宁夏水土保持生态补偿优先区识别

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2023.09.16

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

水土保持服务功能下的生态补偿优先区识别的研究，对建立适宜当地生态发展的水土保持生态补偿体系具有重要参考意义。以宁夏为研究区，运用InVEST模型评估水源涵养、土壤保持和碳储存三项主要水土保持服务功能，并进行价值化表达；综合考虑各区县生态补偿优先级和生态脆弱性指数，对全区水土保持生态补偿优先区进行空间识别。研究表明：2000年、2010年、2020年宁夏水土保持价值分别为2478.9×10⁸元、2661.7×10⁸元、2958.5×10⁸元，总体呈现不断增长趋势；在空间上呈现南高北低的空间分布特征，其最高值位于泾源县，最低值位于金凤区；全区20 a来水土保持优先补偿区动态变化差异较小，补偿优先区主要位于生态价值高、经济落后的南部地区，而生态补偿次级优先区则位于中部和北部生态价值较低、经济水平较高区域。对生态补偿优先区进行补偿能够有效提高生态补偿的效率，促进区域生态环境和经济社会可持续发展。

关键词: 生态服务价值, 生态补偿优先区, 水土保持, InVEST模型

Abstract:

Identifying priority areas for ecological compensation under soil and water conservation is an important reference for establishing a suitable compensation system to support local ecological development. In this study, the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region is taken as the study area, and the InVEST model is employed to evaluate three major soil and water conservation service functions: water connotation, soil conservation, and carbon storage. Their respective value amounts were assessed. Additionally, the ecological compensation priority and ecological vulnerability index of each district and county are considered to conduct a spatial identification of priority areas for ecological compensation for soil and water conservation in Ningxia. Research has shown that the value of soil and water conservation in Ningxia has steadily increased each decade from 2000 to 2020, reaching 247.89 billion yuan, 266.17 billion yuan, and 295.85 billion yuan, respectively. Geographically, the southern regions generally exhibit higher values, whereas the northern regions show lower values, with Jingyuan County, Guyuan City, and Jinfeng District, Yinchuan City, representing the highest, and lowest values, respectively. Over the years, the priority compensation areas for soil and water conservation have experienced relatively minor changes. These areas are mainly located in the southern regions, characterized by high ecological value but economic backwardness. The secondary priority areas for ecological compensation are located in the central and northern regions, characterized by low ecological value but high economic development. Compensating these priority areas can effectively improve the efficiency of ecological compensation, foster the regional ecological environment, and promote sustainable economic, and social development.

Key words: ecological service value, ecological compensation priority zone, soil and water conservation, InVEST model

申草,任宗萍,李鹏,王凯博,鲁克新,任正龑,魏小燕. 宁夏水土保持生态补偿优先区识别[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(9): 1527-1536.

SHEN Cao,REN Zongping,LI Peng,WANG Kaibo,LU Kexin,REN Zhengyan,WEI Xiaoyan. Identification of priority areas for ecological compensation under soil and water conservation in Ningxia[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(9): 1527-1536.

