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。     

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。     

辽河三角洲湿地区域生态风险评价

生态风险评价区别于生态影响评价的重要特征在于其强调不确定性因素的作用,区域生态风险评价相对于一般生态风险评价而言,其所涉及的风险源以及评价受体等都在区域内具有窨异质性,即具有区域分异现象,因而更具复杂性,以辽河三角洲湿地（盘锦市）为研究范围进行区域生态风险评价理论和方法的探讨,针对辽河三角洲主要生态风险源洪涝、干旱、风暴潮灾害和油田污染事故的概率进行了分级评价;并提出度量生态环境重要性和脆弱性的指标,分析了风险源的危害作用;运用遥感资料和地理信息系统（GIS）技术,完成了区域生态风险综合评价。     

基于Citespace软件的生态风险知识图谱分析

伴随着重大环境事件频发,环境污染、生态破坏现象的日益严峻,生态风险研究受到各国学者和政府的广泛关注。对整个生态风险研究领域进行全面系统的分析,旨在探究研究热点及趋势,归纳研究主题演进,了解当前国际研究现状。以Web of Science数据库为数据源,利用Citespace软件,绘制生态风险研究知识图谱,进行文献可视化分析。研究发现:(1)国际生态风险研究的发文数量经历了缓慢增长-平稳增长-迅速增长3个阶段;(2)生态风险研究分为奠基期,成长期,拓展期3个阶段,各阶段研究热点不同,当前研究热点是"空间分布、生态系统服务、城市土壤、源解析、海洋沉积物";(3)生态风险研究由单一风险源、风险受体、小尺度的评价演化为多种风险源、多种风险受体的大尺度综合评价;(4)欧美国家、学者奠定了该领域的研究基础,中国起步较晚但发展迅速。     

太湖流域生态风险评价

随着城镇的急剧扩张和经济的快速增长,流域生态环境遭到极大冲击和破坏,致使生态系统出现资源退化、环境恶化与灾害风险加剧的趋势,生态环境面临前所未有的挑战.从复合生态系统入手,深入分析流域内各生态系统要素之间的相互作用与影响机制,综合考虑多风险源、多风险受体和生态终点共存情况下的风险大小,从风险源危险度、生境脆弱度及受体损失度三方面构建了流域生态风险评价技术体系,并选取太湖流域为实证区域,对太湖流域2000年、2008年两个时期生态风险的时空演化特征进行评价与分析.结果表明:太湖流域生态风险指数介于0.015-0.253之间,以中等和较低生态风险为主.至2008年,高、较高生态风险所占面积逐渐扩大,已由2000年的5.66％、13.42％增加至6.05％、18.42％,主要集中在流域北部的常州市区、江阴市大部分地区以及无锡市区.     

基于RS和GIS的南四湖生态风险评价

以南四湖为研究对象,基于遥感和地理信息系统技术选择干旱、洪涝和水体污染为生态风险源,用景观格局指数评价生态系统的地位和受体的易损性,并依据生态风险值的度量的原理,通过计算综合风险概率及生态综合损失度得到南四湖的生态风险值。研究结果显示南四湖区域生态风险存在上下级湖分异与湖滨带状分异两大空间规律,体现了南四湖区域生态风险的空间异质性。     

基于GIS的渭河下游河流沿线区域生态风险评价

以渭河下游河流沿线区域为研究区,基于风险度量的基本原理和区域生态风险评价的流程框图,构建了综合生态风险值的计算模型,即综合生态风险值是综合风险概率、综合生态损失度和综合社会经济易损度的叠加.在研究区历史资料考证和2002年ETM+遥感影像景观分类的基础上,通过选取干旱、洪水、污染和水土流失,利用地理信息系统和现代地理学中的大量数学方法,按照评价步骤和计算模型,将研究区4种生态风险源综合评价结果划分为低风险区,较低风险区,中等风险区,较高风险区和高风险区5个级别.研究结果为环境管理和生态风险决策提供数量化的理论依据和数据支持.     

