基于风险源体—受体—响应系统的控制单元水环境综合风险评价

doi:10.11821/dlyj201612014

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

随着控制单元在全国的推广,风险防范型优先控制单元缺少相应的理论支撑。基于控制单元水环境风险特点,提出了源体—受体—响应综合评价体系,根据指标特性,采用熵值法、模糊层次分析法计算权重系数,通过综合风险评价确定各控制单元的风险等级,并定义高风险控制单元为风险防范型优先控制单元、中风险控制单元为优先预警单元。研究筛选五大类20个指标构建三级水环境风险评价体系,通过对太湖流域（浙江片区）13个县市35个控制单元风险评估表明：① 4个位于下游的控制单元为风险防范型优先控制单元;② 17个为优先预警单元,除嘉善县均为优先控制单元外,涵盖其余12县市。研究成果可为风险防范型控制单元提供重要的理论依据。

关键词: 风险, 控制单元, 源体, 受体, 响应

Abstract:

Small areas within watersheds, known as control units, have been designated in China to improve water resources management, and the definition of these control units is a government priority. As yet, there is no consensus on how to identify "risk defensive priority", "water quality maintained priority" and "water quality improved priority" control units. Hence, the definition of risk defensive priority control units was the focus of this study. The risk source-acceptor-response framework was applied to establish a comprehensive water environment risk evaluation system with quantitative and qualitative indexes. Different methods were used to calculate the weighting coefficient for each type of index: for the quantitative index, the coefficient was determined using the entropy value method; for the qualitative index, the coefficient was determined using a fuzzy hierarchy analysis method. Finally, the risk level for each control unit was ascertained by calculating the risk scoring, and four levels of risk were established: "high", "medium", "low" and "extremely low". The high-risk units were defined as risk defensive priority control units, and the medium-risk units were defined as early warning units. A case study of the Zhejiang province in the Taihu watershed was conducted using 2011 data. Five categories of risk and 20 indexes were selected to construct the three-level water environmental risk evaluation system. In all, 35 control units were dispersed across 13 counties of the research area. Four high-risk (risk defensive priority) control units were identified, which were located in the downstream portion of the basin, including all of Jiashan County and part of Pinghu County. These units suffer from "self-contamination" risk and from "upstream accumulated pollution" risk, and should receive much remedial attention. In addition, 17 medium-risk (early warning) control units were identified, which were distributed in 12 towns (excluding the town of Jiashan County). In conclusion, it is feasible to identify risk defensive priority units and early warning units by distinguishing their risk rankings. This study provides an important theoretical benchmark for objective definition of risk defensive priority control units.

Key words: risk, control unit, source, acceptor, response

谢蓉蓉, 逄勇, 蒋彩萍, 王菲凤. 基于风险源体—受体—响应系统的控制单元水环境综合风险评价[J]. 地理研究, 2016, 35(12): 2363-2372.

Rongrong XIE, Yong PANG, Caiping JIANG, Feifeng WANG. The water environmental risk evaluation of watershed control units based on the risk source-acceptor-response framework[J]. GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH, 2016, 35(12): 2363-2372.