图/表 10

图1

表1

表2

图2

图3

表3

图4

图5

图6

表4

参考文献 33

[1]	Lu Y, Zhang L, Feng X, et al. Recent ecological transitions in China: greening, browning and influential factors[J]. Scientific Reports, 2015, 5: 8732. doi: 10.1038/srep08732
[2]	De Groot R, Brande L, Ploeg S, et al. Global estimates of the value of ecosystem and their services in monetary units[J]. Ecosystem Services, 2012, 1(1): 50-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.005
[3]	Farley J, Costanza R. Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global[J]. Ecological Economics, 2010, 69(11): 2060-2068. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.010
[4]	Costanza R, De Groot R, Farber S, et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital[J]. Nature, 1997, 387(6630): 253-260. doi: 10.1038/387253a0
[5]	赵建林, 董志洋, 常兆丰. 基于生态服务价值机会成本的沙漠电灌工程生态补偿研究——以景电高扬程电力提灌工程为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2019, 36(3): 743-751.
	[Zhao Jianlin, Dong Zhiyang, Chang Zhaofeng. Ecological compensation of a desert water-lifting irrigation project based on opportunity cost of ecosystem service value: A case study on Jingtaichuan Water-Lifting Irrigation Project[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2019, 36(3): 743-751.]
[6]	Wang C D, Li W Q, Sun M X, et al. Exploring the formulation of ecological management policies by quantifying interregional primary ecosystem service flows in Yangtze River Delta region, China[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2021, 284: 112042. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112042
[7]	Sun L N, Lu W X, Yang Q C, et al. Ecological compensation estimation of soil and water conservation based on cost-benefit analysis[J]. Water Resources Management, 2013, 27(8): 2709-2727. doi: 10.1007/s11269-013-0268-5
[8]	Xiong Y, Wang K L. Eco-compensation effects of the wetland recovery in Dongting Lake area[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2010, 20(3): 389-405. doi: 10.1007/s11442-010-0389-1
[9]	郭年冬, 李恒哲, 李超, 等. 基于生态系统服务价值的环京津地区生态补偿研究[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2015, 23(11): 1473-1480.
	[Guo Niandong, Li Hengzhe, Li Chao, et al. Regional ecological compensation based on ecosystem service value in the area surrounding Beijing and Tianjin[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2015, 23(11): 1473-1480.]
[10]	严有龙, 王军, 王金满. 基于生态系统服务的闽江流域生态补偿阈值研究[J]. 中国土地科学, 2021, 35(3): 97-106.
	[Yan Youlong, Wang Jun, Wang Jinman. Study on eco-compensation thresholds of Min River basin based on ecosystem services[J]. China Land Science, 2021, 35(3): 97-106.]
[11]	高振斌, 王小莉, 苏婧, 等. 基于生态系统服务价值评估的东江流域生态补偿研究[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2018, 34(6): 563-570.
	[Gao Zhenbin, Wang Xiaoli, Su Jing, et al. Ecological compensation of Dongjiang River basin based on evaluation of ecosystem service value[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2018, 34(6): 563-570.]
[12]	胡影, 冯晓明, 巩杰. 基于生态系统服务的宁夏回族自治区自然-社会经济协调性分析[J]. 生态学报, 2022, 42(16): 6523-6533.
	[Hu Ying, Feng Xiaoming, Gong Jie. Coordination analysis of the nature and social-economic system of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region based on ecosystem services[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2022, 42(16): 6523-6533.]
[13]	魏东, 杨阳, 倪细炉. 区域森林生态系统服务功能评估——以宁夏回族自治区为例[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2018, 35(3): 278-284.
	[Wei Dong, Yang Yang, Ni Xilu, et al. Regional forest ecosystem services assessment: A case study of Ningxia Hui Autonomous[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2018, 35(3): 278-284.]
[14]	黄悦悦, 杨东, 冯磊. 近年来宁夏植被指数与气候生产力的时空变化[J]. 水力发电学报, 2019, 38(11): 70-81.
	[Huang Yueyue, Yang Dong, Feng Lei. Spatiotemporal distributions of vegetation index and climatic productivity in Ningxia in recent years[J]. Journal of Hydroelectric Engineering, 2019, 38(11): 70-81.]
[15]	Sharp R, Chaplin-Kramer R, Wood S, et al. InVEST 3.9.0 User’s Guide[EB/OL]. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, and World Wildlife Fund, 2020.
[16]	生态环境部环境规划院, 中国科学院生态环境研究中心. 陆地生态系统生产总值核算技术指南(20201654-T-469)[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2020.
	[Chinese Academy of Environmental Planning, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, CAS. Gross Terrestrial Ecosystem Product Accounting Technical Guidelines (20201654-T-469)[S]. Beijing: China Standards Press, 2020.]
[17]	Richard G Allen, Luis S Pereira, Dirk Raes. Crop Evapotranspiration-guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements-FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56[M]. Rome: FAO-Food and Agriculture Organizationof the United Nations, 1998.
[18]	贾雨凡, 王国庆. 基于InVEST模型的伊洛河流域水源涵养能力评估[J]. 水土保持学报, 2023, 37(3): 101-108.
