Original Articles

Soil Erosion Economic Loss Under Different Land Use Structures: A Case Study of Maotiao River Watershed, Guizhou Province

Expand
  • 1. College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China;
    2. Academy of Disaster reduction and Emergency Management, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

Received date: 2010-01-01

  Revised date: 2010-07-01

  Online published: 2010-11-25

Abstract

Taking the Maotiao river watershed as the area for a case study, based on environmental economic theories and methods, this paper calculated the soil erosion economic loss under different land use structures in different years in the study area, and analyzed the current situations of soil erosion economic loss, the dynamic change chanracteristics of soil erosion loss, and its relationship with land use structure. The results showed that (1) the total economic loss from soil erosion reached 37381.64×104 yuan in 2007 in the study area, and the loss of nitrogen, phosphorus, kalium and organic matter acounted for 90.26% of the total economic loss, which was 33739.98×104 yuan. Among different land use types, soil erosion economic loss was the highest in dry land and grass land, accounting for 47.08% and 44.24%of the total loss, respectively. The economic loss was higher in the north and southwest of the study area. (2) The soil erosion economic loss changed dramatically during recent 30 years, with an intimate relationship with land use structure. The soil erosion economic loss increased by 3092.98×104 yuan during 1973-1990, or 8.74%, and decreased by 11162.43×104 yuan during 1990-2007, or 22.99%. Dry farmlands and grasslands were the main land-use types that caused soil erosion economic loss. Qingzhen, Pingba and Xiuwen are the main regions that should take measures to prevent soil erosion in the study area.

Cite this article

XU Yueqing, HUANG Jing, FENG Yan, ZHOU Dong . Soil Erosion Economic Loss Under Different Land Use Structures: A Case Study of Maotiao River Watershed, Guizhou Province[J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2010 , 29(11) : 1451 -1456 . DOI: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2010.11.045

References


[1] 赵善伦, 尹民, 孙希华. 山东省水土流失经济损失与生态价值损失评估. 经济地理, 2002, 22(5): 616-619.

[2] 王强, 姚孝友, 张玉堂, 等. 山东沂沭泗河流域土壤侵蚀经济损失估值研究. 水土保持研究, 2006, 13(4): 154-157.

[3] 夏建国, 胡萃, 刘芸. 川西地山区土壤侵蚀经济损失及其评估模式. 生态学报, 2006, 26(11): 3697-3703.

[4] 赵芹, 卿太明, 曹叔尤. 汶川特大地震对四川水土流失的影响及其经济损失评估. 中国水土保持. 2009(3): 5-7.

[5] 安裕伦, 蔡广鹏, 熊书益. 贵州高原水土流失及其影响因素研究. 水土保持通报, 1999, 19(3): 47-52.

[6] 王世杰, 李阳兵, 李瑞玲. 喀斯特石漠化的形成背景、演化与治理. 第四纪研究, 2003, 23(6): 657-666.

[7] 熊康宁, 白利妮, 彭贤伟, 等. 不同尺度喀斯特地区土地利用变化研究. 中国岩溶, 2005, 24(1): 41-47.

[8] 李阳兵, 高明, 魏朝富, 等. 土地利用对岩溶山地土壤质量性状的影响. 山地学报, 2003, 21(1):41-49.

[9] 苏维词. 贵州喀斯特山区的土壤侵蚀性退化及其防治. 中国岩溶, 2001, 20(3): 217-223.

[10] 许月卿, 邵晓梅. 基于GIS 和RUSLE 的土壤侵蚀量计算: 以贵州省猫跳河流域为例. 北京林业大学学报, 2006, 28(4): 67-71.

[11] 许月卿, 蔡运龙. 土壤侵蚀经济损失分析及价值估算. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(4): 470- 474.

[12] 杨志新, 郑大玮, 李永贵. 北京市土壤侵蚀经济损失分析及价值估算. 水土保持学报, 2004, 18(3): 175-178.

[13] 侯秀瑞, 许云龙, 毕绪岱. 河北省山地森林保土生态效益计量研究. 水土保持通报, 1998, 18(1): 17-21.

Outlines

/