The impact of “Production-Living-Ecological” land structure change on ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihood: a case study of the Dongyangpo watershed in Taihang Mountain area
-
摘要: 太行山区由于受人类活动的影响, 在过去的几十年内众多小流域土地利用结构产生了很大的变化, 进而影响了小流域生产、生活、生态的“三生”用地结构、生态系统服务和山区农户生计。本文以洞阳坡小流域作为太行山中山区代表, 通过对当量因子法系数的修正, 对2000—2020年“三生”用地结构变化及其生态系统服务价值进行了评估, 并以人工种植面积最大且为本地优势树种的连翘为例, 进一步调研分析了“三生”用地结构变化对农户生计的影响。研究结果表明: 1) 20年来洞阳坡小流域“三生”用地结构比例基本保持不变, 呈现出生态用地>生产用地>生活用地。但“三生”用地中生态用地内部的土地利用方式发生了变化, 具体表现为人为作用下, 当地优势树种连翘种植面积显著增加。2) 20年来洞阳坡小流域内生态系统服务价值提高了1528万元, 其主要原因是生态用地中大量草地转化为以种植连翘为主的林地, 林地生态系统服务的提高对生态系统总服务提高的贡献率为99.95%。3) 20年来, 连翘林地供给服务的增加占小流域供给服务增加的43.05%, 占小流域生态系统总服务增加的28.02%, 连翘林地生态系统服务供给效益的提高增加了洞阳坡小流域的农户收入, 使得小流域农户生计水平有所改善, 连翘种植带来的“三生”用地变化对农户收入来源结构起到了优化调整的作用。本研究可为太行山区的生态经济协同发展提供一定的理论依据。Abstract: Due to the influence of human activities on Taihang Mountain area, the land use structure of numerous small watersheds has undergone significant changes over the past few decades, which in turn affects the “Production-Living-Ecological” land use structure, ecosystem services, and the livelihood of mountain farmers in small watersheds. The Dongyangpo watershed is a typical transitional geographical space in the transition from the subalpine area to the hilly area of Taihang Mountain area. This study aimed to systematically study the impact of “Production-Living-Ecological” land use change on ecosystem services and farmers’ livelihoods in small mountain watersheds. Taking the Dongyangpo watershed, a typical small watershed in Taihang Mountain area, as an example, this study evaluated the structure change and ecosystem service values of “Production-Living-Ecological” land from 2000 to 2020 by modifying the coefficient of equivalent factor method in combination with the actual situation of the small watershed, and further investigated and analyzed the impact of the land structure change of “Production-Living-Ecological” on farmers’ livelihood by considering Forsythia suspensa, which has the largest artificial planting area. The research results showed that, first, over the past 20 years, the “Production-Living-Ecological” land structure in the Dongyangpo watershed had remained basically unchanged, showing ecological land > production land > living land. However, the land use mode within the ecological land had changed, which was specifically reflected in the significant increase in the planting area of F. suspense, the local dominant tree species, and reduction in grassland areas. Second, the ecological land in the Dongyangpo watershed contributed the most to the total ecosystem services, and the total ecosystem services value in each period accounted for more than 99% of the total. Third, over the past 20 years, the ecosystem service value had increased significantly, with an increase of 146.89%. The main reason for this was a large portion of grasslands in ecological land transforming into forest land represented by F. suspense forest, and the ecosystem service value increase caused by this change accounted for 99.95% of the total value of ecosystem services. Fourth, over the past 20 years, the increase in F. suspensa forest land supply services accounted for 43.05% of the increase in small watershed supply services and 28.02% of the increase in total ecosystem services value in the small watersheds. After F. suspensa planting, the livelihood level of farmers in the Dongyangpo watershed had improved, and the improvement of F. suspensa forest land ecosystem service supply benefits had increased the income of farmers in the Dongyangpo watershed. The change of “Production-Living-Ecological” land brought by F. suspensa planting also played a role in optimizing and adjusting the structure of farmers’ income source. This study provides a theoretical basis for the coordinated development of the ecological economy in Taihang Mountain area.
