EN中文

地理研究 >

2017 , Vol. 36 >Issue 3: 407 - 419

DOI: https://doi.org/10.11821/dlyj201703001

观点与争鸣

区域生态安全格局构建研究进展与展望

  • 彭建 , 1, 2 ,
  • 赵会娟 2 ,
  • 刘焱序 1 ,
  • 吴健生 1, 2
展开
  • 1. 北京大学城市与环境学院,地表过程分析与模拟教育部重点实验室,北京 100871
  • 2. 北京大学深圳研究生院城市规划与设计学院,城市人居环境科学与技术重点实验室,深圳 518055

作者简介：彭建（1976- ）,男,四川彭州人,博士,副教授,研究方向为综合自然地理学、景观生态与土地利用、生态系统综合评估。E-mail:

收稿日期: 2016-06-21

  要求修回日期: 2016-10-24

  网络出版日期: 2017-03-20

基金资助

国家自然科学基金项目（41271195）

1999年,美国保护基金会和农业部林务局

收起

Research progress and prospect on regional ecological security pattern construction

  • PENG Jian , 1, 2 ,
  • ZHAO Huijuan 2 ,
  • LIU Yanxu 1 ,
  • WU Jiansheng 1, 2
Expand
  • 1. Laboratory for Earth Surface Processes, Ministry of Education, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
  • 2. Key Laboratory for Environmental and Urban Sciences, School of Urban Planning and Design, Shenzhen Graduate School, Peking University, Shenzhen 518055, Guangdong, China

Received date: 2016-06-21

  Request revised date: 2016-10-24

  Online published: 2017-03-20

Copyright

《地理研究》编辑部
Fold

摘要

近年来,城市化的不断推进使得生态系统面临巨大压力甚至诱发生态灾难,而另一方面人类对于生态系统服务福祉的提升提出了新要求,因此经济发展和生态保护两者之间的矛盾不断激化。生态安全格局作为沟通生态系统服务和人类社会发展的桥梁,目前被视为区域生态安全保障和人类福祉提升的关键环节。在系统梳理生态安全格局与城市增长边界、生态网络、绿色基础设施和生态控制线等概念内涵异同的基础上,从热点区域、生态源地指标筛选、生态阻力面设置与修正、相关研究成果应用等方面阐释区域生态安全格局构建的近今研究进展,并指出当前研究的主要不足;同时提出了区域生态安全格局构建的重点方向,即生态安全格局构建的重要阈值设定、有效性评价、多尺度关联和生态过程耦合等四个方面。

关键词： 生态安全格局; 生态源地; 生态廊道; 阻力面; 研究进展与展望

本文引用格式

彭建 , 赵会娟 , 刘焱序 , 吴健生 . 区域生态安全格局构建研究进展与展望[J]. 地理研究, 2017 , 36(3) : 407 -419 . DOI: 10.11821/dlyj201703001

Abstract

In recent years, due to the continuous urbanization, natural ecosystems are under enormous pressure, even resulting in ecological catastrophes. Moreover, with the start of the New Urbanization and Ecological Civilization Construction work in China, the demand for improvement of ecosystem services to promote human well-being is increasing. Hence, there is an intensifying contradiction between economic development and ecological protection. Ecological security patterns (ESPs) as a bridge linking ecosystem services and human society, has become one of the effective ways of constructing the protective barriers for terrestrial ecosystems. The ESPs construction directly affects the balance between social development and ecological conservation, and thus it has become the key to solving ecological problems and improving human well-being. To improve and enrich the theory of ESPs, we systematically combed the similarities and differences in the connotation of ESPs and other four main relevant concepts, namely urban growth boundary (UGB), ecological networks (EN), green infrastructure (GI), and ecological control lines (ECL). Furthermore, a research paradigm of regional ESPs construction was proposed based on literature review. According to this paradigm, research progresses on four main aspects were summarized systematically. These four aspects were research hotspots, ecological sources identification, ecological resistance surface setting, and practical application. Then the main deficiencies were indicated and summarized as follows: (1) The research objects selected in previous studies were mainly concentrated in the province, city and county levels, and were more confined to a specific administrative region, lacking larger-scale researches across administrative boundaries. (2) The selection of ecological index was mostly based on the intrinsic characteristics of ecological patches, less considering its relationship with surrounding objects and its status and functions in the whole pattern. And many studies ignored the coupling of human ecological demand and ecological processes. (3) The ecological resistance surface was assigned mainly based on land-use type, which covered up the difference between the internal space of the same land use type. The amended case studies based on impervious surface area and nighttime light were still insufficient to reveal the real situation. (4) Most of the provided policy recommendations for the protection and management of ESPs were broad and lack of the effective real-time monitoring and comparison to ecological security pattern. Based on the main disadvantage of regional ESPs construction in the current researches, we put forward four main directions for future research: setting important thresholds, evaluating the effectiveness of ESPs, constructing ESPs across multi-scales, and coupling the ESPs with ecological processes.

Key words： ecological security patterns; ecological source; ecological corridor; resistance surface; research progress and prospect

因应中国城市化特质,生态安全格局构建实质是一种被动适应的、底线式的宏观生态系统管理,当前面临重要阈值设定、有效性评价、多尺度关联和生态过程耦合等核心科学问题。

1 引言

快速的城市化进程已成为20世纪以来人类社会发展的最显著特征;在这个过程中伴随着高强度的土地开发与土地利用方式的快速转变,使原本脆弱的生态环境更趋恶化[1,2],直接影响区域景观格局与可持续发展[3-5],以及全球化背景下的经济竞争与国家安全[6]。随着对社会经济与生态环境问题的广泛关注,20世纪80年代初期生态安全开始成为国际生态系统研究的热点领域和人类社会可持续发展面临的新主题[7,8];90年代后期,生态安全主题也逐渐受到国内学者的高度重视,相关研究迅速展开[9]。生态安全理念旨在确保资源、环境和生态系统服务的安全、健康和可持续发展,通过强化有利的生态过程、控制有害的生态过程,寻求生态安全保障途径[10-12]。而通过何种途径实现这一目标,成为生态安全研究亟需解决的现实问题。景观生态学以格局与过程的相互作用作为其核心研究内容,为生态安全的保护与生态系统的有效管理提供了重要的空间途径;生态安全格局这一概念的提出,正适应了生态安全研究对生态过程进行合理调控的理论述求,也成为景观生态学空间格局—生态过程耦合理论指引实践的有效方式[13]。
生态安全格局理论依据格局与过程的互馈作用,通过构建区域生态安全格局,达到对生态过程的有效调控,从而保障生态功能的充分发挥,实现区域自然资源和绿色基础设施的有效合理配置,确保必要的自然资源的生态和物质福利,最终实现生态安全[9]。因而,生态安全格局目前已成为缓解生态保护与经济发展之间矛盾的重要空间途径之一[14,15],也是从末端生态治理走向前端生态管理的必然选择,为中国新常态下寻求更加契合区域发展需求的生态保护提供了有力支撑。但是,目前对生态安全格局构建研究尚缺乏系统梳理,对于重要阈值确定和阻力面设置等关键问题仍未形成有效的解决方案,且存在对其构建结果缺乏有效性评价和对多尺度、跨行政边界的生态安全格局构建研究、耦合生态过程的关联解析关注不足等问题,尤其缺乏对重点研究方向的凝练与明晰。因此,本文在系统梳理生态安全格局及其相关概念内涵异同的基础上,从热点区域、源地识别和阻力面设置以及相关研究成果应用等方面,重点阐释生态安全格局构建研究的近今进展,并基于当前研究存在的不足,指出未来研究中应当重点推进的方向,以期有效推动生态安全格局构建的理论研究及其在中国新型城镇化路径下的实践应用。

2 生态安全格局相关概念辨析

目前,国际上与生态安全格局（Ecological Security Pattern,ESP）内涵相似或相关的概念,主要有城市增长边界（Urban Growth Boundary,UGB）、生态网络（Ecological Network,EN）、绿色基础设施（Green Infrastructure,GI）和生态控制线（Ecological Control Line,ECL）等,本文对这些概念的内涵、起源、关注点和主要应用领域进行对比分析,便于更好地理解生态安全格局内涵（表1）。具体来看,UGB是在20世纪60-70年代美国的精明增长运动中,西方国家为防止城市蔓延而提出来的技术方案和管理手段[16,17]。EN于20世纪80年代在欧洲出现,是为了应对区域生态功能区面积增加和质量提高有限,但人类活动导致的景观破碎化和生境面积萎缩已成为威胁野生生物生存的全球性问题[18,19]。GI是20世纪90年代美国提出的与交通、桥梁等“灰色基础设施（Gray Infrastructure）”相对的国家自然生命保障系统[20]。ECL是指为了维持生态系统服务,禁止或者限制开发建设的区域生态保护范围界线,而生态红线是比生态控制线的保护力度更为严格、更为特殊的底线式生态系统保护界线。生态安全格局缘起于景观生态规划方法,明确的景观生态安全格局概念则提出于20世纪90年代,最初是基于格局与过程的相互作用机制和格局优化与干扰分析途径,综合集成地理信息系统、空间模拟及预案分析等技术方法,识别适应生物保护和生态恢复的区域发展空间。随着2011年《国务院关于加强环境保护重点工作的意见》（国发[2011]35号）的出台,重要生态安全空间的识别与保护已经提升为国家生态保护战略的核心组成[21,22]。
Tab. 1 Contrast between ecological security pattern and related concepts

表1 生态安全格局相关概念辨析

名称 概念内涵 起源 关注点 主要应用
UGB 阻止城市无序蔓延,划分城市和乡村的分界线 20世纪60-70年代,
精明增长运动		 城市边界及土地扩展与游憩 城市规划
EN 由生态节点、廊道、缓冲区及自然保护区等组成的网络状景观 20世纪80年代,欧洲 生物多样性与自然保护 生态规划
GI 由一系列生态要素组成的自然生命保障系统 1999年,美国保护基金会和农业部林务局 自然保育与生态系统服务支撑 城市规划
ESP 维持生态系统健康及可持续服务的关键空间点、线、面 20世纪90年代,中国 生态系统健康及服务的可持续性 生态规划
ECL 阻止建设用地扩展,保育生态 2005年,中国 可开发区与生态保育区 生态与城市规划
宽泛地讲,生态安全格局构建可以被视为对已存在的或者潜在的对于维护、控制特定地段某种生态过程有着重要意义的关键生态要素,如节点、斑块、廊道乃至整体网络的空间识别及其生境恢复与重建;通过区域生态安全格局的构建,可以达到对特定生态过程的有效调控,从而保障生态系统功能及服务的充分发挥。因此,生态安全格局与上述四个概念有着共同的生态保护目标,即保障区域生态系统服务的可持续供给,提升区域发展的人类福祉。对比来看,生态安全格局构建理念在国外多以GI和EN等形式出现,而UGB和ECL近年来在国内则逐渐成为研究热点。基于生态保护视角,可以狭义的认为UGB和ECL是生态安全格局的线状边界,同时UGB、GI和EN的概念、设计与实施也丰富了生态安全格局的理论和实践内涵。但上述概念之间仍存在一定差异,产生这种分异的原因,既与提出者的学科背景、关注点和拟解决问题的差异不无关联,也与不同国家和地区面临生态环境问题的特征及严峻性有着直接联系。在中国复杂而脆弱的生态环境基底条件下,规模巨大的、短时期内快速的城乡建设活动使脆弱的城市生态环境面临巨大的生态灾害风险,而突发的灾害一旦发生其恢复的可能性极小或代价极大。同时,随着新型城镇化和生态文明建设这一国家战略的稳步推进,人们对于自然生态和文化休闲的需求日益增强,生态安全格局构建其实质成为一种被动适应的、底线式的宏观生态系统管理。另一方面,在欧美国家,尽管生境破碎化、生态多样性丧失被视为社会—生态系统可持续发展面临的核心瓶颈,但其生态安全问题的严重性远不及中国,漫长的、渐进式城市化过程亦有助于生态环境问题的缓解与消纳,产生的生态后果仍在可控或可恢复范围内,因此重在城市发展过程中的生态恢复及可持续性能力提升,以满足人类生态需求、保障社会福祉,其核心生态系统管理理念强调人的主动调控和事前规避。
近年来,城市生态安全（Urban Ecological Security,UES）和弹性基础设施（Secure Urbanism and Resilient Infrastructure,SURI）等理念也引起了国际学者的关注,有学者提出将关键的基础设施建设融入到生态安全研究中来,优先保护对于人类社会发展和生态维持具有关键意义的城市区域[7],如Sutton-Grier等提出通过建设自然和人工混合的基础设施来增强海岸带生态系统的韧性[23];也有学者采用星球边界（Planetary Boundary,PB）的概念框架,基于调控地球系统运行的关键过程,识别决定人类社会发展和生存的、可恢复的安全土地空间[6]。在未来的研究中,实现这几个相关概念的有效衔接和相互补充,是生态安全格局理论深化和实践应用拓展的重要基础。随着全球化过程中国内外生态安全问题的趋同性和生态保护理念的相互渗透,不同国家、不同领域和不同关注点的生态安全格局相关概念在未来终会从交叉走向融合。

