基于改进三维生态足迹模型的珠江—西江经济带生态补偿价值测度及分区研究

doi:10.16088/j.issn.1001-6600.2023111802

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 生态补偿机制构建难点在于厘清补偿主客体、评估补偿优先时序及精准测算补偿标准,构建科学有效的生态补偿机制有助于流域上下游生态保护责任合理分配。本文以珠江—西江经济带地级市为研究单元,将改进三维生态足迹模型与生态系统服务价值估算相结合,测度2005—2020年各市生态补偿价值与标准,引入生态补偿优先级,最终划定优先支付、潜力支付、平衡、潜力受偿及优先受偿5类分区。结果表明:1)2020年经济带生态补偿赤字为288.09亿元,广州支付价值最高为185.14亿元,人均生态补偿标准为987.92元,仅崇左获生态补偿,受偿价值为0.68亿元,人均受偿标准为32.62元。2)广州、佛山与南宁长期为优先支付区;崇左长期为优先受偿区;肇庆、柳州及百色近年转为潜力支付区;来宾、贵港、梧州与云浮为平衡区;经济带优先受偿区与潜力受偿区逐步转为优先支付区、潜力支付区与平衡区。3)广州、佛山及南宁应率先支付生态补偿平衡经济带区际生态保护责任,协调区际生态保护共治关系;应优先给予崇左生态补偿以实现生态保护受益,获得生态环境治理的经济支持。

关键词: 生态补偿, 生态足迹, 价值测度, 生态系统服务价值, 生态补偿综合分区, 珠江—西江经济带

Abstract: The difficulty in the construction of the ecological compensation mechanism lies in clarifying the subject and object of compensation, evaluating the priority sequence of compensation and accurately calculating the compensation standard. The construction of a scientific and effective ecological compensation mechanism is conducive to the rational distribution of ecological protection responsibilities in the upstream and downstream of the basin. Taking the prefecture-level cities in the Pearl River-West River Economic Belt as the research unit, this paper combines the improved three-dimensional ecological footprint model with the estimation of ecosystem service value to measure the value and standard of ecological compensation in each city from 2005 to 2020, and introduces the priority of ecological compensation, and finally delineates five types of sub-districts: priority payment, potential payment, balance, potential compensation and priority compensation. The results showed that: 1) In 2020, the ecological compensation deficit in the economic belt was 28.809 billion yuan, the highest payment value in Guangzhou was 18.514 billion yuan, and the per capita ecological compensation standard was 987.92 yuan, and only Chongzuo received ecological compensation, with a compensation value of 68 million yuan and a per capita compensation standard of 32.62 yuan. 2) Guangzhou, Foshan and Nanning had long been priority payment areas; Chongzuo had long been a priority compensation area; Zhaoqing, Liuzhou and Baise had been transformed into potential payment areas in recent years; Laibin, Guigang, Wuzhou and Yunfu were balanced areas; The priority compensation area and potential compensation area of the economic belt had gradually changed to the priority payment area, potential payment area and balance area. 3) Guangzhou, Foshan and Nanning should take the lead in paying ecological compensation to balance the inter-regional ecological protection responsibilities of the economic belt, and coordinate the inter-regional ecological protection and co-governance relationship; Priority should be given to Chongzuo ecological compensation to benefit from ecological protection and obtain economic support for ecological and environmental governance.

Key words: ecological compensation, ecological footprint, value measurement, ecosystem service value, comprehensive ecological compensation zones, Pearl River-West River Economic Belt

中图分类号: X171

奉婷, 周严, 董仁玲, 李灿. 基于改进三维生态足迹模型的珠江—西江经济带生态补偿价值测度及分区研究[J]. 广西师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 42(4): 229-244.

FENG Ting, ZHOU Yan, DONG Renling, LI Can. Study on Measurement and Zoning of Ecological Compensation Value in Pearl River-West River Economic Belt Based on Improved Three-Dimensional Ecological Footprint Modeling[J]. Journal of Guangxi Normal University(Natural Science Edition), 2024, 42(4): 229-244.

