| 瓯江“山水工程”生态系统服务权衡/协同关系的驱动因素及分区管控 |
| 摘要点击 250 全文点击 6 投稿时间：2025-09-07 修订日期：2025-10-31 |
| 查看HTML全文
查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 中文关键词 生态系统服务 权衡/协同 驱动因素 贝叶斯网络（BBNs） 瓯江 浙江省 |
| 英文关键词 ecosystem services trade offs/synergies driving factors Bayesian network（BBNs） Oujiang River Zhejiang Province |
| DOI 10.13227/j.hjkx.202509086 |
|
| 中文摘要 |
| 探究生态系统服务的权衡/协同关系及其驱动因素是生态修复精准管控与人类福祉提升的关键科学基础. 以瓯江源头区域山水林田湖草沙一体化保护和修复工程（简称瓯江“山水工程”）为研究对象，采用生态系统服务综合指数量化分析2001年~2022年生态系统服务权衡/协同关系，借助自组织映射（SOM）聚类法识别生态管理功能区，基于贝叶斯网络（BBNs）识别生态系统服务权衡/协同关系的影响因素及不同情景下各生态管理功能区的关键驱动因素. 结果表明：①空气净化、固碳服务、粮食供给和生境质量整体呈下降态势，产水量、游憩服务和土壤保持整体呈上升态势. 从空间分布来看，土壤保持能力较低，高值区零星分布；空气净化、粮食供给和游憩服务呈显著空间异质性，大部分地区均具有良好的生境质量和较强的固碳服务供给能力. ②生态系统服务权衡/协同关系经历“协同弱化-局部调整-显著改善”阶段，2020年后“山水工程”推动权衡指数低值区扩张，生态系统服务综合指数的空间分布格局较稳定，遂昌、龙泉等区域长期位于中高值区. ③SOM聚类识别3类功能区：生态脆弱区的生态系统服务供给能力弱，以土壤保持和游憩服务为主；生态涵养区以生境质量、固碳服务和产水量为核心；多功能复合区的生态系统服务供给能力最强. ④生态系统服务驱动因素呈现服务特异性与功能区差异性. 服务层面，气象因子主导产水与粮食供给，人类活动因子主导空气净化与游憩服务；功能区层面，生态脆弱区受NDVI、GDP、人口密度和土地利用影响；生态涵养区的主导因子为NDVI与GDP；多功能复合区则由气温、蒸散发、降水、NDVI与GDP共同驱动. 研究结果可为瓯江“山水工程”乃至全国生态保护修复实践管理与政策优化提供科学依据. |
| 英文摘要 |
| Exploring the trade offs/synergies among ecosystem services and their driving factors is essential for informing targeted ecological management and enhancing human well-being. This study examines the “Mountain-River-Forest-Cropland-Lake-Grassland-Desert” Integrated Protection and Restoration Project in the source area of the Oujiang River （referred to as the Oujiang “Shanshui Initiative”）. Using a comprehensive ecosystem services index， we quantified and analyzed trade offs/synergies among ecosystem services from 2001 to 2022. Ecological management functional zones were delineated via self-organizing map （SOM） clustering， and a Bayesian network （BBNs） was applied to identify factors influencing trade offs/synergies， as well as key drivers within each functional zone under different scenarios. The results indicate that： ① Air purification， carbon sequestration， food supply， and habitat quality generally declined， while water yield， recreational services， and soil conservation exhibited an overall increasing trend. Spatially， soil conservation capacity was relatively low， with high-value zones sporadically distributed； air purification， food supply， and recreational services showed marked spatial heterogeneity； and most areas maintained favorable habitat quality and strong carbon sequestration capacity. ② The relationships among ecosystem services transitioned through three phases： “weakening synergy-local adjustment-notable improvement.” After 2020， the Oujiang “Shanshui Initiative” contributed to an expansion of areas characterized by low trade-off intensity， while the spatial pattern of the comprehensive ecosystem services index remained relatively stable. Regions such as Suichang and Longquan consistently exhibited medium-to-high index values over time. ③ SOM clustering identified three functional zone types： the ecologically fragile zone， characterized by limited ecosystem service provision， dominated by soil conservation and recreational services； the ecological conservation zone， centered on habitat quality， carbon sequestration， and water yield； and the multi-functional composite zone， which demonstrated the highest overall capacity for ecosystem service provision. ④ The drivers of ecosystem services exhibited both service-specific and zonal differentiation. At the service level， meteorological factors were the primary drivers of water yield and food supply， while human activity factors dominated air purification and recreational services. At the zonal level， the ecologically fragile zone was influenced by NDVI， GDP， population density， and land use； the ecological conservation zone was mainly affected by NDVI and GDP； and the multi-functional composite zone was jointly driven by temperature， evapotranspiration， precipitation， NDVI， and GDP. These findings provide a scientific foundation for refining management strategies and policy design for the Oujiang “Shanshui Initiative，” as well as for guiding national ecological protection and restoration efforts. |
