滨海湿地生态安全评价研究
|
摘要
滨海湿地是海岸带内陆地与海洋相互作用相互影响而形成的特殊生态系统,是生物多样性最丰富、生态服务价值高的湿地生态系统之一。滨海湿地的特殊结构决定了它在功能的多样性,例如在保护生物多样性,野生动物栖息地、防洪减灾、净化陆地排放的污染物、抵缓海水入侵、调节气候等方面有着重要的意义。同时,滨海湿地也为海水养殖业、盐业和海洋渔业等产业的发展提供了最基础的自然资源。滨海湿地对海岸带地区、国家或全球的社会经济发展、人类生活水平的提高和生存环境可持续发展都具有重要的影响,是当前当今国际社会研究的热点地区。
在海陆地交互作用下,广西钦州湾滨海地区发育了多种类型的资源丰富的湿地,主要有淤泥质滩涂、红树林湿地、浅海水域、人工养殖池、浅海水域等。为了保护滨海湿地环境,2005年钦州湾沿海成立了广西茅尾海红树林自治区级自然区,2011年国家批准成立了国家级海洋公园——广西钦州茅尾海国家级海洋公园,目的是协调海洋生态保护和资源利用关系中的重要作用,促进沿海地区社会济的可持续发展,这些措施对保护钦州湾生态环境有一定的积极意义。然而,在近年来人类高强度开发活动的影响下,湿地资源的过度利用导致钦州湾滨海地区天然湿地大量减少,取而代之的是人工湿地和城镇居民地。滨海湿地生态系统也受到极大的干扰,正面临着日渐严重的天然湿地萎缩、生物资源衰减、湿地功能退化、环境污染、生态环境恶化、野生动植物栖息地逐渐丧失等一系列湿地生态问题,这些问题构成了钦州湾滨海湿地可持续发展的最大障碍。
生态安全是指一个国家或地区的人类社会生存和发展所需的生态环境处于不受或少受破坏与威胁的状态。随着人口增长带来的压力越来越大,社会经济发展对资源需要的迫切性增加,跟随而来的是环境退化和生态破坏甚至环境和生态灾害等诸多问题,一个地区的生态安全问题对区域发展的威胁越来越大。生态安全问题成为了理论上和实际中都有待探讨和解决的领域。
因此,通过开展钦州湾滨海湿地生态安全评价研究,探讨滨海湿地这一特殊地区的生态安全评价的理论和方法,为解决生态安全与湿地资源利用、社会经济发展之间的矛盾,为最终实现钦州湾地区资源、环境、经济和社会可持续发展提供了理论支撑。
本文以钦州湾滨海湿地为研究对象,基于多源遥感数据及非遥感数据,以1999～2011年11年为时间尺度,以钦州湾滨海地区潮上带至陆上O-l0km为空间尺度,在遥感图像处理软件和地理信息系统的支持下,建立了研究区湿地景观分类系统,并提取了湿地景观信息,对研究区滨海湿地景观变化进行了解译分析。结合“压力-状态-响应”(PSR)框架模型,采用层次分析方法,构建了包括人口、经济、生态、景观等生态安全影响因素17个指标的滨海生态安全评价体系,进行了相关指标的定量化探讨,得出钦州湾滨海湿地生态安全度的时间变化特征;同时,在空间尺度上,针对茅尾海段、钦州港段、三娘湾-大风江河口段等三个不同区位的滨海湿地变化特征,探讨其安全格局变化的内在机制。基于生态安全评价结果,提出钦州湾滨海湿地生态系统持续发展的调控措施,探索生态安全研究与海岸带综合管理的对接方法,为湿地资源保护及区域可持续发展提供了参考。主要结论如下：
1.本研究开展滨海湿地生态安全评价研究的基础理论有可持续发展理论、景观生态学、生态承载力理论和系统论等。在滨海湿地这一生态系统中,由资源、环境、社会经济等因素构成复杂的子系统,滨海湿地生态安全状况是各子系统之间的冲突和协调的结果。各子系统通过协调作用和相互效应,使滨海湿地生态系统由无序状态变为有序状态,从而实现生态安全状态,从而达到饮州湾滨海湿地可持续发展的目标。同时,通过分析影响生态安全状态的内在机制,为滨海湿地生态安全评价提供理论基础,为生态安全评价指标的确定以及评价方法的选择提供科学依据。
2.湿地景观动态变化格局和景观特征值是反映湿地生态安全状态的重要衡量值,也是进行湿地生态安全评价的本底数据基础,景观多样性、景观破碎度、分维值等指标参数更是反映湿地结构和生态功能值的重要参数。因此,运用景观生态学理论,经多次野外调查,对研究区内TM、SPOT、ALOS等影像数据在遥感解译软件ERDAS下进行湿地信息提取。按照湿地类型空间形态的一致性、植被覆盖特征和影像自身特征进行湿地景观分类,结合湿地生态安全评价目的,把研究区滨海湿地划分为自然湿地和人工湿地两大类,其中自然湿地有红树林湿地、淤泥质滩涂、浅海水域、砂石海滩等,人工湿地主要有人工养殖池和水田。为了更好地表现湿地与其他土地利用类型之间转换的特点,本研究同时也对非湿地地类(建设用地、林地)进行了解译与分析。在地理信息系统软件Arcgis和景观格局分析软件的支持下进行湿地景观格局动态分析,很好地揭示了湿地景观格局及其变化的特征,是研究湿地景观格局及其变化过程的有效方法。整个区域的各湿地类型发生了大幅度的变化,转移频繁,自然湿地的变化主要流向人工养殖虾塘和建设用地,对于保持研究区内的生物多样性和生态功能都有一定的负面作用。各种滨海湿地景观变化表现为：
有关湿地面积及结构变化。1999年,研究区内滨海湿地的优势类型为浅海水域和淤泥质滩涂,三者合计约占区域湿地总面积的60%,林地是区域最主要的非湿地利用类型,其面积比例达到18.94%。在1999年到2006年期间,区域内湿地的主要类型间变化不大,增加幅度比较大的非自然湿地类型有人工养殖池,面积从3.31%增加至5.58%。
自然湿地面积急剧减少。1999-2011年间,淤泥质滩涂、浅海水域、红树林湿地等自然湿地面积共减少12643.1hm2。人工湿地面积增加10690.3hm2。在自然湿地的变化中,淤泥质滩涂面积减少3526.1hm2,减少了20.15%。红树林湿地面积减少了1.33%,其中因2005年起人工种植了无瓣海桑等红树林品种,红树林湿地退化的幅度减缓。砂石海滩面积基本保持空间上的稳定。浅海水域也呈减少的趋势,且减少的速度由慢到快。1999-2006年,水域面积减少了1339.7hm2,2006～2011年减少了4867.6hm2,减少幅度很大。海域面积减少的主要原因是大面积围海滩涂养殖和围海造地。
人工湿地景观方面,建设用地大幅度增加,水田面积减少。建设用地转换的重要途径为由原来的滩涂、红树林湿地或水域等填海而成,据统计,2006～2011年,钦州湾填海约480hm2,用于交通运输用海(港口、码头)旅游娱乐用地等,特别集中在2008-2010年间,大量的填海工程使得滨海湿地景观多样性减少,生态功能减弱。
有关湿地景观的空间分布特征变化。茅尾海段、饮州港段、三娘湾-大风江河口段等三个区的近10年湿地景观总体变化趋势表现为：茅尾海段、三娘湾-大风江河口段的淤泥质滩涂面积减少显著,人工养殖池(虾塘)面积大幅度扩展；钦州港段建设用地剧增；整个研究区的砂石海滩面积变化不大。1999-2011年,研究区湿地景观破碎度和景观多样性增强,人为活动干扰强烈。
3.压力-状态-响应(PSR)模型框架是目前进行生态安全评价最常用的模型框架之-它体现了人类活动与资源、环境之间的相互作用和联系。其中环境资源的“状态”来呈现环境恶化或改善的程度：而区域的经济活动、社会结构和人类干扰带来的“压力”是对环境造成施压的因素；“响应”则是指人类对环境变化的压力而应对的反馈,是社会组织或个人为了缓解、阻止那些不利于人类生存与发展的生态环境变化而采取的措施。PSR模型各系统之间因果关系非常清晰,又具有综合性和灵活性的优点,所以被广泛认可和使用。
本研究基于压力-状态-响应(PSR)模型框架,在征求专家和环保海洋等部门的意见下,根据整体性原则、科学性、动态性及可操作性等原则,运用层次分析法,构建了3个层次、包含17个指标的湿地生态安全评价指标体系。生态安全评价指标体系分三层：目标层(A)、准则层(B)和指标层(C)。指标体系的最高目标层(A)为钦州市滨海湿地生态安全状态,其最终结果采用生态安全等级表示。准则层为压力(B1)、状态(B2)、响应(B3)三个子系统。压力系统用资源压力和人文社会指标反映：状态系统用环境污染、景观特征指数、水资源等指标反映,响应系统有生态系统响应、经济响应和人文社会响应,指人类社会为了应对湿地生态安全状态变化而采取的投放,它反映生态系统本身对环境问题的解决能力。指标层(C)是准则层指标的具体特征指标,由可度量的指标来构成。本研究选择的以上指标体系在架构上突出了区域生态安全评价的共性要求,针对滨海湿地生态安全评价而设计的同时,具有适应性。
参考国内外研究湿地生态安全评价的标准,按照生态安全评价综合指数值的高低排序,分别为：[0.8,1]、[0.6,0.8]、[06,0.4]、[0.4,0.2]、[0.2,0],表示了安全、较安全、预警、脆弱、危险五个等级,用以反映湿地生态安全度从优到劣的变化。不同的级别可以生湿地生态环境的活力、组织结构和恢复力三个主要特征来具体定义。主要特重有景观的自然状态,湿地类型的结构完整性,生态功能完善程度,生态系统的稳定性和可持续状态,生态功能恢复等。生态安全等级有一定的判别标准,这些标准也可以视为湿地生态系统健康的表征之一,也是判定湿地生态系统是否安全的重要依据。确定了评价标准和生态安全分级系统后,以研究区内茅尾海段、饮州港段、三娘湾-大风江河口段的三个区为评价单元,分别在时间和空间上对对钦州湾滨海湿地生态系统的安全状况进行了评价。
4.在时间变化上,研究区生态环境的生态安全度总体上处于较安全级别,但从1999-2011年生态安全度逐渐降低,部分区显恶化的趋势。
5.从空间分布上,饮州湾滨海湿地生态安全三娘湾-大风江河口段的生态安全总体状况最好,茅尾海段其次,钦州港段较低,生态安全指数分别为0.845、0.793、0.726。主要原因是：三娘湾-大风江河口段的湿地类型主要为砂石海岸和浅海水域,人为干扰度较低,海洋功能划分中将大风江口划分为红树林自然保护区,湿地保护措施较有效；茅尾海区内以淤泥质滩涂这种易于转为人工养殖池的湿地类型为主,靠近钦州市的主城区,沿海滩涂开发利用历史较久,受人类活动影响较大,即使有广西钦州湾国家海洋公园、广西茅尾海红树林保护区核心区两个湿地保护单元,但自然滨海湿地面积减少显著,退化速度非常快：钦州港区经过近十年的沿海工业大规模开发,大面积的围海造地,自然湿地遭到严重破坏。
6.钦州湾滨海湿地的生态安全状况正面临着严峻考验。经分析,钦州湾滨海湿地近十年的演变是在自然干扰和人为干扰的共同影响下进行的。自然因素主要有滨海地区水动力变化、入海河流的泥沙淤积、围垦造陆引起的海湾纳潮量减少、生物入侵等。同时也有人为因素和经济因素的干扰。如湿地资源过度开发、周边港口工程建设带来巨大压力、管理体制缺乏、经费投入不足等,各种因素导致滨海湿地面积减少和功能的退化。从深层次来看,滨海湿地生态安全状况是其资源、环境、经济与社会四个子系统之间的冲突和协调的结果,有钦州湾滨海地区为了经济利益与湿地保护的冲突,也有湿地资源在利用上考虑短期而忽视长期利益的冲突,以及区域不同的利益主体间资源抢夺的冲突等,不同的主体追求在资源利用和利益竞争中发生非协调的现象,从而使滨海湿地生态安全状态面临严峻的压力与挑战。只有通过资源、社会、经济和生态等各子系统的协调作用和相互效应,才能使滨海湿地生态系统由无规则混乱状态变为宏观有序状态,实现区域生态安全状态。
7.结合以上钦州湾滨海湿地生态安全影响机制的分析,因此,生态安全调控措施主要从控制生态安全压力、恢复生态功能和提高生态响应效率三个方面来进行。控制生态安全的压力,适度开发滨海湿地资源,从长远的角度来平衡资源开发、经济发展、社会进步与生态系统安全之间的关系,不断调整产业结构,治理钦州湾陆上与海上环境污染,控制污染源等,这是提高钦州湾滨海湿地生态安全的根本措施；同时对当前钦州湾滨海湿地进行生态恢复,最大限度地发挥钦州湾国家海洋公园和广西茅尾海红树林自然保护区的效能和作用；提高生态响应则是通过健全湿地管理体制,加强生态研究以及推动公众参与等措施,完善和提高钦州湾滨海湿地的生态安全生态管理和恢复能力。
Coastal wetland is a special ecosystem by the interaction of ocean and terrene, presenting one of the most abundant biodiversity, high productivity and most valuable ecosystems. Coastal wetland plays an important role in protecting biodiversity, flood control, remediate seawater intrusion, recharging groundwater, climate control and providing inhabitation for wild animals. Moreover, the natural resource in coastal wetland is prerequisite to the sustainable development of fishery, salt industry and salt chemical industry. With its significant influence on local, national and global economic development and human living environment, coastal wetland has become one of the hot international research topics.
