城市生物多样性研究为何重要

Urban Biodiversity Research: Why It Matters

撰文 （加）帕特里克-穆尼
Text by Patrick MOONEY (Canada)

翻译 熊瑶
Translation by XIONG Yao

校对 王云才
Proofreading by WANG Yun-cai

我这项研究旨在强调保护城市区域内生物多样性的重要性。生物差异（即生物多样性）是指生物的多样化。它涵盖所有物种，如野生的和驯养的，也包括所有的生物群体，以及在个体和种群之中，乃至整个地球上任何一处生态系统中的遗传变异 [1]。

生物多样性丧失的主要原因是土地表面变化和气候变化。城市化进程中所伴随的地表变化，导致栖息地减少，退化和分裂，进而造成城市区域内生物多样性的损失。研究这种损失是因为生物多样性在生态系统中会逐渐恢复，并且对于研究生态和文化的可持续发展是一个非常重要的组成部分和衡量指标[1-6]。生物多样性的逐渐下降表明了全球性生态系统可持续发展的减弱，并威胁人类健康、物种和文化的可持续性[7-11]。

生物多样性支撑着可持续发展，因为它对于提供生态系统服务或者人类从自然中得到的其他服务而言是必不可少的。这些服务包括直接的经济效益，如粮食、纤维和医药，也包括长远的、间接的以及非经济上的利益，如土壤的演替、气候改良和与自然接触所产生的心理愉悦等。生物多样性的所有这些方面，从物种多样性到景观的空间特征，均可影响生态系统服务的提供[12]。

由于科学界还没有建立生态系统的功能模型，用来预测生态系统服务下降的阈值，因而尚未有衡量生物多样性丧失的安全界限。所以，在我们更完整地了解生物多样性所提供生态系统服务的作用之前，我们的重点应放在防止生物多样性的损失和退化方面[13]。

自然界的生态系统对于人类最大益处在于促进人类心理健康。过去3年多的研究表明，对于人类的安康来说，与自然界接触会获得显著的正面效益[14-20]。我们能明显地观察到，接触自然环境，甚至是有关自然环境的图片，便能缓解人的压力，改善临床的医疗结果，并提高精神健康[16]。

哈佛大学生物学家E-O-威尔逊进一步加强了我们对接触大自然的好处的理解，在他提出的“热爱生命的天性假说”中，他设定人类这一物种天生便倾向于与自然结合[21]。威尔逊和其他研究人类天性的学者认为“人类热爱生命”背后的驱动力[22]在于我们普遍天生地被自然环境之美所吸引。近来，我们已经认识到环境的生物多样性更多，为我们带来的福利就更多[20]。

我的研究是为了更好地了解如何在城市区域内保护生物多样性和生态系统服务，并将其运用在城市和园林的规划中。如果我们能保持我们在城市中所建立的生物多样性，我们将获得来自自然界直接的生态系统服务以及有利于康复的种种益处。

虽然本文重点针对鸟类种群，但科学研究表明，鸟类多样性能够指示更加普遍和广泛的生物多样性[23]。鸟类栖息地环境的提升会伴随其他物种栖息地的共同提升，例如龟，蜻蜓和土狼[24]。同时，也提升了人类对生物栖息地的利用。

有人可能会问为什么我没有把这样的工作让一名生物学家去完成，甚至我时常会被问到这项研究和风景园林有什么关系？关于城市生物栖息地在维持区域生物多样性方面的作用尚未确定。公平地讲，城市区域内生物多样性的存在被低估了，并且城市生态系统也并未被科学界广泛地关注。直到最近，我们才开始去认识世界各地的城市区域中所形成的生物多样性，并将城市环境作为生态系统来研究[25]。如果我们要更好地塑造可持续发展的城市区域，便还有很多要去学习的，同时我们需要新的和更具体的信息。作为一门应用性学科，风景园林学科面对这些问题必须给出行之有效的解决方案。这就决定了我们所要研究的问题，以及获得结论所使用的方法。这项研究试图提高我们的专业知识水平，使我们可以更好地服务于一个可持续发展的社会。

 

The intent of my research is to support the maintenance of biological diversity in urban regions. Biological diversity or biodiversity is the variety of life. It encompasses all species, both wild and domesticated, all communities, the genetic variation between individuals and the populations and ecosystems of any area of the earth or of the entire planet (Dasmann 1991).

