世界生物圈保护区网络生态代表性与保护成效的南北差异

doi:10.17520/biods.2025267

生物多样性 ›› 2025, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (9): 25267. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2025267 cstr: 32101.14.biods.2025267

所属专题：世界生物圈保护区专题

世界生物圈保护区网络生态代表性与保护成效的南北差异

武慧¹^,²(), 俞乐¹^,³^,^*()(), 赵剑桥⁴(), 郑诗军¹(), 刘涛¹(), 戚文超¹(), 赵强¹(), 朱丽⁵(), 申小莉⁵(), 马克平²^,⁵()

1.清华大学地球系统科学系, 北京 100084
2.东北林业大学林学院东北亚生物多样性中心, 哈尔滨 150040
3.东亚迁徙鸟类与栖息地生态学教育部野外观测研究站, 北京 100084
4.中国农业大学土地科学与技术学院, 北京 100083
5.中国科学院植物研究所, 北京 100093

出版日期:2025-09-20 发布日期:2025-10-31
通讯作者: *E-mail: leyu@tsinghua.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划(2024YFF1307600);国家自然科学基金青年基金(42401314);车八岭国家级自然保护区物候相机监测网络建设及应用项目(CBLHT-2025050);武夷山生态环境与人体健康关联性研究项目(20242120035)

Global South-North differences in ecological representativeness and conservation performance of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves

Hui Wu¹^,²(), Le Yu¹^,³^,^*()(), Jianqiao Zhao⁴(), Shijun Zheng¹(), Tao Liu¹(), Wenchao Qi¹(), Qiang Zhao¹(), Li Zhu⁵(), Xiaoli Shen⁵(), Keping Ma²^,⁵()

1 Department of Earth System Science, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
2 Northeast Asia Biodiversity Research Center, College of Forestry, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China
3 Ministry of Education Ecological Field Station for East Asian Migratory Birds, Beijing 100084, China
4 College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China
5 Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100093, China

Online:2025-09-20 Published:2025-10-31
Contact: *E-mail: leyu@tsinghua.edu.cn
Supported by:
National Key Research and Development Program of China(2024YFF1307600);Young Scientists Fund of the National Natural Science Foundation of China(42401314);Chebaling National Nature Reserve Phenology Monitoring Network Construction and Application Project(CBLHT-2025050);Investigation Research Program Between Ecological Environment and Human Health in Wuyi Mountain(20242120035)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本研究聚焦联合国教科文组织“人与生物圈计划”框架下的世界生物圈保护区网络, 系统评估其在生态代表性与保护成效方面的全球南北差异。基于全球759个生物圈保护区的空间分布格局, 结合1992-2020年生境质量数据与3类全球保护优先区图层, 分析其生态演变趋势与代表性特征。结果表明, 尽管全球范围内生境质量整体呈下降趋势, 但近10年降幅明显减缓, 且全球北方保护区的生境状况普遍优于全球南方。在空间代表性方面, 生物圈保护区对生物多样性重要区、特有鸟类区与植物多样性中心的覆盖率分别为11.91%、9.76%和9.52%, 均显著高于其占全球陆地面积的随机覆盖概率(4.83%), 但在热带山区与岛屿等关键区域仍存在明显空缺。上述差异反映出全球南方与北方在保护能力、监测支撑与制度保障等方面的结构性不均衡。面向未来, 推进一个更具代表性、公平性与适应性的全球保护体系, 将有赖于生物圈保护区在南北差异认知基础上的协同提升。

关键词: 人与生物圈计划, 生物圈保护区, 生物多样性

Abstract

Background: The World Network of Biosphere Reserves (WNBR), established under the framework of UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme, plays a key role in linking biodiversity conservation with sustainable development. However, the ecological representativeness and conservation effectiveness of the network remain uneven across the Global South and the Global North. Existing knowledge gaps persist in systematically comparing their performance in habitat protection and spatial coverage of priority biodiversity areas. This study provided a global assessment of the ecological outcomes and spatial representativeness of 759 biosphere reserves, with a particular focus on South-North differences.
Results: Analysis of habitat quality data from 1992 to 2020 and three global conservation priority layers—Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), Endemic Bird Areas (EBAs), and Centres of Plant Diversity (CPDs)—show that although habitat quality has generally declined over the past three decades, the rate of decline has slowed in the past ten years. Habitat conditions in the Global North have remained more stable and at higher levels than those in the Global South. The coverage of KBAs, EBAs, and CPDs by biosphere reserves reached 11.91%, 9.76%, and 9.52%, respectively, all notably higher than the expected random coverage of 4.83%.
Problems & Prospects: Despite these positive signals, significant spatial gaps persist in ecologically critical regions—such as tropical mountains and islands—particularly within the Global South. These disparities highlight structural imbalances in monitoring capacity, conservation financing, and institutional support between the Global North and South. Looking ahead, building a more representative, equitable, and adaptive global conservation framework will depend on addressing these South-North differences and advancing the collaborative potential of the WNBR.

