DING Yuanxin,LIU Chunlan,PEI Sha,et al.Analysis of Different Stakeholders' Cognition on Ecosystem Services in Ecological Conservation Areas[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2023,30(05):453-461.[doi:10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2023.05.048.]
不同利益相关者对生态涵养区生态系统服务的认知分析
- Title:
- Analysis of Different Stakeholders' Cognition on Ecosystem Services in Ecological Conservation Areas
- 文章编号:
- 1005-3409(2023)05-0453-09
- Keywords:
- stakeholders; ecosystem services; cognitive analysis; multiple Logistic regression analysis; ecological conservation area; Beijing City
- 分类号:
- X171.4; X826
- 文献标志码:
- A
- 摘要:
- [目的]利益相关者对生态系统服务的认知影响决策的制定,开展不同利益相关者对生态系统服务认知程度及影响因素调研与分析,可为生态涵养区生态系统管理、生态系统服务优化供给以及生态保护补偿政策制定提供重要支撑。[方法]通过问卷调查的方法分析了北京市生态涵养区管理者和农户对生态系统服务认知类型和空间差异及其影响因素。[结果](1)管理者与农户均认为生态系统主要提供调节服务,但对气体调节、环境净化和文化服务认知较低,对水源涵养、生物多样性维护与文化教育认知差异明显; 农户仅对供给服务认知高于管理者。(2)不同利益者类型对不同生态系统所提供的主导服务认知差异明显,管理者对不同生态系统的水源涵养、生物多样性维护和文化教育认知均高于农户,农户对草地和农田的供给服务、森林水土保持及湿地和农田的气体调节、休闲娱乐认知均高于管理者。(3)不同区域的利益相关者对气体调节、文化服务等的认知存在明显区域差异; 密云区管理者对气体调节认知较低,房山和门头沟区的农户对生物多样性维护认知较低。(4)文化程度、生态管控程度和收入水平是影响管理者认知的主要因素,文化程度、生态管控程度与管理者认知成正比; 文化程度、生态管控程度和生态环境培训是影响农户认知的主要因素,文化程度、生态环境相关培训主要与农户认知成正比。[结论]不同利益相关者对生态系统服务认知存在明显认知类型差异和区域差异,文化程度、生态管控程度、收入水平和生态环境培训是影响认知差异的主要因素,未来应着力加强生态环境培训,注重各区间经验交流及对农户的宣传与引导,提升不同利益相关者的参与度,从而制定差异化的生态系统管理与服务供给政策,促进生态保护政策落地实施。
- Abstract:
- [Objective] Stakeholders' cognition on ecosystem services affects decision-making. Carrying out research and analysis on people's cognition for ecosystem services in ecological conservation areas and its influencing factors among different stakeholders can lie the solid foundation for ecosystem management, the optimal supply of ecosystem services as well as comprehensive compensatory policy formulation for ecological protection in ecological conservation areas. [Methods] Types and spatial differences of ecosystem services cognition and influencing factors among managers and farmers in Beijing's ecological conservation areas were analyzed by means of questionnaire survey. [Results](1)Both managers and farmers believed that the regulating service was the main role of ecosystem. Their cognition levels on gas regulation, environmental purification and cultural services were low. They had significant differences in water conservation, biodiversity maintenance and cultural education. However, farmers only held a fairer perception on supply services than managers.(2)There were obvious cognition differences on the dominant services provided by different ecosystems. Managers held a fairer perception than farmers of water conservation, biodiversity maintenance and cultural education of different ecosystems. Farmers had higher cognition than managers concerning supply services of grassland and farmland, water and soil conservation of forest, gas regulation and leisure and entertainment of wetlands and farmland.(3)Stakeholders in different districts had different perspectives of gas regulation and cultural services in different regions. Managers' knowledge in gas regulation was comparatively less in Miyun District, while farmers' perceptions in biodiversity maintenance in Fangshan and Mentougou District were superficial to a certain extent.(4)Education level, intensity of ecological supervision and income level were the main factors affecting managers' cognition. Two factors of education level and intensity of ecological supervision were in direct proportion to managers' cognition. Educational level, intensity of ecological supervision and ecological environment training were the main factors affecting the cognition of farmers. Educational level and ecological environment training were the positive correlative factors for farmers. [Conclusion] There were obvious differences in the types and regions of different stakeholders' cognition of ecosystem services. Education level, intensity of ecological supervision, income level and ecological environment training were the main influencing factors. Ecological environment training, exchange of experiences in different districts for managers, and publicity and education for farmers should be strengthened emphatically in the future. Enhancing the participation of different stakeholders will be conducive to formulating differentiated ecosystem management and service supply policies, and promoting the implementation of ecological protection policies.
参考文献/References:
[1] Bidegain I, Cerda C, Catalan E, et al. Social preferences for ecosystem services in a biodiversity hotspot in South America [J]. Plos One, 2019,14(4):e0215715.
[2] Rodriguez J P, Beard T D, Bennett E M, et al. Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services[J]. Ecology and Society, 2005,11(1):709-723.
