Vulnerability of land systems to fire: Interactions among humans,climate, the atmosphere,and ecosystems

Fires are critical elements in the Earth System, linking climate, humans, and vegetation. With 200–500 Mha burnt annually, fire disturbs a greater area over a wider variety of biomes than any other natural disturbance. Fire ignition, propagation, and impacts depend on the interactions among climate, vegetation structure, and land use on local to regional scales. Therefore, fires and their effects on terrestrial ecosystems are highly sensitive to global change. Fires can cause dramatic changes in the structure and functioning of ecosystems. They have significant impacts on the atmosphere and biogeochemical cycles. By contributing significantly to greenhouse gas (e.g., with the release of 1.7–4.1 Pg of carbon per year) and aerosol emissions, and modifying surface properties, they affect not only vegetation but also climate. Fires also modify the provision of a variety of ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration, soil fertility, grazing value, biodiversity, and tourism, and can hence trigger land use change. Fires must therefore be included in global and regional assessments of vulnerability to global change. Fundamental understanding of vulnerability of land systems to fire is required to advise management and policy. Assessing regional vulnerabilities resulting from biophysical and human consequences of changed fire regimes under global change scenarios requires an integrated approach. Here we present a generic conceptual framework for such integrated, multidisciplinary studies. The framework is structured around three interacting (partially nested) subsystems whose contribute to vulnerability. The first subsystem describes the controls on fire regimes (exposure). A first feedback subsystem links fire regimes to atmospheric and climate dynamics within the Earth System (sensitivity), while the second feedback subsystem links changes in fire regimes to changes in the provision of ecological services and to their consequences for human systems (adaptability). We then briefly illustrate how the framework can be applied to two regional cases with contrasting ecological and human context: boreal forests of northern America and African savannahs.     

中国陆地地表水生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价

根据水生态系统提供服务特点,可将水的生态系统服务功能划分为具有直接使用价值的产品和具有间接使用价值的支持系统功能两大类。在评价中,将我国陆地水生态系统分为河流、水库、湖泊、沼泽4个类型,结合基础数据的可获得性,建立了由生活及工农业供水、水力发电、内陆航运、水产品生产、休闲娱乐5个直接使用价值指标和调蓄洪水、河流输沙、蓄积水分、保持土壤、净化水质、固定碳、维持生物多样性7个间接使用价值指标构成的评价指标体系。以2000年为评价基准年份,对全国陆地水生态系统生态经济价值进行了评价,结果表明,陆地地表水生态系统2000年的直接使用价值为4263.91×10⁸元,间接使用价值为5546.92×10⁸元,总价值为9810.83×10⁸元,相当于2000年我国国内生产总值的10.97%。     

御临河流域河流湿地生态系统服务价值评价

御临河流域河流湿地具有非常重要的生态服务功能,包括直接使用价值和间接使用价值。直接使用价值有物质生产功能、水资源服务、旅游休闲功能、科研文化功能等,间接使用价值包括气体调节功能、水分调蓄功能及河岸带湿地污染净化功能的价值等。本研究采用市场价值法、碳税法、影子工程法、类比法及旅行费用法对御临河流域河流湿地生态系统服务价值进行了初步估算,其生态系统服务总价值为4.39亿元人民币,是2000年该流域GDP的28.52%。研究结果表明,御临河流域河流湿地生态系统的服务价值是不容忽视的。在进行流域规划管理时必须重视自然生态系统的潜在价值,才能保证流域生态系统的健康及可持续发展。     

农业光伏电站综合效益评估研究——以浙江某150兆瓦项目为例

农光互补项目具有能源生产和粮食种植的双重价值,开展农业光伏电站的综合效益评估,有助于量化项目的实施效果,促进项目可持续发展。基于生态系统服务价值理论,本文构建了农业光伏电站的综合效益评估体系,并结合实地调查,以浙江乐清市某150兆瓦农光互补光伏发电项目为例进行了示范研究,分析了电站2018—2021年综合效益的构成和变化,比较了电站不同土地利用类型的生态系统服务差异,探讨了不同生态系统服务之间的协同与权衡关系。结果表明：(1)电站每年的经济效益在7534.11万～8417.06万元,电力效益上下波动,农业收益稳步增长;(2)随着项目的实施,电站的生态系统服务价值呈现“先减少后增加”的变化,总体增长量为435.31万元,单位面积生态价值从7.16万元/公顷提升至8.52万元/公顷,说明此农光互补模式对生态系统有积极影响;(3)由于光伏板下杂草区向水稻区的转变,电站的水源涵养和空气净化功能略微降低,土壤保持功能基本不变,而洪水调蓄和固碳释氧功能大幅增长;(4)光伏板的存在导致电站固碳和释氧功能的下降,而在光伏板下种植水稻改善了这一状况,并使电站的土壤保持和洪水调蓄功能发挥了较大作用;(5)...     

生态系统服务价值非货币量核算:理论框架与方法学

1997年两个开创性的著作,即Gretchen Daily主编的Nature’s Services:Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems一书及同年Robert Costanza在Nature上发表的The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital,引发了关于生态资本和生态系统服务、政策等研究的热潮。中国近几年来也将生态文明建设提到了前所未有的高度,并提出了一系列以生态系统服务价值核算为前提的制度和措施。基于此,本研究首先综述了现有生态系统服务分类体系及其存在的不足,剖析了现有核算生态系统服务价值的两类方法,即货币量方法和非货币量方法的核心差异点与可能的融合点,构建了基于能值分析方法和融合货币量核算方法的非货币量生态系统服务功能的新的核算框架,包括:(1)重新分类了生态系统服务价值,即直接价值(增加NPP、固碳释氧、增加土壤、补给地下水/涵养水源、提供水源水电和农产品等)、间接价值(净化大气、水、土壤、人畜排泄物和减少水土流失/侵蚀等)和存在价值(调节气候、调蓄水量、调节径流、旅游休闲、文化教育、维持生物多样性等)三大类;(2)确立了各类生态系统服务价值的核算方法体系;(3)厘清了核算中的加和原则等,以避免重复计算。该理论和方法学是解决现有生态系统服务价值核算方法不足的尝试和完整的方法论构建。     

基于生态系统服务的市场化生态补偿机制研究——以五马河流域为例

五马河作为赤水河的支流,为下游酒企提供水源,该流域具备实现市场化生态补偿的条件.通过CLUE-S模拟该流域现有及未来到2030年经济发展、生态保护两种情景下的土地利用/覆被情况,进而依据InVEST模型对该地区的产水量、氮磷元素消减量和泥沙持留量三种生态系统服务进行评估,最终求得该地区当前生态系统服务价值总量为4.1825亿元,在未来两种情景下的价值总量分别为4.1759亿元和4.1622亿元.同时,通过对当地居民及酒企进行生态补偿意愿的调查,得到符合各利益相关方意愿的生态补偿额度最高为2.74亿元/a,而使用发展机会成本法求得该流域发展权损失为1.78亿元/a.结合上述结果,确定了五马河流域市场化生态补偿标准的合理区间,并以该区间以及SWOT分析为基础,设计了五马河市场化流域生态补偿机制.     

过牧对草地生态系统服务价值的影响——以甘肃省玛曲县为例

文章以甘肃省玛曲县为例,通过对该县草地状况的分析,以玛曲县20世纪80年代草地状况作为过牧前状态,目前草地状况作为过牧后状态,探讨过牧对草地生态系统服务价值的影响,并通过对该县草地生态系统的分析,建立了过牧对草地生态系统服务价值影响评价指标体系,即食物生产、调节大气、营养物质循环与贮存、控制侵蚀、涵养水源、环境污染净化六大功能。最后运用生态经济学方法对过牧造成的经济损失进行了初步估算。结果表明,玛曲县由于过牧造成的直接和间接经济损失分别为:食物生产1.50×108元,调节大气1.04×109元,营养物质循环与贮存0.99×108元,控制侵蚀1.02×107元,涵养水源3.94×108元,环境污染净化2.9×107元,总经济损失达到1.72×109元,其中,间接经济损失占91.3%。     

