Ecology and Environmental Sciences ›› 2025, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (5): 688-698.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2025.05.003
• Research Article【Ecology】 • Previous Articles Next Articles
ZHAO Zhixuan1,2,3,*(), WEI Fangfei1,2, WU Haotian1,2, WANG Yining1,2, WANG Pengzhe1,2
Received:
2024-08-14
Online:
2025-05-18
Published:
2025-05-16
赵志轩1,2,3,*(), 魏芳菲1,2, 吴皓天1,2, 王怡宁1,2, 王澎喆1,2
通讯作者:
*
作者简介:
赵志轩(1983年生),男,正高级工程师,博士,主要从事水文水资源和生态水文领域研究工作。E-mail: zxzhao@nhri.cn
基金资助:
CLC Number:
ZHAO Zhixuan, WEI Fangfei, WU Haotian, WANG Yining, WANG Pengzhe. The Response of Ecological Service Value to Land Use Change in Lancang-Mekong River Basin[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2025, 34(5): 688-698.
赵志轩, 魏芳菲, 吴皓天, 王怡宁, 王澎喆. 澜沧江-湄公河流域生态系统服务价值对土地利用变化的响应[J]. 生态环境学报, 2025, 34(5): 688-698.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.jeesci.com/EN/10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2025.05.003
分类 | 供给服务 | 调节服务 | 支持服务 | 文化服务 | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
食物生产 | 原料生产 | 水资源供给 | 气体调节 | 气候调节 | 净化环境 | 水文调节 | 土壤保持 | 维持养分循环 | 生物多样性 | 美学景观 | ||||
农田 | 872 | 336 | −341 | 693 | 369 | 104 | 588 | 834 | 123 | 134 | 61 | |||
林地 | 234 | 534 | 275 | 1754 | 5255 | 1567 | 3883 | 2140 | 162 | 1949 | 856 | |||
草地 | 218 | 317 | 177 | 1124 | 2968 | 978 | 2175 | 1368 | 104 | 1241 | 548 | |||
湿地 | 482 | 472 | 2447 | 1795 | 3401 | 3401 | 22893 | 2183 | 170 | 7436 | 4469 | |||
裸地 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 94 | 28 | 19 | 0 | 19 | 9 | |||
水体 | 726 | 209 | 7606 | 706 | 2099 | 5044 | 20453 | 844 | 64 | 2315 | 1719 | |||
建设用地 | 0 | 0 | −64 | 489 | 909 | 488 | 790 | 196 | 45 | 296 | 287 |
Table 1 Ecosystem service value coefficient of each land use type in the Lancang-Mekong river basin
分类 | 供给服务 | 调节服务 | 支持服务 | 文化服务 | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
食物生产 | 原料生产 | 水资源供给 | 气体调节 | 气候调节 | 净化环境 | 水文调节 | 土壤保持 | 维持养分循环 | 生物多样性 | 美学景观 | ||||
农田 | 872 | 336 | −341 | 693 | 369 | 104 | 588 | 834 | 123 | 134 | 61 | |||
林地 | 234 | 534 | 275 | 1754 | 5255 | 1567 | 3883 | 2140 | 162 | 1949 | 856 | |||
草地 | 218 | 317 | 177 | 1124 | 2968 | 978 | 2175 | 1368 | 104 | 1241 | 548 | |||
湿地 | 482 | 472 | 2447 | 1795 | 3401 | 3401 | 22893 | 2183 | 170 | 7436 | 4469 | |||
裸地 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 94 | 28 | 19 | 0 | 19 | 9 | |||
水体 | 726 | 209 | 7606 | 706 | 2099 | 5044 | 20453 | 844 | 64 | 2315 | 1719 | |||
建设用地 | 0 | 0 | −64 | 489 | 909 | 488 | 790 | 196 | 45 | 296 | 287 |
土地利用类型 | 1995年 | 2000年 | 2005年 | 2010年 | 2015年 | 2020年 | NDS | ADS | EPS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
农田 | 25.85 | 26.48 | 26.95 | 27.18 | 27.27 | 27.02 | 27.67 | 35.11 | 21.30 |
林地 | 34.91 | 34.25 | 33.27 | 32.28 | 31.73 | 32.21 | 28.21 | 24.30 | 31.14 |
草地 | 18.20 | 18.22 | 18.63 | 19.26 | 19.56 | 19.33 | 22.10 | 18.70 | 25.11 |
湿地 | 0.68 | 0.71 | 0.80 | 0.87 | 0.87 | 0.85 | 1.17 | 1.11 | 1.27 |
裸地 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 |
水体 | 1.16 | 1.12 | 1.10 | 1.15 | 1.18 | 1.19 | 1.25 | 1.19 | 1.56 |
建设用地 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.45 | 0.43 | 0.47 |
Table 2 Area of different land use in the Lancang-Mekong river basin during 1995?2020 km2
土地利用类型 | 1995年 | 2000年 | 2005年 | 2010年 | 2015年 | 2020年 | NDS | ADS | EPS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
农田 | 25.85 | 26.48 | 26.95 | 27.18 | 27.27 | 27.02 | 27.67 | 35.11 | 21.30 |
林地 | 34.91 | 34.25 | 33.27 | 32.28 | 31.73 | 32.21 | 28.21 | 24.30 | 31.14 |
草地 | 18.20 | 18.22 | 18.63 | 19.26 | 19.56 | 19.33 | 22.10 | 18.70 | 25.11 |
湿地 | 0.68 | 0.71 | 0.80 | 0.87 | 0.87 | 0.85 | 1.17 | 1.11 | 1.27 |
裸地 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 |
水体 | 1.16 | 1.12 | 1.10 | 1.15 | 1.18 | 1.19 | 1.25 | 1.19 | 1.56 |
建设用地 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.45 | 0.43 | 0.47 |
土地利用类型 | NDS | ADS | EPS | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
面积/km2 | 比例/% | 面积/km2 | 比例/% | 面积/km2 | 比例/% | |||
农田 | 27.67 | 34.21 | 35.11 | 43.42 | 21.30 | 26.34 | ||
林地 | 28.21 | 34.88 | 24.30 | 30.05 | 31.14 | 38.51 | ||
草地 | 22.10 | 27.33 | 18.70 | 23.12 | 25.11 | 31.04 | ||
湿地 | 1.17 | 1.44 | 1.11 | 1.38 | 1.27 | 1.56 | ||
裸地 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | ||
水体 | 1.25 | 1.54 | 1.19 | 1.47 | 1.56 | 1.93 | ||
建设用地 | 0.45 | 0.55 | 0.43 | 0.53 | 0.47 | 0.58 |
Table 3 Areas of the different land use types under each scenario for Lancang-Mekong river basin in 2040
土地利用类型 | NDS | ADS | EPS | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
面积/km2 | 比例/% | 面积/km2 | 比例/% | 面积/km2 | 比例/% | |||
农田 | 27.67 | 34.21 | 35.11 | 43.42 | 21.30 | 26.34 | ||
林地 | 28.21 | 34.88 | 24.30 | 30.05 | 31.14 | 38.51 | ||
草地 | 22.10 | 27.33 | 18.70 | 23.12 | 25.11 | 31.04 | ||
湿地 | 1.17 | 1.44 | 1.11 | 1.38 | 1.27 | 1.56 | ||
裸地 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | ||
水体 | 1.25 | 1.54 | 1.19 | 1.47 | 1.56 | 1.93 | ||
建设用地 | 0.45 | 0.55 | 0.43 | 0.53 | 0.47 | 0.58 |
情景 | 高程 | 坡度 | 年均 降水 | 年均 气温 | 与水体距离 | 人口 密度 | 人类 足迹 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NDS | 0.202** 1) | 0.163** | 0.048** | 0.214** | 0.047** | 0.085** | 0.363** |
ADS | 0.211** | 0.161** | 0.044** | 0.228** | 0.055** | 0.072** | 0.346** |
