Landscape transformation through the use of ecological and socioeconomic indicators in Xishuangbanna, Southwest China, Mekong Region

E

Li

Ja

b

c

a

ARRA

KELRXYM

1

Lnliifrtpteti

If

(

1h

ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelCOIND-1308; No. of Pages 8

Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Ecological Indicators

jo ur nal homep age: www.elsev ier .com/ locate /eco l ind

andscape transformation through the use of ecological and socioeconomicndicators in Xishuangbanna, Southwest China, Mekong Region

ianchu Xua,b,∗∗, R. Edward Grumbineb,∗, Philip Beckschäferc

World Agroforestry Centre, China & East Asia Node, Kunming 650204, ChinaCentre for Mountain Ecosystem Studies, Kunming Institute of Botany (CAS), Kunming 650204, ChinaForest Inventory and Remote Sensing,Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:eceived 24 November 2011eceived in revised form 21 August 2012ccepted 25 August 2012

eywords:cological indicatorsand useubber

a b s t r a c t

Rapid land-use transformations are occurring throughout the Mekong Region, and especially in Xishuang-banna, Yunnan Province in southwest China. Most of this is due to the spread of monoculture rubberplantations. Using a new map derived from Landsat and RapidEye imagery tracking the spread of rub-ber from 1992 to 2010 in combination with a literature review and interviews with key local expertsand officials, we performed a general overview of the extent, causes and consequences of landscapetransformation in Xishuangbanna. We discovered that structural and functional biodiversity has beenreduced, habitat fragmentation has increased, carbon sequestration in natural forests has been reduced,and hydrological systems altered. For humans, while incomes have risen, food insecurity has also grown.

ishuangbannaunnanekong Region

The drivers of these changes are regional economic integration, government policy, and conservation vsdevelopment value systems. To improve land-use management, we surveyed the availability of ecolog-ical and socioeconomic indicators that may better track such changes. We found that combining bothtypes of indicators within a multi-scale conservation planning framework would help to inform policymaking in the region. As yet, however, there is little integrative research using indicators to track changesin ecosystems and human livelihoods in the region.

. Introduction

The Mekong Region, comprising the five countries of Cambodia,ao Peoples’ Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Thailand and Viet-am – plus China’s Yunnan Province, is experiencing widespread

and transformation with associated ecological and socioeconomicmpacts. These changes have been characterized by two broad,nteractive trends. The first is ecological – the reduction of nativeorest cover, while the second is primarily socioeconomic – theeplacement of a variety of subsistence shifting cultivation sys-ems with plantation monocultures of cash crops (rubber, tea, oilalm, etc.). There are both costs and benefits to these transforma-ions. While these transitions are not occurring at the same rate

Please cite this article in press as: Xu, J., et al., Landscape transformatiXishuangbanna, Southwest China, Mekong Region. Ecol. Indicat. (2013

verywhere across the region, the overall trend is unmistakable;he region is becoming developed and therefore more integratednto regional and global economies.

∗ Corresponding author.∗∗ Corresponding author at: Centre for Mountain Ecosystem Studies, Kunmingnstitute of Botany (CAS), Kunming 650204, China. Tel.: +86 871 5223052;ax: +86 871 5216350.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J. Xu), [email protected]. Grumbine).

470-160X/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.023

© 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

These land-use trends are set to continue and possibly evenspeed up. States throughout the region are busy implementingsocioeconomic developments that will continue to bring newconstruction of transportation and communication infrastructureinto the Mekong Region. A host of new roadways, railways, andpipelines for fossil fuel energy transfer are being constructed.Recent debates among Mekong countries have focused on the com-mercial exploitation of the region’s natural resources as against theneed to promote sustainability of the ecosystems in the area. Insuf-ficient attention has been given, however, either in scientific studiesor policy discussions, to the current and long-range ecological con-sequences of the overall rate and scale of local and regional land-usechanges.

Xishuangbanna Dai Nationality Autonomous Prefecture insouthern Yunnan Province in southwest China is a subregion of theMekong where many of these land transformations are particularlydramatic. Compared to other areas, Xishuangbanna is also rela-tively well-studied. Using this area of the Mekong and the spreadof rubber plantation as a focal case study, our goals in this paper arefour-fold. First, we want to provide a general overview for a broad

on through the use of ecological and socioeconomic indicators in), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.023

audience of the landscape transformations occurring here, describ-ing their ecological costs and benefits. Second, we want to identifythe main political and socioeconomic drivers that are influencingsuch changes. Third, we wish to highlight how indicators may be

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.023


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/1470160X

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


ING ModelE

2 ndicat

ulees

2

2

sgto2aiCTt

oiplgteogewieui

tfoefcavithcv2ac2

2c

dcpTt

ARTICLECOIND-1308; No. of Pages 8

J. Xu et al. / Ecological I

sed to quantify the ecological and socioeconomic aspects of theseand transformations. Last, we want to suggest that using integratedcological and socioeconomic indicators can help inform the gen-ral public and policy makers about ongoing issues of ecologicalustainability in the Mekong Region.

. Methods

.1. Study area

Xishuangbanna Dai Nationality Autonomous Prefecture, theouthernmost political unit in Yunnan, lies within the Indo-Burmalobal biodiversity hotspot (Mittermeier et al., 2005). The area con-ains a remarkable diversity of species – while it covers only 0.2%f the land area of China, it harbors some 16% of the vascular flora,1.7% of mammals, and 36.2% of birds found in the country (Zhangnd Cao, 1995). The northern-most tropical rainforest in the worlds found here below 800 masl (Zhu et al., 2006). The presence ofhina’s top tropical scientific research facility, the Xishuangbannaropical Botanical Garden, has resulted in many studies focused onhe ecology of the region (Fig. 1).

