Research on ecological restoration zoning in coastal zone based on landscape ecological risk and ecosystem service value：a case study of Fangchenggang City
-
摘要:
以防城港市海岸带地区为例，计算其在不同时期内的景观生态风险和生态系统服务价值，利用空间自相关分析二者的空间关联性，基于分析结果划定海岸带地区的国土空间生态修复分区。结果表明：2000—2020年防城港市海岸带地区的土地利用类型以林地为主，约占研究区面积的50%，其次为海域（18%）、耕地（16%）和建设用地（6%），在研究期间海岸带地区林地、海域和建设用地的类型转换最为剧烈。研究区整体生态风险等级以较低生态风险为主，约占研究区面积的32%，其次为中生态风险（26%）、低生态风险（18%）和较高生态风险（16%），而高生态风险的面积较少，约仅占研究区的面积8%，研究期间较低生态风险和中生态风险的范围呈现缩减趋势，而低生态风险、较高生态风险和高生态风险的范围呈现扩张趋势。研究区的生态系统服务价值呈现“先增后减”的趋势，20年间累计减少了5.431亿元。基于景观生态风险和生态系统服务价值的空间集聚分析结果，将研究区划分为生态优先修复区、生态重点修复区、生态综合提升区、生态预防治理区和生态保育涵养区，针对不同分区分别提出了滨海湿地修复、农地肥力培育、城市内河治理、提升生态用地完整度和促进林草自然更新等生态修复措施。
Abstract:The coastal zone of Fangchenggang City was taken as an example, its landscape ecological risk and ecosystem service value in different periods were calculated, the spatial correlation of the two was analyzed using spatial autocorrelation, and the ecological restoration zoning of the national land space in the coastal zone were delineated based on the analysis results. The results showed that from 2000 to 2020, the land use type of the coastal zone of Fangchenggang City was dominated by forest land, accounting for about 50% of the study area, followed by sea area (18%), cultivated land (16%) and construction land (6%), and the type conversion of forest land, sea area and construction land in the coastal zone was the most drastic during the study period. The overall ecological risk level of the study area was dominated by lower ecological risk, which accounted for about 32% of the study area, followed by medium ecological risk (26%), low ecological risk (18%) and higher ecological risk (16%), while the area of high ecological risk was smaller, accounting for only about 8% of the study area. The ranges of lower ecological risk and medium ecological risk showed a trend of shrinking during the study period, while the ranges of low, higher and high ecological risk showed an expansion trend. The value of ecosystem services in the study area showed a trend of "increasing first and then decreasing", with a cumulative decrease of 543.1 million yuan over the 20 years. Based on the results of spatial clustering analysis of landscape ecological risk and ecosystem service value, the study area was divided into ecological priority restoration area, ecological key restoration area, ecological comprehensive enhancement area, ecological preventive management area and ecological conservation and nourishment area. Ecological restoration measures such as restoration of coastal wetlands, cultivation of agricultural land fertility, management of urban inland waterways, enhancement of the completeness of ecological land use, and promotion of natural regeneration of forests and grasses, etc., were put forward for the different sub-areas, respectively.
-
图 2 2000—2020年研究区土地利用类型分布
Figure 2. Distribution of land use types in the study area from 2000 to 2020
图 3 研究区2000—2020 年景观生态风险空间分布
Figure 3. Spatial distribution of landscape ecological risks in the study area from 2000 to 2020
图 4 研究区2000—2020 年生态系统服务价值空间分布
Figure 4. Spatial distribution of ecosystem service values in the study area from 2000 to 2020
图 5 研究区2000—2020 年景观生态风险与生态系统服务价值空间相关性
Figure 5. Spatial correlation between landscape ecological risk and ecosystem service value in the study area from 2000 to 2020
图 6 研究区2000—2020年景观生态风险与生态系统服务价值空间自相关聚类
Figure 6. Spatial autocorrelation clustering of landscape ecological risk and ecosystem service value in the study area from 2000 to 2020
图 7 研究区国土空间生态修复分区
Figure 7. Ecological restoration zoning of national land space in the study area
表 1 研究区各景观类型单位面积生态系统服务价值
Table 1. Ecosystem service value per unit area for each landscape type in the study area
