基于爱知生物多样性目标11的我国自然保护地管理有效性评估进展与分析

doi:10.17520/biods.2020061

生物多样性 ›› 2021, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (2): 150-159.DOI: 10.17520/biods.2020061

基于爱知生物多样性目标11的我国自然保护地管理有效性评估进展与分析

冯斌¹^,²^,³, 李迪强¹^,²^,^*(), 张于光¹^,², 薛亚东¹^,²

1.中国林业科学研究院森林生态环境与保护研究所, 北京 100091
2.国家林业和草原局生物多样性保护重点实验室, 北京 100091
3.广西中医药研究院中药资源研究所, 南宁 530022

收稿日期:2020-02-27 接受日期:2020-08-31 出版日期:2021-02-20 发布日期:2020-12-21
通讯作者: 李迪强
作者简介:* E-mail: lidq@caf.ac.cn
基金资助:
十二五国家科技支撑计划(2013BAC09B02)

Progress and analysis on the management effectiveness evaluation of protected area based on Aichi Biodiversity Target 11th in China

Bin Feng¹^,²^,³, Diqiang Li¹^,²^,^*(), Yuguang Zhang¹^,², Yadong Xue¹^,²

1 Institute of Forest Ecology, Environment and Protection, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091
2 Key Laboratory of Biodiversity Conservation, State Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091
3 Institute of Chinese Medicine Resources, Guangxi Institute of Chinese Medicine & Pharmaceutical Science, Nanning 530022

Received:2020-02-27 Accepted:2020-08-31 Online:2021-02-20 Published:2020-12-21
Contact: Diqiang Li

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本文基于我国相关政府部门、国际机构、科研机构和文献关于我国自然保护地管理有效性评估数据, 梳理和分析了我国针对爱知生物多样性目标11的自然保护地管理有效性评估的进展情况。结果显示, 我国已按时完成了爱知生物多样性目标11中2015年之前对60%以上自然保护地管理有效性评估的指标; 目前已开展管理有效性评估的自然保护地面积达136.19万km², 占我国自然保护地面积(186.60万km²)的72.99%; 我国自然保护地管理有效性受多方关注。本研究调查数据与世界自然保护地数据库、自然保护地管理有效性全球数据库的数据差异较大; 我国自然保护地管理有效性评估工具多样, 各类型自然保护地管理有效性评估工作进展差异显著, 管理有效性评估标准化和连续性有待提高。最后, 提出了如下建议: 加强自然保护地整体性和连通性; 参考世界自然保护区委员会的评估框架和世界自然保护联盟自然保护地绿色名录标准, 按照国家公园、自然保护区和自然公园分类制定管理有效性评估规范并将评估制度化; 有效利用评估结果促进我国自然保护地建设的标准化、科学化并建立激励机制等。

关键词: 自然保护地, 管理有效性, 爱知生物多样性目标, 生物多样性公约

Abstract

Aims: Effective management in protected areas is an important prerequisite for achieving the goal of protected areas. One of the key indicators for achieving Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 was for the Convention on Biological Diversity party to accomplish 60% and higher area of protected area before 2015. However, according to the Fifth National Report on China’s Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2014, there “lacked sufficient data” indicating progress of management effectiveness for protected areas as determined by Aichi Biodiversity Target 11. Discussing the performance of China’s Aichi Biodiversity Targets on the eve of the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity will be beneficial to showcase China’s biodiversity conservation achievements and provide a basis for scientific decision-making on the development of this protected area.
Methods: Based on the data from relevant Chinese government departments, international organizations, research institutions and literature on the effective management of protected areas in China, this study summarized and analyzed the progress of management effectiveness of protected areas as determined by Aichi Biodiversity Target 11.
Results: The results show, as indicated by Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 that management effectiveness evaluation of 60% and higher of China’s protected areas before 2015 was achieved. Currently, the protected areas under management effectiveness evaluation has reached 1.3619 million km², accounting for 72.99% of China’s protected areas (1.8660 million km²). Management effectiveness of China’s protected areas attracted attention from multi-groups. The data of this study are quite different from the data from the World Database on Protected Areas and the Global Database on Protected Area Management Effectiveness. There are various tools to evaluate the management effectiveness of protected areas in China. There are significant differences in the amount of progress made in management effectiveness depending on the protected area. Standardization and persistency of management effectiveness in protected areas need to be improved.
Conclusions and Suggestions: Based on our results, we propose the the following management practices: (1) strengthening connectivity and integrity of protected areas; (2) referring to the evaluation framework of World Commission of Protected Areas and the Green List Standard of Protected Areas of International Union for Conservation of Nature when making decisions; (3) to institutionalize the classified criterion of management effectiveness evaluations according to different types of protected area (such as national park, nature reserve and natural park), to facilitate the standardized and scientific construction, and to establish incentive mechanisms within China’s protected areas by effectively using of the results from the management effectiveness evaluation.

Key words: protected area, management effectiveness, Aichi Biodiversity Targets, Convention on Biological Diversity

冯斌, 李迪强, 张于光, 薛亚东 (2021) 基于爱知生物多样性目标11的我国自然保护地管理有效性评估进展与分析. 生物多样性, 29, 150-159. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2020061.

Bin Feng, Diqiang Li, Yuguang Zhang, Yadong Xue (2021) Progress and analysis on the management effectiveness evaluation of protected area based on Aichi Biodiversity Target 11th in China. Biodiversity Science, 29, 150-159. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2020061.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/10.17520/biods.2020061

https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/Y2021/V29/I2/150

图/表 4

参考文献 10

[1]	Barnes MD, Craigie ID, Harrison LB, Geldmann J, Collen B, Whitmee S, Balmford A, Burgess ND, Brooks T, Hockings M, Woodley S (2016) Wildlife population trends in protected areas predicted by national socio-economic metrics and body size. Nature Communications, 7, 12747. URL PMID
[2]	Coad L, Leverington F, Knights K, Geldmann J, Eassom A, Kapos V, Kingston N, de Lima M, Zamora C, Cuardros I, Nolte C, Burgess ND, Hockings M (2015) Measuring impact of protected area management interventions: Current and future use of the Global Database of Protected Area Management Effectiveness. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 370, 20140281. DOI URL
[3]	Geldmann J, Barnes M, Coad L, Craigie ID, Hockings M, Burgess ND (2013) Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing biodiversity and habitat loss and population declines. Biological Conservation, 161, 230-238. DOI URL
[4]	Gill DA, Mascia MB, Ahmadia GN, Glew L, Lester SE, Barnes M, Craigie I, Darling ES, Free CM, Geldmann J, Holst S, Jensen OP, White AT, Basurto X, Coad L, Gates RD, Guannel G, Mumby PJ, Thomas H, Whitmee S, Woodley S, Fox HE (2017) Capacity shortfalls hinder the performance of marine protected areas globally. Nature, 543, 665-669.
[5]	Hockings M, Stolton S, Leverington F, Dudley N, Courrau J, Valentine P (2006) Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing Management Effectiveness of Protected Areas. International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland.
[6]	Juffe-Bignoli D, Burgess N, Bingham H, Belle E (2014) Protected Planet Report 2014. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.
[7]	Liu FZ, Cui GF (2013) Comparative study of methodologies for management effectiveness evaluation of protected areas in China and overseas. World Forestry Research, 26(6), 33-38. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[ 刘方正, 崔国发 (2013) 国内外保护区管理有效性评价方法比较. 世界林业研究, 26(6), 33-38.]
[8]	Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’ s Republic of China(2014) China’s Fifth National Report on the Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity. China Environmental Science Press. Beijing. (in Chinese)
	[ 中华人民共和国环境保护部(2014) 中国履行《生物多样性公约》第五次国家报告. 中国环境科学出版社, 北京.]
[9]	UNEP-WCMC (2019) Protected Planet: The Global Database on Protected Areas Management Effectiveness (GD-PAME), July 2019 version. UNEP-WCMC, IUCN, Cambridge.
[10]	Zhang Y, Liu J, Zhu CQ (2015) IUCN Green List of Protected Areas: Introduction, progress, opportunities and challenges for protected areas in China. Biodiversity Science, 23, 437-439. (in Chinese)
	[ 张琰, 刘静, 朱春全 (2015) 自然保护地绿色名录: 内容, 进展及为中国自然保护地带来的机遇和挑战. 生物多样性, 23, 437-439.]

