Institute of Tropical Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Guangzhou 510520, China.
College of Life Science, Taizhou University, Taizhou 318000, Zhejiang, China.
Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao. 2023 Nov;34(11):3073-3084. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202311.025.
Ecosystem services refer to the benefits that human obtain from natural ecosystems. Different ecosystem services are generated by the combination of social-ecological driving factors, and exhibit different spatial patterns across scales. The complex relationships and driving mechanisms among ecosystem services under different spatial scales remain unclear. With Shaoguan City from Guangdong Province as the study area, we analyzed the spatial patterns and relationships of four ecosystem services and their trade-offs/synergies (TOSs), quantified their responses to seven social-ecological drivers at the kilometer grid scale and sub-watershed scale, and proposed regional ecologi-cal management and planning strategies for cross-scale sustainable development. The results showed that the spatial distribution of ecosystem services in Shaoguan City exhibited spatial clustering and cross-scale variations. Habitat quality, water yield, and carbon storage exhibited similar spatial distribution pattern. High supply was mainly distributed in mountainous areas in the east, north, west, and south, while weak supply was distributed in plain areas in the central, northwest, south and northeast. In addition, the spatial clustering of these services intensified with increasing spatial scale. Ecosystem services displayed synergistic relationships at both spatial scales, and the intensity of the synergy changed with scale. At both the kilometer grid and sub-watershed scale, the primary drivers for ecosystem services were the normalized vegetation index and digital elevation model. The main driver for TOSs was the mean annual temperature at the kilometer grid scale, while it was the mean annual evapotranspiration at the sub-watershed scale. Based on the supply levels of ecosystem services, the study area could be divided into five distinct ecosystem service bundles, , mountain ecological balance zone, forest ecological conservation zone, urban forest maintenance zone, ecologically sensitive zone, and ecological risk zone. All bundles exhibited both spatial heterogeneity and cross-scale variations. We integrated the cross-scale variations of four representative ecosystem services and their complex interactions and driving mechanisms in Shaoguan City into spatial planning to facilitate the sustainable ecosystem management across multiple scales, which could offer valuable references for the construction of ecological civilization in other regions.
生态系统服务是指人类从自然生态系统中获得的效益。不同的生态系统服务是由社会-生态驱动因素的组合产生的，并在不同尺度上表现出不同的空间格局。不同尺度下生态系统服务之间的复杂关系和驱动机制仍不清楚。以广东省韶关市为例，我们分析了四种生态系统服务及其权衡/协同关系（TOS）的空间格局和关系，在公里网格尺度和子流域尺度上量化了它们对七个社会-生态驱动因素的响应，并提出了跨尺度可持续发展的区域生态管理和规划策略。结果表明，韶关市生态系统服务的空间分布表现出空间集聚和跨尺度变化。生境质量、产水量和碳储量表现出相似的空间分布模式。高供给主要分布在东部、北部、西部和南部的山区，而弱供给分布在中部、西北部、南部和东北部的平原地区。此外，这些服务的空间集聚随着空间尺度的增加而加剧。生态系统服务在两个空间尺度上都表现出协同关系，协同关系的强度随尺度而变化。在公里网格和子流域尺度上，生态系统服务的主要驱动因素是归一化植被指数和数字高程模型。TOS 的主要驱动因素是公里网格尺度上的年平均气温，而子流域尺度上的主要驱动因素是年平均蒸散量。基于生态系统服务的供给水平，研究区可分为五个不同的生态系统服务包，即山地生态平衡区、森林生态保护区、城市森林维护区、生态敏感区和生态风险区。所有包都表现出空间异质性和跨尺度变化。我们将韶关市四种代表性生态系统服务及其复杂相互作用和驱动机制的跨尺度变化纳入空间规划，以促进多尺度的可持续生态系统管理，为其他地区的生态文明建设提供有价值的参考。