The major causes of biodiversity loss are land cover change and climate change. Land cover change that accompanies urbanization leads to habitat reduction, degradation and fragmentation, and the loss of local biodiversity in urban areas. This loss is concerning because biodiversity instills resiliency in ecological systems and is an important component and indicator of ecological and cultural sustainability (Forman 1990; Dasmann 1991; Naess 1992; Baskin 1994; Hinterberger 1994; Lee and Rudd, 2003). A measured decline in biological diversity indicates a weakening of global ecological sustainability and threatens the sustainability of human health, populations and culture (Kangas 1997; Chapin et al. 2000; Chivian 2002; Rees 2002; Diamond 2005).

Biodiversity underpins sustainability because it is fundamental to the provision of ecosystem services or the services that people derive from nature. These services include direct economic benefits like food, fiber and medicine, and also benefits that are longer term, indirect and non-economic such as soil generation, climate amelioration and the psychological benefits derived from contact with nature. All aspects of biodiversity, from species diversity to the spatial characteristics of landscapes, can influence the provision of ecosystem services (Diaz et al. 2006).

Since the scientific community does not yet have models of ecosystem function that can predict the thresholds at which ecosystem services decline, there is no safe level of biodiversity loss. Until we understand more completely the role of biodiversity in providing ecosystem services, our focus should be on preventing the loss of biodiversity (Kremen 2005).

Not the least of the ecosystem services provided by nature is psychological wellness. Research conducted over the last thirty years has shown that contact with the natural world leads to significant positive benefits to human well-being (Ulrich, 1984; Parsons, 1991; Hartig and Evans 1991; Ulrich et. al. 1991; Kaplan 1995; Frumkin, 2001, Fuller et al. 2007). It has become clear that exposure to natural environments, or even pictures of natural environments, ameliorates stress, improves clinical outcomes and improves mental wellbeing (Hartig and Evans 1991).

Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson added to our understanding of the benefits of contact with nature when he developed what is now called “the biophilia hypothesis” in which he posited that our species is innately predisposed to bond with nature (Wilson 1984). He and other biophilic theorists consider our unlearned and universal attraction to the aesthetics of natural environments to be the driving force behind biophilia (Heerwagen and Orians 1993). More recently we have come to realize that more biodiverse environments are more beneficial to our wellbeing (Fuller et al. 2007).

My research is an attempt to better understand how to preserve biodiversity and ecosystem services in urban regions and to apply that understanding to urban planning and landscape architecture. If we can maintain the biodiversity found in our urban regions, we will capture both the direct ecosystem services derived from nature and restorative benefits of contact with nature.

Although this paper focuses on bird populations, scientific research demonstrates that avian diversity indicates more general biodiversity (Reyers et al. 2000). One cannot enhance a habitat for birds without enhancing it for other species, like turtles, dragonflies and coyotes (Mooney P.F. 2010). Coincidentally this also enhances human usage.

One might ask why I have not left such work to the biologists. Or even, as I have been asked on occasion, how this research is landscape architecture? The role of urban habitats in supporting regional biodiversity is not yet established. It is fair to say that the presence of biodiversity in urban regions has been underestimated and that urban ecosystems have not been addressed extensively by the scientific community. Only recently have we begun to recognize the biodiversity found in urban regions around the world and to study urban environments as ecosystems (Ricketts and Imhoff 2003). There is still much to learn and we will need new and specific information if we are to better shape sustainable urban regions. As an applied discipline, landscape architecture must have answers that support applied solutions. This determines the research questions we ask and the approach we use to reach our conclusions. This research is an attempt to provide an improved level of knowledge for our profession so that we can better serve a more sustainable society.

参考文献：

References:

[1]Dasmann RF. The Importance of Cultural and Biological Diversity[M]//Oldfield MK,Alcorn JB (eds).Biodiversity: Culture Conservation and Eco Development. Boulder :Westview Press, 1991:7-15.

[2]Forman RTT. Ecologically Sustainable Landscapes: The Role of Spatial Configuration[M]//Zonneveld IS, Forman RTT (eds). Changing Landscapes: An Ecological Perspective. New York: Springer Verlag, 1990:299-309.

[3]Naess A. Sustainability! The Integral Approach[M]//Sandlund OT, Hindar K,Brown ADH (eds).Conservation of Biodiversity for Sustainable Development. Oslo :Scandinavian University Press, 1992:303-310.