图/表 8

图1

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

图2

参考文献 23

[1]	Zogaris S, Economou A N, Dimopoulos P.Ecoregions in the southern Balkans: Should their boundaries be revised. Environmental Management, 2009, 43(4): 682-697. doi: 10.1007/s00267-008-9243-y
[2]	孟伟, 张楠, 张远, 等. 流域水质目标管理技术研究Ⅰ: 控制单元的总量控制技术. 环境科学研究, 2007, 20(4): 1-8.
	[Meng Wei, Zhang Nan, Zhang Yuan, et al.The study on technique of basin water quality target management: Pollutant total amount control technique in control unit. Research of Environmental Sciences, 2007, 20(4): 1-8.]
[3]	孟伟, 王海燕, 王业耀. 流域水质目标管理技术研究Ⅳ: 控制单元的水污染物排放限值与削减技术评估. 环境科学研究, 2008, 21(2): 1-9.
	[Meng Wei, Wang Haiyan, Wang Yeyao.The study on technique of basin water-quality target management Ⅳ: The control-unit-based effluent permit limits and pollutant reduction technology assessment. Research of Environmental Sciences, 2008, 21(2): 1-9.]
[4]	王涛, 张萌, 张柱, 等. 基于控制单元的水环境容量核算研究: 以锦江流域为例. 长江流域资源与环境, 2012, 21(3): 283-387.
	[Wang Tao, Zhang Meng, Zhang Zhu, et al.Calculation of water environmental capacity based on control unit: A case of the Jinjinag River Basin. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze River, 2012, 21(3): 283-387.]
[5]	王晓燕, 尚伟. 水体有毒有机污染物的危害及优先控制污染物. 首都师范大学学报: 自然科学版, 2002, 23(3): 73-78. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9398.2002.03.018
	[Wang Xiaoyan, Shang Wei.The harm of organic micro-pollutant on water body and priority pollutants. Journal of Capital Normal University: Natural Science Edition, 2002, 23(3): 73-78.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9398.2002.03.018
[6]	USEPA. Guidance for Water Quality-based Decisions: The TMDL Process. Washington DC: Office of Water, USEPA, 1991.
[7]	王伟, 冯海波, 臧志雪, 等. 河北省海河流域污染防治优先控制单元研究. 南水北调与水利科技, 2011, 9(4): 1-8. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1201.2011.05059
	[Wang Wei, Feng Haibo, Zang Zhixue, et al.Research of priority control unit for pollution prevention at Haihe River Basin in Hebei Province. South-to-North Water Diversion and Water Science & Technology, 2011, 9(4): 1-8.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1201.2011.05059
[8]	谢阳村, 王东, 赵康平. 利用控制单元识别松花江流域水污染防治重点. 环境保护科学, 2012, 38(5): 18-21. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-6216.2012.05.005
	[Xie Yangcun, Wang Dong, Zhao Kangping.Recognizing the key of water pollution control of Songhua River Basin by control unit. Environmental Protection Science, 2012, 38(5): 18-21.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-6216.2012.05.005
[9]	段华平, 孙勤芳, 王梁, 等. 常熟市农业和农村污染的优先控制区域识别. 环境科学, 2010, 31(4): 911-917.
	[Yin Huaping, Sun Qinfang, Wang Liang, et al.Identification of the prior regions for agricultural and rural pollution control in Changshu. Environmental Science, 2010, 31(4): 911-917.]
[10]	马丁·格里菲斯. 欧盟水框架指令手册. 水利部国际经济技术合作交流中心译. 北京: 中国水利水电出版社, 2008.
	[Griffiths M.The European Union Water Framework Directive Manua. Translated by International Economic and Technical Cooperation and Exchange Center of the Ministry of Water Resources. Beijing: China Water Conservancy and Hydropower Press, 2008.]
[11]	王成金, 金凤君, 何丹. 自然灾害承险体的分类技术与方案. 地理研究, 2013, 32(3): 431-440. doi: 10.11821/yj2013030005
	[Wang Chengjin, Jin Fengjun, He Dan.Identification and classification program of the bearing body of the natural hazards. Geographical Research, 2013, 32(3): 431-440.] doi: 10.11821/yj2013030005
[12]	夏富强, 康相武, 吴绍洪, 等. 黄河下游不同洪水情景决溢风险评价. 地理研究, 2008, 27(1): 229-240.
	[Xia Fuqiang, Kang Xiangwu, Wu Shaohong, et al.Research on dike breach risk of the hanging reach under different flood conditions in the lower Yellow River. Geographical Research, 2008, 27(1): 229-240.]
[13]	Jenkins L.Selecting scenarios for environmental disaster planning. European Journal of Operational Research, 2000, 121(2): 275-286. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00217-9
[14]	Price J M, Johnson W R, Marshall C F, et al.Overview of the oil spill risk analysis model for environmental impact assessment. Spill Science and Technology Bulletin, 2003, 8(5/6): 529-533. doi: 10.1016/S1353-2561(03)00003-3
[15]	李维新, 张永春, 张海平, 等. 太湖流域水环境风险预警系统构建. 生态与农村环境学报, 2010, 26(S1): 4-8. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4831.2010.z1.002
	[Li Weixin, Zhang Yongchun, Zhang Haiping, et al.Construction of water environmental risk early warning system for Taihu lake basin. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2010, 26(S1): 4-8.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4831.2010.z1.002
[16]	Spellerberg I F, Fedor P J.A tribute to Claude Shannon (1916-2001) and a plea for more rigorous use of species richness, species diversity and the 'Shannon-Wiener' Index. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2003, 12(3): 177-179.
[17]	谢蓉蓉, 逄勇, 张倩, 等. 嘉善地区水环境敏感点水质影响权重分析及风险等级判定. 环境科学, 2012, 33(7): 2244-2250.
	[Xie Rongrong, Pang Yong, Zhang Qian, et al.Weight parameters of water quality impact and risk grade determination of water environmental sensitive spots in Jiashan. Environmental Science, 2012, 33(7): 2244-2250.]
[18]	张家其, 吴宜进, 葛咏, 等. 基于灰色关联模型的贫困地区生态安全综合评价.地理研究, 2014, 33(8): 1457-1466. doi: 10.11821/dlyj201408006
	[Zhang Jiaqi, Wu Yijin, Ge Yong, et al.Eco-security assessments of poor areas based on gray correlation model: A case study in Enshi. Geographical Research, 2014, 33(8): 1457-1466.] doi: 10.11821/dlyj201408006
[19]	许文杰, 曹升乐. 基于PSR-熵权综合健康指数法的城市湖泊生态系统健康评价. 水文, 2010, 30(5): 64-68. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-0852.2010.05.015
	[Xu Wenjie, Cao Shengle.Health assessment of urban lake ecosystem based on PSR-entropy weight comprehensive health index method. Journal of China Hydrology, 2010, 30(5): 64-68.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-0852.2010.05.015
[20]	孟周济, 张西宁. 基于模糊层次分析法的房地产投资决策研究. 企业科技与发展, 2011, (22): 67-69. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-0688.2011.22.024
	[Meng Zhouji, Zhang Xining.Research on real estate investment decision-making based on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Enterprise Science and Technology & Development, 2011, (22): 67-69.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-0688.2011.22.024
[21]	李强, 杨莲芳, 吴璟, 等. 底栖动物完整性指数评价西苕溪溪流健康. 环境科学, 2007, 28(9): 2141-2147. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0250-3301.2007.09.044
	[Li Qiang, Yang Lianfang, Wu Jing, et al.Stream health assessment using a benthic-index of biotic integrity in Xitiaoxi stream, Zhejiang province, China. Environmental Science, 2007, 28(9): 2141-2147.] doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0250-3301.2007.09.044
[22]	韩鸣花. 浙江西苕溪流域城镇溪流大型底栖无脊椎动物多样性研究. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2011.
	[Han Minghua.Benthic macroinvertebratre diversity of urban streams in Xitiaoxi watershed, Anji county, ZheJiang province, China. Nanjing: Nanjing Agricultural University, 2011.]
[23]	黄亮亮, 李建华, 邹丽敏. 东苕溪中下游河岸类型对鱼类多样性的影响.生态学报, 2011, 31(12): 3415-3423.
	[Huang Liangliang, Li Jianhua, Zhou Limin.Effect of bank type on fish biodiversity in the middle-lower reaches of East Tiaoxi River. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(12): 3415-3423.]