3 区域生态安全格局构建研究进展

综合来看,经过二十余年的发展,区域生态安全格局构建研究基于土地利用优化[24]、生态基础设施建设[20]、生态红线划定[15]等视角,经历了从最初的定性规划、定量格局分析,到近年逐步发展起来的空间数据演算、静态格局优化、动态格局模拟以及状态趋势分析等快速发展历程,其研究方法则主要涉及生态适宜性/敏感性分析、景观格局指数、情景分析、综合指标体系等。
当前,区域生态安全格局的构建模式仍在不断完善,指标与方法不一而足。但越来越多的研究采用“源地—廊道”的组合方式识别、构建生态安全格局,初步形成区域生态安全格局的构建范式,本文将其概括为以下三大基本步骤（图1）：① 源地的确定。将对区域生态过程与功能起决定作用的,以及对区域生态安全具有重要意义或者担负重要辐射功能的生境斑块,识别为确保区域生态安全的关键地块,即源地;而源地的选取方法,则主要包括定性的生态系统结构判定,以及定量的生境重要性、生态敏感性、景观连通性等准则。② 廊道的识别。生态廊道是指生态网络体系中对物质、能量与信息流动具有重要连通作用,尤其是为动物迁徙提供重要通道的带状区域。由于数据需求简单、运算效率高,并具有可视化的分析结果,最小累积阻力模型成为识别生态廊道的主要方法,阻力面设置则成为廊道准确识别的关键。③ 战略点的设置。阻力面在源地所处位置下陷,在最不容易到达的区域高峰突起,两峰之间会有低阻力的谷线、高阻力的脊线各自相连;而多条谷线的交汇点,以及单一谷线上的生态敏感区、脆弱区,则构成影响、控制区域生态安全的重要战略节点。将以上各种存在的、潜在的景观组分进行叠加组合,就形成特定安全水平下的生态安全格局。整体而言,生态源地的确定和生态廊道的识别是生态安全格局构建过程中两个核心环节,而战略点设置目前尚未受到足够关注。
Fig.1 Logical paradigm for constructing regional ecological security pattern

图1 区域生态安全格局构建逻辑范式

3.1 热点区域

生态安全格局构建研究的空间层次,主要包括全球、国家和区域等尺度,其中区域被视为生态安全格局研究的重点尺度;而按照研究对象的组织层次来划分,还可以包括个体、种群、群落和生态系统等不同层次的生态安全格局研究。自20世纪90年代提出以来,生态安全格局构建研究目前已经开展了不少个案研究。总体而言,这些研究涉及面较广、尺度跨度大。按照生态保护目标来看,具体涉及土地利用[24]、生物多样性保护[25]等研究对象;按照研究区域的空间范围大小,则涵盖景观[13]、区域[26]和国家[27]等不同尺度;按照研究区域的类型特征来看,涉及城市化区域[28,29]、农牧交错带[30]、干旱/半干旱 区[31]、风景名胜区[32]等多个社会—生态系统特征显著差异的区域。其中,城市作为人类活动最为密集和改变地表最为强烈的区域单元,生态安全问题尤为突出,其生态安全格局构建受到高度关注。
相对于大量针对人为活动剧烈区域的生态安全格局构建研究,目前以森林、草原等自然地域为对象的生物物种保护安全格局研究相对较少,水安全格局的研究近年来则逐渐引起重视[33]。同时,由于人类活动和自然干扰,黄土丘陵区、喀斯特地区等生态环境较为脆弱、全球变化响应敏感区域的景观整体格局相对较为破碎、稳定性及恢复力差,针对这些特色地域关键生态过程的生态安全格局构建研究仍有待继续深入。而从景观空间格局及其生态过程交互作用出发,分析区域生态安全状况,明确对于物种生境和环境可持续性具有重要意义的生态过程和重要斑块、廊道、节点,即明晰区域生态安全格局,将为这些区域的生物多样性保护、水土保持等特定景观服务及其可持续性管理提供重要决策支持。

3.2 源地识别指标筛选

生态安全格局构建是以最小面积的生态用地保护来满足城市与区域社会经济发展的生态需求,是区域社会经济功能和生态系统服务的权衡结果,能够更好地协调区域生态安全与社会经济发展之间的矛盾。目前,生态源地识别通常基于生物多样性丰富度及生态系统服务重要性的考虑,大致可以分为两种途径：① 直接识别,即选取自然保护区、风景名胜区的核心区等直接作为生态源地[34]。这一方法具有很高的便捷性,但也有其固有的缺陷。例如,自然保护区或风景名胜区的设立本身即有强烈的行政管制因素,且随着时间的推移其内部的空间差异逐渐增强,尤其是随着旅游业在自然保护区的迅速发展,局部地区已经出现明显的生态退化、景观破碎化和生态系统服务下降等现象。此外,也有学者选择土地利用类型长期稳定且面积较大的斑块,如林地、耕地等作为生态源地[35-37],但这一做法忽略了相同地类的内部差异。② 构建综合评价指标体系识别生态源地。指标体系的有效性是区域生态安全源地识别的核心问题之一,由于对生态安全内涵理解的不一致和区域面临生态安全问题的具体差异,不同研究方案所选取的指标大不相同。总体来讲,已有研究所采用的指标可分为生态敏感性[38,39]、景观连通性[40]、生境重要性[40]等维度,各类指标的适用性各有优劣。其中,生境重要性指标应用较为广泛,主要关注土壤保持、生物多样性保护、水源涵养和固碳释氧等具体生态系统服务。
从发展脉络来看,自生态安全格局构建研究开展以来,学者们对生态源地识别指标的筛选进行了重点完善,主要体现为从最初只考虑生态用地斑块自身功能属性[41],到逐步关注斑块自身属性的动态变化趋势[42],再到强调斑块在整个景观格局中的连通重要性等[43]。而具体研究中,通常选择某个视角或多个视角相结合的方法,来进行源地的定量识别。例如,李宗尧等[35]将生态系统敏感性、生态系统服务、生物多样性和水源地保护等指标结合起来构建生态安全格局;吴健生等[43]基于景观连通性分析、生物多样性服务评估和生境质量评估来提取生态源地斑块;陈昕等[40]基于生态系统服务重要性、生态敏感性及景观连通性识别生态源地。此外,由于城市景观具有高度的人类主导性[44],在城市发展需求胁迫下,城市地域生态用地普遍面临着面积缩小、人工化严重、异质性下降、生态系统服务退化等结构与功能问题。基于生态经济学视角,生态保护必须同时考虑“成本”与“效益”两方面因素;由于生态用地受人类活动干扰越强,功能退化风险越大,其保护成本相应增大;因此,对应于斑块保留的生态收益与投入成本,城市生态用地保留价值评估需要综合权衡不同生态用地斑块的功能重要性与功能退化风险。同时,生态安全格局的构建旨在提升生态系统服务水平、促进人类福祉的增益,因此源地的识别应当将满足人类需求作为首要目标,考虑其为人类提供有效服务的能力。

3.3 阻力面设置与修正

廊道是区域内能量和物质流动的载体,是保持生态流、生态过程、生态功能在区域内连通的关键生态组分;提取关键生态廊道,对于保障生态斑块之间的物质和能量流动的畅通,实现区域生态系统功能的完整性具有重要意义[45]。目前,已发展了多种生态廊道的定量识别方法,如最小累积阻力模型[46]、斑块重力模型[19]、综合评价指标体系[47]。其中,最小累积阻力模型能较好模拟景观对空间运动过程的阻碍作用,相比传统概念模型和数学模型能更好地表达景观格局和生态过程的相互作用关系,目前广泛应用于生态网络和生态安全格局构建[48,49]。该方法的关键在于生态阻力面的设定,已有研究大多基于土地覆被类型,依据专家咨询打分直接赋值。由于城市景观的高度破碎化与土地利用方式的多样性,以及土地利用与生态过程相互作用的复杂性[50],基于土地覆被类型的均一化赋值,必然会掩盖同一土地覆被类型下不同土地利用方式与强度对生态阻力系数的影响差异,难以真实反映生态阻力的空间分异。另一方面,对于不同地类的阻力值相对大小难以形成统一范式。例如,孔繁花等[51]认为对于物种迁移的阻力可以设置为道路1000~5000,水体10000,城市建设区50000;也有学者的阻力赋值为道路景观300、河流水域500、建设用地1000、绿地系统0.7~20[36];还有学者直接采用了不同地类阻力的相对大小,认为生态阻力值林地<灌草丛<水域和湿地<冰雪地<农田<城镇用地[34]。
囿于数据精度,城市土地覆被分类体系不可能无限细分,因此有必要选取能够定量表征不同空间单元生态阻力差异的指数,修正基于土地覆被类型赋值的生态阻力面。近年来,已有学者尝试引入不同的空间数据对不同土地覆被类型生态阻力系数进行修正,而不透水表面指数（Impervious Surface Index,ISA）和夜间灯光（Nighttime Light,NTL）数据为该问题的解决提供了很好的途径,能够有效提升廊道提取的准确性与合理性。通过计算单位面积内不透水表面地表所占的面积比例,不透水表面指数可以定量表征自然生态流在城市景观中的可流通性,与城市地表生态过程紧密相关,能够有效度量城市生态/建设格局[52];而夜间灯光数据能够基于栅格连续表征地表受人类干扰的空间分布特征,是城市化水平、经济状况、人口密度等人类活动强度的综合表达,体现同一用地类型内部受人类影响水平的差异[53]。因此,应用不透水表面比例和夜间灯光数据修正传统基于土地覆被类型赋值的生态阻力面,将是未来关键生态廊道识别中生态阻力面设置的重要趋向。

3.4 相关研究成果应用

目前,基于生态安全格局构建方法的研究成果已大量涌现,但在中国多以生态网络、主体功能区、生态功能区和相关生态规划等形式出现,其实质是整合生态系统服务的生态空间异质性识别与管治。这些研究成果在中国的空间管制和区域主体功能识别与保护中发挥着重要作用,为国土生态管理提供战略决策支撑。例如,贾良清等在生态系统类型、生态敏感性和生态系统服务重要性等指标的基础上提出安徽省生态功能区划方案[54],燕乃玲等考虑了水源涵养等7项生态系统服务将长江源区划分为五个一级生态功能区[55],樊杰主持编制的主体功能区规划通过对可利用土地、环境容量等10项指标的适宜性评价形成中国首部主体功能区划方案[56]。对比分析可以发现,这些研究其方法的实质均是基于生态敏感性、生态重要性指标体系对区域生态“源地”的空间识别和保护规划。此外,也有学者将生态安全格局的构建方法应用在城市增长边界和生态红线划定中,如周锐等以4种单一生态过程的生态安全格局为城镇增长的阻力因子划定城市增长边界,是对综合生态安全格局构建方法在城市增长边界中的直接应用[57]。还有学者尝试基于单一要素的生态功能分区[58],其实质也是针对单一要素生态安全格局的分级分类保护体系。
但目前的生态功能区划研究,大多基于生态环境现状及敏感性、重要性指标,对于景观空间格局考虑不足,强调空间异质性而非保护的重要性或优先性。对于廊道这一对于区域物质、能量和信息输送及区际连通性具有重要意义的关键要素没有纳入考量体系。此外,功能区划与相关生态环境保护规划分别出自不同部门,各有不同的制度框架和内涵特征,彼此之间的政策和权能边界尚不清晰,对于生态保护实践的指导作用有限。因此,在未来的研究中,应有效借鉴和运用生态安全格局概念及其构建理论与方法,形成以生态安全格局构建为主导的生态功能区划体系,从而实现由主体功能区划、生态功能区划和空间管制区划向综合国土（生态）安全格局区划的转变,构建统一的城乡生态安全格局空间管治框架。
通过上述从热点区域、源地识别、阻力面设置以及相关研究成果应用等方面对区域生态安全格局构建研究进展的梳理,可以发现：① 从生态安全格局构建对象的类型选择来看,主要集中在省域、市域和县域等区域,且已有研究中研究区多囿于特定的行政边界,缺乏城市群以及更大范围的跨尺度、跨行政边界研究;② 评价指标的选取,已有研究大多仅考虑评价对象本身的特性,较少考虑与周边地域的关系和在整个区域中所处的地位和承担的功能,忽略了生态过程的耦合关联以及生态用地与人类福祉的相互关系,极少从人类生态需求角度去衡量生态用地的重要性;③ 从生态阻力面的设定来看,主要基于土地利用类型进行均一化赋值,掩盖了相同土地利用类型下的内部空间差异,基于不透水表面指数和夜间灯光数据的修正案例仍较少;④ 从相关研究成果应用来看,中国目前的主体功能区划、生态功能区划与生态安全格局构建的思路较为相似,相互交叉融合,均强调生态空间的异质性识别。但现有研究成果对于景观连通性和廊道识别考虑不足,且存在政策和权能边界不明等问题,对生态保护实践指引有限。

4 区域生态安全格局构建研究展望

城市扩展和剧烈的人类活动快速且高强度地改变着地表景观的结构与功能,造成经济发展与生态保护的矛盾日益激化,而区域生态安全格局的构建可以有效地保护重要生态斑块,是目前陆地生态安全屏障建设的有效途径之一,得到了公众与学界的普遍关注。目前,中国区域生态安全格局构建研究工作虽已大量开展,但对于某些问题或亟需高度关注,或尚未形成有效的解决方案,在未来的工作中仍需重点推进（图2）：重要阈值的确定在源地识别、廊道宽度设定和保护区划分等各个环节都高度制约研究结果的有效性,是区域生态安全格局构建的基础要点;尽管生态安全格局构建难以通过可控实验的途径对照完成,有效性评价仍是生态安全格局构建的关键环节,应引起高度关注;基于多尺度、跨行政边界的生态安全格局构建对于解决多层级的生态安全问题具有重要意义,应作为生态安全格局构建研究的核心内容重点探讨;而深入解析生态过程之间的耦合关联,实现山水林田湖生命综合体一体化管理,是生态安全格局构建的重点突破方向。
Fig.2 Research framework for regional ecological security pattern construction

图2 区域生态安全格局构建研究框架

4.1 区域生态安全格局构建重要阈值设定

区域生态安全格局强调在自然过程/生物过程及人文过程等多过程中存在一系列不同层次的阈值,以此为依据确定维护生态过程的关键组分及其构成,并对其进行空间上的格局优化与类型组合,能够保障自然生态过程的可持续发展[59]。确定生态安全的标准,即评价指标的阈值,不仅对生态安全格局构建本身极其重要,而且直接关涉生态安全研究,是生态安全格局构建研究的基础要点。但是,生态安全标准究其实质是一个人类标准,评判某个状态是否安全在很大程度上取决于相关社会群体的人类福祉期望。面向同一生态系统,由于人类期望值的差异,其生态安全评估的结果也会迥然不同;同时,由于人类的主观期望是动态变化的,安全更是一个时间维度上的相对概念,绝对的安全标准是不存在的。因此,在相关研究中,不仅要关注重要指标和过程的阈值,还要探讨生态安全格局构建中阈值的时间动态变化与空间分异,增加对时空动态演变规律的认知与把握。
人类活动维持和生态系统服务保持“双赢”的景观优化方案是当前景观生态规划长期努力的目标[60,61],权衡利弊以获取整体最优一直以来都是可持续性战略的基本指导思想。因此,城市最小生态用地需求测算或生态源地识别及其阈值确定,其实质是对生态用地保护和建设用地扩张,以及城市社会经济功能和生态系统服务之间的权衡。目前,生态安全格局阈值设定仍未形成统一范式,基本为主观判断的结果,对生态安全的指示意义并不明确。例如,廊道是具有一定宽度的现状景观类型,一般认为生态廊道越宽越好;但在土地资源高度紧缺的城市化地区,城市生态廊道宽度的确定既要考虑生态效益的充分发挥,又要兼顾经济发展的需求,因此设置合理的城市生态廊道宽度就显得尤为重要[62]。但是,目前对于其宽度的阈值设定及其指标选取、方法等方面仍未形成共识[63,64]。此外,生态安全格局分区管控是对生态风险进行有效控制的策略之一,其分区比例的设置是影响当地政府和保护者能否以最小的财力投入而收益最大化地保护生态斑块的直接因素,这一关键阈值如何准确设定在未来的研究中亟需关注。

4.2 区域生态安全格局构建有效性评价

当前大多数已有研究多依据不同的标准、不同的生态保护目标或者不同的安全格局水平,构建相应的生态安全格局,但对所构建生态安全格局的有效性或合理性缺少评价,尤其是定量评价极为少见。一方面,是由于该问题尚未引起学者们的足够重视;另一方面,也与动态监测进而定量化评价的代价大、风险高、时间长等困难有着密切关系。但是,在设计方案实施后,动态监测、评价方案的实施效果,对照初始目标差异,反馈调整设计方案,是可持续的生态安全格局构建的基本途径。因此,有效性评价是区域生态安全格局构建研究的关键环节,应引起广泛重视。
目前,已有研究大多将已构建的区域生态安全格局与现有的用地方式及区域发展需求对比,定性地评价已构建格局的优劣;不过,也有学者开始探索生态安全格局构建有效性的定量化评价方法。例如,俞孔坚等[28]将“无、低、中、高”等不同生态安全水平下的土地利用方式作为城市空间发展的预案,对比不同水平生态安全格局下生态保护、农业生产、城市增长等多目标实现的可能性和程度;李阳菊等[65]则以景观格局指数作为生态安全格局构建优劣评价的定量依据。在未来的研究中,采用动态的监测方法实时评估生态安全格局构建的有效性、发展定量的评估方法,是重要的目标指向。此外,采用成果对比法,将生态安全格局构建结果与生态控制线、绿色基础设施等研究成果对比,从数量和质量的双重角度评估不同构建方法和不同保护策略下的实施效果异同,也是生态安全格局构建有效性评价的可能途径之一,同时也有助于实现不同生态保护理念和途径的有效衔接。

4.3 区域生态安全格局构建多尺度关联

为生态环境保护提供理论依据和决策支持是生态安全格局构建的重要实践意义之所在。以行政区作为分析单元、对象,不仅在数据获取方面有很大的便利性,也有利于决策者针对不同行政区的生态安全问题制定针对性政策,更有利于获得生态保护的地方财政支持。因此,目前已有生态安全格局构建多以行政区界线为分析边界。但是,生态安全问题的产生和发展并不完全受行政边界制约,自然地理基底的空间连续性、生态系统服务与环境污染的空间流动性,都决定了特定行政区生态安全格局的构建需要考虑更大自然地域空间范围内相关因素的影响。同时,区域生态安全问题存在于一个多要素的复杂耦合系统中,其应对与解决也理应是在一个跨尺度、多等级的系统中,因此生态安全格局的构建不能仅仅局限于一定的空间尺度,在景观等小尺度和生态功能区、城市群等大尺度的生态安全格局分析更有助于对区域生态安全问题的微观细节认知和宏观背景把握,多尺度关联由此成为生态安全格局构建的核心内容。
随着中国城市群的不断发育及其对区域社会经济发展和生态环境保护的支撑作用越来越显著,城市群作为未来城镇化的主体形态,其快速发展背后的资源环境效应也引起了人们的高度关注,因此城市群将成为生态安全格局构建的重点尺度。但是,生态环境问题的存在并不以一定的行政边界为界线,城市群也只是生态安全问题存在的空间载体之一,如同生态功能区、国土与地区、大洲范围的生态安全格局构建一样,需要突破行政边界的制约。目前,中国已经开展了国土尺度的生态安全格局构建工作,保障了国土空间关键生态系统运行、维持了重要生态要素和过程。而随着区域合作和国际交流的不断深入,以及“一带一路”战略的实施,跨地区、国家的生态安全战略合作将为全球生态环境问题的解决提供良好契机。

4.4 基于生态过程耦合的区域生态安全格局构建

景观格局与生态过程的耦合是景观生态学研究的核心内容,而区域生态安全格局构建其实质就是依循格局与功能的互馈,通过特定空间斑块、廊道的景观结构保护,来实现特定或综合生态功能/过程的保育。但在区域综合生态安全格局的构建过程中,单一生态过程机理解析及多过程耦合方法的不同,将对区域生态安全格局构建的最终结果有着直接影响。目前,已有基于重要生态过程的生态安全格局构建多采用权重法进行不同生态过程的耦合,将生态用地斑块在不同生态过程准则下的重要性得分按照不同的权重来综合叠置。也就是说,在区域生态安全格局构建中,假定不同生态过程之间相互兼容,彼此之间不存在协同或权衡关系。但事实上,不同生态过程之间存在密切的相互作用、相互影响,其与整体生态功能的耦合关联可能大相迥异。因此,有必要深入解析不同生态过程的耦合关联,构建面向山水林田湖生命共同体一体化管理的区域生态安全格局。
在未来的研究中,有必要在深入解析多种生态过程耦合机制的同时,采用多元数据融合和多学科、跨学科整合的方式,寻找更契合生态安全格局构建的耦合途径;将不同生态过程和生态要素当作一个生命共同体,强调生命共同体的相互作用和影响。同时,关注不同群体的利益诉求,开展长期的统一计划、行动和管理,做到整体保护、系统修复、综合治理,切实构建区域生态安全的空间保障。

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

参考文献

原文顺序 | 文献年度倒序 | 文中引用次数倒序
[1]
Naveh Z.From biodiversity to ecodiversity: A landscape-ecology approach to conservation and restoration. Restoration Ecology, 1994, 2(3): 180-189.Abstract An environmental revolution is urgently needed that will lead to a post-industrial symbiosis between man and nature. This can be realized only if the present unrestrained biological impoverishment and neotechnological landscape degradation are replaced by the creation of healthy and attractive landscapes. Restorationists can fulfill a vital role in this process. They must broaden their scales from biodiversity restoration in small, protected nature islands to the large-scale restoration of natural and cultural landscapes. To achieve this they must restore not only the patterns of vegetation but also the processes that create these patterns, including human land uses. Their goal should be to restore the total biological, ecological, and cultural landscape diversity, or codiversity,- and its intrinsic and instrumental values of highly valuable, endangered seminatural, agricultural and rural landscapes. For this purpose it is essential to maintain and restore the dynamic flow equilibrium between biodiversity, ecological, and cultural landscape heterogeneity, as influenced by human land uses, which occur at different spatial and temporal scales and intensities. Recent advances in landscape ecology should be utilized for broader assessment of ecodiversity, including proposed indices of ecodiversity, new techniques such as Intelligent Geographical Information Systems (IGIS), and Green Books for the holistic conservation and restoration of valuable endangered landscapes. Restoration ecology can make an important contribution to an urgently needed environmental revolution. This revolution should lead to a new symbiosis between man and nature by broadening the goal of vegetation restoration to ecological and cultural landscape restoration, and thereby to total landscape ecodiversity.

DOI

[2]
蒋艳灵, 刘春腊, 周长青, 等. 中国生态城市理论研究现状与实践问题思考. 地理研究, 2015, 34(12): 2222-2237.回溯中国生态城市研究的缘起,利用历史分析、文献检索等方法,分析中国生态城市研究的主要领域、发展过程及其影响因素等问题,探讨城市生态理论研究、城市化率、国家宏观环境政策等对生态城市研究与建设实践的影响效果,在系统梳理1989年以来国家宏观环境政策的基础上总结中国生态城市建设实践的基本特征,并指出了中国生态城市建设中存在的主要问题。结果表明:1北京、天津、上海、江苏等省份是中国生态城市研究力量分布的核心地区,研究者以高级职称者居多;2从论文成果看,中国生态城市研究获得资助的类型以国家级科学基金项目和省部级项目为主,研究成果以工程技术(自科)、行业指导(社科)为主;实践中,包括地方政府在内的其他项目也对生态城市给予了很大关注;3生态城市建设、生态城市规划设计、生态城市与可持续发展、生态城市与生态环境等是研究热点领域中的重点;4对中国生态城市研究具有极大引导与促进作用的主要有城市化率、生态城市发展、国家生态环境管理水平、宏观管理政策导向等因素;5认识水平的深化、注重环境要素建设、住居与生产功能的综合、城市与区域协调、从定性到定量评估等是中国生态城市建设实践的五大基本特征;6中国生态城市建设中的问题主要存在于发展定位、区域环境影响、主体功能区划、规划与管理等四个方面。

DOI

[Jiang Yanling, Liu Chunla, Zhou Changqing, et al.Overview of theoretical research and practical considerations on eco-cities of China. Geographical Research, 2015, 34(12): 2222-2237.]

[3]
侯鹏, 王桥, 申文明, 等. 生态系统综合评估研究进展:内涵、框架与挑战. 地理研究, 2015, 34(10): 1809-1823.自然生态系统中的所有生物和非生物都具有双重属性,既是生态系统 不可或缺的组成部分,也是人类社会可持续发展的基础资源.客观准确地评估生态系统状况,不仅是生态系统生态学所面临的一个科学问题,更是人类可持续发展所 面临的一个生态系统综合管理问题.如何客观全面地评估生态系统现状、变化和趋势,是生态学领域研究的热点和难点之一,成为关系着人类社会可持续发展的关键 性命题之一.根据当前国内外研究主要成果,从生态系统综合评估的概念和内涵、框架模式和主要内容、发展趋势和挑战等三个方面,梳理和分析了生态系统综合评 估的研究进展.基于"社会—经济—自然"复合生态系统角度和社会与生态系统的互动过程,综述了生态系统管理、生态系统服务、生态资产等概念和内涵,讨论和 梳理了三者之间的关系.对相关国际组织和政府实施的全球、区域、国家等不同尺度的生态系统综合评估,分析归纳为"生态压力—政策响应"、"生态系统服务— 人类福祉"、"服务价值—自然益惠"、"综合状况—变化趋势"等四种评估框架模式.但是,面对多元、综合、复杂、开放的生态系统,基于生态系统与人类社会 交互关系的评估框架及相关理论研究、生态系统综合评估指标和方法体系构建、观测技术方法集成和数据同化、时空尺度选择和确定的协同等科学问题,将会成为今 后生态系统综合评估发展趋势和挑战.

DOI

[Hou Peng, Wang Qiao, Shen Wenming, et al.Progress of integrated ecosystem assessment: Concept, framework and challenges. Geographical Research, 2015, 34(10): 1809-1823.]

[4]
Li Y F, Sun X, Zhu X D, et al.An early warning method of landscape ecological security in rapid urbanizing coastal areas and its application in Xiamen, China. Ecological Modeling, 2010, 221(19): 2251-2260.Based on the Pressure-State-Response (P-S-R) approach, an index system for landscape ecological security (LES) was suggested using three dimensions, six factors, and three weights. The indicators in the system were divided into two groups: spatial interpolation (acquired by the remote sensing data) and non-spatial interpolation (acquired by consultation with experts). According to data of 2003 and 2006, coupled with current tendencies, the early warning method was classified into four categories: security and degradation, sub-security and slow degradation, sub-security and rapid degradation, and insecurity. Our research with early warning method finds three interesting phenomena: (1) mean value of LES in 2003 was 0.586, indicating medium security; while in 2006 it was 0.650, an upper medium security. The LES level within each districts of Xiamen in 2006 was better than the level in 2003. In terms of LES, the comprehensive condition within each district of Xiamen in 2006 was enhanced compared with 2003. Overall, there was improvement in 80.5% of areas from 2003 to 2006, showing promising signs of positive development. (2) The LES of Xiang'an District and Jimei District were in stages of high early warning given that the percentage of land in these districts that showed symptoms of insecurity and degradation was 41.03 and 34.89%, respectively. (3) On the whole, the areas that showed notable signs of insecurity and rapid landscape, and which can already be identified as early warning areas requiring immediate attention, correspond closely with the distribution of coastal industrial parks in these regions. In conclusion, the consequences of rapid industrialization and urbanization are far reaching and affect local and regional ecological security.