Xishuangbanna is also culturally diverse. More than two thirdsf the population belongs to one of 12 ethnic minorities includ-ng the Dai, Hani, Bulang, Jinuo, Miao and Yao. Historically, theseeoples have used, nurtured and sustained the diverse landscapes

ocated here. Many studies have focused on how these differentroups have evolved enduring land-use systems from paddy riceo shifting cultivation and ancient tea agroforestry (Pei, 1985; Liut al., 2002; Xu et al., 2009). Local people have long traditionsf managing forest margins in agroforestry systems that inte-rate secondary successional vegetation with a diversity of nativecosystems. These various agroecosystems have served as valuableildlife habitat as well as provided for ecological functions includ-

ng gene flow, nutrient cycling and hydrological processes. To thextent that humans can live in relative ecological balance with nat-ral and cultural landscapes, the history of Xishuangbanna land use

nto the late 20th century provides evidence that this can happen.Since the 1949 revolution, the government of China has main-

ained a strong interest in political security within this borderrontier region. Beginning in the 1980s, state land policies focusedn reducing shifting cultivation practices and sedentarizing farm-rs so that tenure rights to swidden fields and collectively managedorests could be secured. The state believed that if ethnic minoritiesould be settled down, they would be easier to control and borderdministration would be strengthened. To support forest conser-ation, the first national nature reserve in Yunnan was establishedn Xishuangbanna in 1958. By the late 1990s, however, to increasehe growth of China’s domestic rubber sector, conservation policiesave been overwhelmed by state-supported wholesale land-useonversion from primary and secondary natural forests along witharious forms of swidden to cash crop monocultures (Xu et al.,006). Although 12.6% of Xishuangbannas’ total land is designateds protected area, tropical forests in Xishuangbanna continue to beonverted to rubber plantation and other development (Li et al.,007; Zhu et al., 2004)

.2. Reviewing landscape transformation and its ecologicalonsequences

We reviewed the academic literature and government policyocuments on landscape change in Xishuangbanna and its asso-


iated costs and benefits. To assess the current spread of rubberlantation, we constructed new maps using 1992 and 2002 LandsatM imagery, and 2010 RapidEye imagery, ERDAS and eCogni-ion softwares, and an extraction conceptual model from DEM for

PRESSors xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

classification of land use and land change. To evaluate the impactof monoculture rubber plantation on ecosystem functions (water,carbon and trophic flux) at watershed and landscape levels, we sur-veyed pertinent literature, and held interviews with key informantsand focus groups.

Biodiversity in agroecosystems has not only ecological, butalso economic and socio-cultural functions. To assess how peo-ple working for local institutions make land-use decisions andhow factors interact in specific places to influence decisionmaking, we reviewed regional socioeconomic studies since thelate 1990s and interviewed key local officials and govern-ment agency personnel. Follow-up semi-structured interviewswere then conducted for constructing social–ecological indicatorattributes.

3. The rubber transition

3.1. Rubber plantation and its ecological consequences

By far, the single most important aspect of landscape trans-formation in Xishuangbanna is the dramatic spread of rubberplantation. Rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) was not introduced intoXishuangbanna until 1940. By 1955, the first state rubber farm wasestablished with Han Chinese staff. With technical support from thestate, the first rubber planting by local farmers occurred in 1963 andrubber spread quickly into much of the lowland hills of Xishuang-banna, replacing mostly secondary vegetation. Since 1992, the paceof expansion has been very rapid (Fig. 2) and cash crop plantationshave transformed both forests and traditional agroecosystems intoan industrial landscape. In 1992, rubber covered 87,000 ha rising to153,000 ha in 2002 and 424,000 ha in 2010, respectively (the offi-cial government figure is about 200,000 ha). From 2002 to 2010alone this represents an increase of over 175%. Smallholder plan-tations have outgrown the state farms and farmers now do mostof the plantation work. Rubber covers 22.14% of Xishuangbanna’slandscape and the spread continues.

This startling pace of land-use transformation in Xishuangbannahas both structural and functional ecological consequences. At thegenetic level, swidden practices have played significant roles in cre-ating, maintaining and conserving genetic resources of upland ricefor many centuries. Jinuo people alone have cultivated 71 rice vari-eties; now, many of these are at risk (Yin, 2001). As lowland andupland ecosystems have undergone major land-use changes, biodi-versity, as measured by the number of species found, is decreasing(Sodhi et al., 2004; Xu and Melick, 2007). Ecosystem diversity hasalso been impacted; from 1976 to 2003, all forest cover in Xishuang-banna was reduced from 69% to less than 50%, and the importanttropical seasonal rainforest was reduced from 10.9% to 3.6% of thelandscape (Li et al., 2009). Fragmentation of the landscape is a majorconcern as the overall number of forest patches has increased, aver-age patch size and amount of core habitat have decreased, and bothamount of edge habitat and average distance to other forest patcheshave increased (Li et al., 2009). These data reflect conditions for allforest types in the region. Across much of the landscape, there islittle to virtually no natural forest of any kind left outside Xishuang-banna’s nature reserves. Some areas of plantation can even be foundinside reserve boundaries.

As yet, there are few studies in Xishuangbanna of how theselandscape-level changes may affect native species and ecosystemsover the long term, but conservation biology theory would suggestthat negative impacts will increase. Over 20% of native vascu-


lar plant species have been lost or replaced in some forest typesand invasion into remaining forest patches by non-native plantsis increasing (Zhu et al., 2004; Lin and Cao, 2009). There is alsoevidence that populations of Asian Elephants (Elaphas maximus)


ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelECOIND-1308; No. of Pages 8

J. Xu et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 3

banna

aa

foOrabc0Cb

Fig. 1. Location of Xishuang

nd white-cheeked gibbons (Nomascus leucogenys) have been neg-tively impacted (Feng and Zhang, 2005; Fan and Huo, 2009).

