区域生态风险评价研究进展

生态风险评价是一种重要的生态环境管理手段。从区域尺度着手,分析生态系统所遭受的风险,对加强生态系统管理、区域生态安全具有重要的现实意义。本文在回顾国内外区域生态风险评价概念内涵、主要内容及其发展历程的基础上,对当前研究区域、研究尺度、研究模型和研究的不确定性分析等关键性问题做了较为系统的探讨,并就其未来研究方向进行了展望。     

区域生态风险评价方法研究进展

生态风险评价是近十几年逐渐兴起并得到发展的一个研究领域,区域生态风险评价作为生态风险评价的组成部分,由于其空间异质性和评价过程的复杂性,而成为了研究的难点与热点。本文综述了生态风险评价和区域生态风险评价的概念、方法和实践研究的进展,总结了具有代表性的生态风险评价概念模型框架和步骤以及物理、数学和计算机模拟等评价方法;归纳了区域生态风险评价的概念模型、PETAR方法以及相对风险评价模型等;介绍了针对多样化的风险源、风险受体和评价数据源类型的不同而进行的实践案例研究。针对目前研究中存在评价阈值确定、暴露和危害分析、定量表征、不确定性处理等方面的问题,提出需进一步研究和探讨区域生态风险评价的指标体系、评价标准、定量化方法与技术以及风险效应表征等。     

生态风险评价研究进展

20多年来,生态风险评价研究经历了从环境风险到生态风险到区域生态风险评价的发展历程,风险源由单一风险源扩展到多风险源,风险受体由单一受体发展到多受体,评价范围由局地扩展到区域景观水平.区域生态风险评价就是大尺度上研究复杂环境背景下包含多风险源、多风险受体的综合风险研究.目前,区域生态风险评价的理论框架已经搭建起来,统计方法多采用相对评价法.区域生态风险评价未来的发展方向为继续加强实验和野外调查,进一步减小不确定性,逐步解决尺度推移问题.区域生态风险评价必须与经济、社会、文化相结合,才能充分发挥它在管理决策中的作用.     

生态安全评价研究中的若干问题

生态安全评价是对生态系统完整性以及对各种风险下维持其健康的可持续能力的识别与研判,以生态风险和生态健康评价为核心内容,并体现人类安全的主导性．生态风险识别和生态脆弱性是生态风险评价的构成要素,生态健康则表现在生态完整性、生态系统活力与恢复力三方面．生态安全评价的准则与指标体系应将生态风险与生态健康有机结合。同时兼容不同空间尺度并能体现动态变化,其中在EDI、REI和IRI分类基础上叠加暴露分析指标是较大空间尺度生态安全指标体系建立的发展方向．文中综述了现阶段主要的生态安全评价方法,表明暴露-响应综合评价模式在现阶段应用最为广泛,生态模型法评价不同尺度的生态安全则是未来主要发展领域,并注重生态过程安全评价．生态安全评价研究需要与生态安全预测及预警研究相结合,并将生态安全的保障、维护与管理研究纳入其范畴．     

矿区生态风险评价研究述评

作为世界上矿产资源最丰富的国家之一,我国的矿山开采活动在给经济发展注入强大拉动力的同时,也给矿区生态环境带来了巨大的生态风险。总结前人相关研究,在对比分析了矿区生态风险及其评价与区域生态风险评价异同的基础上,初步明晰矿区生态风险具有风险源的多样性、空间影响边界的模糊性、随空间距离的衰减性及时间累积的延续性等特性。目前矿区生态风险评价的矿区类型过多集中于金属矿区的重金属污染等单项风险,对综合生态风险评价的重视不充分,多基于景观格局、生态环境问题视角,结果多对斑块或生态系统风险评价进行拼接,欠缺基于空间异质性的整体综合;风险度量模型、指标体系法和空间分析法则是较为常用的矿区生态风险评价方法,但在模型模拟方面略显不足。基于现有研究进展,预期矿区独特性的体现、空间格局的关注、"3S"技术的综合应用、生态安全阈值的设定、不确定性表征、基于评价结果的风险规避等将有望成为未来研究的重点。     

基于生态系统服务的城市化区域生态风险表征方法研究

快速城市化导致城市周边区域生态系统服务损失并引发生态风险。以多种类型的生态系统服务作为生态风险的评价终点,构建了基于服务价值量的城市化区域生态风险表征方法,以北京市为例对方法进行了应用,并进行了风险评价结果的不确定性分析和参数敏感性分析。案例研究显示2015年北京市生态风险总体处于低风险接近中等风险水平,低风险和极低风险区域面积占全市的50%以上,主要分布于北京市西部和北部,高风险和极高风险区域面积占20%左右,主要分布于中心城区。生态风险空间格局特征表明北京市城市区域的扩张造成周边区域生态系统服务的下降,导致生态风险水平的上升。研究提出的生态风险指数同生态系统服务当量因子间具有显著的线性关系,可用于估算生态系统服务价值。不确定性和参数敏感性分析表明生态风险指数计算结果变异较小,指数具有较高的可靠性。研究方法能够综合表征城市化区域的生态风险,定量表征结果便于决策者理解,具有应用于风险评价和管理实践的价值。     

生态风险评价研究进展

生态风险评价有效整合了学术研究、政策制定和生态环境管理,越来越多地被应用到生态环境问题的解决。生态风险评价研究历经20多年发展历程,风险源从单一风险源扩展到多风险源,风险受体从单一受体发展到多受体,评价尺度也从种群、生态系统扩展到区域和景观水平。但已有研究中,风险受体大部分还停留在生物个体或种群水平,风险受体尺度有待扩展,定性或者半定量研究方法亦难以适应现有研究尺度以及综合性评价的要求,因此,基于区域可持续发展视角的大尺度、综合性定量评价方法和模型将成为未来研究的重点。     

区域尺度生态修复空间辨识研究进展

区域尺度辨识生态修复空间是进行生态恢复与重建的重要前提,对区域生态文明建设和可持续发展具有重要作用。如何构建科学合理、面向政策和民众需求的生态修复空间辨识指标体系,目前已成为生态学研究的热点问题之一。系统梳理生态空间评价理论,综合构建生态修复空间辨识框架,包括评价对象的选择、评价指标筛选的原则、指标体系构建的主要方法和评价指标权重设定等方面,在区域生态评价的基础上,强调政策目标、民众需求,构建了生态质量、生态系统服务、生态系统健康3个方面18个指标,能够较全面反映区域生态空间主要特征,以期为构建区域尺度生态修复空间辨识指标体系提供参考,为生态恢复和重建提供科学依据。研究还展望了区域尺度下生态修复空间辨识的重点发展方向,即加强复合生态系统理论的应用,统筹社会、经济、自然因子开展综合评价,并推动多尺度评价结果的融合与应用。     

基于土地破坏的矿区生态风险评价:理论与方法

矿区生态风险评价已成为区域生态风险研究的热点领域。如何合理选择和表征区域生态风险源和风险受体,量化多风险源和多风险受体的交互作用,是目前区域生态风险评价研究的焦点。为此,在总结矿区生态风险评价研究成果的基础上,构建了矿区生态风险源、风险受体及作用对象与过程的因果链模型,结合矿区生态环境问题产生过程的独特性,将土地挖损、占用及塌陷等土地破坏作为矿区的直接生态风险源。基于土地破坏类型提出了适宜矿区的区域生态风险评价流程、指标体系与计算方法;并专门在定量化多风险源与多风险受体交互作用上做出探讨,构建了生态系统单元暴露指数和土地破坏累积作用指数来评价矿区土地破坏与生态系统单元间的暴露与危害作用关系。为矿区生态风险评价的实证研究提出了理论基础与方法框架,未来可结合实证研究对此方法及相关指标参数做出完善与改进,为矿区生态环境管理与生态安全建设提供科学的参考依据。     

生态空间区划体系的理论内涵及关键技术研究

生态空间是维护区域可持续发展的重要组成部分,是国土空间规划体系的核心领域。生态空间区划是国土空间管控的重要内容,是解决区域供需矛盾,维护国土安全的重要手段。研究在系统总结现有生态区划理论、技术和方法的基础上,探讨了目前生态区划存在的不足,进一步提出新时代生态空间区划的理论、内涵和国土空间规划背景下生态空间区划技术要点。生态空间区划是以生态空间提供生态系统服务,维系生态安全为基础,从区域尺度以山水林田湖草生命共同体理念综合辨识分类生态空间。评价指标体系应基于生态功能区划和环境功能区划,结合政策目标、居民需求并参考区域城镇化特征及未来发展定位,以生态系统服务、生态敏感性、生态质量、生态健康等多因子评价为主。生态空间区划的目的是对生态空间开展保护、修复、和高质量开发建设,因此生态空间区划阈值的选取要立足于政策目标、居民需求和可持续发展,按照生态系统服务供需耦合机制划定生态空间分区,并及时调整。研究还基于现阶段区域尺度下生态空间区划的难点,从加强生态空间区划体系的应用、加强生态空间基础数据库的构建、加强命名规范等方面进行了工作展望。     

生态风险评价及研究进展

生态风险是当前环境管理研究领域中的一个热点问题,其研究着重关注化学、物理和生物的胁迫因子可能对生态系统或其组分的有害影响.生态风险评价对科学制定环境管理决策有着重要的意义.要对生态系统进行有效地管理,必须预测不利生态影响发生的可能性及后果,减小其对于生态系统或某些组分的损害程度.本文对生态风险评价的研究方法、工具以及研究趋势进行了综述,指出了目前生态风险评价中还需要进一步加强的研究领域,认为在当前城市化水平不断提高的情况下要关注城市生态风险,并针对存在的一些问题提出了今后的研究展望.     