自然保护地类型 Protected area type	数量 Number		面积 Area (× 10⁴ km²)		已评估数量 Evaluated number		已评估面积Evaluated area (× 10⁴ km²)		评估面积比例 Proportion of evaluated area (%)
自然保护地类型 Protected area type	2014	2019	2014	2019	2014	2019	2014	2019	2014	2019
国家公园 National park	0	10	0	21.95	0	10	0	21.95	0	100.00
自然保护区 Nature reserve	2,729	2,694	146.99	128.93	2,067	2,081	123.46	123.85	83.99	84.15
国家湿地公园 National wetland park	569	897	2.75	3.53	7	9	0.03	0.03	1.09	0.84
风景名胜区 Scenic area	962	1,037	19.37	19.1	3	3	0.03	0.03	0.15	0.15
森林公园 Forest park	3,101	3,485	17.81	19.28	1	1	0.01	0.01	0.06	0.05
海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	45	111	6.68	7.15	5	60	0.17	6.13	2.54	85.73
地质公园 Geological park	495	608	11.03	12.09	1	1	0.11	0.11	0.09	0.88
国家级水产种质资源保护区 National aquatic germplasm resource conservation zone	429	533	13.11	15.4	0	0	0	0	0	0
国家沙漠(石漠)公园 National desert (rock desert) park	55	120	0.3	0.41	0	0	0	0	0	0
世界自然遗产地 World natural heritage	14	18	3.07	7.11	14	18	3.07	7.11	100.00	100.00
世界地质公园 Global geopark	33	39	3.86	4.72	33	39	3.86	4.72	100.00	100.00
国际重要湿地 International important wetland	46	56	5.83	6.62	46	56	5.83	6.62	100.00	100.00
生物圈保护区 Biosphere reserve	24	34	3.51	7.37	24	34	3.51	7.37	100.00	100.00
自然保护地绿色名录 Green List of Protected Areas	6	6	0.04	0.04	6	6	0.04	0.04	100.00	100.00

自然保护地类型 Protected area type	数量 Number		面积 Area (× 10⁴ km²)		已评估数量 Evaluated number		已评估面积Evaluated area (× 10⁴ km²)		评估面积比例 Proportion of evaluated area (%)
自然保护地类型 Protected area type	2014	2019	2014	2019	2014	2019	2014	2019	2014	2019
国家公园 National park	0	10	0	21.95	0	10	0	21.95	0	100.00
自然保护区 Nature reserve	2,729	2,694	146.99	128.93	2,067	2,081	123.46	123.85	83.99	84.15
国家湿地公园 National wetland park	569	897	2.75	3.53	7	9	0.03	0.03	1.09	0.84
风景名胜区 Scenic area	962	1,037	19.37	19.1	3	3	0.03	0.03	0.15	0.15
森林公园 Forest park	3,101	3,485	17.81	19.28	1	1	0.01	0.01	0.06	0.05
海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	45	111	6.68	7.15	5	60	0.17	6.13	2.54	85.73
地质公园 Geological park	495	608	11.03	12.09	1	1	0.11	0.11	0.09	0.88
国家级水产种质资源保护区 National aquatic germplasm resource conservation zone	429	533	13.11	15.4	0	0	0	0	0	0
国家沙漠(石漠)公园 National desert (rock desert) park	55	120	0.3	0.41	0	0	0	0	0	0
世界自然遗产地 World natural heritage	14	18	3.07	7.11	14	18	3.07	7.11	100.00	100.00
世界地质公园 Global geopark	33	39	3.86	4.72	33	39	3.86	4.72	100.00	100.00
国际重要湿地 International important wetland	46	56	5.83	6.62	46	56	5.83	6.62	100.00	100.00
生物圈保护区 Biosphere reserve	24	34	3.51	7.37	24	34	3.51	7.37	100.00	100.00
自然保护地绿色名录 Green List of Protected Areas	6	6	0.04	0.04	6	6	0.04	0.04	100.00	100.00

数据来源 Data source		保护地类型 Protected area type	已评估数量 Evaluated number	已评估面积 Evaluated area (× 10⁴km²)	评估周期Evaluation cycle (year)
业务主管部门 Competent department of business	国家林业和草原局 National Forestry and Grassland Administration	国家公园 National park	10	21.95
	国家林业和草原局 National Forestry and Grassland Administration	自然保护区 Nature reserve	2,006	122.88
	生态环境部 Ministry of Ecology and Environment	自然保护区 Nature reserve	465	97.72
联合国机构数据库 United Nations organizations’ database	自然保护地管理有效性全球数据库 Global Database-Protected Areas Management Effectiveness	自然保护区 Nature reserve	12	40.41
		生物圈保护区 Biosphere reserve	3	0.25	10
		世界自然遗产地 World natural heritage	14	3.04	6
		国际重要湿地 International important wetland	2	0.01	4
	GEF项目数据库 Global Environmental Facility project database	自然保护区 Nature reserve	58	46.87	1
		风景名胜区 Scenic area	3	0.03
		海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	5	0.18
国内外认证机构 Domestic and foreign certification institutes	联合国教科文组织 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization	世界自然遗产地 World natural heritage	18	7.11	6
		世界地质公园 Global geopark	39	4.72	4
		自然保护区 Nature reserve	33	7.33	10
		风景名胜区 Scenic area	1	0.04	10
	世界自然保护联盟 International Union for Conservation of Nature	自然保护区 Nature reserve	3	0.26	5
		风景名胜区 Scenic area	1	0.02
		森林公园 Forest park	1	0.01
		地质公园 Geological park	1	0.11
	湿地公约 The Convention on Wetlands	国际重要湿地 International important wetland	56	3.20	4
国际保护组织 International conservation organization	世界自然基金会 World Wild Fund	自然保护区 Nature reserve	88	9.91
学术论文 Academic paper	学术期刊 Academic journals	自然保护区 Nature reserve	939	92.28
		湿地公园 Wetland park	9	0.03
		海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	5	0.81
	博、硕士学位论文 Doctoral and master’s thesis	自然保护区 Nature reserve	658	58.38
	博、硕士学位论文 Doctoral and master’s thesis	海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	60	6.13