EPS | 0.190** | 0.144** | 0.043** | 0.202** | 0.033** | 0.078** | 0.288** |
Table 4 Factor detector of the drivers on ESV under each development scenario
情景 | 高程 | 坡度 | 年均 降水 | 年均 气温 | 与水体距离 | 人口 密度 | 人类 足迹 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NDS | 0.202** 1) | 0.163** | 0.048** | 0.214** | 0.047** | 0.085** | 0.363** |
ADS | 0.211** | 0.161** | 0.044** | 0.228** | 0.055** | 0.072** | 0.346** |
EPS | 0.190** | 0.144** | 0.043** | 0.202** | 0.033** | 0.078** | 0.288** |
情景 | 影响因子 | 高程 | 坡度 | 年均降水 | 年均气温 | 与水体距离 | 人口密度 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NDS | 人类足迹 | 0.449 | 0.399 | 0.418 | 0.452 | 0.379 | 0.371 |
ADS | 0.427 | 0.380 | 0.390 | 0.439 | 0.360 | 0.353 | |
EPS | 0.394 | 0.338 | 0.352 | 0.398 | 0.308 | 0.301 |
Table 5 Factor interaction detections on ESV under each development scenario
情景 | 影响因子 | 高程 | 坡度 | 年均降水 | 年均气温 | 与水体距离 | 人口密度 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NDS | 人类足迹 | 0.449 | 0.399 | 0.418 | 0.452 | 0.379 | 0.371 |
ADS | 0.427 | 0.380 | 0.390 | 0.439 | 0.360 | 0.353 | |
EPS | 0.394 | 0.338 | 0.352 | 0.398 | 0.308 | 0.301 |
情景 | I | Z(I) | E(I) | Z(G) | G | E(G) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NDS | 0.49 | 92.8 | 1×10−3 | 73.3 | 1×10−6 | 1×10−6 |
ADS | 0.5 | 97.4 | 1×10−3 | 79.2 | 1×10−6 | 1×10−6 |
EPS | 0.49 | 94.7 | 1×10−3 | 74.5 | 1×10−6 | 1×10−6 |
Table 6 Spatial autocorrelation and high/low clustering index of Lancang-Mekong river basin under 3 scenarios in 2040
情景 | I | Z(I) | E(I) | Z(G) | G | E(G) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NDS | 0.49 | 92.8 | 1×10−3 | 73.3 | 1×10−6 | 1×10−6 |
ADS | 0.5 | 97.4 | 1×10−3 | 79.2 | 1×10−6 | 1×10−6 |
EPS | 0.49 | 94.7 | 1×10−3 | 74.5 | 1×10−6 | 1×10−6 |
情景 | TYPE | CA/km2 | NP | MPS/km2 | MSI | ED | MPI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NDS | 热点区域 | 91368 | 77 | 1186.60 | 1.40 | 0.14 | 19.47 |
冷点区域 | 181359 | 29 | 6253.76 | 1.49 | 0.15 | 172.46 | |
ADS | 热点区域 | 47547 | 51 | 932.29 | 1.29 | 0.08 | 4.93 |
冷点区域 | 217566 | 28 | 7770.21 | 1.53 | 0.16 | 190.82 | |
EPS | 热点区域 | 145233 | 71 | 2045.54 | 1.48 | 0.19 | 70.68 |
冷点区域 | 149850 | 40 | 3746.25 | 1.43 | 0.15 | 235.58 |
Table 7 Landscape metrics value of hot/cold spot area for the class type in Lancang-Mekong River basin
情景 | TYPE | CA/km2 | NP | MPS/km2 | MSI | ED | MPI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NDS | 热点区域 | 91368 | 77 | 1186.60 | 1.40 | 0.14 | 19.47 |
冷点区域 | 181359 | 29 | 6253.76 | 1.49 | 0.15 | 172.46 | |
ADS | 热点区域 | 47547 | 51 | 932.29 | 1.29 | 0.08 | 4.93 |
冷点区域 | 217566 | 28 | 7770.21 | 1.53 | 0.16 | 190.82 | |
EPS | 热点区域 | 145233 | 71 | 2045.54 | 1.48 | 0.19 | 70.68 |
冷点区域 | 149850 | 40 | 3746.25 | 1.43 | 0.15 | 235.58 |
[1] | AKHTAR M, ZHAO Y Y, GAO G L, et al., 2020. Assessment of ecosystem services value in response to prevailing and future land use/cover changes in Lahore, Pakistan[J]. Regional Sustainability, 1(1): 37-47. |
[2] | BERNABE J B, DAVID M, MORENO R T, et al., 2020. ARIES: Evaluation of a reliable and privacy-preserving European identity management framework[J]. Future Generation Computer Systems, 102: 409-425. |
[3] | BRANDER L M, DE GROOT R, SCHÄGNER J P, et al., 2024. Economic values for ecosystem services: A global synthesis and way forward[J]. Ecosystem Services, 66(6630): 101606. |
[4] | CHASIA S, OLANG L O, SITOKI L, 2023. Modelling of land-use/cover change trajectories in a transboundary catchment of the Sio-Malaba-Malakisi Region in East Africa using the CLUE-s model[J]. Ecological Modelling, 476(75): 110256. |
[5] | 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. |
[6] | COSTANZA R, DE GROOT R, BRAAT L, et al., 2017. Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go[J]. Ecosystem Services, 28(3): 1-16. |
[7] | DAILY G C, 1997. Nature’s services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems[M]. Washington D. C.: Island Press: 57. |
[8] | HAN Z, SONG W, 2022. Inter-annual trends of vegetation and responses to climate change and human activities in the Great Mekong Sub-region[J]. Global Ecology and Conservation, 38: e02215. |
[9] | LI F X, LI Z F, CHEN H H, et al., 2020. An agent-based learning-embedded model (ABM-learning) for urban land use planning: A case study of residential land growth simulation in Shenzhen, China[J]. Land Use Policy, 95(24): 104620. |
[10] | LIANG X, GUAN Q F, CLARKE K C, et al., 2021. Understanding the drivers of sustainable land expansion using a patch-generating land use simulation (PLUS) model: A case study in Wuhan, China[J]. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 85: 101569. |
[11] | LIANG X, LIU X P, LI X, et al., 2018. Delineating multi-scenario urban growth boundaries with a CA-based FLUS model and morphological method[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 177: 47-63. |
[12] | LOHANI S, DILTS T E, WEISBERG P J, et al., 2020. Rapidly accelerating deforestation in Cambodia’s Mekong River Basin: A comparative analysis of spatial patterns and drivers[J]. Water, 12(8): 2191. |
[13] | Mekong River Commission. Enhancing the MRC land use and land cover 2020 mapping products[M]. Vientiane: Mekong River Commission Secretariat. |
[14] |
MU H W, LI X C, WEN Y N, et al., 2022. A global record of annual terrestrial Human Footprint dataset from 2000 to 2018[J]. Scientific Data, 9(1): 176.