参考文献

[1] 薛明皋, 邢路, 王晓艳. 中国土地生态系统服务当量因子空间修正及价值评估[J]. 中国土地科学, 2018, 32(9): 81-88. DOI: 10.11994/zgtdkx.20181017.123746.
[2] 樊新刚, 仲俊涛, 杨美玲,等. 区域可持续发展能力的能值与耦合分析模型构建[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(10): 2062-2077. DOI: 10.11821/dlxb201910008.
[3] 王前进, 王希群, 陆诗雷,等. 生态补偿的经济学理论基础及中国的实践[J]. 林业经济, 2019, 41(1): 3-23. DOI: 10.13843/j.cnki.lyjj.2019.01.001.
[4] 毛显强, 钟瑜, 张胜. 生态补偿的理论探讨[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2002, 12(4):40-43. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2002.04.010.
[5] CAPLAN A J, SILVA E C D. An efficient mechanism to control correlated externalities: redistributive transfers and the coexistence of regional and global pollution permit markets[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics & Management, 2005, 49(1): 68-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2004.03.004.
[6] 李国平, 李潇, 萧代基. 生态补偿的理论标准与测算方法探讨[J]. 经济学家, 2013(2):42-49. DOI: 10.16158/j.cnki.51-1312/f.2013.02.002.
[7] 李飞. 构建助力精准脱贫攻坚的横向生态补偿机制[J]. 新视野, 2019(3): 31-36. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0138.2019.03.004.
[8] 袁伟彦, 周小柯. 生态补偿问题国外研究进展综述[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2014, 24(11): 76-82. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2014.11.010.
[9] LIU J M, CHEN H B, HOU X H, et al. Time to adopt a context-specific and market-based compensation scheme for a new round of the Grain for Green Program[J]. Land Use Policy, 2021, 108: 105675. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105675.
[10] REN Y S, LU L, ZHANG H M, et al. Residents’ willingness to pay for ecosystem services and its influencing factors: a study of the Xin’an River Basin[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 268: 122301. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122301.
[11] 杨莉, 乔光华. 基于牧民受偿意愿的生态保护红线区草原生态补偿标准研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2021, 35(11): 55-60. DOI: 10.13448/j.cnki.jalre.2021.297.
[12] 胡振通, 柳荻, 孔德帅, 等. 基于机会成本法的草原生态补偿中禁牧补助标准的估算[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2017, 31(2): 63-68. DOI: 10.13448/j.cnki.jalre.2017.045.
[13] ZHOU Y J, ZHOU J X, LIU H L, et al. Study on eco-compensation standard for adjacent administrative districts based on the maximum entropy production[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 221: 644-655. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.239.
[14] FANG Z, CHEN J Y, LIU G, et al. Framework of basin eco-compensation standard valuation for cross-regional water supply: a case study in northern China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 279: 123630. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123630.
[15] COSTANZA R, D’ARGE R, DE GROOT R, et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital[J]. Ecological Economics, 1998, 25(1): 3-15. DOI: 10.1016/s0921-8009(98)00020-2.
[16] 谢高地, 张彩霞, 张雷明,等. 基于单位面积价值当量因子的生态系统服务价值化方法改进[J]. 自然资源学报, 2015, 30(8): 1243-1254. DOI: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2015.08.001.
[17] 杨欣, 蔡银莺, 张安录. 武汉城市圈跨区域农田生态补偿转移支付额度测算[J]. 经济地理, 2013, 33(12):141-146. DOI: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2013.12.005.
[18] 罗海平, 朱勤勤, 潘柳欣,等. 粮食主产区农田生态系统服务价值动态演化与空间分异[J]. 统计与决策, 2020, 36(4): 49-52. DOI: 10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2020.04.011.
[19] 李理, 朱文博, 李艳红,等. 基于地形梯度特征淇河流域生态系统服务价值损益[J]. 水土保持研究, 2019, 26(5): 287-295. DOI: 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2019.05.042.
