流域水生态功能区划及其关键问题

作为流域生态系统管理和水资源保护的重要手段,如何科学合理地开展流域水生态功能区划,已成为世界各国可持续发展所面临的关键挑战之一.本文立足我国流域综合管理的特点和发展趋势,针对我国现行水功能区划的问题,结合国外流域水生态区划的经验,提出了基于流域生态学、地域分异规律、生态系统健康与生态完整性、流域生态系统管理等理论基础的,以恢复流域持续性、完整性生态系统健康为目标,反映流域水陆耦合体在不同时空尺度景观异质性的流域水生态功能区划及其原则,重点分析了流域水生态系统的空间格局、生态过程以及动态演替等3个区划的关键问题,并提出了区划的方法,以期为我国流域水生态功能区划和流域生态系统管理提供战略层次的科学依据.     

基于文献分析的中国生态服务研究

以1999-2010年间中国学者在中国学术期刊网络出版总库收录期刊上发表的727篇生态服务研究论文为统计数据,采用文献计量学的原理和方法,对中国生态服务研究文献的数量、期刊类型、生态系统类型、研究区域和研究主题的分布等方面进行定量分析.结果表明,中国生态服务研究发展迅速,发表生态服务文献10篇以上的期刊有15种,文献发表量占文献总量的47.73％.共有321篇文献针对具体的生态系统类型开展研究,其中关于森林生态系统的文献数量最多,为116篇.研究区的分布统计显示,以流域为主要研究区的文献有67篇,以地理单元或区域为研究区的文献有168篇.探讨了中国生态服务内涵与分类、生态服务评估、人类活动和自然干扰对生态服务的影响及生态服务应用实践的研究现状,分析表明未来研究的重点将包括生态服务的尺度效应、多情景动态模拟、生态服务评价的规范化和生态服务对人类活动的响应4个方面.     

农田生态系统服务功能研究进展

农田生态系统是人类社会存在和发展的基础,研究农田生态系统服务功能及其价值评估具有重要的意义.文章综述了国内外有关农田生态系统服务功能及其价值评估的研究进展;提出了农田生态系统服务功能的特点;将其服务功能类型划分为生产功能、生态功能和生活功能.分析了当前研究中存在的问题,如服务功能形成的微观机制及其参数研究欠缺;评价结果不准确;评价指标和方法有待完善等.因此,今后农田生态系统服务功能价值评估研究重点应着重于理论探索和方法完善方面,从农田生态系统微观形成机制入手,开展不同尺度和类型的农田生态系统功能价值评估研究,充分考虑影响其功能价值的因素,改进评估的手段、方法和技术,使评估结果更具可比性和实用性,为合理开发利用农业资源、管理农田生态系统,实现农业的永续发展提供理论依据和技术支持.     

珊溪水库生态系统服务物质量和价值量评估

生态系统服务具有区域性特征.水库生态系统服务功能由陆域、水域生态系统服务功能构成.开展水库特别是水库所在流域的自然资源实物量核算与生态系统服务价值量评估,对于有效开展生态系统服务评估具有重要意义.根据珊溪水库所在流域生态系统特点及生态系统服务特征,构建水生态物质量和价值量评估指标体系,借助静态的流域生态产品价值核算方法...     

生态系统服务与人类福祉关系研究进展

生态系统服务是连接自然系统与人类福祉的桥梁,生态系统通过生态功能持续为人类提供产品与服务,满足人类福祉需求。在分析国内外生态系统服务、人类福祉及关系等研究动态的基础上,归纳生态系统服务、人类福祉内涵与分类,重点阐述生态系统服务与人类福祉作用关系、关系形式以及关系评估方法,总结提出生态系统服务与人类福祉关系研究重点是数量和空间的供需状态与评估方法。强调今后要加强生态系统服务与人类福祉关系的科学研究,并将其应用到政策制定与管理中,通过生态系统服务与人类福祉关系研究,可为生态系统管理和扶贫等可持续发展战略提供有力支撑。     