DOI

[5]
Su S L, Li D, Yu X, et al.Assessing land ecological security in Shanghai (China) based on catastrophe theory. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 2011, 25(6): 737-746.Given the important role of land ecosystem in social-economic progress at regional, national, and international scale and concurrent degradation of land ecosystems under rapid urbanization, a systematic diagnosis of land ecological security (eco-security) for sustainable development is needed. A catastrophe model for land ecological security assessment was developed in order to overcome the disadvantages in subjectivity and complexity of the currently used assessment methods. The catastrophe assessment index system was divided into hierarchical sub-systems under the pressure-state-response framework. The catastrophe model integrated multiple assessment indices of land eco-security according to the inherent contradictions and relative importance of indices without calculating weights. Specifically, membership degree of higher level index was calculated based on the membership degrees of lower level indices that were subjective to suitable model, such as cusp, fold, swallowtail and butterfly model. This model was applied to evaluate the state of land eco-security in Shanghai. Mannendall test was utilized to characterize its temporal trend between 1999 and 2008. Significant downward trend was identified for land eco-security, in terms of pressure sub-index, state sub-index, response sub-index and synthetic index. All these implied that land ecosystem conditions were not optimistic for Shanghai and such situation should draw the attention of policy makers. The calculation procedure presented in this paper does not require a high level of technical expertise to determine the membership degree, making it simple and operational. Being applicable to similar land ecosystems, the catastrophe model is thus believed to provide an alternative approach to land eco-security assessment.

DOI

[6]
Hodson M, Marvin S.'Urban ecological security': A new urban paradigm?. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2009, 33(1): 193-215.Abstract The term 'ecological security' is usually used in relation to attempts to safeguard flows of ecological resources, infrastructure and services at the national scale. But increasing concerns over 'urban ecological security' (UES) are now giving rise to strategies to reconfigure cities and their infrastructures in ways that help to secure their ecological and material reproduction. Yet cities have differing capacities and capabilities for developing strategic responses to the opportunities and constraints of key UES concerns. These include resource constraints and climate change, and consequently these newly emerging strategies may selectively privilege particular urban areas and particular social interests over others. In this article, we focus on world cities and outline the challenges posed by the growing concern for UES. We review the emerging responses that may increasingly form a new dominant 'logic' of infrastructure provision, which we characterize as Secure Urbanism and Resilient Infrastructure (SURI). We conclude by addressing the extent to which this new dominant 'logic' underpins a new strategy of accumulation or more 'progressive' politics by outlining alternatives to SURI, possibilities for shaping SURI more 'progressively' and developing an agenda for future research. Copyright (c) 2009 The Authors. Journal Compilation(c) 2009 Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

DOI

[7]
Steffen W, Richardson K, Rockström J, et al.Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 2015, 347(6223): 1259855.ABSTRACT The planetary boundaries framework defines a safe operating space for humanity based on the intrinsic biophysical processes that regulate the stability of the Earth System. Here, we revise and update the planetary boundaries framework, with a focus on the underpinning biophysical science, based on targeted input from expert research communities and on more general scientific advances over the past 5 years. Several of the boundaries now have a two-tier approach, reflecting the importance of cross-scale interactions and the regional-level heterogeneity of the processes that underpin the boundaries. Two core boundaries—climate change and biosphere integrity—have been identified, each of which has the potential on its own to drive the Earth System into a new state should they be substantially and persistently transgressed.

DOI PMID

[8]
Wu J G.Urban ecology and sustainability: The state-of-the-science and future directions. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2014, 125(2): 209-221.School of Life Sciences & Global Institute of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-4501, ETATS-UNIS

DOI

[9]
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.生态安全是21世纪人类社会可持续发展所面临的一个新主题。本文归纳了学术界对生态安全概念的各种理解和认识，并将生态安全内涵概括为：（1）生态系统自身的健康、完整和可持续性，（2）生态系统对人类提供完善的生态服务。简述了生态安全的研究内容，提出了生态安全研究框架。综述10年来生态安全方面的研究进展，概括出生态安全研究十几年来的3个基本理论：①生态系统健康与环境风险评价理论;②环境（生态）安全的国家利益理论;③生态权利理论及其法律实践，以及生态安全研究所采用的几种主要技术方法，最后提出了生态安全研究展望。

DOI

[Chen Xing, Zhou Chenghu.Review of the studies on ecological security. Progress in Geography, 2005, 24(6): 8-20.]

[10]
Dabelko G D, Dabelko D D.Environmental security: Issues of conflict and redefinition. Environmental Change and Security Project Report, 1995, 1(1): 3-13.This paper reviews the current arguments in North American debates about the notion of "environmental security" as an alternative to the military paradigm for recognizing and addressing security threats. First the paper explains that the traditional definition of security focuses on military challenges and ignores the impact of macroeconomics or the environment but that a heightened ecological awareness has helped prioritize environmental concerns as security issues. Next the paper reviews arguments for considering the environment as a security issue that call for moving beyond a strictly statist conception of security or highlight the competitive relationship between humans and nature or locate causes of conflict in environmental stress. The paper continues by presenting the arguments against considering the environment as a security issue. These arguments promote retention of a military-based definition of security and charge that environmental security engages mismatched institutions is an inappropriate label is a bureaucratic tactic or is not likely to cause interstate war. After pointing out that the debate between those who would redefine security to incorporate environmental issues and the skeptics largely hinges on differences about how to achieve the same environmental goals the paper ends by identifying 1) critical unresolved issues such as whether a concept of environmental security is necessary for linking environmental degradation or resource scarcity to conflict or whether a theory of conflict can include environmental stress as a precipitating vehicle without incorporating a concept of environmental security and 2) research needs.

[11]
傅伯杰. 我国生态系统研究的发展趋势与优先领域. 地理研究, 2010, 29(3): 383-396.进入21世纪以来,生态系统研究取得了重要进展,在国际上形成了一系列的研究热点,包括生物多样性与生态系统功能、生态系统管理、生态风险与生态安全、全球变化的生态响应与效应等,表现出向着机理深化、多尺度系统监测与模拟、社会经济自然综合评价与管理对策等多维方向发展的总体趋势。中国的资源环境问题已经成为经济社会发展所面临的重要挑战。为应对挑战,我国已经开展了大规模生态保护、生态恢复重建等方面的生态工程,从而对生态系统研究提出了一系列亟待解决的科学问题。在综合分析中国国情和国际学术研究前沿领域与发展趋势的基础上,本文提出了我国未来生态系统研究的优先领域和重点方向。

DOI

[Fu Bojie.Trends and priority areas in ecosystem research of China. Geographical Research, 2010, 29(3): 383-396.]

[12]
Liu D, Chang Q.Ecological security research progress in China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2015, 35(5): 111-121.In the last two decades, China has experienced extensive economic development and urbanization. The consequential loss and degradation of natural resources and resulting environment pollution may adversely affect human health. As global changes ensue, ecological security becomes one hotspot of researches and practices all over the world. Based on the literature analysis from 1985 to 2012 and bibliometric methods, this paper examines the current research stage, contents and emerging topics of ecological security in China. Ecological security researches in China go through two stages: the conceptual and theoretical framework exploratory stage (1985-1999) and the theory formation and practical development stage (2000-2012). In the exploratory stage, researchers mainly focused upon ecological problems at the global and national level, rather than the local or regional level. Research hotspots involved national security strategy, ecological risk assessment, landscape ecology and ecological balance, all of which were not correlated tightly. During this period, researches concerning ecological security were still exploring the concept of ecological security and tried to form its theoretical framework and technical methods. In the practical stage, researchers examined concepts, spatial patterns, assessments and management systems of ecological security, especially the ecological security assessment index system. During this period, the research methods shifted from conceptual and exploratory qualitative analysis to quantitative analysis, including mathematical models, and digital terrain models, etc.; the research content developed from a theoretical exploration to a case study approach. We also reviewed the historical research of ecological security in China and suggest a research framework involving different research scales, different research objectives, and different research methods. Our statistical findings show that ecological security research on global and regional scales is one topic of increased research activity. From the perspective of research goals, the current focus is biodiversity conservation. Next, from the view of the research subject, environmental science is most frequently studied among domestic researchers on ecological security. The number of published articles concerning ecological security accounts for 40.73% of the total. Finally, in terms of sustentation funds, the fund of the ecological security research is mainly from Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), accounting for 38.01% of the total funds support. A total of 1178 papers were awarded sustentation funds, accounting for 23.83%. Our study summarized the research progress of ecological security assessment, ecological security warning, ecological security maintenance and ecological security patterns. Thus based on these statistic data and analysis, ecological security research in China may be emphasized from the following aspects: (1) to form the theoretical system of ecological security and to integrate the technical methods; (2) to improve ecological security warning mechanisms and environmental monitoring; and (3) to improve ecological security maintenance and management system. In conclusion, we believe ecological security warning and ecological security patterns will be given more attention in the future research. The correlation research will develop from the previously exploratory qualitative research and status analysis to the quantitative research and dynamic warning. At the same time, by using -3S- space technology and combining with the disciplines/professions of geography, environmental science, ecology, landscape ecology, restoration ecology and economics, there may be a stronger establishment of grounded ecological security knowledge. Therefore, the ecological security evaluation index system and grading standards of the evaluation results will be gradually integrated and improved plus the dynamic evaluation, simulation and warning research will be strengthened.

DOI

[13]
Yu K J.Security patterns and surface model in landscape ecological planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1996, 36(1): 1-17.Abstract It is demonstrated that there are potential spatial patterns, called security patterns (SPs), composed of strategic portions and positions of the landscape that have critical significance in safeguarding and controlling certain ecological processes. Components of security patterns have the quality of initiative, coordination and efficiency, and are, therefore, strategically important in landscape change in biological conservation. SPs can be identified according to the properties on a general surface model of flows.Potential surfaces (accessibility surfaces) are developed using landscape resistance to represent the dynamics of horizontal ecological processes (species movement). Four strategic landscape portions and positions are identified on the potential surfaces: buffer zones, inter-source linkages, radiating routes and strategic points. These components, specified by certain quantitative and qualitative parameters, together with the identified sources (native habitats), compose the ecological SPs at various security levels. SPs may vary with the target species. Individual SPs for various target species or groups can be combined in cases when overall ecological SPs are needed. These SPs could be used by defenders of ecological processes as defensive frontiers and strategies of spatial bartering in landscape changes. A case study is presented following the discussion on the concept and method of ecological security patterns. The GIS (geographical information systems) is intensively applied in the case study.

DOI

[14]
李月辉, 胡志斌, 高琼, 等. 沈阳市城市空间扩展的生态安全格局. 生态学杂志, 2007, 26(6): 875-881.在分析沈阳市1956—2004年6个时期市区空间扩展规律及其原因基础上,选择地势地貌、地面塌陷危害、水体(河流湖泊和水田)、林地、基本农田和土壤污染6个生态控制因子,将城市拓展区分为优先发展、适合发展、限制发展和严禁发展4个等级,最终形成生态安全格局,揭示了生态安全保障下城市空间扩展的趋势和方向。结果表明:1956—2004年建成区持续扩增;2000年前,沿着浑河在东北-西南轴向延伸程度较大;2001—2004年城市集中向南、跨越浑河开发了浑南新区。沈阳市发展初期,其格局主要由工业生产力布局塑造,政治、经济因素为主导,至2004年,建成区面积已达291km2,再继续扩张,生态因素将成为城市发展的重要限制因子之一。生态安全格局显示东部、西部发展受到限制;北部、南部和西南部存在较大发展空间,尤其南部扩展空间更大,可以以南部为主要扩展方向。

[Li Yuehui, Hu Zhibin, Gao Qiong, et al.Ecological safety pattern of spatial extension in Shenyang City. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2007, 26(6): 875-881.]

[15]
欧定华, 夏建国, 张莉, 等. 区域生态安全格局规划研究进展及规划技术流程探讨. 生态环境学报, 2015, 24(1): 163-173.区域生态安全格局规划是化解生态保护与经济发展之间矛盾冲突的有效途径,进行区域生态安全格局规划研究具有重要理论和现实意义。但是,目前尚缺少对区域生态安全格局规划概念内涵、支撑理论、技术方法等相关文献的系统梳理和归纳总结。鉴于此,通过查阅大量文献资料、总结分析国内外相关研究成果,厘清了生态安全格局相关概念之间的逻辑关系,给出了区域生态安全格局规划的确切定义,对景观生态分类与适宜性评价、景观格局演变分析与动态模拟、生态安全预测预警、空间规划决策技术方法等区域生态安全格局规划相关支撑理论和技术方法,研究成果总结发现:景观生态分类指标构建理论和分类结果可靠性验证研究较为薄弱;应用较多的景观生态适宜性评价方法有"千层饼"法、层次分析法等传统方法和人工神经网络、遗传算法、元胞自动机等现代人工智能方法;景观格局变化驱动因子定量识别相对缺乏,各驱动因子间相互作用关系探讨不深入,常忽视景观格局本身对驱动因子的自适应和反馈作用;在众多景观格局动态演变模拟模型中,CA-Markov模型综合了CA和Markov模型的优点,可实现研究对象时空演变信息的精确挖掘;生态安全预警可弥补传统生态安全评价不能揭示生态环境质量长期动态变化状况的不足,能反映区域生态安全状况动态变化过程,是生态安全格局规划的重要基础;常见的空间规划决策技术方法主要有多准则数量优化法、空间分析技术方法、情景分析法、人工智能优化法和综合优化法,在综合优化法中CLUE-S模型能综合土地利用变化各驱动因子对不同时空尺度下的土地利用变化进行预测模拟,集成模型能集成多个模型优点来解决一些复杂空间格局优化问题,两者对进行区域生态安全格局规划方法探讨皆具有重要参考价值和借鉴意义。在此基础上,依据现阶段比较成熟的景观生态学理论、景观生态规划原理,综合集成现行空间规划决策技术方法,将区域生态安全格局规划技术流程概括为景观生态分类、景观格局演变分析、景观生态适宜性评价、景观格局演变动态模拟、生态安全预测预警、生态安全需求预测、多情景模式构建和总体规划目标确定、生态安全格局规划、多种规划方案比选、方案试点效果监测与评价、规划实施与执行监管等14个步骤。今后加强区域生态安全格局规划基础理论、技术方法、实践应用这3方面研究是未来该领域研究的重要方向。

DOI

[Ou Dinghua, Xia Jianguo, Zhang Li, et al.Research progress on regional ecological security pattern planning and discussion of planning technique flow. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2015, 24(1): 163-173.]

