中国三江源国家公园与韩国智异山国家公园的对比研究

自1967年智异山被认定为韩国首个国家公园以来,韩国以国家公园为主体的自然保护地体系建设已历经50余年。这期间韩国在国家公园的建设中积累了大量经验,十分值得我国借鉴。选取我国首个国家公园体制试点——三江源国家公园和韩国首个国家公园——智异山国家公园为研究对象,对二者的管理现状进行了定性分析,并运用基于最优实践的国家公园管理能力评价方法对二者的管理能力进行了定量评价。研究表明:三江源国家公园的管理能力综合得分低于智异山国家公园,在体制建设、保障机制、资源环境管理、社区管理和科普教育五个方面均与智异山国家公园存在一定差距;智异山国家公园在资源本底调查、法制建设、多方参与、环境教育和游憩管理方面的管理能力十分突出,为三江源国家公园管理能力的提升提供了有益借鉴;三江源国家公园在生态补偿和制度约束方面具有比较优势,但在自然资源权属、资源本底调查、社区组织建设和游憩管理方面则亟待提升。在此基础上,针对三江源国家公园建设提出了强化科研支撑、健全多方参与制度、推进全民福利共享三项建议,针对我国国家公园体制建设提出了制定《国家公园法》、设置自然保护地顶层规划两项建议,以期促进三江源国家公园管理能力提升、推动我国国家公园体制建设。

Comparative study between Three-River-Source National Park of China and Jiri National Park of Korea

Since Jiri National Park was designated as the first national park in 1967, Korean protected area system with national parks as the core part has undergone more than 50 years development. A lot of management experiences have been achieved in the construction process of Korean national parks, which deserves China to learn from it. In this study, the Three-River-Source National Park (the first national park in China) and the Jiri National Park (the first National Park in South Korea) were chosen as study cases and both qualitative and quantitative analyses were applied to reveal their differences in management capacity. Evaluation method on the management capacity of national parks based on the best practices was used in the quantitative analysis where comparisons in both the comprehensive and individual management capacity were made between the two cases. Main conclusions were drawn as follows. Firstly, the comprehensive scores of management capacity of Three-River-Source National Park and Jiri National Park were 68.03 and 86.59, respectively. The gap in the management capacity between the two cases existed in five aspects of the institutional construction, guarantee mechanism, natural resources and environment management, community management, and popular science and education. Secondly, the individual management capacity of Jiri National Park was outstanding in resources baseline survey, legal system, multi-stakeholder participation, environmental education, and tourism management, which could provide useful reference for the Three-River-Source National Park. Thirdly, Three-River-Source National Park had comparative advantages in the individual management capacity of ecological compensation and restraint system, while its disadvantages in natural assets registration, resources survey, community organization, and tourism management needed to be improved urgently. Based on the results, suggestions were put forward for improvement of the management capacity of Three-River-Source National Park like strengthening the support of scientific research, improving the mechanism of multi-stakeholder participation, and promoting the welfare sharing. Suggestions were also put forward for the construction of the national park system in China, namely, establishing the National Park Law and formulating top-level planning for the protected areas.