欢迎访问《生态学杂志》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

生态学杂志

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇

重庆市生态系统服务价值动态评估

杜加强1,2;王金生1,2;滕彦国1,2;张桐3   

  1. 1北京师范大学水科学研究院, 北京 100875; 2北京师范大学水沙科学教育部重点实验室, 北京 100875; 3北京市政工程总公司党校, 北京 100088
  • 收稿日期:2007-10-08 修回日期:1900-01-01 出版日期:2008-07-10 发布日期:2008-07-10

Dynamic evaluation on ecosystem service value of Chongqing City.

DU Jia-qiang1,2;WANG Jin-sheng1,2;TENG Yan-guo1,2;ZHANG Tong3   

  1. 1College of Water Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100
    875, China;2Ministry of Educational Key Laboratory of Water and Sediment,
    Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875 China;3Party School of Beijin
    g Municipal Engineering Corporation, Beijing 100088, China
  • Received:2007-10-08 Revised:1900-01-01 Online:2008-07-10 Published:2008-07-10

摘要: 研究生态系统服务价值的动态变化对于区域生态环境的保护和恢复具有重要意义。本文分别采用Costanza等和谢高地等确定的生态系统服务价值评估方法,对重庆市1997—2005年的生态系统服务价值进行估算。结果表明:重庆市生态系统服务价值总体上呈增长趋势,生态系统服务价值与GDP的比值呈下降趋势;灰色系统预测的结果显示,重庆市生态系统服务价值将继续增长;采用Costanza等方法、2000年不变价的谢高地等方法和当年价的谢高地等方法计算得到的生态系统服务价值数值差异较大,不同的方法之间可比性较低;3种方法分别回答了不同的问题,采用Costanza等方法主要反映了生态系统服务价值对土地利用变化的响应,采用2000年不变价还反映了生物量的变化对生态系统服务价值的影响,而采用当年价除反映了土地利用、生物量变化的影响外,还部分地反映了人们对生态系统服务支付意愿的变化。

关键词: 土壤养分, 空间变异性, 地统计学

Abstract: To study the dynamic change of ecosystem service value is of significance in regional ecoenvironmental protection and restoration. In this paper, Costanza’s and Xie’s methods were adopted to evaluate the ecosystem service value (ESV) of Chongqing City from 1997 to 2005. Two price systems, i.e., 2000 constant price and current price, were adopted in the coefficient computations of Chinese terrestrial ecosystem service value per unit area. According to our results, the ESV of Chongqing had an increasing trend, while the ESV/GDP ratio was in adverse. A gray system model was built to predict the ESV and GDP from 2006 to 2010, and the prediction showed that in these 5 years, the ESV would continue increasing while the ESV/GDP would continue decreasing. There were significant differences among the results calculated from Costanza’s method and from Xie’s method with 2000 constant price and current price, indicating the low comparability of the three methods, which was due to the different aspects emphasized in each situation. By adopting Costanza’s method, the influence of land use change on ESV was mainly reflected; by adopting Xie’s 2000 constant price method, the influence of biomass variation on ESV was reflected as well; while adopting Xie’s current price method, besides the influences of land use change and biomass variation on ESV, the people’s willingness to pay for ESV was also partially reflected.

Key words: Soil nutrient, Spatial variability, Geostatistics