1. Introduction
As the global problems of resource scarcity, environmental pollution, and ecological damage become increasingly serious, mankind is compelled to seek a more effective and rational path to realize sustainable development [
1]. In this context, the United Nations put forward 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, reflecting the determination of the world’s countries to solve these problems [
2]. As of October 2023, 191 countries have submitted voluntary national reviews to the annual meeting of the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development, although they are not mandatory [
3]. There are variations in the implementation of the SDGs in countries at different levels of development. OECD countries are concerned about global natural environment problems in general and are launching appropriate programs of action. BRICS countries are actively involved in international and regional cooperation, and government plans are dominant in advancing sustainable development. Due to limited financial and facility status, the least developed countries tend to prioritize the goal of meeting the basic needs of their people [
4]. As one of the BRICS countries, China has taken the construction of ecological civilization as a concrete practice and a primary task of sustainable development and elevated its status to a strategic level of national development [
5]. Under the guidance of the concept that “lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets”, ecological restoration and ecological governance have been continuously promoted and achieved great results [
6,
7]. According to the Report on the State of the Ecology and Environment in China 2022 [
8], the percentage of days of urban air quality meeting the standard was 86.5%, the percentage of centralized drinking water sources meeting the standard was 95.9%, the percentage of water quality of nearshore sea areas meeting the standard was 81.9%, forest coverage was 24.02%, and the area of the red lines for ecological conservation accounted for about 30% or more of the national territory.
As China’s ecological advantages become more and more obvious, the desire to transform ecological factors into production factors becomes increasingly strong. Hence, a new concept has been proposed in China: Ecological Products (EPs), which are understood as the result of the intertwining of ecosystems, economic systems, and social systems and have great value in their use [
9]. Ecological Product Value Realization (EPVR) is not only regarded as an effective tool for the construction of ecological civilization but is also considered an important way to promote economic structural adjustment and social green transformation under the new normal [
10]. Exploring EPVR is a process of continuous improvement and gradual progress. The Chinese government has issued a series of policy documents to clarify related matters and promoted the practice by establishing pilots, as detailed in Wang et al. [
11].
The research on EPVR is a widely discussed topic and can yield new insights in interdisciplinary studies such as economics, management, and environmental sciences [
11,
12]. There is some progress in the basic research on the connotations, categorizations, and attributes of EPs, as well as on the pathways and models for EPVR, as follows: (1) In a narrow sense, EPs are often regarded as natural elements that maintain ecological security and enhance people’s well-being. In a broad sense, they are more focused on the impact of human activities on ecosystem production and can be understood as an extension of the concept of Ecosystem Services [
11,
13]. (2) Based on competitiveness and exclusivity, EPs can be divided into public ecological products, private ecological products, and quasi-public ecological products. However, they can still be categorized from different theoretical perspectives due to their multiple attributes of “ecology”, “economy”, and “society” [
12,
14]. (3) The value of EPs is often implicit, and the essence of EPVR is to make these implicit values explicit through appropriate ways [
15]. Therefore, many scholars are concerned about the models and paths of EPVR. Zhang et al. [
16] summarized eight major categories and twenty-two sub-categories of models from many practice cases, as well as three types of paths: the government path, the market path, and the hybrid path, which provide important references for promoting EPVR. Some scholars have argued that EPs, like general products, needed to realize their value through market exchanges. For example, in some regions, natural resources were being assetized and capitalized through platforms such as “forest banks” and “wetland banks” to continuously improve the benefits of EPs [
17,
18]. Further, some studies have found that eco-industrialization and industrial ecologization were endogenous and exogenous driving forces of EPVR, respectively, and were particularly applicable in eco-fragile areas, such as karst regions [
12,
19].
Wang et al. [
20] argued that EPVR could be simply characterized by indicators such as the Green Gold Index. However, to better reflect the EPVR status, it was still necessary to build a suitable evaluation index system, which was the focus of the current research. The Chinese government has released evaluation index systems for ecological civilization construction, beautiful China construction, green development, and the “Two Mountains” index, which provide many references for research in this field [
21,
22,
23]. Some scholars have tried to construct the EPVR effectiveness evaluation index system from different perspectives, including the logical perspectives of “ecological product supply—policy intervention—people’s well-being improvement” [
24] and “ecological product protection—value transformation—guarantee mechanism” [
25], the factor perspective of “input capacity—operational capacity—organizational capacity” [
26], the modeling perspective of the Inclusive Wealth Index [
27], and the transformational efficiency perspective based on the Gross Ecosystem Product [
28]. In general, these studies could provide useful references for this study, but there were still some problems that needed improvement. First, the research scale focused on the river basin [
24,
27], province [
26], and city [
28], but lacked research at the national level. Second, most of the studies only analyzed the EPVR effectiveness at a certain point in time, such as for 2019 [
25] and 2020 [
26], and ignored the dynamic trend of interannual changes. Third, there was a lack of a systematic and mature research framework, and the intrinsic relationship between different indicators was neglected, which made it difficult to accurately understand the essence and process of EPVR. It was necessary to construct a more systematic, comprehensive, practical, and dynamic evaluation index system for the effectiveness of EPVR.
The Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model provides a framework to help understand complex social and economic phenomena and can elucidate the structure and connections of problems [
29]. It will offer great prospects for a comprehensive evaluation of EPVR. However, there are no studies that directly apply the DPSIR model to the field of EPVR.
In summary, this study aims to make up for the shortcomings of the above studies and tries to construct an evaluation index system for the effectiveness of EPVR in China based on the DPSIR model and answers the following questions through empirical analysis: (1) Is the index system reasonable and can it be applied? (2) What is the law of temporal dynamic change of the effectiveness of EPVR in China? (3) What are the differences in effectiveness and the degree of coordination between the different subsystems? (4) What are the main obstacles to promoting the EPVR in China? Secondly, based on the results of the study, corresponding recommendations are made for the reference of governmental departments.
2. Process of Constructing the Evaluation Index System
2.1. Adaptability of the DPSIR Model to EPVR
2.1.1. Important Connotations of EPVR
Xu et al. [
30] argued that EPVR in China was a localized practice of Nature-based Solutions and that the two are highly compatible in terms of philosophies and models. This study argued that the essence of EPVR was the process of transforming natural resource elements containing ecological advantages into ecological products through appropriate means and measures, leading to the continuous manifestation of their economic, ecological, and social benefits. It was formed in a specific context and had a positive impact on the production—living—ecological spaces. The aim was to strengthen ecosystem functions and promote harmony between humans and nature.
2.1.2. Positive Effects of Introducing the DPSIR Model
As an effective tool for constructing the evaluation index system, the DPSIR model was widely used in many study areas [
29,
31]. We proposed to introduce it into the EPVR effectiveness evaluation to provide additional insights. On the one hand, it could explain the process of human interaction with the natural environment [
32], which provided the possibility of revealing the potential causes and expressing the intrinsic mechanism of EPVR. On the other hand, with the introduction of it, the evaluation index system for EPVR effectiveness could be made more comprehensive, systematic, logical, and operable. First, it could cover multiple aspects of the evaluation unit, which facilitates a comprehensive analysis. Second, it could clarify the causal relationships between different factors and specifically refine the effectiveness of EPVR into five subsystems: Driver, Pressure, States, Impact, and Response. Third, it embodied a complete chain of thinking for the effectiveness of EPVR: why, what, and how. Fourth, as a mature framework, there were a certain number of cases for reference, and it was highly operational.
2.2. Design Logic and Principles of the Index System
To combine the DPSIR model with the evaluation of EPVR effectiveness, it was not only necessary to use the model as the logical framework of the index system but also to take into full consideration the important connotations, main features, and critical factors of EPVR. In the selection of indicators, the differences and connections between indicators of different dimensions should be fully considered to reduce redundancy.
Based on learning from the international experience of constructing the evaluation index system [
33,
34], this study determines the following principles: (1) Scientific nature. Ensure that each evaluation index can truly and effectively reflect the EPVR’s development status. (2) Systematicity. Ensure that the layers of the index system are diversified and the subsystems are correlated. (3) Data availability. The indicators can be obtained from public statistical yearbooks, statistical bulletins, or corresponding databases and have good continuous statistical characteristics. (4) Farsightedness. The indicators can be applicable over a long period and be able to indicate the direction of EPVR development.
2.3. Selection of Indicators
Based on summarizing the common indicators used in existing studies [
24,
25,
26,
27,
28] and combining the relevant evaluation indicators issued by the Chinese government [
21,
22,
23], the basic indicators for this study were obtained. Further, according to the design logic and principles, representative indicators affecting EPVR were selected from resource status, economic development, human activities, and social changes to improve the whole index system. The logic of the evaluation index system constructed in this study is shown in
Figure 1, and the description of the indicators is shown in
Table 1. Indicator attributes were categorized as positive, negative, and moderate. Positive indicators would promote the effectiveness of EPVR, negative indicators would inhibit the effectiveness of EPVR, and moderate indicators fall somewhere in between. Specifically, the selection of indicators for the subsystems was considered as follows.
The Driver subsystem represented the potential causes that affect the changes of EPVR, which could be considered in three dimensions: economic development (D1), population growth (D2), and social structure (D3). Accordingly, X1~X6 were selected as the driving factor indicators. These indicators were the deep-seated causes and macro-drivers of EPVR development.
The Pressure subsystem was the direct cause of changes in EPVR under the long-term influence of the Driver subsystem, which was mainly reflected in the impacts of human activities on resources, the environment, and ecology. Specifically, it was set as three aspects of resource depletion (P1), environmental pollution (P2), and ecological damage (P3) in this study, and X7~X12 were selected as indicators of pressure factors.
Under the direct action of the Pressure subsystem, resources, environment, and ecology would exhibit certain statuses and changes and would be gathered in the State subsystem. It was the basic condition and main carrier for the formation of EPs. The indicators were selected from resource reserves (S1), environmental conditions (S2), and ecological security (S3), and X13~X23 were taken as the indicators of the State subsystem. These indicators characterized the state of multiple ecological elements and could reflect the strength of regional ecological advantages.
Existing state conditions would have certain impacts on economic and human social systems, which could be seen as a result of the EPVR development process. In this study, the Impact subsystem was categorized into three aspects: industrial ecologicalization (I1), ecological industrialization (I2), and social life (I3), and X24~X35 were used as the measurement indicators. I1 and I2 reflected the significant impacts on the economic field brought about by EPVR, which could contribute to the development of the ecological economy. I3 reflected the positive impacts released by EPVR on the social field.
The Response subsystem focused on human efforts to adjust the EPVR system. It consisted of measures that contributed to the development of EPVR. Based on the analysis of the EPVR practice process, the indicators were selected from ecological governance (R1), fiscal support (R2), green finance (R3), ecological property rights trading (R4), research and education (R5), infrastructure development (R6), and environmental regulation (R7), and X36~X52 were used as the measurement indicators of this subsystem. The Response subsystem could act on the other subsystems to varying degrees by reducing “pressure”, improving “state”, promoting positive “impact”, and guiding the “driver”.
Finally, the evaluation index system of the effectiveness of EPVR in China was constructed with five subsystems as the standard layer (first-level indicators), nineteen aspects as the factor layer (second-level indicators), and fifty-two specific indicators as the indicator layer (third-level indicators). The indicators were all placed in this cyclically ordered system, which could illuminate the causal chains and dynamic evolutionary paths of EPVR.
5. Discussion
5.1. Linkages and Differences between Ecological Product Value Accounting (EPVA) and EPVR Effectiveness Evaluation
In fact, EPVA was a fundamental work to promote EPVR, which was conducive to figuring out the ecological background. It could present the potential well-being of ecosystems for mankind in a more intuitive form (amount of value) and provide scientific decision-making services for the government to carry out natural resource management and ecological protection [
15,
59]. In other words, EPVA could provide a usable “stock” reference for evaluating the effectiveness of EPVR. However, like EPVR, EPVA also faced a few challenges. On the one hand, mainstream ecosystem services accounting methods, such as the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA, 2005), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB, 2010), and the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) (United Nations, 2012) provided useful references for EPVA, but ecological products and ecosystem services cannot be viewed as completely equivalent [
60]. On the other hand, although Gross Ecosystem Product accounting was an effective method for EPVA [
61], the gross ecosystem value could not be used as a direct substitute for gross ecological product, because the inclusion of traditional products, such as agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, and fishery in ecological products might overestimate its value [
62]. Therefore, there was a need to further clarify the concept of ecological products and the boundary between them and traditional products to better serve the evaluation of EPVR effectiveness through EPVA.
EPVR was a process in which the comprehensive benefits of ecological products were gradually realized in different links, involving the preservation, growth, and transformation of ecological assets, and its effectiveness was the result of the interaction of different factors, such as economic, social, and ecological, under specific conditions [
17,
30]. As a result, the EPVR effectiveness evaluation tended to be an outcome-oriented type of evaluation based on an understanding of the process. There still have been relatively few studies in this area (see the Introduction section for details). Undeniably, these studies, including this paper, concluded that the effectiveness of EPVR was closely related to the amount of available ecological products and their value [
11,
15].
5.2. Comparison with Other Studies
EPVR is an effective tool and an important element of China’s ecological civilization construction [
6,
19,
31,
58]. By constructing an evaluation index system and conducting empirical analyses, this study found that the overall effectiveness of China’s EPVR showed an upward trend, with the composite evaluation index increasing from 0.1481 in 2011 to 0.7680 in 2021, which was similar to the results of some previous studies. For example, Yan and Sun [
63] designed an indicator system for ecological civilization construction (ECC) in terms of environment, society, and economy, and empirically found that China’s ECC level increased from 0.355 in 2012 to 0.553 in 2021. Zhang et al. [
64] found that China’s ECC made great progress from 2015 to 2019 through empirical analysis, with the scores improving by about 8%. In addition, it was estimated that China’s GEP grew from CNY 70.6 trillion in 2015 to CNY 82.2 trillion in 2020, which confirmed the development potential of China’s EPVR [
65].
