九寨沟国家级自然保护区地震前后生态系统服务价值评估
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:

九寨沟灾后重建科研项目(5132202020000046);国家重点研发计划项目(2017YFC0505005-1,2020YFE0203200)


Ecosystem service values assessment before and after earthquake in Jiuzhaigou National Nature Reserve
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    九寨沟县为"中国旅游强县",区域社会经济发展与九寨沟自然保护区生态系统服务价值联系紧密。2017年,九寨沟保护区发生7.0级地震,当地生态环境和社会经济发展遭受极大创伤。基于此,分别以2016、2018年为地震前后基准年,从供给服务、调节与维持服务、文化服务3个方面选取7项指标,构建九寨沟自然保护区生态系统服务价值评价体系,探明地震前后生态系统服务价值变化。研究表明:(1)地震前后九寨沟保护区生态系统服务总价值分别为1.96×1010元/a、1.52×1010元/a,单位面积价值量达3.05×105元hm-2 a-1、2.36×105元hm-2 a-1,总降幅达22.68%。(2)地震前后三类服务价值均有所下降但价值占比序列未改变,依次为供给服务、调节与维护服务和文化服务,降幅分别为24.61%、12.25%和86.02%。(3)地震前,7项服务指标按其经济价值大小排序依次为:木材供给 > 水源涵养 > 保育土壤 > 森林游憩 > 固碳释氧 > 大熊猫存在 > 科研教育,前三项服务价值累计占比达92.80%。地震后,价值排序变化为:木材供给 > 水源涵养 > 保育土壤 > 固碳释氧 > 大熊猫存在 > 科研教育 > 森林游憩,前三项服务价值累计占比达96.93%。(4)三类服务中文化服务受地震影响较大,总价值占比由4.54%下降至0.82%,7项服务中仅科研教育和保育土壤价值有所增加,其余5项服务均不同程度下降,降幅依次为森林游憩、固碳释氧、木材供给、大熊猫存在和水源涵养。由于景区关闭,以旅游收入测算的森林游憩价值变化最大,其价值降幅达97.74%,说明地质灾害导致旅游收入呈断崖式下降,短期内对当地社会经济发展具较大影响。

    Abstract:

    Jiuzhaigou County is an attractive tourism county in China, and the regionally social and economic development is closely related to the ecosystem service values (ESVs) of Jiuzhaigou National Nature Reserve. In 2017, a 7.0-magnitude earthquake occurred in Jiuzhaigou National Nature Reserve, which severely damaged the local ecological environment and regional social and economic development. Based on the ecologic environment status of Jiuzhaigou, taking 2016 and 2018 as the base years of before and after the earthquake respectively, seven indexes were selected from three aspects of provisioning services, regulating and maintenance services and cultural services to construct the ESVs evaluation system of Jiuzhaigou National Nature Reserve and identify the change of ESVs before and after earthquake. The results show that (1) the total ESVs of Jiuzhaigou before and after the earthquake were estimated to be 1.96×1010 yuan/a and 1.52×1010 yuan/a, respectively, while the unit area ESVs were 3.05×105 yuan hm-2 a-1 and 2.36×105 yuan hm-2 a-1, with a decrease of 22.68%. (2) The three types of ecosystem service values all decreased before and after the earthquake, but the sequence of the ESVs proportion unchanged, followed by provisioning services, regulating and maintenance services and cultural services, with a decline of 24.61%, 12.25% and 86.02%, respectively. (3) Before the earthquake, the ESVs were in the order of wood supply, water retention, soil conservation, forest recreation, carbon fixation and oxygen release, existent of Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) and scientific education, and the top three services accounted for 92.80% of the total values. After the earthquake, the order of the ESVs changed into wood supply, water retention, soil conservation, carbon fixation and oxygen release, existent of Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca), scientific education and forest recreation, while the top three ESVs accounted for 96.93% of the total values. (4) Among the three types of ecosystem services, cultural services were greatly affected by the earthquake, with the proportion of ESVs decreased from 4.54% to 0.82%. Among the seven indexes of ecosystem services, only the values of scientific education and soil conservation increased, while the values of the other five ecosystem services all decreased to various degrees, and the decreasing order was forest recreation, carbon fixation and oxygen release, wood supply, existent of Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) and water retention. Due to the closure of Jiuzhaigou National Nature Reserve, the values of forest recreation measured by tourism revenue changed the most, with a decrease of 97.74%, indicating that the geological disasters caused a cliff-like decline in tourism industry and had a huge impact on the development of social economic in Jiuzhaigou County.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

廖雨辰,史雪威,刘俊雁,廖建,谢雨,朱忠福,吴彦,ANDELKA Plenkovi&#;-Moraj.九寨沟国家级自然保护区地震前后生态系统服务价值评估.生态学报,2022,42(6):2063~2073

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数: