Ecological Compensation Mechanism Study of Guangdong Province Based on Spilled Ecosystem Service Value

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2022.05.018

Ecology and Environment ›› 2022, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (5): 1024-1031.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2022.05.018

• Research Articles • Previous Articles Next Articles

Ecological Compensation Mechanism Study of Guangdong Province Based on Spilled Ecosystem Service Value

LIU Xianghua¹^,²^,³(), WANG Xiuming¹^,²^,³, LIU Xuchen¹^,²^,³^,^*(), ZHANG Yinbo¹^,²^,³, LIU Piao¹^,²^,³

1. South China Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Guangzhou 510655, P. R. China
2. South China Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Ecology and Environment (Guangdong Think Tank), Guangzhou 510655, P. R. China
3. National Key Laboratory of Urban Ecological Environment Simulation and Protection, Guangzhou 510655, P. R. China.

Received:2021-11-30 Online:2022-05-18 Published:2022-07-12
Contact: LIU Xuchen

基于外溢生态系统服务价值的广东省生态补偿机制研究

刘香华¹^,²^,³(), 王秀明¹^,²^,³, 刘谞承¹^,²^,³^,^*(), 张音波¹^,²^,³, 刘飘¹^,²^,³

1.生态环境部华南环境科学研究所,广东广州 510655
2.生态环境部华南环境科学研究所（广东省重点智库）,广东广州 510655
3.国家环境保护城市生态环境模拟与保护重点实验室,广东广州 510655

通讯作者: 刘谞承
作者简介:刘香华（1986年生）,女,工程师,硕士研究生,主要从事生态保护政策研究。E-mail: 550779812@qq.com
基金资助:
中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务专项(PM-zx703-202104-061);国家重点研发计划项目(2019YFC1803900)

Abstract

Abstract:

Ecological compensation plays a key role in realizing the value of ecological product in ecological protected area. In the current study, the value of ecosystem services in 21 cities of Guangdong Province was calculated considering both the spillover of regional ecological regulation services and the differences in economic development. In order to promote benefit-sharing between the service providing areas and the benefiting areas, a regionally ecological compensation plan with an estimate of the amount of ecological compensation was also proposed. The analysis results showed that: (1) The value of ecosystem services was generally higher in the mountainous areas including northern Guangdong, the west of Guangdong, and the peripheral area of Pearl River Delta, while the value of the core area of Pearl River Delta and the east of Guangdong were relatively low. (2) The value realization rate of ecological products in different regions was 8%-47%. The realization rate in the core area of Pearl River Delta, the east of Guangdong and the west of Guangdong was generally higher than 30%, while the value realization rate of ecological products in the peripheral areas of the Pearl River Delta and northern Guangdong are relatively low. Therefore, it is urgent to improve the value realization rate of ecosystem services through ecological compensation. (3) Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Foshan, and Dongguan are benefiting areas and also economically more developed. These areas should take the lead in paying the ecological compensation. The total estimated amount of the ecological payment was 0.154-1.278 billion RMB, which would account for 0.3%-1.1% in local financial revenue. The financial burden for these cities would be relatively small according to the estimation. (4) Zhaoqing, Jiangmen, Maoming, Yangjiang and Shanwei along with five other cities in north Guangdong should receive ecological compensations. These areas are the largest ecosystem services provider while being relatively poor. Our estimate of the amount of ecological compensation for each cities were 0.020-0.963 billion RMB, which would account for 0.4%-7.7% of their fiscal revenue. This strategy would greatly improve the financial situation of these areas, and play a positive role in promoting ecological protection and restoration efforts. (5) Five cities including Zhanjiang, Zhongshan, Chaozhou, Jieyang and Shantou were also benefiting areas but might not be able to pay ecological compensations. These cities should delay the compensation payment plans. Huizhou was also an ecosystem service provider but more economically developed, therefore no ecological compensation was proposed for the city at this time. This research provide a reference for the practice of horizontal ecological compensation in Guangdong Province, and promote the realization of ecological product value in ecological protected areas.

Key words: ecological compensation, ecosystem service value, spilled ecological regulation services, ecological product value, compensation mechanism, Guangdong Province

摘要：

生态补偿是实现生态保护地区生态产品价值的重要措施。该文以广东省为研究区,开展了21个地市的生态系统服务功能价值核算,综合考虑各地生态系统调节服务价值的外溢情况和经济发展水平构建区域生态补偿方案,确定生态补偿额,促进生态受益地区和生态外溢地区利益共享。结果表明,（1）粤北山区、粤西和珠三角外围区域生态系统服务价值高于珠三角核心区域和粤东等地。（2）各地生态产品价值实现率为8%—47%。珠三角核心地区、粤东和粤西地区生态产品价值实现率普遍高于30%;珠三角外围区域和粤北等地则相对较低,亟需通过生态补偿等途径提高区域生态产品价值实现率。（3）广州、深圳、珠海、佛山、东莞五地生态受益,因经济较发达可率先开展1.54×10⁸—12.78×10⁸元的生态支付,金额约占各地地方财政收入的比例为0.3%—1.1%,对支付主体的财政压力相对较小。（4）粤北山区、肇庆、江门、茂名、阳江和汕尾共10地生态外溢,因经济欠发达,需优先接受0.20×10⁸—9.63×10⁸元的生态补偿金额,约占各地地方财政收入的比例为0.4%—7.7%,能较大改善补偿地区的财政状况,积极地推动该地开展生态保护修复工作。（5）湛江、中山、潮州、揭阳、汕头5地生态受益但因支付能力不足,建议暂缓生态支付;惠州生态外溢但生态和经济协调发展,可暂缓接受生态补偿。研究结果可为广东省区域横向生态补偿机制建设及落实提供参考,促进生态保护地区生态产品价值实现。

关键词: 生态补偿, 生态系统服务价值, 外溢生态调节服务, 生态产品价值, 补偿机制, 广东省

CLC Number:

X196

LIU Xianghua, WANG Xiuming, LIU Xuchen, ZHANG Yinbo, LIU Piao. Ecological Compensation Mechanism Study of Guangdong Province Based on Spilled Ecosystem Service Value[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(5): 1024-1031.

刘香华, 王秀明, 刘谞承, 张音波, 刘飘. 基于外溢生态系统服务价值的广东省生态补偿机制研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(5): 1024-1031.

