中国西北干旱生态移民区跨流域调水生态效益研究——以黄花滩生态移民区为例

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2024.703

干旱区地理 ›› 2025, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (11): 1926-1938.doi: 10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2024.703 cstr: 32274.14.ALG2024703

中国西北干旱生态移民区跨流域调水生态效益研究——以黄花滩生态移民区为例

田晋华¹(), 黄枭², 高雅玉²^,³^,⁴(), 郝建斌², 吴冠衡⁵, 何文博²

1.甘肃省水土保持科学研究所，甘肃兰州 730020
2.兰州理工大学土木与水利工程学院，甘肃兰州 730050
3.甘肃有色工程勘察设计研究院，甘肃兰州 730030
4.自然资源部高寒干旱区矿山地质环境修复工程技术创新中心，甘肃兰州 730030
5.甘肃省景泰川电力提灌水资源利用中心，甘肃白银 730400

收稿日期:2024-11-14 修回日期:2025-01-09 出版日期:2025-11-25 发布日期:2025-11-26
通讯作者: 高雅玉（1985-），女，博士，正高级工程师，主要从事水资源与水土保持方面的研究. E-mail: gyy@lut.edu.cn
作者简介:田晋华（1986-），男，硕士，正高级工程师，主要从事生态建设与水土保持方面的研究. E-mail: tjhgyy@yeah.net
基金资助:
甘肃省重点研发计划项目(22YF7FA165);2022年陇原青年创新创业人才（团队）项目(甘组通字[2022]77号);甘肃省水利科学试验研究及推广计划项目(甘水建管发[2025]24号);甘肃省水利科学试验研究及推广计划项目(甘水建管发[2024]78号);兰州理工大学研究生课程思政示范项目(KCSZ-SF-202302606)

Ecological benefits of inter-basin water transfer in arid ecological migration regions of northwest China: A case of Huanghuatan ecological immigrant area

TIAN Jinhua¹(), HUANG Xiao², GAO Yayu²^,³^,⁴(), HAO Jianbin², WU Guanheng⁵, HE Wenbo²

1. Institute of Soil and Water Conservation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730020, Gansu, China
2. School of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering, Lanzhou University of Technology, Lanzhou 730050, Gansu, China
3. Gansu Nonferrous Engineering Survey, Design and Research Institute, Lanzhou 730030, Gansu, China
4. Technology Innovation Center for Mine Geological Environment Restoration in the Alpine and Arid Regions, Ministry of Natural Resources, Lanzhou 730030, Gansu, China
5. Gansu Jingtaichuan Electric Power Irrigation Water Resource Utilization Center, Baiyin 730400, Gansu, China

Received:2024-11-14 Revised:2025-01-09 Published:2025-11-25 Online:2025-11-26

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 生态移民与跨流域调水是西北干旱区生态恢复和环境保护的重要举措，对实现乡村振兴和生态文明建设具有不可或缺的意义。以黄花滩生态移民区为研究对象，从自然气象、植被概况、人类活动和景观格局4个层面选取15个生态指标，构建生态移民区生态效益评价体系，系统分析2005—2020年自然和人类活动对研究区生态效益的影响。结果表明：（1）2005—2020年黄花滩生态移民区旱地、疏林地和建设用地增加，其他土地利用类型减少，主要土地利用转移方式为旱地、草地和裸地之间的相互转换。（2）在类型水平上，草地和裸地破碎化程度先减小后增大，旱地先增大后减小，其他土地利用类型基本不变；在景观水平上，除聚合度指数外其他指数均呈现先增大后减小的趋势。（3）2005—2020年归一化植被指数年均值呈持续上升趋势，上升了109.41%，主要表现为高值区向周边地区不断改善的变化趋势。（4）植被净初级生产力（NPP）年均值变化较小，90%左右地域NPP年均值处于1~50 g C·m^-2之间。在西北干旱区进行生态效益评价探索性研究，可为全面评价西北干旱区生态移民和跨流域调水工程的生态环境效益以及生态保护管理等提供科技支撑。

关键词: 生态效益, 生态移民, 跨流域调水, 景观格局, 植被覆盖, 中国西北干旱区

Abstract:

Ecological migration and inter-basin water transfer are important measures for ecological restoration and environmental protection in the arid regions of northwest China, which are indispensable for rural revitalization and ecological civilization construction. This paper takes the ecological migrant area of Huanghuatan as research object, selecting 15 ecological indicators from four levels: natural meteorology, vegetation profiles, human activities and landscape patterns, constructs an ecological benefits evaluation system, and analyzes the impacts that nature and human activities have the ecological benefits of the study area from 2005 to 2020. The results indicated that: (1) Dry land, open land, and construction land increased, while other land use types fell in the Huanghuatan ecological migrant area from 2005 to 2020. The main transfer mode was conversion among dry land, grassland and bare land. (2) At the level of type, the fragmentation degree of grassland and bare land first decreased and then increased, the dry land first increased and then decreased, and other land use types went largely unchanged. At the level of landscape, with the exception of the degree of the aggregation index, indices showed a trend of increasing first and then decreasing. (3) The annual mean value of normalized difference vegetation index showed a continuous upward trend, increasing by 109.41% overall from 2005 to 2020, mainly showing a trend of continuous improvement from the high-value area to the surroundings. (4) The annual mean value of the net primary productivity (NPP) changed little, and the annual mean value of NPP in about 90% of the regions was 1-50 g C·m^-2. Exploratory research on the evaluation of ecological benefit in the arid region of northwest China can provide scientific and technological support for comprehensive evaluation of the ecological environmental benefits of ecological migration and inter-basin water transfer projects, as well as ecological protection management in the northwest arid region.

Key words: ecological benefits, ecological migration, inter-basin water transfer, landscape pattern, vegetation cover, arid region of northwest China

田晋华, 黄枭, 高雅玉, 郝建斌, 吴冠衡, 何文博. 中国西北干旱生态移民区跨流域调水生态效益研究——以黄花滩生态移民区为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2025, 48(11): 1926-1938.

TIAN Jinhua, HUANG Xiao, GAO Yayu, HAO Jianbin, WU Guanheng, HE Wenbo. Ecological benefits of inter-basin water transfer in arid ecological migration regions of northwest China: A case of Huanghuatan ecological immigrant area[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2025, 48(11): 1926-1938.

图/表 12

图1

表1

生态效益评估指标数据来源及其生态学意义"

要素层	指标层	生态学意义	数据来源
自然气象	年降水量	直接影响土地植被的生长、水资源的运动和分布、土壤侵蚀和养分流失等	中国科学院资源与环境科学数据中心（http://www.resdc.cn；2005—2023年；空间分辨率：中国地面国家级基准、古浪基本站）
	年蒸发量	反映土地利用和气候变化影响最有效的因素
	气温	气温变化直接影响生态系统的结构
	平均相对湿度	影响植被群落的结构和物种组成，进而影响生态系统的稳定性
植被概况	归一化植被指数	对植被变化状况监测、植被资源合理利用和其他生态环境相关领域的研究有十分重要的参考意义	国家地球系统科学数据中心（http://www.geodata.cn/；2005—2020年；空间分辨率：30 m×30 m）；Google Earth Engine平台（https://earthengine.google.com/；2005—2020年；空间分辨率：500 m×500 m）
植被概况	植被净初级生产力	评估生态系统的碳储存能力、生物量生产以及对气候变化的响应，可以更好地理解生态系统的生产力和健康状况
人类活动	土地利用	人类活动作用于自然环境的主要途径之一，是土地覆被变化的最直接和最主要的驱动因子	中国科学院资源与环境科学数据中心（http://www.resdc.cn；2005—2020年；空间分辨率：30 m×30 m）；景电工程管理局（2013—2022年）
	土地转移	人类活动作用于自然环境的主要途径之一，是土地覆被变化的最直接和最主要的驱动因子
	跨流域调水量	反映生态系统中人类活动的影响
景观格局	斑块数量	分析生态系统类型在区域内的分布规模和破碎程度，从而评估人类活动对景观格局的影响	基于土地利用数据利用FRAGSTATS 4.2软件计算所得
	斑块密度	分析生态系统类型在区域内的分布规模和破碎程度，从而评估人类活动对景观格局的影响
	分割度指数	评估景观破碎化对生态系统服务和生物多样性的影响，以及人类活动对生态系统的潜在影响
	辛普森多样性指数	有助于评估和理解生态系统的多样性和健康状态，从而为生态环境保护规划提供科学依据
	聚合度指数	考察每一种景观类型斑块间的连通性，有助于评估景观的连通性和生态过程的连续性
	分离度指数	衡量景观中斑块或区域的空间分散程度，其值越大，表示景观中的斑块被更多的线性特征（如道路、河流等）所分隔

表1

图2

图3

表2

图4

图5

表3

图6

表4

图7

图8

参考文献 33

[1]	钟水映, 冯英杰. 生态移民工程与生态系统可持续发展的系统动力学研究——以三江源地区生态移民为例[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2018, 28(11): 10-19.
	[Zhong Shuiying, Feng Yingjie. Research on the system dynamics of ecological migration engineering and ecosystem sustainable development: For example of Three-River-Source region ecological migration[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2018, 28(11): 10-19. ]
[2]	赵多平, 赵伟佚, 撒小龙, 等. 宁夏生态移民社区生活空间融合与重构的影响因素及机理——以宁夏闽宁镇为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2022, 37(1): 121-134.
	[Zhao Duopin, Zhao Weiyi, Sa Xiaolong, et al. Influencing factors and mechanism of living space integration in an ecological migrant community of Ningxia: Taking Minning Town as an example[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2022, 37(1): 121-134. ]
[3]	Zhao T T, Du Z R, Yang J Y, et al. Land cover mapping and ecological risk assessment in the context of recent ecological migration[J]. Remote Sensing, 2021, 13(7): 1381, doi: 10.3390/rs13071381.
[4]	Tai X J, Lu L G, Jiang Q B, et al. The perception of desertification, its social impact and the adaptive strategies of ecological migrants in the desertification area, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment, 2020, 18(4): 324-330.
[5]	Zhao R, Long D P, Yang M L, et al. From resettlement to revitalization: Examining the water resource environment carrying capacity of ecological migrant resettlement areas in China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2024, 160: 111879, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.111879.
[6]	Wu T J, Liu Y X, Qi X H, et al. The environmental impact assessment of China’s ecological migration from a social-ecological perspective[J]. Ambio-A Journal of Environment and Society, 2024, 53(9): 1355-1366.
[7]	Li J T, Dong H R, Li S X. Economic development and optimal allocation of land use in ecological emigration area in China[J]. Land Use Policy, 2024, 142: 107178, doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107178.
[8]	Peng Z Y, Pu H R, Liang Y B. Study on ecological compensation of inter-basin water transfer based on evolutionary game theory[J]. Water, 2022, 14(21): 3498, doi: 10.3390/w14213498.
[9]	Li L, Wang L F, Liu R M, et al. Evaluating the impacts of inter-basin water transfer projects on ecosystem services in the Fenhe River Basin using the SWAT model[J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2023, 195(4): 455, doi: 10.1007/s10661-023-11077-0.
[10]	Yan H L, Lin Y Q, Chen Q W, et al. A review of the eco-environmental impacts of the south-to-north water diversion: Implications for inter basin water transfers[J]. Engineering, 2023, 30(11): 161-169.
[11]	Lu Z X, Feng Q, Xiao S C, et al. The impacts of the ecological water diversion project on the ecology-hydrology-economy nexus in the lower reaches in an inland river basin[J]. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 2021, 164: 105154, doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105154.
[12]	邵全琴, 刘树超, 宁佳, 等. 2000—2019年中国重大生态工程生态效益遥感评估[J]. 地理学报, 2022, 77(9): 2133-2153.
	[Shao Quanqin, Liu Shuchao, Ning Jia, et al. Assessment of ecological benefits of key national ecological projects in China in 2000—2019 using remote sensing[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2022, 77(9): 2133-2153. ]
[13]	Huang F, Ochoa C G. A Copula incorporated cellular automata module for modeling the spatial distribution of oasis recovered by ecological water diversion: An application to the Qingtu Oasis in Shiyang River Basin, China[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2022, 608: 127573, doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127573.
[14]	Huang F, Ochoa C G, Chen X, et al. An entropy-based investigation into the impact of ecological water diversion on land cover complexity of restored oasis in arid inland river basins[J]. Ecological Engineering, 2020, 151: 105865, doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.105865.
[15]	崔国屹, 张艳, 晁阳, 等. 秦岭地区近40年土地利用变化及其生态环境效应[J]. 水土保持研究, 2023, 30(1): 319-326.
	[Cui Guoyi, Zhang Yan, Chao Yang, et al. Land use change and eco-environmental effects in Qinling Mountains in recent 40 years[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2023, 30(1): 319-326. ]
[16]	冯朝红. 基于水资源承载力的西北地区农业可持续发展评估研究[D]. 西安: 西安理工大学, 2021.
	[Feng Zhaohong. Assessment of agricultural sustainable development in northwest China based on water resources carrying capacity[D]. Xi’an: Xi’an University of Technology, 2021. ]
[17]	张伟, 周亮, 孙东琪, 等. 干旱区生态移民空间迁移特征与生态影响——以甘肃省古浪县为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(2): 618-627.
	[Zhang Wei, Zhou Liang, Sun Dongqi, et al. Spatial migration characteristics and ecological impacts of ecological migrants in arid regions: A case of Gulang County, Gansu Province[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(2): 618-627. ]