[4]Baskin P .How Much Does Diversity Matter?[J].Science, 1994,264: 202-203.

[5]Hinterberger F. Biological, Cultural, and Economic Evolution and the Economy/Ecology Relationship[M]//Van den Bergh JC,Van der Straaten J (eds). Toward Sustainable Development: Concepts, Methods and Policy. Washington DC: Islands Press, 1994:57-81.

[6]Lee N, Rudd H. Conserving Biodiversity in the Greater Vancouver Region: Indicator Species and Habitat Quality(2nd Edition)[M].Vancouver: Douglas College Institute of Urban Ecology,2003:Volumes 1 & 2.

[7]Kangas P.Tropical Sustainable Development and Biodiversity[M]//Kudla ML, Wilson DE,Wilson EO (eds).Biodiversity II: Understanding and Protecting Our Biological Resources. Washington DC: Joseph Henry Press, 1997:389-409.

[8]Chapin III FS, Zavalets ES, Eviner VT, Naylor RL, Vitousek PM, Reynolds HL, Hooper DU, Lavorel S, Sala OE, Hobbie SE, Mack MC, Diaz S.Consequences of Changing Biodiversity[J].Nature,2000, 405 (6783): 234-242.

[9]Chivian E. Species Loss and Ecosystem Disruption[M]//M. McCally (ed). Life Support: The Environment and Human Health. Cambridge :MIT Press,.2002:119-134. 2002

[10]Rees W. Waking the Sleepwalkers – Globalization and Sustainability: Conflict or Convergence.[M]//Chesworth W, Moss M,Thomas VG (eds).The Human Ecological Footprint: The Kenneth Hammond Lectures on Environment, Energy and Resources(2002 Series). Guelph: Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph,2002: 1-34.

[11]Diamond J .Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed[M]. New York: Viking Press, 2005.

[12]Diaz S, Fargione J, Chapin III FS, Tillman D. Biodiversity Loss Threatens Human Well-being[J].PLoS Biology, 2006,4(8): 1300-1305.

[13]Kremen C .Managing Ecosystem Services: What Do We Need to Know about Their Ecology? [J].Ecology Letters,2005, 8(5): 468-479.

[14]Ulrich RS.View through a Window may Influence Recovery from Surgery[J].Science,1984, 224 (4647): 420–421.

[15]Parsons R. The Potential Influences of Environmental Perception on Human Health[J].Journal of Environmental Psychology,1991,11: 1-23.

[16]Hartig T, Evans GW. Restorative Effects of Natural Environment Experience[J].Environment and Behavior,1991, 23: 3-26.

[17]Ulrich RS, Simons RF, Losito BD, Fiorito E, Miles MA and Zelson M. Stress Recovery during Exposure to Natural and Urban Environments[J].Journal of Environmental Psychology,1991, 11 (3): 201–230.

[18]Kaplan S. The Restorative Benefits of Nature: Toward an Integrative Framework[J].Journal of Environmental Psychology ,1995,15:169-182.

[19]Frumkin H. Beyond Toxicity: The Greening of Environmental Health[J].American Journal of Preventive Medicine,2001, 20:47-53.

Fuller et al. 2007

[20]Fuller RA, Irvine KN, Devine-Wright P, Warren PH, Gaston KJ. Psychological Benefits of Greenspace Increase with Biodiversity[J].Biology Letters,2007, 3(4):390-394.

[21]Wilson EO. Biophilia: The Human Bond with Other Species [M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.

[22]Heerwagen JH Orians GH. Humans, Habitats and Aesthetics [M]//Kellert SR, Wilson EO (eds) The Biophilia Hypothesis. Washington DC: Island Press, 1993:138–72.

[23]Reyers B, Van Jaarsveld AS ,Kruger M. Complementarity as a Biodiversity Indicator Strategy[J].Proceedings: Biological Sciences,2000, 267(1442): 505 -513.

[24]MooneyPF.Maplewood Flats: Abundant Life on a Brownfield Site[J].Landscape/Paysage,2010, 12 (1): 14-15.

[25]Ricketts T, Imhoff M. Biodiversity, Urban Areas, and Agriculture: Locating Priority Ecoregions for Conservation[J].Conservation Ecology,2003, 8(2): 1.

[26]Mooney HA, Cropper A, Reid W.The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: What Is It All About?[J]. TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution,2004, 19(5): 221-224.