[16]
Cho S H, Poudyal N, Lambert D M.Estimating spatially varying effects of urban growth boundaries on land development and land value. Land Use Policy, 2008, 25(3): 320-329.The empirical evidence is mixed on whether urban growth boundaries (UGB) effectively moderate urbanization. The spatially varying effects of a UGB on land development patterns and land value in Eastern Tennessee, USA, were estimated to examine the impacts of the UGB in different submarkets. A simultaneous-equation model was used with an endogenous binary variable to reflect the parcel's state of development and an endogenous continuous variable measuring parcel land value. Submarkets were identified using cluster analysis. The results suggest that the UGB slowed down development in urban submarkets but development accelerated in rural&ndash;urban submarket interfaces where the UGB did not play a role in land values.

DOI

[17]
张润朋, 周春山. 美国城市增长边界研究进展与述评. 规划师, 2010, 26(11): 89-96.城市增长边界是西方国家应对城市蔓延问题提出的一种技术解决措施和空间政策响应,当前已成为美国控制城市蔓延发展最成功的一种技术手段和政策工具。通过对美国城市增长边界研究进展的综述分析,从设置动因、影响研究（积极效应、负面影响）、实施管理（成功实施的因素、修正的方法）等方面,揭示了增长边界的技术理念和方法。在此分析基础上,规划师应从城市增长边界在我国的适应性、划定方法与思路、现行规划管理体系的限制方面思考该技术在我国的有效运用。

DOI

[Zhang Runpeng, Zhou Chunshan.Urban growth boundary research in America. Planner, 2010, 26(11): 89-96.]

[18]
Esbah H, Cook E A, Ewan J.Effects of increasing urbanization on the ecological integrity of open space preserves. Environmental Management, 2009, 43(5): 846-862.Abstract This article analyzes the effects of increasing urbanization on open space preserves within the metropolitan area of Phoenix, Arizona, USA. Time series analysis is used in 10-year increments over 40 years to study urban landscape change. Three landscape metrics--(1) matrix utility (measures intensity of adjacent land uses), (2) isolation (measures distances to other open space patches), and (3) connectivity (measures physical links to other open space patches and corridors)--are used to assess changes in landscape patterns and serve as indicators of urban ecological integrity of the open space preserves. Results show that in the case of both open space preserves, general decline in indicators of urban ecological integrity was evident. The matrix utility analysis demonstrated that increasing intensity of land uses adjacent to preserve is likely to increase edge effects, reducing the habitat value of interior or core habitat areas. Isolation analysis showed that both preserves have experienced increasing isolation from other open space elements over time. Also, connectivity analysis indicated that terrestrial connections to other open space elements have also deteriorated. Conclusions of this research demonstrate that while preservation of natural areas as open space is important in an urban context, intense development of surrounding areas reduces the urban ecological integrity significantly.

DOI PMID

[19]
Kong F H, Yin H W, Nakagoshi N, et al.Urban green space network development for biodiversity conservation: Identification based on graph theory and gravity modeling. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2010, 95(1-2): 16-27.Urban areas can contain rich flora that contribute significantly to biodiversity, but loss and isolation of habitats due to urban sprawl threaten biodiversity and warrant limits on development. The connectivity provided by urban green spaces offers habitats and corridors that help conserve biodiversity. Researchers and planners have begun using landscape ecology principles to develop green space networks and increase connectivity to preserve and restore biodiversity. In this paper, potential corridors were identified in Jinan City, China, using the least-cost path method, and green space networks were developed and improved based on graph theory and the gravity model. Spatial analysis revealed that the proposed plan decreased fragmentation and increased connectivity. Plaza and roadside green spaces were the main types of green space that increased, but they only weakly improved networks and biodiversity. Identifying potential corridors using least-cost path analysis made the results better approximate the real landscape by including impedance along links. The potential networks revealed problems in the current greening plan. The green space network developed based on graph theory and the gravity model simplified and systematized the complex landscape, helping to identify the significance of each green space and guiding urban planning for biodiversity conservation.

DOI

[20]
Benedict M A, McMahon E T. Green infrastructure: Smart conservation for the 21st century. Renewable Resources Journal, 2002, 20(3): 12-17.Abstract "Green infrastructure" is a term becoming more commonly used among natural resource professionals. While it means different things to different people, depending on the context in which it is used, for the purposes of this article, green infrastructure is an interconnected network of green space that conserves natural ecosystem values and functions and provides associated benefits to human populations. Green infrastructure is the ecological framework needed for environmental, social and economic sustainability- our nation's natural life support system. Planning utilizing green infrastructure differs from conventional open space planning because it looks at conservation values in concert with land development, growth management and built infrastructure planning. This article introduces green infrastructure as a strategic approach to land conservation that addresses the ecological and social impacts of sprawl and the accelerated consumption and fragmentation of open land. It describes the concept and value of green infrastructure and presents seven principles for successful green infrastructure initiatives.

[21]
李明晶, 刘洁贞, 李颖, 等. 新型城镇化背景下生态控制线划定与管控方法: 以肇庆市生态控制线规划为例. 规划师, 2015, 31(9): 51-55.划定生态控制线是保障城市生态安全、优化城市空间布局及引导城市健康发展的有效手段。在新型城镇化与生态文明建设的重要阶段,如何划定和管理城市生态控制线已经越来越受到规划界的关注。文章以肇庆市为例,从生态控制线划定与管控两方面探讨了新型城镇化背景下生态控制线规划的新思路:首先是在构建城市生态安全格局和校核生态用地规模的基础上,采用"分类—分级"的方法对市域生态控制线进行划定,将生态用地划分为四大类、两级管制区;其次是强调生态资源的复合利用,打造"一张图"的生态资源管控平台,并建立动态评估调整机制,以确保生态控制线规划的顺利实施。

DOI

[Li Mingjing, Liu Jiezhen, Li Ying, et al.Ecological line control and governance in new urbanization: Zhaoqing ecological control line planning. Planner, 2015, 31(9): 51-55.]

[22]
林勇, 樊景凤, 温泉, 等. 生态红线划分的理论和技术. 生态学报, 2016, 36(5): 1244-1252.在重要生态功能区、生态环境敏感区/脆弱区等区域划定生态红线,控制人类活动强度,对于维护区域生态完整性和生态服务功能的可持续性,解决生态环境退化和资源枯竭问题,减轻异常自然灾害不利影响具有重要意义.虽然不少省市已开展生态红线划分和管理试点工作,但生态红线划分的理论和技术尚不完善.生态红线区划和管理急需理论指导和技术支持.对生态红线的内涵进行了分析,指出了空间红线、面积红线和管理红线之间的有机联系,强调了生态安全空间格局和区域生态服务需求在生态红线划分中的重要性;在生态红线划分技术研究综述基础上剖析了生态红线的研究中存在的问题,如划分方法简单粗放、对景观和区域尺度上的空间过程和空间联系考虑不足以及由于部门和学科分割带来的(海)水陆缺乏统筹等;论述了生态适宜性评价、景观/区域安全格局理论、海陆统筹理论、干扰生态学理论、生态系统管理和适应性理论以及驱动力-压力-状态-影响;响应(DPSIR)模型框架等技术方法和理论以及它们在在生态红线划分中的潜在应用;最后提出了基于生态安全格局和区域生态服务需求的生态红线划分的技术路线,并对今后生态红线划分研究进行了展望.提出的生态红线划分技术和理论方法可为今后生态红线的研究提供有益参考.

DOI

[Lin Yong, Fan Jingfeng, Wen Quan, et al.Primary exploration of ecological theories and technologies for delineation of ecological redline zones. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(5): 1244-1252.]

[23]
Sutton-Grier A E, Wowk K, Bamford H. Future of our coasts: The potential for natural and hybrid infrastructure to enhance the resilience of our coastal communities, economies and ecosystems. Environmental Science and Policy, 2015, 51: 137-148.There is substantial evidence that natural infrastructure (i.e., healthy ecosystems) and combinations of natural and built infrastructure (-ybrid- approaches) enhance coastal resilience by providing important storm and coastal flooding protection, while also providing other benefits. There is growing interest in the U.S., as well as around the world, to use natural infrastructure to help coastal communities become more resilient to extreme events and reduce the risk of coastal flooding. Here we highlight strengths and weaknesses of the coastal protection benefits provided by built infrastructure, natural ecosystems, and the innovative opportunities to combine the two into hybrid approaches for coastal protection. We also examine some case studies where hybrid approaches are being implemented to improve coastal resilience as well as some of the policy challenges that can make implementation of these approaches more difficult. The case studies we examine are largely in the U.S. but also include a couple of international examples as well. Based on this analysis, we conclude that coastal communities and other decision makers need better information in order to incorporate ecosystem protection and restoration into coastal resilience planning efforts. As additional projects are developed, it is important to capitalize on every opportunity to learn more about the cost of natural and hybrid infrastructure projects, the value of the storm and erosion protection benefits provided, and the full suite of co-benefits provided by healthy coastal ecosystems. We highlight top priorities for research, investment in, and application of natural and hybrid approaches. These data are critical to facilitate adoption of these approaches in planning and decision-making at all levels to enhance the resilience of our coasts.

DOI

[24]
蒙吉军, 朱利凯, 杨倩, 等. 鄂尔多斯市土地利用生态安全格局构建. 生态学报, 2012, 32(21): 6755-6766.合理构建区域土地利用生态安全格局来实施管理对策和改善区域生态安全水平,已经成为区域生态环境保护的新需求。以位于中国北方农牧交错区的鄂尔多斯市为研究区,基于自然地理数据、社会经济统计数据、土地利用/覆被数据等,借助多目标优化模型和GIS空间分析技术,构建了鄂尔多斯市土地利用生态安全格局,结果表明:(1)不适宜性耕地所占比重较大,林地和草地分布比较合理,适宜的未利用地面积所占比重较大,后备土地资源丰富;(2)多目标优化结果显示,耕地、林地、水域和建设用地面积呈现增加的趋势;草地面积基本保持不变;未利用地面积大幅度下降;(3)土地利用生态安全格局显示,耕地面积增加,主要分布在水分条件较好的河流、湖泊和水库等的周边地区以及城镇和乡村居民点周围;林地面积大幅度增加,主要分布在达拉特旗北部和准格尔旗东部;草地略有增加,广泛分布于库布齐沙漠和毛乌素沙地以外的地区;建设用地增加面积主要来自于重点发展城镇的扩展和规划的重点矿产资源开采区;未利用地大幅度减少,主要集中在杭锦旗境内的库布齐沙漠以及乌审旗和鄂托克旗境内的毛乌素沙地。研究结果对鄂尔多斯市土地资源管理和生态安全建设具有重要指导意义。

DOI

[Meng Jijun, Zhu Likai, Yang Qian, et al.Building ecological security pattern based on land use: A case study of Ordos, Northern China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2012, 32(21): 6755-6766.]

[25]
Zhao X Q, Xu X H.Research on landscape ecological security pattern in a eucalyptus introduced region based on biodiversity conservation. Russian Journal of Ecology, 2015, 46(1): 59-70.Landscape fragmentation and habitat loss are one of the important factors resulting in biodiversity decrease and species extinction. A large amount of Eucalyptus have been introduced into Yunnan Province in China since 2003, replaced the native forest, farmland, wasteland and other ecosystems, leading to natural habitat loss and landscape fragmentation. In order to protect habitat and the biodiversity, the secondary evergreen broad-leaved forest were selected as “protection source”, land cover types, altitude, slope and soil texture were selected as resistance factors, to construct a medium-security and high-security level landscape eco-security patterns for Eucalyptus introduction regions by using the minimum cumulative resistance model and GIS technology. The patterns were composed of the eco-security pattern compositions and ecological function zones. The eco-security pattern compositions were composed of corridor, radiating routes and strategic point etc. The ecological function zones were composed of key eco-protection zone, eco-buffer zone, eco-transition zone, Eucalyptus planting zone, Eucalyptus banned zones, farming zone, living zone etc.

DOI

[26]
苏泳娴, 张虹鸥, 陈修治, 等. 佛山市高明区生态安全格局和建设用地扩展预案. 生态学报, 2013, 33(5): 1524-1534.城市生态环境问题已上升到生态安全的层面.以人类生存安全和理想 人居环境为目标,基于空间数据和统计资料,利用景观安全格局原理和地理信息系统空间分析方法,构建了包含基本保障格局-缓冲格局-最优格局3个级别的水安 全格局、地质灾害安全格局、大气安全格局、生物保护安全格局和农田安全格局,叠加得到高明区综合生态安全格局,在此基础上提出了高明区建设用地扩展最优方 案和生态功能分区.结果显示,并非生态安全格局水平越高,城乡发展模式越优,缓冲生态安全格局下的高明区建设用地扩展模式,最可能实现生态安全保护与城镇 扩展的和谐发展.综合生态安全格局明确了区域的生态环境敏感区和生态服务功能重要区,为区域生态功能分区提供了新的思路.

DOI

[Su Yongxian, Zhang Hongou, Chen Xiuzhi, et al.The ecological security patterns and construction land expansion simulation in Gaoming. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(5): 1524-1534.]

[27]
MacMillan R A, Moon D E, Coupé R A. Automated predictive ecological mapping in a forest region of BC, Canada, 2001-2005. Geoderma, 2007, 140(4): 353-373.