[18]	王效科, 杨宁, 吴凡, 等. 生态效益评价内容和评价指标筛选[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(15): 5442-5449.
	[Wang Xiaoke, Yang Ning, Wu Fan, et al. Ecological benefit evaluation contents and indicator selection[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(15): 5442-5449. ]
[19]	古浪县县志编纂办公室. 古浪年鉴[M]. 兰州: 甘肃民族出版社, 2023.
	[Gulang County County Annals Compilation Office. Gulang yearbook[M]. Lanzhou: Gansu Nationalities Publishing House, 2023. ]
[20]	刘洋, 王娅, 周立华. 基于过程和结果的甘肃古浪黄花滩生态移民工程绩效评价[J]. 中国沙漠, 2022, 42(6): 185-193.
	[Liu Yang, Wang Ya, Zhou Lihua. Performance evaluation of ecological migration project based on process and outcome: A case study of Huanghuatan migration area in Gulang, Gansu, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2022, 42(6): 185-193. ]
[21]	Alibakhshi S, Azadi H, Leal E L. Can land-use and land-cover change explain reduced resilience in forests?[J]. Frontiers in Earth Science, 2024, 12: 1317188, doi: 10.3389/feart.2024.1317188.
[22]	Ning X G, Zhu N, Liu Y F, et al. Quantifying impacts of climate and human activities on the grassland in the Three-River Headwater region after two phases of ecological project[J]. Geography and Sustainability, 2022, 3(2): 164-176.
[23]	杨洁. 黄河流域草地生态系统服务功能及其权衡协同关系研究[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2021.
	[Yang Jie. Research on grassland ecosystem service function and its tradeoff synergistic relationship in the Yellow River Basin[D]. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2021. ]
[24]	郝军, 田雅楠, 戈锋, 等. 流域土地利用与景观生态风险响应关系研究[J]. 中国环境科学, 2023, 43(11): 6132-6140.
	[Hao Jun, Tian Ya’nan, Ge Feng, et al. Correlational relationship between land use and landscape ecological risks in Inner Mongolia section of middle Nenjiang River[J]. China Environmental Science, 2023, 43(11): 6132-6140. ]
[25]	欧阳晓, 陈键, 魏晓, 等. 长株潭城市群土地利用变化对生态系统健康影响的关键类型及阈值效应[J]. 地理科学, 2024, 44(11): 1946-1954.
	[Ouyang Xiao, Chen Jian, Wei Xiao, et al. Exploring key types and threshold effects of land use change impact on ecosystem health in Changsha-Zhuzhou-Xiangtan urban agglomeration[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2024, 44(11): 1946-1954. ]
[26]	Hu Y C, Zhou W, Yuan T. Environmental impact assessment of ecological migration in China: A survey of immigrant resettlement regions[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University-Science A (Applied Physics & Engineering), 2018, 19(3): 240-254.
[27]	Jiang L G, Liu Y, Wu S, et al. Analyzing ecological environment change and associated driving factors in China based on NDVI time series data[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2021, 129: 107933, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107933.
[28]	吴万民, 刘涛, 陈鑫. 西北干旱半干旱区NDVI季节性变化及其影响因素[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(12): 1969-1981.
	[Wu Wanmin, Liu Tao, Chen Xin. Seasonal changes of NDVI in the arid and semi-arid regions of northwest China and its influencing factors[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(12): 1969-1981. ]
[29]	张华, 徐存刚, 王浩. 2001—2018年西北地区植被变化对气象干旱的响应[J]. 地理科学, 2020, 40(6): 1029-1038.
	[Zhang Hua, Xu Cungang, Wang Hao. Response of vegetation change to meteorological drought in northwest China from 2001 to 2018[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2020, 40(6): 1029-1038. ]
[30]	杨晓玲, 丁文魁, 周华, 等. 石羊河流域归一化植被指数变化及其驱动因子分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2024, 47(10): 1735-1744.
	[Yang Xiaoling, Ding Wenkui, Zhou Hua, et al. Normalized difference vegetation index change and its driving factors in Shiyang River Basin[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2024, 47(10): 1735-1744. ]
[31]	尹振良, 冯起, 王凌阁, 等. 2000—2019年中国西北地区植被覆盖变化及其影响因子[J]. 中国沙漠, 2022, 42(4): 11-21.
	[Yin Zhenliang, Feng Qi, Wang Lingge, et al. Vegetation coverage change and its influencing factors across the northwest region of China during 2000—2019[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2022, 42(4): 11-21. ]
[32]	常文静, 丛士翔, 王融融, 等. 气候变化和人类活动对毛乌素沙地NDVI变化的量化分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2025, 48(1): 63-74.
	[Chang Wenjing, Cong Shixiang, Wang Rongrong, et al. Quantitative analysis of NDVI changes in Mu Us Sandy Land by climate change and human activities[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2025, 48(1): 63-74. ]
[33]	员学锋, 施林童, 杨悦, 等. 陕北黄土丘陵沟壑区人类活动和植被覆盖对关键生态系统服务的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(12): 3235-3246.
	[Yuan Xuefeng, Shi Lintong, Yang Yue, et al. Impacts of human activities and vegetation cover on key ecosystem services in the Loess hilly-gully region of northern Shaanxi, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2024, 35(12): 3235-3246. ]

