中国多样的生态农业技术体系

中国生态农业的技术体系主要包括①农业环境综合整治技术;②农业资源的保护与增殖技术;③小流域综合利用技术;④立体种养技术;⑤庭院资源综合利用技术;⑥再生能源利用技术;⑦农业副产物再利用技术;⑧有害生物的综合防治技术。中国生态农业的技术体系继承了中国传统农业的精华,充分利用资源,合理保护资源,有效地连接农业的不同组分。文章介绍了中国近１０多年来成功应用这些技术的典型例子,并且指出这将有利于中国实践＂２１世纪议程＂和粮农组织的＂持续农业和农村发展宣言＂。     

矿区生态系统健康内涵及评价指标体系研究

结合生态系统健康理论及矿区发展特点，探讨了矿区生态系统健康内涵、阐述了矿区生态系统健康评价目的和评价指标体系的设置思想，构建了矿区生态系统健康评价指标体系。     

黑龙江省生物多样性保护重要性评价

根据黑龙江省生物多样性现状和国家规定的评价方法与指标对黑龙江省的生态系统进行生物多样性保护重要性评价,评价结果将黑龙江省生物多样性保护重要地区分为4级,即极重要、中等重要、比较重要和一般重要四个级别,并确定了它们的分布区域.这一成果为黑龙江省生态功能区划奠定了基础,提供了科学依据.     

草原生态系统健康与评价研究进展

生态系统健康研究是近年来生态学领域的新热点。本文从生态系统健康和生态系统服务的概念出发，简要阐述了草原生态系统健康评价的指导思想、原则、指标和方法。结果表明，草原生态系统健康评价应以生态系统服务为指导思想，根据区域分异的因地制宜原则，采用VOR健康指数，运用综合评价方法将生态系统健康状况分为：健康、警戒、不健康和崩溃4个时期；或很健康、健康、较健康、一般病态和疾病5级。以便将草原生态系统对号人座了解其健康状况，进行科学管理和有效治理。     

中外大河河口湿地保护与利用初探

在分析研究河口湿地形成与演变、河口湿地生态系统特征的基础上 ,对中外大河河口湿地保护与利用现状进行了初步研究 ,以期为中国河口湿地保护与利用提供一定的借鉴和启示     

Ecological assessment of cities-procedure and a case study

This paper discusses the scientific background and content of the ecological assessment of cities, and takes Boda, a new town in Xinjiang province, China, as a case study.     

西部生态脆弱区矿山不同开采强度下生态系统服务时空变化——以神府矿区为例

以神府矿区为例,选取土地利用、植被覆盖、土壤、气象等生态环境与统计数据指标,利用RS和GIS技术构建生态系统服务遥感测量评估指标体系,评估研究区2005-2015年生态系统服务变化及时空分布特征,进一步探究神府矿区不同开采强度对生态系统服务的影响并进行驱动力分析。研究结果表明：（1）2005年、2010年、2015年研究区的总生态系统服务分别为1.598×10¹⁰元、1.905×10¹⁰元、2.134×10¹⁰元,呈现逐年递增的趋势;（2）生态系统服务功能中水土保持价值比例最大,草地的单位面积生态系统服务价值最高,耕地、草地生态系统为该地区贡献了最多的生态系统服务价值;（3）研究区生态系统服务分布表现为由东北向西南逐渐降低的趋势,不同开采强度下的生态系统服务增长变化较为相似,煤炭开采区域生态系统服务未显著下降,整体较为平稳。对生态系统服务变化的驱动分析表明在近年来相对改善的气候环境与人工修复共同作用下,神府矿区生态系统服务未发生明显的缩减。此类半干旱生态脆弱矿区国土空间生态修复适宜通过主动的“保护性开发”以及“人工诱导+自然修复”为主的方式,避免大范围与高强度的水土扰动型治理,通过适度的人为干预保证与维持区域内生态系统服务的功能。研究成果不但揭示高强度煤矿开采下的生态环境变化,也对西部生态脆弱区环境做了定量评估;同时,为将来的矿区重建提供了重要的依据。     

THE MISUSE OF HYDROLOGIC UNIT MAPS FOR EXTRAPOLATION,REPORTING, AND ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT1

ABSTRACT: The use of watersheds to conduct research on land/water relationships has expanded recently to include both extrapolation and reporting of water resource information and ecosystem management. More often than not, hydrologic units (HUs) are used for these purposes, with the implication that hydrologic units are synonymous with watersheds. Whereas true topographic watersheds are areas within which apparent surface water drains to a particular point, generally only 45 percent of all hydrologic units, regardless of their hierarchical level, meet this definition. Because the area contributing to the downstream point in many hydrologic units extends far beyond the unit boundaries, use of the hydrologic unit framework to show regional and national patterns of water quality and other environmental resources can result in incorrect and misleading illustrations. In this paper, the implications of this misuse are demonstrated using four adjacent HUs in central Texas. A more effective way of showing regional patterns in environmental resources is by using data from true watersheds representative of different ecological regions containing particular mosaics of geographical characteristics affecting differences in ecosystems and water quality.     

INTEGRATING HUMANS IN ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT USING MULTI‐CRITERIA DECISION MAKING1

ABSTRACT: The Ecosystem Management (EM) process belongs to the category of Multi‐Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problems. It requires appropriate decision support systems (DSS) where “all interested people” would be involved in the decision making process. Environmental values critical to EM, such as the biological diversity, health, productivity and sustainability, have to be studied, and play an important role in modeling the ecosystem functions; human values and preferences also influence decision making. Public participation in decision and policy making is one of the elements that differentiate EM from the traditional methods of management. Here, a methodology is presented on how to quantify human preferences in EM decision making. The case study of the National Park of River Nestos Delta and Lakes Vistonida and Ismarida in Greece, presented as an application of this methodology, shows that the direct involvement of the public, the quantification of its preferences and the decision maker's attitude provide a strong tool to the EM decision making process. Public preferences have been given certain weights and three MCDM methods, namely, the Expected Utility Method, Compromise Programming and the Analytic Hierarchy Process, have been used to select alternative management solutions that lead to the best configuration of the ecosystem and are also socially acceptable.