[3] Martin-Lopez B, Iniesta-Arandia I, Garcia-Llorente M, et al. Uncovering Ecosystem Service Bundles through Social Preferences [J]. Plos One, 2012,7(6):e0038970.
[4] 李鹏,姜鲁光,封志明,等.生态系统服务竞争与协同研究进展[J].生态学报,2012,32(16):5219-5229.
[5] 符家铭.广州市生态系统服务变化的利益相关者及其影响研究[D].广州:广州大学,2020.
[6] 任婷婷,周忠学.农业结构转型对生态系统服务与人类福祉的影响:以西安都市圈两种农业类型为例[J].生态学报,2019,39(7):2353-2365.
[7] Wilhelm J A, Smith R G, Jolejole-Foreman M C, et al. Resident and stakeholder perceptions of ecosystem services associated with agricultural landscapes in New Hampshire[J]. Ecosystem Services, 2020,45:e101153.
[8] 冯漪,曹银贵,李胜鹏,等.生态系统服务权衡与协同研究:发展历程与研究特征[J].农业资源与环境学报,2022,39(1):11-25.
[9] 甄霖,刘雪林,李芬,等.脆弱生态区生态系统服务消费与生态补偿研究:进展与挑战[J].资源科学,2010,32(5):797-803.
[10] 郑海霞,张陆彪,张耀军.金华江流域生态服务补偿的利益相关者分析[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(25):12111-12115.
[11] Raum S. A framework for integrating systematic stakeholder analysis in ecosystem services research:Stakeholder mapping for forest ecosystem services in the UK [J]. Ecosystem Services, 2018,29:170-184.
[12] Felipe-Lucia M R, Martin-Lopez B, Lavorel S, et al. Ecosystem services flows:Why stakeholders' power relationships matter [J]. Plos One, 2015,10(7):e0132232.
[13] 阿依努尔·艾尼,玉米提·哈力克,塔依尔江·艾山,等.利益相关者对塔里木河下游荒漠河岸林生态系统服务的认知度分析[J].水土保持研究,2016,23(1):205-209.
[14] 贺娟,舒晓波,于秀波.鄱阳湖区农户对湿地生态系统服务认知的调查与分析[J].资源科学,2010,32(4):776-781.
[15] Ahmed Y, Tesfye E. Determinates of farmer's preference for watershed ecosystem services: The case of Belesa districts, Amhara region of Ethiopia[J]. Cogent Food & Agriculture, 2021,7(1):e1917135.
[16] Wei X, Khachatryan H, Zhu H G. Poyang lake wetlands restoration in China:An analysis of farmers'perceptions and willingness to participate [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021,284(1):e125001.
[17] 胡越,陈晓丽,张安录,等.农民对农田生态系统服务价值认知的二重偏差及影响因素[J].土地经济研究,2014(2):64-78.
[18] Bernues A, Alfnes F, Clemetsen M, et al. Exploring social preferences for ecosystem services of multifunctional agriculture across policy scenarios [J]. Ecosystem Services, 2019,39:e101002.
[19] Cai Y, Zhao M J, Shi Y X, et al. Assessing restoration benefit of grassland ecosystem incorporating preference heterogeneity empirical data from Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region [J]. Ecological Indicators, 2020,117:e106705.
[20] 毛碧琦,敖长林,宁家靖,等.基于潜在分类模型的湿地生态系统服务公众生态偏好异质性研究[J].自然资源学报,2018,33(5):747-760.
[21] 李青,薛珍,陈红梅,等.基于CVM理论的塔里木河流域居民生态认知及支付决策行为研究[J].资源科学,2016,38(6):1075-1087.
[22] 史恒通,赵敏娟.生态系统服务功能偏好异质性研究:基于渭河流域水资源支付意愿的分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2016,30(8):36-40.
[23] Kotchen M J, Reiling S D. Environmental attitudes, motivations, and contingent valuation of nonuse values:a case study involving endangered species [J]. Ecological Economics, 2000,32(1):93-107.
[24] 傅斌,徐佩,郭滢蔓.山区多元化生态补偿挑战与对策[J].中国国土资源经济,2019,32(7):18-24.
[25] 陈新云,王甜,李宝健.北京市西北部生态涵养区未来土地利用及生态系统服务变化情景模拟[J].西北林学院学报,2021,36(1):86-95.
[26] 杨文杰,巩前文,林震.北京市生态涵养区生态资产时空格局及驱动因素[J].生态学报,2021,41(15):6051-6063.
[27] 石巧玲,薛发彪,陈钦.森林公园游客重游意愿影响因素实证研究:以福建省莆田市九龙谷国家森林公园为例[J].林业经济,2021,43(8):50-61.
[28] 李玉新,魏同洋,靳乐山. 牧民对草原生态补偿政策评价及其影响因素研究:以内蒙古四子王旗为例[J].资源科学, 2014,36(11):2442-2450.
