|
| Comparative study on identification standards for the degree of cultivated land damage |
| Received:November 17, 2023 |
| View Full Text View/Add Comment Download reader |
| KeyWord:cultivated land damage;identification standards;index;grade |
| Author Name | Affiliation | E-mail | | LIU Yunfang | South China Environmental Forensic Center, South China Institute of Environmental Science, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Guangzhou 510655, China | | | WEN Jing | South China Environmental Forensic Center, South China Institute of Environmental Science, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Guangzhou 510655, China | 361299772@qq.com | | ZHANG Yuxuan | Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Marine Disaster Prediction and Prevention, Shantou University, Shantou 515063, China | | | LIN Jiancong | South China Environmental Forensic Center, South China Institute of Environmental Science, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Guangzhou 510655, China | | | LIU Yuedan | South China Environmental Forensic Center, South China Institute of Environmental Science, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Guangzhou 510655, China | | | HONG Wei | South China Environmental Forensic Center, South China Institute of Environmental Science, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Guangzhou 510655, China | | | YI Hao | South China Environmental Forensic Center, South China Institute of Environmental Science, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Guangzhou 510655, China | |
|
| Hits: 511 |
| Download times: 570 |
| Abstract: |
| Identification of the degree of cultivated land damage is a practical demand for land enforcement supervision and judicial litigation in China. Because of the complex and diverse types of cultivated land damage, as well as insufficient operability of identification standards, the fairness and objectivity of identification conclusions on a large number of cultivated land damage cases have been questioned and the credibility of these forensics is affected. This study compared the identification standards for the degree of cultivated land damage of 20 regions; analyzed the differences in terms of procedures, content, indicator systems, and key aspects; and puts forward relevant suggestions. Comparison showed that the Identification Measures for the Degree of Cultivated Land and Specifications for the Degree of Cultivated Land focus on the mechanism and regulations, respectively, with a slight overlap in content. The specifications only provide principles for the identification of units and control areas. Significant differences were observed in the basis of land type verification and the identification system. The systematic and comprehensive nature of monitoring methods remains insufficient, and different sampling and detection methods are sometimes used for the same indicator. The standards generally use the limit condition method to determine the level of damage. Significant differences exist in the standard limits for severe damage to planting conditions, whereas those for severe soil pollution are similar. Establishing a scientific, reasonable, effective, and accurate identification system based on the planting conditions of regional cultivated land, combined with the types and characteristics of cultivated land damage, and in accordance with the principle of “simple rather than complicated”is recommended for all regions. The indicators should be aligned with national and industry standards, with a focus on the dominant factors of damage. The indicators include, but are not limited to, the area; depth, slope; crack density; soil bulk density; pH; organic matter; salt content; gravel content; changes in crop species, agricultural product yield, and quality; changes in soil microbial species; supporting conditions（such as irrigation, drainage, roads, lighting and ventilation）; and recovery costs. The same indicator should have a unified monitoring method. This study suggests using the analytic hierarchy process to calculate the weights of each indicator and improve the science of the standards. |
|
|
|
