A comparative analysis of ecosystem service valuation methods: Taking Beijing, China as a case

Ecosystem service value (ESV) is a crucial metric used to assess the well-being that ecosystems provide to human. However, a unified and standardized approach for accounting ESV is currently lacking. Further investigation is needed for cross-comparisons and empirical analyses using different methods. In this study, we quantified Beijing’s ESV from 2009 to 2018 using the equivalent value factor (EVF) method and the gross ecosystem product (GEP) method. This quantification illustrated the evolving ecological status of Beijing over the decade and highlighted the differences between the two methods. We analyzed the two approaches based on functional classification, accounting value, application scope, and changing patterns, uncovering significant disparities in their evaluation outcomes. The GEP method employs a wider range of indicators than those used by the EVF method. In 2018, the calculation results of the EVF and the GEP methods were 423.43 × 109 yuan and 493.83 × 109 yuan, respectively. The accounting results of the EVF method rose notably over the decade, while those of the GEP method fluctuated. The main causes of these disparities are that the EVF method is heavily influenced by dynamic equivalent factors and land uses, with an emphasis on the water equivalent factor, making it more suitable for natural ecosystem assessment. In contrast, the GEP method is affected by multiple factors and is more suitable for regions with high urbanization, like Beijing. This study underscores the importance of methodological considerations in ESV assessment, guiding the selection of accounting methods suitable for diverse scales and regions, thereby enhancing the scientific rigor of ecological protection decisions and facilitating coordinated regional ecological planning and economic development.