Research Progress on Ecological Risk Assessment based on Multifunctional Landscape

doi:10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2021.02.012

Abstract

Abstract:

The unreasonable utilization and trade-offs of the multifunctional landscape is one of the important causes leading to ecological risk. Quantifying the relationship, heterogeneous process and driving mechanism between landscape function and human well-being can provide a scientific basis for achieving a win-win situation of regional development and ecological protection, and it is also an important issue for relevant scientific research. In this paper, we reviewed the current state of knowledge regarding landscape function and ecological risk, identified the feedback mechanisms among landscape change, landscape function, human well-being and ecological risk, constructed the ecological risk assessment framework based on landscape functions, and sorted out the key scientific issues and research trends. The interconnections between the multifunctional landscape, human well-being, and ecological risk comprise an important scientific issue in ecological risk assessment. However, there is a lack of understanding of the spatial-temporal characteristics of landscape function trade-offs, and there is also a lack of systematic and standardized methods for the identification and comprehensive evaluation of landscape functions. Exploring ecological risk management and the methodologies that integrate the two processes of nature and humanity is an inevitable trend for future research. Coupling landscape structure, function and process into ecological risk assessment, as well as focusing on the combination of human well-being, landscape function trade-off and ecological risk control policy design are important issues to be studied.

Key words: landscape function, ecological risk, human well-being, feedback mechanism, management regulation

LIN Dayi, LIU Fangyu, ZHANG Jiping, HAO Haiguang, ZHANG Qiang. Research Progress on Ecological Risk Assessment based on Multifunctional Landscape[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2021, 12(2): 260-267.