There are many types of coastal wetland with abundant resource in the coastal zone in Qinzhou, Guangxi province, mainly mud flat, mangrove wetland, shallow sea area and artificial culture pond. Gaungxi Maoweihai national ocean park project was approved by the state, to coordinate the oceanic ecologic protection and resource utilization and promote the economic sustainable development in coastal area. It is critical for ecological environment of Qinzhou.But the coastal wetland has been reduced due to long-term human activities by over exploration of the wetland resource and hysteretic protect program of the wetland. Large area of the wetland has been replaced by artificial wetland and residential area. The ecosystem of coastal wetland is being threating to a serious of wetland problems, including wetland shrinking, bio resource reducing, environment pollution, deterioration of ecological environment and reduction of wild animals' inhabitation.
Eco-security refers to a state that the survival and development of the ecological environment of human society is not subject to destruction or threatened. With the growth of population and socio-economic development, the environmental and ecological disasters on regional development caused by environmental degradation and ecological damage, has become a growing threat to national security and social progress. Ecological security problems as the theoretical and practical problems that need to be addressed.
Therefore, the ecological security evaluation of coastal wetlands in Qinzhou by exploring the theories and methods of ecological security evaluation of coastal wetlands provides scientific basis to resolve coastal conflicts between wetland eco-security and socio-economic development and to the eventual realize sustainable development of local resources, environment, economy and society in Qinzhou.
This study established landscape classification system, and by collecting landscape information carried out interpretation analysis on coastal wetland landscape changes in Qinzhou. The dissertation is based on multiple source remote sensing data and the non-remote sensing data from the tide up to10km from1999-2011, employing remote sensing image processing software and geographic information systems. Combining the "pressure-state-response"(PSR) framework model, using analytical hierarchy process, this study built a coastal ecological safety assessment system including a number of19evaluating indicators such as population, economy, ecology and landscape. Quantification of relating indicators was carried out to investigate temporal change characteristics of Qinzhou. In the other hand, on the spatial scale, three different geographical regions, Mao Weihai, Qinzhou port fields, Sanliang Bayand Wind River estuary were investigated to explore the inner mechanism of security patterns change. Based on the ecological security assessment results, control measures of sustainable development of Qinzhou coastal wetland eco-systems was proposed to explore the connection of ecological security research and integrated coastal zone management, providing scientific reference for the protection of wetland resources and regional sustainable development. The main conclusions are as follows:
1. Under the guidance the theories of sustainable development, landscape ecology, ecological carrying capacity theory and systems theory, the research focus of this dissertation is ecological security of wetlands in the study area. There are complicated subsystems in coastal wetland eco-system due to resources, environment and socio-economic factors. Coastal wetland eco-security situation is the result of conflict and coordination between the subsystems. The coordination and interaction between the subsystems result the coastal wetland eco-system from a state of disorder into order status, leading to the achievement of ecological security status, so as to achieve the objectives of sustainable development in Qinzhou coastal wetlands. This dissertation provides theoretical basis for ecological security evaluation index and evaluation method selection by analyzing the impact ecological security assessment for coastal wetlands and providing the inner mechanism of ecological security status.
2. The dynamic change patterns of wetland landscape and wetland landscape characteristics are an important indicator of wetland ecological security status, and the background data base for wetland ecological security evaluation. Landscape diversity, fragmentation of the landscape, fractal dimension parameters are important parameters of the structure and ecological function of wetland. Applying the landscape ecology principle, after several field investigations, the TM, SPOT and ALOS remote sensing image data of the study area were used for wetland information extraction by interpretation software ERDAS. According to the consistency of wetland type spatial morphology, vegetation cover characteristics and wetland landscape image characteristics, combined with the wetland eco-security evaluation, the coastal wetlands in study area can be classified into natural wetlands and artificial wetland. The natural wetlands includes mangrove wetland, muddy tidal flats, shallow sea water and sand beaches; the artificial wetland mainly consists of artificial ponds and paddy fields. In order to better perform the characteristics of wetlands and other land-use conversions, this study also focused on the translation and analysis of non-wetland type (urban construction land, woodlands). The dual employment of GIS software and landscape pattern analysis software is an advanced method to reveal the characteristics of wetland landscape pattern and the variation of wetlands, also as well as an effective method to study the wetland landscape pattern and its ecological processes. All wetland types in the entire area has undergone significant change and frequently transfer. The primary change of natural wetlands is their alternation to farmed shrimp ponds and construction land, which has a certain negative effect on maintaining biological diversity and ecological functions of the study area. The changes of coastal wetland landscape are as follows:
Related wetlands area and structure. In1999, the dominant type of coastal wetlands in the study area were shallow sea area and muddy tidal flats, which was approximately60%of total regional wetland area. The main non-wetland was woodland, as18.94%of the area. During1999to2006, the main types of wetlands in the area had little change. The relatively higher increase of the non-natural wetland was artificial ponds, increased from3.31%to5.58%of the area.
Drastic reduction of natural wetland. During1999to2011, muddy tidal flats, mangrove wetlands, shallow sea area and other natural wetland has a total reduction of12643.1hm2, while artificial wetland has an increase of10690.3hm. As the natural wetland reduction, muddy tidal-flat area declined20.15%as3526.1hm2. There is a considerable reduction of mangroves of1.33%from1999to2011. In2005, flaps sonneratiacaseolaris mangrove was planted to retain the reduction of mangrove wetland. Sand beach area generally remained on stability. Sand and gravel beaches are mainly located in Rhino foot, Sanniang Bay area with a relatively small conversion ratio to other wetland types. Shallow sea area decreased with a more and more fast speed. In1999-2006, water area reduced1339.7hm2and in2006～2011decreased4867.6hm2, with a large scale reduction. The main cause of the reduction of sea area is the large area and reclamation of tidal flat reclamation culture.
Substantial increase in artificial wetland landscape. Changing paddy field area has decreased. In coastal areas, due to the much higher income from mariculture than that of crop cultivation, acres of farmland were converted into shrimp ponds salt filed. In the study area, non-wetland is increasingly changed into construction land. According to statistics, in2006-2011, the reclamation area in Qinzhou Bay is approximately480hm2, which is used as sea transportation (port, dock), entertainment and travel sites. Most the conversion happened in2008-2010. Reclamation reduced the biodiversity of landscape.
Spatial distribution of wetland landscape. In the last decade, the general variation tendencies of Mao Weihai, Qinzhou port fields, Sanniang Bay and Wind River estuary are: considerable reduction of muddy tidal flats in Mao Weihai, Sanniang Bay and Wind River estuary; significant increase of artificial ponds (shrimp pond) area expansion; large increase of urban construction and traffic land in Qinzhou port; no significant alteration of sand beach area. Based on landscape characteristics index, in1999-2011. landscape diversity and fragmentation in the study area has increased resulted from strong anthropogenic activities.
3. Pressure-state-response, PSR model framework is the one most popular models for ecological safety evaluation. It represents the interaction and relationship between human-being and the environment. In the model,'state' of environment ecological resource is used to reflect the degree of environment changing;'pressure' is the factors that give pressure to the environment due to regional economic activity, social structure and human disturbance;'response' is the people's reaction due to environment change, reflecting the reactions of stopping, releasing, preventing or recovering the factors which are against the development of human and the environment. it is widely recognized and used for very clear causal relationship between the model system, but also has a comprehensive and flexibility advantages.
4. This study is based on the PSR model framework, under the advises of experts and environment/ocean related department, according to the principles of holistic principles, scientific, dynamic and operability, using Analytic Hierarchy Process, to build a three-level, containing17indicators of wetland ecological safety evaluation index system. The concrete steps are:①establishing the index system;②selection of evaluation methods;③evaluation standards and classification;④determination of evaluation cell;⑤calculation of ecological security indicators;⑥evaluation of ecological security.
Indicators of the system are divided into three layers:the target layer, criteria layer and index layer. Highest target layer of the system:(A) Security status of Qinzhou City coastal wetland ecosystem. Results using the ecological security level. Criteria layer consists of pressure (B1), state (B2), and response (B3) the three subsystems. Pressure system is reflected by resources, environmental pollution, and the humanities and social indicators. State system is reflected with soil, biological, vegetation, water resources, and socio-economic indicators. Response system inclues ecosystem response, economic response and the humanities and social response, in response to the changes of the wetland ecological security state. It reflects the the solution of environmental problems by ecological system itself. Index layer (C) is the most basic level of the index system guidelines layer indicators of the specific characteristics of indicators, constituted by measurable indicators. The index system architecture not only reflects the common requirements of the regional ecological security assessment, but aloes designed for both coastal wetland ecological security evaluation.