Figures/Tables 7

References 32

[1]	COSTANZA R, D’ARGE R, DE GROOT R, et al., 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital[J]. Nature, 387(6630): 253-260. DOI URL
[2]	DAILY G C, 1997. Nature’s Services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems[M]. Washington DC: Island Press: 1-392.
[3]	FARLEY J, COSTANZA R, 2010. Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global[J]. Ecological Economics, 16(11): 2060-2068.
[4]	GAO X, SHEN J Q, HE W J, et al., 2021. Spatial-temporal analysis of ecosystem services value and research on ecological compensation in Taihu Lake Basin of Jiangsu Province in China from 2005 to 2018[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 317: 1-18.
[5]	HEIN L, BAGSTAD K J, OBST C, et al., 2020. Progress in natural capital accounting for ecosystems global statistical standards are being developed[J]. Science, 367(6477): 514-515. DOI URL
[6]	JIN Y, HUANG J F, PEGN D L, et al., 2009. A new quantitative model of ecological compensation based on ecosystem capital in Zhejiang Province, China[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University: Science B, 10(4): 301-305. DOI URL
[7]	PASCUAL U, PHELP J, GARMENDIA E, et al., 2014. Social equity matters in payments for ecosystem services[J]. Bioscience, 64(11): 1027-1036. DOI URL
[8]	陈梅, 纪荣婷, 刘溪, 等, 2021. “两山”基地生态系统生产总值核算与“两山”转化分析——以浙江省宁海县为例[J]. 生态学报, 41(14): 5899-5907.
	CHEN M, JI R T, LIU X, et al., 2021. Gross ecosystem product accounting for ‘two mountains’ bases and transformation analysis: the case study of Ninghai county[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 41(14): 5899-5907.
[9]	程翠云, 葛察忠, 杜艳春, 等, 2019. 浙江省衢州市绿金指数核算研究[J]. 生态学报, 39(1): 37-44.
	CHENG C Y, GE C Z, DU Y C, et al., 2019. Green gold index accounting for Quzhou City in Zhejiang Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(1): 37-44.
[10]	董天, 张路, 肖燚, 等, 2019. 鄂尔多斯市生态资产和生态系统生产总值评估[J]. 生态学报, 39(9): 3062-3074.
	DONG T, ZHANG L, XIAO Y, et al., 2019. Assessment of ecological assets and gross ecosystem product value in Ordos City[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(9): 3062-3074.
[11]	邓元杰, 侯孟阳, 贾磊, 等, 2022. 基于生态系统服务价值评估的长征沿线革命老区生态补偿策略[J]. 应用生态学报, 33(1): 159-168.
	DENG Y J, HOU M Y, JIA L, et al., 2022. Ecological compensation strategy of the old revolutionary base areas along the route of Long March based on ecosystem service value evaluation[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 33(1): 159-168.
[12]	国家林业局, 2008. 森林生态系统服务功能评估规范:LY/T 1721—2008 [S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社: 4-12.
	Steta Forestry Administration, 2008. Specifications for assessment of forest ecosystem services in China:LY/T 1721—2008 [S]. Beijing: China Standard Press: 4-12.
[13]	黄晶晶, 李玲玲, 徐琳瑜, 2021. 基于外溢生态系统服务的区域生态补偿机制研究[J]. 生态学报, 41(17): 1-8.
	HUANG J J, LI L L, XU L Y, 2021. Regional ecosystem compensation based on spilled ecosystem service value assessment[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 41(17): 1-8. DOI URL
[14]	林秀珠, 李小斌, 李家兵, 等, 2017. 基于机会成本和生态系统服务价值的闽江流域生态补偿标准研究[J]. 水土保持研究, 24(2): 314-319.
	LIN X Z, LI X B, LI J B, et al., 2017. Research on ecological compensation standard in Minjiang river basin based on opportunity cost and ecosystem services values[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 24(2): 314-319.
[15]	柳荻, 胡振通, 靳乐山, 2018. 生态保护补偿的分析框架研究综述[J]. 生态学报, 38(2): 380-392.
	LIU D, HU Z T, JIN L S, 2018. Review on analytical framework of eco-compensation[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(2): 380-392.
[16]	李丽, 王心源, 骆磊, 等, 2018. 生态系统服务价值评估方法综述[J]. 生态学杂志, 37(4):1233-1245.
	LI L, WANG X Y, LUO L, et al., 2018. A systematic review on the methods of ecosystem services value assessment[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 37(4): 1233-1245.
[17]	李凡, 颜晗冰, 吕果, 等, 2021. 生态产品价值实现机制的前提研究——以南京市高淳区生态系统生产总值 (GEP) 核算为例[J]. 环境保护, 49(12): 51-58.
	LI F, YAN H B, LÜ G, et al., 2021. Research on the premise of ecological product value realization mechanism: A case study of Gaochun district, Nanjing[J]. Environmental Protection, 49(12): 51-58.
[18]	马国霞, 於方, 王金南, 等, 2017. 中国2015年陆地生态系统生产总值核算研究[J]. 中国环境科学, 37(4): 1474-1482.
	MA G X, YU F, WANG J N, et al., 2017. Measuring gross ecosystem product (GEP) of 2015 for terrestrial ecosystems in China[J]. China Environmental Science, 37(4): 1474-1482.
[19]	牛乐, 王娇月, 郗凤明, 等, 2021. 基于生态系统服务付费模型的福州市区域生态补偿额度核算[J]. 应用生态学报, 32(11): 3805-3814.
	NIU L, WANG J Y, XI F M, et al., 2021. Regional ecological compensation accounting in Fuzhou City based on a payment for ecosystem services (PES) model[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 32(11): 3805-3814.
[20]	欧阳志云, 王效科, 苗鸿, 等, 1999a. 中国陆地生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值的初步研究[J]. 生态学报, 19(5): 19-25.
	OUYANG Z Y, WANG X K, MIAO H, et al., 1999. A primary study on Chinese terrestrial ecosystem services and their ecological-economic values[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica. 19(5): 19-25.
[21]	欧阳志云, 王如松, 赵景柱, 1999b. 生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价[J]. 应用生态学报, 10(5): 635-640.
	OUYANG Z Y, WANG R S, ZHAO J Z, 1999. Ecosystem services and their economic valuation[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 10(5): 635-640.
[22]	欧阳志云, 朱春全, 杨广斌, 等, 2013. 生态系统生产总值核算: 概念、核算方法与案例研究[J]. 生态学报, 33(21): 6747-6761.
	OUYANG Z Y, ZHU C Q, YANG G B, et al., 2013. Gross ecosystem product: concept, accounting framework and case study[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(21): 6747-6761. DOI URL
[23]	宋昌素, 欧阳志云, 2020. 面向生态效益评估的生态系统生产总值GEP核算研究——以青海省为例[J]. 生态学报, 40(10): 3207-3217.
	SONG C S, OUYANG Z Y, 2020. Gross ecosystem product accounting for ecological benefits assessment: A case study of Qinghai Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40(10): 3207-3217.
[24]	汪东川, 孙志超, 孙然好, 等, 2019. 京津冀城市群生态系统服务价值的时空动态演变[J]. 生态环境学报, 28(7): 1285-1296.
	WANG D C, SUN Z C, SUN R H, et al., 2019. Spatial-temporal dynamic evolution of ecosystem service value in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 28(7): 1285-1296.
[25]	王秀明, 刘谞承, 龙颖贤, 等, 2020. 基于改进的InVEST模型的韶关市生态系统服务功能时空变化特征及影响因素[J]. 水土保持研究, 27(5): 381-388.
	WANG X M, LIU X C, LONG Y X, et al., 2020. Spatial-Temporal changes and influencing factors of ecosystem services in Shaoguan City based on improved invest[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 27(5): 381-388.
[26]	王秀明, 赵鹏, 龙颖贤, 等, 2022. 基于生态安全格局的粤港澳地区陆域空间生态保护修复重点区域识别[J]. 生态学报, 42(2): 1-12.
	WANG X M, ZHAO P, LONG Y X, et al., 2022. Identification of key areas of land space ecological protection and restoration based on the pattern of ecological security in Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macau[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 42(2): 1-12.
[27]	谢高地, 鲁春霞, 冷允法, 等, 2003. 青藏高原生态资产的价值评估[J]. 自然资源报, 18(2): 189-196.
	XIE G D, LU C X, LENG Y F, et al., 2003. Valuation of ecological assets in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 18(2): 189-196.
[28]	於方, 杨威杉, 马国霞, 等, 2020. 生态价值核算的国内外最新进展与展望[J]. 环境保护, 48(14): 18-24.
	YU F, YANG W S, MA G X, et al., 2020. The latest development and prospect of ecological value accounting at home and abroad[J]. Environmental Protection, 48(14): 18-24.
[29]	袁广达, 蔡昀, 2022. 生态系统服务价值下的新安江跨界生态补偿标准设计[J]. 生态经济, 38(2): 142-149.
	YUAN G D, CAI J, 2022. Accounting of Xin’an River cross-regional ecological compensation standard based on value of ecosystem services[J]. Ecological Economy, 38(2): 142-149.
[30]	赵志刚, 余德, 王凯荣, 等, 2020. 赣西地区生态系统服务价值与生态补偿策略[J]. 生态学报, 40(20): 7507-7518.
	ZHAO Z G, YU D, WANG K R, et al., 2020. Ecosystem services value evaluation and strategies of payment for ecosystem service in western Jiangxi Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40(20): 7507-7518.
[31]	张晓娅, 杜凤莲, 2022. 阿拉善左旗沙区居民生态补偿支付意愿及其影响因素[J]. 中国沙漠, 42(2): 54-61.
	ZHANG X Y, DU F L, 2022. Influencing factors of residents’ willingness to pay for ecological compensation in sand area of Alxa Left Banner, Inner Mongolia, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 42(2): 54-61.
[32]	浙江省市场监督管理局, 2020. 生态系统生产总值 (GEP) 核算技术规范陆域生态系统: DB33/T 2274—2020[S]. 杭州: 浙江省市场监督管理局: 22.
	Zhejiang Provincial Administration for Market Regulation, 2020. Technical specification for accounting gross ecosystem product (GEP)-terrestrial ecosystem: DB33/T 2274—2020[S]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang Provincial Administration for Market Regulation: 22.

