Forest ecological benefit compensation plays a promoting role in improving the enthusiasm of forest ecological builders and maintainers, maintaining the legitimate economic interests of forest owners, and coordinating the fairness between the “clear water and green mountains” protectors and the “gold and silver mountains” beneficiaries. Comprehensive combed the domestic forest ecological benefit compensation mechanism, including the compensation scope, compensation subject, compensation object, the research progress of compensation standard, summarized the forest ecosystem benefits measurement, including physical appraisal method, the value evaluation method, energy analysis method and the characteristics and application research progress of ecological model method. This paper discusses the research status and existing problems of the calculation basis of compensation standard, the origin, research emphasis and progress of forest ecological service payment abroad in recent years, and the mechanism of forest ecological service payment in many countries. Finally, some suggestions are put forward to improve the compensation mechanism of forest ecological benefits in China. On the one hand, it is necessary to broaden the source of funds through various ways of marketization and scientifically evaluate the forest ecological benefits. On the other hand, the compensation standard should be established scientifically and reasonably to achieve different compensation levels or compensation intervals.

1. Liu Y, Wu P. Guowai linye shengtai buchang yanjiu zongshu (Chinese) [Review of foreign research on forestry ecological compensation]. Labor Security World (Theory Edition) 2011; (8): 60–62.

2. Grima N, Singh SJ, Smetschka B, et al. Payment for ecosystem services (PES) in Latin America: Analysing the performance of 40 case studies. Ecosystem Services 2016; 17: 24–32.

3. Li G. Zhongguo gongyilin shengtai buchang jizhi yanjiu (Chinese) [Research on ecological compensation mechanism of public welfare forest in China]. Beijing: People’s Publishing House; 2019.

4. Li W, Li F, Li S, et al. The status and prospect of forest ecological benefit compensation. Journal of Natural Resources 2006; (5): 677–688.

5. Gao Y, Wang Y, Song Y. Zhongguo yu gesidalijia senlin shengtai buchang bijiao ji qishi (Chinese) [Comparison and enlightenment of forest eco-compensation between China and Costa Rica]. World Forestry Research 2021; 34(6): 81–85.

6. Zhang T. Senlin shengtai xiaoyi buchang jizhi (Chinese) [Study on payment mechanism of forest ecological compensation] [PhD thesis]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Forestry; 2003.

7. Liu C, Zhang M. Literature review and comments on forest ecological compensation. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Science Edition) 2019; (5): 149–155.

8. Liu M, Lu Q, Yang J. Problems and improvement of compensation system for forest ecological benefits in China. Issues of Forestry Economics 2018; (5): 1–9.

9. Cao X, Liu Y. The discussion about market-based compensation route for ecological benefit of forest in China. Issues of Forestry Economics 2011; (1): 16–19.

10. Tong G. On the problems of Beijing forest eco-compensation legal mechanisms and policies practice. Journal of Beijing University of agriculture 2018; 33(4): 81–85.

11. Li Y, Pan H, Zou Y, et al. Social trust and willingness of urban residents to pay forest ecological compensation—Based on the survey of Heilongjiang. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment 2020; 34(7): 90–96.

12. Jiang Y, Chen K, Zhu S, et al. Measure of forest ecological compensation standard in Hunhe River basin. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation 2018; (6): 206–211.

13. Peng X, Sun S, Yan S. A review of forest ecological compensation mechanism. Journal of Central South University of Forest & Technology (Social Sciences) 2019; (3): 45–51.

14. Wang H. Research on theory and practice of forest ecological Compensation. Natural Resources Economics of China 2019; (7): 25–33.

15. Nie C, Cheng M. Research on regional lateral forest ecological compensation based on the theory of Marginal Effect—Taking Beijing and Zhang Cheng District of Hebei Province as examples. Forestry Economics 2019; (1); 24–31.

16. Pan H, Liu H. The evolutionary game analysis of cross-regional forest ecological compensation—Based on the perspective of the main functional area. Acta Ecologica Sinica 2019; (12): 4560–4569.

