[1]HE Xiang,YAO Yao.Analysis of Ecological Risk Based on Supply and Demand of Ecosystem Services in Karst Mountains[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2020,27(05):202-212,220.
Copy
Analysis of Ecological Risk Based on Supply and Demand of Ecosystem Services in Karst Mountains
Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume:
27
Number of periods:
2020 05
Page number:
202-212,220
Column:
目次
Public date:
2020-08-20
- Title:
- Analysis of Ecological Risk Based on Supply and Demand of Ecosystem Services in Karst Mountains
- Keywords:
- ecosystem services; supply and demand; ecological risk; Guizhou Province; Karst mountainous area
- CLC:
- X826
- DOI:
- -
- Abstract:
- In this paper, by constructing the evaluation index of ecosystem service supply and demand, using the method of ecological risk index model, we analyzed the structural characteristics and spatial differentiation of ecosystem service supply and demand in Guizhou Province, and discussed the degree of ecosystem risk. The results showed that:(1)from 2010 to 2015, the area of construction land increased significantly, the total value of ecosystem supply increased by 21.45%, and the annual average growth rate was 3.96%; the total supply of water resources services was negative due to the steep terrain, high area rate of cultivated land in mountainous areas and the dual hydrological characteristics of surface and underground space in Guizhou Province, resulting in weak water storage and conservation, and serious shortage of water resources supply in agricultural production; the value of support and regulation services accounted for about 85% of the total value, indicating that its ecosystem had an important ecological barrier function for the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River and the Pearl River;(2)the average annual growth rate of demand for ecosystem services was 10.15%; in 2015, the total demand for ecosystem services was 61.46%; the supply of ecosystem services was surplus, but the growth rate of demand was much higher than that of supply;(3)Guiyang City and Anshun City belonged to the pattern of low supply and high demand, Bijie City, Qiannan Prefecture, Qiandongnan Prefecture and Zunyi City belonged to the pattern of high supply and low demand, Liupanshui City, Southwest Guizhou Prefecture and Tongren City belonged to the pattern of low supply and low demand;(4)there were serious deficits in the supply and demand of food, raw materials and water resources services in the ecosystems of all cities, and the risk of ecosystems was high; the ecological risk index of aesthetics, food and raw material supply services increased by 419.42%, 50.24% and 11.87%, respectively, and the ecological risk was aggravated; there was no ecological risk in support and regulation ecosystem services, and the pressure of ecological risk was low; there was no ecological risk in support and regulation services, and the pressure of ecological risk was low, which was the result of long-term ecological control and restoration of rocky desertification. These research results can reveal that the growth rate of demand for ecosystem services in Guizhou Province is greater than that of supply. There are serious structural and ecological risk differentiation and spatial imbalance between supply and demand of ecosystem services, and serious ecological risk in ecosystem.
- References:
-
[1]Daily G C. Nature's services:Societal dependence on natural ecosystems[M]. Washington DC: Island Press, 1997.
[2]Costanza R, d'Arge R, De Groot R, et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital[J]. Nature, 1997,387(6630):253-260.
[3]Costanza R. Ecosystem services:multiple classification systems are needed[J]. Biol Conservat, 2008,141(2):350-352.
[4]谢高地,鲁春霞,成升魁.全球生态系统服务价值评估研究进展[J].资源科学,2001,23(6):5-9.
[5]欧阳志云,王如松.生态系统服务功能、生态价值与可持续发展[J].世界科技研究与发展,2000,22(5):45-50.
[6]Boerema A, Rebelo A J, Bodi M B, et al. Are ecosystem services adequately quantified?[J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017,54(2):358-370.
[7]Turner B L, Kasperson R E, Matson P A, et al. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2003,100(14):8074-8079.
[8]谢高地,甄霖,鲁春霞,等.一个基于专家知识的生态系统服务价值化方法[J].自然资源学报,2008,23(5):911-919.
[9]Hu H, Fu B, Lü Y, et al. SAORES:a spatially explicit assessment and optimization tool for regional ecosystem services[J]. Landscape Ecology, 2015,30(3):547-560.