yuan/hm2 第一类服务 第二类服务 耕地 林地 草地 湿地 水域 海域 供给服务 食物生产 1 421.45 324.81 385.91 656.05 1 029.11 1 029.11 原料生产 315.16 746.10 572.44 643.19 295.87 295.87 水资源供给 −1 678.73 385.91 315.16 3 331.73 10 664.10 10 664.10 调节服务 气体调节 1 144.88 2 453.77 2 000.32 2 444.13 990.51 990.51 气候调节 598.17 7 342.02 5 293.46 4 630.97 2 945.81 2 945.81 净化环境 173.66 2 151.47 1 749.48 4 630.97 7 139.42 7 139.42 水文调节 1 923.14 4 804.64 3 878.44 31 169.03 131 519.67 131 519.67 支持服务 土壤保持 668.92 2 987.62 2 437.69 2 971.54 1 196.34 1 196.34 维持养分循环 199.39 228.33 186.53 231.55 90.05 90.05 生物多样性 218.68 2 720.70 2 219.01 10 123.82 3 280.27 3 280.27 文化服务 美学景观 96.48 1 193.12 977.65 6 084.59 2 431.26 2 431.26 合计 5 081.21 25 338.51 20 016.10 66 917.58 161 582.42 161 582.42 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 研究区2000—2020年各等级景观生态风险面积和比例
Table 2. Area and proportion of each class of landscape ecological risk in the study area from 2000 to 2020
生态风险等级 2000 年 2010 年 2020 年 面积/km2 占比/% 面积/km2 占比/% 面积/km2 占比/% 低生态风险区 221.29 18.20 203.34 16.72 251.11 20.65 较低生态风险区 421.96 34.70 349.89 28.77 369.70 30.40 中生态风险区 321.50 26.44 343.07 28.21 306.65 25.22 较高生态风险区 171.70 14.12 211.37 17.38 203.32 16.72 高生态风险区 79.63 6.55 108.41 8.91 85.30 7.01
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 研究区2000—2020 年各土地利用类型生态系统服务价值变化
Table 3. Changes in ecosystem service values by land use types in the study area from 2000 to 2020
地类 ESV/亿元 ESV变化率/% 2000 年 2010 年 2020 年 2000—
2010 年2010—
2020 年2000—
2020 年耕地 0.994 0.989 0.994 −0.45% 0.44% −0.01% 林地 16.281 16.110 15.374 −1.05% −4.57% −5.57% 草地 0.031 0.006 0.007 −80.85% 21.78% −76.67% 湿地 1.360 0.791 1.081 −41.81% 36.57% −20.54% 水域 10.478 17.618 12.739 68.15% −27.69% 21.58% 海域 39.493 35.817 33.010 −9.31% −7.84% −16.41% 合计 68.636 71.333 63.205 4% −11% −8%
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 研究区2000—2020 年各项生态系统服务价值变化
Table 4. Changes in the values of various ecosystem services in the study area from 2000 to 2020
第一类服务 第二类服务 ESV/亿元 ESV 变化率/% 2000 年 2010 年 2020 年 2000—2010 年 2010—2020 年 2000—2020 年 供给服务 食物生产 0.819 0.832 0.777 1.54% −6.53% −5.10% 原料生产 0.646 0.620 0.609 −4.15% −1.77% −5.85% 水资源供给 3.286 3.239 2.979 −1.42% −8.03% −9.33% 调节服务 气体调节 2.160 0.580 2.033 −73.14% 250.59% −5.85% 气候调节 5.848 1.147 5.483 −80.39% 377.99% −6.25% 净化环境 3.721 2.450 3.436 −34.16% 40.25% −7.66% 水文调节 44.776 44.335 41.034 −0.99% −7.45% −8.36% 支持服务 土壤保持 2.485 0.562 2.331 −77.38% 314.81% −6.18% 维持养分循环 0.219 0.071 0.207 −67.33% 189.65% −5.36% 生物多样性 3.015 1.249 2.787 −58.58% 123.17% −7.56% 文化服务 美学景观 16.63 8.95 15.30 −46.16% 70.90% −7.99%
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 蔡晓梅. 探索人与自然和谐共生的中国式现代化: 自然保护地高质量发展的理论与实践: 写在专辑刊发之后的话[J]. 自然资源学报,2023,38(4):1116-1118. [2] 王军, 应凌霄, 钟莉娜. 新时代国土整治与生态修复转型思考[J]. 自然资源学报,2020,35(1):26-36. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20200104WANG J, YING L X, ZHONG L N. Thinking for the transformation of land consolidation and ecological restoration in the new era[J]. Journal of Natural Resources,2020,35(1):26-36. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20200104 [3] 于少康, 汪浩, 何蕾. 县域国土空间生态修复分区研究: 以江西省湖口县为例[J]. 自然资源情报,2023(12):68-74.YU S K, WANG H, HE L. Ecological restoration zoning of territorial space at county leve: a case of Hukou County, Jiangxi[J]. Natural Resources Information,2023(12):68-74. [4] 王鹏, 赵微. 典型喀斯特地区国土空间生态修复分区研究: 以贵州猫跳河流域为例[J]. 自然资源学报,2022,37(9):2403-2417. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20220914WANG P, ZHAO W. Ecological restoration zoning of territorial space in typical Karst region: a case study of Maotiao River Basin in Guizhou[J]. Journal of Natural Resources,2022,37(9):2403-2417. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20220914 [5] 王韵秋, 胡业翠, 高梦雯, 等. 多维视角下广西喀斯特石漠化地区国土空间生态修复分区[J]. 农业工程学报,2023,39(1):223-231.WANG Y Q, HU Y C, GAO M W, et al. Land-space ecological restoration zoning of Karst rocky desertification areas in Guangxi from multi-dimensional perspectives[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering,2023,39(1):223-231. [6] 乔斌, 曹晓云, 孙玮婕, 等. 基于生态系统服务价值和景观生态风险的生态分区识别与优化策略: 以祁连山国家公园青海片区为例[J]. 