According to studies of the wetland ecological security evaluation standard in both domestic and overseas, in accordance with the level of comprehensive evaluation score, from highest to lowest, divided into safe, safer, early warning, fragile, dangerous five levels, the Composite Index being [0.8,1],[0.6,0.8],[06,0.4],[0.4,0.2],[0.2,0], in order to reflect the wetland ecological safety degree from good to bad. Different level are defined from the three main characteristics of vigor, structure and resilience, from high to low. Such as whether landscape maintaining the natural state; wetland type structure being complete, the ecological function being perfect, the ecosystem vitality exists or extent, the ecosystem being a stable and sustainable state, the existence of state appeared abnormal or not, how ecological restoration functioning well etc.. For the ecological security rating, there are certain assessment standards which can be considered as the characterizations of wetland ecosystem health and criterion basis of ecosystem safety.
After evaluation criteria and grading system established, using three section of the study area, Qinzhou port in Maowei Sea section, Sanniang Bay and the estuary as evaluation units, evaluated the security situation in the Gulf of Qinzhou coastal wetland ecosystem in time and space dimensions.
5. On the timescale, according to the results of ecological security evaluation if Qinzhou Bay, the ecological security of the study area is relatively safe level. Though it has decreased gradually from1999to2011, followed by the Maoweihai area. The ecological security of Qinzhou Bay has deteriorated.
6. As the spatial pattern, Sanniang Bay in Qinzhou Bay and Wind River estuary region have the best security assessment, followed by Maoweihai area and Qinzhou port area, with the safety index of0.845,0.793and0.726respectively. The wetland types of Sanniang Bay and the Wind River estuary are mainly sandy coast and shallow sea area, less-human disturbance. Based on the marine functional division, Wind River was classified as mangrove nature reserves, where the wetland protection measures are relatively more effective; Maoweihai area mainly consists of muddy tidal flats that are easy transferred into artificial ponds. Near the urban area of Qinzhou city, coastal development has a long utilization history, where the wetland has been significantly influenced by human activities. Although there are two wetland protection units--the Qinzhou Bay National Ocean Park, and Guangxi Maoweihai mangrove reserve, the natural coastal wetlands area declined significantly and degraded quickly; After nearly a decade of industrial-scale development along the coast, large areas of land reclamation, natural wetlands in Qinzhou port experienced severe damage.
7. Coastal wetland eco-security of the Qinzhou Bay is facing a severe test. In the last decade, the evolution of coastal wetlands Qinzhou Bay resulted from both the natural and human disturbance. Natural factors include water dynamic changes in coastal regions, river sediment, tidal volume reduction, biological invasions caused by the reclamation, biological invasion, and so on, meanwhile the interfere with human factors and economic factors. Factors as wetland Resource overexploitation, enormous pressure from the peripheral port construction, inadequate management systems, inadequate funding, lead to reduction and degradation of coastal wetlands. Deeply thought, coastal wetland ecological security is the conflict and coordination combination of the four subsystems--resources, environment, economic and society. The conflicts include the conflict between economic interests and wetland protection of Qinzhou Bay, the conflict between long-term and short-term utilization of wetland resources, and the conflict of resources plunder due to different regional interests. Incoordination during the competition between different subjects in resources using and benefit-seeking has made coastal wetland ecological security faced serious of pressure and challenge. Only the coordination and mutual effect of subsystems of resource, society, economic and ecology can make coastal wetland ecosystems from random chaos into orderly state and achieve regional ecological security.
8. Based on the above analysis of coastal wetland eco-security mechanism of the influence of the Qinzhou Bay, therefore, measures of ecological safety include the pressure control of ecological security, the restoration of ecological functions and improvement of the ecological response efficiency. The fundamental measures to improve coastal wetland eco-security of the Qinzhou Bay are controlling the ecological safety pressure, appropriate exploitation of coastal wetlands resources, in the long run to balance the resource exploitation, the economic development, social progress and ecological safety, constantly adjusting the industrial structure, governance of Qinzhou Bay land and sea pollution, pollution source control. At the same time, the current coastal wetland ecological of Qinzhou Bay need to be restored, and steps need to maximize Qinzhou Bay Ocean National Park and Guangxi Maoweihai Mangrove forest reserve effectiveness. Improvement of the ecological response requires effective organization of the wetland regulation system, strengthening ecological research and to promote public participation, to improve ecological security management and recovery capabilities of coastal wetlands in Qinzhou Bay.
在海陆地交互作用下,广西钦州湾滨海地区发育了多种类型的资源丰富的湿地,主要有淤泥质滩涂、红树林湿地、浅海水域、人工养殖池、浅海水域等。为了保护滨海湿地环境,2005年钦州湾沿海成立了广西茅尾海红树林自治区级自然区,2011年国家批准成立了国家级海洋公园——广西钦州茅尾海国家级海洋公园,目的是协调海洋生态保护和资源利用关系中的重要作用,促进沿海地区社会济的可持续发展,这些措施对保护钦州湾生态环境有一定的积极意义。然而,在近年来人类高强度开发活动的影响下,湿地资源的过度利用导致钦州湾滨海地区天然湿地大量减少,取而代之的是人工湿地和城镇居民地。滨海湿地生态系统也受到极大的干扰,正面临着日渐严重的天然湿地萎缩、生物资源衰减、湿地功能退化、环境污染、生态环境恶化、野生动植物栖息地逐渐丧失等一系列湿地生态问题,这些问题构成了钦州湾滨海湿地可持续发展的最大障碍。
生态安全是指一个国家或地区的人类社会生存和发展所需的生态环境处于不受或少受破坏与威胁的状态。随着人口增长带来的压力越来越大,社会经济发展对资源需要的迫切性增加,跟随而来的是环境退化和生态破坏甚至环境和生态灾害等诸多问题,一个地区的生态安全问题对区域发展的威胁越来越大。生态安全问题成为了理论上和实际中都有待探讨和解决的领域。
因此,通过开展钦州湾滨海湿地生态安全评价研究,探讨滨海湿地这一特殊地区的生态安全评价的理论和方法,为解决生态安全与湿地资源利用、社会经济发展之间的矛盾,为最终实现钦州湾地区资源、环境、经济和社会可持续发展提供了理论支撑。
本文以钦州湾滨海湿地为研究对象,基于多源遥感数据及非遥感数据,以1999～2011年11年为时间尺度,以钦州湾滨海地区潮上带至陆上O-l0km为空间尺度,在遥感图像处理软件和地理信息系统的支持下,建立了研究区湿地景观分类系统,并提取了湿地景观信息,对研究区滨海湿地景观变化进行了解译分析。结合“压力-状态-响应”(PSR)框架模型,采用层次分析方法,构建了包括人口、经济、生态、景观等生态安全影响因素17个指标的滨海生态安全评价体系,进行了相关指标的定量化探讨,得出钦州湾滨海湿地生态安全度的时间变化特征;同时,在空间尺度上,针对茅尾海段、钦州港段、三娘湾-大风江河口段等三个不同区位的滨海湿地变化特征,探讨其安全格局变化的内在机制。基于生态安全评价结果,提出钦州湾滨海湿地生态系统持续发展的调控措施,探索生态安全研究与海岸带综合管理的对接方法,为湿地资源保护及区域可持续发展提供了参考。主要结论如下：
1.本研究开展滨海湿地生态安全评价研究的基础理论有可持续发展理论、景观生态学、生态承载力理论和系统论等。在滨海湿地这一生态系统中,由资源、环境、社会经济等因素构成复杂的子系统,滨海湿地生态安全状况是各子系统之间的冲突和协调的结果。各子系统通过协调作用和相互效应,使滨海湿地生态系统由无序状态变为有序状态,从而实现生态安全状态,从而达到饮州湾滨海湿地可持续发展的目标。同时,通过分析影响生态安全状态的内在机制,为滨海湿地生态安全评价提供理论基础,为生态安全评价指标的确定以及评价方法的选择提供科学依据。
2.湿地景观动态变化格局和景观特征值是反映湿地生态安全状态的重要衡量值,也是进行湿地生态安全评价的本底数据基础,景观多样性、景观破碎度、分维值等指标参数更是反映湿地结构和生态功能值的重要参数。因此,运用景观生态学理论,经多次野外调查,对研究区内TM、SPOT、ALOS等影像数据在遥感解译软件ERDAS下进行湿地信息提取。按照湿地类型空间形态的一致性、植被覆盖特征和影像自身特征进行湿地景观分类,结合湿地生态安全评价目的,把研究区滨海湿地划分为自然湿地和人工湿地两大类,其中自然湿地有红树林湿地、淤泥质滩涂、浅海水域、砂石海滩等,人工湿地主要有人工养殖池和水田。为了更好地表现湿地与其他土地利用类型之间转换的特点,本研究同时也对非湿地地类(建设用地、林地)进行了解译与分析。在地理信息系统软件Arcgis和景观格局分析软件的支持下进行湿地景观格局动态分析,很好地揭示了湿地景观格局及其变化的特征,是研究湿地景观格局及其变化过程的有效方法。整个区域的各湿地类型发生了大幅度的变化,转移频繁,自然湿地的变化主要流向人工养殖虾塘和建设用地,对于保持研究区内的生物多样性和生态功能都有一定的负面作用。各种滨海湿地景观变化表现为：
有关湿地面积及结构变化。1999年,研究区内滨海湿地的优势类型为浅海水域和淤泥质滩涂,三者合计约占区域湿地总面积的60%,林地是区域最主要的非湿地利用类型,其面积比例达到18.94%。在1999年到2006年期间,区域内湿地的主要类型间变化不大,增加幅度比较大的非自然湿地类型有人工养殖池,面积从3.31%增加至5.58%。
自然湿地面积急剧减少。1999-2011年间,淤泥质滩涂、浅海水域、红树林湿地等自然湿地面积共减少12643.1hm2。人工湿地面积增加10690.3hm2。在自然湿地的变化中,淤泥质滩涂面积减少3526.1hm2,减少了20.15%。红树林湿地面积减少了1.33%,其中因2005年起人工种植了无瓣海桑等红树林品种,红树林湿地退化的幅度减缓。砂石海滩面积基本保持空间上的稳定。浅海水域也呈减少的趋势,且减少的速度由慢到快。1999-2006年,水域面积减少了1339.7hm2,2006～2011年减少了4867.6hm2,减少幅度很大。海域面积减少的主要原因是大面积围海滩涂养殖和围海造地。
人工湿地景观方面,建设用地大幅度增加,水田面积减少。建设用地转换的重要途径为由原来的滩涂、红树林湿地或水域等填海而成,据统计,2006～2011年,钦州湾填海约480hm2,用于交通运输用海(港口、码头)旅游娱乐用地等,特别集中在2008-2010年间,大量的填海工程使得滨海湿地景观多样性减少,生态功能减弱。
有关湿地景观的空间分布特征变化。茅尾海段、饮州港段、三娘湾-大风江河口段等三个区的近10年湿地景观总体变化趋势表现为：茅尾海段、三娘湾-大风江河口段的淤泥质滩涂面积减少显著,人工养殖池(虾塘)面积大幅度扩展；钦州港段建设用地剧增；整个研究区的砂石海滩面积变化不大。1999-2011年,研究区湿地景观破碎度和景观多样性增强,人为活动干扰强烈。
3.压力-状态-响应(PSR)模型框架是目前进行生态安全评价最常用的模型框架之-它体现了人类活动与资源、环境之间的相互作用和联系。其中环境资源的“状态”来呈现环境恶化或改善的程度：而区域的经济活动、社会结构和人类干扰带来的“压力”是对环境造成施压的因素；“响应”则是指人类对环境变化的压力而应对的反馈,是社会组织或个人为了缓解、阻止那些不利于人类生存与发展的生态环境变化而采取的措施。PSR模型各系统之间因果关系非常清晰,又具有综合性和灵活性的优点,所以被广泛认可和使用。
本研究基于压力-状态-响应(PSR)模型框架,在征求专家和环保海洋等部门的意见下,根据整体性原则、科学性、动态性及可操作性等原则,运用层次分析法,构建了3个层次、包含17个指标的湿地生态安全评价指标体系。生态安全评价指标体系分三层：目标层(A)、准则层(B)和指标层(C)。指标体系的最高目标层(A)为钦州市滨海湿地生态安全状态,其最终结果采用生态安全等级表示。准则层为压力(B1)、状态(B2)、响应(B3)三个子系统。压力系统用资源压力和人文社会指标反映：状态系统用环境污染、景观特征指数、水资源等指标反映,响应系统有生态系统响应、经济响应和人文社会响应,指人类社会为了应对湿地生态安全状态变化而采取的投放,它反映生态系统本身对环境问题的解决能力。指标层(C)是准则层指标的具体特征指标,由可度量的指标来构成。本研究选择的以上指标体系在架构上突出了区域生态安全评价的共性要求,针对滨海湿地生态安全评价而设计的同时,具有适应性。