Functionally, compared to primary and secondary naturalorests, rubber plantations have decreased concentrations of soilrganic carbon and total soil and inorganic nitrogen (Li et al., 2008).ld forests in Xishuangbanna sequester much more carbon than

ubber plantations (Lu et al., 2010) both above (Bunker et al., 2005)nd below (Guo and Gifford, 2002) the ground. Conversion to rub-er leads to a substantial net release of carbon dioxide. Annual


arbon emissions due to land use change have been estimated at.37 ± 0.03 Tg C/year between 1976 and 1988 and 0.13 ± 0.04 Tg/year from 1988 to 2003 (Li et al., 2008). Land clearance starts withurning the local forest, which provides a nutrient pulse for young

Fig. 2. Expansion of rubber planta

, Yunnan, Southwest China.

rubber trees and intercropped pineapples, but within a few years,chemical fertilizers are required. Heavy application of fertilizers hasled to eutrophication of water bodies, and the combination of her-bicide use and reduced natural filtering has contaminated drinkingwater. There has been a reduction both in the number of foggydays and hours of fog per day; this has been linked to forest coverloss (Li, 2001; Liu et al., 2004), since stable-isotope studies haveshown that fog is primarily derived from evapotranspiration (Liuet al., 2007). Rubber plantations also impact water supplies (Ziegler


et al., 2009). Watershed services are deteriorating as streams dryup (Guardiola-Claramonte et al., 2008). Rubber uses more waterthan other crops or native vegetation particularly in the periodof leaf flushing during the hottest and driest season (Guardiola-

tion during 1992 and 2010.


ING ModelE

4 ndicat

Cdbrbptfflwd

li2ttpcse

3

tsrht

arSpvafsmi2w

io(redtltptkpXb1e

dsnt



laramonte et al., 2010). In comparison to rainforest, leaf-litterecomposition rates and nutrient-use efficiency are lower in rub-er plantation (Tang et al., 2010). The decomposer community inubber is also less diverse and is more susceptible to colonizationy invasive earthworms (Zhang et al., 2010). Tropical rainforest hasersisted at its northern latitudinal limit in Xishuangbanna dueo a combination of pronounced cold foggy season, high subsur-ace water, and adequate soil moisture with diverse soil fauna andora. In effect these influences prolong the monsoon season, butith rubber cover creating a longer hotter and drier season, theegradation of ecosystem services is inevitable.

Overall, it is important to note that almost all of the above eco-ogical studies are based on forest cover as it stood before 2003, thats to say, prior to the dramatic expansion (over 175%) of rubber from002 to the present. Since then, there have been no further studieso update ecological conditions on the ground that would capturehe loss of another 270,000 ha of habitat to rubber plantations. Inarticular, new peer-reviewed regional hydrology and landscapeonnectivity studies that assess rubbers’ impacts on wildlife andpecies migration have yet to be done see (ADB, 2012; Dhanusht al., 2012).

.2. Human livelihoods costs and benefits

Due to the loss of native forest cover and the rise of the monocul-ure plantation economy over the last few decades and especiallyince 2002, the ecological health of Xishuangbanna has deterio-ated (Ziegler et al., 2009). Human communities, on the other hand,ave experienced both gains and losses due to these landscaperansformations.

The biggest gain has been financial-villager incomes have risens people have switched from swidden agriculture practices toubber cultivation (Liu et al., 2006; Manivong and Cramb, 2008;turgeon, 2010). For rural people, rubber is providing a path out ofoverty. Over the decades in the Mekong, primarily in response toarious government policies and the expansion of regional, nationalnd international markets, there have always been transitions inarmers’ swidden strategies. But the region has never before seenuch large-scale changes as are taking place today. A farmer canake more money using less labor by cultivating rubber, especially

f plantation work is supplemented with off-farm labor (Fu et al.,009). As long as the global price for rubber remains high, farmersill continue to benefit throughout the Mekong Region.

Financial gains, however, have come with certain costs. Whilencomes have increased, villagers now have fewer livelihoodptions, less opportunities to collect non-timber forest productsNTFPs), and, arguably, less food security (Fu et al., 2010). With theeduction of diverse swidden agriculture systems, the traditionalxchange of forest products between indigenous groups has beenisrupted. With less overall natural forest cover and farther dis-ances from villages to remaining patches of forest, people deriveess income from the collection of NTFPs (Fu et al., 2009). Theraditional ecological knowledge base and aesthetic and culturalractices have been eroded, with farmers more dependent on cropshat are priced on the world market that local people have littlenowledge of and no control over (Xu et al., 2005). If the globalrice of rubber goes down, so will farmers’ incomes. Similarly, whenishuangbanna experiences cold weather that causes losses in rub-er trees, as it has on average about every eight years since the960s (Chapman, 1991), farmers’ incomes will be impacted (Xut al., 2005).

At the regional scale in the Mekong, rural food security is pre-


icted to become more tenuous. Maneeratana and Hoare (2007)uggest a 2% annual increase in food production out to 2025 will beecessary, accounting only for population growth. They point outhat such agricultural yields would be unprecedented in the region


and therefore declare that more cash crops are inevitable, creatinga positive feedback loop.

Looking more broadly at general agrarian transitions, thereis no consensus as to whether rural people across the devel-oping world will gain (increased incomes, rises in small-scale-entrepreneurship) or lose (food insecurity, loss of control over land,dependence on global markets) due to specific land-use transitionsand the general impacts of globalization (Bernstein, 2002; Rigg,2006). In the Mekong, however, while the long-term impact of rub-ber on smallholders is not yet clear, one thing is certain – just asforest cover has undergone dramatic losses in recent years with asyet unknown ecological consequences, traditional livelihood sys-tems are also in the midst of dramatic changes.