Key words: Man and the Biosphere Programme, Biosphere Reserves, biodiversity

武慧, 俞乐, 赵剑桥, 郑诗军, 刘涛, 戚文超, 赵强, 朱丽, 申小莉, 马克平 (2025) 世界生物圈保护区网络生态代表性与保护成效的南北差异. 生物多样性, 33, 25267. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2025267.

Hui Wu, Le Yu, Jianqiao Zhao, Shijun Zheng, Tao Liu, Wenchao Qi, Qiang Zhao, Li Zhu, Xiaoli Shen, Keping Ma (2025) Global South-North differences in ecological representativeness and conservation performance of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. Biodiversity Science, 33, 25267. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2025267.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/10.17520/biods.2025267

https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/Y2025/V33/I9/25267

图/表 3

图1 全球南北方生物圈保护区分布。灰点表示全球759个生物圈保护区的位置。背景色表示全球南方(红色)与全球北方(蓝色)的划分。本研究参考联合国统计司(United Nations Statistics Division, UNSD)的“发达地区”分类标准, 将被归类为发达经济体的国家(如美国、加拿大、德国、法国、英国、意大利、瑞典、澳大利亚、新西兰、日本、韩国、以色列等)归为“全球北方”, 其余国家归为“全球南方”。

Fig. 1 Global distribution of Biosphere Reserves across the Global South and Global North. Gray dots indicate the locations of 759 Biosphere Reserves worldwide. Background colors denote the Global South (red) and the Global North (blue). Following the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) classification of “developed regions,” countries categorized as developed economies (e.g., the United States, Canada, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Israel) are grouped as the “Global North”; all other countries are grouped as the “Global South”.

图2 生物圈保护区(BRs)对生物多样性重要区域(KBAs)、特有鸟类区(EBAs)和植物多样性中心(CPDs)的代表性。(a)全球生物圈保护区与生物多样性重要区域的空间分布及其叠加关系; (b1)全球生物圈保护区与特有鸟类区的空间分布及其叠加关系; (b2)生物圈保护区对全球218个特有鸟类区的覆盖率; (c1)全球生物圈保护区与植物多样性中心的空间分布及其叠加关系; (c2)生物圈保护区对全球234个植物多样性中心的覆盖率。

Fig. 2 Representativeness of Biosphere Reserves (BRs) for Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), Endemic Bird Areas (EBAs), and Centres of Plant Diversity (CPDs). (a) Spatial overlap between global BRs and KBAs; (b1) Spatial overlap between global BRs and EBAs; (b2) Coverage rate of BRs across 218 global EBAs; (c1) Spatial overlap between global BRs and CPDs; (c2) Coverage rate of BRs across 234 global CPDs.

图3 全球南方(红)与全球北方(蓝)生物圈保护区生境质量变化趋势与分布特征(1992-2020年)。(a)年均生境质量的变化趋势: 分1992-2000年、2001-2010年和2011-2020年3个时间段进行线性拟合, 阴影表示95%置信区间, ****表示P < 0.0001; **表示P < 0.01。(b)1992年与2020年的生境质量分布: 上方为核密度分布, 下方箱线图显示中位数、四分位数与范围, 并标注均值和中位数。

Fig. 3 Habitat quality trends and distributions for Biosphere Reserves in the Global South (red) and Global North (blue), 1992-2020. (a) Annual habitat quality trends: Linear fits are shown for three periods—1992-2000, 2001-2010, and 2011-2020; shaded areas indicate 95% confidence intervals; **** P < 0.0001; ** P < 0.01. (b) Habitat quality distributions in 1992 and 2020: Kernel density curves (top) and boxplots (bottom) showing the median, interquartile range, and range, with the mean and median annotated.