参考国内外研究湿地生态安全评价的标准,按照生态安全评价综合指数值的高低排序,分别为：[0.8,1]、[0.6,0.8]、[06,0.4]、[0.4,0.2]、[0.2,0],表示了安全、较安全、预警、脆弱、危险五个等级,用以反映湿地生态安全度从优到劣的变化。不同的级别可以生湿地生态环境的活力、组织结构和恢复力三个主要特征来具体定义。主要特重有景观的自然状态,湿地类型的结构完整性,生态功能完善程度,生态系统的稳定性和可持续状态,生态功能恢复等。生态安全等级有一定的判别标准,这些标准也可以视为湿地生态系统健康的表征之一,也是判定湿地生态系统是否安全的重要依据。确定了评价标准和生态安全分级系统后,以研究区内茅尾海段、饮州港段、三娘湾-大风江河口段的三个区为评价单元,分别在时间和空间上对对钦州湾滨海湿地生态系统的安全状况进行了评价。
4.在时间变化上,研究区生态环境的生态安全度总体上处于较安全级别,但从1999-2011年生态安全度逐渐降低,部分区显恶化的趋势。
5.从空间分布上,饮州湾滨海湿地生态安全三娘湾-大风江河口段的生态安全总体状况最好,茅尾海段其次,钦州港段较低,生态安全指数分别为0.845、0.793、0.726。主要原因是：三娘湾-大风江河口段的湿地类型主要为砂石海岸和浅海水域,人为干扰度较低,海洋功能划分中将大风江口划分为红树林自然保护区,湿地保护措施较有效；茅尾海区内以淤泥质滩涂这种易于转为人工养殖池的湿地类型为主,靠近钦州市的主城区,沿海滩涂开发利用历史较久,受人类活动影响较大,即使有广西钦州湾国家海洋公园、广西茅尾海红树林保护区核心区两个湿地保护单元,但自然滨海湿地面积减少显著,退化速度非常快：钦州港区经过近十年的沿海工业大规模开发,大面积的围海造地,自然湿地遭到严重破坏。
6.钦州湾滨海湿地的生态安全状况正面临着严峻考验。经分析,钦州湾滨海湿地近十年的演变是在自然干扰和人为干扰的共同影响下进行的。自然因素主要有滨海地区水动力变化、入海河流的泥沙淤积、围垦造陆引起的海湾纳潮量减少、生物入侵等。同时也有人为因素和经济因素的干扰。如湿地资源过度开发、周边港口工程建设带来巨大压力、管理体制缺乏、经费投入不足等,各种因素导致滨海湿地面积减少和功能的退化。从深层次来看,滨海湿地生态安全状况是其资源、环境、经济与社会四个子系统之间的冲突和协调的结果,有钦州湾滨海地区为了经济利益与湿地保护的冲突,也有湿地资源在利用上考虑短期而忽视长期利益的冲突,以及区域不同的利益主体间资源抢夺的冲突等,不同的主体追求在资源利用和利益竞争中发生非协调的现象,从而使滨海湿地生态安全状态面临严峻的压力与挑战。只有通过资源、社会、经济和生态等各子系统的协调作用和相互效应,才能使滨海湿地生态系统由无规则混乱状态变为宏观有序状态,实现区域生态安全状态。
7.结合以上钦州湾滨海湿地生态安全影响机制的分析,因此,生态安全调控措施主要从控制生态安全压力、恢复生态功能和提高生态响应效率三个方面来进行。控制生态安全的压力,适度开发滨海湿地资源,从长远的角度来平衡资源开发、经济发展、社会进步与生态系统安全之间的关系,不断调整产业结构,治理钦州湾陆上与海上环境污染,控制污染源等,这是提高钦州湾滨海湿地生态安全的根本措施；同时对当前钦州湾滨海湿地进行生态恢复,最大限度地发挥钦州湾国家海洋公园和广西茅尾海红树林自然保护区的效能和作用；提高生态响应则是通过健全湿地管理体制,加强生态研究以及推动公众参与等措施,完善和提高钦州湾滨海湿地的生态安全生态管理和恢复能力。
Coastal wetland is a special ecosystem by the interaction of ocean and terrene, presenting one of the most abundant biodiversity, high productivity and most valuable ecosystems. Coastal wetland plays an important role in protecting biodiversity, flood control, remediate seawater intrusion, recharging groundwater, climate control and providing inhabitation for wild animals. Moreover, the natural resource in coastal wetland is prerequisite to the sustainable development of fishery, salt industry and salt chemical industry. With its significant influence on local, national and global economic development and human living environment, coastal wetland has become one of the hot international research topics.
There are many types of coastal wetland with abundant resource in the coastal zone in Qinzhou, Guangxi province, mainly mud flat, mangrove wetland, shallow sea area and artificial culture pond. Gaungxi Maoweihai national ocean park project was approved by the state, to coordinate the oceanic ecologic protection and resource utilization and promote the economic sustainable development in coastal area. It is critical for ecological environment of Qinzhou.But the coastal wetland has been reduced due to long-term human activities by over exploration of the wetland resource and hysteretic protect program of the wetland. Large area of the wetland has been replaced by artificial wetland and residential area. The ecosystem of coastal wetland is being threating to a serious of wetland problems, including wetland shrinking, bio resource reducing, environment pollution, deterioration of ecological environment and reduction of wild animals' inhabitation.
Eco-security refers to a state that the survival and development of the ecological environment of human society is not subject to destruction or threatened. With the growth of population and socio-economic development, the environmental and ecological disasters on regional development caused by environmental degradation and ecological damage, has become a growing threat to national security and social progress. Ecological security problems as the theoretical and practical problems that need to be addressed.
Therefore, the ecological security evaluation of coastal wetlands in Qinzhou by exploring the theories and methods of ecological security evaluation of coastal wetlands provides scientific basis to resolve coastal conflicts between wetland eco-security and socio-economic development and to the eventual realize sustainable development of local resources, environment, economy and society in Qinzhou.
This study established landscape classification system, and by collecting landscape information carried out interpretation analysis on coastal wetland landscape changes in Qinzhou. The dissertation is based on multiple source remote sensing data and the non-remote sensing data from the tide up to10km from1999-2011, employing remote sensing image processing software and geographic information systems. Combining the "pressure-state-response"(PSR) framework model, using analytical hierarchy process, this study built a coastal ecological safety assessment system including a number of19evaluating indicators such as population, economy, ecology and landscape. Quantification of relating indicators was carried out to investigate temporal change characteristics of Qinzhou. In the other hand, on the spatial scale, three different geographical regions, Mao Weihai, Qinzhou port fields, Sanliang Bayand Wind River estuary were investigated to explore the inner mechanism of security patterns change. Based on the ecological security assessment results, control measures of sustainable development of Qinzhou coastal wetland eco-systems was proposed to explore the connection of ecological security research and integrated coastal zone management, providing scientific reference for the protection of wetland resources and regional sustainable development. The main conclusions are as follows:
1. Under the guidance the theories of sustainable development, landscape ecology, ecological carrying capacity theory and systems theory, the research focus of this dissertation is ecological security of wetlands in the study area. There are complicated subsystems in coastal wetland eco-system due to resources, environment and socio-economic factors. Coastal wetland eco-security situation is the result of conflict and coordination between the subsystems. The coordination and interaction between the subsystems result the coastal wetland eco-system from a state of disorder into order status, leading to the achievement of ecological security status, so as to achieve the objectives of sustainable development in Qinzhou coastal wetlands. This dissertation provides theoretical basis for ecological security evaluation index and evaluation method selection by analyzing the impact ecological security assessment for coastal wetlands and providing the inner mechanism of ecological security status.
2. The dynamic change patterns of wetland landscape and wetland landscape characteristics are an important indicator of wetland ecological security status, and the background data base for wetland ecological security evaluation. Landscape diversity, fragmentation of the landscape, fractal dimension parameters are important parameters of the structure and ecological function of wetland. Applying the landscape ecology principle, after several field investigations, the TM, SPOT and ALOS remote sensing image data of the study area were used for wetland information extraction by interpretation software ERDAS. According to the consistency of wetland type spatial morphology, vegetation cover characteristics and wetland landscape image characteristics, combined with the wetland eco-security evaluation, the coastal wetlands in study area can be classified into natural wetlands and artificial wetland. The natural wetlands includes mangrove wetland, muddy tidal flats, shallow sea water and sand beaches; the artificial wetland mainly consists of artificial ponds and paddy fields. In order to better perform the characteristics of wetlands and other land-use conversions, this study also focused on the translation and analysis of non-wetland type (urban construction land, woodlands). The dual employment of GIS software and landscape pattern analysis software is an advanced method to reveal the characteristics of wetland landscape pattern and the variation of wetlands, also as well as an effective method to study the wetland landscape pattern and its ecological processes. All wetland types in the entire area has undergone significant change and frequently transfer. The primary change of natural wetlands is their alternation to farmed shrimp ponds and construction land, which has a certain negative effect on maintaining biological diversity and ecological functions of the study area. The changes of coastal wetland landscape are as follows:
Related wetlands area and structure. In1999, the dominant type of coastal wetlands in the study area were shallow sea area and muddy tidal flats, which was approximately60%of total regional wetland area. The main non-wetland was woodland, as18.94%of the area. During1999to2006, the main types of wetlands in the area had little change. The relatively higher increase of the non-natural wetland was artificial ponds, increased from3.31%to5.58%of the area.
Drastic reduction of natural wetland. During1999to2011, muddy tidal flats, mangrove wetlands, shallow sea area and other natural wetland has a total reduction of12643.1hm2, while artificial wetland has an increase of10690.3hm. As the natural wetland reduction, muddy tidal-flat area declined20.15%as3526.1hm2. There is a considerable reduction of mangroves of1.33%from1999to2011. In2005, flaps sonneratiacaseolaris mangrove was planted to retain the reduction of mangrove wetland. Sand beach area generally remained on stability. Sand and gravel beaches are mainly located in Rhino foot, Sanniang Bay area with a relatively small conversion ratio to other wetland types. Shallow sea area decreased with a more and more fast speed. In1999-2006, water area reduced1339.7hm2and in2006～2011decreased4867.6hm2, with a large scale reduction. The main cause of the reduction of sea area is the large area and reclamation of tidal flat reclamation culture.
Substantial increase in artificial wetland landscape. Changing paddy field area has decreased. In coastal areas, due to the much higher income from mariculture than that of crop cultivation, acres of farmland were converted into shrimp ponds salt filed. In the study area, non-wetland is increasingly changed into construction land. According to statistics, in2006-2011, the reclamation area in Qinzhou Bay is approximately480hm2, which is used as sea transportation (port, dock), entertainment and travel sites. Most the conversion happened in2008-2010. Reclamation reduced the biodiversity of landscape.
Spatial distribution of wetland landscape. In the last decade, the general variation tendencies of Mao Weihai, Qinzhou port fields, Sanniang Bay and Wind River estuary are: considerable reduction of muddy tidal flats in Mao Weihai, Sanniang Bay and Wind River estuary; significant increase of artificial ponds (shrimp pond) area expansion; large increase of urban construction and traffic land in Qinzhou port; no significant alteration of sand beach area. Based on landscape characteristics index, in1999-2011. landscape diversity and fragmentation in the study area has increased resulted from strong anthropogenic activities.
3. Pressure-state-response, PSR model framework is the one most popular models for ecological safety evaluation. It represents the interaction and relationship between human-being and the environment. In the model,'state' of environment ecological resource is used to reflect the degree of environment changing;'pressure' is the factors that give pressure to the environment due to regional economic activity, social structure and human disturbance;'response' is the people's reaction due to environment change, reflecting the reactions of stopping, releasing, preventing or recovering the factors which are against the development of human and the environment. it is widely recognized and used for very clear causal relationship between the model system, but also has a comprehensive and flexibility advantages.
4. This study is based on the PSR model framework, under the advises of experts and environment/ocean related department, according to the principles of holistic principles, scientific, dynamic and operability, using Analytic Hierarchy Process, to build a three-level, containing17indicators of wetland ecological safety evaluation index system. The concrete steps are:①establishing the index system;②selection of evaluation methods;③evaluation standards and classification;④determination of evaluation cell;⑤calculation of ecological security indicators;⑥evaluation of ecological security.
Indicators of the system are divided into three layers:the target layer, criteria layer and index layer. Highest target layer of the system:(A) Security status of Qinzhou City coastal wetland ecosystem. Results using the ecological security level. Criteria layer consists of pressure (B1), state (B2), and response (B3) the three subsystems. Pressure system is reflected by resources, environmental pollution, and the humanities and social indicators. State system is reflected with soil, biological, vegetation, water resources, and socio-economic indicators. Response system inclues ecosystem response, economic response and the humanities and social response, in response to the changes of the wetland ecological security state. It reflects the the solution of environmental problems by ecological system itself. Index layer (C) is the most basic level of the index system guidelines layer indicators of the specific characteristics of indicators, constituted by measurable indicators. The index system architecture not only reflects the common requirements of the regional ecological security assessment, but aloes designed for both coastal wetland ecological security evaluation.
According to studies of the wetland ecological security evaluation standard in both domestic and overseas, in accordance with the level of comprehensive evaluation score, from highest to lowest, divided into safe, safer, early warning, fragile, dangerous five levels, the Composite Index being [0.8,1],[0.6,0.8],[06,0.4],[0.4,0.2],[0.2,0], in order to reflect the wetland ecological safety degree from good to bad. Different level are defined from the three main characteristics of vigor, structure and resilience, from high to low. Such as whether landscape maintaining the natural state; wetland type structure being complete, the ecological function being perfect, the ecosystem vitality exists or extent, the ecosystem being a stable and sustainable state, the existence of state appeared abnormal or not, how ecological restoration functioning well etc.. For the ecological security rating, there are certain assessment standards which can be considered as the characterizations of wetland ecosystem health and criterion basis of ecosystem safety.
After evaluation criteria and grading system established, using three section of the study area, Qinzhou port in Maowei Sea section, Sanniang Bay and the estuary as evaluation units, evaluated the security situation in the Gulf of Qinzhou coastal wetland ecosystem in time and space dimensions.
5. On the timescale, according to the results of ecological security evaluation if Qinzhou Bay, the ecological security of the study area is relatively safe level. Though it has decreased gradually from1999to2011, followed by the Maoweihai area. The ecological security of Qinzhou Bay has deteriorated.
6. As the spatial pattern, Sanniang Bay in Qinzhou Bay and Wind River estuary region have the best security assessment, followed by Maoweihai area and Qinzhou port area, with the safety index of0.845,0.793and0.726respectively. The wetland types of Sanniang Bay and the Wind River estuary are mainly sandy coast and shallow sea area, less-human disturbance. Based on the marine functional division, Wind River was classified as mangrove nature reserves, where the wetland protection measures are relatively more effective; Maoweihai area mainly consists of muddy tidal flats that are easy transferred into artificial ponds. Near the urban area of Qinzhou city, coastal development has a long utilization history, where the wetland has been significantly influenced by human activities. Although there are two wetland protection units--the Qinzhou Bay National Ocean Park, and Guangxi Maoweihai mangrove reserve, the natural coastal wetlands area declined significantly and degraded quickly; After nearly a decade of industrial-scale development along the coast, large areas of land reclamation, natural wetlands in Qinzhou port experienced severe damage.
7. Coastal wetland eco-security of the Qinzhou Bay is facing a severe test. In the last decade, the evolution of coastal wetlands Qinzhou Bay resulted from both the natural and human disturbance. Natural factors include water dynamic changes in coastal regions, river sediment, tidal volume reduction, biological invasions caused by the reclamation, biological invasion, and so on, meanwhile the interfere with human factors and economic factors. Factors as wetland Resource overexploitation, enormous pressure from the peripheral port construction, inadequate management systems, inadequate funding, lead to reduction and degradation of coastal wetlands. Deeply thought, coastal wetland ecological security is the conflict and coordination combination of the four subsystems--resources, environment, economic and society. The conflicts include the conflict between economic interests and wetland protection of Qinzhou Bay, the conflict between long-term and short-term utilization of wetland resources, and the conflict of resources plunder due to different regional interests. Incoordination during the competition between different subjects in resources using and benefit-seeking has made coastal wetland ecological security faced serious of pressure and challenge. Only the coordination and mutual effect of subsystems of resource, society, economic and ecology can make coastal wetland ecosystems from random chaos into orderly state and achieve regional ecological security.
8. Based on the above analysis of coastal wetland eco-security mechanism of the influence of the Qinzhou Bay, therefore, measures of ecological safety include the pressure control of ecological security, the restoration of ecological functions and improvement of the ecological response efficiency. The fundamental measures to improve coastal wetland eco-security of the Qinzhou Bay are controlling the ecological safety pressure, appropriate exploitation of coastal wetlands resources, in the long run to balance the resource exploitation, the economic development, social progress and ecological safety, constantly adjusting the industrial structure, governance of Qinzhou Bay land and sea pollution, pollution source control. At the same time, the current coastal wetland ecological of Qinzhou Bay need to be restored, and steps need to maximize Qinzhou Bay Ocean National Park and Guangxi Maoweihai Mangrove forest reserve effectiveness. Improvement of the ecological response requires effective organization of the wetland regulation system, strengthening ecological research and to promote public participation, to improve ecological security management and recovery capabilities of coastal wetlands in Qinzhou Bay.
引文
[1]陆健健.中国滨海湿地的分类[J].环境导报,1996(1)：1-2.
[2]杨永兴.国际湿地科学研究进展和中国湿地科学研究优先领域与展望[J].地球科学进展,2002(4)：508-514.
[3]王自磐.滨海湿地保护及其在海洋产业结构中的战略定位[J].海洋开发与管理,2001(2)：43-47.
[4]周娟.滨海湿地生物多样性影响评价研究[D].国家海洋局第三海洋研究所,2010.
[5]蔡守秋,张百灵.论我国滨海湿地综合性法律调整机制的构建[J].长江流域资源与环境,2011(5)：585-591.
[6]徐东霞,章光新.人类活动对中国滨海湿地的影响及其保护对策[J].湿地科学,2007(3)：282-288.
[7]Amalberti R. Safety in process-control:An operator-centred point of view[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety,1992,38(1-2):99-108.
[8]陈星,周成虎.生态安全：国内外研究综述[J].地理科学进展,2005(6)：8-20.
[9]Ruitenbeek H J. Distribution of ecological entitlements:Implications for economic security and population movement[J]. Ecological Economics,1996,17(1):49-64.
[10]Eason C, O'Halloran K. Biomarkers in toxicology versus ecological risk assessment[J]. Toxicology,2002,181-182(0):517-521.
[11]吴结春,李鸣.生态安全及其研究进展[J].江西科学,2008(1)：105-108.
[12]曲格平.关注生态安全之二：影响中国生态安全的若干问题[J].环境保护,2002(7)：3-6.
[13]肖笃宁,陈文波,郭福良.论生态安全的基本概念和研究内容[J].应用生态学报,2002(3)：354-358.
[14]王朝科.湿地生态安全评价刍议[J].科技情报开发与经济,2003(6)：114-115.
[15]王根绪,程国栋,钱鞠.生态安全评价研究中的若干问题[J].应用生态学报,2003(9)：1551-1556.
[16]高庆国.生态安全视野下的南北关系研究[D].西北师范大学,2009.
[17]李辉,魏德洲,姜若婷.生态安全评价系统及工作程序[J].中国安全科学学报,2004,14(4)：43-46.
[18]贾铁飞,冯亚芬.生态脆弱地区旅游资源开发的生态安全评价——以内蒙古鄂尔多斯市为例[J].干旱区资源与环境,2012(5)：187-193.
[19]杨冬梅,任志远,赵听.生态脆弱区的县域生态安全评价——以神木县为例[J].江西农业学报,2007(2)：98-101.
