《中国的生物多样性保护》白皮书发布

正国务院新闻办公室于10月8日发表《中国的生物多样性保护》白皮书。白皮书介绍,中国幅员辽阔,陆海兼备,地貌和气候复杂多样,孕育了丰富而又独特的生态系统、物种和遗传多样性,是世界上生物多样性最丰富的国家之一。作为最早签署和批准《生物多样性公约》的缔约方之一,中国一贯高度重视生物多样性保护,不断推进生物多样性保护与时俱进、创新发展,取得显著成效,走出了一条中国特色生物多样性保护之路。     

青海维管束植物的多样性

文章着重讨论了青海维管束植物种类多样性的特点、主要价值和物种多样性的分区，为生物多样性保护提供科学依据。     

保护生物多样 防止外来入侵物种

5月22日国际生物多样性日，由环境保护部、中国科学院等主办的国际生物多样性日纪念大会召开。今年的主题是“保护生物多样性，防止外来入侵物种”，会议为我们展示了生物多样性之美，并呼吁人类行动起来保护环境、保护生物多样性。     

山东省生物多样性保护进展

分析了山东省生物多样性现状及国家重点保护动植物物种保护状况,论述了自然保护区、森林公园和风景名胜区建设与管理特征,指出了外来物种入侵和生物多样性保护存在的问题。     

保护中国的生物多样性

生物物种是否丰富．生态系统类型是否齐全．遗传物质的野生亲缘种类多少．将直接影响到人类的生存、繁衍、发展。在全球范围内生物多样性正受到威胁，生物多样性保护刻不容缓。中国既是世界上生物多样性极其丰富的国家之一．同时更是生物多样性遭受最严重威胁的国家之一。对于生物多样性的保护，中国从来都是不遗余力的……     

解读:"三步走"战略确保生物物种资源有效保护与合理利用

世间万物息息相关,一个物种的灭亡会引发不可预料的多米诺效应,就像电影《蝴蝶效应》一样,谁都无法断定某个生物种群的灭绝,会对人类的生存产生什么样的影响。所以,人类必须要有效保护并合理利用生物物种资源。这是人类生存和社会发展的基础,也是国民经济可持续发展的战略性资源。我国是世界上生物多样性最丰富的国家之一,但由于对生物物种资源的过度开发、外来物种的引进、环境污染、气候变化等原因,我国生物物种资源丧失和流失情况严重。为此,国家环保总局联合生物物种资源保护部际联席会议16个成员单位共同编制了《全国生物物种资源保护与利用规划纲要》(以下简称《纲要》),以进一步加强生物物种资源保护,扭转生物物种资源管理面临的被动局面,并在保护的基础上,推进生物物种资源的可持续利用。     

新疆生物多样性调查与评价研究

新疆生态学学会承担完成了国家环境保护部2009-2010年生物多样性项目《全国生物多样性调查与评价研究新疆子项目》,对新疆82个市县分区的野生高等动物及维管束植物丰富度、生态系统类型多样性、植被垂直层谱的完整性、物种特有性、外来物种入侵度、受威胁物种进行了分区调查统计研究,并进行评价,系统的掌握了新疆生物多样性的现状。依项目规定要求多样性评价排序,第一名为呼图壁县,尾部为岳普湖县。     

青海生物多样性信息及其监测

生物多样性监测是生物多样性保护必不可少的组成部分。生物多样性现状和生物多样性保护的决策，必须以充分、准确的信息为依据。监测对象与时间空间尺度的确定，以及指示物种的选择，应是生物多样性监测过程中予以充分关注的内容。     

关于南方稻田生物多样性问题的分析

南方稻田连作模式单一，盲目使用农药，稻田周边湿地淤积、废弃和填埋，致使面源污染消纳系统衰退，破坏了稻田生物多样性的发展空间。而生物多样性的破坏，已成为诱发稻田生物灾害的因素之一。目前，保护稻田周边湿地，构建稻田污染消纳系统；利用田埂荒地，构建生物群落；丰富连作模式，避免生物物种单一，对重建南方稻田的生物多样性具有十分重要的意义。     

云南省生物多样性与生态安全形势研究

云南省以其得天独厚的自然条件孕育了丰富而又脆弱的生物多样性资源，然而外来物种入侵破坏了云南的生物多样性，威胁到国家的生态安全。分析了外来物种入侵、生物多样性及生态安全三者之间的关系，提出生物多样性资源是我国的核心竞争力所在，要将维护生态安全提升到国家战略高度予以重视，同时采取多种措施防范外来物种入侵。     