	[Jia Yufan, Wang Guoqing. Assessment of water conservation capacity of Yiluo River basin based on the InVEST model[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2023, 37(3): 101-108.]
[19]	田义超, 白晓永, 黄远林, 等. 基于生态系统服务价值的赤水河流域生态补偿标准核算[J]. 农业机械学报, 2019, 50(11): 312-322.
	[Tian Yichao, Bai Xiaoyong, Huang Yuanlin, et al. Ecological compensation standard accounting of Chishui River Basin based on ecosystem service value[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2019, 50(11): 312-322.]
[20]	章文波, 付金生. 不同类型雨量资料估算降雨侵蚀力[J]. 资源科学, 2003, 27(1): 35-41.
	[Zhang Wenbo, Fu Jinsheng. Rainfall erosivity estimation under different rainfall amount[J]. Resources Science, 2003, 27(1): 35-41.]
[21]	杨苗苗, 杨勤科, 张科利, 等. 砾石含量对土壤可蚀性因子估算的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2021, 58(5): 1157-1168.
	[Yang Miaomiao, Yang Qingke, Zhang Keli, et al. Effects of content of soil rock fragments on calculating of soil erodibility[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2021, 58(5) : 1157-1168.]
[22]	杨勤科. 泛第三极(20国)土壤可蚀性因子(K)数据集(2020年,7.5弧秒分辨率)[DB/OL]. 国家青藏高原科学数据中心, 2021.
	[Yang Qinke. Soil Erodibility Dataset of Pan-Third Pole 20 Countries(2020, with a resolution of 7.5 arc second)[DB/OL ]. National Tibetan Plateau Scientific Data Center, 2021. ]
[23]	Desment P J, Govers G. A GIS procedure for automatically calculating the USLE LS factor on topographically complex landscape units[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 1996, 51(5): 427-433.
[24]	王蓓, 赵军, 胡秀芳. 石羊河流域生态系统服务权衡与协同关系研究[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(21): 7582-7595.
	[Wang Bei, Zhao Jun, Hu Xiufang. Analysison trade-offs and synergistic relationships among multiple ecosystem services in the Shiyang River Basin[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(21): 7582-7595.]
[25]	朱青, 周自翔, 刘婷, 等. 黄土高原植被恢复与生态系统土壤保持服务价值增益研究——以延河流域为例[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(7): 2557-2570.
	[Zhu Qing, Zhou Zixiang, Liu Ting, et al. Vegetation restoration and ecosystem soil conservation service value increment in Yanhe Watershed, Loess Plateau[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2021, 41(7): 2557-2570.]
[26]	吴娜, 宋晓谕, 康文慧, 等. 不同视角下基于InVEST模型的流域生态补偿标准核算——以渭河甘肃段为例[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(7): 2512-2522.
	[Wu Na, Song Xiaoyu, Kang Wenhui. Standard of payment for ecosystem services in a watershed based on InVEST model under different standpoints: A case study of the Weihe River in Gansu Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(7): 2512-2522.]
[27]	刘洋, 张军, 周冬梅, 等. 基于InVEST模型的疏勒河流域碳储量时空变化研究[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(10): 4052-4065.
	[Liu Yang, Zhang Jun, Zhou Dongmei, et al. Temporal and spatial variation of carbon storage in the Shule River Basin based on InVEST model[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinice, 2021, 41(10): 4052-4065.]
[28]	薛卓彬. 基于InVEST模型的延河流域生态系统服务功能评估[D]. 西安: 西北大学, 2017.
	[Xue Zhuobin. The Assessment of Ecosystem Services Functions in Yanhe River Based on the InVEST Model[D]. Xi’an: Northwest University, 2017.]
[29]	宁夏回族自治区水利厅.宁夏回族自治区2020年水土保持公报[R]. 2020.
	[Ningxia Water Conservancy. Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region 2020 Soil and Water Conservation Bulleti[R]. 2020.]
[30]	李姣, 李朗, 汪杰, 等. 水土保持生态补偿优先区域的空间识别: 以洞庭湖生态经济区为例[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2021, 37(4): 474-483.
	[Li Jiao, Li Lang, Wang Jie, et al. Priority areas recognition of ecological compensation for soil and water conservation: Taking Dongting Lake eco-economic zone as an example[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2021, 37(4): 474-483.]
[31]	王女杰, 刘建, 吴大千, 等. 基于生态系统服务价值的区域生态补偿: 以山东省为例[J]. 生态学报, 2010, 30(23): 6646-6653.
	[Wang Nüjie, Liu Jian, Wu Daqian, et al. Regional eco-compensation based on ecosystem service assessment: A case study of Shandong Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(23): 6646-6653.]
[32]	金丽娟, 许泉立. 基于SRP模型的四川省生态脆弱性评价[J]. 生态科学, 2022, 41(2): 156-165.
	[Jin Lijuan, Xu Quanli. Ecological vulnerability assessment of Sichuan Province based on SRP model[J]. Ecological Science, 2022, 41(2): 156-165.]
[33]	李永化, 范强, 王雪, 等. 基于SRP模型的自然灾害多发区生态脆弱性时空分异研究——以辽宁省朝阳县为例[J]. 地理科学, 2015, 35(11): 1452-1459. doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2015.011.1452
	[Li Yonghua, Fan Qiang, Wang Xue, et al. Spatial and temporal differentiation of ecological vulnerability under the frequency of natural hazard based on srp model: A case study in Chaoyang County[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2015, 35(11): 1452-1459.] doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2015.011.1452

