生物多样性 ›› 2021, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (2): 133-149.DOI: 10.17520/biods.2020070

• • 上一篇    下一篇

中国生物多样性就地保护成效与展望

王伟1,2, 李俊生1,2,*()   

  1. 1.中国环境科学研究院国家环境保护区域生态过程与功能评估重点实验室, 北京 100012
    2.中国环境科学研究院生物多样性研究中心, 北京 100012
  • 收稿日期:2020-03-02 接受日期:2020-10-07 出版日期:2021-02-20 发布日期:2021-01-17
  • 通讯作者: 李俊生
  • 作者简介:* E-mail: lijsh@craes.org.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家重点研发计划项目(2016YFC0503304)

In-situ conservation of biodiversity in China: Advances and prospects

Wei Wang1,2, Junsheng Li1,2,*()   

  1. 1 State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Regional Eco-process and Function Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012
    2 Biodiversity Research Center, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012
  • Received:2020-03-02 Accepted:2020-10-07 Online:2021-02-20 Published:2021-01-17
  • Contact: Junsheng Li

摘要:

生物多样性就地保护是指通过开展自然保护地体系的建立与管理, 结合自然保护地以外其他有效的基于区域的保护措施(other effective area-based conservation measures, OECMs), 从而实现物种种群及其栖息地的保护与恢复以及保障和提升生态系统服务的目标。就地保护是实现2020年全球生物多样性保护目标最为重要的措施之一。本文从自然保护地数量与面积、代表性、有效性, 以及其他生物多样性就地保护措施等方面, 整理和综述了国内外近年来的相关报道。总体来看, 我国基本建立了具有中国特色的生物多样性就地保护与管理体系, 实施了各项生物多样性保护恢复措施, 取得了一系列重大进展。自然保护地的面积和数量均呈现上升趋势, 已覆盖陆域国土面积的18%, 对一些重要生态系统及重点保护物种的保护取得了一定成效。正在建设的10处国家公园体制试点提升了部分重点物种的保护连通性。自然保护区总体管理状况相对较好, 保护了90%以上的哺乳动物和97%的兰科植物。此外, 其他有效的基于区域的保护措施亦为生物多样性就地保护贡献了民间力量。在此基础上, 本文对照《中国生物多样性保护战略与行动计划(2011-2030年)》中对“加强生物多样性就地保护”的各项要求, 分析总结了当前我国生物多样性就地保护仍然存在的问题与不足, 具体表现在以下几个方面: 自然保护地整体保护能力仍有待提升; 生物多样性保护优先区域仍然存在保护空缺; 自然保护区管理质量有待提升; 缺乏公共协商机制; 自然保护地以外的其他就地保护工作仍在探索阶段等。在此基础上, 对将来我国生物多样性就地保护提出了进一步建议与展望: (1)制定更为具体和量化的生物多样性就地保护目标; (2)加大力度减少物种受威胁程度, 特别是受关注较少的物种; (3)以保障和提升生态系统服务为目标, 提升生态系统保护修复的系统性与整体性; (4)加强自然保护地以外的生物多样性就地保护; (5)完善长期监测体系, 为生物多样性就地保护成效评估提供数据支撑。本文可为“2020年后全球生物多样性框架”特别是就地保护目标的制定与实施提供参考。

关键词: 爱知目标, 代表性, 生态保护红线, 生态保护修复, 生态系统服务, 自然保护地

Abstract:

Summary: In-situ conservation of biodiversity refers to the establishment and management of protected areas, combined with other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). The goals of in-situ conservation are the protection and restoration of species populations and their habitats, and the improvement of ecosystem services. In-situ conservation is one of the best measures for achieving the 2020 global biodiversity conservation target. Here, we summarize relevant reports in the past decade that highlights issues such as the number and area of protected areas, and the representativeness and effectiveness of protected areas, and OECMs (e.g., ecological conservation red lines, mini natural reserves, sacred mountains, and civil protected areas).
Advances: Overall, China has made significant progress by implementing an in-situ conservation and management system and various protection and restoration measures. The total area and number of areas protected by China has increased (covering 18 percent of land area), which has been relatively effective for conserving several ecosystems and key protected wild animals and plants. Ten national parks pilots aimed at improving the connectivity of some key wild animals were developed. Nature reserves, with relatively good management effectiveness, had represented more than 90% species of mammals and 97% of Orchidaceae. Additionally, the other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) made non-governmental contributions to in-situ conservation of China’s biodiversity.
Weak points: Furthermore, we propose some weak points in China’s current in-situ conservation plan based on the major requirements in “Strengthening in-situ conservation of biodiversity” from the “China National Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and Action Plan (2011-2030)”. The weak points in China’s current in-situ conservation include: (1) the need for improvement in overall conservation efficiency of protected areas; (2) conservation gaps in some biodiversity conservation priority areas; (3) the need for improvement in management quality of nature reserves, and the lack of public consultation; (4) the initial phase of OECMs.
Prospects: We then suggest that the government and researchers need to: (1) identify more specific and measurable conservation targets; (2) enhance efforts to reduce species threats (especially those with least concern); (3) promote the systematics and integrity of OECMs with the goal of ensuring and improving ecosystem services; (4) develop more OECMs to facilitate an effective in-situ conservation network; (5) improve the long-term monitoring system and keep providing scientific data to sustain periodic assessment of the conservation effectiveness. We hope these suggestions can help with the formulation and implementation of in-situ conservation goals beyond 2020.

Key words: the Aichi biodiversity targets, representativeness, ecological conservation red line, ecological protection and restoration, ecosystem services, protected areas