生态学报,2023,43(3):986-1004.QIAO B, CAO X Y, SUN W J, et al. Ecological zoning identification and optimization strategies based on ecosystem service value and landscape ecological risk: taking Qinghai area of QilianM ountain National Park as an example[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica,2023,43(3):986-1004. [7] 魏露露, 金莲. 基于生态安全格局的国土空间生态修复分区研究: 以贵州省清镇市为例[J]. 环境污染与防治,2022,44(7):966-971.WEI L L, JIN L. Research on zoning of ecological restoration in territorial space based on ecological security pattern: a case study of Qingzhen City in Guizhou Province[J]. Environmental Pollution & Control,2022,44(7):966-971. [8] 高嫄, 原野, 赵艺芳. 基于生态系统服务供需的农牧交错带流域生态修复分区: 以桑干河上游为例[J]. 环境工程技术学报, 2023, 13(3).GAO L, YUAN Y, ZHAO Y F. Ecological restoration zoning of watersheds in agricultural and pastoral intertwined zones based on ecosystem service supply and demand - A case study of the upper Sanggan River[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology, 2023, 13(3). [9] 刘陈立. 基于生态系统健康-风险-服务的甘南高寒牧区生态安全评价[D]. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2022. [10] 曾晨, 程轶皎, 吕天宇. 基于生态系统健康的国土空间生态修复分区: 以长江中游城市群为例[J]. 自然资源学报,2022,37(12):3118-3135. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20221207ZENG C, CHENG Y J, LYU T Y. Research on land-space ecological restoration zoning based on ecosystem health: a case study of the urban agglomeration in the middle reaches along the Yangtze River[J]. Journal of Natural Resources,2022,37(12):3118-3135. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20221207 [11] 张师赫, 李宝银, 林玉英, 等. 基于生态系统服务的景观生态风险评价及其驱动因素研究: 以福建省为例[J]. 水土保持研究,2022,29(6):174-182.ZHANG S H, LI B Y, LIN Y Y, et al. Research on landscape ecological risk assessment and driving factors based on ecosystem services: a case study of Fujian Province[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2022,29(6):174-182. [12] MUNNS W R Jr, REA A W, SUTER G W 2nd, et al. Ecosystem services as assessment endpoints for ecological risk assessment[J]. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management,2016,12(3):522-528. doi: 10.1002/ieam.1707 [13] 朱润苗, 陈松林. 1980—2020年福建省景观生态风险与生态系统服务价值的空间关系[J]. 应用生态学报,2022,33(6):1599-1607.ZHU R M, CHEN S L. Spatial relationship between landscape ecological risk and ecosystem service value in Fujian Province, China during 1980-2020[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,2022,33(6):1599-1607. [14] JIA Y Y, TANG X L, LIU W. Spatial–temporal evolution and correlation analysis of ecosystem service value and landscape ecological risk in Wuhu city[J]. Sustainability,2020,12(7):2803. doi: 10.3390/su12072803 [15] YANG J, HUANG X. The 30 m annual land cover dataset and its dynamics in China from 1990 to 2019[J]. Earth System Science Data,2021,13(8):3907-3925. doi: 10.5194/essd-13-3907-2021 [16] 王洁, 摆万奇, 田国行. 土地利用生态风险评价研究进展[J]. 自然资源学报,2020,35(3):576-585. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20200306WANG J, BAI W Q, TIAN G H. A review on ecological risk assessment of land use[J]. Journal of Natural Resources,2020,35(3):576-585. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20200306 [17] 李加林, 等. 海岸带资源开发与评价[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2020: 240-241. [18] 巩杰, 谢余初, 赵彩霞, 等. 甘肃白龙江流域景观生态风险评价及其时空分异[J]. 中国环境科学,2014,34(8):2153-2160.GONG J, XIE Y C, ZHAO C X, et al. Landscape ecological risk assessment and its spatiotemporal variation of the Bailongjiang watershed, Gansu[J]. China Environmental Science,2014,34(8):2153-2160. [19] XIE G D, ZHANG C X, ZHEN L, et al. Dynamic changes in the value of China’s ecosystem services[J]. Ecosystem Services,2017,26:146-154. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.06.010 [20] AKBAR A, ABULIZI A, ABLIZ A, et al. Land use and land cover change effects on the value of ecosystem services in the konqi river basin, China, under ecological water conveyance conditions[J]. Forests,2023,14(5):1028. doi: 10.3390/f14051028 [21] 谢高地, 张彩霞, 张昌顺, 等. 中国生态系统服务的价值[J]. 