以系統性保育規劃法評估氣候變遷對生態系服務的影響-以陳有蘭溪流域為例

Systematic conservation approach in assessment of climate change impacts on Ecosystem services-Chen You Lan River watershed

張文豪(Wen-Hao Chang)

指導教授 ： 林裕彬

國立臺灣大學/生物資源暨農學院/生物環境系統工程學研究所/碩士(2018年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201802432

摘要

全球人口數與人類需求量不斷上升，因此需要砍伐森林成為人類居住地，導致土地利用覆蓋改變，過度使用石化燃料也造成氣候異常，這些變化使生態系的功能減少，因此，本研究目的為整合氣候變遷、土地利用與覆蓋、生態系服務，並評估台灣陳有蘭溪集水區在氣候變遷的影響下，不同的保護區劃設政策對土地利用與生態系服務的影響，其中生態系服務包括：產水量、氮磷營養鹽留存、沉積物留存、碳儲存和棲地品質的變化，進而挑選出適合的保護區劃設方案，提供決策者作為參考依據。
本研究以Integrated valuation of ecosystem services and tradeoffs (InVEST)模式，計算出1999年各項生態系服務與棲地品質，並且利用區域空間相關指標Local Indicators of Spatial Association (LISA)找出生態系服務聚集的熱點，再以Zonation對熱點區域進行系統性保育規劃，並設置四種土地利用情境，情境一：玉山國家公園保護區；情境二：玉山國家公園保護區與陳有蘭溪流域前10%重要網格；情境三：玉山國家公園保護區與陳有蘭溪流域前20%重要網格；情境四：玉山國家公園保護區與陳有蘭溪流域前30%重要網格，以上述不同土地利用情境與Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)公佈之Fifth Assessment Report (AR5)的Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP)8.5與RCP2.6的5種General Circulation Models (GCMs)，置入Conversion of Land Use and its Effects at Small regional extent (CLUE-S)模式模擬2023年的土地利用分佈，再以InVEST進行2023年生態系服務與棲地品質的計算。
以KAPPA值比較2023年與1999年的生態系服務與棲地品質的熱點結果，其表示使用系統性保育規劃後的熱點變化較小，可以有效使重要區域保持在相同區域。若是以總量分析，可以發現情境二、三與四的氮、磷營養鹽留存與沉積物留存會優於情境一。情境二、三、四不管在哪種氣候變遷模式的模擬下都能有效保護生態系服務之熱點與提升生態系服務，而情境二所需之土地的又較其他方案少，因此效率最高，應該被優先選擇，本研究所提供的方法可以有效的評估氣候變遷、土地利用與覆蓋、生態系服務三者之關聯，提供決策者制定政策的參考。

關鍵字

氣候變遷 ； 生態系服務 ； 土地利用與覆蓋 ； 區域空間相關量測指標 ； 系統性保育規劃

並列摘要

Ecosystem services are closely linked to land use and climate change. Integrating ecosystem services approaches to Systematic Landscape conservation planning (SLCP) facilitate the strategic planning for land-use conservation more effectively. This study evaluates the impacts of different zoning policies and climate change on ecosystem services in the Chen You Lan River watershed in Taiwan. The study focuses on five types of ecosystem services including water yield, sediment retention, nitrogen retention, phosphorus retention, carbon storage, as well as biodiversity, and further, to identify the appropriate area conservation scenario as a reference for decision makers.
This study firstly quantifies those ecosystem services present in 1999 based on meteorological data and land use maps of the same year by Integrated Valuations of Ecosystem Tradeoff (InVEST) model. Second, we use Local Indicators of Spatial Association (LISA) to perform a cluster analysis on the 1999 ecosystem services spatial data and identify these areas as hotspots. Third, we use Zonation to produce priority rank maps that reflect four land use scenarios: 1) Yushan National Park Reserve; 2) Top 10% Zonation conservation prioritization output for Chen You Lan River watershed with Yushan National Park Reserve; 3) Top 20% Zonation conservation prioritization output for Chen You Lan River watershed with Yushan National Park Reserve; and 4) Top 30% Zonation conservation prioritization output for Chen You Lan River watershed with Yushan National Park Reserve. The Conversion of Land Use and its Effects at Small regional extent (CLUE-S) model utilizes these four land use scenarios to simulate the land use in 2023. Accordingly, five Global Climate Models (GCM) with two Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC AR5) projection scenarios: a RCP8.5 scenario for high emissions and a RCP2.6 scenario for low emissions, are integrated to the developed 2023 land use map created, to further, quantify the 2023 ecosystem services. Finally, 2023 ecosystem services for four land use scenarios under different climate change conditions are analyzed, the recommendations are raised based on kappa statistics and the study area’s actual total amount values.
A comparison of kappa statistical values for 1999 and 2023 hotspots indicate that when using Zonation, it is more efficient to prioritize conservation areas that are ecosystem services hotspots. Study findings further indicate that for ecosystem services in 2023, scenarios 2, 3 and 4 works better than scenario 1 in nitrogen retention, phosphorous retention, and sediment retention if we use the study area’s actual total amount values to compare results. Regardless of which GCM is employed, scenarios 2, 3 and 4 are able to conserve ecosystem services hotspots and the study area’s actual total amount values. Furthermore, since scenario 2 also requires less land use than other scenarios and so has the highest efficiency, it is recommended for strategic land use conservation planning considerations for the study area.

並列關鍵字

Climate change ； Ecosystem service ； Land useLand cover ； LISA ； Systematic conservation planning

參考文獻

1. Aguiar, A. P. D., Vieira, I. C. G., Assis, T. O., Dalla‐Nora, E. L., Toledo, P. M., Oliveira Santos‐Junior, R. A., ... & Nobre, C. A. (2016). Land use change emission scenarios: anticipating a forest transition process in the Brazilian Amazon. Global change biology, 22(5), 1821-1840.

2. Andersen, H. E., Kronvang, B., Larsen, S. E., Hoffmann, C. C., Jensen, T. S., & Rasmussen, E. K. (2006). Climate-change impacts on hydrology and nutrients in a Danish lowland river basin. Science of the Total Environment, 365(1-3), 223-237.

3. Alegria-Moran, R., Miranda, D., Parra, A., & Lapierre, L. (2017). What do we know about the behavior of animal rabies in Chile through the last years?. Online journal of public health informatics, 9(1).

4. Amaral, P. V., & Anselin, L. (2014). Finite sample properties of Moran's I test for spatial autocorrelation in tobit models. Papers in Regional Science, 93(4), 773-781.

5. Anselin, L. (1995). Local indicators of spatial association—LISA. Geographical analysis, 27(2), 93-115.