基于CLUE-S和InVEST模型的五马河流域生态系统服务多情景评估

开展生态系统服务量化评估是科学进行生态系统管理的前提,对保障区域可持续发展和人类福祉意义重大。基于生态系统服务和交易的综合评估模型(In VEST),耦合小区域土地利用转换及其效应模型(CLUE-S),对五马河流域当前土地覆盖条件下及2030年2种土地覆盖情景[经济发展情景(SED)和生态保护情景(SEP)]下的产水、营养物质输移和沉积物持留3项生态系统服务进行量化评估。结果表明,当前流域的总产水量、总氮输出量、总磷输出量、沉积物持留量分别约为2.7×108m3、630 t、142 t和2×108t。经济发展情景下2030年流域上述3项生态系统服务的物质量相对于当前变化均不明显。生态保护情景下2030年流域总产水量相对于当前将减少约600×104m3,总氮和总磷输出量分别减少约34.8%和35.4%,沉积物持留量增加约0.7×106t。总体而言,五马河流域上述3项生态系统服务与土地覆盖状况密切相关,生态保护情景下2030年上述3项生态系统服务功能较当前将有明显提高。     

生态系统服务内涵、价值评估与GIS表达

生态系统服务价值评估是当前生态经济学领域的研究热点,为解决生态系统之于人类的重要性提供了量化的参考,也是生态补偿机制建立的重要依据.近5年国际上SCI论文发表数量以年均40%速度增长,我国研究起步于上世纪90年代末,十年来发展迅速,从对国外研究的简单模仿逐渐转向对评估模型参数的修正及对技术方法的适应性集成与发展.生态系统服务的内涵研究不断推进,在阐释“自然组分-生态过程-生态功能-生态服务.获得利益”关系上呈现多种观点,相应地提出了不同的价值评估指标体系;生态系统服务价值评估以瞬时静态为主,动态评估略显不足;研究对象从大尺度和单一生态系统逐渐转向中尺度区域,评估结果表现形式从单一数值化向基于GIS的空间表达发展.在回顾全球范围生态系统服务评估研究成果的基础上,从研究区域分布与学科特点、内涵及分类、评估方法和GIS技术应用等四大方面进行归纳分析,并从生态系统管理和决策支持需求的角度,指出生态系统评估研究已取得显著进展,但有关生态系统服务的内涵与分类、生态系统服务价值的动态评估及GIS技术的应用研究仍待深入.     

近20年国内外生态系统服务研究回顾与解析

生态系统服务对人类生存发展以及生态环境的可持续具有重要的意义,作为当前生态学、环境科学、地理学、生态经济学等诸多学科的研究热点和前沿,目前已经积累了大量的研究成果。文章基于Citespace V5.2软件以及文献计量学分析方法,以Web of science核心合集与CNKI核心期刊为数据来源,系统地分析了1999—2018年近20年国内外生态系统服务研究热点、进展与存在的问题。首先从生态系统服务形成机制及其流动、生物多样性与生态系统服务、土地利用与生态系统服务、气候变化与生态系统服务、生态系统服务评估、生态系统服务权衡协同与生态管理等6个方面对国际生态系统服务的研究热点进行了详细的评述。又进一步从生态系统服务价值评估、土地利用变化与生态系统服务、生态系统服务与可持续等3个方面对国内近20年生态系统服务研究进展与现状进行追踪与分析;讨论了目前国内研究中存在生态系统服务理论研究尚待深入、评估方法科学性有待提高、研究结果应用性不强等3个方面的问题。最后,针对当前研究存在的问题与未来发展方向提出展望:加强生态系统服务形成机理及综合应用研究、建立更加精确的生态系统服务价值评估体系指标与方法、加强生态系统服务区域集成和尺度转化研究。     

基于生态系统服务价值评估的东江流域生态补偿研究

生态补偿有利于协调区域经济发展与生态环境保护的关系。通过现场调研和数据分析,构建适用于东江流域的生态系统服务价值当量因子表,对东江流域生态系统服务价值进行评估,确定其生态补偿标准。引入生态补偿优先级(ECPS)指标对东江流域19县市生态补偿的迫切程度进行量化。结果表明:(1)东江流域生态系统服务总价值为1 711.41亿元,其中,森林生态系统价值占总价值的86.17%;一类生态服务中调节服务价值最显著;二类生态服务中水文调节功能价值最显著。(2)东江流域理论生态补偿总额度为1 047.26亿元,其中,森林生态系统补偿价值为880.21亿元,占总补偿额度的84.05%,是区域生态补偿的核心。(3)东江流域19县市生态补偿实际额度为68.73亿元,其中,东源县补偿额度最高,为16.76亿元。(4)东江流域19县市生态补偿优先级顺序为东源、安远、寻乌、紫金、新丰、连平、龙川、和平、定南、龙门、兴宁、惠东、博罗、惠阳、河源市区、惠州市区、增城市、东莞和深圳。     

