AEP  >> Vol. 1 No. 2 (December 2011)

    基于生态系统服务能值价值的生态风险分析方法及应用研究
    Ecological Risk Analysis Methods and Their Application Based on the Emergy Value of Ecosystem Services

  • 全文下载: PDF(423KB) HTML    PP.13-19   DOI: 10.12677/aep.2011.12003  
  • 下载量: 1,730  浏览量: 7,765   国家自然科学基金支持

作者:  

宋科,赵晟,桂峰,蔡惠文,吴常文

关键词:
生态风险分析生态系统服务能值
Ecological Risk Analysis; Value of Ecosystem Services; Emergy

摘要:
生态风险的定量评价与综合研究是目前国际上一个热点问题。本文在大尺度生态系统上,通过生态系统服务价值的定量化与风险分析的数学模型相结合,进行了基于生态系统服务能值价值的风险分析研究,提供了一种生态系统风险分析的定量化研究方法。通过建立EVR生态风险分析模型和基于信息扩散理论的生态风险分析模型,以及对生态系统服务的定量化指标:生态系统服务的能值价值的阐述,计算了舟山市不同年份(1985~2007)的生态系统服务能值价值,并分别用EVR模型和信息扩散模型进行了实证分析。首先用EVR模型计算了在不同置信水平下未来一年生态系统服务能值价值损失的上限,即EVR值,如置信水平为95%时,能值价值的损失上限是5.233E+21sej;其次用信息扩散模型计算了生态系统服务能值价值的风险估计值。如能值价值为4.00E+21sej时,风险估计值为1.0641。

Ecological risk analysis is a new marginal subject that studies issues on risk theory, modern eco- logy and environmental science, etc. Currently, quantitative assessing and integrative study of ecological risk is a significant issue in the world. At the macrocosm scale we have a practice study on risk analysis based on the value of ecosystem services by integrating the quantification of the value of ecosystem services with the model of risk analysis. We establish an ecological risk analysis models: the model of ecological value at risk (EVR) and the information diffusion model. They provide a quantitative method for the ecological risk ana- lysis. The Zhoushan city was selected as an example for application of our study. According to the historical data of Zhoushan city (1985 - 2007), the emergy value of the ecosystem services was calculated and the value of ecological risk was estimated by using the EVR and information diffusion model. First, we calculate the value of EVR. Such as the confidence level is 95%, the value of EVR of the emergy value is 5.233E+21. Secondly, we evaluate the risk index of Zhoushan’s ecosystems. Finally, we evaluate the estimated value of ecosystem ser- vices at risk. When the given emergy value is 4.00E+21 sej, the estimated value is 1.0641, it means that the pro- bability of the emergy value at risk in next year bigger than 4.00E+21 sej is 1.0641.

文章引用:
宋科, 赵晟, 桂峰, 蔡惠文, 吴常文. 基于生态系统服务能值价值的生态风险分析方法 及应用研究 [J]. 环境保护前沿, 2011, 1(2): 13-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.12677/aep.2011.12003

参考文献

[1] C. S. Findlay, L. G. Zheng. Estimating ecosystem risks using cross-validated multiple regression and cross-validated hologra- phic neural networks. Ecological Modelling, 1999, 119(1): 57-72.
[2] N. S. Cavanagh, T. L. McDaniels, L. J. Axelrod, et al. Perceived ecological risks to water environments from selected forest in- dustry activities. Forest Science, 2000, 46(3): 344-355.
[3] J. H. Gentile, M. A. Harwell. Strategies for assessing cumulative ecological risks. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2001, 7(2): 239-246.
[4] G. M. Wang, W. D. Edge and J. O. Wolff. Demographic uncer- tainty in ecological risk assessments. Ecological Modelling, 2001, 136(1): 95-102.
[5] T. L. McDaniel, L. J. Axelrod and P. Slovic. Perception of eco- logical risk to water environments. Risk Analysis, 1997, 17(3): 291-298.
[6] T. L. McDaniel, L. J. Axelrod, N. S. Cavanagh, et al. Perception of ecological risk to water environments. Insurance: Mathe- matics and Economics, 1998, 22(2): 190-191.
[7] T. Oka, H. Matsuda and Y. Kadono. Ecological risk-benefit ana- lysis of a wetland development based on risk assessment using “expected loss of biodiversity”. Risk Analysis, 2001, 21(6): 1011- 1024.
[8] M. A. Santomero. Financial risk management: The whys and hows. Financial Markets Institutions & Instruments, 1995, 4(5): 1-13.
[9] A. Luoma, E. Ranta and V. Kaitala. Moose Alces alces hunting in Finland—An ecological risk analysis. Wildlife Biology, 2001, 7(3): 181-187.
[10] D. R. J. Moore. The Anna Karenina principle applied to eco- logical risk assessments of multiple stressors. Human and Eco- logical Risk Assessment, 2001, 7(2): 231-237.
[11] L. S. McCarty, M. Power. Environmental risk assessment within a decision-making framework. Environmental Toxicology Che- mistry, 1997, 16: 122-125.
[12] R. F. Noss. High-risk ecosystems as foci for considering bio- diversity and ecological integrity in ecological risk assessments. Environmental Science & Policy, 2000, 3(6): 321-332.
[13] K. S. Shrader-Frechette. What risk management teaches us about ecosystem management. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1998, 40(1): 141-150.
[14] R. G. Stahl, J. Orme-Zabaleta and K. Austin. Ecological indicators in risk assessment: Workshop summary. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2000, 6(4): 671-677.
[15] M. T. Brown, T. R. McClanahan. Emergy analysis perspectives of Thailand and Mekong River dam proposals. Ecological Mo- delling, 1996, 91(1-3): 105-130.
[16] M. Federici, S. Ulgiati, D. Verdesca, et al. Efficiency and sus- tainability indicators for passenger and commodities transporta- tion systems. The case of Siena, Italy. Ecological Indicators, 2003, 3(3): 155-169.
[17] S. Ulgiati, M. T. Brown, S. Bastianoni, et al. Emergy-based in- dices and ratios to evaluate the sustainable use of resources. Eco- logical Engineering, 1995, 5: 519-531.
[18] H. T. Odum, E. P. Odum. The energetic basis for valuation of ecosystem services. Ecosystems, 2000, 3(1): 21-23.
[19] 蓝盛芳, 陆宏芳, 钦佩. 生态经济系统能值分析[M]. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2002: 35-36, 407.
[20] 李自珍, 李维德, 石洪华, 贾晓红. 生态风险灰色评价模型及其在绿洲盐渍化农田生态系统中的应用[J]. 中国沙漠, 2002, 22(6): 617-622.
[21] E. F. Fama. The behavior of stock-market prices. Journal of Business, 1965, 38(1): 34-105.
[22] R. Martin, K. Thompson and C. Browne. VaR: Who contributes and how much? Risk, 2001, 14(8): 99-102.
[23] P. Jorion. Risk: Measuring the risk in value at risk. Financial Analysts Journal, 1996, 52(6): 47-56.
[24] K. R. Campbell, T. S. Campbell. Lizard contaminant data for ecological risk assessment. Reviews of Environmental Contami- nation and Toxicology, 2000, 165: 39-116.
[25] 黄崇福, 刘新立, 周国贤, 李学军. 以历史灾情资料为依据的农业自然灾害风险评估方法[J]. 自然灾害学报, 1998, 7(2): 1- 8.