参考文献 24

[1]	Bridgewater P, Babin D (2017) UNESCO-MAB Biosphere Reserves already deal with ecosystem services and sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 114, e4318.
[2]	CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) (2022) Monitoring Framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/cop-15-dec-05-en.pdf/. (accessed on 2025-09-30)
[3]	Cuong CV, Dart P, Dudley N, Hockings M (2017) Factors influencing successful implementation of biosphere reserves in Vietnam: Challenges, opportunities and lessons learnt. Environmental Science & Policy, 67, 16-26.
[4]	Dabard CH, Mann C, Martín-López B (2025) Biosphere Reserves as catalysts for sustainability transformations: Five strategies to support place-based innovation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 73, 101508. DOI URL
[5]	Eken G, Bennun L, Brooks TM, Darwall W, Fishpool LDC, Foster M, Knox D, Langhammer P, Matiku P, Radford E, Salaman P, Sechrest W, Smith ML, Spector S, Tordoff A (2004) Key biodiversity areas as site conservation targets. BioScience, 54, 1110. DOI URL
[6]	Gohr C, von Wehrden H, Saatchi S, Pettorelli N, Ibisch PL (2025) Effectiveness of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves in maintaining forest ecosystem functions. Communications Earth & Environment, 6, 83.
[7]	Gunawan H, Tryanto DH, Mizuno K, Kozan O (2023) Toward climate change mitigation:Restoration of the Indonesian peat swamp. In: Vulnerability and Transformation of Indonesian Peatlands (ed. Abe K), pp. 141-157. Springer Nature, Singapore.
[8]	Kuiper J, Carpenter-Urquhart L, Berbés-Blázquez M, Oteros-Rozas E, Fredström L, Psiuk K, Savu C, Kautsky R, Guerry A, Carpenter S, Green C, Meacham M, Remme R, Ravera F, Wankmüller F, Arkema K, Pereira L, Peterson G (2024) Biosphere Futures: A database of social-ecological scenarios. Ecology and Society, 29, art19.
[9]	Mirtl M, Borer ET, Djukic I, Forsius M, Haubold H, Hugo W, Jourdan J, Lindenmayer D, McDowell WH, Muraoka H, Orenstein DE, Pauw JC, Peterseil J, Shibata H, Wohner C, Yu X, Haase P (2018) Genesis, goals and achievements of Long-Term Ecological Research at the global scale: A critical review of ILTER and future directions. Science of the Total Environment, 626, 1439-1462. DOI URL
[10]	Pettorelli N, Safi K, Turner W (2014) Satellite remote sensing, biodiversity research and conservation of the future. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369, 20130190. DOI URL
[11]	Plummer R, Baird J, Dzyundzyak A, Armitage D, Bodin Ö, Schultz L (2017) Is adaptive co-management delivering? Examining relationships between collaboration, learning and outcomes in UNESCO biosphere reserves. Ecological Economics, 140, 79-88. DOI URL
[12]	Reed M, Price MF (2019) Introducing UNESCO Biosphere Reserves. In: UNESCO Biosphere Reserves: Supporting Biocultural Diversity, Sustainability and Society (eds Reed M, Price M), pp. 1-14. Routledge, Abingdon.
[13]	Sandström C, Mancheva I, Laudon H (2025) Unlocking the potential of biosphere reserves: A review of structural, institutional, and ideational challenges to transformational learning. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 75, 101543. DOI URL
[14]	Schultz L, West S, Bourke AJ, D’Armengol L, Torrents P, Hardardottir H, Jansson A, Roldán AM (2018) Learning to live with social-ecological complexity: An interpretive analysis of learning in 11 UNESCO Biosphere Reserves. Global Environmental Change, 50, 75-87. DOI URL
[15]	Seddon N, Smith A, Smith P, Key I, Chausson A, Girardin C, House J, Srivastava S, Turner B (2021) Getting the message right on nature-based solutions to climate change. Global Change Biology, 27, 1518-1546. DOI PMID
[16]	Stattersfield AJ, Crosby M, Long A, Wege D (1998) Endemic Bird Areas of the World:Priorities for Biodiversity Conservation. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, DC.
[17]	Thakur TK, Patel DK, Bijalwan A, Dobriyal MJ, Kumar A, Thakur A, Bohra A, Bhat JA (2020) Land use land cover change detection through geospatial analysis in an Indian Biosphere Reserve. Trees, Forests and People, 2, 100018. DOI URL
[18]	Turner W, Rondinini C, Pettorelli N, Mora B, Leidner AK, Szantoi Z, Buchanan G, Dech S, Dwyer J, Herold M, Koh LP, Leimgruber P, Taubenboeck H, Wegmann M, Wikelski M, Woodcock C (2015) Free and open-access satellite data are key to biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation, 182, 173-176. DOI URL
[19]	UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) (1995) The Seville Strategy for Biosphere Reserves. UNESCO, Paris.
[20]	UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) (2016) Lima Action Plan (2016-2025) for UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere Programme and Its World Network of Biosphere Reserves. UNESCO, Paris.
[21]	UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) (2024) Regional and Thematic Networks: IberoMAB Mid-Term Assessment Report. UNESCO, Paris.
[22]	UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) (2025) Mangrove Restoration as a Nature-Based Solution in Biosphere Reserves of Latin America and the Caribbean. UNESCO, Paris.
[23]	WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature), IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) (1994-1997) Centres of Plant Diversity: A Guide and Strategy for Their Conservation, Three Volumes. IUCN Publications Unit, Cambridge.
[24]	Zhao JQ, Yu L, Newbold T, Chen X (2025) Trends in habitat quality and habitat degradation in terrestrial protected areas. Conservation Biology, 39, e14348.