EPs can be seen as an “upgraded version” of ecosystem services [
12]. In this study, it was found that its obstacle effect on EPVR could be eliminated by improving the ecological background conditions. Similarly, some studies argued that the implementation of ecological restoration projects could significantly increase the value of ecosystem services [
66,
67]. In addition, this study concluded that demographic, social, and economic factors needed to be fully considered to further promote the development of EPVR. For ecosystem services, many scholars also believe that, in addition to natural factors, some key anthropogenic factors need to be considered, such as the intensity of human activities, population density, GDP, land-use change, etc. [
68,
69]. Nevertheless, EPVR still holds its own characteristics, such as being closely related to the eco-industry [
12,
20].
5.3. Innovation, Significance, and Applicability
The innovation of this study was to review the existing EPVR effectiveness evaluation index system, analyze its shortcomings, and make appropriate improvements. First, it filled the research gap in this field at the national level. Second, the continuous dynamic analysis of EPVR effectiveness in time series was realized. Third, the DPSIR model was introduced for the first time and organically integrated with EPVR to establish a more systematic and mature research framework. In addition, in the selection of indicators, we not only fully absorbed and extracted some common indicators from the existing study, but also added some indicators that were more relevant to EPVR and could highlight its characteristics, such as the indicators of ecological industrialization (X29, X30, and X31), green finance (X42, X43, X44, and X45), and ecological property rights trading (X46), and so on. At the same time, this study fully considered the availability of data, and all indicators could be quantified to minimize the influence of human subjective factors.
This study contributed both in terms of theoretical and practical significance. On the one hand, this study tried to use the DPSIR model to organize complex empirical scientific research with a new perspective to deepen the understanding of EPVR effectiveness by incorporating the causes, status, and improvement pathways of EPVR into a holistic framework. It not only complemented and improved the research in the field, but also consolidated and developed theories related to ecological capital, ecological economy, and strong sustainability. On the other hand, this study was a comprehensive review of China’s EPVR development in a quantitative form. By constructing a chain feedback mechanism of EPVR effectiveness, elucidating the coupling coordination relationship of each element, and analyzing the main obstacles affecting EPVR, this study could provide a guiding direction for the governmental departments to formulate a more scientific and reasonable improvement strategy.
The empirical results of this study were in line with the actual situation of EPVR development in China, and the variation in EPVR effectiveness over certain periods was rationally explained (see
Section 4 for more details). This not only validated the applicability of the DPSIR model in evaluating the effectiveness of EPVR in China but also verified the practicality of the constructed indicator system. Hence, this study could provide a new methodology for multidisciplinary researchers in human geography, resource economics, and ecology. Furthermore, the DPSIR model was also a theoretical framework with openness, and the indicator system could be modified and improved according to the characteristics of different research scales, research regions, and research objects, to realize wider application. Meanwhile, the methodology and indicator system of this study were not only applicable to China but could also provide a reference for other countries to assess the degree of green development and sustainable resource utilization.
5.4. Limitations and Future Research Perspectives
Despite the promising results of this study, there were still some shortcomings due to the objective conditions, mainly as follows. First, China has had a relatively short period to carry out EPVR practice work in the true sense of the word. This study already selected the corresponding period to the greatest extent possible, but the development of EPVR might go through a more complex process as time goes by. It was needed to make the evaluation of EPVR effectiveness a long-term task with continuous observations to test the methodology of this study, as well as the scientific nature of the index system over a longer time span. Second, this study was based on certain principles to select representative indicators to construct the evaluation system. The number of indicators has already reached 52, but it still needs to be improved in the future according to the development characteristics of EPVR and the actual situation of ECC. Some indicators that present greater difficulties in data collection and quantification, such as policy, behavioral change, community action, stakeholder involvement, and climate change response, still need to be explored in depth. Third, this study determined the indicator weights using EWM, which was relatively objective but might not be comprehensive enough. Future studies can consider combining subjective evaluation methods, such as the Delphi method, to improve the indicator weighting process. Finally, this study was a preliminary evaluation of EPVR effectiveness at the national scale, taking China as a whole. Caution is needed when directly applying this evaluation index system to other countries or other research scales (e.g., province, city, county). Because the factors involved in EPVR are very complex and diverse. When developing specific assessment guidelines, the government can try to introduce third-party organizations, such as research institutes, to strengthen the scientific nature and integrity of the evaluation system. Different regions have differentiated characteristics and should make appropriate adjustments to the evaluation system according to their own realities. In addition, the issue of spatial spillover effects was not considered in this study. Next, we would combine spatial analysis methods to further explore the characteristics of EPVR effectiveness among different provinces.