Figures/Tables 2

References 58

1	Burkhard B, de Groot R, Costanza R , et al. 2012. Solutions for sustaining natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators, 21: 1‒6.
2	Cao Q W, Wei X M, Wu J S . 2016. A review on the tradeoffs and synergies among ecosystem services. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 35(11): 3102‒3111. (in Chinese)
3	Cao Q W, Zhang X W, Ma H K , et al. 2018. Review of landscape ecological risk and an assessment framework based on ecological services: ESRISK. Acta Geographical Sinica, 73(5): 843‒855. (in Chinese)
4	Carreño L, Frank F C, Viglizzo E F . 2012. Tradeoffs between economic and ecosystem services in Argentina during 50 years of land-use change. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 15(4): 4‒68.
5	Dai E F, Wang X L, Zhu J J , et al. 2016. Methods, tools and research framework of ecosystem service trade-offs. Geographical Research, 35(6): 1005‒1016. (in Chinese)
6	Daily G C, Polasky S, Goldstein J , et al. 2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(1): 21‒28.
7	de Groot R S, Alkemade R, Braat L , et al. 2010. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7(3): 260‒272.
8	Dudhagara D R, Rajpara R K, Bhatt J K , et al. 2016. Distribution, sources and ecological risk assessment of PAHs in historically contaminated surface sediments at Bhavnagar Coast, Gujarat, India. Environmental Pollution, 213: 338‒346. DOI URL PMID
9	Engelbrecht H J . 2009. Natural capital, subjective well-being, and the new welfare economics of sustainability: Some evidence from cross-country regressions. Ecological Economics, 69(2): 380‒388.
10	Faber J H, van Wensem J . 2012. Elaborations on the use of the ecosystem services concept for application in ecological risk assessment for soils. Science of the Total Environment, 415: 3‒8.
11	Felipe-Lucia M R, Martín-López B, Lavorel S , et al. 2015. Ecosystem services flows: Why stakeholders’ power relationships matter. Plos One, 10(7). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132232. DOI URL PMID
12	Fu B J, Yu D D . 2016. Trade-off analyses and synthetic integrated method of multiple ecosystem services. Resources Science, 38(1): 1‒9. (in Chinese) DOI URL
13	Fu B J . 2018. Thoughts on the recent development of physical geography. Progress in Geography, 37(1): 1‒7. (in Chinese)
14	Fu Z Y, Xu X G . 2001. Regional ecological risk assessment. Advance in Earth Sciences, 16(2): 267‒271. (in Chinese)
15	Galic N, Schmolke A, Forbes V , et al. 2012. The role of ecological models in linking ecological risk assessment to ecosystem services in agroecosystems. Science of the Total Environment, 415: 93‒100.
16	Goldstein J H, Caldarone G, Duarte T K , et al. 2012. Integrating ecosystem-service tradeoffs into land-use decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 109(19): 7565‒7570. DOI URL PMID
17	Hains-Young R, Potschin M. 2010. The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: Raffaelli D and Frid C (eds). Ecosystem Ecology: A New Systhsis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18	Han R, Zhou B, Li N , et al. 2015. Ecological risk assessment in a lake watershed based on ecosystem level. Research of Environmental Sciences, 28(7): 1122‒1129. (in Chinese)
19	Hein L, van Koppen K, de Groot R S , et al. 2006. Spatial scales stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 57(2): 209‒228.
20	Hunka A D, Meli M, Palmqvist A , et al. 2015. Ecological risk assessment of pesticides in the EU: What factors and groups influence policy changes? Journal of Risk Research, 18(9): 1165‒1183.
21	Kang P, Chen W P, Wang M E . 2016. Advancesin ecosystem service-based ecological risk assessment. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 36(5): 1192‒1203. (in Chinese)
22	Kapustka L A, Galbraith H, Luxon B M , et al. 2001. Using landscape ecology to focus ecological risk assessment and guide risk management decision-making. Toxicology and Industrial Health, 17: 236‒246. DOI URL PMID
23	Kareiva P T H, Ricketts T H, Daily G C , et al. 2011. Natural capital: Theory and practice of mapping ecosystem services. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
24	Kienast F, Bolliger J, Potschin M , et al. 2009. Assessing landscape functions with broad-scale environmental data: Insights gained from a prototype development for Europe. Environmental Management, 44(6):1099-1120.
25	Kremen C . 2005. Managing ecosystem services: What do we need to know about their ecology? Ecology Letters, 8(5): 468‒479. DOI URL PMID
26	Li C, Zheng H, Li S Z , et al. 2015. Impacts of conservation and human development policy across stakeholders and scales. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 112(24): 7396‒7401. DOI URL PMID
27	Liu C, Xu Y Q, Sun P L , et al. 2016. Progress and prospects of multi-functionality of land use research. Progress in Geography, 35(9): 1087‒1099. (in Chinese) DOI URL
28	Liu L Y, Bian Z Q, Ding S Y . 2018a. Effects of landscape spatial heterogeneity on the generation and provision of ecosystem services. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(18): 6412‒6421. (in Chinese)
29	Liu W P, Yu Z R . 2013. A research review of landscape service. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(22): 7058‒7066. (in Chinese)
30	Liu Y X, Fu B J, Zhao W , et al. 2018b. Ecological asset accounting and ecosystem services evaluation: Concept intersection and key research priorities. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(23): 8267‒8276. (in Chinese)
31	Liu Y X, Fu B J . 2019. Landscape multifunctionality: Concept clarification, recent progress, and frontier issues. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(8): 2645‒2654. (in Chinese)