水文连通性研究进展

水文连通是反映流域水生态过程、蓄泄能力及修复效果的关键指标,也是国家解决水问题的重要途径.在总结前人研究基础上,尝试界定水文连通性的内涵及范畴,同时对水文连通性的评估方法、理论体系及其应用实践进行综述.水文连通性的狭义概念是指流域内物质以水为媒介,在空间异质性景观或斑块内(间)进行传输的便利程度;广义概念则指地球外部各圈层内(间)各种生态水文及生物地球化学过程在不同时空尺度上的流通程度.将目前已有的水文连通性评估方法划分为原位监测、水文模型、连通性函数和图论等4类,现有方法多关注流域尺度内地表水文结构连通度的定量表征,尚不具备尺度推绎性.水文连通理论体系研究目前尚落后于实践、未成系统.最后介绍了水文连通在影响平原水网调蓄能力和修复受损水生态系统功能两个方面的应用实践.未来应结合地学信息技术与野外监测数据,开展跨多时空尺度域的综合水文连通性定量评估;重点关注连通工程前中后需遵循的原理;应用实践应重点关注不同河流结构的河网调蓄特征和最佳蓄泄调度,以及构建能够表征各种关键模块的综合水文连通修复模型框架,筛选能够指示修复过程或效果的关键因素.     

湿地生态风险评价中生物完整性指数研究进展

湿地是陆地与水域之间的过渡地带,是地球上生产力最高的生态系统。湿地生态风险评价的实际应用将使人们更好地理解物理、化学和生物风险源如何影响湿地,并为湿地管理提供科学支撑,这就要求确定湿地生态健康评价指标的完整性。生物完整性指数以环境生态毒理学数据为依据,是进行生态系统健康风险评价的最有力工具。大中型无脊椎动物作为易选择的分类群,可用于湿地评估的生物完整性指数的建立,土壤动物特别是线虫类群作为湿地土壤和水环境健康评价的指示生物具有广阔前景。通过线虫分子毒理学等研究方法,可优化出生物完整性指数体系,建立扰动背景下的湿地生态风险评价模型,为湿地污染的监测、防控和修复,提供理论依据和实践方法。     

An assessment of adherence to basic ecological principles by payments for ecosystem service projects

Programs and projects employing payments for ecosystem service (PES) interventions achieve their objectives by linking buyers and sellers of ecosystem services. Although PES projects are popular conservation and development interventions, little is known about their adherence to basic ecological principles. We conducted a quantitative assessment of the degree to which a global set of PES projects adhered to four ecological principles that are basic scientific considerations for any project focused on ecosystem management: collection of baseline data, identification of threats to an ecosystem service, monitoring, and attention to ecosystem dynamics or the formation of an adaptive management plan. We evaluated 118 PES projects in three markets—biodiversity, carbon, and water—compiled using websites of major conservation organizations; ecology, economic, and climate‐change databases; and three scholarly databases (ISI Web of Knowledge, Web of Science, and Google Scholar). To assess adherence to ecological principles, we constructed two scientific indices (one additive [ASI] and one multiplicative [MSI]) based on our four ecological criteria and analyzed index scores by relevant project characteristics (e.g., sector, buyer, seller). Carbon‐sector projects had higher ASI values (P < 0.05) than water‐sector projects and marginally higher ASI scores (P < 0.1) than biodiversity‐sector projects, demonstrating their greater adherence to ecological principles. Projects financed by public–private partnerships had significantly higher ASI values than projects financed by governments (P < 0.05) and marginally higher ASI values than those funded by private entities (P < 0.1). We did not detect differences in adherence to ecological principles based on the inclusion of cobenefits, the spatial extent of a project, or the size of a project's budget. These findings suggest, at this critical phase in the rapid growth of PES projects, that fundamental ecological principles should be considered more carefully in PES project design and implementation in an effort to ensure PES project viability and sustainability.     