[20]张军以,苏维词.三峡库区土地生态安全评价[J].广东农业科学,2009(9)：211-214.
[21]姚解生,田静毅.生态安全研究进展与应用[J].中国环境管理干部学院学报,2007(2)：47-50.
[22]邹长新,沈渭寿,张慧.内陆河流域重要生态功能区生态安全评价研究——以黑河流域为例[J].环境监控与预警,2010(3)：9-13.
[23]范弢,胡文英,李捷.泸沽湖景区生态安全评价[J].云南地理环境研究,2008(2)：78-81.
[24]张青青,徐海量,樊自立,等.基于玛纳斯河流域生态问题的生态安全评价[J].干旱区地理,2012(3)：479-486.
[25]Costanza R. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment[J]. Ecological Economics, 1995,15(2):89-90.
[26]Berger U, Rivera-Monroy V H, Doyle T W, et al. Advances and limitations of individual-based models to analyze and predict dynamics of mangrove forests:A review[J]. Aquatic Botany, 2008,89(2):260-274.
[27]刘艳艳,吴大放,王朝晖.湿地生态安全评价研究进展[J].地理与地理信息科学,2011(1)：69-75.
[28]左伟,王桥,王文杰,等.区域生态安全评价指标与标准研究[J].地理学与国土研究,2002(1).
[29]郭斌,任志远,高孟绪.3S支持的城市土地利用变化与生态安全评价研究[J].测绘科学,2010(2)：125-129.
[30]迟国泰,张楠.基于AHM-关联分析的生态评价模型及辽宁14个城市的实证[J].管理评论,2011(7)：25-33.
[31]程砚秋,迟国泰.基于核主成分分析的生态评价模型及其应用研究[J].中国管理科学,2011(3)：182-192.
[32]黄舸,孙凡.重庆市生态安全评价系统研究[J].重庆工商大学学报(自然科学版),2006(3)：249-252.
[33]李文杰,张时煌.GIS和遥感技术在生态安全评价与生物多样性保护中的应用[J].生态学报,2010(23)：6674-6681.
[34]张峥,张建文,李寅年,等.湿地生态评价指标体系[J].农业环境保护,1999(6)：283-286.
[35]郭敏,侯淑涛.湿地生态评价指标体系研究[J].今日科苑,2008(6)：187.
[36]吴涛,赵冬至,康建成.流域—河口三角洲湿地生态系统健康评价研究进展[J].海洋环境科学,2010(2)：286-292.
[37]吴涛,赵冬至,康建成.基于遥感技术的河口三角洲湿地景观生态健康研究进展[J].海洋环境科学,2010(3)：451-456.
[38]张祖陆,梁春玲,管延波.南四湖湖泊湿地生态健康评价[J].中国人口.资源与环境,2008(1)：180-184.
[39]刘昀,李瑞敏,刘永生,等.基于土壤-小麦系统的河南黄淮平原As生态安全评价[J].地质通报,2009(4)：523-530.
[40]徐映雪,邵景力,杨文丰,等.基于RS和GIS的鸭绿江口滨海湿地分类及变化[J].现代地质,2006(3)：500-504.
[41]曹永强,梁凤国,杨俊.辽河流域滨海湿地分类和时空变化规律研究[J].人民长江,2008(20)：18-20.
[42]曹宇,莫利江,李艳,等.湿地景观生态分类研究进展[J].应用生态学报,2009(12)：3084-3092.
[43]林立,何东进,王韧,等.闽东滨海湿地景观分类体系与格局特征[J].西南林业大学学报,2012(2)：62-67.
[44]唐小平,黄桂林.中国湿地分类系统的研究[J].林业科学研究,2003(5)：531-539.
[45]Frieswyk C B, Zedler J B. Vegetation Change in Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands:Deviation from the Historical Cycle[J]. Journal of Great Lakes Research,2007,33(2):366-380.
[46]Walters B B, Ronnback P, Kovacs J M, et al. Ethnobiology, socio-economics and management of mangrove forests:A review[J]. Aquatic Botany,2008,89(2):220-236.
[47]Krauss K W, Lovelock C E, McKee K L, et al. Environmental drivers in mangrove establishment and early development:A review[J]. Aquatic Botany,2008,89(2):105-127.
[48]Jana B B. Sewage-fed aquaculture:The Calcutta model[J]. Ecological Engineering,1998,11(1-4):73-85.
[49]Lens F, Luteyn J L, Smets E, et al. Ecological trends in the wood anatomy of Vaccinioideae (Ericaceae s.l.)[J]. Flora-Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants, 2004,199(4):309-319.
[50]翟万林,龙江平,乔吉果,等.长江口滨海湿地景观格局变化及其驱动力分析[J].海洋学研究,2010(3)：17-22.
[51]王毅杰,俞慎.长江三角洲城市群区域滨海湿地利用时空变化特征[J].湿地科学,2012(2)：129-135.
[52]温庆可,张增祥,徐进勇,等.环渤海滨海湿地时空格局变化遥感监测与分析[J].遥感学报,2011(1)：183-200.
[53]姜玲玲,熊德琪,张新宇,等.大连滨海湿地景观格局变化及其驱动机制[J].吉林大学学报(地球科学版),2008(4)：670-675.
[54]吴珊珊,张祖陆,陈敏,等.莱州湾南岸滨海湿地变化及其原因分析[J].湿地科学,2009(4)：373-378.
[55]李婧欣.北方农牧交错带生态安全评价研究[D].北京林业大学,2009.
[56]李婧,王爱军,李团结.近20年来珠江三角洲滨海湿地景观的变化特征[J].海洋科学进展,2011(2)：170-178.
[57]田博,遆超普,刘进超,等.杭州湾滨海湿地景观动态变化分析[J].遥感信息,2010(1)：22-26.
[58]左平,李云,赵书河,等.1976年以来江苏盐城滨海湿地景观变化及驱动力分析[J].海洋学报(中文版),2012(1)：101-108.
[59]谷东起,付军,闫文文,等.盐城滨海湿地退化评估及分区诊断[J].湿地科学,2012(1)：1-7.
[60]张华兵.江苏省盐城市沿海滩涂生态系统健康综合评价研究[J].国土与自然资源研究,2010(3)：70-72.
[61]陈丽欣.河北省滨海湿地生态安全评价与保护研究[D].河北师范大学,2010.
[62]戴科伟.江苏盐城湿地珍禽国家级自然保护区生态安全研究[D].南京师范大学,2007.
[63]张绪良,于冬梅,丰爱平,等.莱州湾南岸滨海湿地的退化及其生态恢复和重建对策[J].海洋科学,2004(7)：49-53.
[64]刘荣成,洪志猛,叶功富,等.泉州湾洛阳江滨海湿地的生态恢复与重建对策[J].福建林业科技,2004(3)：75-78.
[65]Rescic S, Plescia P, Cossari P, et al. Mechano-chemical activation:an ecological safety process in the production of materials to stone conservation[J]. Procedia Engineering, 2011,21(0):1061-1071.
[66]梁士楚.广西湿地植被分类系统[J].广西植物,2011(1)：47-51.
[67]李信贤,温远光,何妙光.广西红树林类型及生态[J].广西农学院学报,1991(4)：70-81.
[68]赖廷和,何斌源.广西红树林区大型底栖动物种类多样性研究[J].广西科学,1998(3)：7-13.
[69]韦绥概,张永强,陆温,等.广西红树林蜘蛛群落研究[J].蛛形学报,2000(1)：33-37.
[70]李婷婷,莫创荣,姚焕玫,等.基于能值分析的广西沿海红树林生态效益[J].生态经济(学术版),2009(1)：364-367.
[71]刘文爱,范航清.广西红树林害虫的危险性评价[J].安徽农学通报(下半月刊),2010(24)：104-106.
[72]彭在清,孟祥江,吴良忠,等.广西北海市滨海湿地生态系统服务价值评价[J].安徽农业科学,2012(9)：5507-5511.
[73]叶汝坤.广西海岸环境脆弱性的特点及成因分析[J].国土与自然资源研究,2007(2)：56-57.
[74]张宏科,刘勐伶.广西北部湾海洋环境保护的现状及对策分析[J].中国科技财富,2008(11)：122-123.
[75]李凤,谭学锋,李贵玉,等.广西湿地立法保护的思考与建议[J].湿地科学与管理,2011(2)：66-69.
[76]陈群英,李凤华.广西沿海地区海洋生态环境保护状况及对策建议[J].环境科学与管理,2008(9)：146-149.
[77]牛振国,孙桂凤.近10年中国可持续发展研究进展与分析[J].中国人口.资源与环境,2007(3)：122-128.
[78]季中淳.东北的振兴、可持续发展与湿地区域生物圈保护研究：中国生态学会第七届全国会员代表大会,2004[C].
[79]宫少军,叶思源,詹华明,等.天津市滨海湿地生态系统健康研究进展[J].海洋地质前沿,2012(7)：52-58.
[80]朱晓丽,李文龙,薛中正,等.基于生态安全的高寒牧区生态承载力评价[J].草业科学,2012(2)：198-203.
[81]付强,李伟业.三江平原沼泽湿地生态承载能力综合评价[J].生态学报,2008(10)：5002-5010.
[82]黄青,任志远.论生态承载力与生态安全[J].干旱区资源与环境,2004,18(2)：11-17.
[83]高鹭,张宏业.生态承载力的国内外研究进展[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2007,17(2)：19-26.
[84]许联芳,杨勋林,王克林,等.生态承载力研究进展[J].生态环境,2006,15(5)：1111-1116.
[85]李金海.区域生态承载力与可持续发展[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2001,11(3)：76-78.
[86]余云军,王琳.基于系统论的流域与海岸带自然系统与流域——海岸连续统释义[J].海洋环境科学,2010(4)：603-607.
[87]邬建国.景观生态学中的十大研究论题[J].生态学报,2004,24(9)：2074-2076.
[88]郭丽娟.中国景观生态学研究进展[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(27)：15280-15281,15295.
[89]坞建国.景观生态学——概念与理论[J].生态学杂志,2000,19(1)：42-52.
[90]肖笃宁,李秀珍.景观生态学的学科前沿与发展战略[J].生态学报,2003,23(8)：1615-1621.
[91]傅伯杰,吕一河,陈利顶,等.国际景观生态学研究新进展[J].生态学报,2008,28(2)：798-804.
[92]角媛梅,肖笃宁,郭明.景观与景观生态学的综合研究[J].地理与地理信息科学,2003,19(1)：91-95.
[93]张绪良,张朝晖,徐宗军,等.莱州湾南岸滨海湿地的景观格局变化及累积环境效应[J].生态学杂志,2009(12)：2437-2443.
[94]林和山,陈本清,许德伟,等.基于PSR模型的滨海湿地生态系统健康评价——以辽河三角洲滨海湿地为例[J].台湾海峡,2012(3)：420-428.
[95]王永丽,于君宝,董洪芳,等.黄河三角洲滨海湿地的景观格局空间演变分析[J].地理科学,2012(6)：717-724.
[96]戴朝霞,黄政.关于生态补偿理论的探讨[J].湖南工业大学学报(社会科学版),2008(4)：89-91.