[29] 王济川,郭志刚. Logistic回归模型:方法与应用[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2001:190-194.
[30] 张宏锋,欧阳志云,郑华.生态系统服务功能的空间尺度特征[J].生态学杂志,2007,26(9):1432-1437.
[31] 刘华妍,肖文发,李奇,等.北京市生态系统服务时空变化与权衡分析[J].生态学杂志,2021,40(1):209-219.
[32] 陈瑶,蔡广鹏,韩会庆,等.居民对城市湿地公园生态系统服务功能认知的分析[J].南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2017,41(6):147-152.
[33] 张红丽,仝文静.生态脆弱区农户对农田防护林生态系统服务功能认知的分析[J].北方园艺,2019,(19):160-167.
[34] 贺祥,姚尧.基于生态系统服务供需对喀斯特山区生态风险分析[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(5):202-212+220.
相似文献/References:
[1]阿依努尔·艾尼,玉米提·哈力克,塔依尔江·艾山,等.利益相关者对塔里木河下游荒漠河岸林生态系统服务的认知度分析[J].水土保持研究,2016,23(01):205.
Ayinuer·Aini,Umut·Halik,Tayierjiang·Aishan,et al.Analysis of Stakeholders’ Cognition on Desert Riparian Forest Ecosystem Services in the Lower Reaches of Tarim River, China[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2016,23(05):205.
[2]李 龙,吴大放,刘艳艳.国内外土地利用与生态系统服务研究热点与趋势——基于CiteSpace计量分析[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(05):396.
LI Long,WU Dafang,LIU Yanyan.Hotspots and Trends of the Researches for Land Use and Ecosystem Service-Based on CiteSpace[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2020,27(05):396.
[3]牟雪洁,王夏晖,张 箫,等.北京市延庆区生态系统生产总值核算及空间化[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(01):265.
MOU Xuejie,WANG Xiahui,ZHANG Xiao,et al.Accounting and Mapping of Gross Ecosystem Product in Yanqing District, Beijing[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2020,27(05):265.
[4]于 媛,韩 玲,李明玉,等.哈长城市群生态系统服务时空特征及其权衡/协同关系研究[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(02):293.
YU Yuan,HAN Ling,LI Mingyu,et al.Study on the Spatial-Temporal Characteristics of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs/Synergies in Ha-Chang Urban Agglomeration[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2021,28(05):293.
[5]李 辉,张晓媛,国洪磊.基于土地利用的三峡库区近30年生态系统服务价值时空变化特征[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(02):309.
LI Hui,ZHANG Xiaoyuan,GUO Honglei.Spatial and Temporal Changes of Ecosystem Service Value in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area in the Past 30 Years Based on Land Use[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2021,28(05):309.
[6]程 静,黄 越.宁夏回族自治区生态系统服务价值时空演变及其驱动力[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(02):382.
CHENG Jing,HUANG Yue.Spatiotemporal Evolution of Ecosystem Services Value and Its Driving Forces in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2021,28(05):382.
[7]苗培培,赵祖军,赵筱青,等.云南典型石漠化区生态系统服务权衡与协同研究[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(04):366.
MIAO Peipei,ZHAO Zujun,ZHAO Xiaoqing,et al.Study on Trade-off and Cooperation of Ecosystem Service Space in Rocky Desertification Area of Yunnan Province[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2021,28(05):366.
[8]裴宏伟,刘孟竹,李雅丽,等.生态修复措施对干旱半干旱地区生态系统服务影响研究——以河北坝上地区为例[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(02):192.
PEI Hongwei,LIU Mengzhu,LI Yali,et al.Impact of Ecological Restoration Measures on Ecosystem Services in Arid and Semi-arid Area[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2022,29(05):192.
[9]陈 安,李景吉,王茂生,等.西藏“一江两河”流域生态系统服务变化及权衡与协同关系研究[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(02):313.
CHEN An,LI Jingji,WANG Maosheng,et al.Research for Change of Ecosystem Service and the Tradeoff-Synergy Relation of the YLN Basin in the Tibet Autonomous Region[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2022,29(05):313.
[10]韦绍音,陆汝成,林晓楠,等.基于土地利用转型的广西边境地区生态服务功能交叉敏感性分析[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(03):308.
WEI Shaoyin,LU Rucheng,LIN Xiaonan,et al.Cross-Sensitivity Analysis of Ecological Service Function in Guangxi Border Region Based on Land Use Transition[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2022,29(05):308.
备注/Memo
收稿日期:2022-07-22 修回日期:2022-09-06
资助项目:国家自然科学基金项目(41901260); 北京市自然科学资助项目(5204033); 国家自然科学基金项目(41801186,41701209)
第一作者:丁远鑫(1996—),女,山西运城人,硕士研究生,研究方向为生态系统服务。E-mail:dyx2333dyx@163.com
通信作者:刘晓娜(1986—),女,山东临沂人,博士,副研究员,主要从事土地利用与土地覆被变化、生态系统服务功能评价研究。E-mail:xnliu1986@163.com