A framework designation for the assessment of urban ecological risks

Urban ecological risks stemming from urbanization are increasing and limiting the capability of China to effectuate sustainable urban development. Therefore, addressing urban ecological risks is an urgent need. Numerous factors are involved in urban ecological risks, including air, water, and soil. Additionally, risk sources and risk receptors are complex and diverse. In this study, urban ecological risks are defined as adverse effects and possibility of impacts on urban ecosystem services resulting from urbanization. Urbanization is recognized as the risk source, and the urban ecosystem is considered the risk receptor. Based on this understanding, the components of urban ecological risks are defined, and the relationships between the components of urban ecological risks are illuminated by establishing an indicator system. Based on previous studies on urban ecological risks, an explicit framework for identification, assessment, and management of urban ecological risks is proposed. For purposes of identification, there are three types of risk sources: population growth, industrial development, and the expansion of built land. Stressors include the accumulation of contaminants, consumption of resources, and occupation of space. Assessment endpoints are divided into provisioning, regulating, cultural, and supporting services. In response to urban ecological risks having multiple stressors and multiple assessment endpoints, we assessed risks both with a single stressor/single endpoint and comprehensive ecological risks. In our framework, the physical or material assessment of ecosystem services is adopted as the core method for the analysis of urban ecological risk, because it is believed that the analysis of urban ecological risk should be based on the physical or material assessment of ecosystem services instead of the value assessment of ecosystem services. The results of the single value assessment of urban ecosystem services will cause the deviation from the purpose of urban ecosystem services assessment. The purpose of urban ecosystem services assessment is to maintain and/or improve the capability of urban ecosystems of providing physical or material services, and further to reduce or avoid the occurrence risks of unsustainable cities. Additionally, a multi-level characterization method was adopted for the results of urban ecological risk assessment. In this study, we established a platform to manage urban ecological risks based on landscape ecology and environmental internet of things technologies, and to effectuate online urban ecological risk identification, assessment, and management via this platform.     

重要生态功能区典型生态服务及其评估指标体系的构建

科学评估重要生态功能区的生态服务是管理者制定相关政策的基础,对促进重要生态功能区维护区域生态安全、支撑经济社会可持续发展具有重要意义。依据生态服务的空间转移特性,探索提出了重要生态功能区典型生态服务的概念与内涵,并在此基础上综合运用频度分析法、专家咨询法和层次分析法,构建了重要生态功能区水源涵养、土壤保持、防风固沙、生物多样性保护和洪水调蓄等典型生态服务的评估指标体系。结果表明：在指标体系中,影响水源涵养服务的主要是土壤质地和降水量;影响土壤保持服务的主要是植被覆盖度和丰富度指数;影响防风固沙服务的主要是植被覆盖度和大风时速;影响生物多样性服务的主要是植被景观多样性指数;影响洪水调蓄服务的主要是湿地容积和降水量。土壤、植被、地形和气候等生态因子是重要生态功能区典型生态服务产生与发挥的重要基础。     

Current situation and development of Chinese urban forestry

This paper introduces Chinese urban forestry research in terms of the concept, forest types, ecosystem services, spatial structure, planning and construction, assessment and management. Modern Chinese urban forest had a close relationship with traditional landscape architecture. Urban forest services had been quantified in some case cities, and determined by urban forest spatial patterns and internal structures. Based on landscape ecology and urban planning, urban forest spatial patterns have been analysed and planned rationally in some cities. However, studies on urban forestry generally lack long-term, continuous and systemic observations, as well as in-depth research on ecological processes and mechanisms. The development trends in urban forestry in China might include extensive application of '3S' technology, research on the relationship between urban forest landscape spatial patterns and their ecological effects, economic assessment, ecological and economic benefits and studies on the negative effects of pollutants.     

生态系统服务研究的问题与展望

生态系统服务的研究是当前资源经济学和生态经济学的研究热点之一。通过分析生态系统服务的概念辨析,认为从生态系统功能的定义过渡到生态系统服务定义的过程中,在关注生态系统整体性的同时忽略了生态系统要素之间的相互作用,导致生态系统服务的评估中可能存在着重复估值或者估值不全面等风险。针对目前的很多生态系统的评估对生态系统的耗损贬值和环境退化所造成的负效益的忽略,以及对人类活动的干扰和气候变化等对生态系统服务产生影响研究不足,提出在今后的研究中应该在深入理解生态系统的复杂生态学机制的基础上,结合数学模型模拟在不确定性下的各种风险损失,加强对生态系统服务的时空动态分析,重视在气候变化、经济发展、环境污染、城市化以及人类活动的过度放牧和过度开垦引起的水土流失、环境退化、荒漠化等土地利用变化的干扰时生态系统服务的变化和反馈,更进一步分析和预测生态系统服务的损益和响应研究;通过长期的试验监测揭示生物多样性和生态系统的关系,测度出土地利用和环境变化对生物多样性的影响和边际效益,及其对生态系统服务的影响的弹性值,实现生态系统服务的精确估值;关注生态系统服务对人类福利的影响,尤其重视贫困地区和生态脆弱区的生态系统服务对减小贫困的研究,建立科学的生态补偿机制,实现可持续发展。     