数据来源 Data source		保护地类型 Protected area type	已评估数量 Evaluated number	已评估面积 Evaluated area (× 10⁴km²)	评估周期Evaluation cycle (year)
业务主管部门 Competent department of business	国家林业和草原局 National Forestry and Grassland Administration	国家公园 National park	10	21.95
	国家林业和草原局 National Forestry and Grassland Administration	自然保护区 Nature reserve	2,006	122.88
	生态环境部 Ministry of Ecology and Environment	自然保护区 Nature reserve	465	97.72
联合国机构数据库 United Nations organizations’ database	自然保护地管理有效性全球数据库 Global Database-Protected Areas Management Effectiveness	自然保护区 Nature reserve	12	40.41
		生物圈保护区 Biosphere reserve	3	0.25	10
		世界自然遗产地 World natural heritage	14	3.04	6
		国际重要湿地 International important wetland	2	0.01	4
	GEF项目数据库 Global Environmental Facility project database	自然保护区 Nature reserve	58	46.87	1
		风景名胜区 Scenic area	3	0.03
		海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	5	0.18
国内外认证机构 Domestic and foreign certification institutes	联合国教科文组织 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization	世界自然遗产地 World natural heritage	18	7.11	6
		世界地质公园 Global geopark	39	4.72	4
		自然保护区 Nature reserve	33	7.33	10
		风景名胜区 Scenic area	1	0.04	10
	世界自然保护联盟 International Union for Conservation of Nature	自然保护区 Nature reserve	3	0.26	5
		风景名胜区 Scenic area	1	0.02
		森林公园 Forest park	1	0.01
		地质公园 Geological park	1	0.11
	湿地公约 The Convention on Wetlands	国际重要湿地 International important wetland	56	3.20	4
国际保护组织 International conservation organization	世界自然基金会 World Wild Fund	自然保护区 Nature reserve	88	9.91
学术论文 Academic paper	学术期刊 Academic journals	自然保护区 Nature reserve	939	92.28
		湿地公园 Wetland park	9	0.03
		海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	5	0.81
	博、硕士学位论文 Doctoral and master’s thesis	自然保护区 Nature reserve	658	58.38
	博、硕士学位论文 Doctoral and master’s thesis	海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	60	6.13

数据来源 Data source	自然保护地面积 Area of protected area (× 10⁴ km²)	陆域自然保护地面积 Area of terrestrial protected areas (× 10⁴ km²)	已评估陆域自然保护地面积 Evaluated area of terrestrial protected areas (× 10⁴ km²)	海洋自然保护地面积 Area of marine protected areas (× 10⁴ km²)	已评估海洋自然保护地面积 Evaluated area of marine protected areas (× 10⁴ km²)	已评估陆域自然保护地比例 Proportion of evaluated terrestrial protected areas	已评估海洋自保护地比例 Proportion of evaluated marine protected areas
WDPA	150.90	146.15	20.05	4.75	0.08	13.72%	1.68%
本研究 This study	186.60	172.80	129.46	13.80	6.73	74.92%	48.77%

基于爱知生物多样性目标11的我国自然保护地管理有效性评估进展与分析

Progress and analysis on the management effectiveness evaluation of protected area based on Aichi Biodiversity Target 11th in China

