Exploring the application of flagship species in biodiversity valuation
-
摘要:
利益相关者对生物多样性的价值感知影响其态度与行为，从而影响环境保护政策执行的效率与效果。为准确刻画出利益相关者对特定区域内生物多样性的价值感知，提出一套以旗舰物种为视角的选择实验设计方法，具体步骤包括：结合研究区域选择旗舰物种进行属性设计；根据预调研结果优化生成正式调研的选择实验问卷；通过问卷调研获取支付意愿；评估局地生物多样性价值。将该方法应用于秦岭（陕西段），选取秦岭大熊猫、秦岭金丝猴、朱鹮为旗舰物种，调查了1 288位受访者，结果显示：陕西省内、省外受访者对秦岭生物多样性保护的边际货币支付意愿分别为146.29、212.60元/a，边际时间支付意愿价值分别为240.12、350.01元/a。根据边际支付意愿估算得到秦岭（陕西段）生物多样性价值为4 897.72亿~9 795.45亿元/a。该方法能较为全面地反映局地生物多样性的价值并兼具可理解性，为生物多样性保护政策的制定与执行提供数据基础。
Abstract:The value of the biodiversity perceived by the stakeholders will influence their behavior and attitude towards environment protection and thus impact the efficiency and effectiveness of policies related to environmental conservation directly. To characterize the value perception of biodiversity by stakeholders in a specific region more accurately, a method of choice experiment designed from the perspective of flagship species was proposed. The steps of the method included: selecting flagship species for attribute design based on the study area, optimizing and generating the choice experiment questionnaire for the formal survey based on the results of the pre-survey, obtaining the willingness to pay through the questionnaire survey, evaluating the value of biodiversity in a specific region. Applying the methodology in Qinling Mountains (Shaanxi section), giant pandas, golden monkeys, and crested ibis were selected as flagship species, and 1 288 individuals were finally included through field visits and online surveys. The results showed that the marginal monetary willingness to pay of respondents from inside and outside Shaanxi Province for Qinling biodiversity protection was 146.29 and 212.60 yuan per year, and the value of marginal time willingness to pay was 240.12 and 350.01 yuan per year, respectively. According to the marginal willingness to pay, the biodiversity value of Qinling Mountains (Shaanxi section) was estimated to be 489.772-979.545 billion yuan per year. The case study proves that this method can reflect the value of biodiversity in a more comprehensive and comprehensible way, and provide a solid data basis for the formulation and implementation of ecosystem protection policies.
-
图 2 秦岭（陕西段）保护范围示意
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of the protection scope of Qinling (Shaanxi section)
图 3 预调研选择实验中方案选择与原因选择示例
Figure 3. An example of scheme selection and reason selection in pre-survey choice experiment
图 4 正式选择实验中方案选择与双重响应示例
Figure 4. An example of scheme selection and double-check question in formal choice experiment
图 5 个人特征相关矩阵热力图
注：***表示$ p\leqslant 0.001 $；**表示$ p\leqslant 0.01 $；*表示$ p\leqslant 0.05 $。
Figure 5. Correlation matrix heatmap of interviewees' personal characteristics
图 6 陕西省内外受访者个人特征频数及独立性检验
Figure 6. Frequency and independence test of interviewees' personal characteristics inside and outside Shaanxi Province
表 1 秦岭生物多样性估值调查问卷属性设置及含义
Table 1. Attribute settings and meaning of Qinling biodiversity valuation questionnaire
属性 属性水平 秦岭低海拔地区
生物多样性1=以朱鹮为代表的全部生物灭绝 2=以朱鹮为代表的全部生物偶尔出现 3=以朱鹮为代表的全部生物经常出现 秦岭中海拔地区
生物多样性1=以秦岭金丝猴为代表的全部生物灭绝 2=以秦岭金丝猴为代表的全部生物偶尔出现 3=以秦岭金丝猴为代表的全部生物经常出现 秦岭高海拔地区
生物多样性1=以秦岭大熊猫为代表的全部生物灭绝 2=以秦岭大熊猫为代表的全部生物偶尔出现 3=以秦岭大熊猫为代表的全部生物经常出现 支付方式 时间支付：0=0天；1=1天；2=2天；3=3天 货币支付：0=0元；1=50元；2=100元；3=150元 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 受访者个人特征统计
Table 2. Statistics of the interviewees' personal characteristics
个人统计特征及缩写 分类指标含义与取值 同意支付人数/人 拒绝支付人数/人 同意支付比例/% 年龄（ AGE） 18岁以下=1 11 3 79 18~25岁=2 354 31 92 26~30岁=3 194 19 91 31~40岁=4 299 16 95 41~50岁=5 201 8 96 51~60岁=6 124 7 95 60岁以上=7 19 2 90 性别（GEN） 男=1 556 50 92 女=0 646 36 95 受教育程度（EDU） 初等教育（小学）=1 13 4 76 中等教育（中学）=2 118 9 93 大学（本科/专科）=3 273 20 93 研究生（硕士/博士）=4 783 52 94 其他=0 15 1 94 收入水平（REV） 3 000元以下=1 505 32 94 3 000~7 500元=2 516 34 94 7 500~20 000元=3 164 17 91 20 000元以上=4 17 3 85 工作/学习内容是否与环保相关（REL） 是=1 507 24 95 否=0 695 62 92 对常住地生态环境保护力度及
