| 摘要: |
| 系统开展生态修复关键区识别方法与管控策略研究，是科学有序推进生态修复规划建设的重要内容。以青海省为例，构建了“空间识别-风险分级-产品
分类”的多维度生态修复关键区空间识别与管控研究框架。将生态系统生产总值核算方法整合至生态网络识别方法中，结合生态风险评估识别了不同类别的生态
修复关键区，并基于GEP簇的识别分类构建差异化的生态产品价值实现途径。结果表明：1)研究区生态网络共包含93个生态源地斑块，229条生态廊道和70个生
态节点；2)根据生态风险与生态网络的评估结果，共识别出生态源地、生态廊道和生态节点3类生态修复关键区；3)生态修复关键区可进一步划分为6类GEP簇，
可为生态产品价值实现途径的构建提供科学支撑 |
| 关键词: 风景园林 生态修复 关键区 生态产品价值实现 空间识别 |
| DOI：10.19775/j.cla.2025.02.0039 |
| 投稿时间：2024-10-16修订日期：2024-11-11 |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金重点项目(71734006)；国家资助博士后研究人员计划(GZC20231226)；城乡园林景观建设国家林草局重点实验室和中央高校基本
科研业务费专项资金(BFUKF202310) |
|
| Research on Identification and Control of Key Ecological Restoration Areas in Qinghai Province |
| WANG Ziyao,LI Feng* |
| Abstract: |
| Conducting systematic research on the identification methods and
management strategies for key ecological restoration areas is essential for scientifically
and methodically promoting ecological restoration planning and development. In
general, existing studies on the selection of ecological sources emphasize ecological
functions, overlooking a holistic evaluation of the supply capacity of ecological
products and their socio-economic value. Additionally, the formulation of ecological
restoration strategies struggles to effectively respond to policy needs for achieving
ecological product value, lacking effective synergy between ecological functions and
value realization, which poses challenges to the transformation from "green mountains
and clear waters" to "golden mountains and silver waters". This study focuses on
Qinghai Province as the research area, addressing pressing issues such as ecological
sensitivity and the urgent need for ecological product value realization, and establishes
a multidimensional framework for spatial identification and management of key
ecological restoration areas through "spatial identification, risk grading, and product
classification". First, the Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP) accounting method is
integrated into the ecological network construction framework to scientifically identify
the spatial distribution of ecological sources, ecological corridors, and ecological
nodes in the study area. Second, external risks to the ecological network in the study
area are quantitatively evaluated from the perspectives of ecological sensitivity and
habitat degradation index, and these results are overlaid with the ecological network
identification outcomes to pinpoint key areas for ecological restoration. On this
basis, the ecosystem service bundle evaluation method was applied, clustering GEP
assessment results using Self-Organizing Maps (SOM) to determine dominant GEP
types and structural characteristics across regions, facilitating the proposal of targeted
ecological restoration strategies and pathways for realizing ecological product value.
The main findings of this study are as follows: 1) GEP accounting: In 2020, the total
GEP of Qinghai Province was 3.55 trillion yuan, including 2.32 trillion yuan from
material products, 1.18 trillion yuan from regulation services, and 0.05 trillion yuan
from cultural services. The spatial distribution of various GEP categories in the study
area exhibits significant spatial heterogeneity, with the overall GEP value showing
a south-high, north-low pattern. 2) Ecological network construction: Based on GEP
accounting results, this study identified 93 ecological source patches in Qinghai
Province, with a total area of 213,700 km2, concentrated in the eastern and southern
regions of the study area. A total of 229 ecological corridors were identified, with
a combined length of 15,909.96 km. The corridors form a spider-web structure,
connecting the eastern, southern, and scattered ecological sources, with a distribution
pattern characterized by sparse networks in the southeast and denser networks in the
northwest. There are 70 ecological nodes, including 28 ecological pinch points and 42
ecological barrier points, mainly distributed in the Qaidam Basin and the northwestern
part of Yushu Prefecture. 3) Ecological risk assessment and diagnosis of critical
ecological restoration areas: In Qinghai Province, high-risk areas cover 139,000 km2,
medium-risk areas cover 317,200 km2, and low-risk areas cover 266,100 km2. By
overlaying ecological risk assessment results with ecological network identification,
three types of critical ecological restoration areas were identified: ecological source
areas (168,600 km2), ecological corridors (7,311.57 km in total length), and all
ecological nodes as restoration priority areas. 4) GEP bundles identification and
pathways for ecological product value realization: Using the SOM method, six types
of GEP bundles were identified, including the ecological conservation bundle, the
windbreak and sand fixation bundle, the ecological regulation bundle, the product
supply bundle, the aesthetic landscape bundle, and the flood mitigation bundle.
Based on the GEP composition and resource endowments of different GEP clusters,
combined with the "Implementation Plan for Promoting the Establishment of
Ecological Product Value Realization Mechanisms in Qinghai Province", this study
developed differentiated pathways for ecological product value realization tailored to
critical ecological restoration areas. The research findings not only provide scientific
foundations and methodological guidance for the implementation of major ecological
civilization strategies in Qinghai Province but also serve as valuable references for
other ecologically sensitive regions. |
| Key words: landscape architecture ecological restoration key areas ecological
product value realization spatial recognition |
