China's Sloping Land Conversion Programme Four Years on: Current Situation, Pending Issues
By Zhlgang Xu, M. Bennett, Ran Tao, Jintao Xu. 2004
243 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Political Science and International Relations
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9dbb4ba94fd18b92a2fec721b8abb13661f6a468
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Global and Planetary Change
In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
In Political Science and International Relations
Citations in the corpus
- China's sloping land conversion program: Institutional innovation or business as usual? (2008, background): “Both grain and cash subsidies are for 8 years if ecological forests are planted and for 5 years or 2 years if economic forests or grasses are planted, respectively (Xu et al., 2004).”
- Are the poor benefiting from China's land conservation program? (2007, unknown): “If implemented to its intended size, such a program would surpass in area the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) in the United States (Xu et al. , 2004a).”
- China’s conversion of cropland to forest program: a systematic review of the environmental and socioeconomic effects (2016, unknown): “[14], authors collected empirical data showing that the land selection process targeted more appropriate land in Shaanxi and Sichuan provinces than in Gansu province [24].”
- How sustainable are sustainable development programs? The case of the sloping land conversion program in China. (2009, background): “This confirms previous observations that shortfalls in the quality of compensation may jeopardize future confidence in any renewed program (Weyerhaeuser et al., 2005; Xu et al., 2004).”
- Notions of Justice in Payments for Ecosystem Services:Insights from China’s Sloping Land Conversion Program in Yunnan Province (2015, methodology): “In 2000, the Chinese government launched the Sloping Land Conversion Program (SLCP), which uses public payments to promote the conversion of cropland on steep slopes to forest and is the largest and best-funded afforestation program in China (Xu et al., 2004; Li, 2004; Bennett, 2008).”
- Relaxing rural constraints: a ‘win-win’ policy for poverty and environment in China? (2010, background): “Secondly, previous analyses have shown that o¤-farm incomes represent the predominant substitute for crop incomes for participants in the SLCP (Xu et al. 2004; Groom 2005)6.”
- Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis Revisited (2017, unknown): “The Sloping Land Conversion program (SLCP) in Pingzhang, China Background: China’s central government initiated the SLCP in 1999 in response to the cessation of flow in the Yellow River and major floods in the Yangtze and other basins (Bennett, 2008; Xu et al. , 2004).”
- The Sloping Land Conversion Program in China: Effect on the Livelihood Diversification of Rural Households (2015, background): “Although it was initially planned that households would be provided with a certain level of subsidies for participating in the SLCP, the allocation of the funds was often delayed and sometimes the payments were insufficient (Uchida, Xu, Xue, & Rozelle, 2007; Xu et al., 2004), so the subsidies in the”
- Conservation Payments, Liquidity Constraints, and Off-Farm Labor: Impact of the Grain-for-Green Program on Rural Households in China (2009, unknown): “5 For an excellent overview of Grain for Green, see Xu et al. (2004) .”
- Impact of China's Large-Scale Ecological Restoration Program on the Environment and Society in Arid and Semiarid Areas of China: Achievements, Problems, Synthesis, and Applications (2011, background): “As a result, local government officials urged farmers to withdraw much more land than set by the central government's original goals ( Xu and Cao, 2002 ; Xu et al, 2004 ).”
- Quantifying the effectiveness of ecological restoration projects on long-term vegetation dynamics in the karst regions of Southwest China (2017, background): “In contrast, low or no effectiveness was detected in large parts of the years (economic forest) or 2 years (grassland) (Xu et al., 2004).”
- All That Glitters: A Review of Payments for Watershed Services in Developing Countries (2009, background): “A survey of participants and non-participants in 2003 found that only 15% of participants and 28% of non-participants felt they had any autonomy in choosing whether to participate (Xu et al. 2004).”