[10]戴尔阜,王晓莉,朱建佳,等.生态系统服务权衡/协同研究进展与趋势展望[J].地球科学进展,2015,30(11):1250-1259.
[11]李双成,张才玉,刘金龙,等.生态系统服务权衡与协同研究进展及地理学研究议题[J].地理研究,2013,32(8):1379-1390.
[12]傅伯杰,于丹丹.生态系统服务权衡与集成方法[J].资源科学,2016,38(1):1-9.
[13]Burkhard B, Kroll F, Nedkov S, et al. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2012,21(10):17-29.
[14]张彪,谢高地,肖玉.基于人类需求的生态系统服务分类[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2010,20(6):64-67.
[15]Kroll F, Müller F, Haase D, et al. Rural-urban gradient analysis of ecosystem services supply and demand dynamics[J]. Land Use Policy, 2012,29(3):521-535.
[16]王文美,吴璇,李洪远.滨海新区生态系统服务功能供需量化研究[J].生态科学,2013,32(3):379-385.
[17]武爱彬,赵艳霞,沈会涛,等.京津冀区域生态系统服务供需格局时空演变研究[J].生态与农村环境学报,2018,34(11):968-975.
[18]王萌辉,白中科,董潇楠.基于生态系统服务供需的陕西省土地整治空间分区[J].中国土地科学,2018,32(11):73-80.
[19]Wang J, Zhai T, Lin Y, et al. Spatial imbalance and changes in supply and demand of ecosystem services in China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019,657(3):781-791.
[20]Bai, X. Integrating global environmental concerns into urban management[J]. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2007,11(2):15-29.
[21]Jenerette G D, Wu W, Goldsmith S, et al. Contrasting water footprints of cities in China and the United States[J]. Ecological Economics, 2006,57(3):346-358.
[22]Larondelle N, Lauf S. Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales[J]. Ecosystem Services, 2016,22(12):18-31.
[23]Bryan B A, Ye Y, Connor J D. Land-use change impacts on ecosystem services value:Incorporating the scarcity effects of supply and demand dynamics[J]. Ecosystem Services, 2018,32(8):144-157.
[24]景永才,陈利顶,孙然好.基于生态系统服务供需的城市群生态安全格局构建框架[J].生态学报,2018,38(12):4121-4131.
[25]李俊翰,高明秀.滨州市生态系统服务价值与生态风险时空演变及其关联性[J].生态学报,2019,39(21):7815-7828.
[26]陈丹,蒋贵国,张妍.基于生态服务价值的沱江流域土地景观生态风险时空分异研究[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(3):223-232.
[27]陈峰,李红波,张安录.基于生态系统服务的中国陆地生态风险评价[J].地理学报,2019,74(3):423-445.
[28]Galic N, Schmolke A, Forbes V, et al. The role of ecological models in linking ecological risk assessment to ecosystem services in agroecosystems[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2012,415(2):93-100.
[29]Kang P, Chen W P, Wang M E. Advances in ecosystem service-based ecological risk assessment[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016,36(5):1192-1203.
[30]刘世梁,侯笑云,张月秋,等.基于生态系统服务的土地整治生态风险评价与管控建议[J].生态与农村环境学报,2017,33(3):193-200.
[31]谢高地,鲁春霞,冷允法,等.青藏高原生态资源的价值评估[J].自然资源学报,2003,18(2):189-196.
[32]Jones L, Norton L, Austin Z, et al. Stocks and flows of natural and human-derived capital in ecosystem services[J]. Land Use Policy, 2016,52(3):151-162.
[33]Curran S R, de Sherbinin A. Completing the picture:the challenges of bringing“consumption”into the population-environment equation[J]. Population and Environment, 2004,26(2):107-131.
[34]Song K, Zhao S, Gui F, et al. Ecological risk analysis methods and their application based on the emergy value of ecosystem services[J]. Advances in Environmental Protection, 2011,1(2):13-19.
[35]Fama, E F. The behavior of stock-market prices[J]. Journal of Business, 1965,38(1):34-105.
[36]Martin R, Thompson K, Browne C. VaR:Who contributes and how much[J]. Risk, 2001,14(8):99-102.
- Similar References:
Memo
-
Last Update:
2020-08-25