-
图 2 洞阳坡小流域2000—2020年土地利用分布图
Figure 2. Land use distribution of Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
图 3 洞阳坡小流域2000—2020年“三生”用地分布图
Figure 3. Distribution of “Production-Living-Ecological” lands in Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
图 4 洞阳坡小流域2000—2020年生态系统服务价值
Figure 4. Ecosystem service values of Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
图 5 洞阳坡小流域2000—2020年生态系统服务价值空间分布图
Figure 5. Spatial distribution of ecosystem services values in Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
图 6 2000—2020年洞阳坡小流域生态系统服务变化的空间分布图
Figure 6. Spatial distribution of ecosystem services change in Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
图 7 洞阳坡小流域连翘收入占总收入的比值
Figure 7. Ratio of Forsythia suspensa income to total income in Dongyangpo watershed
图 8 洞阳坡小流域2000年和2020年收入来源
A、B、C、D和E分别代表务工、务农、养殖、做生意和采摘连翘。A, B, C, D and E represent working, farming, breeding, doing business and picking Forsythia suspensa, respectively.
Figure 8. Income sources of Dongyangpo watershed in 2000 and 2020
表 1 洞阳坡小流域“三生”用地分类体系
Table 1. Classification system of “Production-Living-Ecological” lands in Dongyangpo watershed
用地分类 Land classification 土地利用类型 Land use type 生态用地 Ecological land 草地 Grassland 连翘林地 Forsythia suspensa forest land 毛梾林地 Cornus walteri forest land 香椿林地 Toona sinensis forest land 其他林地 Other forest lands 水域 Waters 未利用地 Unused land 生产用地 Land for production 耕地 Cultivated land 生活用地 Living land 建设用地 Land used for building 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 修订后的洞阳坡小流域生态系统服务价值当量表
Table 2. Revised ecosystem services value equivalents of Dongyangpo watershed
土地利用类型
Land use type供给服务
Supply service调节服务
Regulatory service支持服务
Support service文化服务
Cultural service一级分类
Primary classification二级分类
Secondary classificationFP RMP WS GR CR EC HR SC NCM BM AL 耕地
Cultivated land旱地
Dry land0.51 0.24 0.02 0.40 0.22 0.06 0.16 0.61 0.07 0.08 0.04 林地
Woodland连翘林地
Forsythia suspensa forest land0.10 6.09 0.12 0.77 2.30 0.69 1.82 1.35 0.07 0.85 0.38 毛梾林地
Cornus walteri forest land0.10 50.73 0.12 0.77 2.30 0.69 1.82 0.93 0.07 0.85 0.38 香椿林地
Toona sinensis forest land0.51 0.23 0.12 0.77 2.30 0.69 1.82 0.93 0.07 0.85 0.38 其他林地
Other forest lands0.10 0.23 0.12 0.77 2.30 0.69 1.82 0.93 0.07 0.85 0.38 草地
Grassland草原
Grassland0.10 0.14 0.08 0.52 1.37 0.45 1.00 0.63 0.05 0.57 0.26 建设用地
Land used for building建设用地
Land used for building0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 未利用地
Unused land裸地
Naked land0 0 0 0.02 0 0.08 0.02 0.02 0 0.02 0.01 水域
Waters水系
River system0.30 0.09 3.15 0.30 0.87 2.11 38.89 0.35 0.02 0.97 0.72 FP: 食品生产; RMP: 原材料生产; WS: 水资源供给; GR: 气体调节; CR: 气候调节; EC: 净化环境; HR: 水文调节; SC: 土壤保持; NCM: 维持养分循环; BM: 生物多样性; AL: 美学景观。FP: food production; RMP: raw material production; WS: water supply; GR: gas regulation; CR: climate regulation; EC: clean the environment; HR: hydrological regulation; SC: soil conservation; NCM: maintain nutrient cycle; BM: biodiversity; AL: aesthetic landscape.