功能类型 Functional type	核算公式 Accounting formula	说明和参数来源 Description and source of parameters
产品供给 Product supply	—	受新冠疫情影响,采用各地区2019年农林牧渔业产值代替2020年度产品供给服务价值,数据来源于地方统计年鉴
水源涵养 Water conservation	U_wr=Q_wr×P_w	U_wr为水源涵养服务价值;水源涵养服务实物量Q_wr的核算采用修正的InVEST模型计算,计算过程和参数见参考文献（王秀明等,2020）;水库单位库容的工程造价P_w参考相关成果折算得出（浙江省市场监督管理局,2020）
土壤保持 Soil conservation	U_sr=U_sd+U_dpd U_sd=λ×(Q_sr/ρ)×P_c U_dpd=∑n i=1Q_sr×C_i×P_i/R_i	U_sr为土壤保持服务价值,包括减少泥沙淤积（U_sd）和减少面源污染（U_dpd）两方面;Q_sr为水土保持服务功能实物量,计算过程和参数选择详见相关研究成果（欧阳志云等,2013）;P_c为单位水库清淤工程费用,参考广东省建设工程计价依据《广东省市政工程综合定额2018》取值为31.2 yuan∙m^-3;C_i为土壤中氮、磷、钾、有机质纯含量（%）,R_i分别为磷酸二铵化肥含氮、磷,氯化钾化肥含钾,有机质中有机质的含量,参考相关成果取值（国家林业局,2008）;𝑃_𝑖为磷酸二铵、氯化钾化肥及有机质的价格,经查阅农资网（http://www.ampcn.com/）取磷酸二铵化肥、氯化钾化肥和有机质的价格分别为3300、2800和800 yuan∙t^-1
洪水调蓄 Flood mitigation	U_fm=C_fm×P_w	U_fm为洪水调蓄服务价值;C_fm为洪水调蓄实物量,包括湖泊和沼泽湿地洪水调蓄量,参考《生态保护红线监管技术规范生态功能评价 (试行)》计算;水库单位库容的工程造价P_w取值同上
空气净化 Air purification	U_ap=∑n i=1Q_ap_i×P_i	U_ap为空气净化服务价值,涉及SO₂、NO_x两种污染物的净化价值;Q_ap_i为第i种大气污染物的净化量,采用单位面积生态系统净化服务价值核算法计算;P_i为第i类大气污染物的治理成本,取值参考相关成果（浙江省市场监督管理局,2020）
水质净化 Water purification	U_wp=∑n i=1Q_wp_i×P_i	U_wp为水质净化服务价值,涉及COD、氨氮和总磷3种污染物的净化价值;Q_wp_i为第i种水体污染物的净化量,采用单位面积生态系统净化服务价值核算法计算;P_i为第i类水污染物的治理成本,取值参考相关成果（浙江省市场监督管理局,2020）
固碳 Carbon fixation	U_cf=Q_C×C_C	U_cf为固碳服务价值;Q_C为生态系统固碳总量,计算过程见参考文献（王秀明等,2022）;二氧化碳交易价格（C_C）参考广东省环境权交易网站碳排放权交易价格,取值36 yuan∙t^-1
释氧 Oxygen production	U_op=Q_op×C_O2 Q_op=32/44×Q_CO2=44/12×Q_C	U_op为释氧服务价值;Q_op为生态系统氧气释放量,Q_CO2为生态系统固定二氧化碳的总量,根据光合作用化学方程式可知,植物每生产吸收1 mol CO₂,就会释放1 mol氧气,以此测算出生态系统释放氧气的质量;M_O2、M_CO2和M_C分别为O₂、CO₂和C分子的物质量,即32、44和12;C_O2为工业制氧价格,市场调查获得的医用氧气的价格为3000 yuan∙t^-1
气候调节 Climate regulation	U_tt=E_tt×P_e	U_tt为气候调节服务价值;生态系统调节温度或湿度消耗的总能量（E_tt）参考《生态保护红线监管技术规范生态功能评价（试行）》计算,当地电价（P_e）采用当地2020年度居民生活用电取高峰和低谷用电的平均值
文化 Culture	采用旅行费用法,以各地旅游收入的70%近似代替（马国霞等,2017;程翠云等,2019）。受新冠疫情影响, 以2019年的生态旅游收入代替2020年生态旅游收入,数据来源于地方统计资料

