陕西渭北旱塬区土地利用与生态系统服务价值变化——以陇县为例

以陕西省陇县为研究对象，基于该区域2000年、2005年、2010年、2014年四期遥感影像，探讨了陇县土地利用变化情况，并参照生态系统服务价值当量估算法定量分析了研究期内陇县的生态系统服务价值变化特征，以期为陇县生态环境保护和土地利用调控提供科学参考。结果表明:（1）近14年，陇县土地利用结构发生了明显变化，耕地、未利用地、水体的面积出现减少，林地、草地、建设用地的面积均有不同程度增加，草地面积增加最多，增长了15.18%，耕地面积减少最多，减少了2.68%。（2）研究期内，林地生态系统服务价值最高，依次为耕地、草地、水体和未利用地。陇县总生态系统服务价值增加了1.617×10⁷元，林地和草地的贡献度最大。耕地和水体面积减少引起食物生产、废物处理、水源涵养和娱乐文化的生态服务价值在不同时期出现下降。（3）不同时期，各地类的生态系统服务价值敏感系数均小于1，表明生态系统服务价值对价值系数变化缺乏弹性，研究结果具有可信度。

Dynamic Changes of Land Use and Ecosystem Service Values in the Arid-Highland,North of Weihe River in Shaanxi Province -A Case Study of the Long County

Strengthening the study of land use change and ecological service in ecologically fragile regions is conducive to regional environmental protection and land use management. Based on the remote sensing images of 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2014, we quantitatively analyzed the characteristics of the land use changes and the ecosystem service value changes in Long County by using dynamic index, sensitivity coefficient, information entropy and the table of equivalent value per unit area of ecosystem services. The results showed that the land use structure of Long County changed significantly in the past 14 years. The areas of farmland, unused land, and water body decreased, while the areas of forestland, grassland, and construction land increased with various degrees. The area of grassland increased by of 15.18%, the maximum increment of area was found in grassland. The area of farmland decreased by of 2.68%, and the maximum decline of area occurred in the farmland. During the study period, forest had the highest ecosystem service value, followed by farmland, grassland, water body and unused land. The aggregate value of ecosystem service increased by 1.617×10⁷ RMB, the contribution of forest and grassland to the value was the most. The ecosystem service values of food production, waste treatment, water conservation, and entertainment culture presented the declining trend in different periods,which was caused by the reduction of farmland area and water body. Every sensitivity coefficient of land ecological service value was less than 1, indicating that ecological service value was lack of elasticity to ecosystem service function indexes and the results were credible.