一级指标	二级指标	三级指标	等级
一级指标	二级指标	三级指标	高风险	中风险	低风险	极低风险
风险源体（S）	点源（S1）	主导行业（S11）	石油加工、炼焦和核燃料加工业,化学原料和化学制品制造业,医药制造业。	纺织业,造纸及纸制品业,金属冶炼及压延加工业、金属表面处理及热处理加工,皮革、毛皮、羽毛及其制品和制鞋业,橡胶和塑料制品业,化学纤维制品业。	设备制造业,交通运输、仓储和邮政业,建筑业,采矿业。	其他
		污水排放量（m³/d）（S12）	≥2000	≥1000	≥200	≥0
		污水水质复杂程度（S13）	复杂	中等	简单	不排放
		主导行业工艺水平（S14）	国内落后	国内平均	国内先进	国际先进
	面源（S2）	氮肥施用强度（kg/hm²）（S21）	>364	>225	>120	≥0
		磷肥施用强度（kg/hm²）（S22）	>104	>46	>10	≥0
		畜禽养殖数量（折算成猪,头）（S23）	≥6000	≥3000	≥1200	≥0
		生活污水接管率(%)（S24）	≤70	≤80	≤90	≤100
风险受体（A）	控制断面水环境（A1）	断面控制类别（A11）	国控	省控	市控	县控及以下
		COD（A12）	>40	>30	>20	≥0
		NH₄-N（A13）	>2.0	>1.5	>1.0	≥0
		TN（A14）	>2.0	>1.5	>1.0	≥0
		TP（A15）	>0.4	>0.3	>0.2	≥0
		功能区划目标水质（A16）	Ⅰ、Ⅱ	Ⅲ	Ⅳ	Ⅴ
		流量(m³/s)（A17）	≤5	≤15	≤150	>150
	区域水生态（A2）	鱼类多样性指数（A21）	≤0.4	≤0.6	≤0.8	>0.8
	区域水生态（A2）	底栖动物多样性指数（A22）	≤2	≤3	≤4	>4
风险响应（R）	政府公众响应（R1）	应急响应能力（R11）	无	低	中	高
		政策法规贯彻力度（R12）	极低	低	中	高
		公共环保意识（R13）	无	低	中	高