功能类型 Functional type	核算公式 Accounting formula	说明和参数来源 Description and source of parameters
产品供给 Product supply	—	受新冠疫情影响,采用各地区2019年农林牧渔业产值代替2020年度产品供给服务价值,数据来源于地方统计年鉴
水源涵养 Water conservation	U_wr=Q_wr×P_w	U_wr为水源涵养服务价值;水源涵养服务实物量Q_wr的核算采用修正的InVEST模型计算,计算过程和参数见参考文献（王秀明等,2020）;水库单位库容的工程造价P_w参考相关成果折算得出（浙江省市场监督管理局,2020）
土壤保持 Soil conservation	U_sr=U_sd+U_dpd U_sd=λ×(Q_sr/ρ)×P_c U_dpd=∑n i=1Q_sr×C_i×P_i/R_i	U_sr为土壤保持服务价值,包括减少泥沙淤积（U_sd）和减少面源污染（U_dpd）两方面;Q_sr为水土保持服务功能实物量,计算过程和参数选择详见相关研究成果（欧阳志云等,2013）;P_c为单位水库清淤工程费用,参考广东省建设工程计价依据《广东省市政工程综合定额2018》取值为31.2 yuan∙m^-3;C_i为土壤中氮、磷、钾、有机质纯含量（%）,R_i分别为磷酸二铵化肥含氮、磷,氯化钾化肥含钾,有机质中有机质的含量,参考相关成果取值（国家林业局,2008）;𝑃_𝑖为磷酸二铵、氯化钾化肥及有机质的价格,经查阅农资网（http://www.ampcn.com/）取磷酸二铵化肥、氯化钾化肥和有机质的价格分别为3300、2800和800 yuan∙t^-1
洪水调蓄 Flood mitigation	U_fm=C_fm×P_w	U_fm为洪水调蓄服务价值;C_fm为洪水调蓄实物量,包括湖泊和沼泽湿地洪水调蓄量,参考《生态保护红线监管技术规范生态功能评价 (试行)》计算;水库单位库容的工程造价P_w取值同上
空气净化 Air purification	U_ap=∑n i=1Q_ap_i×P_i	U_ap为空气净化服务价值,涉及SO₂、NO_x两种污染物的净化价值;Q_ap_i为第i种大气污染物的净化量,采用单位面积生态系统净化服务价值核算法计算;P_i为第i类大气污染物的治理成本,取值参考相关成果（浙江省市场监督管理局,2020）
水质净化 Water purification	U_wp=∑n i=1Q_wp_i×P_i	U_wp为水质净化服务价值,涉及COD、氨氮和总磷3种污染物的净化价值;Q_wp_i为第i种水体污染物的净化量,采用单位面积生态系统净化服务价值核算法计算;P_i为第i类水污染物的治理成本,取值参考相关成果（浙江省市场监督管理局,2020）
固碳 Carbon fixation	U_cf=Q_C×C_C	U_cf为固碳服务价值;Q_C为生态系统固碳总量,计算过程见参考文献（王秀明等,2022）;二氧化碳交易价格（C_C）参考广东省环境权交易网站碳排放权交易价格,取值36 yuan∙t^-1
释氧 Oxygen production	U_op=Q_op×C_O2 Q_op=32/44×Q_CO2=44/12×Q_C	U_op为释氧服务价值;Q_op为生态系统氧气释放量,Q_CO2为生态系统固定二氧化碳的总量,根据光合作用化学方程式可知,植物每生产吸收1 mol CO₂,就会释放1 mol氧气,以此测算出生态系统释放氧气的质量;M_O2、M_CO2和M_C分别为O₂、CO₂和C分子的物质量,即32、44和12;C_O2为工业制氧价格,市场调查获得的医用氧气的价格为3000 yuan∙t^-1
气候调节 Climate regulation	U_tt=E_tt×P_e	U_tt为气候调节服务价值;生态系统调节温度或湿度消耗的总能量（E_tt）参考《生态保护红线监管技术规范生态功能评价（试行）》计算,当地电价（P_e）采用当地2020年度居民生活用电取高峰和低谷用电的平均值
文化 Culture	采用旅行费用法,以各地旅游收入的70%近似代替（马国霞等,2017;程翠云等,2019）。受新冠疫情影响, 以2019年的生态旅游收入代替2020年生态旅游收入,数据来源于地方统计资料