3.3. Potential drivers of land transformation

There are three hypothetical drivers behind the wholesale lossof native forests and the rise of a cash crop plantation economy inXishuangbanna and throughout the Mekong. The first is the generaladvance of globalization. In the Mekong, the logic of this process isthis: building economic corridors through infrastructure stimulatestransboundary flows of goods and services; competition grows,prices fall, efficiency increases; the resulting growth creates jobsand increases personal income, with poverty thereby reduced. Theflow of goods is paramount; there is little need to address whatkinds of goods are produced, who does the work, and how goodsare made. Ecological impacts and local institution building are lit-tle addressed (Oehlers, 2007) and the income gap between the richand poor increases (ADB, 2012).

The second hypothetical driver is related to the first; Chi-nese government policies have placed rapid, short-term economicdevelopment ahead of any other goal, and the dramatic advance ofrubber in Xishuangbanna is a direct result of the booming Chineseeconomy. Since 2009, the country has become the world’s largestrubber consumer. China now has the largest automobile marketin the world; in addition, some 50% of China’s production of tiresis exported (Shen, 2008). Forecasts indicate that global demandfor natural rubber may outpace supply by 1.4 million metric tonsby 2020 (Prachaya, 2009) and the price of rubber in 2011 was ata record high. Entrepreneurs from China, Vietnam, Malaysia, andThailand are investing heavily in rubber plantations all across theless developed regions of the Mekong including Northern Thailand,Laos and Myanmar.

In Xishuangbanna over recent decades, rubber and tea havecontributed the lion’s share of the revenue for the local govern-ment. Specific government goals include increasing prefecturalGDP, poverty alleviation, the building of regional infrastructurelinkages to neighboring countries, and border security. All of thesepolicies represent laudable goals; the trouble is that they havebeen pursued single mindedly with little thought of ecological orlivelihood impacts. Despite scientific research that was publishedas early as 1995 warning of the consequences, the destruction ofXishuangbannas’ native forests has only increased in rate and scale(Zhang and Cao, 1995). Simplified systems of monoculture cashcrops have been preferred over other more sustainable models ofplanting “green” rubber (Gouyon et al., 1993). For decades, subsis-tence swidden systems have been characterized by the governmentas “backward” and ecologically damaging (Xu, 2006). In parallel,plantation is defined by the Chinese government as ‘forest’, eventhough rubber monoculture has few of the ecological attributes ofnative forest communities (Xu, 2011; Tang et al., 2007). Classifying


rubber plantation as ‘forest’ allows local governments to perverselyclaim that they are maintaining forest cover and ecological valueseven as they reap economic benefits from the destruction of thosevalues.


ING ModelE

ndicat

svttmasbtlTtipt

cdtasefwiUP

belaimR

4l

tipa

-

-

-

fncetstapm



The third hypothetical driver of land transformation is moreubtle than the first two – we would characterize it as ‘conser-ation vs development’, a dichotomous habit of mind as opposedo a precise policy on the ground. This view of the world allowshose who believe in it to think, for example, that the establish-

ent of nature reserves is not only necessary but also sufficientnd that once reserves are demarcated, one does not have to con-ider much about management of the matrix lands outside and inetween protected areas. Neither do protected area managers needo think much about the influence of reserves on local peoples orocal land-use (i.e. rubber) on reserves (Brockington et al., 2008).his attitude allows for just the type of wholesale transformationshat are occurring in Xishuangbanna, where policies that resultn rubber plantation covering more area than nature reserves areromulgated without much thought to the relationships betweenhese two types of land use.

Overall, the roads, dams, pipelines and powerlines now beingonstructed in Xishuanbanna (and all across the Mekong) are theirect result of specific government development priorities. Yethere is little evidence of environmental impact assessment forny of these projects; most regional states do not publicly releasetudy results. Indirect evidence for how regional governments viewconomic development vs conservation can be seen in programunding levels: for example, through 2008, all biodiversity corridorork throughout the Mekong had received USD 2 million in fund-

ng, while one highway project (out of several) had been funded forSD 90 million (Greater Mekong Subregion Economic Cooperationrogram, 2009).

None of the above three drivers of change in the Mekong haveeen proven; they remain hypotheses awaiting further study. Nev-rtheless, as rubber continues its march across the Xishuangbannaandscape, the question is this: when will managers, researchers,nd policy makers begin to see the opportunities that exist tontegrate heretofore separate analyses into more holistic assess-

ents that can better serve both people and nature in the Mekongegion?

. Using ecological and socioeconomic indicators to informand management decision making

Ecological and socioeconomic indicators are just the kinds ofools that can help with the analytical integration of decision mak-ng in Xishuangbanna and the Mekong Region. If indicators are tolay a role in tracking ecological and socioeconomic changes, therere three questions that must be addressed:

What ecological and socioeconomic factors should be selectedthat will adequately represent land-use and livelihood changesover time?

What qualitative and quantitative measures are available to beused as indicators to track trends in the above factors?

How may scientists communicate indicator research results todecision makers?

Answering the first two questions is made difficult by theact that not all important land-use ecological and socioeco-omic factors have adequate data describing them. In addition,hoosing ecological indicators is a relatively new activity incology and many indices created to measure specific fac-ors, if they exist at all, are experimental, untested, and/or aretill being debated. The following discussion is therefore ten-


ative; it represents, as much as anything, a wish list for thedoption of ecological and socioeconomic indicators to helprovide better information about change for managers and policyakers.

PRESSors xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 5

4.1. Indicators for structural biodiversity

In Xishuangbanna, we believe that the following structural char-acteristics are important to track with indicators: biodiversity at thegenetic, species, and ecosystem levels. For genetics, since Xisuang-banna is the heartland for worldwide rice genotypic diversity, wewould like to see the collection and quantitative monitoring of ricegenotypes (Zeng et al., 2007). In the region, however, there is cur-rently no work being done on this issue nor is anyone working oncreating ecological indicators to assess rice diversity.