17. Zhao J, Wang L, Han H, et al. Research advances and trends in forest ecosystem services value evaluation. Chinese Journal of Ecology 2013; 32(8): 2229–2237.

18. Pan H, Li Y, Chen Z. A review and perspectives on the methods for evaluation of forest ecosystem services values. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment 2018; 32(6): 72–78.

19. Zhou F, Jiang D. Evaluation and compensation of forest ecological value based on system dynamics model. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences 2018; (20): 325–329.

20. Wang B, Ren X, Hu W. Reginal variation of forest ecosystem services in China. Journal of Beijing Forestry University 2011; 33(2): 43–47.

21. Yuan Z, Wan R, Zhang Y, et al. Regional Variation of forest ecosystem services in China. Ecological Science 2019; 38(5): 210–219.

22. Costanza R, D’arge R, De Groot RS, et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997; 387: 253–260.

23. Xie G, Zhang C, Zhang L, et al. Improvement of the evaluation method for ecosystem service value based on per unit area. Journal of Natural Resources 2015; 30(8): 1243–1254.

24. Hu S. Jiyu shengtai jingji jicha dizu de linye shengtai buchang yanjiu (Chinese) [Research on Forestry Ecological Compensation based on eco-economic level differential land rent [MSc thesis]]. Changsha: Central South University of Forestry and Technology; 2019.

25. Tang L, Zhang H, Yang W, et al. Forest ecological value accounting method based on value equivalent of standard plot: A case study of Longgang District of Shenzhen City. China Land 2020; (11): 26–28.

26. Feng R. Chongqing senlin shengtai xitong fuwu jiazhi pingjia (Chinese) [The evaluation of forest ecosystem benefit in Chongqing] [MSc thesis]. Chongqing: Southwest University; 2014.

27. Wu W, Gu L, Shen Y. Senlin shengtai xiaoyi buchang ruogan wenti de sikao (Chinese) [Some issues on forest ecological benefit compensation]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University 2002; (3): 72–76.

28. Zhang Y. Ecological compensation for public welfare forests. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House; 2012.

29. Kong F. Eco-compensation mechanism for ecological function conservation zones in the headwaters—A case study of Dongjiang riverhead region in Jiangxi Province. Economic Geography 2010; (2): 299–305.

30. Sheng W, Zhen L, Xiao Y. Distinct eco-compensation standards for ecological forests in Beijing. Acta Ecologica Sinica 2019; 39(1): 45–52.

31. Zhang J, Liu X, Dong X, et al. Forest Eco-compensation standard in Hohhot City. Inner Mongolia Forestry Investigation and Design 2018; (6): 89–93.

32. Li Y. Forest ecological value accounting and ecological compensation study—Taking Mudanjiang City as an example [PhD thesis]. Harbin: Northeast Agricultural University; 2016.

33. Bao F, Sun H, Yan J. A primary discussion on evaluation of forest leading ecological values and ecological compensation. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conversation 2005; (6): 101–104.

34. Lu Y, Jin D. Compensation of ecological benefit for public welfare forests in Guangxi, south China. Journal of Beijing Forestry University 2006; (3): 53–56.

35. Wu Q, Peng Y, Ma H, et al. Research on the value of forest ecosystem services and compensation in a Pinus massonisna forest. Acta Ecologica Sinica 2019; (1): 117–130.

36. Li L. Research on forest ecological compensation mechanism in Hunan Province based on carbon exchange accounting [MSc thesis]. Changsha: Central South University of Forestry and Technology; 2019.

37. Zheng P, Yang L, Han W, et al. Evaluation of social benefits of forest based on ecosystem services function: A case study of forest resources in Yunnan Province. Ecological Economy 2020; 36(5): 161–170.

38. Xu W, Ma A, Zhao M. Present situation and prospect of research on evaluation of forest ecosystem value in China. Forest Investigation Design 2015; (2): 1–5.

39. Zhang Q, Zhao T. Thinking of ecology forest compensation mechanism of mountainous area collective—A case study of Pinggu District in Beijing. China Forestry Economy 2010; (2): 29–32.