世界生物圈保护区网络生态代表性与保护成效的南北差异

Global South-North differences in ecological representativeness and conservation performance of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 3

参考文献 24

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	梁竣策, 李开枝, 谭烨辉. 南海翼足类物种多样性与分布[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(5): 25487-.
[2]	周丽洁, 郝珉辉, 何怀江, 程艳霞, 张春雨, 赵秀海. 小兴安岭森林β多样性格局、组分及其影响因素[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(4): 25443-.
[3]	彭昀月, 彭奎, 刘昕然, 孙天怡, 张小全. 生物多样性信用的企业参与途径、市场发展障碍与建议[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(4): 26031-.
[4]	李伯尧, 盛天成, 幸小云. 生物多样性风险对企业财务绩效的影响: 来自中国上市公司的证据[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(4): 25330-.
[5]	刘昊, 张玉霄, 刘冰, 李飞飞, 马洪峥, 覃海宁, 李德铢, 陈文俐. 中国禾本科植物多样性及其物种名录[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(4): 25438-.
[6]	孔孜亦, 王德港, 王建涛, 裴志永, 孙晶, 张长春, 张军国. 基于SCD-HRNet模型的野生动物姿态估计及其在生物多样性监测中的应用: 以内蒙古赛罕乌拉地区为例[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(4): 25287-.
[7]	朱浩友, 周友兵, 罗怡, 周昭敏. 南充市城区繁殖鸟类群落20年前后的变化[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(3): 24560-.
[8]	侯姝彧, 刘盈盈, 杨锐. 《昆蒙框架》背景下国际OECMs体系构建实践进展及中国化思路[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(3): 25264-.
[9]	程晓帆, 李青媛, 李媛辉, 张明祥. 外来入侵物种治理政策体系的困境与出路[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(2): 25332-.
[10]	陈璐露, 汤皓婷, 冷红, 袁青, 杨昕悦. 城市街区建成环境对生物多样性的影响[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(2): 25286-.
[11]	高雯琪, 向景荣, 赵耀, 范灵霜, 谷圆, 邵韦涵, 李高俊, 赵光军, 陈明斌, 蔡杏伟, 陈凯. 海南热带雨林国家公园黎母山和尖峰岭溪流鱼类群落特征及其对土地利用的响应[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(2): 25374-.
[12]	卢晓强, 芮丹, 张江峰, 尹冰鑫, 王雨露, 岑雨婷, 崔怡晨, 杨万霞. 氮输入驱动的关键生态过程对生物多样性的影响及其管理启示[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(2): 25368-.
[13]	谭廷鸿, 高帆, 杨雨, 肖群英, 吴春芳, 邱娜, 赵宁宁, 周敏, 康公平, 卢志宏, 高健强, 杨红, 杨传东, 邓春英. 中国西南喀斯特地区大型真菌物种编目[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(2): 25281-.
[14]	章旭日, 罗标, 赵彤, 黄丹, 艾为明. 浙江鱼类多样性: 编目、分布与保护[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(2): 25225-.
[15]	刘海鸥, 郝志明, 杜乐山, 刘文慧, 李子圆, 刘蕾. 全球生物多样性框架基金运行进展、挑战与启示[J]. 生物多样性, 2026, 34(2): 25463-.