[28]
俞孔坚, 王思思, 李迪华, 等. 北京市生态安全格局及城市增长预景. 生态学报, 2009, 29(3): 1189-1204.在快速城市化和城市生态安全面临巨大挑战的时代背景下，构建生态安全格局是实现区域和城市生态安全的基本保障和重要途径。在梳理国内外生态安全格局研究进展的基础上，提出基于景观安全格局理论的北京市生态安全格局网络和城市发展空间格局。通过对北京市水文、地质灾害、生物多样性保护、文化遗产和游憩过程的系统分析，运用GIS和空间分析技术，判别出维护上述各种过程安全的关键性空间格局（景观安全格局），进而综合、叠加各单一过程的安全格局，构建具有不同安全水平的综合生态安全格局，形成保障北京城市和区域生态安全的生态基础设施。在此基础上，提出城镇空间发展预景和土地利用空间布局的优化战略。对不同预景进行综合评价，结果显示：基于生态安全格局的城镇空间发展格局可以维持生态过程的连续性并克服常规城市发展模式下的蔓延，基于“满意生态安全格局”（中安全水平）的城市空间格局可以同时满足生态用地、农用地和建设用地的需求，是一个同时实现精明保护与精明增长的有效工具。

DOI

[Yu Kongjian, Wang Sisi, Li Dihua, et al.The function of Ecological security patterns as an urban growth framework in Beijing. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2009, 29(3): 1189-1204. ]

[29]
方淑波, 肖笃宁, 安树青. 基于土地利用分析的兰州市城市区域生态安全格局研究. 应用生态学报, 2005, 16(12): 2284-2290.中尺度区域生态安全的研究针对区域的实际生态安全问题展开,处于 各尺度生态安全概念的核心地位.作为特殊的区域,以生态基础设施建设为核心的城市区域生态安全格局的构建成为城市可持续发展的基础内容.基于土地利用分析 的定性、定量相结合的景观格局研究,生态价值评估以及社会经济驱动分析为城市区域生态安全格局的构建提供了一种可能.兰州市区域生态安全格局由生态保障体 系、生态缓冲体系以及生态过滤体系所构成,经过分析,认为生态缓冲体系的建设成为兰州市区域生态安全格局构建的关键.城市未来扩展格局的定量分析成为兰州 市区域生态安全格局安全级别的判别函数,根据不同的响应,把区域生态安全格局化分为低级、中级和高级3个级别.

[Fang Shubo, Xiao Duning, An Shuqing.Regional ecosecurity pattern in urban area based on land use analysis: A case study in Lanzhou. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2005, 16(12): 2284-2290.]

[30]
王让虎, 李晓燕, 张树文, 等. 东北农牧交错带景观生态安全格局构建及预警研究: 以吉林省通榆县为例. 地理与地理信息科学, 2014, 30(2): 111-115.东北农牧交错带是典型的生态脆弱区,以吉林省通榆县为研究区域,基于RS和GIS技术,采用最小累积阻力模型构建通榆县1986年、2000年和2008年景观生态安全格局,基于2008年的景观安全格局进行风险预警分析.结果表明:1)由于景观格局的变化,研究区安全核心区的面积略有扩大,安全缓冲区面积在减少,安全外围区面积在增加;2)研究区的景观格局阻力值呈两极分化趋势,生态高风险重点预警区域主要集中在通榆县中东部,应优先考虑开展生态恢复治理.

DOI

[Wang Ranghu, Li Xiaoyan, Zhang Shuwen, et al.Research for landscape ecological security pattern and early warning in farming-pastoral zone of northeast China: A case study of Tongyu county in Jilin province. Geography and Geo-Information Science, 2014, 30(2): 111-115.]

[31]
潘竟虎, 刘晓.疏勒河流域景观生态风险评价与生态安全格局优化构建. 生态学杂志. 2016, 35(3): 791-799.以疏勒河流域为研究区域,利用 RS和GIS技术,建立基于景观格局的景观生态风险指数,分析研究区域内景观生态风险的时空变化特征和聚集模式。利用最小累积阻力模型,以自然保护区、水 域、林地等作为生态"源地",以生态安全水平、海拔和坡度作为阻力因子生成阻力面,构建流域生态安全格局,识别潜在廊道和节点,建立优化后的生态安全网 络。结果表明:疏勒河流域北部的生态风险高于南部,生态风险水平在30年间有所改善,1980—1995年生态风险等级退化的区域主要位于流域西南部和东 部;1995—2010年等级退化的区域面积小于1980—1995年。景观生态风险指数在空间上呈正的自相关性,30年间空间自相关程度有所减弱,空间 趋同性逐渐降低。优化后的生态网络将生态源地、潜在廊道和节点等景观组分结合,充分利用已有的河流水系,打通廊道,避开城镇工矿用地和交通干线,并在生态 脆弱区设置关键点作为物种扩散的"踏板"。

[Pan Jinghu, Liu Xiao.Landscape ecological risk assessment and landscape security pattern optimization in Shule River basin. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2016, 35(3): 791-799.]

[32]
张玉虎, 于长青, 特依拜, 等. 风景区生态安全格局构建方法研究: 以北京妙峰山风景区为例. 干旱区研究, 2008, 25(3): 420-425.景观中某些关键性点、位置的破 坏对整个生态安全具有负面的后果,研究构建景观层次的生态安全格局已成为当前景观生态学研究的热点。以北京妙峰山风景区为例,运用景观生态安全格局理论, 借助有效费用距离模型(ECDM),究构建了妙峰山景区生态安全格局过程。结果表明:应用有效费用距离模型(ECMD)建立的研究区景观生态安全格局能够 反映该区的实际情况,整个风景区面积处于低安全区有21.46 km2,中度安全区有21.78km2,高安全区有6.72 km2。同时,根据生态安全格局图与实际风景区内的人为干扰因子叠加,找到主要的胁迫因素,得出应将风景区内的采石矿点作为关键战略点优先实施生态恢复与 治理的对策。

[Zhang Yuhu, Yu Changqing, Tashpolat Tiyip, et al.Methodology for constructing the landscape ecological security pattern in scenic area: A case study in the scenic area in the Miaofeng Mountain. Arid Zone Research, 2008, 25(3): 420-425.]

[33]
彭建, 赵会娟, 刘焱序, 等. 区域水安全格局构建:研究进展及概念框架. 生态学报, 2016, 36(11): 3137-3145.随着全球变化背景下生态安全问题的日益严峻,生态安全格局研究成为宏观生态学关注的热点领域;水作为重要的自然生态要素,其安全格局的构建也是区域生态安全格局优化的重要组成部分,但目前其基本内涵、构建理论与方法、指标体系等尚未受到足够重视,缺乏系统梳理.在对比分析资源、环境与灾害等多学科视角下水安全概念异同的基础上,明晰了区域水安全格局的概念内涵,将其定义为保障区域水安全目标的土地利用空间格局;系统探讨了水安全格局构建历程与方法研究进展,指出水安全研究正由定量评价向空间管控转型,水环境安全格局构建严重滞后,缺乏水安全格局与自然生态过程、社会经济过程的耦合关联分析;最后,基于景观生态学格局-过程互馈理论和地理学区域综合视角,以GIS空间分析、InVEST模型等为技术支撑,构建了水资源安全、水环境安全和水灾害规避安全3个单一维度的水安全格局,并提出基于空间多准则分析模型的区域综合水安全格局构建概念框架,以期有效提升中国城市化进程的水安全格局保障.

DOI

[Peng Jian, Zhao Huijuan, Liu Yanxu, et al.Progress and conceptual framework of regional water security pattern construction. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(11): 3137-3145.]

[34]
李晖, 易娜, 姚文璟, 等. 基于景观安全格局的香格里拉县生态用地规划. 生态学报, 2011, 31(20): 5928-5936.通过构建不同水平的景观安全格局,可以为区域的生态用地规划提供相应对策。香格里拉县近年来随着经济的发展生态安全问题已经提到日程。选择研究区内的5个自然保护区和风景名胜区为"源",以生物多样性保护为目标,选择地表景观类型、坡度两个因子及相应的阻力因子系数进行分析。采用GIS中的空间分析工具,计算建立了地表景观类型、坡度两个单因子的最小累积阻力面,在此基础上,利用加权叠加方法构建了两个因子的最小累积阻力面。根据最小累积阻力阈值,建立了"源"间生态廊道及"源"与外部联系的辐射道,确定了关键的战略点,最终完成景观安全格局的构建。基于生物多样性目标得到了低、中、高3个不同安全水平的生态用地分别占研究区总面积的12.81%、44.1%和80.3%。为制定研究区生态安全策略提供了重要参考。

[Li Hui, Yi Na, Yao Wenjing, et al.Shangri-La county ecological land use planning based on landscape security pattern. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(20): 5928-5936.]

[35]
李宗尧, 杨桂山, 董雅文. 经济快速发展地区生态安全格局的构建: 以安徽沿江地区为例. 自然资源学报, 2007, 22(1): 106-113.生态安全格局; 经济快速发展地区; 经济发展潜力; 生态敏感性; 生态系统服务功能; 安徽沿江地区

DOI

[Li Zongyao, Yang Guishan, Dong Yawen.Establishing the ecological security pattern in rapidly developing regions- A case in the AYRAP. Journal of Natural Resources, 2007, 22(1): 106-113.]

[36]
许文雯, 孙翔, 朱晓东, 等. 基于生态网络分析的南京主城区重要生态斑块识别. 生态学报, 2012, 32(4): 1264-1272.在城市化程度较高,用地极为紧张的大都市,识别重要的生态斑块对其进行保留和修复不仅对控制大城市的城市过度扩张、提升城市品质、优化人居环境具有重要意 义,也具有较强可操作性.以南京市主城区为例,在GIS技术的支撑下,(1)将景观阻力分析和网络分析相结合,定量表征研究区的潜在生态廊道,构建生态网 络,寻找生态节点；(2)对城市中生态斑块的特殊服务功能进行分析,筛选出具备河流生态防护、隔离工业污染和居民休闲功能的生态斑块；(3)对生态斑块的 规模进行分析,提取面积较大的斑块.综合分析后识别出7个重要的节点斑块,建议对其进行立法保护和修复,划定为永久绿地或永久生态空间,并对其建设方向提 出意见.

DOI

[Xu Wenwen, Sun Xiang, Zhu Xiaodong, et al.Recognition of important ecological nodes based on ecological networks analysis: A case study of urban district of Nanjing. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2012, 32(4): 1264-1272.]

[37]
李晶, 蒙吉军, 毛熙彦. 基于最小累积阻力模型的农牧交错带土地利用生态安全格局构建: 以鄂尔多斯市准格尔旗为例. 北京大学学报:自然科学版, 2013, 49(4): 707-715.选择位于农牧交错带的鄂尔多斯市准格尔旗,基于自然地理情况、社会经济统计及多年土地覆被数据,在对研究区近30年来土地利用时空动态变化进行分析的基础上,运用GIS空间分析技术,借用最小累积阻力模型,对区域内关键土地利用类型进行分析与模拟,判断各土地单元针对关键土地利用类型的适宜度,据此构建区域土地利用生态安全格局,进而提出土地利用安全格局实施和管理的建议。研究结果对区域土地资源的持续利用具有重要的指导意义,并对最小累积阻力模型的应用进行了扩展。

[Li Jing, Meng Jijun, Mao Xiyan.MCR based model for developing land use ecological security pattern in farming-pastoral zone: A case study of Jungar Banner, Ordos. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2013, 49(4): 707-715.]

[38]
曹玉红, 曹卫东, 吴威, 等. 基于自然生态约束空间差异的区域生态安全格局构建. 水土保持通报, 2008, 28(1): 106-109.自然生态条件的空间差异是导致不同地区生态功能差异的重要原因, 直接影响区域生态安全.通过对自然生态条件的分区评价,理清不同空间生态功能差异,可为建构区域生态安全格局提供基础支撑.以GIS技术为支撵,通过对地 形地貌、特殊生态保护区、区域环境容量等方面的指标选择与综合评价,以安徽沿江地区为实证,进行生态功能空间差异分区.在分区的基础上,结合安徽沿江区域 开发的方向,构建区域生态源区4个,生态廊道7个和众多的生态楔,最后提出区域生态安全格局构建的建议.

[Cao Yuhong, Cao Weidong, Wu Wei, et al.Constructing regional ecological security pattern based on the spatial difference of eco-environmental restriction. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2008, 28(1): 106-109.]

[39]
钱颖, 杨建军. 基于生态敏感性和景观格局的城市生态带规划探究. 中国园林, 2014, (6): 107-111.从规划价值取向和规划技术方法出发,围绕生态保护和建设开发的矛盾这一生态带基本问题,旨在寻找一种协调多学科领域矛盾的综合集成方法。以杭州市西南部生态带为例,从生态敏感性分析和生态景观安全格局的角度划分建设适宜性用地类型;同时从当前城市经济、社会发展用地需求的角度,分析规划生态带规模。最后对2种规划路径博弈分析,确定最终方案,划定空间管制单元并制定单元控制指标,以期寻求更可行、更科学的生态带规划方法。

[Qian Ying, Yang Jianjun.Research on urban ecological belt planning based on ecological sensitivity and landscape structure. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2014, (6): 107-111.]

[40]
陈昕, 彭建, 刘焱序, 等. 基于“重要性—敏感性—连通性”框架的云浮山市生态安全格局构建. 地理研究, 2017, 36(3): 471-484 .

[Chen Xin, Peng Jian, Liu Yanxu, et al.Constructing ecological security patterns in Yunfu city based on the framework of importance-sensitivity-connectivity. Geographical Research, 2017, 36(3): 471-484.]