Prioritization of Ecosystem Services Research: Tampa Bay Demonstration Project

The Tampa Bay Ecosystem Services Demonstration Project (TBESDP) is part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Ecosystem Services Research Program. The principal objectives of TBESDP are to (1) quantify the ecosystem services of the Tampa Bay watershed, (2) determine the value of ecosystem services to society, (3) predict the supply of ecosystem services under future scenarios of population growth and climate change, and (4) apply this knowledge through models and tools that will support the best informed environmental decisions possible. The scope and complexity of this project required intensive effort to establish which services can be quantified by applying existing models, data, and scientific literature and which services will require supporting research. Research priorities were assessed by: (1) developing and refining conceptual models of major ecosystems in the Tampa Bay region, (2) gathering input from stakeholders about the relative importance and values of various ecosystem services, (3) preparing and reviewing a bibliometric analysis of the volume of scientific literature relevant to the ecosystems and services of interest, and (4) evaluating an integrated analysis of importance, value, and availability of scientific information. This analysis led us to focus on two research priorities, seagrass-habitat functions as support for fishery production, and wetlands as regulators of water quality.     

Obscuring Ecosystem Function with Application of the Ecosystem Services Concept

Abstract: Conservationists commonly have framed ecological concerns in economic terms to garner political support for conservation and to increase public interest in preserving global biodiversity. Beginning in the early 1980s, conservation biologists adapted neoliberal economics to reframe ecosystem functions and related biodiversity as ecosystem services to humanity. Despite the economic success of programs such as the Catskill/Delaware watershed management plan in the United States and the creation of global carbon exchanges, today's marketplace often fails to adequately protect biodiversity. We used a Marxist critique to explain one reason for this failure and to suggest a possible, if partial, response. Reframing ecosystem functions as economic services does not address the political problem of commodification. Just as it obscures the labor of human workers, commodification obscures the importance of the biota (ecosystem workers) and related abiotic factors that contribute to ecosystem functions. This erasure of work done by ecosystems impedes public understanding of biodiversity. Odum and Odum's radical suggestion to use the language of ecosystems (i.e., emergy or energy memory) to describe economies, rather than using the language of economics (i.e., services) to describe ecosystems, reverses this erasure of the ecosystem worker. Considering the current dominance of economic forces, however, implementing such solutions would require social changes similar in magnitude to those that occurred during the 1960s. Niklas Luhmann argues that such substantive, yet rapid, social change requires synergy among multiple societal function systems (i.e., economy, education, law, politics, religion, science), rather than reliance on a single social sphere, such as the economy. Explicitly presenting ecosystem services as discreet and incomplete aspects of ecosystem functions not only allows potential economic and environmental benefits associated with ecosystem services, but also enables the social and political changes required to ensure valuation of ecosystem functions and related biodiversity in ways beyond their measurement on an economic scale.     

Current Normative Concepts in Conservation

A plethora of normative conservation concepts have recently emerged, most of which are ill-defined: biological diversity, biological integrity, ecological restoration, ecological services, ecological rehabilitation, ecological sustainability, sustainable development, ecosystem health, ecosystem management, adaptive management, and keystone species are salient among them. These normative concepts can be organized and interpreted by reference to two new schools of conservation philosophy, compositionalism and functionalism. The former comprehends nature primarily by means of evolutionary ecology and considers Homo sapiens separate from nature. The latter comprehends nature primarily by means of ecosystem ecology and considers Homo sapiens a part of nature. Biological diversity, biological integrity, and ecological restoration belong primarily in the compositionalist glossary; the rest belong primarily in the functionalist glossary. The former set are more appropriate norms for reserves, the latter for areas that are humanly inhabited and exploited. In contrast to the older schools of conservation philosophy, preservationism and resourcism, compositionalism and functionalism are complementary, not competitive and mutually exclusive. As the historically divergent ecological sciences—evolutionary ecology and ecosystem ecology—are increasingly synthesized, a more unified philosophy of conservation can be envisioned.