At the species level, identification and assessment of wild key-stone species in Xishuangbanna would be valuable. Some work hasbeen done on this – Sanitjan and Chen (2009) discovered that figtrees provide both microhabitats for bird assemblages and foodsources, and Wang and Yong (2003) found out that swidden-fallowvegetation maintains a high diversity and richness of birds. Forecosystem diversity, the relative percentage of rubber plantationvs native forest types at different elevations should be measured.Though there are no specific ecological indicators designed to dothis, the work of Li and colleagues (2009) could be used as a baselineto track this ecological attribute with repeat measurements everyfive years.

4.2. Functional biodiversity indicators

Functional ecosystem diversity can be measured through habi-tat fragmentation, management of protected areas, and the creationof connectivity across the landscape. All of these factors aresubject to active ecological indicator research. In measuring the“fragmentation-barrier” effect of roads, Fu et al. (2010) used aProbability of Connectivity index that showed negative impactson landscape connectivity in Xishuangbanna. Use of this ecolog-ical indicator could be adopted as a standard metric throughoutthe region. Defries (2010) employed a composite “Zone of Interac-tion” (ZOI) to assess how much land beyond protected area legalboundaries was important to consider in the overall managementof reserves. Three of the four factors used in defining ZOI canbe measured quantitatively: the critical habitat for populationsof species that range beyond protected area boundaries; land-usethat alters hydrological flows that originate outside reserves; andhabitat reduction due to land-use that occurs outside the areas.(The fourth factor is more subjective-human use along the bordersof protected areas that may be detrimental to wildlife.) Zones ofInteraction could be adapted as an ecological indicator in Xishuang-banna. Work done in Europe using an Equivalent Connected Areaecological indicator to model the probability of connecting one pro-tected area with another may also be useful. This model measuresthe size of a single habitat patch that would provide the same prob-ability of connection with an actual landscape pattern (Saura et al.,2011). This measure is still being refined to take account of the dif-ferent movement capabilities of different species. Finally, there isa great deal of work being done on landscape connectivity using avariety of models (Carroll et al., 2012) Any of this work could beusefully applied in the Mekong but this remains to be done.

4.3. Monitoring and local indicators

Credible, up-to-date scientific ecological indicators are essen-tial for the development of land-use policy and planning. Butin Xishuangbaana, our review found a lacuna in field observa-tion networks for monitoring biodiversity due to a general lackof awareness of their importance. For the government agencies,


it is important to develop scientific monitoring using indicatorswith standardized methods and applications for year-round obser-vation. Today, remote sensing such as RapidEye imagery allowsfor regular and repeated monitoring of land-use and land-cover


ING ModelE

6 ndicat

clpme

mfailTiuopecrrrambimjqahdri

4

ftwlasscismAseL

libeogedt

tcj



hange; this technology can be employed to facilitate analysis ofandscape fragmentation and prediction of ecological risks. To sup-ort this goal, well-equipped field stations focused on long-termonitoring, networking, and cooperation within and between gov-

rnment ministries and academia are essential.Along with scientific collection of indicator data, participatory

ethods based on local perceptions, practices, and managementalling under the rubric of civic science could be developed tossess and monitor local environmental changes. Local criteria andndicators can be developed for assessment of cultural and bio-ogical diversity, environmental quality and even climate change.his would enable communities to play active roles in determin-ng adaptive land-use practices which could reinforce resiliencesing local information and knowledge. After all, many groupsf local people have long-established, sophisticated landscaperotection practices (Liu et al., 2002; Long and Zhou, 2001; Xut al., 1999, 2009). Participatory mapping of cultural landscapesould strengthen not only cultural identify but also aid ecologicalestoration processes. Establishing community-based biodiversityegisters for non-timber forest products as well as key local landace crops would be valuable tools to help conserve local biologicalnd cultural diversity (Gadgil et al., 2000). Freshwater environ-ental quality could also be monitored by local people using a

io-indicator approach (Saipothong et al., 2005). A range of biolog-cal indicators including aquatic invertebrates, fish, algae, plants,

ammals, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and insects could be definedointly by scientific and local experts. Handbooks on watersheduality containing local and scientific names, pictures, and detailsbout what indicators to monitor could be made available. Toelp monitor basic information on precipitation, number of foggyays, water temperatures, stream depth, surface flow velocity, etc.,ainfall gauges, and simple floats and tipping baskets could bentroduced into local schools.

.4. Socioeconomic indicators

Despite the need to quantify socioeconomic changes that resultrom land transformations over time, there are as yet few indica-ors that have been developed to do this. In Xishuangbanna, weould welcome the development of indicators to measure the fol-

owing factors. First, measuring increases in rural peoples’ incomend linking this metric to the maintenance of a diversity of incomeources would be valuable, given the movement away from sub-istence agricultural livelihoods to dependence on globally tradedommodities. Second, increasing the participation of local peoplen land-use decision making that impacts their livelihood choiceseems important to support and monitor, yet there is no move-ent afoot to do this in the research community or politically.lternatively, there are nascent attempts to define and implemento-called payments for ecosystem services with some of thesefforts being supported by the government (Van Noordwijk andeimona, 2010).

Last, though it could easily be placed under measures of eco-ogical function, there is a need to devise indicators that tracknfrastructure development. Just as policy makers can chooseetween monoculture plantation and mixed agroforestry rubbercosystems, so can they support the building of conventional roadsr better-planned “greenways” (Xu et al., 2011). Given that theovernment in Xishuangbanna still does not publically releasenvironmental assessments for major infrastructure projects, weo not see a movement on the horizon to use indicators to quantifyhe impacts of these projects.


