Ecological value and its spatiotemporal dynamic patterns of grassland in China

doi:10.11686/cyxb2023058

Abstract

Abstract:

As China’s largest terrestrial ecosystem and one of the important natural resources， grasslands provide a series of ecosystem services which contribute to human well-being. However， there are still wide expanses of grassland suffering from various degrees of degradation， and requiring urgent conservation and restoration action to improve their quality， function and stability. Accounting of grassland ecological value provides an effective means to monitor the changes in and assess the combined importance of multiple grassland ecosystem functions. This study analyzed the spatiotemporal evolution of grassland ecological value in China from 2000 to 2020. It then assessed the spatiotemporal dynamics of the value of key ecological services of grasslands， including windbreak and sand fixation， water conservation， forage supply and carbon sequestration. Next， adaptation strategies for optimizing and enhancing the grassland ecological value in China were proposed. It was found that in 2020， the ecological value of China’s grassland was 2.47×10⁴ billion CNY， and the value was 7.6 million CNY·km^-2， among which the value per unit area of windbreak and sand fixation and species richness maintenance were relatively high， accounting for 27.3% and 25.8% of the total， respectively. In the past 20 years， more than 90% of China’s grassland area has shown an increasing trend in ecological value. This applies especially to grassland located on the eastern Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau， the northern Loess Plateau， and the eastern and central parts of Inner Mongolia indicate a rapid growth. Moreover， the sum of grassland ecological values of Mongolia， Tibet， Qinghai， Sichuan and Xinjiang accounted for about 67.4% of China’s total ecological value. In the past 20 years， Shaanxi， Beijing， Ningxia， Tianjin， and Shanxi showed a relatively high growth rate in grassland ecological value （>65%）. Finally， China’s grasslands were divided into three categories and twelve subcategories， based on grassland protection and restoration strategies focusing on different key ecological services. Our study offers significant insights for assigning various protection and restoration priorities to achieve sustainable growth in grassland ecological value.

Key words: grassland, ecological value, temporal and spatial changes, optimization and promotion strategies, China

Jia-hui LI, Lin HUANG, Jiang-wen FAN. Ecological value and its spatiotemporal dynamic patterns of grassland in China[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2023, 32(12): 1-13.

Figures/Tables 10

References 46

1	O’Mara F P. The role of grasslands in food security and climate change. Annals of Botany， 2012， 110（6）： 1263-1270.
2	Wilsey B J. The biology of grasslands. Oxford， USA： Oxford University Press， 2018.
3	White R P， Murray S， Rohweder M， et al. Grassland ecosystems. Washington， DC， USA： World Resources Institute， 2000.
4	Bengtsson J， Bullock J M， Egoh B， et al. Grasslands-more important for ecosystem services than you might think. Ecosphere， 2019， 10（2）： e02582.
5	Bai Y F， Cotrufo M F. Grassland soil carbon sequestration： Current understanding， challenges， and solutions. Science， 2022， 377： 603-608.
6	Tang X L， Zhao X， Bai Y F， et al. Carbon pools in China’s terrestrial ecosystems： New estimates based on an intensive field survey. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences， 2018， 115（16）： 4021-4026.
7	Bardgett R D， Bullock J M， Lavorel S， et al. Combatting global grassland degradation. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment， 2021， 2（10）： 720-735.
8	Murphy B P， Andersen A N， Parr C L. The underestimated biodiversity of tropical grassy biomes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B： Biological Sciences， 2016， 371： 20150319.
9	Bond W J. Ancient grasslands at risk. Science， 2016， 351： 120-122.
10	Lavorel S， Grigulis K， Leitinger G， et al. Historical trajectories in land use pattern and grassland ecosystem services in two European alpine landscapes. Regional Environmental Change， 2017， 17（8）： 2251-2264.
11	Dass P， Houlton B Z， Wang Y P， et al. Grasslands may be more reliable carbon sinks than forests in California. Environmental Research Letters， 2018， 13（7）： 074027.
12	Wu G L， Liu Y F， Cui Z， et al. Trade-off between vegetation type， soil erosion control and surface water in global semi-arid regions： A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Ecology， 2020， 57（5）： 875-885.
13	Costanza R， Kubiszewski I， Giovannini E， et al. Development： Time to leave GDP behind. Nature， 2014， 505： 283-285.
14	Liu H F， Hou L L， Kang N N， et al. A meta-regression analysis of the economic value of grassland ecosystem services in China. Ecological Indicators， 2022， 138： 108793.
15	Bastin J F， Finegold Y， Garcia C， et al. The global tree restoration potential. Science， 2020， 365（6448）： 76-79.
16	Bullock J M， Aronson J， Newton A C， et al. Restoration of ecosystem services and biodiversity： Conflicts and opportunities. Trends in Ecology & Evolution， 2011， 26（10）： 541-549.
17	Okpara U T， Stringer L C， Akhtar-Schuster M， et al. A social-ecological systems approach is necessary to achieve land degradation neutrality. Environmental Science & Policy， 2018， 89： 59-66.
18	Manning P， van der Plas F， Soliveres S， et al. Redefining ecosystem multifunctionality. Nature Ecology & Evolution， 2018， 2（3）： 427-436.
19	Shao Q Q， Liu S C， Ning J， et al. Assessment of ecological benefits of key national ecological projects in China in 2000-2019 using remote sensing. Acta Geographica Sinica， 2022， 77（9）： 2133-2153.
	邵全琴，刘树超，宁佳，等. 2000-2019年中国重大生态工程生态效益遥感评估. 地理学报， 2022， 77（9）： 2133-2153.
20	Ren Y J， Lu Y H， Fu B J. Quantifying the impacts of grassland restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in China： A meta-analysis. Ecological Engineering， 2016， 95： 542-550.
21	Li R Q， Li Y F， Hu H. Support of ecosystem services for spatial planning theories and practices. Acta Geographica Sinica， 2020， 75（11）： 2417-2430.
	李睿倩，李永富，胡恒. 生态系统服务对国土空间规划体系的理论与实践支撑. 地理学报， 2020， 75（11）： 2417-2430.
22	Ouyang Z Y， Zhu C Q， Yang G B， et al. Gross ecosystem product： Concept， accounting framework and case study. Acta Ecologica Sinica， 2013， 33（21）： 6747-6761.
	欧阳志云，朱春全，杨广斌，等. 生态系统生产总值核算：概念、核算方法与案例研究. 生态学报， 2013， 33（21）： 6747-6761.
23	Xie G D， Zhang Y L， Lu C X， et al. Study on valuation of rangeland ecosystem services of China. Journal of Natural Resources， 2001（1）： 47-53.
	谢高地，张钇锂，鲁春霞，等. 中国自然草地生态系统服务价值. 自然资源学报， 2001（1）： 47-53.
24	Jiang L P， Qin Z H， Xie W， et al. Estimation of grassland ecosystem services value of China using remote sensing data. Journal of Natural Resources， 2007（2）： 161-170.
	姜立鹏，覃志豪，谢雯，等. 中国草地生态系统服务功能价值遥感估算研究. 自然资源学报， 2007（2）： 161-170.
25	Liu Y Y， Ren H Y， Zhou R L， et al. Estimation and dynamic analysis of the service value of grassland ecosystem in China. Acta Agrestia Sinica， 2021， 29（7）： 1522-1532.
	刘洋洋，任涵玉，周荣磊，等. 中国草地生态系统服务价值估算及其动态分析. 草地学报， 2021， 29（7）： 1522-1532.
26	Hutchinson M F， Xu T. Anusplin version 4.4 user guide. Canberra： Fenner School of Environment and Society， the Australian National University， 2013.
27	Cressie N A. Statistics for spatial data. Hoboken： Wiley Online Library， 1993.
28	Beijing Municipal Bureau of Quality and Technical Supervision. Technical specifications for valuation of forest resource assets， DB11/T 659-2018. Beijing： Beijing Municipal Bureau of Quality and Technical Supervision， 2018.
	北京市质量技术监督局. 森林资源资产价值评估技术规范， DB11/T 659-2018. 北京：北京市质量技术监督局， 2018.
29	National Forestry and Grassland Administration. Specifications for assessment of forest ecosystem services， GB/T 38582-2020. Beijing： State Administration for Market Regulation， 2020.
	国家林业和草原局.森林生态系统服务功能评估规范， GB/T 38582-2020. 北京：中华人民共和国国家市场监督管理总局， 2020.
30	Ma A N， Yu G R， He N P， et al. Above and below ground biomass relationships in China’s grassland vegetation. Quaternary Sciences， 2014， 34（4）： 769-776.
	马安娜，于贵瑞，何念鹏，等. 中国草地植被地上和地下生物量的关系分析. 第四纪研究， 2014， 34（4）： 769-776.
31	Shen H H， Zhu Y K， Zhao X， et al. Analysis of current grassland resources in China. Chinese Science Bulletin， 2016， 61（2）： 139-154.
	沈海花，朱言坤，赵霞，等. 中国草地资源的现状分析. 科学通报， 2016， 61（2）： 139-154.
32	Wu D， Shao Q Q， Liu J Y， et al. Spatiotemporal dynamics of water regulation service of grassland ecosystem in China. Research of Soil and Water Conservation， 2016， 23（5）： 256-260.
	吴丹，邵全琴，刘纪远，等. 中国草地生态系统水源涵养服务时空变化. 水土保持研究， 2016， 23（5）： 256-260.
33	Zhu L Q， Xu S M， Chen P Y. Study on the impact of land use/land cover change on soil erosion in mountainous areas. Geographical Research， 2003， 22（4）： 432-438.
	朱连奇，许叔明，陈沛云. 山区土地利用/覆被变化对土壤侵蚀的影响. 地理研究， 2003， 22（4）： 432-438.
34	Han G Z， Wang D C， Xie X J. Pedotransfer functions for prediction of soil bulk density for major types of soils in China. Acta Pedologica Sinica， 2016， 53（1）： 93-102.
	韩光中，王德彩，谢贤健. 中国主要土壤类型的土壤容重传递函数研究. 土壤学报， 2016， 53（1）： 93-102.
35	Han Y W， Gao J X， Wang B L， et al. Evaluation of soil conservation function and its values in major eco-function areas of Loess Plateau in eastern Gansu Province. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering， 2012， 28（17）： 78-85.
	韩永伟，高吉喜，王宝良，等. 黄土高原生态功能区土壤保持功能及其价值. 农业工程学报， 2012， 28（17）： 78-85.
36	Raich J W， Potter C S， Bhagawati D. Interannual variability in global soil respiration， 1980-94. Global Change Biology， 2002， 8（8）： 800-812.
37	Bond-Lamberty B， Wang C K， Gower S T. A global relationship between the heterotrophic and autotrophic components of soil respiration？ Global Change Biology， 2004， 10（10）： 1756-1766.
38	OECD. Carbon pricing in times of COVID-19： What has changed in G20 economies？ Paris， France： OECD Publishing， 2021. DOI： https：//dx.doi.org/10.1787/8f030bcc-en.
39	Wang Y， Wang J S， Zhang Q. Drought risk status of grassland in China. Acta Prataculturae Sinica， 2022， 31（8）： 1-12.
	王莺，王健顺，张强. 中国草原干旱灾害风险特征研究. 草业学报， 2022， 31（8）： 1-12.
40	Li G C， Wu M H， Yu X J. Introduction to Meta-analysis. Beijing： Science Press， 2021.
41	Dong S K， Shang Z H， Gao J X， et al. Enhancing the ecological services of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau’s grasslands through sustainable restoration and management in era of global change. Agriculture， Ecosystems & Environment， 2022， 326： 107756.
42	Ge J， Hou M J， Liang T G， et al. Spatiotemporal dynamics of grassland aboveground biomass and its driving factors in North China over the past 20 years. Science of the Total Environment， 2022， 826： 154226.
43	Wang Y F， Lv W W， Xue K， et al. Grassland changes and adaptive management on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment， 2022， 3（10）： 668-683.
44	Hou L L， Xia F， Chen Q H， et al. Grassland ecological compensation policy in China improves grassland quality and increases herders’ income. Nature Communications， 2021， 12（1）： 4683.
45	Jin K， Wang F， Han J Q， et al. Contribution of climatic change and human activities to vegetation NDVI change over China during 1982-2015. Acta Geographica Sinica， 2020， 75（5）： 961-974.
	金凯，王飞，韩剑桥，等. 1982-2015年中国气候变化和人类活动对植被NDVI变化的影响. 地理学报， 2020， 75（5）： 961-974.
46	Xie G D. Ecological asset evaluation： Stock， quality and value. Environmental Protection， 2017， 45（11）： 18-22.
	谢高地. 生态资产评价：存量、质量与价值. 环境保护， 2017， 45（11）： 18-22.

主要类别Major category	核算指标Accounting indicator	价值量评估方法Valueing method
供给价值Supply service value	牧草供给Forage supply	市场价值法Market price
供给价值Supply service value	物种保育Species richness maintenance	保育价值法Conservation value
调节价值Regulating service value	水源涵养Water conservation 水源涵养Water conservation	影子工程法Shadow price 替代成本法Replacement cost
	水土保持Soil retention	替代成本法Replacement cost
	防风固沙Windbreak and sand fixation	恢复成本法Restoration cost
	碳固定Carbon sequestration	替代成本法Replacement cost
	微气候调节Climate regulation	替代成本法Replacement cost
	氧气提供Oxygen supply	替代成本法Replacement cost
文化价值Cultural service value	生态旅游Ecotourism	旅游产值法Tourism revenue

主要类别Major category	核算指标Accounting indicator	价值量评估方法Valueing method
供给价值Supply service value	牧草供给Forage supply	市场价值法Market price
供给价值Supply service value	物种保育Species richness maintenance	保育价值法Conservation value
调节价值Regulating service value	水源涵养Water conservation 水源涵养Water conservation	影子工程法Shadow price 替代成本法Replacement cost
	水土保持Soil retention	替代成本法Replacement cost
	防风固沙Windbreak and sand fixation	恢复成本法Restoration cost
	碳固定Carbon sequestration	替代成本法Replacement cost
	微气候调节Climate regulation	替代成本法Replacement cost
	氧气提供Oxygen supply	替代成本法Replacement cost
文化价值Cultural service value	生态旅游Ecotourism	旅游产值法Tourism revenue

等级 Level	丰富度 Richness	单位面积价值 Value of per unit area （CNY·hm^-2·a^-1）
1	563≤Richness≤698	50000
2	455≤Richness≤562	40000
3	368≤Richness≤454	30000
4	282≤Richness≤367	20000
5	205≤Richness≤281	10000
6	130≤Richness≤204	5000
7	26≤Richness≤129	3000

等级 Level	丰富度 Richness	单位面积价值 Value of per unit area （CNY·hm^-2·a^-1）
1	563≤Richness≤698	50000
2	455≤Richness≤562	40000
3	368≤Richness≤454	30000
4	282≤Richness≤367	20000
5	205≤Richness≤281	10000
6	130≤Richness≤204	5000
7	26≤Richness≤129	3000

编号Number	类别 Category	类型 Strategy	描述 Description
1	C	防风固沙型 Windbreak and sand fixation type	防风固沙价值显著减少的区域。 Areas with significantly reduced value of windbreak and sand fixation.
2	C	水源涵养型Water conservation type	水源涵养价值显著减少的区域。 Areas with significantly reduced value of water conservation.
3	C	双重效应型Double-benefits type	防风固沙、水源涵养、牧草供给、碳固定4项核心价值中，2项价值显著减少的区域。 Areas with the two of the four key ecosystem services which significantly decreased.
4	C	三重效应型Triple-benefits type	4项核心价值中，3项价值显著减少的区域。 Areas with the three of the four key ecosystem services which significantly decreased.
5	P	防风固沙型 Windbreak and sand fixation type	防风固沙价值显著增加的区域。 Areas with significant increase in windbreak and sand fixation value.
6	P	水源涵养型Water conservation type	水源涵养价值显著增加的区域。 Areas with significant increase in water conservation value.
7	P	牧草供给型Forage supply type	牧草供给价值显著增加的区域。Areas with significant increase in forage supply value.
8	P	碳固定型Carbon sequestration type	碳固定价值显著增加的区域。Areas with significant increase in carbon sequestration value.
9	P	双重效应型Double-benefits type	4项核心价值中，2项价值显著增加的区域。 Areas with the two of the four key ecosystem services which significantly increased.
10	P	三重效应型Triple-benefits type	4项核心价值中，3项价值显著增加的区域。 Areas with the three of the four key ecosystem services which significantly increased.
11	P	多重效应型Multiple-benefits type	4项核心价值均显著增加的区域。 Areas with the four key ecosystem services which significantly increased.
12	C×P	保护修复并重型 Conservation and protection focused type	4项核心价值变化均不显著的区域。 Areas with insignificant changes in the four key ecosystem services.