[41]
赵筱青, 王海波, 杨树华, 等. 基于GIS支持下的土地资源空间格局生态优化. 生态学报, 2009, 29(9): 4892-4901.以防治水土流失和维护景观整体生态优化为目标,选择我国滇西南地区亚热带山地为典型案例,利用遥感数据和GIS的空间信息处理技术,采用适宜性评价与土地资源利用格局整体优化相结合的方法,用最小累积阻力模型(MCR)确定土地利用的功能分区和生态格局组分,探讨山地土地资源空间格局生态优化途径。结果表明:(1)基于GIS空间分析技术和"成本距离加权"制图分析工具,采用最小累积阻力模型(MCR)的土地资源空间格局生态优化方法是可行的;(2)将水平生态过程作为一种对景观的控制过程来对待,以常绿阔叶林和思茅松林为保护源,基于最小累积阻力面(MCR)模型,构建了对土地资源整体生态功能起维护作用,对源内物种的迁移或扩散过程具有关键作用的廊道、辐射道和战略点等生态格局组分;(3)基于MCR阻力值建立的频率序列及拐点图,拐点两侧的土地利用类型异质性较大,可以作为划分土地功能分区的临界点,以此划分出有利于生态安全的核心源保护区、生态缓冲区、生态过渡区、生态边缘区、农业耕作区和居民生活区等6类土地功能区,并提出各功能区的管理措施。

DOI

[Zhao Xiaoqing, Wang Haibo, Yang Shuhua, et al.GIS-based ecological optimization of spatial patterns of land resources. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2009, 29(9): 4892-4901.]

[42]
黎燕琼, 张海鸥, 龚固堂, 等. 成都市景观生态安全格局动态变化. 西南林业大学学报, 2012, 32(6): 48-53, 58.采用1985年、1995年TM和2006年ETM卫星数据作主要数据源，运用GIS技术， 以景观生态安全格局理论与方法为指导，研究成都市景观生态安全格局的特点和时空变化趋势，结果表明：1985--2006年，成都市景观生态安全格局的整 体生态安全水平分布不平衡，西北部的高山深丘地区和中部平原东面的低山丘陵地区大多处于高安全区，中部盆地平原区和东部浅丘部地区多处在低、中安全区；其 中，1985年的生态安全状态最好，高安全区面积所占比例最大；1985--1995年，生态安全状态有所恶化，大部分高安全区转化为中安全 区；1995--2006年，生态安全状态有所改善，大部分中安全区再次转化为高安全区。

DOI

[Li Yanqiong, Zhang Haiou, Gong Gutang, et al.The dynamic change of landscape ecological security pattern in Chengdu Municipality. Journal of Southwest Forestry University, 2012, 32(6): 48-53, 58.]

[43]
吴健生, 张理卿, 彭建, 等. 深圳市景观生态安全格局源地综合识别. 生态学报, 2013, 33(13): 4125-4133.城市生态安全格局是景观生态学研究的热点和重点之一,识别源地是构建生态安全格局的首要环节.在总结已有研究中重要斑块识别方法的基础上,提出了结合景观连通性分析、生物多样性服务评估和生境质量评估来提取重要斑块的方法.以深圳市为研究区,采用基于图论的景观连通性指数、生物多样性服务当量、InVEST模型生境质量评估模块和GIS技术相结合的方法识别生态用地重要斑块.结果表明:深圳市生态斑块依照连通性、生物多样性和生境质量的综合评估分为五级,其中最重要斑块主要分布在龙岗区、盐田区和罗湖区;现行基本生态控制线政策可以保护大部分重要斑块.

DOI

[Wu Jiansheng, Zhang Liqing, Peng Jian, et al.The integrated recognition of the source area of the urban ecological security pattern in Shenzhen. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(13): 4125-4133.]

[44]
彭建, 王仰麟, 景娟, 等. 城市景观功能的区域协调规划. 生态学报, 2005, 25(7): 1714-1719.城市景观功能的完善是城市可持续发展的重要保障之一,其与区域景观功能的相互协调是城市规划的重要组成部分,有利于城市和区域的整体持续发展。在分析城市景观基本特征的基础上,探讨了城市景观功能区域协调规划的基本思路,以城市景观为规划对象,以人类社会的功能需求为立足点,依据景观生态学理论,将城市景观的功能划分为生物生产功能、环境服务功能、文化支持功能和信息输运功能,对体现这些基本功能的景观类型进行区域协调规划。以深圳市为例,实证分析了其景观功能在珠江三角洲地区的协调规划。

[Peng Jian, Wang Yanglin, Jing Juan, et al.Research on integrated regional planning of urban landscape functions. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2005, 25(7): 1714-1719.]

[45]
李卫锋, 王仰麟, 彭建, 等. 深圳市景观格局演变及其驱动因素分析. 应用生态学报, 2004, 15(8): 1403-1410.在遥感与GIS技术支持下,以深圳市域1978年MSS影像与1986、 1990、1995和1999年4期TM影像为主要数据源,研究了深圳市域景观的空间格局特征及其动态变化,探讨了不同尺度下景观格局演变的驱动因素与变 化机制.结果表明,深圳市近20年景观特征发生了深刻变化,耕地面积比例由31.06%下降至2.67%,城建用地则由0.33%上升至22.52%.景 观多样性指数1978～1995年上升近25%,1999年稍有下降;蔓延度指数先降后升,整体破碎度由0.0042上升到0.0073;景观修改分维数 1990年以前有所下降,20世纪90年代则呈现递增趋势.景观格局指数的变化,反映了人为活动对区域景观特征的深刻影响.人为活动已成为深圳市景观格局 演变的主要驱动因素.其中,斑块形状复杂化主要是受个体经济单元的经济利益驱动,景观空间构型的变化取决于产业布局与地域分工的影响,景观整体多样性的演 变受到社会经济发展水平的强烈影响,而自然生态条件则是景观整体结构变化的重要约束因子.

[Li Weifeng, Wang Yanglin, Peng Jian, et al.Landscape spatial changes in Shenzhen and their driving factors. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2004, 15(8): 1403-1410.]

[46]
Knaapen J P, Scheffer M, Harms B.Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1992, 23(1): 1-16.Habitat patches situated amidst an otherwise inhospitable landscape are often considered as islands in the sense of the equilibrium theory of insular zoogeography. Their species richness can be affected by isolation from other areas of suitable habitat. However, the isolation of habitat islands is not only dependent on the distance from the source area, as with oceanic islands, but also on the characteristics of the interjacent landscape. To account for the latter, the use of a measure of isolation termed ‘minimal cumulative resistance’ (MCR) is proposed. A simple model is described for calculating MCR from a grid-based map on which estimated dispersal resistances are assigned to landscape types. Application of the model is illustrated with a specific case: the allocation of new forests in the western part of the Netherlands. Although its application is bound by a number of restrictions, it is concluded that the model can be a useful aid in physical planning and nature conservation.

DOI

[47]
张小飞, 李正国, 王如松, 等. 基于功能网络评价的城市生态安全格局研究: 以常州市为例. 北京大学学报: 自然科学版, 2009, 45(4): 728-736.基于景观功能网络评价,提出城市复合空间优化方案,并选择常州市 为研究区,实证城市生态安全格局理念在空间优化过程中的操作性.由于城市为整合社会、经济与生态功能的复合生态系统,本研究首先依据城市景观功能与结构特 征,将城市空间结构分为支持社会经济功能的红色景观,维持能源、资金、产品与信息传播、流通的灰色景观、保持生物多样性与调节区域环境的蓝色景观及绿色景 观.其次由功能网络连通性及其相互作用的角度分析城市景观格局、功能流路径与不同功能流在空间上的相互作用,以获得生态功能冲突与环境敏感区域的空间位 置.最后,从功能整体协调发展角度,将研究区分为优化开发、调整开发、限制开发及禁止开等分区,针对其存在的生态安全问题,提出符合城市生态安全的空间优 化方案.

[Zhang Xiaofei, Li Zhengguo, Wang Rusong, et al.Study on network analysis for urban ecological security pattern in Changzhou City. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2009, 45(4): 728-736.]

[48]
Wang Y H, Yang K C, Bridgman C L, et al.Habitat suitability modelling to correlate gene flow with landscape connectivity. Landscape Ecology, 2008, 23(8): 989-1000.ABSTRACT Landscape connectivity is important in designing corridor and reserve networks. Combining genetic distances among individuals with least-cost path (LCP) modelling helps to correlate indirect measures of gene flow with landscape connectivity. Applicability of LCP modelling, however, is reduced if knowledge on dispersal pathways or routes is lacking. Therefore, we integrated habitat suitability modelling into LCP analysis to avoid the subjectivity common in LCP analyses lacking knowledge on dispersal pathways or routes. We used presence-only data and ecological niche factor analysis to model habitat suitability for the spiny rat, Niviventer coninga, in a fragmented landscape of western Taiwan. We adapted the resultant habitat suitability map for incorporation into LCP analyses. Slightly increased Mantel correlations indicated that a class-weighted suitability map better explained genetic distances among individuals than did geographical distances. The integration of habitat suitability modelling into LCP analysis can thus generate information on distribution of suitable habitats, on potential routes of dispersal, for placement of corridors, and evaluate landscape connectivity.

DOI

[49]
Huck M, Jędrzejewski W, Borowik T, et al.Analyses of least cost paths for determining effects of habitat types on landscape permeability: Wolves in Poland. Acta Theriologica, 2011, 56(1): 91-101.Determining ecological corridors is crucial for conservation efforts in fragmented habitats. Commonly employed least cost path (LCP) analysis relies on the underlying cost matrix. By using Ecological Niche Factor Analysis, we minimized the problems connected with subjective cost assessment or the use of presence/absence data. We used data on the wolf presence/absence in Poland to identify LCPs connecting patches of suitable wolf habitat, factors that influence patch occupancy, and compare LCPs between different genetic subpopulations. We found that a lower proportion of cities and roads surrounds the most densely populated patches. Least cost paths between areas where little dispersal takes place (i.e., leading to unpopulated patches or between different genetic subpopulations) ran through a higher proportion of roads and human settlements. They also crossed larger maximal distances over deforested areas. We propose that, apart from supplying the basis for direct conservation efforts, LCPs can be used to determine what factors might facilitate or hinder dispersal by comparing different subsets of LCPs. The methods employed can be widely applicable to gain more in-depth information on potential dispersal barriers for large carnivores.

DOI PMID

[50]
HepcanÇ C, Özkan M B.Establishing ecological networks for habitat conservation in the case of Çeşme-Urla Peninsula, Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2011, 174(1-4): 157-170.ABSTRACT The study involves the eme-Urla Peninsula, where habitat fragmentation and loss, which threaten biological diversity, have become an urgent matter of concern in recent decades. The study area has been subjected to anthropogenic pressures and alterations due to ongoing and impending land uses. Therefore, ecological networks, as an appropriate way to deal with habitat fragmentation and loss and to improve ecological quality, were identified in the study area as one of the early attempts in the country to maintain its rich biodiversity. In this sense, core areas and ecological linkages as primary components of ecological networks were established on the basis of sustaining natural habitats. A GIS-based model was created to identify core areas and to facilitate the ecological connectivity. The modeling process for core areas and corridors combined 14 and 21 different variables, respectively. The variables were used as environmental inputs in the model, and all analyses were materialized in ArcGIS 9.2 using grid functions of image analysis and spatial analyst modules. As a result, six core areas and 36 corridor alternatives were materialized. Furthermore, some recommendations for the implementation and management of the proposed ecological networks were revealed and discussed.

DOI PMID

[51]
孔繁花, 尹海伟. 济南城市绿地生态网络构建. 生态学报, 2008, 28(4): 1711-1719.城市绿地为城市生物多样性保护提供了重要的空间保障。改善与提高城市绿地生态网络的连接对保护城市生物多样性具有重要意义。以济南市为例，在gis技术的支撑下，在考虑不同绿地斑块间的距离与景观阻力的基础上，采用最小路径方法，定量表征与模拟了研究区的潜在生态廊道，并基于重力模型和网络连接度指数，对绿地斑块间相互作用强度与生态网络结构进行了定量分析与评价。研究结果表明，风景林、滨水绿地和公园绿地是组成研究区生态网络的优势景观类型；济南绿地系统规划中的许多斑块在生态网络中起着“踏脚石”的作用，但占规划绿地面积的比例不高；不同绿地斑块间的相互作用强度差异显著，斑块之间相互作用强的绿地廊道在生态网络中的地位突出，对生物物种的丰富度、迁移与扩散等起着重要作用，而斑块之间相互作用弱的廊道景观阻力大，生境适宜性低，必须在未来的绿地系统规划中加以改善；网络结构越复杂，连接度与闭合度水平越高，对物种的迁移与扩散就越有利。因此，增加绿地斑块，优化绿地空间布局，改善绿地斑块间的连接，完善城市绿地网络是新一轮城市绿地系统规划的关键任务。研究结果可为城市建设者与规划者进行城市绿地系统规划提供科学的依据与参考信息。

DOI

[Kong Fanhua, Yin Haiwei.Developing green space ecological networks in Jinan city. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(4): 1711-1719.]

[52]
刘珍环, 王仰麟, 彭建, 等. 基于不透水表面指数的城市地表覆被格局特征: 以深圳市为例. 地理学报, 2011, 66(7): 961-971.以遥感数据进行土地利用/覆被分类为基础,利用景观格局指数研究快速城市化地区地表覆被格局变化时,面临两大难题,即①混合像元影响分类的精度存在不确定性,直接影响格局分析结论的可靠性；②景观格局指数,难以有效分析城市内部局部地区景观格局演变过程的变化特征。针对上述关键问题,本文以不透水表面组分表征城市的主体景观,运用地统计学及剖面线方法分析深圳市地表覆被格局的空间分异及其演变特征。结果表明①1990-2005年,深圳地表覆被空间格局经历了分散—单中心聚集—多中心分散—多中心聚集的演变过程,在经历了东西—西北东南—东北西南—南北方向的发展过程后,景观整体的自相关程度高,空间梯度差异小。1990年的不透水表面组分比2005年低20%~40%,并且早期局地变化波动较大,后期变化波动明显减小。在局地空间演变上,老城区变化小,新城区及工业区变化大,城市不透水表面的局地空间差异性显著缩小。②城市不透水表面具有显著的梯度特征,在空间上主要呈现连续渐变的特点,因而在格局分析方法上,地统计学与剖面线方法可以同时从整体和局地两个层次对空间格局演变进行有效刻画。

DOI

[Liu Zhenhuan, Wang Yanglin, Peng Jian, et al.Using ISA to analyze the spatial pattern of urban land cover change: A case study in Shenzhen. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2011, 66(7): 961-971.]

[53]
Zhang L Q, Peng J, Liu Y X, et al.Coupling ecosystem services supply and human ecological demand to identify landscape ecological security pattern: A case study in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China. Urban Ecosystems, 2016, DOI: 10.1007/s11252-016-0629-y.Landscape ecological security pattern (LESP) can effectively safeguard urban ecological security, which is vital for urban sustainable development. Previous studies have not adequately considered the

DOI

[54]
贾良清, 欧阳志云, 赵同谦, 等. 安徽省生态功能区划研究. 生态学报, 2005, 25(2): 254-260.生态功能区划是依据区域生态系统类型、生态系统受胁迫过程与效应、生态环境敏感性、生态服务功能重要性等特征的空间分异性而进行的地理空间分区 ,其目的是明确区域或国家生态安全重要地区 ,分析区域可能的生态环境问题与生态环境脆弱区 ,为产业布局、生态环境保护与建设规划提供科学依据 ,为实施区域生态环境分区管理提供基础和前提。在对区域生态环境特征分析的基础上 ,依据建立的生态功能区划原则、方法和指标体系 ,以安徽省域尺度生态系统为对象 ,在生态系统受胁迫过程与效应、生态环境敏感性和生态系统服务功能等指标评价的基础上 ,以中国生态环境区划方案为背景 ,综合了自然因素与人类活动对安徽省生态系统叠加影响 ,形成了安徽省生态功能区划方案 ,将安徽省分为 5个生态区、16个生态亚区、4 7个生态功能区 ,为生态保护与建设的重点、目标、措施的确定以及区域产业结构与布局的调整提供了重要依据

DOI

[Jia Liangqing, Ouyang Zhiyun, Zhao Tongqian, et al.The ecological function regionalization of Anhui Province. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2005, 25(2): 254-260.]

[55]
燕乃玲, 赵秀华, 虞孝感. 长江源区生态功能区划与生态系统管理. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(5): 598-602.生态功能区划是近年来我国着力建设的一个新的关于资源与环境管理的框架。首先简要讨论了生态功能区划的性质，指出生态功能区划是基于生态系统的地理框架。与生态区比较，生态功能区强调人文活动对生态系统提供产品和服务能力的影响，并反映人类的价值判断。生态功能区划的最终目的是以生态系统的等级结构和尺度原则为基础，在不同尺度水平上实施“基于生态系统的管理”。以长江源区为例，进行了生态功能区划的实证分析。其基本认识是，按照生态系统的自然边界划分生态系统单元；进行生态系统描述和评价；在确定主导生态功能的基础上划分不同的生态功能区。最后讨论了按照生态系统原理对长江源生态功能分区进行管理和建设。

DOI

[Yan Nailing, Zhao Xiuhua, Yu Xiaogan.Ecosystem delineation on priority ecosystem services and ecosystem management in the upper Yangze river. Resources and Environment in the Yangze Basin, 2006, 15(5): 598-602.]

[56]
樊杰. 中国主体功能区划方案. 地理学报, 2015, 70(2): 186-201.中国主体功能区划方案是刻画未来中国国土空间开发与保护格局的规划蓝图,主体功能区规划已上升为主体功能区战略和主体功能区制度。2004-2014年,笔者组织系列研究项目,配合国家编制主体功能区规划,研究地域功能基础理论和功能区划技术流程,提出国家和省区尺度进行空间管制的地域功能区域类型为城市化区域、粮食安全区域、生态安全区域、文化和自然遗产区域等4类,在此基础上转化为以县级行政区划为单元的优化开发、重点开发、限制开发和禁止开发4类主体功能区。研制了由水资源、土地资源,生态重要性、生态脆弱性、环境容量、灾害危险性、经济发展水平、人口集聚度和交通优势度等9类可定量指标及战略选择为1项定性指标构成的地域功能识别指标体系,进行了单项指标评价,开发并运用地域功能适宜程度综合评价指数进行了综合评价,测算了各省区保护类区域下限、开发类区域上限以及开发强度等关键参数;研讨了以规划为应用指向的主体功能区划分方法,形成中国首部主体功能区划方案,按照全国主体功能区规划口径,2020年与2010年相比,全国国土空间开发强度从3.48%增加到3.91%;按照省区集成的主体功能区规划口径,优化、重点、限制开发区域的土地面积比重分别为1.48%、13.60%、84.92%,城市化、粮食安全、生态安全区域的土地面积比重分别为15.08%、26.11%、58.81%。结合区域发展水平、资源环境承载状态、民生质量等相关分析,给出了主体功能区的主要特征。通过区划方案校验,国家和省区分两级采用笔者主持制定的《主体功能区划技术规程》互动完成的全国主体功能区划方案,同预判的吻合程度多为80%以上。

DOI

[Fan Jie.Draft of major function oriented zoning of China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2015, 70(2): 186-201.]

[57]
周锐, 王新军, 苏海龙, 等. 平顶山新区生态用地的识别与安全格局构建. 生态学报, 2015, 35(6): 2003-2012.生态用地对城市生态安全具有重要意义,关键性生态用地的识别与安全格局的构建是实现城市精明增长和生态保护的重要途径。以河南省平顶山新区为例,结合GIS（Geographic Information System）空间技术,分析得到基于水资源安全、地质灾害规避、生物多样性保护三种单一过程的生态用地,进而综合叠加并重分类为理想型、缓冲型和底线型三类生态用地,并以底线型生态用地为源,现状土地覆被为阻力因子,应用最小累积阻力模型构建了平顶山新区生态用地的安全格局。结果表明：新区内最小生态用地,即底线型生态用地的面积为88.44 km^2,占研究区总面积的29.35%;缓冲型和理想型生态用地的面积分别为22.28 km^2和43.87 km^2。确定了三种安全水平的生态用地范围、＂源＂与外部联系的辐射道、＂源＂间连接的生态廊道、关键的生态节点等。关键性生态用地综合安全格局的构建,旨在为研究区城市生态规划和城镇空间布局规划等提供科学参考。

DOI

[Zhou Rui, Wang Xinjun, Su Hailong, et al.Identification and security pattern of ecological land in Pingdingshan newly developed area. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2015, 35(6): 2003-2012.]

[58]
黄艺, 蔡佳亮, 吕明姬, 等. 流域水生态功能区划及其关键问题. 生态环境学报, 2009, 18(5): 1995-2000.作为流域生态系统管理和水资源保护的重要手段,如何科学合理地开展流域水生态功能区划,已成为世界各国可持续发展所面临的关键挑战之一。本文立足我国流域综合管理的特点和发展趋势,针对我国现行水功能区划的问题,结合国外流域水生态区划的经验,提出了基于流域生态学、地域分异规律、生态系统健康与生态完整性、流域生态系统管理等理论基础的,以恢复流域持续性、完整性生态系统健康为目标,反映流域水陆耦合体在不同时空尺度景观异质性的流域水生态功能区划及其原则,重点分析了流域水生态系统的空间格局、生态过程以及动态演替等3个区划的关键问题,并提出了区划的方法,以期为我国流域水生态功能区划和流域生态系统管理提供战略层次的科学依据。

DOI

[Huang Yi, Cai Jialiang, Lv Mingji, et al.Aquatic ecological function regionalization at watershed scale and its key issues. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2009, 18(5): 1995-2000.]

[59]
Groffman P M, Baron J S, Blett T, et al.Ecological thresholds: The key to successful environmental management or an important concept with no practical application? Ecosystems, 2006, 9(1): 1-13.lt;a name="Abs1"></a>An ecological threshold is the point at which there is an abrupt change in an ecosystem quality, property or phenomenon, or where small changes in an environmental driver produce large responses in the ecosystem. Analysis of thresholds is complicated by nonlinear dynamics and by multiple factor controls that operate at diverse spatial and temporal scales. These complexities have challenged the use and utility of threshold concepts in environmental management despite great concern about preventing dramatic state changes in valued ecosystems, the need for determining critical pollutant loads and the ubiquity of other threshold-based environmental problems. In this paper we define the scope of the thresholds concept in ecological science and discuss methods for identifying and investigating thresholds using a variety of examples from terrestrial and aquatic environments, at ecosystem, landscape and regional scales. We end with a discussion of key research needs in this area.

DOI

[60]
Daily G C, Matson P A.Ecosystem services: From theory to implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2008, 105(28): 9455-9456.

PMID

[61]
Tallis H, Kareiva P, Marvier M, et al.An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. PNAS, 2008, 105(28): 9457-9464.The core idea of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment is that the human condition is tightly linked to environmental condition. This assertion suggests that conservation and development projects should be able to achieve both ecological and social progress without detracting from their primary objectives. Whereas "win-win" projects that achieve both conservation and economic gains are a commendable goal, they are not easy to attain. An analysis of World Bank projects with objectives of alleviating poverty and protecting biodiversity revealed that only 16% made major progress on both objectives. Here, we provide a framework for anticipating win-win, lose-lose, and win-lose outcomes as a result of how people manage their ecosystem services. This framework emerges from detailed explorations of several case studies in which biodiversity conservation and economic development coincide and cases in which there is joint failure. We emphasize that scientific advances around ecosystem service production functions, tradeoffs among multiple ecosystem services, and the design of appropriate monitoring programs are necessary for the implementation of conservation and development projects that will successfully advance both environmental and social goals. The potentially bright future of jointly advancing ecosystem services, conservation, and human well-being will be jeopardized unless a global monitoring effort is launched that uses the many ongoing projects as a grand experiment.

DOI PMID

[62]
Peng J, Zhao H J, Liu Y X.Urban ecological corridors construction: A review. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(1): 23-30.Abstract An ecological corridor, with both ecological and cultural functions, is a symbol of urban ecological or green civilization, and has therefore become one of the major topics in the fields of landscape ecology, urban ecology, and ecological planning. On the one hand, along with the prominent contradiction between regional ecological protection and economic development, as well as between the growing ecological demands of urban residents and the destruction of natural ecosystems, the construction of urban ecological corridors is very challenging. On the other hand, with contemporary urbanization and ecological civilization development, the standards and requirements for the construction of urban ecological corridors are set higher and higher. Constructing an urban ecological corridor is therefore particularly important, and must adopt a spatial approach that balances the relationship between ecological protection and economic development. In this study, the classification of urban ecological corridors was firstly conducted according to the structural or functional differences. Secondly, research progress on the construction of urban ecological corridors was systematically summarized and the main inadequacies were indicated. Following the analysis of the main methods employed in the construction of urban ecological corridors, existing methods were classified into three kinds, i.e. qualitative analysis, quantitative analysis, and spatial analysis. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of the methods of subjective judgment, suitability and sensitivity analysis, network analysis, and minimum cost path analysis were compared. To provide theoretical support for the construction and management of urban ecological corridors, four key research directions were also pointed out, i.e. the identification of key nodes of urban ecological corridor, the determination of the width of urban ecological corridor, the measurement of integrated effect of urban ecological corridor, and the multi-scale integration of urban ecological corridor. The present study will aid in accelerating and improving the process of ecological corridors construction in China's new-type urbanization.

DOI

[63]
Hobbs R J.The role of corridors in conservation: Solution or bandwagon? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 1992, 7(11): 389-392.Abstract Corridors are currently a major buzzword in conservation biology and landscape ecology. These linear landscape features may perform numerous functions, but it is their role in facilitating movement of fauna that has attracted much recent debate. The database supporting the idea of corridors acting as faunal conduits is remarkably small, and few studies have actually demonstrated that movement along corridors is important for any given species. Such data are very difficult to obtain, and conservation biologists are thus faced with the problem of whether to recommend the allocation of resources to corridors on the assumption that they may be important.

DOI PMID

[64]
朱强, 俞孔坚, 李迪华. 景观规划中的生态廊道宽度. 生态学报, 2005, 25(9): 2406-2412.生态廊道具有保护生物多样性、过滤污染物、防止水土流失、防风固沙、调控洪水等多种功能。建立生态廊道是景观生态规划的重要方法,是解决当前人类剧烈活动造成的景观破碎化以及随之而来的众多环境问题的重要措施。按照生态廊道的主要结构与功能,可将其分为线状生态廊道、带状生态廊道和河流廊道3种类型。生态廊道设计包括的关键问题有廊道数目、本底、宽度、联接度、构成要素、关键点(区)等。由于生态廊道结构与功能的复杂性,使得廊道的宽度具有很大的不确定性。具体的讲,生态廊道的宽度由保护目标、植被情况、廊道功能、周围土地利用,廊道长度等多个因素决定。合适的廊道宽度应该根据对廊道主要生态过程的研究来确定。从景观的结构与功能分析出发,分别从生物保护廊道和河流廊道两方面对生态廊道的宽度及其影响因素进行分析,并对相关研究成果进行综述,总结得出两种类型生态廊道的适宜宽度值范围。最后提出确定宽度时应该注意的相关问题。

DOI

[Zhu Qiang, Yu Kongjian, Li Dihua.The width of ecological corridor in landscape planning. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2005, 25(9): 2406-2412.]

[65]
李阳菊, 马立辉, 赖杨阳, 等. 重庆合川区城乡绿地系统景观生态安全格局分析. 西南农业大学学报: 社会科学版, 2010, 8(3): 1-4.以重庆合川区为例,在对土地利用现状及地貌、高程、水文、坡度径流、地质灾害、土壤侵蚀程度等环境因子分析评价的基础上,运用层次分析法和因子加权叠加法,分析评价研究区的生态敏感性,探讨了城乡绿地系统的景观安全的格局,旨在为山地地区城乡绿地系统景观格局规划提供依据。

DOI

[Li Yangju, Ma Lihui, Lai Yangyang, et al.Urban and rural landscape ecological security pattern of the green space system analysis in Hechun, Chongqing. Journal of Southwest Agricultural University: Social Science Edition, 2010, 8(3): 1-4.]

Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