Regional Ecological Risk Assessment of a Near Shore Marine Environment: Cherry Point,WA

We conducted a regional ecological risk assessment for a near shore marine environment in northwestern Washington State using the Relative Risk Model. The objectives of this study were threefold: (1) to analyze cumulative impacts from multiple sources of chemical and non-chemical stressors in the near shore region and upland watersheds of Cherry Point (2) to determine the utility of Monte Carlo type uncertainty analysis in a rank-based regional risk assessment and (3) to investigate the effects of model habitat characterization on risk estimates. We used geographic information systems to compile and compare spatial data to determine ranks for sub-regions within the study area. By quantitatively combining ranks with exposure and effects filters, we estimated total relative risk between sub-regions and relative contributions of stressors. Finally, we used Monte Carlo analysis and an alternative ranking scheme to evaluate the effects of model and parameter uncertainty on risk predictions. The regional risk assessment results suggest the major contributors of risk are vessel traffic, upland urban and agricultural land use and shoreline recreational activities. This assessment demonstrated the applicability of regional risk assessment to marine near shore regions and the benefit of Monte Carlo analysis in describing uncertainty in a Relative Risk Model regional risk assessment.     

Developing A Regional Ecological Risk Assessment: A Case Study of a Tasmanian Agricultural Catchment

A regional ecological risk assessment was conducted for the Mountain River catchment in Tasmania, Australia. The Relative Risk Model was used in conjunction with geographic information systems interpretations. Stakeholder values were used to develop assessment endpoints, and regional stressors and habitats were identified. The risk hypotheses expressed in the conceptual model were that agriculture and land clearing for rural residential are producing multiple stressors that have potential for contamination of local waterbodies, eutrophication, changes in hydrology, reduction in the habitat of native flora and fauna, reductions in populations of beneficial insects in agricultural production systems, increased weed competition in pastures, and loss of aesthetic value in residential areas. In the risk analysis the catchment was divided into risk regions based on topography and land use. Stressors were ranked on likelihood of occurrence, while habitats were ranked on percentage land area. Risk characterization showed risks to the maintenance of productive primary industries were highest across all risk regions, followed by maintenance of a good residential environment and maintenance of fish populations. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to show the variability in risk outcomes stemming from uncertainty about stressors and habitats. Outcomes from this assessment provide a basis for planning regional environmental monitoring programs.     

Integration of Ecosystem Services into Ecological Risk Assessment for Implementation in Ecosystem-Based River Management: A Case Study of the Yellow River,China

Ecological risk assessment (ERA) is a scientific tool used to support ecosystem-based management (EBM), but most current ERA methods consider only a few indices of particular species or components. Such limitations restrict the scope of results so that they are insufficient to reflect the integrated risk characterization of an ecosystem, thereby inhibiting the application of ERA in EBM. We incorporate the concept of ecosystem services into ERA and develop an improved ERA framework to create a comprehensive risk map of an ecosystem, accounting for multiple human activities and ecosystem services. Using the Yellow River as a case study, we show how this framework enables the implementation of integrated risk characterization and prioritization of the most important ecological risk issues in the ecosystem-based river management of the Yellow River. This framework can help practitioners facilitate better implementation of ERA within EBM in rivers or any target ecosystem.     

基于生态系统服务的生态风险评价研究进展

生态风险评价对科学管理与保护生态系统具有重要的意义,为弥补传统生态风险评价方法的不足和提高风险管理的效率,将生态系统服务引入生态风险评价中进行发展和完善,成为了当前生态风险评价研究的前沿和热点。系统分析了生态系统服务在生态风险评价中的应用,指出生态系统服务在问题形成阶段中可明确保护对象和属性,在风险分析阶段可联系生态系统结构过程作用,在风险表征阶段及后续阶段能可提供清晰明确的评价结果,加强风险交流和管理,能有效地改进生态系统传统生态风险评价。在实践上,基于生态系统服务的生态风险评价可从3个不同层面开展:一是针对外界压力对某类特定功能或者系统中某些服务功能的影响,构建基于某种特定服务的实体属性评价方法;二是针对外界压力作用下生态系统结构与过程变化下对功能影响,构建基于复杂生态系统作用的评价方法,实现对生态风险的模拟评价;三是评价社会生态系统下外界驱动对人类福祉的影响时,可将DPSIR(Drive-Pressure-State-Impact-Response)理论模型运用到生态风险管理中,也可基于景观生态系统服务与压力源的空间作用关系,实现社会生态系统风险评价与管理。作为生态风险表征手段,可基于生态系统服务损失与不利服务进行表征,也可选取热力学等指标作为评估量纲。从理论、评价方法、风险管理等方面对基于生态系统服务生态风险评价给予展望。     

