Watershed.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To make environmental management decisions more executive and targeted, it is essential for decision-making to include local residents' perceptions and preferences for ecosystem services (ES) and biodiversity (BD). This study conducted a questionnaire survey with 386 local residents to explore social perceptions for ES and BD in the Fenghe River watershed. ES contain food from agriculture (AGR), food from livestock (LIV), fresh water (FW), air purification (AP), water purification (WP), water retention (WR), soil retention (SR), aesthetics (AES), recreation (RE), and spirit (SP) in this study. Ranking and Likert scales are combined to identify residents' preferences for ES and BD. The hypothetical market method is used to identify the willingness to pay for BD and ES. Independent sample T-test, one-way ANOVA, and Spearman correlation are used to analyze preference heterogeneity. The results show that: (1) residents prefer WP, AP, AGR, and FW; (2) 51.3% of respondents are willing to pay a fee for improving ES while 48.7% of respondents are unwilling to pay; (3) residents' personal and residential factors affect preference heterogeneity. Last, we put forward three management suggestions on controlling environmental pollution, improving residents' awareness of ES, and establishing a multi-channel fund based on government financial resources for improving ES in the Fenghe River watershed. Integrating stakeholders' perceptions for ES into decision-making can promote the sustainable development in Fenghe River watershed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.