地区 Area	r/%¹⁾	d²⁾	生态调节服务外溢值 Spilled ecological regulation services/ (10⁸ yuan)	区域类型 Region type	补偿方案 Compensation Scheme
广州 Guangzhou	225.6	>0	-1023.25	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
深圳 Shenzhen	284.2	>0	-1159.98	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
珠海 Zhuhai	196.2	>0	-139.90	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
佛山 Foshan	157.2	>0	-636.90	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
东莞 Dongguan	157.4	>0	-697.03	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
惠州 Huizhou	96.4	=0	171.52	生态外溢、经济适中	暂缓补偿
中山 Zhongshan	98.5	=0	-250.09	生态受益、经济适中	暂缓支付
江门 Jiangmen	92.1	<0	324.82	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
肇庆 Zhaoqing	77.6	<0	790.33	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
茂名 Maoming	73.3	<0	40.58	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
阳江 Yangjiang	72.1	<0	277.70	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
汕尾 Shanwei	58.0	<0	33.26	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
韶关 Shaoguan	65.4	<0	732.22	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
清远 Qingyuan	61.8	<0	716.77	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
河源 Heyuan	53.6	<0	953.22	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
梅州 Meizhou	43.1	<0	549.79	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
云浮 Yunfu	58.0	<0	251.15	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
湛江 Zhanjiang	49.8	<0	-285.3	生态受益、经济欠发达	暂缓支付
潮州 Chaozhou	59.0	<0	-31.51	生态受益、经济欠发达	暂缓支付
揭阳 Jieyang	52.0	<0	-280.38	生态受益、经济欠发达	暂缓支付
汕头 Shantou	68.5	<0	-353.69	生态受益、经济欠发达	暂缓支付