基于生态系统服务的汾河源头区域生态安全格局优化

生态安全格局的优化是保障区域生态安全,维护生态系统稳定和提升生态系统服务的重要空间途径。以汾河源头区域为例,定量评估产水量、生境质量、土壤保持量三种生态系统服务,利用热点分析法识别重要的生态源地,考虑到河流在生态系统中复杂的作用机制,构建了两种模式的生态安全格局,并在此基础上提出了综合生态安全格局。研究结果表明：汾河源头区域共19个生态源地,占研究区面积的16.59%,三种模式分别构建了33条、42条、43条潜在生态廊道。网络结构评估结果表明：三种模式均可生成闭合的生态网络,优化后的生态廊道总长度为565.957 km,网络闭合度、节点连接率及网络连接度较高,成本比较小。此外,共识别了35个生态断裂点,明确了生态保护与修复建设的重点区域,以期为区域生态保护与修复规划提供空间指引。     

The alignment of agricultural and nature conservation policies in the European Union

Europe is a region of relatively high population density and productive agriculture subject to substantial government intervention under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Many habitats and species of high conservation interest have been created by the maintenance of agricultural practices over long periods. These practices are often no longer profitable, and nature conservation initiatives require government support to cover the cost for them to be continued. The CAP has been reformed both to reduce production of agricultural commodities at costs in excess of world prices and to establish incentives for landholders to adopt voluntary conservation measures. A separate nature conservation policy has established an extensive series of protected sites (Natura 2000) that has, as yet, failed to halt the loss of biodiversity. Additional broader scale approaches have been advocated for conservation in the wider landscape matrix, including the alignment of agricultural and nature conservation policies, which remains a challenge. Possibilities for alignment include further shifting of funds from general support for farmers toward targeted payments for biodiversity goals at larger scales and adoption of an ecosystem approach. The European response to the competing demands for land resources may offer lessons globally as demands on rural land increase.     

The Need to Disentangle Key Concepts from Ecosystem‐Approach Jargon

The ecosystem approach—as endorsed by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) in 2000—is a strategy for holistic, sustainable, and equitable natural resource management, to be implemented via the 12 Malawi Principles. These principles describe the need to manage nature in terms of dynamic ecosystems, while fully engaging with local peoples. It is an ambitious concept. Today, the term is common throughout the research and policy literature on environmental management. However, multiple meanings have been attached to the term, resulting in confusion. We reviewed references to the ecosystem approach from 1957 to 2012 and identified 3 primary uses: as an alternative to ecosystem management or ecosystem‐based management; in reference to an integrated and equitable approach to resource management as per the CBD; and as a term signifying a focus on understanding and valuing ecosystem services. Although uses of this term and its variants may overlap in meaning, typically, they do not entirely reflect the ethos of the ecosystem approach as defined by the CBD. For example, there is presently an increasing emphasis on ecosystem services, but focusing on these alone does not promote decentralization of management or use of all forms of knowledge, both of which are integral to the CBD's concept. We highlight that the Malawi Principles are at risk of being forgotten. To better understand these principles, more effort to implement them is required. Such efforts should be evaluated, ideally with comparative approaches, before allowing the CBD's concept of holistic and socially engaged management to be abandoned or superseded. It is possible that attempts to implement all 12 principles together will face many challenges, but they may also offer a unique way to promote holistic and equitable governance of natural resources. Therefore, we believe that the CBD's concept of the ecosystem approach demands more attention. La Necesidad de Desenredar Conceptos Clave del Argot Ambiente‐Estrategia