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 10

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

自然保护地类型 Protected area type	评估方法 Evaluation method	已评估数量 Evaluated number	已评估面积 Evaluated area (× 10⁴km²)
以国家公园为主体的自然保护地 Protected areas with national parks as the main body
国家公园 National park	国家公园体制试点评估指标体系 Evaluation indicator system of national park system pilot	10	21.95
自然保护区 Nature reserve	自然保护区有效管理评价技术规范 Technical Regulations for the Management Effectiveness Evaluation of Nature Reserves	2,045	123.92
	自然保护区管理评估规范 Standard for Assessment of Nature Reserve Management	465	97.72
	管理有效性跟踪工具 Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool	1,096	92.13
	管理快速评估和优先性确定方法 Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management	157	21.47
	生物多样性管理调查 Governance of Biodiversity Research Project	33	7.33
	绿色名录标准 Green List Standard	3	0.26
	其他评估方法 Other evaluation methods	646	60.03
自然公园 Natural park
湿地公园 Wetland park	国家湿地公园评估标准 Assessment Standards of National Wetland Park	6	0.02
湿地公园 Wetland park	其他评估方法 Other evaluation methods	3	0.01
风景名胜区 Scenic area	管理有效性跟踪工具 Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool	3	0.05
风景名胜区 Scenic area	绿色名录标准 Green List Standard	1	0.02
地质公园 Geological park	绿色名录标准 Green List Standard	1	0.11
海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	管理有效性跟踪工具 Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool	10	0.99
海洋特别保护区(海洋公园) Special marine protected area (marine park)	其他评估方法 Other evaluation methods	60	6.13
国际认证自然保护地 International certificated protected areas
世界自然遗产地 World natural heritage	世界遗产瞭望 World Heritage Outlook	18	7.11
世界地质公园 Global geopark	世界地质公园重生效程序 Global geopark revalidatation process	39	4.72
生物圈保护区 Biosphere reserve	生物多样性管理调查 Governance of Biodiversity Research Project	34	7.37
自然保护地绿色名录 Green List of Protected Areas	绿色名录标准 Green List Standard	6	0.39
国际重要湿地 International important wetland	中国国际重要湿地监测指南 Monitoring Guideline on International Important Wetland in China	57	6.62

[1]	刘春晖, 杨京彪, 尹仑. 云南省生物多样性保护进展、成效与前瞻[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(2): 200-211.
[2]	秦天宝, 袁昕. 推进生物多样性跨境区域保护的中国实践[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(2): 220-230.
[3]	王伟, 李俊生. 中国生物多样性就地保护成效与展望[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(2): 133-149.
[4]	李保平, 薛达元. 《生物多样性公约》中“土著和地方社区”术语在中国的适用性和评价指标体系[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(2): 193-199.
[5]	陈曦, 王泺. 生物多样性国际发展援助作用、现状与中国行动思考: 基于CBD履约视角[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(2): 247-258.
[6]	于书霞, 邓梁春, 吴琼, 王真. 《生物多样性公约》审查机制的现状、挑战和展望[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(2): 238-246.
[7]	田佳, 朱淑怡, 张晓峰, 何礼文, 古晓东, 官天培, 李晟. 大熊猫国家公园的地栖大中型鸟兽多样性现状: 基于红外相机数据的分析[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(11): 1490-1504.
[8]	李佳, 王秀磊, 杨明伟, 陈大祥, 王晓菊, 罗平, 刘芳, 薛亚东, 李广良, 张于光, 张宇, 李迪强. 自然保护区生物标本资源共享子平台红外相机数据库建设进展[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(9): 1081-1089.
[9]	William J.McShea, 申小莉, 刘芳, 王天明, 肖治术, 李晟. 中国的野生动物红外相机监测需要统一的标准[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(9): 1125-1131.
[10]	冯斌, 李迪强, 张于光, 薛亚东. 自然保护区减缓和适应气候变化的管理有效性评估: 以广西12个典型自然保护区为例[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(8): 1026-1035.
[11]	耿宜佳,田瑜,李俊生,徐靖. “2020年后全球生物多样性框架”进展及展望[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(2): 238-243.
[12]	刘海鸥,张风春,赵富伟,杜乐山,薛达元. 从《生物多样性公约》资金机制战略目标变迁解析生物多样性热点问题[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(2): 244-252.
[13]	段菲, 李晟. 黄河流域鸟类多样性现状、分布格局及保护空缺[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(12): 1459-1468.
[14]	曹越, 侯姝彧, 曾子轩, 王小珊, 王方邑, 赵智聪, 杨锐. 基于“三类分区框架”的黄河流域生物多样性保护策略[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(12): 1447-1458.
[15]	黄宝荣, 张丛林, 邓冉. 我国自然保护地历史遗留问题的系统解决方案[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(10): 1255-1265.