[97]胡长玲.我国湿地生态补偿法律制度研究[D].黑龙江大学法律,2010.
[98]赵春光.我国流域生态补偿法律制度研究[D].中国海洋大学环境与资源保护法学,2009.
[99]胡小飞,傅春,陈伏生,等.国内外生态补偿基础理论与研究热点的可视化分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2012(11)：1395-1401.
[100]贾欣.海洋生态补偿机制研究[D].中国海洋大学农业经济与管理,2010.
[101]熊彩云,蔡海生,张学玲,等.鄱阳湖湿地管理现状及对策分析[J].湿地科学与管理,2011(4)：24-27.
[102]杨凯,李平.湿地生态补偿机制研究综述[J].绿色科技,2012(10)：138-140.
[103]石月珍.滨海湿地区域资源环境与经济社会协调发展研究——以江苏盐城滨海湿地区域为例[D].河海大学港口、海岸及近海工程,2006.
[104]成筠,秦延文,郑丙辉,等.基于GIS的海岸带生境修复与经济协调发展系统[J].计算机工程与设计,2009(7)：1816-1818.
[105]石月珍.滨海湿地区域资源环境与经济社会协调发展研究[D].河海大学,2006.
[106]刘永强.土地生态安全评价方法综合应用研究[D].南京农业大学,2011.
[107]赵听,任志远.基于生态足迹法的宝鸡市生态安全评价研究[J].西北林学院学报,2009(5)：186-189.
[108]申艳萍,郭长虹,王谦.河南省城市生态安全评价及生态安全模式分析[J].安全与环境学报,2008(3)：89-93.
[109]陈作志,蔡文贵,徐姗楠,等.广西北部湾近岸生态系统风险评价[J].应用生态学报,2011(11)：2977-2986.
[110]黄桂林陈建伟.中国湿地分类系统及其划分指标的探讨[J].林业资源管理,1995(5)：65-71.
[111]赵焕庭,王丽荣.中国海岸湿地的类型[J].海洋通报,2000(6)：72-82.
[112]李桂荣,梁士楚.广西湿地分类系统的研究[J].玉林师范学院学报(自然科学版),2007(3)：75-79.
[113]李桂荣,梁士楚.广西湿地资源现状与保护对策[J].湿地科学与管理,2008(1)：40-43.
[114]徐淑庆,李家明,卢世标,等.广西北部湾红树林资源现状及可持续发展对策[J].生物学通报,2010(5)：11-14.
[115]张丽珍,徐淑庆.广西北部湾红树林湿地生态功能的探讨[J].安徽农学通报(上半月刊),2010(23)：134-136.
[116]韦蔓新,赖廷和,何本茂.钦州湾丰、枯水期营养状况变化趋势及其影响因素[J].热带海洋学报,2003(3)：16-21.
[117]何本茂,韦蔓新.钦州湾近20a来水环境指标的变化趋势Ⅶ：水温、盐度和pH的量值变化及其对生态环境的影响[J].海洋环境科学,2010(1)：51-55.
[118]吴瑞娟,何秀凤,杨智翔.ALOS全色与多光谱影像融合的土地覆盖分类[J].地理空间信息,2012(1)：116-118.
[119]孟育红,刘勇.ALOS全色与多光谱影像融合方法比较[J].地理空间信息,2012(5)：99-102.
[120]孟育红.基于对象影像分析技术提取日光温室遥感信息方法研究[D].兰州大学地图学与地理信息系统,2012.
[121张雪红.基于知识与规则的红树林遥感信息提取[J].南京信息工程大学学报(自然科学版),2011(4)：341-345.
[122]阎新兴,刘国亭.钦州湾近海区沉积特征及航道淤积研究[J].水道港口,2006(2)：79-83.
[123]李树华,童万平.钦州湾潮流和污染物扩散的数值模型(Ⅰ)钦州湾潮流的数值模拟[J].海洋环境科学,1987(2)：30-37.
[124]吴黎黎,李树华.广西滨海湿地生态系统的恢复与保护措施[J].广西科学院学报,2010(1)：62-66.
[125]蓝文陆.近20年广西钦州湾有机污染状况变化特征及生态影响[J].生态学报,2011(20)：5970-5976.
[126]雷富,韦重霄,何小英,等.钦州湾近岸海域底栖生物体内重金属含量与污染评价[J].广西科学院学报,2011(4)：351-354.
[2]杨永兴.国际湿地科学研究进展和中国湿地科学研究优先领域与展望[J].地球科学进展,2002(4)：508-514.
[3]王自磐.滨海湿地保护及其在海洋产业结构中的战略定位[J].海洋开发与管理,2001(2)：43-47.
[4]周娟.滨海湿地生物多样性影响评价研究[D].国家海洋局第三海洋研究所,2010.
[5]蔡守秋,张百灵.论我国滨海湿地综合性法律调整机制的构建[J].长江流域资源与环境,2011(5)：585-591.
[6]徐东霞,章光新.人类活动对中国滨海湿地的影响及其保护对策[J].湿地科学,2007(3)：282-288.
[7]Amalberti R. Safety in process-control:An operator-centred point of view[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety,1992,38(1-2):99-108.
[8]陈星,周成虎.生态安全：国内外研究综述[J].地理科学进展,2005(6)：8-20.
[9]Ruitenbeek H J. Distribution of ecological entitlements:Implications for economic security and population movement[J]. Ecological Economics,1996,17(1):49-64.
[10]Eason C, O'Halloran K. Biomarkers in toxicology versus ecological risk assessment[J]. Toxicology,2002,181-182(0):517-521.
[11]吴结春,李鸣.生态安全及其研究进展[J].江西科学,2008(1)：105-108.
[12]曲格平.关注生态安全之二：影响中国生态安全的若干问题[J].环境保护,2002(7)：3-6.
[13]肖笃宁,陈文波,郭福良.论生态安全的基本概念和研究内容[J].应用生态学报,2002(3)：354-358.
[14]王朝科.湿地生态安全评价刍议[J].科技情报开发与经济,2003(6)：114-115.
[15]王根绪,程国栋,钱鞠.生态安全评价研究中的若干问题[J].应用生态学报,2003(9)：1551-1556.
[16]高庆国.生态安全视野下的南北关系研究[D].西北师范大学,2009.
[17]李辉,魏德洲,姜若婷.生态安全评价系统及工作程序[J].中国安全科学学报,2004,14(4)：43-46.
[18]贾铁飞,冯亚芬.生态脆弱地区旅游资源开发的生态安全评价——以内蒙古鄂尔多斯市为例[J].干旱区资源与环境,2012(5)：187-193.
[19]杨冬梅,任志远,赵听.生态脆弱区的县域生态安全评价——以神木县为例[J].江西农业学报,2007(2)：98-101.
[20]张军以,苏维词.三峡库区土地生态安全评价[J].广东农业科学,2009(9)：211-214.
[21]姚解生,田静毅.生态安全研究进展与应用[J].中国环境管理干部学院学报,2007(2)：47-50.
[22]邹长新,沈渭寿,张慧.内陆河流域重要生态功能区生态安全评价研究——以黑河流域为例[J].环境监控与预警,2010(3)：9-13.
[23]范弢,胡文英,李捷.泸沽湖景区生态安全评价[J].云南地理环境研究,2008(2)：78-81.
[24]张青青,徐海量,樊自立,等.基于玛纳斯河流域生态问题的生态安全评价[J].干旱区地理,2012(3)：479-486.
[25]Costanza R. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment[J]. Ecological Economics, 1995,15(2):89-90.
[26]Berger U, Rivera-Monroy V H, Doyle T W, et al. Advances and limitations of individual-based models to analyze and predict dynamics of mangrove forests:A review[J]. Aquatic Botany, 2008,89(2):260-274.
[27]刘艳艳,吴大放,王朝晖.湿地生态安全评价研究进展[J].地理与地理信息科学,2011(1)：69-75.
[28]左伟,王桥,王文杰,等.区域生态安全评价指标与标准研究[J].地理学与国土研究,2002(1).
[29]郭斌,任志远,高孟绪.3S支持的城市土地利用变化与生态安全评价研究[J].测绘科学,2010(2)：125-129.
[30]迟国泰,张楠.基于AHM-关联分析的生态评价模型及辽宁14个城市的实证[J].管理评论,2011(7)：25-33.
[31]程砚秋,迟国泰.基于核主成分分析的生态评价模型及其应用研究[J].中国管理科学,2011(3)：182-192.
[32]黄舸,孙凡.重庆市生态安全评价系统研究[J].重庆工商大学学报(自然科学版),2006(3)：249-252.
[33]李文杰,张时煌.GIS和遥感技术在生态安全评价与生物多样性保护中的应用[J].生态学报,2010(23)：6674-6681.
[34]张峥,张建文,李寅年,等.湿地生态评价指标体系[J].农业环境保护,1999(6)：283-286.
[35]郭敏,侯淑涛.湿地生态评价指标体系研究[J].今日科苑,2008(6)：187.
[36]吴涛,赵冬至,康建成.流域—河口三角洲湿地生态系统健康评价研究进展[J].海洋环境科学,2010(2)：286-292.
[37]吴涛,赵冬至,康建成.基于遥感技术的河口三角洲湿地景观生态健康研究进展[J].海洋环境科学,2010(3)：451-456.
[38]张祖陆,梁春玲,管延波.南四湖湖泊湿地生态健康评价[J].中国人口.资源与环境,2008(1)：180-184.
[39]刘昀,李瑞敏,刘永生,等.基于土壤-小麦系统的河南黄淮平原As生态安全评价[J].地质通报,2009(4)：523-530.
[40]徐映雪,邵景力,杨文丰,等.基于RS和GIS的鸭绿江口滨海湿地分类及变化[J].现代地质,2006(3)：500-504.
[41]曹永强,梁凤国,杨俊.辽河流域滨海湿地分类和时空变化规律研究[J].人民长江,2008(20)：18-20.
[42]曹宇,莫利江,李艳,等.湿地景观生态分类研究进展[J].应用生态学报,2009(12)：3084-3092.
[43]林立,何东进,王韧,等.闽东滨海湿地景观分类体系与格局特征[J].西南林业大学学报,2012(2)：62-67.
[44]唐小平,黄桂林.中国湿地分类系统的研究[J].林业科学研究,2003(5)：531-539.
[45]Frieswyk C B, Zedler J B. Vegetation Change in Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands:Deviation from the Historical Cycle[J]. Journal of Great Lakes Research,2007,33(2):366-380.
[46]Walters B B, Ronnback P, Kovacs J M, et al. Ethnobiology, socio-economics and management of mangrove forests:A review[J]. Aquatic Botany,2008,89(2):220-236.
[47]Krauss K W, Lovelock C E, McKee K L, et al. Environmental drivers in mangrove establishment and early development:A review[J]. Aquatic Botany,2008,89(2):105-127.
[48]Jana B B. Sewage-fed aquaculture:The Calcutta model[J]. Ecological Engineering,1998,11(1-4):73-85.