DOI PMID |
[15] | MUNTHALI M G, MUSTAK S, ADEOLA A, et al., 2020. Modelling land use and land cover dynamics of Dedza district of Malawi using hybrid Cellular Automata and Markov model[J]. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 17: 100276. |
[16] | SHERROUSE B C, SEMMENS D J, ANCONA Z H, 2022. Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES): Open-source spatial modeling of cultural services[J]. Environmental Modelling and Software, 148: 105259. |
[17] | THI THU HA T, DIJK H, R. BUSH S, 2012. Mangrove conservation or shrimp farmer’s livelihood? The devolution of forest management and benefit sharing in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam[J]. Ocean & Coastal Management, 69: 185-193. |
[18] | VEETTIL B K, QUANG N X, TRANG N T T, 2019. Changes in mangrove vegetation, aquaculture and paddy cultivation in the Mekong Delta: A study from Ben Tre Province, southern Vietnam[J]. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 226: 106273. |
[19] | WEN X, WANG J J, HAN X J, 2024. Impact of land use evolution on the value of ecosystem services in the returned farmland area of the Loess Plateau in northern Shaanxi[J]. Ecological Indicators, 163: 112119. |
[20] | XIAO J, ZHANG Y F, XU H J, 2024. Response of ecosystem service values to land use change, 2002-2021[J]. Ecological Indicators, 160: 111947. |
[21] | YANG X, YUAN X F, AN J J, et al., 2024. Drivers of ecosystem services and their trade-offs and synergies in different land use policy zones of Shaanxi Province, China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 452: 142077. |
[22] | 付梦娣, 唐文家, 刘伟玮, 等, 2021. 基于生态系统服务视角的生态风险评估及生态修复空间辨识——以长江源区为例[J]. 生态学报, 41(10): 3846-3855. |
FU M D, TANG W J, LIU W W, et al., 2021. Ecological risk assessment and spatial identification of ecological restoration from the ecosystem service perspective: A case study in source region of Yangtze River[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 41(10): 3846-3855. | |
[23] | 胡和兵, 刘红玉, 郝敬锋, 等, 2013. 城市化流域生态系统服务价值时空分异特征及其对土地利用程度的响应[J]. 生态学报, 33(8): 2565-2576. |
HU H B, LIU H Y, HAO J F, et al., 2013. Spatio-temporal variation in the value of ecosystem services and its response to land use intensity in an urbanized watershed[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(8): 2565-2576. | |
[24] | 雷金睿, 陈宗铸, 吴庭天, 等, 2019. 海南岛东北部土地利用与生态系统服务价值空间自相关格局分析[J]. 生态学报, 39(7): 2366-2377. |
LEI J R, CHEN Z Z, WU T T, et al., 2019. Spatial autocorrelation pattern analysis of land use and the value of ecosystem services in northeast Hainan Island[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(7): 2366-2377. | |
[25] | 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. | |
[26] |
乔斌, 祝存兄, 曹晓云, 等, 2020. 格网尺度下青海玛多县土地利用及生态系统服务价值空间自相关分析[J]. 应用生态学报, 31(5): 1660-1672.
DOI |
QIAO B, ZHU C X, CAO X Y, et al., 2020. Spatial autocorrelation analysis of land use and ecosystem service value in Maduo County, Qinghai Province, China at the grid scale[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 31(5): 1660-1672.
DOI |
|
[27] |
王劲峰, 徐成东, 2017. 地理探测器: 原理与展望[J]. 地理学报, 72(1): 116-134.
DOI |
WANG J F, XU C D, 2017. Geodetector: Principle and prospective[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 72(1): 116-134.
DOI |
|
[28] | 危小建, 辛思怡, 张颖艺, 等, 2023. 不同格网尺度下生态系统服务价值空间分异及其影响因素差异——以大南昌都市圈为例[J]. 生态学报, 43(18): 7585-7597. |
WEI X J, XIN S Y, ZHANG Y Z, et al., 2023. Spatial difference of ecological services and its influencing factors under different scales: Taking the Nanchang Urban Agglomeration as an example[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 43(18): 7585-7597. | |
[29] | 谢高地, 张彩霞, 张雷明, 等, 2015. 基于单位面积价值当量因子的生态系统服务价值化方法改进[J]. 自然资源学报, 30(8): 1243-1254. |
XIE G D, ZHANG C X, ZHANG L M, et al., 2015. Improvement of the evaluation method for ecosystem service value based on per unit area[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 30(8): 1243-1254.
DOI |
|
[30] | 殷楠, 王帅, 刘焱序, 2021. 生态系统服务价值评估: 研究进展与展望[J]. 生态学杂志, 40(1): 233-244. |
YIN N, WANG S, LIU Y X, et al., 2021. Ecosystem service value assessment: Research progress and prospects[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 40(1): 233-244.
DOI |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||
Copyright © 2021 Editorial Office of ACTA PETROLEI SINICA
Address:No. 6 Liupukang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, P.R.China, 510650
Tel: 86-010-62067128, 86-010-62067137, 86-010-62067139
Fax: 86-10-62067130
Email: syxb@cnpc.com.cn
Support byBeijing Magtech Co.ltd, E-mail:support@magtech.com.cn