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 洞阳坡小流域2000—2020年“三生”用地结构变化情况
Table 3. Change of “Production-Living-Ecological” land structure in Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
用地分类
Land classification2000 2010 2020 面积
Area (×104 m2)比例
Proportion (%)面积
Area (×104 m2)比例
Proportion (%)面积
Area (×104 m2)比例
Proportion (%)生态用地 Ecological land 509.00 96.66 508.09 96.49 509.47 96.75 生活用地 Living land 3.99 0.57 4.05 0.77 4.15 0.79 生产用地 Production land 14.60 2.77 14.46 2.74 12.98 2.46
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 2000—2010年和2010—2020年洞阳坡小流域“三生”用地转移矩阵
Table 4. Land transfer matrixs of “Production-Living-Ecological” lands in Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2010 and 2010 to 2020
生态用地 Ecological land 生活用地 Living land 生产用地 Ecological land 总计 Total 2000 ×104 m2 2010 生态用地 Ecological land 508.09 508.09 生活用地 Living land 0.92 2.99 0.14 4.05 生产用地 Land for production 14.46 14.45 总计 Total 509.00 2.99 14.60 526.59 2010 2020 生态用地 Ecological land 508.03 1.44 509.47 生活用地 Living land 0.05 4.05 0.05 4.15 生产用地 Production land 12.98 12.98 总计 Total 508.09 4.05 14.46 526.59
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 洞阳坡小流域2000—2020年“三生”用地的生态系统服务价值
Table 5. Ecosystem services values of “Production-Living-Ecological” lands in Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
用地类型
Land classification生态服务价值 Ecosystem service value (×105 ¥) 变化率 Change rate (%) 2000 2010 2020 2000—2010 2010—2020 生态用地 Ecological land 95.0 234.5 248.1 146.89 5.81 生活用地 Living land 0 0 0 0 0 生产用地 Production land 1.2 1.2 1.1 −0.97 −10.25
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 洞阳坡小流域2000—2020年“三生”用地单位面积生态系统服务价值
Table 6. Ecosystem services per unit area of “Production-Living-Ecological” lands in Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
用地类型
Land classification2000 2010 2020 生态用地
Ecological land生产用地
Production land生活用地
Living land生态用地
Ecological land生产用地
Production land生活用地
Living land生态用地
Ecological land生产用地
Production land生活用地
Living land¥∙hm−2 供给服务
Supply service1833.89 2609.65 0 21 277.84 2609.65 0 21 384.69 2609.65 0 调节服务
Regulatory service11 558.68 2854.31 0 17 041.52 2854.31 0 18 916.77 2854.31 0 支持服务
Support service4362.27 2609.65 0 6367.93 2609.65 0 6836.32 2609.65 0 文化服务
Cultural service902.21 135.92 0 1457.23 135.92 0 1557.01 135.92 0
下载: 导出CSV
表 7 2000—2020年洞阳坡小流域“三生”用地转型导致的生态系统服务价值变化
Table 7. Changes of ecosystem service values caused by “Production-Living-Ecological” land use transformation in Dongyangpo watershed from 2000 to 2020
“三生”用地转型方式
Transformation of “Production-Living-Ecological” lands面积
Area
(hm²)生态系统服务价值 Ecosystem services value (×104 ¥) 2000年转换前
Before conversion in 20002020年转换后
After conversion in 2020增加值
Added value生态用地→生态用地
Ecological land → ecological land草地→香椿林地
Grassland → Toona sinensis forest land28.81 50.75 85.06 34.31 草地→毛梾林地
Grassland → Cornus walteri forest land33.33 58.71 667.27 608.56 草地→连翘林地
Grassland → Forsythia suspensa forest land225.97 398.05 1133.85 735.80 草地→其他林地
Grassland → other forest lands146.42 257.92 411.44 153.52 草地→水域
Grassland → waters0.69 1.22 11.23 10.01 未利用地→其他林地
Unused land → other forest lands1.41 0.08 3.96 3.88 生产用地→生态用地
Production land → ecological land耕地→连翘林地
Cultivated land → Forsythia suspensa forest land1.44 1.18 7.23 6.05 生态用地→生活用地
Ecological land → living land草地→建设用地
Grassland → land used for building0.97 1.71 0.00 −1.71 生产用地→生活用地
Production land → living land耕地→建设用地
Cultivated land → land used for building0.19 0.16 0.00 −0.16
下载: 导出CSV
表 8 2000—2020年洞阳坡小流域及其连翘林地的生态系统服务增加量