Overall, whatever specific ecological and socioeconomic indica-ors are selected, there is a need to place them into a multi-scaleonservation planning framework that assesses conditions acrossurisdictional boundaries. At the local scale, the interests and


participation of stakeholders could inform monitoring and anal-yses. The need for transboundary coordination would requireintegration of local indicators into regional scale assessments. Andjust as the fact that formal protected areas will never be numer-ous enough to protect all wild species entails management of thehuman-dominated matrix lands between reserves, it is time thatlinks between ecological and socioeconomic indicators become thenew standard of land transformation studies. Without this integra-tion, it will be difficult to assess in the present and project into thefuture where environmental tipping points may be located withinthe host of land-use changes that are occurring (Brondizio et al.,2009).

5. Conclusion

We have reserved the question of how to communicate theresults of ecological indicator analyses to decision makers for ourconclusion since it highlights the need to integrate such work acrossthe research and policy arenas. While much has been written aboutreducing the chasm between scientific research and policy mak-ing, the dramatic spread of rubber monoculture in Xishuangbanna,despite publication of a host of scientific studies describing theproblems associated with doing so, provides evidence that this gapremains.

Something must change. To begin, researchers in all disciplinesshould understand that the best trend data from ecological indi-cators will likely gain little traction in solving land-use problemswithout a concomitant understanding of the socioeconomic driversof change. Drivers need to be monitored, and incentives also needto be highlighted. But these factors are, by definition, political, andresearchers are socialized to avoid this territory. This is one reasonwhy the science/policy gap persists.

Based on our review, we offer a general observation and severalspecific suggestions for ecologists interested in having ecologi-cal indicator work influence decision makers. In general, solvingland-use problems requires a transboundary, multi-scale perspec-tive; for an example of this, see the work of Lambin et al. (2001).One way to begin to integrate ones’ work in this manner is tosearch for win/win solutions. In Xishuangbanna, for example, therewas no a priori reason why monoculture rubber had to be chosenover diverse agroforestry rubber systems. Using a ‘green’ rubberapproach, local peoples’ incomes would still have risen without los-ing so much ecosystem structure, functional diversity and humanlivelihood resilience. Now, the state is faced with the significantcosts of “greening” the rubber plantations.

More specifically, multi-resolution, multi-spectrum, and multi-phase remote sensing of landscape change, provides a particularlyeffective approach to analyzing land transformation drivers. Thesemethods gain greater effectiveness when integrated with ecologi-cal and social indicators as we have described in this paper. Resultsfrom this type of research can also be shared effectively with pol-icy makers if visual products (i.e. maps) are distributed widely andstrategically. In Xishuangbanna and the Mekong Region, there arestill relatively few examples of this kind of integrated assessment.One reason for this is that few researchers can handle all the anal-yses required by this approach, but working in cooperative teamscan fill these gaps.

Of course, a critical path toward having scientific research countin land-use decision making is to make sure that results are com-municated in forms accessible to policy makers and the generalpublic. This means creating a communications strategy for research


results and employing a variety of other formats (video, web-based media, the popular press) in addition to scientific journals.We are not referring to advocacy here, but accenting the value ofclear, broad-based communication methods in addition to normal


ING ModelE

ndicat

setp

ibnpvd

A

G02wi2gGutREr

R

A

B

B

B

B

C

C

D

D

F

F

F

F

G

G

G



cientific publication. Scientific communication is a rich and rapidlyxpanding research area, much of this due to lessons learned fromhe poor communication of climate change science to the generalublic (Moser, 2010; Nisbett, 2009).

The use of ecological and socioeconomic indicators integratednto a multiscalar planning framework holds promise to provideetter analyses of complex land transformations that are occurringot just in the Mekong but all over the world. The visual displayotential of indicators also gives ecologists the opportunity to con-ey their research results in ways that may connect better with aiversity of audiences from policy makers to the general public.

cknowledgements

Part of the funding for this work was generously provided byTZ/BMZ Making the Mekong Connected, Project No. 08.7860.3-01.00, as well as by CSIRO Exploring Mekong Region Futures009–2010 Project. Funding during the latter stages of this researchas generously provided by Chinese Academy of Sciences vis-

ting professorship for senior international scientists, Grant No.010T1S2. This research is also part of the CGIAR Research Pro-ram 6: Forests, Trees and Agroforestry. We acknowledge theerman National Space Agency DLR (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft-nd Raumfahrt e.V.) for the delivery of RapidEye images as part ofhe RapidEye Science Archive (Proposal No. 390). The provision ofapidEye images was funded by the German Federal Ministry ofconomics and Technology. The responsibility for any use of theesults lies with the user.

eferences

DB (Asian Development Bank), 2012. Program Framework Document (2012–2016).Greater Mekong Subregion Core Environmental Program and Biodiversity Cor-ridor Initiative, Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines.

ernstein, H., 2002. Land reform: taking a long(er) view. J. Agrarian Change 2 (4),433–463.

rockington, D., Duffy, R., Igoe, J., 2008. Nature Unbound: Conservation Capitalismand the Future of Protected Areas. Earthscan, London.

rondizio, E., Ostrom, E., Young, O., 2009. Connectivity and the governance of mul-tilevel social–ecological systems: the role of social capital. Annu. Rev. Environ.Resources 34, 253–22778.

unker, D.E., Declerck, F., Bradford, J.C., Colwell, R.K., Perfecto, I., Phillips, O.L.,Sankaran, M., Naeem, S., 2005. Species loss and aboveground carbon storagein a tropical forest. Science 310, 1025–1031.

arroll, C., McRae, B., Brookes, A., 2012. Use of linkage mapping and centrality anal-ysis across habitat gradients to conserve connectivity of Gray Wolf populationsin Western North America. Conserv. Biol. 26 (1), 78–87.

hapman, E., 1991. The expansion of rubber in southern Yunnan, China. Geogr. J.157, 34–36.

efries, R., 2010. Interactions between protected areas and their surroundings inhuman-dominated landscapes. Biol. Conserv. 143, 2870–2880.