山西省能源重工业复合生态带生态风险评价

复合生态区生态风险涉及的风险源及风险受体具有明显的空间异质性,并相对突出地受到社会经济因素的影响,因而更为复杂、多样。山西省属我国黄土高原区,生态系统脆弱性相对突出。近年来,省内重型能源型工业发展速度很快,自吕梁孝义市至临汾侯马市已逐渐形成较明显的以煤焦产业特征为主的复合生态带。以该生态带主要风险源——洪涝、干旱、风灾、煤焦工业污染等的危害作用为研究对象,运用地理信息系统(GIS)分析技术,以区域为尺度探讨了复合生态区生态风险评价的理论与方法,并针对其敏感性提出了区域生态环境安全的保护对策。     

生态风险评价方法述评

生态风险是由环境的自然变化或人类活动引起的生态系统组成、结构的改变而导致系统功能损失的可能性。生态风险评价是定量预测各种风险源对生态系统产生风险的或然性以及评估该风险可接受程度的方法体系,因而是生态环境风险管理与决策的定量依据。在介绍了生态风险概念的基础上,按照风险源性质的分类标准将生态风险划分为化学污染类风险源、生态事件类风险源、复合类风险源3类,并分别论述了3类生态风险对应评价方法的特点与发展的方向。另外,针对生态风险评价研究的现状,讨论了我国生态风险研究的优先领域,包括建立急性、慢性毒理数据库,构建外来生物入侵风险评价标准等,同时,建议将综合概率统计学、复杂系统理论与遥感技术等手段引入生态风险评价方法中,以进一步提高风险评价结果在生态风险管理中的有效性。     

区域生态风险管理研究进展

近20a来,随着生态风险评价研究的不断深化,区域生态风险评价的理论和方法日臻完善,与此紧密相关的生态风险管理日益受到了广泛关注.生态风险管理具有基于监控的反馈机制、风险受害者参与、程序灵活非线性化、关注成本效益等共同点.总结了国内外生态风险管理的研究进展,发现近年来生态风险管理的研究多是基于生态风险评价的结果,针对不同的风险类型和等级采取不同的管理措施.国内现有的研究对灾害风险管理的体系、机制建设较为成熟,但区域生态风险管理的机制研究尤其是预警和防范方面研究尚不成熟.基于此,构建了基于风险来临前、风险到来时和风险过后的区域生态风险管理的基本框架,研究结果对生态风险管理理论的构建和实践应用具有重要的意义.     

区域生态风险评价的关键问题与展望

区域生态风险评价具有多风险因子、多风险受体、多评价终点、强调不确定性因素以及空间异质性的特点,它与传统的生态风险评价在风险源、胁迫因子和评价尺度上具有明显区别。尝试建立了一个基于陆地生态系统的区域生态风险评价框架,同时针对目前区域生态风险评价的研究现状,指出不确定性分析、尺度外推难、评价指标不统一、评价标准不统一、风险因子筛选及优先排序、区域内污染物复合、水生过渡到陆生生态系统风险评价、特殊的人为因素等是目前区域生态风险评价存在的关键问题及难点所在,并提出解决这些问题可能所需的工具、手段和理论方法突破。最后指出区域生态风险观测与数据采集加工、区域生态风险指标体系的统一与整合、区域生态风险评价方法论、区域生态风险的空间分布特征与表达以及区域生态风险评价反馈与管理机制5个方面是区域生态风险评价未来的研究重点。     

Strategies for Assessing Cumulative Ecological Risks

Assessing and managing the ecological risks from multiple stressors is becoming increasingly important as our environmental and regulatory focus moves from managing point sources to one of managing and trading risks from multiples sources over large geographic areas. There are important corollaries to this shift in focus and scale, one is the increased role and importance of non-chemical stressors in shaping and controlling ecological systems, the fact that these categories of stress are, for the most part, not regulated under the traditional legislative mandates, that we have limited knowledge regarding the interaction of chemical and non-chemical stressors, that at large scales we are faced with the integration of and trading of risks to multiple resource categories. This trend of increased attention to regional-scale environmental issues requires the development of new analysis and interpretive strategies and highlight the need for a systematic framework for addressing the ecological effects of multiple stressors at regional ecological scales. We propose that such a framework have three essential properties: it be risk-based; it be effects driven; and it have the flexibility to be used in both a retrospective and prospective manner. While several approaches have been proposed we believe that an ecological risk assessment framework satisfies these criteria, has been used successfully in regional assessments, and can readily be modified and adapted to serve a wide variety of problem settings.     