32	Lü Y H, Ma Z M, Fu B J , et al. 2013. Diversity of ecosystem services and landscape multi-functionality: From scientific concepts to integrative assessment. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(4): 1153‒1159. (in Chinese)
33	MA(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2003. Ecosystems and human well- being: A framework for assessment. Washington DC, USA: Island Press.
34	MA(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington DC, USA: Island Press.
35	Moraes R, Molander S . 2004. A procedure for ecological tiered assessment of risks (PETAR). Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 10(2): 349‒371.
36	Ouyang Z Y, Zheng H, Xiao Y , et al. 2016. Improvements in ecosystem services from investments in natural capital. Science, 352(6292): 1455‒ 1459. DOI URL
37	Qian C Y, Gong J, Zhang J X , et al. 2018. Change and tradeoffs-synergies analysis on watershed ecosystem services: A case study of Bailongjiang Watershed, Gansu. Acta Geographica Sinica, 73(5): 868‒879. (in Chinese) DOI URL
38	Peng J, Du Y Y, Liu Y S , et al. 2017. From natural regionalization, land change to landscape service: The development of integrated physical geography in China. Geographical Research, 36(10): 1819‒1833. (in Chinese)
39	Peng J, Lü H L, Liu Y X , et al. 2015. International research progress and perspectives on multifunctional landscape. Advances in Earth Science, 30(4): 465‒476. (in Chinese) DOI URL
40	Peng J, Pan Y J, Liu Y X , et al. 2018. Linking ecological degradation risk to identify ecological security patterns in a rapidly urbanizing landscape. Habitat International, 71:110-124. DOI URL
41	Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson G D, Bennett E M . 2010. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 107(11): 5242‒5247. DOI URL PMID
42	Rodríguez J P, Beard T D Jr, Bennett E M , et al. 2006. Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecology and Society, 11(1): 709‒723.
43	Schmolke A, Thorbek P, DeAngelis D L , et al. 2010. Ecological models supporting environmental decision making: A strategy for the future. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 25(8): 479‒486. DOI URL PMID
44	Sun H B, Yang G S, Su W Z , et al. 2009. Research progress on ecological risk assessment. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 28(2): 335‒341. (in Chinese)
45	Tang Q, Ding S Y . 2014. A review of multifunctional landscape. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 34(12): 3151‒3157. (in Chinese)
46	Vemuri A W, Costanza R . 2006. The role of human, social, built, and natural capital in explaining life satisfaction at the country level: Toward a National Well-Being Index (NWI). Ecological Economics, 58(1): 119‒133.
47	Wang B, Lu S W . 2009. Evaluation of economic forest ecosystem services in China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 20(2): 417‒425. (in Chinese) URL PMID
48	Wang D S, Zheng H, Ouyan Z Y . 2013. Ecosystem services supply and consumption and their relationships with human well-being. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 24(6): 1747‒1753. (in Chinese) URL PMID
49	Wong C P, Jiang B, Kinzig A P , et al. 2015. Linking ecosystem characteristics to final ecosystem services for public policy. Ecology Letters, 18(1): 108‒118. DOI URL PMID
50	Xiao Y, Xie G D, Lu C X , et al. 2016. Involvement of ecosystem service flows in human wellbeing based on the relationship between supply and demand. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 36(10): 3096‒3102. (in Chinese)
51	Xie G D, Zhang C X, Zhang C S , et al. 2015. The value of ecosystem services in China. Resources Science, 37(9): 1740‒1746. (in Chinese)
52	Xie G D, Zhen L, Lu C X , et al. 2008. Supply, consumption and valuation of ecosystem services in China. Resources Science, 30(1): 93‒99. (in Chinese)
53	Xu X G, Yan L, Xu L F , et al. 2011. Ecological risk assessment of natural disasters in China. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinesis, 47(5): 901‒908. (in Chinese)
54	Yin H, Wang Y L, Cai J L , et al. 2009. Research progress of regional ecological risk assessment. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 28(5): 969‒975. (in Chinese)
55	Zhang H Y, Liu G H . 2006. Design of ecological compensation mechanism for watershed in China. Environmental Protection, (19): 49‒54. (in Chinese)
56	Zhao W W, Liu Y, Feng Q , et al. 2018. Ecosystem services for coupled human and environment systems. Progress in Geography, 37(1): 139‒151. (in Chinese)
57	Zhao Y J, Li Y B, Shao J A . 2013. Ecological risk assessment of small watershed of the three gorges reservoir area based on land use change—A case study of Caotang River. Journal of Natural Resources, 28(6): 944‒956. (in Chinese)
58	Zheng H, Li Y F, Ouyang Z Y , et al. 2013. Progress and perspectives of ecosystem services management. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(3): 702‒710. (in Chinese)

[1]	XIE Hualin, CHEN Qianru. Land Use and Ecological Civilization: A Collection of Empirical Studies [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2021, 12(2): 137-142.
[2]	ZHANG Yongmin, ZHAO Shidong, GUO Rongchao. Recent Advances and Challenges in Ecosystem Service Research [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2014, 5(1): 82-90.
[3]	SHEN Jianxiu, WANG Xiuhong. Spatial-temporal Changes in Ecological Risk of Land Use before and after Grain-for-Green Policy in Zhengning County, Gansu Province [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2013, 4(1): 36-42.