The large-scale loss of ecosystem assets around the world, and the resultant reduction in the provision of nature’s benefits to people, underscores the urgent need for better metrics of ecological performance as well as their integration into decision-making. Gross ecosystem product (GEP) is a measure of the aggregate monetary value of final ecosystem-related goods and services in a specific area and for a given accounting period. GEP accounting captures the use of many ecosystem services in production processes across the economy, which are then valued in terms of their benefits to society. GEP has five key elements that make it transparent, trackable, and readily understandable: (1) a focus on nature’s contributions to people; (2) the measurement of ecosystem assets as stocks and ecosystem services as flows; (3) the quantification of ecosystem service use; (4) an understanding of ecosystem service supply chains through value realization; and (5) the disaggregation of benefits across groups. Correspondingly, a series of innovative policies based on GEP have been designed and implemented in China. The theoretical and practical lessons provided by these experiences can support continued policy innovation for green and inclusive development around the world.

Ecological compensation is a crucial policy instrument that realigns the benefits of stakeholders to the ecosystem service provision. However, the spatial disconnections between locations where ecosystem services produced and used are common. The supply and demand for ecosystem services are calculated to reflect the status of the districts or counties based on ecosystem service flows. The replacement cost methods provide necessary technical supports for the calculation of compensation funds. The realigning of compensation funds between service-benefiting areas and service-providing areas not only identifies the beneficiaries and suppliers but also realizes the connection between them, which may be a feasible methodology. Fuzhou City is the study area, and two ecosystem services of water conservation and soil retention were taken into consideration. The prioritized development zone, Linchuan, and the key agricultural production zones paid ecological compensation funds. Linchuan paid the highest, 5.76 billion yuan. The key ecological function zones and the key agricultural production zones received the ecological compensation funds, of which Yihuang obtained the highest, 1.66 billion yuan. The realigning of compensation funds between the service benefiting and providing areas addresses the trade-offs between ecosystem services, social development, and ecosystem protection. Embedding the ecosystem service flows into the ecological compensation mechanism can most truly realize the value of ecosystem services, achieve the “beneficiary pays” principle, and be conducive to regional sustainable development.

Introduction: Effective provision of ecosystem services (ES) and improvements in well-being of residents can be realized through policy interventions of stakeholder behavior. Of the several policies, market-based instruments (MBIs) have become the focus of global attention. Outcomes/others: To couple the theory with practice and solve the key problem of unclear definition of property rights, the framework of MBIs is designed. First, property rights of market creation must be clearly defined, verifiable, transferable, enforceable, and have policy continuity. Then, four key characteristics of MBIs need to be considered in the case design, namely those involving ES, stakeholders, trading mechanisms, and guarantee mechanisms. The Pledge Financing of the Right of the Ecological Public Welfare Forest (PFREPWF) in Lishui City is a typical case of China’s current marketization, which is a supplement and improvement to the ecological compensation policy. Based on clearly defined contract rights, Lishui City has realized the integration of ecological compensation and credit creation. Discussion: The case design still has the problems of lack of quantification and lack of correlations with ES. Conclusion: The theoretical and practical analysis around the market mechanism has reference value for solving market failures and providing environmental services.