效果满意程度（SAT）很不满意=1 20 4 83 不满意=2 46 4 92 一般=3 324 28 92 满意=4 400 30 93 很满意=5 412 20 95 近自然生态系统居住经历（EXP） 有=1 488 22 96 无=0 714 64 92 常住地（PLA） 陕西省内=1 617 38 94 陕西省外=0 585 48 92 对生物多样性保护相关政策的
了解程度（POL）完全不了解=1 108 16 87 有一些了解（如了解退耕还林）=2 302 26 92 比较了解（如了解国家公园） =3 315 16 95 非常了解（如了解生态补偿） =4 477 28 94 参观秦岭意愿（VIS） 是=1 1 172 79 94 否=0 30 7 81 每年向公益基金捐赠的数额 （M） 0~100元=1 803 80 91 101~200元=2 252 2 99 201~400元=3 83 2 98 400元以上=4 64 2 97 每年向公益基金捐赠的时间 （T） 0~1 d=1 547 63 90 2~3 d=2 393 17 96 4~7 d=3 136 4 97 8 d及以上=4 126 2 98 秦岭是“世界生物基因库” （BIO） 了解=1 918 45 95 不了解=0 284 41 87 秦岭是我国“中央水塔” （WAT） 了解=1 833 49 94 不了解=0 369 37 91 秦岭是华夏的“中华祖脉”（CUL） 了解=1 892 53 94 不了解=0 310 33 90 对秦岭大熊猫的了解程度（PAN） 一点都不了解=1 59 13 82 不太了解=2 175 20 90 一般=3 468 34 93 比较了解=4 301 12 96 非常了解=5 199 7 97 对秦岭金丝猴的了解程度（MON） 一点都不了解=1 94 16 85 不太了解=2 216 20 92 一般=3 489 35 93 比较了解=4 233 10 96 非常了解=5 170 5 97 对朱鹮的了解程度（CRE） 一点都不了解=1 119 23 84 不太了解=2 263 20 93 一般=3 432 31 93 比较了解=4 215 7 97 非常了解=5 173 5 97 职业（OCU） 全日制学生=1 294 30 91 国家机关、党群组织、企事业单位负责人=2 186 9 95 专业技术人员=3 281 17 94 办事人员和有关人员=4 71 6 92 社会生产服务和生活服务人员 =5 82 7 92 农、林、牧、渔生产及辅助人员=6 21 4 84 生产制造及有关人员=7 35 2 95 军队人员=8 5 0 100 不便分类的其他从业者=9 227 11 95
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 混合逻辑模型计算结果
Table 3. Calculation results of mixed logit models
属性 陕西省外样本
（时间支付）陕西省外样本
（货币支付）陕西省内样本
（时间支付）陕西省内样本
（货币支付）估计系数 z 估计系数 z 估计系数 z 估计系数 z 低海拔地区生物多样性 0.618*** 8.840 0.524*** 14.239 0.644*** 8.388 0.440*** 12.330 中海拔地区生物多样性 0.648*** 11.951 0.472*** 14.693 0.649*** 11.098 0.445*** 14.154 高海拔地区生物多样性 0.491*** 8.236 0.643*** 17.061 0.492*** 7.826 0.627*** 17.054 支付方式（时间/货币支付） −0.748*** −16.534 −7.709*** −11.979 −0.898*** −18.875 −10.341*** −14.639 McFadden R2 0.480 0.370 0.456 0.385 注：***表示$ {p}\le 0.001 $。
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 边际支付意愿计算结果
Table 4. Marginal willingness calculation
属性 边际货币支付意愿/（元/级） 边际时间支付意愿/（d/级） 边际时间支付意愿价值/（元/级） 陕西省外受访者 陕西省内受访者 陕西省外受访者 陕西省内受访者 陕西省外受访者 陕西省内受访者 低海拔地区生物多样性 68.03 42.60 0.83 0.72 123.10 86.73 中海拔地区生物多样性 61.17 43.03 0.87 0.72 129.03 86.73 高海拔地区生物多样性 83.40 60.66 0.66 0.55 97.88 66.66 秦岭地区生物多样性 212.60 146.29 2.36 1.99 350.01 240.12
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 马克平. 试论生物多样性的概念[J]. 生物多样性,1993(1):20-22. [2] ASSESSMENT M E. Ecosystems and human well-being[M].Washington DC: Island Press, 2005. [3] HANLEY N, PERRINGS C. The economic value of biodiversity[J]. Annual Review of Resource Economics,2019,11:355-375. [4] 王小莉, 高振斌, 苏婧, 等. 区域生态系统服务价值评估方法比较与案例分析[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2018,8(2):212-220.WANG X L, GAO Z B, SU J, et al. Assessment methods of regional ecosystem service value and a case study of Dongjiang River Basin[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2018,8(2):212-220. [5] 陈朝, 杨贤房, 陈进栋, 等. 考虑地形与生物多样性的InVEST模型及其在县域生物多样性安全格局分析中的应用[J]. 环境工程技术学报,2023,13(4):1345-1353.CHEN C, YANG X F, CHEN J D, et al. InVEST Model considering terrain and biodiversity and its application in the analysis of county biodiversity security pattern: a case study of Wengyuan County[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology,2023,13(4):1345-1353. [6] McINTYRE P B, JONES L E, FLECKER A S, et al. Fish extinctions alter nutrient recycling in tropical freshwaters[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,2007,104(11):4461-4466. [7] 王寿兵, 胥思涵, 李果, 等. 基于《野生动物及其制品价值评估方法》的湿地鸟类经济价值评估: 以江苏三片典型潮间带湿地鸟类为例[J/OL]. 复旦学报(自然科学版), 2023. DOI: 10.15943/j.cnki.fdxb-jns.20231024.001. [8] 郭培培, 於方, 周夏飞, 等. 基于案例分析的湿地生物多样性损害评估研究[J]. 