40. Liu S, Zhang Y, Zhang J, et al. Status, problems and countermeasures of forest ecological benefit compensation system in Tianjin. Tianjin Agricultural Sciences 2014; (8): 109–111.

41. Ran J. Problems of forest eco-efficiency compensation and countermeasures. Xiangcun Keji 2019; (20): 78–79.

42. Chen X, Shi D. Wanshan shengtai gongyilin buchang zhidu de sikao—Jiyu zhejiangsheng shishi shengtai gongyilin jianshe de diaocha (Chinese) [Consideration on improving the compensation system of ecological public welfare forest—Based on the investigation of ecological public welfare forest construction in Zhejiang Province]. Green Finance and Accounting 2019; (10): 3–6.

43. Wen Z. On the effective use of forest ecological benefit compensation funds. Forestry Economics 2001; (11): 16–18.

44. Liu Z. Liaonignsheng shengtai gongyilin buchang jizhi tantao (Chinese) [Discussion on compensation mechanism of ecological public welfare forest in Liaoning Province]. Protection Forest Science and Technology 2017; (S1): 88–90.

45. Kong F. Improving ecological compensation mechanism of China: Theory, practice and research prospect. Issues in Agricultural Economy 2007; (10): 50–53.

46. Zhou Y. Eco-service compensation mechanism of multipurpose forest based on the value of carbon sequestration. Kunming: Yunnan University; 2014.

47. Gong R, Cheng R, Zeng M, et al. Study on poverty alleviation performance of forest carbon sink on the basis of farmers’ perception. South China Journal of Economics 2019; (9): 84–96.

48. Zhu Z, Huang C, Xu Z, et al. How risk attitude of farmers influences the supply willingness of forest carbon sequestration in Zhejiang Province. Resources Science 2016: 38(3): 565–575.

49. Li G. Research progress on forest ecological compensation. Forestry Economics 2019; (1): 32–40.

50. Hu H. Research on our country’s policy of forest ecological benefit compensation and its influences [MSc thesis]. Hefei: Anhui University; 2017.

51. Chen Z, Shi C, Bian G, et al. Study on graded compensation for ecological forest in Zhuzhou. Forest Resources Management 2015; (5): 44–49.

52. Huang L. Study on ecological compensation standard of public forest in Fujian Province [MSc thesis]. Fuzhou: Fujian Agriculture and Forest University; 2012.

53. Chen Q, Huang L. Empirically study on influence factor of ecological compensation standard of non-commercial forest in Fujian. Forestry Economics 2013; (10): 83–85.

54. Liao Y. The research on forest park of Hunan Province public welfare forest ecological compensation mechanism [MSc thesis]. Changsha: Central South University of Forestry and Technology; 2014.

55. Li J, Chen Q, Wang T, et al. Analysis of influencing factors of forest ecological benefit compensation policy of farmers satisfaction: Based on forest survey data of six counties and counties in Fujian Province. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University (Social Science) 2016; 10(5): 51–57.

56. Li T, Qin G, Cui Y. Analysis on Farmers’ willingness to participate in ecological compensation in Anhui Province. Forest Economics 2015; 37(2): 92–95, 104.

57. Guo X, Fu A, Ke Y, et al. Farmers perception and factors of differentiation on non-commercial forest ecology compensation—An empirical analysis on the survey of farmers in the source region of Gan River. Forest Economics 2017; 39(1): 81–86.

58. Daily GC. Nature’s services: Societal dependence on natural eco-system. Washington, DC: Island Press; 1997.

59. Havinga I, Hein L, Vega-Araya M, et al. Spatial quantification to examine the effectiveness of payments for ecosystem services: A case study of Costa Rica’s Pago de Servicios Ambientales. Ecological Indicators 2020; 108: 105766.

60. Le CJ, Froger G, Pesche D, et al. Understanding the governance of the payment for environmental services programme in Costa Rica; A policy process perspective. Ecosystem Services 2015; 16: 253–265.

61. Liagre L, Pettenella D, Pra A, et al. How can national forest funds catalyse the provision of ecosystem services? Lessons learned from Costa Rica, Vietnam, and Morocco. Ecosystem Services 2021; 47: 101228.

62. Chen H. The inspiration based on the research of European forest compensation system [MSc thesis]. Lin’an: Zhejiang A&F University; 2012.

63. Tang R, Huang S. Germany forestry public finance supporting protection policies are worthy to refer. Green China 2010; (5): 57–59.

64. Cai Y, Liu J. Comparison and reference to international forest ecological compensation system innovation. Journal of Northwest A&F University (Social Science Edition) 2009; 9(4): 35–40.

65. Fan S, Peng H. Experiences and enlightenment of the market-based forest ecological compensation mechanism in Australia. World Forestry Research 2021; 34(3): 112–116.

66. Zhao X. Meiguo, deguo, riben senlin shengtai buchang falv zhidu yanjiu (Chinese) [Research on legal system of forest ecological compensation in USA, Germany and Japan]. World Agriculture 2016; (8): 90–94.

67. Wang D. Japanese compensation system for forest ecological benefits and recent implementation. World Forestry Research 2005; (5): 67–72.

68. Pagiola S. Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics 2008; 65(4); 712–724.

69. Wang S, Jiao Y. Foreign forest ecological benefit compensation system and reference. Ecological Economy 2011; (1): 69–73.

70. Cheng L. Study on the problem of forest ecological benefit compensation in China [MSc thesis]. Xi’an: Northwest University; 2007.

71. Tyrväinen L, Mäntymaa E, Juutien A, et al. Private Landowners’ preferences for trading forest landscape and recreational values: A choice experiment application in Kuusamo, Finland. Land Use Policy 2021; 107: 104–478.

72. Liu W. Zhongguo he oumeng senlin shengtai buchang zhengce de bijiao yanjiu (Chinese) [Comparative study on forest ecological compensation policies between China and EU] [MSc thesis]. Nanjing: Nanjing Normal University; 2020.

73. Sattler C, Trampnau S, Schomers S, et al. Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success? Ecosystem Services 2013; 6: 31–45.

74. Daniels AE, Bagstad K, Esposito V, et al. Understanding the impacts of Costa Rica’s PES: Are we asking the right questions? Ecological Economics 2010; 69(11): 2116–2126.

75. Obeng EA, Aguilar FX. Value orientation and payment for ecosystem services: Perceived detrimental consequences lead to willingness-to-pay for ecosystem services. Journal of Environmental Management 2017; 206: 458–471.

76. Kang MJ, Sury JP, Colson G, et al. Do forest property characteristics reveal landowners’ willingness to accept payments for eco-system services contracts in southeast Georgia, U.S.? Ecological Economics 2019; (161): 144–152.

77. Do TH, Vu TP, Nguyen VT, et al. Payment for forest environmental services in Vietnam: An analysis of buyers’ perspectives and willingness. Ecosystem Services 2018; (32): 134–143.

78. Bartczak A, Metelska-Szaniawska K. Should we pay, and to whom, for biodiversity enhancement in private forests? An empirical study of attitudes towards payments for forest ecosystem services in Poland. Land Use Policy 2015; (48): 261–269.

79. Chapman M, Satterfield T, Wittman H, et al. A payment by any other name: Is Costa Rica’s PES a payment for services or a support for stewards? World Development 2020; 129; 104900

80. Izquierdo-Tort S, Ortiz-Rosaa F, Vázquez-Cisneros PA. ‘Partial’ participation in payments for environmental services (PES): Land enrolment and forest loss in the Mexican Lacandona Rainforest. Land Use Policy 2019; 87: 103950.

81. Bauchet J, Asquith N, Ma Z, et al. The practice of payments for ecosystem services (PES) in the Tropical Andes: Evidence from program administrators. Ecosystem Services 2020; 45: 101175.

82. Rasch S, Wünscher T, Casasola F, et al. Permanence of PES and the role of social context in the Regional Integrated Silvo-pastoral Ecosystem Management Project in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics 2021; 185: 107027.