Environmental impact assessment of ecological migration in China: a survey of immigrant resettlement regions

Abstract

Implementation of ecological migration (eco-migration) policies may improve the fragile ecological environment of emigration areas; however, it also places enormous pressure on the human-environment systems in immigrant resettlement regions. Via the application of participatory rural appraisal (PRA) methods, ecological footprint (EF), and stochastic impacts by regression on population, affluence, and technology (STIRPAT) models, 21 villages of Huanjiang County in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China were used in this research as a case study area for the environmental appraisal of eco-migration policies in immigrant resettlement regions. Results show: (1) In the past 20 years of implementing eco-migration policies, the EF per capita constantly increased, the biocapacity (BC) per capita constantly decreased, and the ecological deficit gradually increased, indicating an extremely negative impact of eco-migration projects on the ecological environment in the immigration areas. (2) Cropland and forest land are the most important components of the per-capita EF. The per-capita EF of cropland experienced overall a first increasing and then decreasing trend, and the per-capita EF of forest land constantly increased and showed the most rapid increase among all types of EF in the last two decades. (3) The proportion of per-capita EF of different types of productive land is in the order of forest land > cropland > carbon uptake land > built-up land > grazing land from high to low, and this is a significant change from the original order of cropland > forest land > carbon uptake land > grazing land > built-up land. (4) Because of unequal possession of ecologically productive resources, the overall per-capita EF, overall per-capita BC, overall per-capita ecological deficit of productive land use by migrants, and their component values of different types of productive land use are all lower than the corresponding values of the natives. The ecological deficit of natives is more severe than that of migrants. (5) Whereas population growth and overexploitation of resources lead directly to the increased pressure on the ecological environment in the immigration areas, increasing nonagricultural income and improving the consumption structure can reduce the dependence of farmers on the land, thus inhibiting the increase of EF.