环境科学与管理,2023,48(11):177-182.GUO P P, YU F, ZHOU X F, et al. Assessment of wetland biodiversity damage based on case study[J]. Environmental Science and Management,2023,48(11):177-182. [9] CZAJKOWSKI M, GIERGICZNY M, KRONENBERG J, et al. The economic recreational value of a white stork nesting colony: a case of ‘stork village’ in Poland[J]. Tourism Management,2014,40:352-360. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2013.07.009 [10] RUSSELL S, ENS E. Connection as country: relational values of billabongs in Indigenous northern Australia[J]. Ecosystem Services,2020,45:101169. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101169 [11] LABAND D N. The neglected stepchildren of forest-based ecosystem services: cultural, spiritual, and aesthetic values[J]. Forest Policy and Economics,2013,35:39-44. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.06.006 [12] WATSON R, BASTE I, LARIGAUDERIE A, et al. ummary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services[J]. Bonn, Germany: IPBES Secretariat, 2019: 22-47. [13] 吴杨, 田瑜, 戴逢斌, 等. “自然对人类的贡献”的实现、发展趋势和启示[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(5): 21549.WU Y, TIAN Y, DAI F B, et al. Realization, development trend and enlightenment of Nature's Contributions to People[J]. Biodiversity Science, 2022, 30(5): 21549. [14] 张殷波, 牛杨杨, 王文智, 等. 基于选择试验法的受威胁物种保护偏好及价值评估[J]. 环境科学研究,2020,33(10):2342-2350.ZHANG Y B, NIU Y Y, WANG W Z, et al. Conservation preference and value evaluation of endangered species based on choice experiment methods[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences,2020,33(10):2342-2350. [15] 秦彦强, 余亚亮, 刘瑞涵. 生态价值评估的选择实验法: 原理与国内应用[J]. 中国农学通报,2021,37(17):80-86.QIN Y Q, YU Y L, LIU R H. Choice experiment method and ecological value evaluation: principle and domestic application[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin,2021,37(17):80-86. [16] 朱战国, 董鑫, 张彤. 农产品生态系统价值的标签化策略: 基于选择实验法的实证分析[J]. 南京农业大学学报(社会科学版),2022,22(1):160-171.ZHU Z G, DONG X, ZHANG T. Labeling strategy of ecosystem value of agricultural products: an empirical analysis based on choice experiment[J]. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition),2022,22(1):160-171. [17] 吴晓珍. 基于选择实验法的流域生态系统服务价值评估研究: 以岷江流域为例[D]. 南京: 南京林业大学, 2021. [18] 亢楠楠. 国家森林公园游憩价值评价研究: 基于游客满意度的视角[D]. 大连: 大连理工大学, 2019. [19] MÄNTYMAA E, ARTELL J, FORSMAN J T, et al. Is it more important to increase carbon sequestration, biodiversity, or jobs: a case study of citizens' preferences for forest policy in Finland[J]. Forest Policy and Economics,2023,154:103023. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103023 [20] SHOYAMA K, MANAGI S, YAMAGATA Y. Public preferences for biodiversity conservation and climate-change mitigation: a choice experiment using ecosystem services indicators[J]. Land Use Policy,2013,34:282-293. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.04.003 [21] SAARIKOSKI H, AAPALA K, ARTELL J, et al. Multimethod valuation of peatland ecosystem services: combining choice experiment, multicriteria decision analysis and deliberative valuation[J]. Ecosystem Services,2022,57:101471. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101471 [22] HEYWOOD V H, WATSON R T. Global biodiversity assessment[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. [23] JOHNSINGH A J T, JOSHUA J. Conserving Rajaji and Corbett National Parks: the elephant as a flagship species[J]. Oryx,1994,28(2):135-140. doi: 10.1017/S0030605300028453 [24] 徐卫华, 欧阳志云, 张路, 等. 长江流域重要保护物种分布格局与优先区评价[J]. 环境科学研究,2010,23(3):312-319.XU W H, OUYANG Z Y, ZHANG L, et al. Spatial distribution and priority areas analysis for key protection species in Yangtze Basin[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences,2010,23(3):312-319. [25] MARTÍNEZ-JAUREGUI M, WHITE P C L, TOUZA J, et al. Untangling perceptions around indicators for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services[J]. Ecosystem Services,2019,38:100952. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100952 [26] MARTÍNEZ-JAUREGUI M, DELIBES-MATEOS M, ARROYO B, et al. Beyond rural vs urban differences: a close match in European preferences in some basic wildlife management and conservation principles[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2023,331:117236. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117236 [27] SENZAKI M, YAMAURA Y, SHOJI Y, et al. Citizens promote the conservation of flagship species more than ecosystem services in wetland restoration[J]. Biological Conservation,2017,214:1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2017.07.025 [28] JACOBSEN J B, BOIESEN J H, THORSEN B J, et al. What’s in a Name?The use of quantitative measures versus ‘Iconised’ species when valuing biodiversity[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics,2008,39(3):247-263. doi: 10.1007/s10640-007-9107-6 [29] CHRISTIE M, FAZEY I, COOPER R, et al. An evaluation of monetary and non-monetary techniques for assessing the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services to people in countries with developing economies[J]. Ecological Economics,2012,83:67-78. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.012 [30] KUHFELD W F. Marketing research methods in SAS: experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques [M]. Cary, NC : SAS Institute Inc,2010: 53-241. [31] 黄安琪. 游客视角下的新安江流域游憩服务价值识别研究[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2021. [32] 陈鸣. 农户宅基地退出补偿偏好与异质性来源: 基于选择实验法的分析[J]. 资源科学,2021,43(7):1467-1478.CHEN M. Compensation preference and heterogeneity sources of homestead withdrawal of farming households: based on choice experiment method[J]. Resources Science,2021,43(7):1467-1478. [33] WALKER J. Mixed logit (or logit kernel) model: dispelling misconceptions of identification[J]. Transportation Research Record:Journal of the Transportation Research Board,2002,1805(1):86-98. doi: 10.3141/1805-11 [34] 史恒通, 睢党臣, 吴海霞, 等. 公众对黑河流域生态系统服务消费偏好及支付意愿研究: 基于选择实验法的实证分析[J]. 地理科学,2019,39(2):342-350.SHI H T, SUI D C, WU H X, et al. Public preference and willingness to pay for the Heihe River watershed ecosystem service: an empirical study on choice experiments[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica,2019,39(2):342-350. [35] 王树盛, 黄卫, 陆振波. Mixed Logit模型及其在交通方式分担中的应用研究[J]. 公路交通科技,2006(5):92-95. [36] RUNGIE C M, COOTE L V, LOUVIERE J J. Structural choice modelling: theory and applications to combining choice experiments[J]. Journal of Choice Modelling,2011,4(3):1-29. doi: 10.1016/S1755-5345(13)70040-X [37] McGINLAY J, PARSONS D J, MORRIS J, et al. Leisure activities and social factors influence the generation of cultural ecosystem service benefits[J]. Ecosystem Services,2018,31:468-480. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.019 [38] SATO M, USHIMARU A, MINAMOTO T. Effect of different personal histories on valuation for forest ecosystem services in urban areas: a case study of Mt. Rokko, Kobe, Japan[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening,2017,28:110-117. [39] YANG J, SU K W, ZHOU Z Y, et al. The impact of tourist cognition on willing to pay for rare species conservation: base on the questionnaire survey in protected areas of the Qinling region in China[J]. Global Ecology and Conservation,2022,33:e01952. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01952 [40] HOU Y L, LIU T L, ZHAO Z, et al. Estimating the cultural value of wild animals in the Qinling Mountains, China: a choice experiment[J]. Animals:an Open Access Journal from MDPI,2020,10(12):2422. ⊗ -
下载:
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 80
- HTML全文浏览量: 40
- PDF下载量: 37
- 被引次数: 0
