欢迎访问《生态学杂志》官方网站,今天是

生态学杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (6): 2096-2112.doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202606.012

• 技术与方法 • 上一篇    

西安市典型公园生态系统文化服务价值及影响因素

薛梦扬1,2,3,白蕙娜1,2,3,李琳钰1,2,3,黄晓军1,2,3*   

  1. 1西北大学城市与环境学院, 西安 710127; 2陕西省地表系统与环境承载力重点实验室, 西安 710127; 3陕西西安城市生态系统定位观测研究站, 西安 710127)
  • 出版日期:2026-06-10 发布日期:2026-12-01

Cultural ecosystem service values and driving factors of urban parks in Xi’an, China.

XUE Mengyang1,2,3, BAI Huina1,2,3, LI Linyu1,2,3, HUANG Xiaojun1,2,3*   

  1. (1College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Northwestern University, Xi’an 710127, China; 2Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Earth Surface System and Environmental Carrying Capacity, Xi’an 710127, China; 3Shaanxi Xi’an Urban Forest Ecosystem Research Station, Xi’an 710127, China).

  • Online:2026-06-10 Published:2026-12-01

摘要: 公园作为城市生态系统中的重要组成部分,其提供的生态系统文化服务备受关注。本研究以西安市4个典型公园为例,基于SolVES模型评价典型公园文化服务价值,揭示典型公园不同类型文化服务价值空间分异及其影响因素,结果表明:(1)典型公园的生态系统文化服务热点呈显著空间异质性,高值区呈多中心集聚格局,普遍分布于水体及周边区域,部分广场、绿道及运动场所等公共活动空间也形成一定的集聚区。(2)受访者对典型公园生态系统文化服务价值偏好不同,不同生态系统文化服务价值空间异质性明显,但游憩与旅游和审美价值皆较高,多数公园最大价值指数(MVI)达9~10,而文化遗产、社会关系和精神与宗教生态系统文化服务价值在不同公园中的分布存在一定差异。(3)不同环境变量对典型公园绿地主要生态系统文化服务价值影响差异显著,距离水体的距离是最关键的环境因子,对多类型价值的贡献率普遍超过30%,部分超过40%,其次为山体阴影和坡度,而距离道路的距离、高程及土地利用覆被作用有限。本研究系统识别西安市典型公园生态系统文化服务的关键影响因素,建立多维价值评估框架,为构建生态系统文化服务价值评估模型提供科学依据,进一步提升城市绿地对居民健康福祉的贡献。


关键词: 公园, 生态系统文化服务, 价值评估, SolVES模型

Abstract: As an important component of urban ecosystems, park green spaces have received increasing attention for cultural ecosystem services. We evaluated the cultural service values of park green spaces in four typical parks in Xi’an based on the SolVES model, and examined the spatial differentiation of various types of cultural ecosystem services and their influencing factors. The results showed that: (1) Cultural ecosystem service hotspots in typical urban parks exhibited significant spatial heterogeneity, with high-value areas forming a multi-centered clustering pattern. These areas were predominantly distributed around water bodies and the surrounding zones, while certain plazas, greenways, and sports facilities formed localized clusters. (2) Respondents showed different preferences for the cultural ecosystem service values of typical parks. The cultural ecosystem service values showed substantial spatial heterogeneity. Recreational and tourism and aesthetic values were consistently high, with the maximum value index (M-VI) reaching 9-10 in most parks. The cultural heritage, social relations, and spiritual and religious cultural ecosystem service values varied among parks. (3) The influences of different environmental variables on the main cultural ecosystem service values of typical park green spaces differed significantly. Distance to water bodies was the most critical environmental factor, contributing more than 30% and in some cases over 40%, to multiple value types, followed by mountain shadow and slope, while distance to roads, elevation, and land-use cover had limited effects. This study systematically identified key influencing factors of cultural ecosystem services in typical parks in Xi’an, established a multidimensional value assessment framework, provided a scientific basis for constructing a value assessment model for cultural ecosystem services, and further enhanced the contribution of urban green spaces to residents’ health and well-being.


Key words: park, cultural ecosystem services, valuation, SolVES model