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.     

A Procedure for Ecological Tiered Assessment of Risks (PETAR)

Several procedures for Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA) have been suggested. The use of these existing procedures often relies on availability of existing data and/or on large resources for acquisition of new ones. This paper presents a three-tiered procedure for retrospective evaluation of risks adapted to limited resources and scarce background information of relevance for risk assessments, such as in developing countries. The tiers require successively more detailed investigations. The approach assures that resources available for site-specific investigations are directed towards well-formulated questions raised during previous stages of the assessment. The first tier, the preliminary assessment, is a qualitative evaluation of existing information on anthropogenic stressors, sources of stressors and expected ecological effects. The second tier is a regional risk assessment; a semi-quantitative evaluation of ecological risks, over large geographical areas, which results in a ranking of sources and stressors having the greatest potential for ecological impact and ranking of subareas inside the study area more likely to be impacted. The final tier is a site-specific and quantitative risk assessment, at a smaller scale and requiring more resources, that incorporates methodologies for establishing causality between exposure to multiple stressors and effects on specific endpoints of ecological and societal relevance.     

2022年冬奥会崇礼赛区多重压力下生态风险评价

冬奥会这类重大体育赛事对举办城市的经济转型、城市功能升级、竞争力提升等方面具有助推效应,而其带来的生态影响也不容小觑。近年随着赛事规模的不断扩大和户外场馆的建设,冬奥会导致的生态风险愈加突出。然而,对于规模大、历时长的冬奥会复杂生态风险目前还缺乏定量评价方法。研究旨在探讨一种区域生态风险评价方法,即相对风险模型,并基于地理信息系统（GIS）定量评价冬奥会赛前准备阶段多重压力下的生态风险。选择2022年冬奥会崇礼赛区为案例区,构建压力-生境-终点三大要素组成的相对风险模型,将整个崇礼划为6个风险分区,辨识了冬奥会赛前阶段包括各种人类生产、建设活动和自然因素的11类压力（威胁）、6类生境和4个评价终点,并确定了压力和生境的分级标准。压力分级评价结果显示,道路和交通活动的得分最高,得分最低的是火灾。生境相对等级评价表明,河流栖息地的得分最高,得分最低的是湿地与景区滑雪场。从不同生态终点得分看,生物多样性的风险最高,娱乐休闲风险最低。总体区域风险评价表明,VI区四台嘴乡冬奥场馆核心区的风险得分最高,而风险最低的为III区,包括石嘴子乡和驿马图乡。最后,对相对风险评价的不确定性进行分析,并讨论其优缺点。总之,尽管存在不确定性,相对方法模型仍被认为是评估和优先考虑多个资产的多重压力风险的稳健方法,也是决策者确定管理行动优先级的有用筛选工具。研究证明了相对风险模型方法评估2022年冬奥会主办地风险的可行性,研究结果明确了崇礼区恢复工作的重点区域和压力,对冬奥会的可持续管理和地方发展具有重要参考价值。     

A Regional Multiple Stressor Risk Assessment of the Codorus Creek Watershed Applying the Relative Risk Model

The relative risk model (RRM) used in Port Valdez, AK, and in Oregon's Willamette/McKenzie Watershed was applied to the Codorus Creek Watershed in south central Pennsylvania. The assessment evaluated the relative risk model for its applicability for ranking ecological risks within the Codorus Creek Watershed. The Codorus Creek Watershed approach included ranking stressors and habitats for regions within the watershed. Geographical Information Systems were vital in compiling and comparing stressor and habitat spatial data from regions in the watershed. The risk of ecological impacts to degrade assessment endpoints were calculated and ranked by quantitatively determining the interactions of the stressors and habitats as defined in the conceptual site model. Uncertainty assessment was conducted and the impact upon the relative ranks and risk conclusions evaluated. To determine regional risks, risk management information was gathered identifying areas to be protected, areas of high stress, and areas where additional information is needed. The results supported the applicability of the RRM and suggested areas and stressors for restoration efforts in the Codorus Creek Watershed. Two critical sets of conclusions were drawn from the assessment. First, in the Codorus Creek Watershed, the most significant stressor is agriculture land use, the most significantly impacted endpoint is water quality, and the most vulnerable habitats are those for macroinvertebrates and warm-water fish. Second, this risk assessment demonstrates the feasibility of using the RRM for assessing risk from multiple stressors on habitats with multiple assessment endpoints in an eastern watershed.     

A Weight-of-Evidence Framework for Assessing Sediment (Or Other) Contamination: Improving Certainty in the Decision-Making Process

A basic framework is presented for the ecological weight-of-evidence (WOE) process for sediment assessment that clearly defines its essential elements and will improve the certainty of conclusions about whether or not impairment exists due to sediment contamination, and, if so, which stressors and biological species (or ecological responses) are of greatest concern. The essential “Certainty Elements” are addressed in a transparent best professional judgment (BPJ) process with multiple lines-of-evidence (LOE) ultimately quantitatively integrated (but not necessarily combined into a single value). The WOE Certainty Elements include: (1) Development of a conceptual model (showing linkages of critical receptors and ecosystem quality characteristics); (2) Explanation of linkages between measurement endpoint responses (direct and indirect with associated spatial/temporal dynamics) and conceptual model components; (3) Identification of possible natural and anthropogenic stressors with associated exposure dynamics; (4) Evaluation of appropriate and quantitatively based reference (background) comparison methods; (5) Consideration of advantages and limitations of quantification methods used to integrate LOE; (6) Consideration of advantages and limitations of each LOE used; (7) Evaluation of causality criteria used for each LOE during output verification and how they were implemented; and (8) Combining the LOE into a WOE matrix for interpretation, showing causality linkages in the conceptual model. The framework identifies several statistical approaches for integrating within LOE, the suitability of which depends on physical characteristics of the system and the scale/nature of impairment. The quantification approaches include: (1) Gradient (regression methods); (2) Paired reference/test (before/after control impact and ANOVA methods); (3) Multiple reference (ANOVA and multivariate methods); and 4) Gradient with reference (regression, ANOVA and multivariate methods). This WOE framework can be used for any environmental assessment and is most effective when incorporated into the initial and final study design stages (e.g., the Problem Formulation and Risk Characterization stages of a risk assessment) with reassessment throughout the project and decision-making process, rather than in a retrospective data analysis approach where key certainty elements cannot be adequately addressed.     

Integrated Risk Assessment — Results from an International Workshop

The World Health Organization's International Programme on Chemical Safety and international partners have developed a framework for integrated assessment of human health and ecological risks and four case studies. An international workshop was convened to consider how ecological and health risk assessments might be integrated, the benefits of and obstacles to integration, and the research and mechanisms needed to facilitate implementation of integrated risk assessment. Using the case studies, workshop participants identified a number of opportunities to integrate the assessment process. Improved assessment quality, efficiency, and predictive capability were considered to be principal benefits of integration. Obstacles to acceptance and implementation of integrated risk assessment included the disciplinary and organizational barriers between ecological and health disciplines. A variety of mechanisms were offered to overcome these obstacles. Research recommendations included harmonization of exposure characterization and surveillance methods and models, development of common risk endpoints across taxa, improved understanding of mechanisms of effect at multiple scales of biological organization, and development of methods to facilitate comparison of risks among endpoints.     

区域生态风险评价——以呼和浩特市区为例

区域生态风险具有大尺度、多因素、多风险受体的特点,难以直接定量;从生态风险的定义出发,构建景观破碎度和面积加权生态价值指数评价区域生态风险,并以ArcGIS和Fragstats软件为研究平台,通过空间采样和插值方法得到区域生态风险的空间分布规律。以2006年Spot卫星遥感数据解译的呼和浩特市区土地利用图为例,研究结果表明生态风险值范围在0.04-0.26之间,空间梯度差异明显,风险较高区域为东北部的大青山山区以及西南角的平原农业区,北部风险驱动力主要来自土壤侵蚀、地下水源地水位下降、水质恶化以及林地的退化;南部则是快速工业化导致林地、草地、特别是耕地景观转换为居民与工矿用地景观。案例研究结果表明所建方法直观、简便,可定量描述区域景观生态风险的相对大小和空间分布规律。