SDG11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
Preliminary study and suggestions for modifying indicator SDG 11.4.1（2019）
Scale: National
Study area: China
The UN has proposed to “strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world's cultural and natural heritage” per SDG 11.4. An indicator has been provided to accomplish this goal, which is described as “the total expenditure per capita (public and private)”. International cultural and natural heritage sites are distributed throughout the world in different countries with diverse cultural backgrounds and different levels of economic development. This variance in conditions and culture between different countries makes it difficult to use indicator SDG 11.4.1 since the measurement depends on localized factors. The amount of total expenditure per capita in a country is related to factors such as: (1) the total number of all cultural and natural heritage sites in the country and its total area, (2) the funding invested in each cultural or natural heritage site, and (3) the population of each country. This case study proposes a method that uses in-depth interpretation of the evaluation target system, convenient access to reliable data, and compliance with actual measures to measure capital investment, especially for natural and mixed heritage sites. This value can be calculated from the expenditure per unit area of the heritage site. Per unit area investment = total capital investment / area of heritage site (km2 or ha). The calculation results can be used to measure “increased capital investment”. It is recommended that the indicators given in SDG 11.4 be summarized as a new indicator, SDG 11.4.1. This new indicator can be described as the “increase in capital investment per unit area to protect and safeguard the world's cultural and natural heritage”.
Target 11.4: Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world's cultural and natural heritage.
Indicator 11.4.1: Total expenditure (public and private) per capita spent on the preservation, protection, and conservation of all cultural and natural heritage, by type of heritage (cultural, natural, mixed, and World Heritage Centre designation), level of government (national, regional, and local/municipal), type of expenditure (operating expenditure/investment) and type of private funding (donations in kind, private non-profit sector and sponsorship).
Method
(1)The method involves the calculation of capital investment per unit area. The investment per unit area in the protected area reflects the protection intensity of a country or a single world heritage site. This is given as:
TEPUA=(∑PuE+∑PrE)/A
where the total expenditure per unit area (TEPUA) is the total expenditure (public and private) per unit area on the preservation, protection, and conservation of all cultural and natural heritage. The public expenditure (PuE) is the expenditure for the preservation and conservation of cultural and natural heritage by government departments at all levels. The private expenditure (PrE) is the private expenditure for the preservation, protection, and conservation of cultural and natural heritage. Area (A) is the total area for the regional protection area.
(2)The method involves a calculation of RSEI, which is used to measure changes in the ecological environment, and its formula is given as:
RSEI=1- PCA (f (NDVI, WET, NDSI, LST))
where PCA refers to principal component analysis, NDVI is the normalized difference vegetation index, WET is the wetness component of the tasseled cap transformation, NDSI is the normalized difference soil index, and LST is the land surface temperature. Together they represent greenness, humidity, dryness, and heat.
(3)The case methodology also incorporates a sample selection method. China's national parks have a strong management system. The current management model for natural and cultural heritage has evolved from the original national park management model and there are similarities between the two management systems. This project calculated and summarized capital investment with the aid of geographic information system methods and technologies. The calculation involved income and expenditure statistics and area data for 244 national parks from 2006 to 2017. The aim was to discuss the measurability and operability of the indicator for specific cases.
(4)The method also included an analysis of the relationship between capital investment and the ecological environment. A typical case in Huangshan was used as a demonstration. This case also compared the TEPUA curve with the RSEI curve and analyzed the relationship between capital investment and the ecological environment.
Data used in the case
①Statistics for revenue and expenditure, area, and tourist volume for 244 national parks in China from 2006 to 2017.
②Vector data for 244 national parks and the World Heritage of China.
③Income and expenditure data for Huangshan from 1992 to 2017.
④Landsat series satellite image data from 1992 to 2017. GF series remote sensing data and ground survey data for Huangshan.
Results and analysis
A total of 244 national parks in China were selected as study areas, and these were divided into eastern, central, and western regions. The per capita expenditure and unit area expenditure were then calculated and compared for each district (Figure 1; Figure 2).
According to Figure 2, the average unit area investment in China was observed to increase annually. The total expenditure per square kilometer of China's national parks increased from ￥250,000 RMB in 2006 to ￥650,000 RMB in 2017. The investment in the eastern and central region was higher than in the western region. According to Figure 1, per capita investment was significantly higher in the west than in the eastern region after 2012. The amount of capital investment in the eastern region was much higher than in the western region, and the population density in the west was much lower compared to the eastern region. However, Figure 1 reveals that the per capita investment in the west was higher than in the east. Therefore, it was more reasonable to measure the strength of protection using “investment per unit area” rather than “total expenditure per capita”.
Figure 1. Statistics for the per capita expenditure of China's national parks.
Figure 2. Statistics for the per unit area expenditure of China's national parks.
For example, Huangshan was listed in the World Heritage List in 1990. Huangshan Mountain has three laurels, including: The World Cultural and Natural Heritage Site, the World Geopark, and the World Biosphere Conservation. A typical analysis was performed to assess the protection intensity and capital investment of the site. Figure 3 displays a distribution map of the Huangshan RSEI from 1992 to 2017.
Figure 4 reflects the changes in resource conservation investment and the ecological environment in Huangshan over the past 25 years. An analysis of Figure 4 reveals that the two trends are consistent. In general, the ecological environment in the Huangshan Scenic Area was observed to improve due to the increase in resource conservation investment. Resource protection accounted for 23% of the proportion of expenditures for different projects in Huangshan from 1990 to 2017. This factor played a powerful role in protecting the ecological environment of the heritage site.
Figure 3. RSEI for the Huangshan Scenic Area (1992-2017).
Figure 4. Changes in resource conservation input and RSEI for the Huangshan Scenic Area (the dotted line is the actual value and does not participate in the moving average).
| Highlights |
| It is more reasonable to measure the strength of protection by investment per unit area" rather than “total expenditure per capita”. The ecological environment in the Huangshan Scenic Area was observed to improve due to the increase in resource conservation investment. This case demonstrates the importance of investing in resource conservation measures. |
Outlook
Currently, there is an urgent need to establish a scoring standard (e.g., 0-5) for investment per unit area at the global scale to measure the strength of capital investment. The “total expenditure per unit area” of heritage sites can more scientifically and reasonably reflect the protection efforts of “increased investment” on world heritage sites in comparison with the “total expenditure per capita” method. However, different countries, regions, and heritage sites may require different input funds in order to measure the total expenditure per unit area. There is a need to consider the issue from a global perspective, beginning with the “interference minimization principle” of world heritage sites. A guideline or scoring standard can be established for investment per unit area to measure the strength of capital investment.
Direct and universal indicators are needed to measure the effect of investment on heritage site protection. In this case, the Huangshan World Heritage Site in China was used as an example. RSEI revealed that the ecological environment in Huangshan Reserve had improved due to the increased investment in resource conservation. However, this is only one example. A determination of whether the quantitative relationship between capital investment and ecological environment can be measured by the RSEI will require a comprehensive study of several additional cases. This can be accomplished through international cooperation, and the establishment of a sharing mechanism for statistical data.