基于PSR模型的三峡库区重庆段生态安全动态评价
收稿日期: 2009-09-01
修回日期: 2010-01-01
网络出版日期: 2010-09-25
基金资助
重庆市科委项目(CSTC2007BC7001; CSTC2009BA0002);国家科技支撑计划课题项目(2006BAC01A16);国家自然科 学基金(X40801077);教育部重点项目(209100);重庆市自然科学基金(CSTC2008BB7367);科技部国际合作项目 (2008 GR1256);重庆市教委人文丰f科项目(10SKE15);西I菊大学研究生创新基金项目(kb2009004)
Ecological Safety Evaluation of Three Gorges Reservoir Area in Chongqing with the Pressure-State-Response Model
Received date: 2009-09-01
Revised date: 2010-01-01
Online published: 2010-09-25
基于压力—状态—响应(PSR)概念模型,从20个指标通过数据标准化处理、指标权重确定和生态安全评价模型的构建,以三峡库区重庆段为例,分析三峡库区重庆段自直辖以来的生态安全问题。运用嫡权和AHP的平均值作为权重,结合主观和客观赋权的优点,使评价更为合理。结果表明,三峡库区重庆段1997-2003年生态安全度为很不安全状况,2004-2007年生态安全度为不安全状况。从资源环境压力来看,1997-2007年其ESI一直处于很不安全状况;从资源环境状态来看,1997-1999年为很不安全状态,2000年和2001年为不安全状态,2002-2006年为临界安全状态,2007年为较安全状态;从人文环境响应来看,1997-2004年为很不安全状况,2005-2007年为不安全状况。从压力—状态—响应模型3方面分析对三峡库区重庆段生态安全的影响,据权重值得知,人文环境响应对城市生态影响最大,其次是资源环境状态,影响最小的是资源环境压力。
魏兴萍 . 基于PSR模型的三峡库区重庆段生态安全动态评价[J]. 地理科学进展, 2010 , 29(9) : 1095 -1099 . DOI: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2010.09.011
An ecological safety index (ESI) system including 20 indices for the Three Gorges Reservoir area in Chongqing was built up following the principles of the pressure-state-sponse (P-S-R) model. The ecological safety problems were analysed through standardizing the primary data, estimating values of weight and construtting models for ecological safety evaluation. The study results was made more reasonable by using the average means of the results from the entropy method and AHP method as comprehensive weight values. The Recults showed that the Three Gorges Reservoir area in Chongqing was kept at a very unsafe state from 1997 to 2003 and kept at an unsafe state from 2004 to 2007. The resource environment was at very unsafe state from 1997 to 1999, unsafe state in both 2000 and 2001, critioal safe state from 2002 to 2006 and relative safe state in 2007. The human enviroment response was at very unsafe state from 1997 to 2004 and unsafe state from 2005 to 2007. The affeoting degrees on urban eoologioal safety of the factors in the PSR model follow a desoending order of human enviromental response, resource environmental state and resource environmental pressure m turns.
[1] Costanza R, Norton BG,Hashell B D. Ecosystem Health: New Goals for Environmental Management. Washington DC:Island Press, 1992: 1一125.
[2] Dobson, Andy P, et al. Hopes for the future:Restoration ecology and conservation ecology. Science, 1997, 233: 515-524.
[3] 肖笃宁,陈文波,郭福良.论生态安全的基本概念和研究内容.应用生态学报,2002, 13(3): 354-358.
[4] Rapport D J, Costanza R, McMichael A J. Assessing ecosystem health. Trends in Ecology&Evolution, 1998, 13 (10): 397-402.
[5] 陈辉,刘劲松,曹宇,等.生态风险评价研究进展.生态学报,2006, 26(5): 1558-1566.
[6] 崔胜辉,洪华生,黄云风,等.生态安全研究进展.生态学报,2005, 25(4):861-868.
[7] 陈星,周成虎.生态安全:国内外研究综述.地理科学进 展,2005, 24(6): 8-20.
[8] 任志远,黄青,李晶.陕西省生态安全及空间差异定量分析.地理学报,2005, 60(4): 597-606.
[9] 左伟,王桥,王文杰,等.区域生态安全评价指标与标准研究.地理学与国上研究,2002, 18(1): 67-71.
[10] 邱微,赵庆良,李裕,等.基于“压力一状态一响应”模型的黑龙江省生态安全评价研究.环境科学,2008, 29 (4): 1148一1152.
[11] 肖荣波,欧阳志云,韩艺师,等.海南岛生态安全评价. 自然资源学报,2004, 19(6): 769-775.
[12] 吴开亚,张礼兵,金菊良,等.基于属性识别模型的巢湖流域生态安全评价.生态学杂志,2007, 26(5): 759-764.
[13] 郭明,肖笃宁,李新.黑河流域酒泉绿洲景观生态安全格局分析.生态学报,2006, 26(2): 457-466.
[14] 李晓燕,任志远.基于“压力一状态一响应”模型的渭南市生态安全动态变化分析.陕西师范大学学报,2008, 36 (5): 82-85.
[15] Tong C. Review on enviromental indicator research. Re-search on Environmental Science, 2000, 13(4): 53.
[16] Comalan C, Briggs D, Kjellstrom T. Development of envi-ronmental health indicators//Briggs D, eds. Link-age Methods for Enviroment and Health Analysis. General guidelines. Geneva: UNEP,USEPA and WHO, 1996: 19-53.
[17] 李月臣,刘春霞,赵纯勇,等.三峡库区(重庆段)上壤侵蚀敏感性评价及其空间分异特征.生态学报,2009, 29 (2): 788-796.
[18] Peter C, Schnlze. Overview: Measures of Enviromental Performance and Ecosystem Condition. Washington DC: National Academy Press, 1999.
[19] 叶亚平,刘舍君.中国省域生态环境质量评价指标体系研究.环境科学研究,2002, 13(13): 33-36.
[20] 李佩武,李贵才,张金花,等.深圳城市生态安全评价与预测.地理科学进展,2009, 28(2): 245-252.
[21] 张凤太,苏维词,周继霞.基于墒权灰色关联分析的城市生态安全评价.生态学杂志,2008, 27(7): 1249-1254.
[22] 官冬杰,苏维词.城市生态系统健康评价方法及其应用研究.环境科学学报,2006, 26(10): 1716-1721.
/
〈 | 〉 |