hanush, D., Grumbine, R.E., Zhang, L., Xu, J., 2012. PromotingUpstream–Downstream Linkages Through Integrated Ecosystem Manage-ment in the Greater Mekong Subregion. UNEP Policy Series Brief 8. UnitedNations Environmental Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

an, P.-F., Huo, S., 2009. The northern white-cheeked gibbon (Nomascus leucogenys)is on the edge of extinction in Yunnan. Gibbon J. 5, 44–52.

eng, L., Zhang, L., 2005. Habitat selection by asian elephants in Xishuangbanna,Yunnan, China. Acta Theriol. Sinica 25 (3), 229–236.

u, Y., et al., 2009. Smallholder rubber plantation expansion and its impact on locallivelihoods, land use and agrobiodiversity, a case study from Daka, Xishuang-banna, southwestern China. Intl. J. Sustainable Devel. World Ecol. 16 (1), 22–29.

u, Y., et al., 2010. Agrobiodiversity loss and livelihood vulnerability as a con-sequence of converting from subsistence farming systems to commercialplantation-dominated systems in Xishuangbanna, Yunnan, China. A householdlevel analysis. Land Degrad. Dev. 21, 274–284.

adgil, M., Rao, P.R.S., Utkarsh, G., Pramod, P., Chhatre, A., 2000. New meanings forold knowledge: the people’s biodiversity registers program. Ecol. Appl. 10 (5),1307–1317.

ouyon, A., Foresta, H., Levang, P., 1993. Does “jungle rubber” deserve its name? An


analysis of rubber agroforestry systems in southeast Sumatra. Agroforest. Syst.22, 181–206.

reater Mekong Subregion Economic Cooperation Program 2009. Joint ministe-rial statement. Presented at the 15th Ministerial Meeting, Cha-am, PetchburiProvince, Thailand, June 19.

PRESSors xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 7

Guardiola-Claramonte, M., Troch, P.A., Ziegler, A.D., et al., 2008. Local hydrologiceffects of introducing non-native vegetation in a tropical catchment. Ecohydrol-ogy 1 (1), 13–22.

Guardiola-Claramonte, M., Troch, P.A., Ziegler, A.D., Glambelluca, T.W., Durcik, M.,Vogler, J.B., Nullet, M.A., 2010. Hydrological effects of the expansion of rubber(Hevea brasiliensis) in a tropical catchment. Ecohydrology 3 (3), 306–314.

Guo, L., Gifford, R., 2002. Soil carbon stocks and land use change: a meta analysis.Global Change Biol. 8, 345–360.

Lambin, E., et al., 2001. The causes of land-use and land-cover change: movingbeyond the myths. Global Environ. Change 11, 261–269.

Li, H.M., 2001. Climate change in Xishuangbanna for the past 40 years. Meteorology27, 20–24.

Li, H., et al., 2007. Demand for rubber is causing the loss of high diversity rainforestin Southwest China. Biodivers. Conserv. 16, 1731–1745.

Li, H., Ma, Y., Aide, T.M., Liu, W., 2008. Past, present and future land use in Xishuang-banna, China and the implications for carbon dynamics. For. Ecol. Manage. 255(1), 16–24.

Li, H., Ma, Y., Liu, W., Liu, W., 2009. Clearance and fragmentation of tropical rainforest in Xishuangbanna, SW China. Biodivers. Conserv. 18, 3421–3440.

Lin, L., Cao, M., 2009. Edge effects on soil seed banks and understory vegetation insubtropical and tropical forests in Yunnan, SW China. For. Ecol. Manage. 257,1344–1352.

Liu, H., Xu, Z., Xu, Y., Wang, J., 2002. Practices of conserving plant diversity throughtraditional beliefs: a case study in Xishuangbanna, Southwest China. Biodivers.Conserv. 11, 705–713.

Liu, W., et al., 2006. Environmental and socioeconomic impacts of increasing rub-ber plantations in Menglun Township, Southwest China. Mount. Res. Dev. 26,245–253.

Liu, W., et al., 2004. Water input from fog drip in the tropical seasonal forest ofXishuangbanna, Southwest China. J. Trop. Ecol. 20, 517–524.

Liu, W.J., Liu, W.Y., Li, P.J., Gao, L., Shen, Y.X., Wang, P.Y., Zhang, Y.P., Li, H.M., 2007.Using stable isotopes to determine sources of fog drip in a tropical seasonal rainforest of Xishuangbanna, SW China. Agric. For. Meteorol. 143, 80–91.

Long, C., Zhou, Y., 2001. Indigenous community forest management of Jinuopeople’s swidden agroecosystems in southwest China. Biodivers. Conserv. 5,753–767.

Lu, X.-T, et al., 2010. Ecosystem carbon storage and portioning in a tropical seasonalforest in Southwest China. For. Ecol. Manage. 260 (10), 1798–1803.

Manivong, V., Cramb, R.A., 2008. Economics of smallholder rubber expansion inNorthern Laos. Agroforest. Syst. 74, 113.

Maneeratana, B., Hoare, P., 2007. When shifting cultivators migrate to the cities,how can the forest be rehabilitated? In: Cairns, M. (Ed.), Voices from the Forest.Integrating Indigenous Knowledge into Sustainable Upland Farming. Resourcesfor the Future, Washington, DC, pp. 137–141.

Moser, S., 2010. Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process andfuture directions. Wiley Interdiscipl. Rev.: Clim. Change 1, 31–53.

Mittermeier, R., et al., 2005. Hotspots Revisited: Earth’s Biologically Richest and MostEndangered Ecoregions. CEMEX, Mexico City.

Nisbett, M., 2009. Communicating climate change: why frames matter for publicengagement. Environment 51, 12–23.

Oehlers, A., 2007. A critique of ADB policies towards the Greater Mekong sub-region.J. Contemp. Asia 36, 464–479.