[49]Lens F, Luteyn J L, Smets E, et al. Ecological trends in the wood anatomy of Vaccinioideae (Ericaceae s.l.)[J]. Flora-Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants, 2004,199(4):309-319.
[50]翟万林,龙江平,乔吉果,等.长江口滨海湿地景观格局变化及其驱动力分析[J].海洋学研究,2010(3)：17-22.
[51]王毅杰,俞慎.长江三角洲城市群区域滨海湿地利用时空变化特征[J].湿地科学,2012(2)：129-135.
[52]温庆可,张增祥,徐进勇,等.环渤海滨海湿地时空格局变化遥感监测与分析[J].遥感学报,2011(1)：183-200.
[53]姜玲玲,熊德琪,张新宇,等.大连滨海湿地景观格局变化及其驱动机制[J].吉林大学学报(地球科学版),2008(4)：670-675.
[54]吴珊珊,张祖陆,陈敏,等.莱州湾南岸滨海湿地变化及其原因分析[J].湿地科学,2009(4)：373-378.
[55]李婧欣.北方农牧交错带生态安全评价研究[D].北京林业大学,2009.
[56]李婧,王爱军,李团结.近20年来珠江三角洲滨海湿地景观的变化特征[J].海洋科学进展,2011(2)：170-178.
[57]田博,遆超普,刘进超,等.杭州湾滨海湿地景观动态变化分析[J].遥感信息,2010(1)：22-26.
[58]左平,李云,赵书河,等.1976年以来江苏盐城滨海湿地景观变化及驱动力分析[J].海洋学报(中文版),2012(1)：101-108.
[59]谷东起,付军,闫文文,等.盐城滨海湿地退化评估及分区诊断[J].湿地科学,2012(1)：1-7.
[60]张华兵.江苏省盐城市沿海滩涂生态系统健康综合评价研究[J].国土与自然资源研究,2010(3)：70-72.
[61]陈丽欣.河北省滨海湿地生态安全评价与保护研究[D].河北师范大学,2010.
[62]戴科伟.江苏盐城湿地珍禽国家级自然保护区生态安全研究[D].南京师范大学,2007.
[63]张绪良,于冬梅,丰爱平,等.莱州湾南岸滨海湿地的退化及其生态恢复和重建对策[J].海洋科学,2004(7)：49-53.
[64]刘荣成,洪志猛,叶功富,等.泉州湾洛阳江滨海湿地的生态恢复与重建对策[J].福建林业科技,2004(3)：75-78.
[65]Rescic S, Plescia P, Cossari P, et al. Mechano-chemical activation:an ecological safety process in the production of materials to stone conservation[J]. Procedia Engineering, 2011,21(0):1061-1071.
[66]梁士楚.广西湿地植被分类系统[J].广西植物,2011(1)：47-51.
[67]李信贤,温远光,何妙光.广西红树林类型及生态[J].广西农学院学报,1991(4)：70-81.
[68]赖廷和,何斌源.广西红树林区大型底栖动物种类多样性研究[J].广西科学,1998(3)：7-13.
[69]韦绥概,张永强,陆温,等.广西红树林蜘蛛群落研究[J].蛛形学报,2000(1)：33-37.
[70]李婷婷,莫创荣,姚焕玫,等.基于能值分析的广西沿海红树林生态效益[J].生态经济(学术版),2009(1)：364-367.
[71]刘文爱,范航清.广西红树林害虫的危险性评价[J].安徽农学通报(下半月刊),2010(24)：104-106.
[72]彭在清,孟祥江,吴良忠,等.广西北海市滨海湿地生态系统服务价值评价[J].安徽农业科学,2012(9)：5507-5511.
[73]叶汝坤.广西海岸环境脆弱性的特点及成因分析[J].国土与自然资源研究,2007(2)：56-57.
[74]张宏科,刘勐伶.广西北部湾海洋环境保护的现状及对策分析[J].中国科技财富,2008(11)：122-123.
[75]李凤,谭学锋,李贵玉,等.广西湿地立法保护的思考与建议[J].湿地科学与管理,2011(2)：66-69.
[76]陈群英,李凤华.广西沿海地区海洋生态环境保护状况及对策建议[J].环境科学与管理,2008(9)：146-149.
[77]牛振国,孙桂凤.近10年中国可持续发展研究进展与分析[J].中国人口.资源与环境,2007(3)：122-128.
[78]季中淳.东北的振兴、可持续发展与湿地区域生物圈保护研究：中国生态学会第七届全国会员代表大会,2004[C].
[79]宫少军,叶思源,詹华明,等.天津市滨海湿地生态系统健康研究进展[J].海洋地质前沿,2012(7)：52-58.
[80]朱晓丽,李文龙,薛中正,等.基于生态安全的高寒牧区生态承载力评价[J].草业科学,2012(2)：198-203.
[81]付强,李伟业.三江平原沼泽湿地生态承载能力综合评价[J].生态学报,2008(10)：5002-5010.
[82]黄青,任志远.论生态承载力与生态安全[J].干旱区资源与环境,2004,18(2)：11-17.
[83]高鹭,张宏业.生态承载力的国内外研究进展[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2007,17(2)：19-26.
[84]许联芳,杨勋林,王克林,等.生态承载力研究进展[J].生态环境,2006,15(5)：1111-1116.
[85]李金海.区域生态承载力与可持续发展[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2001,11(3)：76-78.
[86]余云军,王琳.基于系统论的流域与海岸带自然系统与流域——海岸连续统释义[J].海洋环境科学,2010(4)：603-607.
[87]邬建国.景观生态学中的十大研究论题[J].生态学报,2004,24(9)：2074-2076.
[88]郭丽娟.中国景观生态学研究进展[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(27)：15280-15281,15295.
[89]坞建国.景观生态学——概念与理论[J].生态学杂志,2000,19(1)：42-52.
[90]肖笃宁,李秀珍.景观生态学的学科前沿与发展战略[J].生态学报,2003,23(8)：1615-1621.
[91]傅伯杰,吕一河,陈利顶,等.国际景观生态学研究新进展[J].生态学报,2008,28(2)：798-804.
[92]角媛梅,肖笃宁,郭明.景观与景观生态学的综合研究[J].地理与地理信息科学,2003,19(1)：91-95.
[93]张绪良,张朝晖,徐宗军,等.莱州湾南岸滨海湿地的景观格局变化及累积环境效应[J].生态学杂志,2009(12)：2437-2443.
[94]林和山,陈本清,许德伟,等.基于PSR模型的滨海湿地生态系统健康评价——以辽河三角洲滨海湿地为例[J].台湾海峡,2012(3)：420-428.
[95]王永丽,于君宝,董洪芳,等.黄河三角洲滨海湿地的景观格局空间演变分析[J].地理科学,2012(6)：717-724.
[96]戴朝霞,黄政.关于生态补偿理论的探讨[J].湖南工业大学学报(社会科学版),2008(4)：89-91.
[97]胡长玲.我国湿地生态补偿法律制度研究[D].黑龙江大学法律,2010.
[98]赵春光.我国流域生态补偿法律制度研究[D].中国海洋大学环境与资源保护法学,2009.
[99]胡小飞,傅春,陈伏生,等.国内外生态补偿基础理论与研究热点的可视化分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2012(11)：1395-1401.
[100]贾欣.海洋生态补偿机制研究[D].中国海洋大学农业经济与管理,2010.
[101]熊彩云,蔡海生,张学玲,等.鄱阳湖湿地管理现状及对策分析[J].湿地科学与管理,2011(4)：24-27.
[102]杨凯,李平.湿地生态补偿机制研究综述[J].绿色科技,2012(10)：138-140.
[103]石月珍.滨海湿地区域资源环境与经济社会协调发展研究——以江苏盐城滨海湿地区域为例[D].河海大学港口、海岸及近海工程,2006.
[104]成筠,秦延文,郑丙辉,等.基于GIS的海岸带生境修复与经济协调发展系统[J].计算机工程与设计,2009(7)：1816-1818.
[105]石月珍.滨海湿地区域资源环境与经济社会协调发展研究[D].河海大学,2006.
[106]刘永强.土地生态安全评价方法综合应用研究[D].南京农业大学,2011.
[107]赵听,任志远.基于生态足迹法的宝鸡市生态安全评价研究[J].西北林学院学报,2009(5)：186-189.
[108]申艳萍,郭长虹,王谦.河南省城市生态安全评价及生态安全模式分析[J].安全与环境学报,2008(3)：89-93.
[109]陈作志,蔡文贵,徐姗楠,等.广西北部湾近岸生态系统风险评价[J].应用生态学报,2011(11)：2977-2986.
[110]黄桂林陈建伟.中国湿地分类系统及其划分指标的探讨[J].林业资源管理,1995(5)：65-71.
[111]赵焕庭,王丽荣.中国海岸湿地的类型[J].海洋通报,2000(6)：72-82.
[112]李桂荣,梁士楚.广西湿地分类系统的研究[J].玉林师范学院学报(自然科学版),2007(3)：75-79.
[113]李桂荣,梁士楚.广西湿地资源现状与保护对策[J].湿地科学与管理,2008(1)：40-43.
[114]徐淑庆,李家明,卢世标,等.广西北部湾红树林资源现状及可持续发展对策[J].生物学通报,2010(5)：11-14.
[115]张丽珍,徐淑庆.广西北部湾红树林湿地生态功能的探讨[J].安徽农学通报(上半月刊),2010(23)：134-136.
[116]韦蔓新,赖廷和,何本茂.钦州湾丰、枯水期营养状况变化趋势及其影响因素[J].热带海洋学报,2003(3)：16-21.
[117]何本茂,韦蔓新.钦州湾近20a来水环境指标的变化趋势Ⅶ：水温、盐度和pH的量值变化及其对生态环境的影响[J].海洋环境科学,2010(1)：51-55.
[118]吴瑞娟,何秀凤,杨智翔.ALOS全色与多光谱影像融合的土地覆盖分类[J].地理空间信息,2012(1)：116-118.
[119]孟育红,刘勇.ALOS全色与多光谱影像融合方法比较[J].地理空间信息,2012(5)：99-102.
[120]孟育红.基于对象影像分析技术提取日光温室遥感信息方法研究[D].兰州大学地图学与地理信息系统,2012.
[121张雪红.基于知识与规则的红树林遥感信息提取[J].南京信息工程大学学报(自然科学版),2011(4)：341-345.
[122]阎新兴,刘国亭.钦州湾近海区沉积特征及航道淤积研究[J].水道港口,2006(2)：79-83.
[123]李树华,童万平.钦州湾潮流和污染物扩散的数值模型(Ⅰ)钦州湾潮流的数值模拟[J].海洋环境科学,1987(2)：30-37.
[124]吴黎黎,李树华.广西滨海湿地生态系统的恢复与保护措施[J].广西科学院学报,2010(1)：62-66.
[125]蓝文陆.近20年广西钦州湾有机污染状况变化特征及生态影响[J].生态学报,2011(20)：5970-5976.
[126]雷富,韦重霄,何小英,等.钦州湾近岸海域底栖生物体内重金属含量与污染评价[J].广西科学院学报,2011(4)：351-354.