山东省生物多样性及其保护与开发利用

山东省自然条件优越，生态环境多样，因而具有极其丰富的生物多样性，本文初步研究了山东省生物多样性现状，保护与经济协调发展对策。     

Effects of Management on Understory Diversity in the Forest Ecosystems of Northern Spain

Pine plantations are an alternative to marginal agriculture in many countries, and are often presented as an option that improves biodiversity. However, these plantations can have adverse environmental effects if improperly managed. To evaluate the effect of forest management practices on biodiversity, the diversity, species richness, dominance and frequency of understory woody plant species in different forests of the Basque Country (northern Spain) were compared. Plantations of exotic conifers (Pinus radiata [D.] Don) of different ages were compared with deciduous forests of Quercus robur L. and Fagus sylvatica L. The effects of different types and intensities of management were taken into account. The differences observed were mainly conditioned by the intensity of forestry management, although the response varied according to forest type and age. In unmanaged pine plantations, the diversity and species richness of the understory increased rapidly after planting (while dominance decreased), remained stable in the intermediate age range, and reached a maximum in plantations more than 25 years of age. Management practices resulted in decreased understory diversity and species richness, as well as greater dominance. This was more pronounced in younger than in older stands. Moderate management, however, favored a greater diversity of the understory in deciduous forests. The species composition of the plantations and deciduous forests were different, the latter having a wider range of characteristic species. Knowledge of how forestry practices influence biodiversity (in terms of diversity, richness, dominance, and species composition) may allow predictions to be made about the diversity achievable with different management systems.     

Economic growth,biodiversity loss and conservation effort

This paper investigates the relationship between economic growth, biodiversity loss and efforts to conserve biodiversity using a combination of panel and cross section data. If economic growth is a cause of biodiversity loss through habitat transformation and other means, then we would expect an inverse relationship. But if higher levels of income are associated with increasing real demand for biodiversity conservation, then investment to protect remaining diversity should grow and the rate of biodiversity loss should slow with growth. Initially, economic growth and biodiversity loss are examined within the framework of the environmental Kuznets hypothesis. Biodiversity is represented by predicted species richness, generated for tropical terrestrial biodiversity using a species-area relationship. The environmental Kuznets hypothesis is investigated with reference to comparison of fixed and random effects models to allow the relationship to vary for each country. It is concluded that an environmental Kuznets curve between income and rates of loss of habitat and species does not exist in this case. The role of conservation effort in addressing environmental problems is examined through state protection of land and the regulation of trade in endangered species, two important means of biodiversity conservation. This analysis shows that the extent of government environmental policy increases with economic development. We argue that, although the data are problematic, the implications of these models is that conservation effort can only ever result in a partial deceleration of biodiversity decline partly because protected areas serve multiple functions and are not necessarily designated to protect biodiversity. Nevertheless institutional and policy response components of the income biodiversity relationship are important but are not well captured through cross-country regression analysis.     

将华莺山建设成为川东生态屏障

生态环境保护是环保工作的重要内容,是实地西部大开发的主要工程之一。本文就控制环境污染、保护生物多样性、提高植被覆盖率论述了环境保护与生态环境建设的关系,并依据华蓥山系存在的生态环境问题,阐明了加强环境保护与川东生态屏障建设的基本对策。     

Trade-Offs Between Forest Protection and Wood Supply in Europe

Forest protection is one of the main measures to prevent loss of biological and landscape diversity. This study aimed to assess to what extent forests are currently protected and how felling restrictions affect the potential annual wood supply within 27 European Union member states, Norway, and Switzerland and to discuss trade-offs between intensified use of forest biomass and forest protection efforts. Protected forests covered 33 million ha (20 % of total forest area) in 2005, of which 16 million ha was protected for biodiversity and the remaining area for landscape diversity. Within the protected areas, on average 48 % of the volume cannot be harvested in forests protected for biodiversity and 40 % in forests protected for landscapes. Consequently, 73 million m³ (10 % of the annual theoretical potential supply from the total forest area) of wood cannot be felled from the protected forests in Europe. Protected forests do not necessarily affect wood supply given the current demand for wood in Europe. However, if demand for wood from European forests for material and energy use significantly increases, the impact of existing protected forest networks may become significant after all. On the other hand, wood harvesting is allowed to a fair extent in many protected areas. Hence, the question could be raised whether biodiversity and landscape diversity within designated areas are sufficiently protected. Careful planning is required to accommodate both the protection of biological and landscape diversity and demand for wood, while not forgetting all other services that forests provide.     