Pei, S.-j., 1985. Some effects of the Dai People’s cultural beliefs and practices uponthe plant environment of Xishuangbanna, Yunnan Province, Southwest China.In: Hutterer, K.L., Terry Rambo, A., Lovelace, G. (Eds.), Cultural Values and HumanEcology in Southeast Asia. Michigan Papers on South and Southeast Asia No. 27.Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, The University of Michigan, AnnArbor, MI, pp. 321–339.

Prachaya, J., 2009. Rubber Economist Quarterly Report. London, Bangkok.Rigg, J., 2006. Land, farming livelihoods, and poverty: rethinking the

links in the rural south. World Dev. 34, 1180–1202, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.07.015.

Saipothong, P., Preechapanya, P., Promduang, T., Kaewpoka, N., Thomas, D.E.,2005. Community-based watershed monitoring and management in northernThailand. Mount. Res. Dev. 26 (3), 289–291.

Sanitjan, S., Chen, J., 2009. Habitat and fig characteristics influence the bird assem-blage and network properties of fig trees from Xishuangbanna, South-WestChina. J. Trop. Ecol. 25 (2), 161.

Saura, S., Estreguil, C., Mouton, C., Rodriguez-Freire, M., 2011. Network analy-sis to assess landscape connectivity trends: application to European forests(1990–2000). Ecol. Indic. 11, 407–416.

Shen, R., 2008. Rubber trees for tyre industry shrink China rainforests.Reuters News Service, NY, Available from http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/47833/story.htm (accessed June 2008).

Sodhi, N., et al., 2004. Southeast Asian biodiversity: an impending disaster. TREE 19(12), 654–660.

Sturgeon, J., 2010. Governing minorities and development in Xishuangbanna, China:Akha and Dai rubber farmers as entrepreneurs. Geoforum 41, 318–328.

Tang, C., et al., 2007. Man-made versus natural forests in Mid-Yunnan SouthwesternChina. Mount. Res. Dev. 27, 242–249.

Tang, J., Cao, M.W., Zhang, J.H., Li, M.H., 2010. Litterfall production, decomposition


and nutrient use efficiency varies with tropical forest types in Xishuangbanna,SW China: a 10-year study. Plant Soil, 1–18.

Van Noordwijk, M., Leimona, B., 2010. Principles for fairness and efficiency inenhancing environmental services in Asia: payment, compensation, or co-investment? Ecol. Soc. 15 (4), 17.


dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.07.015

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.07.015

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/47833/story.htm

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/47833/story.htm

ING ModelE

8 ndicat

W

XX

X

X

X

X

X



ang, Z., Yong, S.S., 2003. Differences in bird diversity between two swidden agricul-tural sites in mountainous terrain, Xishuangbanna, Yunnan, China. Biol. Conserv.110, 231–243.

u, C., et al., 2011. Constructing China’s greenways naturally. Ecol. Eng. 37, 401–406.u, J., Fox, J., Lu, X., Podger, N., Leisz, S., Ai, X., 1999. Effects of swidden cultivation,

state policies and customary institutions on land cover in a Hani Village, Yunnan.Mount. Res. Dev. 19 (2), 123–132.

u, J., Ma, E., Duojie, T., Fu, Y., Lu, Z., Melick, D., 2005. Integrating sacred knowledgefor conservation: cultures and landscapes in Southwest China. Ecol. Soc. 10 (2),7.

u, J., Fox, J., Melick, D., Fujita, Y., Jintrawet, A., Qian, J., Thomas, D., Weyerhaeuser, H.,2006. Land use transition, livelihoods, and environmental services in MontaneMainland Southeast Asia. Mount. Res. Dev. 26 (3), 278–284.

u, J., 2006. The political, social, and ecological transformation of a landscape: the


case of rubber in Xishuangbanna, China. Mount. Res. Dev. 26, 254–262.u, J., Lebel, L., Sturgeon, J., 2009. Functional links between biodiversity, livelihoods

and culture in a Hani swidden landscape in Southwest China. Ecol. Soc. 14 (2),20.

u, J., 2011. China’s new forests aren’t as green as they seem. Nature 477, 371.


Xu, J., Melick, D., 2007. Rethinking the effectiveness of public protected areas insouthwestern China. Conserv. Biol. 21 (2), 318–328.

Yin, S., (M. Fiskejo, Trans.) 2001. People and Forests: Yunnan Swidden Agriculturein Human-Ecological Perspective. Yunnan Education Press, Kunming.

Zhang, J., Cao, M., 1995. Tropical forest vegetation of XishuangbannaSouthwest China and its secondary changes, with special referenceto some problems in local nature conservation. Biol. Conserv. 73,225–238.

Zhang, M., Zou, X., Schaefer, D.A., 2010. Alteration of soil labile organic carbon byinvasive earthworms (Pontoscolex corethrurus) in tropical rubber plantations.Eur. J. Soil Biol. 46, 74–79.

Zeng, Y., Zhang, H., Li, Z., Shen, S., Sun, J., Wang, M., Liao, D., Liu, X., Wang, X., Xiao,F., Wen, G., 2007. Evaluation of genetic diversity of rice landraces (Oryza sativaL.) in Yunnan, China. Breed. Sci. 57, 91–99.


Ziegler, A., Fox, J., Xu, J., 2009. The rubber juggernaut. Science 324, 1024–1025.Zhu, H., et al., 2004. Tropical rainforest fragmentation and its ecological and species

diversity change in Southern Yunnan. Biol. Conserv. 13, 1355–1372.Zhu, H., Cao, M., Hu, H., 2006. Geological history, flora, and vegetation of Xishuang-

banna, Southern Yunnan, China. Biotropica 38, 310–317.


Documents

Landscape transformation through the use of ecological and socioeconomic indicators in Xishuangbanna, Southwest China, Mekong Region