地区 Area	r/%¹⁾	d²⁾	生态调节服务外溢值 Spilled ecological regulation services/ (10⁸ yuan)	区域类型 Region type	补偿方案 Compensation Scheme
广州 Guangzhou	225.6	>0	-1023.25	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
深圳 Shenzhen	284.2	>0	-1159.98	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
珠海 Zhuhai	196.2	>0	-139.90	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
佛山 Foshan	157.2	>0	-636.90	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
东莞 Dongguan	157.4	>0	-697.03	生态受益、经济发达	生态支付
惠州 Huizhou	96.4	=0	171.52	生态外溢、经济适中	暂缓补偿
中山 Zhongshan	98.5	=0	-250.09	生态受益、经济适中	暂缓支付
江门 Jiangmen	92.1	<0	324.82	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
肇庆 Zhaoqing	77.6	<0	790.33	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
茂名 Maoming	73.3	<0	40.58	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
阳江 Yangjiang	72.1	<0	277.70	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
汕尾 Shanwei	58.0	<0	33.26	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
韶关 Shaoguan	65.4	<0	732.22	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
清远 Qingyuan	61.8	<0	716.77	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
河源 Heyuan	53.6	<0	953.22	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
梅州 Meizhou	43.1	<0	549.79	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
云浮 Yunfu	58.0	<0	251.15	生态外溢、经济欠发达	生态补偿
湛江 Zhanjiang	49.8	<0	-285.3	生态受益、经济欠发达	暂缓支付
潮州 Chaozhou	59.0	<0	-31.51	生态受益、经济欠发达	暂缓支付
揭阳 Jieyang	52.0	<0	-280.38	生态受益、经济欠发达	暂缓支付
汕头 Shantou	68.5	<0	-353.69	生态受益、经济欠发达	暂缓支付

Ecological Compensation Mechanism Study of Guangdong Province Based on Spilled Ecosystem Service Value

基于外溢生态系统服务价值的广东省生态补偿机制研究

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 32

Related Articles 5

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	ZHENG Xiaohao, CHEN Yingbiao, ZHENG Zihao, GUO Cheng, HUANG Zhounan, ZHOU Yongshi. Dynamic Changes of Ecosystem Service Value and Evolution of Its Influencing Factors in Hubei Province [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2023, 32(1): 195-206.
[2]	WANG Chenxi, ZHANG Qiongrui, ZHANG Ruoqi, SUN Xuechao, XU Songjun. Effects of Landscape Pattern on Water Quality Purification Service in the Pearl River Basin in Guangdong Province [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(7): 1425-1433.
[3]	HUANG Qiaoyi, YU Junhong, HUANG Jianfeng, HUANG Xu, LI Ping, FU Hongting, TANG Shuanhu, LIU Yifeng, XU Peizhi. Nutrient Resources of Main Crop Straw and Its Potential of Substituting for Chemical Fertilizer in Guangdong Province [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(2): 297-306.
[4]	CHEN Yaoyao, LIAO Tong, WANG Yu, SHEN Jin, ZHAI Yuhong, YE Siqi, CHEN Duohong, CHEN Jingyang. Characteristics of Ozone Pollution in Guangdong Province from 2016 to 2020 [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(12): 2374-2381.
[5]	WANG Ruijuan, PENG Wenying, LIU Dandan. Research on Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Ecological Compensation from the Perspective of Co-construction, Co-governance and Sharing [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2021, 30(5): 1103-1110.