【作者】 李学明；

【导师】 张淑萍； 王仁卿；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 生态学， 2013， 硕士

【摘要】 本研究综合分析了近30年来生态系统服务价值评估方面的研究进展,进一步澄清了生态系统服务的内涵和定义,解析了生态系统服务价值评估中的尺度问题及大尺度研究用于小尺度决策支持的局限性。结合中国乡村生态系统服务价值保护与可持续利用现状,提出了进行乡村尺度生态系统服务价值评估的重要性与必要性。以山东省莱芜市三个采用不同发展模式的毗邻村庄房干村、富家庄村和安子湾村为研究区域,首先应用区域内及周边5个气象站2010-2012年间的温度和降水数据,对温带地区森林生态系统调节小气候服务价值进行了评估方法的创新研究,结果表明已有的研究成果对生态系统调节小气候服务价值的评估值普遍偏低；采用直接市场法对三个村庄进行生态系统服务价值评估的结果表明：以旅游业为主的房干村生态系统服务在总价值和单位面积价值上都最大,以商业为主导的富家庄村次之,以农业为主导的安子湾村生态系统服务在总价值和单位面积价值上都最低；在生态系统服务价值构成方面,房干村以生态系统娱乐文化价值最高,富家庄村和安子湾村都是以提供生物质产品服务价值最高；同时,结合问卷和询问方式,采用定量和半定量方法对不同发展模式村庄生态系统服务价值与居民福利的关系进行了研究,发现村庄发展模式的选择会对村庄生态系统结构和功能产生影响,进而影响生态系统服务价值构成；三个村庄居民经济福利中生态系统服务的贡献度均在40%以上,但房干村生态系统服务对当地居民贡献度最大,安子湾村最低；房干村生态系统服务对居民生态安全福利的贡献远远高于另外两个村庄,说明发展模式选择对生态系统服务价值和居民福利均有较大影响。本文对乡村尺度生态系统服务价值进行了评估,并分析了生态系统服务构成及其对居民福利的贡献,以定量方法揭示了乡村尺度生态系统服务价值对居民福利的重要性,以及发展模式对生态系统服务和居民福利的影响,同时还可以为管理者在农村建设规划中如何保护和持续利用生态系统服务价值提供决策支持。更多还原

【Abstract】 To gain insight into the advances in Ecosystem Service Assessment in past three decades, we clarified the connotation and definition of Ecosystem Service as well as the scale matters and the limitation of theories from previous research at large scales for decision making at small scales. Combining the context of conservation and utility of Ecosystem Service at village scale of China, the importance and necessity of studying on Ecosystem Service and its contribution to household welfare at village scale were brought up.Three adjacent villages named by Fanggan, Fujiazhuang and Anziwan respectively, located in Laiwu city of Shandong province, were adopted for the case study, since there were very similar natural environment but distinctive developing trajectories from each other of the three villages. In the first place, we innovated the methods of valuating micro-climate adjustment service of forest at small scale in temperate zone using recoding data of temperature and rainfall at five meteorological stations within and surrounding studied area during2010-2012. The results showed a higher value of microclimate adjustment of forest at village scale than most of previous studies at global and regional scales. Using the direct market approaches, we evaluated the Ecosystem Service Values of the three villages in total and per hectare. Fanggan village who took ecotourism as the first industry hold much more ecosystem Service Values in total and per hectare than the other two villages. Fujiazhuang who took commerce and food processing as main industries hold more Ecosystem Service Value than Anziwan village who took conventional farming as predominant industry. Furthermore we compared the structural differences of Ecosystem Service among the three villages. Fanggan village presented a particularly high value of recreation, but both the other two villages documented a higher value of provision. Otherwise we analyzed quantitatively the relationship among Ecosystem Service, development model and the household welfare combining Questionnaire Survey and interview with15-20households from each village. All of the three villages gained more than40percent of their economic welfare from Ecosystem Service, but the households in Fanggan village enjoyed much more economic welfare as well as more ecological safety welfare from Ecosystem Service. The development model may have remarkable positive or negative impacts on Ecosystem Service and the household welfare at village scale under different scenarios of decision making.To sum up, the importance of Ecosystem Service to household welfare at village scale has been demonstrated and highlighted using quantitatively assessment of Ecosystem Service and its contribution to the households’economic and ecological welfare. On the other hand, the results and conclusions of this work would be helpful and considerable for decision makers who have to balance and integrate the utility and conservation of Ecosystem Service at village scale.更多还原