项目	综合评价值
项目	x_min<ESI≤x_min+0.25△	x_min+0.25△<ESI≤x_min+0.5△	x_min+0.5△<ESI≤x_min+0.75△	x_min+0.75△<ESI≤x_max
风险等级	极低风险	低风险	中风险	高风险

评价指标A和 B的相对权重	定义	说明
0.5	同等重要	a_i,a_j对目标具有同样的贡献
0.6	稍微重要	a_i比a_j稍微重要
0.7	明显重要	a_i比a_j重要
0.8	重要的多	a_i比a_j明显重要
0.9	极端重要	a_i比a_j非常重要
0.1,0.2,0.3,0.4	反比较	r_ji=1-r_ij

B2	高风险	中风险	低风险	极低风险
B21	364	225	120	0
B22	104	46	10	0
B23	6000	3000	1200	0
B24	70	80	90	100
B2	高风险	中风险	低风险	极低风险
B21	0	0.382	0.670	1
B22	0	0.558	0.904	1
B23	0	0.5	0.8	1
B24	0	0.333	0.667	1
B1	B11	B12	B13	B14
B11	0.5	0.1	0.3	0.3
B12	0.9	0.5	0.7	0.7
B13	0.7	0.3	0.5	0.5
B14	0.7	0.3	0.5	0.5
B1	B11	B12	B13	B14
B11	0.5	0.3	0.4	0.4
B12	0.7	0.5	0.6	0.6
B13	0.6	0.4	0.5	0.5
B14	0.6	0.4	0.5	0.5

一级指标	一级权重	二级指标	二级权重	三级指标	三级权重
风险源体（S）	0.35	点源（S1）	0.55	主导行业（S11）	0.183
				污水排放量（m³/d）（S12）	0.317
				污水水质复杂程度（S13）	0.250
				主导行业工艺水平（S14）	0.250
		面源（S2）	0.45	氮肥施用强度（kg/hm²）（S21）	0.249
				磷肥施用强度（kg/hm²）（S22）	0.251
				畜禽养殖数量（折算成猪,头）（S23）	0.249
				生活污水接管率（%）（S24）	0.251
风险受体（A）	0.4	控制断面水环境（A1）	0.6	断面控制类别（A11）	0.141
				COD（A12）	0.142
				NH₄-N（A13）	0.142
				TN（A14）	0.142
				TP（A15）	0.142
				功能区划目标水质（A16）	0.141
				流量(m³/s)（A17）	0.150
		区域水生态（A2）	0.4	鱼类多样性指数（A21）	0.500
		区域水生态（A2）	0.4	底栖动物多样性指数（A22）	0.500
风险响应（R）	0.25	响应（R1）	1	应急响应能力（R11）	0.483
				政策法规贯彻力度（R12）	0.283
				公共环保意识（R13））	0.234