评价分数	1级区	2级区	3级区
强脆弱性	5	4	3
弱脆弱性	4	3	2

分目标层	本层权重	准则层	本层权重	指标层	指标说明
生态压力度	0.14	人口活动压力	0.4	人口密度	正向指标
生态压力度	0.14	经济活动压力	0.6	地均GDP	负向指标
生态敏感性	0.62	地形因子	0.2	高程	正向指标
				坡度	正向指标
				地形起伏度	正向指标
		气象因子	0.1	降雨侵蚀力	正向指标
				年均气温	负向指标
				年均相对湿度	负向指标
		地表因子	0.1	植被覆盖率	负向指标
		土壤因子	0.5	土壤侵蚀强度	正向指标
生态恢复力	0.24	景观结构	0.2	景观多样性指数	负向指标
		功能	0.5	土壤有机质	正向指标
		生态环境质量	0.3	生物丰度	负向指标

地区	2000年		2010年		2020年
地区	水保价值 /(10⁴元·km^-2)	GDP/(10⁴元·km^-2)	水保价值 /(10⁴元·km^-2)	GDP/(10⁴元·km^-2)	水保价值 /(10⁴元·km^-2)	GDP /(10⁴元·km^-2)
泾源县	2293.5	13.9	2452.9	64.5	2480.6	183.8
海原县	635.6	8.4	665.6	43.8	842.5	152.6
彭阳县	1133.5	10.2	1253.8	73.7	1194.0	253.3
西吉县	1081.4	12.2	1200.9	82.8	963.4	223.3
隆德县	1888.3	36.9	2021.2	110.8	1190.4	315.9
同心县	402.7	7.8	424.1	60.2	573.8	207.7
盐池县	229.2	14.6	265.7	41.8	336.5	161.3
原州区	957.0	17.9	1017.1	161.3	1019.4	495.8
红寺堡区	251.8	16.6	255.3	34.9	325.6	301.6
沙坡头区	211.8	25.6	218.6	159.6	324.7	354.5
中宁县	231.3	27.3	229.8	205.5	301.8	523.2
平罗县	218.6	48.8	245.3	393.4	367.7	812.1
贺兰县	171.7	124.0	172.3	449.9	459.3	1158.7
青铜峡市	243.2	83.0	261.1	486.1	232.9	663.0
永宁县	177.2	149.6	181.7	666.2	255.7	1093.2
惠农区	194.2	111.4	189.5	390.9	343.8	1473.2
利通区	197.6	153.2	245.0	955.0	235.1	1055.7
大武口区	258.2	247.8	287.2	1278.7	406.0	1968.7
西夏区	174.8	34.8	181.9	531.6	550.5	3590.9
灵武市	258.0	449.4	272.9	1638.6	201.1	1748.6
兴庆区	150.1	307.8	154.2	3805.1	199.3	8244.0
金凤区	160.2	484.3	138.7	4759.2	209.3	10489.3

生态补偿区划	补偿面积/（km²）	补偿面积占比/%	水土保持价值/10⁸元	水土保持价值占比/%	GDP占比/%	水土流失面积占比/%
优先补偿区	23726	0.46	1892.2	0.64	0.12	0.71
次级补偿区	8132	0.16	455.5	0.15	0.09	0.15
一般补偿区	10533	0.2	342.2	0.12	0.18	0.08
潜在补偿区	9532	0.18	268.6	0.09	0.61	0.07