【作者】 庞丙亮；

【导师】 崔丽娟；

【作者基本信息】 中国林业科学研究院 ， 生态学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 湿地生态系统服务价值评价是制定湿地保护和管理决策的重要依据，是当前的研究热点之一，而重复计算会导致价值评估结果出现误差，不利于管理者制定正确的管理和保护措施，也不利于公众对湿地生态系统服务价值的正确认识。本文通过查阅文献和实例调查等方法分析了湿地生态系统服务价值评价重复计算产生的原因，并提出相应的解决办法。以2011年为基准年，通过遥感解译、实地采样、问卷发放等方式收集若尔盖湿地和扎龙湿地生态系统服务价值评价所需数据，采用市场价值法、替代成本法和支付意愿法等环境经济学方法对两块湿地的生态系统服务进行了评价，对价值评价中存在的重复计算进行了具体分析及去除。主要结论如下：1．湿地生态系统服务价值评价重复性计算产生的原因包括5个方面，分别是湿地功能与服务之间复杂的关系、服务之间的因果关系、服务指标的模糊、评价参数的重复和评价方法的不恰当。重复计算的解决办法包括湿地生态系统服务指标体系的明确、最终服务的确定、评价参数的明确、最适评估方法的选择和数学模型的构建。2．最终服务价值即为湿地生态系统服务的总价值，中间服务价值为重复计算的价值。最终服务价值既可能比中间服务价值小，也可能比中间服务价值大。若尔盖高寒湿地的最终服务包括物质生产、供水、土壤保持、固碳、大气调节、调蓄洪水、气候调节、休闲娱乐和科研教育，中间服务包括净初级生产力、涵养水源、营养循环、生物多样性维持服务和废弃物降解，2011年若尔盖高寒湿地的最终服务价值为97.18亿元，中间服务价值为257.96亿元，中间服务的价值显著大于最终服务的价值。扎龙湿地最终服务包括物质生产、调蓄洪水、气候调节、固碳、大气调节、土壤保持、休闲娱乐、科研教育、水质净化和授粉，中间服务包括净初级生产力、涵养水源、营养循环、生物多样性维持和地下水补给，2011年扎龙湿地的最终服务价值为679.39亿元，中间服务价值为471.47亿元，最终服务的价值大于中间服务的价值。3．在湿地生态系统服务价值评价时由于服务指标的模糊、评价参数以及评价方法的不恰当都会导致某一服务或几个服务之间在量化时出现重复计算。对于由服务指标和评价参数的模糊导致的重复计算，应从生态系统服务的本质和生态学角度出发进行分析，将重复计算部分去除；对于由评价方法导致的重复计算，应该结合实际情况选择最适评价方法，以减少重复计算。虽然具体量化过程存在的重复计算价值与服务分类导致的重复计算价值相比可能很小，但是准确的量化湿地生态系统服务的价值是不可或缺的。更多还原

【Abstract】 Wetland ecosystem services valuation is an important basis for managers to makemanaging and protecting decisions, and is one of hot research areas. Double counting can makeevaluation results error, which is not conducive to the public to correctly realize the value ofwetland ecosystem services, and is not conducive to managers to make right decisions toprotect and manage wetland ecosystem. This paper analyzed the causes to double counting inwetland ecosystem services valuation through literature review and other methods, and thensome solutions were proposed. Taking2011as the base year, we collected the evaluationrelated date of Zoige Wetland and Zhalong Wetland by remote sensing interpretation, fieldsampling, questionnaires and other methods, and then the market price method, replacementcost method, contingent valuation method, and other environmental economic methods wereused to assess the values of ecosystem services of these two wetlands, and discussed doublecounting value in the evaluation process. Main results obtained as follow:1. Causes to double counting in wetland ecosystem services include five aspects, they arecomplexity between wetland functions and services, causal relationship among wetlandecosystem services, fuzzy service indicators, repeated valuation parameters, and inappropriatevaluation methods. Measures for reducing double counting in wetland ecosystem servicesvaluation are proposed as follow: valuing the final services, identifying service indicator andvaluation parameters, selecting more appropriate valuation methods for the study context, andestablish model for reduce double counting.2. The total value of final services either bigger than that of intermediate services orsmaller. Final services in wetland include substance production, water supply, soil conservation,carbon fixation, gas regulation, flood protection, climate regulation, recreation, and scientificresearch, while intermediate services include Net primary productivity(NPP), waterconservation, nutrient cycling, biodiversity maintenance, and waste treatment. The value of final services of Zoige wetland was9.718billion Yuan in2011year, much smaller than that ofintermediate services with25.796billion Yuan. Final services of Zhalong wetland includesubstance production, flood protection, climate regulation, carbon fixation, gas regulation, soilconservation, recreation, scientific research, water treatment and pollination, whileintermediate services include NPP, water conservation, nutrient cycling, biodiversitymaintenance, and groundwater recharge. The value of final services of Zhalong wetland was67.939billion Yuan in2011year, bigger than that of intermediate services with47.147billionYuan.3. There are double counting in one service evaluation or several services evaluation, dueto the fuzzy service indicators and evaluation parameters, and inappropriate valuation methods.For double counting caused from fuzzy service indicators and evaluation parameters, doublecounting value should be removed through nature of wetland ecosystem services andecological point. For double counting caused from inappropriate valuation methods, doublecounting value should be removed through selecting appropriate methods based on studycontext. Double counting in evaluation process maybe much smaller than that caused fromclassification of ecosystem services, but precise quantification of wetland ecosystem servicesvalue is essential.更多还原