Improving the Applicability of Quantitative Ecological Risk Assessment Tools—Understanding Demand-Side Changes

Quantitative ecological risk assessment (ERA) methods are the tools of choice for many natural resource management agencies and practitioners. However, a number of researchers and practitioners have recently highlighted that the application of quantitative ERA tools has perhaps been somewhat limited and this has stimulated discussion on the limitations of these methods, considered to be supply-side limitations in this analysis. By contrast, it is argued here that the demand for risk assessment tools has also changed substantively and this also acts to limit the use of ERA approaches. In particular, demand has changed through an increasing expectation that quantitative ERA tools will be able to capture ecosystem-scale, and sometimes global-scale interactions to support ecosystem-based management approaches. Similarly, the burgeoning use of market-based policy instruments often underpinned by the allocation of private property rights to an increasing number of ecosystem goods and services has fundamentally changed many natural resource management issues into allocation conflicts between alternate rights-holders. These demand-side changes represent both an opportunity and a challenge for developers of quantitative ERA tools.     

Using Ecological Risk Assessment Principles in a Source Water Protection Assessment

It has become increasingly common to apply ecological risk assessment (ERA) principles to watershed and regional scale environmental management. This article describes the application of watershed ERA principles to the development of a source water protection assessment and a strategic watershed management plan. The primary focus was on the protection of drinking water quality, a concern typically addressed by human health risk assessors. The approach emphasizes adaptations to the problem formulation phase of ERA (defining assessment endpoints, developing conceptual models and an analysis plan) suitable for watershed management planning in a multi-objective, multi-stressor context. Physical, chemical, and biological attributes were selected for primary drinking water quality assessment endpoints, and coupled with additional assessment endpoints relevant to other environmental and social management objectives. Conceptual models helped the planning team to better understand and communicate the multiple natural and human stressors in the watershed and the causal pathways by which they affected drinking water. The article provides an example of the types of adaptations that can make ERA principles suitable for watershed management related to human health goals, and illustrates the efficiency of integrating health and ecological assessments.     

Planning Transboundary Ecological Risk Assessments at Military Installations

Ecological risk assessments at military installations that are performed to support natural resources management objectives rely on information from the surrounding region. Stressors such as noise, ozone, and ozone precursors cross installation boundaries, and effects of urbanization and highway development are regional in scale. Ecological populations are not limited to one side of the installation boundary. Therefore, a framework for transboundary ecological risk assessment at military installations is under development. This article summarizes the problem formulation stage. Components include: (1) regional management goals such as installation Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans and land acquisition, (2) involvement of multiple stressors, and (3) large-scale assessment endpoint entities. Challenges of selecting measures of exposure include: quantifying exposure to aggregate stressors, describing land cover consistently in the region, describing rates of land-cover transition, scaling local measurements to a region, and aggregating or isolating exposures from within and outside of the installation. Measures of effect that are important to transboundary or regional ecological risk assessments at military installations are those that represent: effects at a distance from the stressor, large-scale effects, effects of habitat change or fragmentation, spatial extrapolations of localized effects, and integrated effects of multiple stressors. These factors are reflected in conceptual models.     

Ten Years of the Relative Risk Model and Regional Scale Ecological Risk Assessment

It has been 10 years since the publication of the relative risk model (RRM) for regional scale ecological risk assessment. The approach has since been used successfully for a variety of freshwater, marine, and terrestrial environments in North America, South America, and Australia. During this period the types of stressors have been expanded to include more than contaminants. Invasive species, habitat loss, stream alteration and blockage, temperature, change in land use, and climate have been incorporated into the assessments. Major developments in the RRM have included the extensive use of geographical information systems, uncertainty analysis using Monte Carlo techniques, and its application to retrospective assessments to determine causation. The future uses of the RRM include assessments for forestry and conservation management, an increasing use in invasive species evaluation, and in sustainability. Developments in risk communication, the use of Bayesian approaches, and in uncertainty analyses are on the horizon.