Table 8. Ecosystem services value increase in Dongyangpo watershed and Forsythia suspensa forest land from 2000 to 2020
项目
Item洞阳坡小流域
Dongyangpo watershed连翘林地
Forsythia suspensa forest land2000 2020 增加量 Increase 2000 2020 增加量 Increase 生态系统总服务 Total ecosystem services (104 ¥) 961.63 2491.50 1529.87 91.13 1091.71 1000.58 供给服务 Supply service (104 ¥) 97.16 1092.87 995.71 39.04 467.67 428.63
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] COSTANZA R, D’ARGE R, DE GROOT R, et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital[J]. Nature, 1997, 387(6630): 253−260 doi: 10.1038/387253a0 [2] DAILY G. Nature’ s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems[J]. The Bryologist, 1998, 101: 475 [3] 李屹峰, 罗跃初, 刘纲, 等. 土地利用变化对生态系统服务功能的影响−以密云水库流域为例[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(3): 726−736LI Y F, LUO Y C, LIU G, et al. Effects of land use change on ecosystem services: a case study in Miyun Reservoir watershed[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2013, 33(3): 726−736 [4] TOLESSA T, KIDANE M, BEZIE A. Assessment of the linkages between ecosystem service provision and land use/land cover change in Fincha watershed, North-Western Ethiopia[J]. Heliyon, 2021, 7(2): e07673 [5] LEH M, MATLOCK M, CUMMINGS E, et al. Measuring ecosystem service change: a case study from a northwest Arkansas dairy farm[J]. International Dairy Journal, 2013, 31(Supplement 1): S91-S100 [6] AMSALU A, STROOSNIJDER L, GRAAFF J D. Long-term dynamics in land resource use and the driving forces in the Beressa watershed, highlands of Ethiopia[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2007, 83(4): 448−459 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.04.010 [7] 安斯文, 马彩虹, 袁倩颖, 等. 生态移民区“三生”用地变化对生态系统服务的影响−以宁夏红寺堡区为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(6): 1836−1846AN S W, MA C H, YUAN Q Y, et al. Effects of “ecological-production-living” land changes on ecosystem services in ecological migration area: a case of Hongsibu District in Ningxia[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(6): 1836−1846 [8] 戴文远, 江方奇, 黄万里, 等. 基于“三生空间”的土地利用功能转型及生态服务价值研究−以福州新区为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2018, 33(12): 2098−2109 doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20171197DAI W Y, JIANG F Q, HUANG W L, et al. Study on transition of land use function and ecosystem service value based on the conception of production, living and ecological space: a case study of the Fuzhou New Area[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2018, 33(12): 2098−2109 doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20171197 [9] 秦方. 河南新郑市“三生”用地转型及其生态服务价值响应[J]. 人民长江, 2020, 51(2): 58−63QIN F. Transformation of ecological — living-industrial land and its response to ecosystem service value in Xinzheng City, Henan Province[J]. Yangtze River, 2020, 51(2): 58−63 [10] 陈百明, 周小萍. 《土地利用现状分类》国家标准的解读[J]. 自然资源学报, 2007, 22(6): 994−1003 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-3037.2007.06.017CHEN B M, ZHOU X P. Explanation of current land use condition classification for national standard of the People’ s Republic of China[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2007, 22(6): 994−1003 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-3037.2007.06.017 [11] 刘纪远, 宁佳, 匡文慧, 等. 2010—2015年中国土地利用变化的时空格局与新特征[J]. 地理学报, 2018, 73(5): 789−802 doi: 10.11821/dlxb201805001LIU J Y, NING J, KUANG W H, et al. Spatio-temporal patterns and characteristics of land-use change in China during 2010−2015[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(5): 789−802 doi: 10.11821/dlxb201805001 [12] 刘继来, 刘彦随, 李裕瑞. 