资源科学,2015,37(9):1740-1746.XIE G D, ZHANG C X, ZHANG C S, et al. The value of ecosystem services in China[J]. Resources Science,2015,37(9):1740-1746. [22] 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.XIE G D, ZHEN L, LU C X, et al. Expert knowledge based valuation method of ecosystem services in China[J]. Journal of Natural Resources,2008,23(5):911-919. [23] 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.LI J H, GAO M X. Spatiotemporal evolution and correlation analysis of ecosystem service values and ecological risk in Binzhou[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica,2019,39(21):7815-7828. [24] 贾艳艳, 唐晓岚, 任宇杰. 长江流域安徽段生态系统服务价值与景观生态风险时空演变及其关联分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2022,46(3):31-40.JIA Y Y, TANG X L, REN Y J. Spatial-temporal evolution and correlation analyses of ecosystem service values and landscape ecological risks in Anhui section of the Yangtze River Basin[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition),2022,46(3):31-40. [25] ANSELIN L. Local indicators of spatial association— LISA[J]. Geographical Analysis,1995,27(2):93-115. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.1995.tb00338.x [26] 王慧玲, 余丹林, 郑江华. 基于空间计量模型的新疆城镇密度时空变化特征分析[J]. 湖南师范大学自然科学学报,2018,41(5):1-9.WANG H L, YU D L, ZHENG J H. Spatial and temporal variation analyses of the urban density based on spatial econometrics model in Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Natural Science of Hunan Normal University,2018,41(5):1-9. [27] 刘玉斌. 中国海岸带典型生态系统服务价值评估研究[D]. 烟台: 中国科学院烟台海岸带研究所, 2021. [28] 丘海红, 胡宝清, 张泽. 基于土地利用变化的广西近20年生态系统服务价值研究[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2022,12(5):1455-1465.QIU H H, HU B Q, ZHANG Z. Study on ecosystem service value of Guangxi in the past 20 years based on land use change[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2022,12(5):1455-1465. [29] 鲍维科, 林倩, 陆海统筹视角下海岸带生态修复分区研究—以象山港流域为例[J]. 海洋开发与管理, 2022, 39(4): 3-10.BAO W K, LIN Q, A study on ecological restoration zoning of coastal zone under the perspective of land-sea integration-taking Xiangshan Harbor watershed as an example[J]. Marine Development and Management, 2022, 39(4): 3-10. [30] 谢余初, 张素欣, 林冰等. 基于生态系统服务供需关系的广西县域国土生态修复空间分区[J]. 自然资源学报,2020,35(1):217-229. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20200118XIE Y C, ZHANG S X, LIN B, et al. Spatial zoning of ecological restoration of county land in Guangxi based on supply and demand of ecosystem services[J]. Journal of Natural Resources,2020,35(1):217-229. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20200118 [31] 谢高地, 张彩霞, 张雷明, 等. 基于单位面积价值当量因子的生态系统服务价值化方法改进[J]. 自然资源学报,2015,30(8):1243-1254. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2015.08.001XIE G D, ZHANG C X, ZHANG L M, et al. Improvement of ecosystem service valorization method based on unit area value equivalent factor[J]. Journal of Natural Resources,2015,30(8):1243-1254. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2015.08.001 [32] 郑婷婷, 杨莉, 贾卓霏, 等. 基于生态系统“受损-恢复力-修复潜力”评价的内蒙古生态空间分区及保护修复策略[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2023,13(5):1901-1909. doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20221162ZHENG T T, YANG L, JIA Z F, et al. Ecological space zoning and conservation and restoration strategies based on the evaluation of ecosystem "damage-resilience-restoration potential" in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2023,13(5):1901-1909. doi: 10.12153/j.issn.1674-991X.20221162 [33] 吴欣芋, 覃盟琳, 蒋红波, 等. 基于碳储量最大化的流域多目标土地利用分区优化模拟: 以广西西江清水河为例[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2023,13(5):1752-1762.WU X Y, QIN M L, JIANG H B, et al. Simulation of land use zoning optimization under multi-objective scenarios based on maximizing carbon storage: taking Qingshui River of Xijiang River in Guangxi as an example[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2023,13(5):1752-1762. ⊕ -
下载:
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 50
- HTML全文浏览量: 25
- PDF下载量: 2
- 被引次数: 0