Protected forests in Europe approaches-harmonising the definitions for international comparison and forest policy making

Comparison of forest protection between regions in Europe is extremely difficult, because there is such wide variation of strategies, procedures and constraints; the way forests have been used historically and their present closeness to nature also varies, and furthermore so does the definition of what constitutes a forest. For the European Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) in 2003, forest protection has been harmonised into three categories for the sake of comparison: protection to safeguard biodiversity, protection of landscape and specific natural features, and protective forest functions.There is no single, uniform and universal model and no internationally agreed target with respect to the percentage of forests which should be protected. What is more important than a fixed percentage level of forested area (e.g. 5 or 10%) is that the protection network should be biogeographically and ecologically representative and accordingly distributed on a regional basis. Long-term practical experience and research have proved that conservation of different species of organisms can be assured by appropriate silvicultural management of multifunctional production forests. Consequently, the focus of debate in Europe appears to shift more and more from total protection in segregated areas to 'precision protection' and to combining protection and timber production in the holistic, integrated concept of modern management of forest areas.Advances in regional ecological planning and the growing adoption of naturalistic forest management practices have slowed the decline of the biological diversity in the multifunctional production forests. However, this fact is not yet widely and sufficiently acknowledged and appreciated. There is consequently a political and scientific need for continued study of the effects of naturalistic silvicultural management on the biodiversity of forests. Information from such research is crucially needed before new and additional protection networks and schemes are set up on a large-scale. Protection by voluntary contracts between parties is a workable model concept for European forestry based on private forest ownership. In small private forests, patches of forest worth protecting are often small and located within production forests.Forest certification can contribute to the efforts of maintaining biodiversity in multifunctional production forests and offers an instrument of independently monitoring and verifying that forests are managed according to the agreed criteria. Forest certification is not an alternative or a means of increasing forest protection, because as a voluntary process it cannot guarantee the permanence of protected areas or deal with issues of finance and compensation.     

Biodiversity and biotechnology

The maintenance of biodiversity is urged from many quarters and on grounds ranging from aesthetic considerations to its usefulness, particularly for biotechnology. But regardless of the grounds for preserving biodiversity, writers are generally in agreement that it should be preserved. But, in examining the various references biodiversity, such as species diversity, genetic diversity, and habitat diversity, it is apparent that we cannot aim to preserve biodiversityas such, since there are a number of conflicts in any such undertaking. In preserving one aspect of biodiversity, we damage another aspect. Five arguments which attempt to ground our moral concern for biodiversity are reviewed and critiqued, not only for their consistency but also for their power to move us to action. The final section of the paper shows how conflicts in the values of personal and environmental health can impair ethical action and especially policy formation.An earlier version of this paper was read at the conference on Agriculture, Food, and Human Values: Tradition and Change, Orlando, Florida, October 7–9, 1987.     

山东省迁徙鸟类资源的保护与利用

为了有效保护和利用山东省迁徙鸟类资源．对该省迁徙鸟类的资源现状进行了研究。结果表明，山东省共有迁徙鸟类357种和亚种，占全省鸟类总数的87．9％；夏候鸟84种、占总数的20．7％，冬候鸟47种、占总数的11．6％，旅鸟226种和亚种、占总数的65．7％。其中有67种被列为国家一、二级保护鸟类。威胁该区迁徙鸟类生存的主要因素包括人们的直接破坏、迁徙鸟类栖居地的破坏和环境污染等，并据此提出了相应的保护对策和利用措施。     

Examining the Effects of Biodiversity on the Ability of Local Plans to Manage Ecological Systems

The protection of biological diversity (hereafter biodiversity) is considered one of the fundamental goals for the sustainable management of ecological systems. This paper examines how existing levels of biodiversity influence ecosystem capabilities at the local level. Specifically, it tests the effects of biodiversity and the degree of threat to biodiversity on the quality of local comprehensive plans in Florida as measured by the ability to manage ecosystems. Regression analysis indicates that high biodiversity does not stimulate planners to adopt higher quality plans. Instead, human disturbance or threats to existing levels of biodiversity are the most significant factors in driving ecosystem plan quality. Based on the results, the paper discusses implications for policy and suggests recommendations to improve proactive planning practices associated with managing ecological systems over the long term.