中国“三生空间”分类评价与时空格局分析[J]. 地理学报, 2017, 72(7): 1290−1304 doi: 10.11821/dlxb201707013LIU J L, LIU Y S, LI Y R. Classification evaluation and spatial-temporal analysis of “Production-Living-Ecological” spaces in China[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2017, 72(7): 1290−1304 doi: 10.11821/dlxb201707013 [13] 李秋颖, 方创琳, 王少剑. 中国省级国土空间利用质量评价: 基于“三生”空间视角[J]. 地域研究与开发, 2016, 35(5): 163−169 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2363.2016.05.030LI Q Y, FANG C L, WANG S J. Evaluation of territorial utilization quality in China: based on the aspect of “Production-Living-Ecological” space[J]. Areal Research and Development, 2016, 35(5): 163−169 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2363.2016.05.030 [14] 孔冬艳, 陈会广, 吴孔森. 中国“三生空间”演变特征、生态环境效应及其影响因素[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(5): 1116−1135 doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20210503KONG D Y, CHEN H G, WU K S. The evolution of “Production-Living-Ecological” space, eco-environmental effects and its influencing factors in China[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2021, 36(5): 1116−1135 doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20210503 [15] 谢高地, 张彩霞, 张雷明, 等. 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, 2015, 30(8): 1243−1254 doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2015.08.001XIE G D, ZHANG C X, ZHANG L M, et al. Improvement of the evaluation method for ecosystem service value based on per unit area[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2015, 30(8): 1243−1254 doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2015.08.001 [16] GAO H, FU T G, LIU J T, et al. Ecosystem services management based on differentiation and regionalization along vertical gradient in Taihang Mountain, China[J]. Sustainability, 2018, 10(4): 986 doi: 10.3390/su10040986 [17] 彭媛媛. 石家庄西部太行山区土地生态系统服务价值空间分异及预测研究[D]. 石家庄: 河北经贸大学, 2018PENG Y Y. Spatial differentiation and prediction of land ecosystem service value in Taihang Mountain area of west Shijiazhuang[D]. Shijiazhuang: Hebei University of Economics and Business, 2018 [18] 宋敏敏, 张青峰, 吴发启, 等. 黄土沟壑区小流域景观格局演变及生态服务价值响应[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(8): 2649−2659SONG M M, ZHANG Q F, WU F Q, et al. Landscape pattern changes and evaluation of ecological service values in a small watershed of the Loess Gully Region[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(8): 2649−2659 [19] RENETZEDER C, SCHINDLER S, PETERSEIL J, et al. Can we measure ecological sustainability? Landscape pattern as an indicator for naturalness and land use intensity at regional, national and European level[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2010, 10(1): 39−48 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.03.017 [20] 鲁晨曦, 曹世雄, 石小亮. 我国北方干旱半干旱地区人工造林对地下水位变化影响的模拟研究[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(3): 715−725LU C X, CAO S X, SHI X L. Stimulation on the impact of afforestation on the groundwater table in arid and semi-arid areas in Northern China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(3): 715−725 [21] TORRES-LEZAMA A, VILANOVA E, RAMÍREZ-ANGULO H, et al. Socioeconomic and environmental basis for the development of small scale forestry in a highly degraded watershed in the Venezuelan Andes[J]. Small-scale Forestry, 2012, 11(3): 321−337 doi: 10.1007/s11842-011-9186-7 -
下载:
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 273
- HTML全文浏览量: 124
- PDF下载量: 25
- 被引次数: 0