[20] 刘永超, 李加林, 袁麒翔,等. 中美港湾流域生态系统服务价值变化比较:以浙江象山港与佛罗里达坦帕湾为例[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(2): 357-368. DOI: 10.11821/dlyj020171106.
[21] RICHARDSON L, LOOMIS J, KROEGER T, et al. The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation[J]. Ecological Economics, 2015, 115: 51-58. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.02.018.
[22] 刘春腊, 刘卫东. 中国生态补偿的省域差异及影响因素分析[J]. 自然资源学报, 2014, 29(7): 1091-1104. DOI: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2014.07.001.
[23] 张皓玮, 方斌, 魏巧巧,等. 区域耕地生态价值补偿量化模型构建:以江苏省为例[J]. 中国土地科学, 2015, 29(1): 63-70. DOI: 10.13708/j.cnki.cn11-2640.2015.01.007.
[24] REES E W. Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out[J]. Environment and Urbanization, 1992, 4(2): 121-130. DOI: 10.1177/095624789200400212.
[25] WACKERNAGEL M, ONISTO L, BELLO P, et al. National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept[J]. Ecological Economics, 1999, 29(3): 375-390. DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(98)90063-5.
[26] NICCOLUCCI V,BASTIANONI S, TIEZZI E, et al. How deep is the footprint? A 3D representation[J]. Ecological Modelling, 2009, 220(20): 2819-2823. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.07.018.
[27] 方恺. 基于改进生态足迹三维模型的自然资本利用特征分析:选取11个国家为数据源[J]. 生态学报, 2015, 35(11): 3766-3777. DOI: 10.5846/stxb201308022011.
[28] 靳相木, 柳乾坤. 基于三维生态足迹模型扩展的土地承载力指数研究:以温州市为例[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(9): 2982-2993. DOI: 10.5846/stxb201601310224.
[29] 苏子龙,袁国华,周伟.基于改进三维生态足迹模型的安徽省土地生态承载力评价[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(3):256-262. DOI: 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2020.03.037.
[30] 阮熹晟, 李坦, 张藕香,等. 基于生态服务价值的长江经济带耕地生态补偿量化研究[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2021, 42(1): 68-76. DOI: 10.7621/cjarrp.1005-9121.20210109.
[31] 官冬杰, 姜亚楠, 严聆云,等. 基于生态足迹视角的长江流域生态补偿额度测算[J]. 生态学报, 2022, 42(20): 8169-8183. DOI: 10.5846/stxb202010282764.
[32] 郭荣中, 申海建. 基于生态足迹的澧水流域生态补偿研究[J]. 水土保持研究, 2017, 24(2): 353-358. DOI: 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2017.02.058.
[33] 郭荣中, 申海建, 杨敏华. 基于生态足迹和服务价值的长株潭地区生态补偿研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2017, 48(1): 70-78. DOI: 10.19336/j.cnki.trtb.2017.01.08.
[34] 周健, 官冬杰, 周李磊. 基于生态足迹的三峡库区重庆段后续发展生态补偿标准量化研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 2018, 38(11): 4539-4553. DOI: 10.13671/j.hjkxxb.2018.0297.
[35] 肖飞鹏, 李晖, 尹辉,等. 基于生态系统服务的青狮潭水库生态补偿研究[J]. 广西师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 32(2): 162-167. DOI: 10.16088/j.issn.1001-6600.2014.02.056.
[36] 钱凤魁, 徐欢, 逄然然,等. 基于三维生态足迹模型辽宁省耕地生态补偿额度估算分析[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2023, 44(6): 97-109. DOI: 10.7621/cjarrp.1005-9121.20230610.
[37] 孟雅丽, 苏志珠, 马杰,等. 基于生态系统服务价值的汾河流域生态补偿研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2017, 31(8): 76-81. DOI: 10.13448/j.cnki.jalre.2017.250.
[38] 李洁, 宋晓谕, 吴娜,等. 渭河流域甘肃段生态补偿成本测度与分区[J]. 经济地理, 2018, 38(1): 180-186. DOI: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2018.01.023.
[39] 郑德凤, 刘晓星, 王燕燕,等. 中国省际碳足迹广度、深度评价及时空格局[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(2):447-458. DOI: 10.5846/stxb201901010003.
[40] 严有龙, 王军, 王金满. 基于生态系统服务的闽江流域生态补偿阈值研究[J]. 中国土地科学, 2021, 35(3): 97-106. DOI: 10.11994/zgtdkx.20210303.145554.
[41] 赵晶晶, 葛颜祥, 李颖,等. 基于生态系统服务价值的大汶河流域生态补偿适度标准研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2023, 37(4): 1-8. DOI: 10.13448/j.cnki.jalre.2023.081.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed