生物多样性 ›› 2022, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (10): 22459.  DOI: 10.17520/biods.2022459

• 综述 • 上一篇    下一篇

自然保护地生物多样性保护研究进展

王伟1,2, 周越1,2, 田瑜1,2, 李俊生3,*()   

  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态研究所, 北京 100012
    3.中国地质调查局自然资源综合调查指挥中心, 北京 100055
  • 收稿日期:2022-08-11 接受日期:2022-10-24 出版日期:2022-10-20 发布日期:2022-11-08
  • 通讯作者: 李俊生
  • 作者简介:* E-mail: lijunsheng001@mail.cgs.gov.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金(32171664)

Biodiversity conservation research in protected areas: A review

Wei Wang1,2, Yue Zhou1,2, Yu Tian1,2, Junsheng Li3,*()   

  1. 1. State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Regional Eco-process and Function Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012
    2. Institute of Ecology, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012
    3. Command Center for Comprehensive Survey of Natural Resources, China Geological Survey Bureau, Beijing 100055
  • Received:2022-08-11 Accepted:2022-10-24 Online:2022-10-20 Published:2022-11-08
  • Contact: Junsheng Li

摘要:

建立自然保护地是保护生物多样性最为重要的措施之一。总体来看, 自然保护地生物多样性保护研究主要围绕关键生态系统以及珍稀濒危物种等保护对象的状态以及变化两个层面进行, 并重点关注自然保护地数量与面积、保护了多少重要生态系统和物种、能否有效保护生物多样性等一系列科学问题。然而, 在自然保护地生物多样性保护研究方面, 还缺少针对上述研究领域的系统性综述。为此, 本文系统梳理了自然保护地空间布局及其与生物多样性分布的关系、自然保护地生物多样性变化及其保护成效等近20年来相关领域的研究进展。自然保护地的空间布局以及与生物多样性分布的关系主要围绕自然保护地与生物多样性在某一阶段的状态开展研究, 致力于探究自然保护地“保护多少” “代表性如何” “在哪儿保护”等一系列关键科学问题。同时, 自然保护地内的生物多样性会随着气候变化、人类活动以及自身演替等发生时空动态变化, 基于自然保护地生物多样性变化分析, 各国学者在全球尺度、国家尺度和单个自然保护地进行了大量的保护成效评估研究, 并逐渐发展出了自然保护地内外配对分析方法以提升保护成效评估的精度, 进而识别出不同自然保护地的主要影响因素。在此基础上, 本文进一步对自然保护地生物多样性保护研究提出了展望, 主要包括: (1)综合考虑自然保护地生物多样性状态和变化; (2)开展多目标协同的自然保护地空间优化布局; (3)强化自然保护地主要保护对象的识别、调查与监测; (4)提升自然保护地的质量和连通性; (5)探究自然保护地管理措施与保护成效的关联机制。本文可为“2020年后全球生物多样性框架”的制定与实施特别是在自然保护地体系建设与优化方面提供参考与借鉴。

关键词: 爱知目标, 保护成效, 代表性, 国家公园, 生物多样性关键区, 自然保护区, 2020年后全球生物多样性框架

Abstract

Background & Aims: The establishment of protected areas (PAs) is one of the most important measures to protect biodiversity. Generally speaking, recent studies on biodiversity conservation in PAs have focused on key ecosystems and rare and endangered species, and explored the status and changes of these conservation objects. There have been a series of scientific debates on issues such as the number and size of PAs, how many important ecosystems and species can be protected in PAs, and whether PAs effectively protect biodiversity. However, there are still few systematic reviews of the above-mentioned research issues; thus, this paper systematically covers research progress in these fields in recent years, from the spatial layout of PAs and their relationship to the distribution of biodiversity, to biodiversity change and the conservation-effectiveness of PAs.
Advances: Studies on the spatial layout of PAs and biodiversity distribution generally focused the status of biodiversity, mainly investigating topics we label as “how much is enough?”, “representativeness and conservation gaps”, and “where to protect?”. Based on the analysis of biodiversity changes in PAs, scholars from different countries have conducted substantial research on conservation-effectiveness assessment at the global, national, and individual-PA scale, and gradually developed a method of pairwise analysis inside and outside of PAs to improve the accuracy of assessments.
Prospects: We conclude by proposing a potential future studies on biodiversity conservation in PAs, which mainly include: (1) Integrating studies on conservation status and biodiversity change in PAs; (2) Studying the optimal spatial layout of PAs under multi objectives; (3) Strengthening the identification, investigation, and monitoring of major conservation objects in PAs; (4) Improving the quality and connectivity of PAs; and (5) Exploring the relationship between management measures and conservation effectiveness of PAs. We hope this paper can provide a reference for the formulation and implementation of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, especially in the construction and optimization of PAs in the next 10 years.

Key words: the Aichi biodiversity targets, conservation effectiveness, representativeness, national parks, key biodiversity areas, nature reserves, Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework