欢迎访问《生态学杂志》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

生态学杂志 ›› 2021, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (12): 4109-4118.doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202112.023

• 技术与方法 • 上一篇    下一篇

国家公园生态环境保护成效评估指标体系构建与应用

付梦娣1,刘伟玮1,李博炎1,任月恒1,李爽1,白雪2,李俊生1,朱彦鹏1*   

  1. 1中国环境科学研究院, 国家环境保护区域生态过程与功能评估重点实验室, 北京 100012;2生态环境部机关服务中心, 北京 100006)
  • 出版日期:2021-12-10 发布日期:2022-05-10

Construction and application of an evaluation index system for ecological and environmental protection effectiveness of national parks.

FU Meng-di1, LIU Wei-wei1, LI Bo-yan1, REN Yue-heng1, LI Shuang1, BAI Xue2, LI Jun-sheng1, ZHU Yan-peng1*   

  1. (1Key Laboratory of Regional Eco-Process and Function Assessment and State Environment Protection, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China; 2Center of Administration Service, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, PRC, Beijing 100006, China).
  • Online:2021-12-10 Published:2022-05-10

摘要: 开展国家公园生态环境保护成效评估对促进国家公园的有效管理和宏观决策具有重要意义。围绕国家公园建设的目标和定位,以自然生态系统原真性、完整性保护为基础,以定量方法为主、定性方法为辅,构建了包括生态系统状况、物种多样性状况、环境质量状况、生物安全状况和生态环境破坏状况5个类别、16个评估指标的国家公园生态环境保护成效评估指标体系,明确了指标计算方法和评估过程。以中国第一个国家公园体制试点——三江源国家公园为例,评估试点以来的生态环境保护成效,探讨评估指标体系的适用性。结果表明:天然生态系统面积总体持平,天然生态系统完整性基本不变,2016年和2019年生态系统水源涵养能力指数分别为0.56和0.59,土壤保持能力指数均为0.11;2016年主要生物类群多样性指数为0.32;选取藏羚作为园区重点物种,种群数量显著增加;2016年和2019年保护成效指数(protection effectiveness index, PEI)分别为7.61和7.64,ΔPEI为0.03,未发生生态环境破坏事件,不存在生物安全风险,综合判定国家公园生态环境保护成效等级为一般。评估体系能够反映三江源国家公园生态环境动态变化,可为国家公园生态环境保护成效评估标准体系的建立提供借鉴。

关键词: 家公园, 保护成效, 评估指标体系, 三江源国家公园

Abstract: Evaluating the effectiveness of ecological and environmental protection of national parks is of great significance for promoting effective management and macro-decision-making. Focusing on the goals and orientations of national park construction, based on the protection of the authenticity and integrity of natural ecosystems, using quantitative methods with supporting of qualitative methods, we established an evaluation index system for ecological and environmental protection effectiveness of national parks. There were five types of indices, including ecosystem status, species diversity status, environmental quality status, biosafety status, and eco-environmental damage status, with 12 first-level indicators and 16 second-level indicators. We determined the index calculation methods and evaluation processes. Taking China’s first national park system pilot, Three-RiverSource National Park, as an example, we evaluated the ecological and environmental protection effectiveness since the pilot and discussed the applicability of the index system. The results showed that the area of natural ecosystems and the integrity of natural ecosystems were generally unchanged. In 2016 and 2019, the water conservation capacity index was 0.56 and 0.59, respectively, and the soil conservation capacity index was 0.11 in both years. In 2016, the diversity index of major biological groups was 0.32. As the key species in the park, the population of Tibetan antelope significantly increased. In 2016 and 2019, the protection effectiveness index (PEI) was 7.61 and 7.64, respectively, and the ΔPEI was 0.03. There were no ecological damage events and no biosafety risks. The comprehensive judgment showed that the national park’s ecological environmental protection effectiveness was at the normal level. The evaluation system reflects the dynamic changes of the ecological environment of the ThreeRiver-Source National Park, providing a reference for the establishment of the evaluation standard system of the national park’s ecological environmental protection effectiveness.

Key words: national park, protection effectiveness, evaluation index system, Three-River-Source National Park.