土地利用类型	2005年		2010年		2015年		2020年
土地利用类型	面积/km²	占比/%	面积/km²	占比/%	面积/km²	占比/%	面积/km²	占比/%
旱地	144.63	31.64	138.18	30.23	138.70	30.35	152.81	33.43
有林地	0.12	0.03	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
疏林地	3.58	0.78	3.58	0.78	3.58	0.78	3.60	0.79
中覆盖度草地	45.73	10.01	47.08	10.30	43.96	9.62	41.79	9.14
低覆盖度草地	155.66	34.06	154.45	33.79	151.89	33.23	153.15	33.50
农村居民点	1.95	0.43	2.05	0.45	4.12	0.90	1.84	0.40
建设用地	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	34.83	0.08	529.20	1.16
沙地	92.20	20.17	90.69	19.84	90.19	19.73	87.74	19.20
裸地	13.18	2.88	21.00	4.59	24.25	5.30	10.87	2.38

年份	斑块数量/个	斑块密度/个·km^-2	分割度指数	分离度指数	辛普森多样性指数	聚合度指数
2005	450	0.9846	0.9408	16.8841	0.7322	93.5590
2010	466	1.0196	0.9459	18.4766	0.7422	93.5449
2015	485	1.0612	0.9486	19.4632	0.7463	93.5702
2020	452	0.9888	0.9470	18.8768	0.7300	93.4910

年份	NDVI				NPP/g C·m^-2
年份	最小值	最大值	年均值	标准差	最小值	最大值	年均值	标准差
2013	0.02	0.63	0.17	0.07	3.00	253.00	41.20	71.60
2014	-0.07	0.57	0.18	0.07	12.00	253.00	45.75	69.84
2015	-0.18	0.63	0.16	0.06	4.00	253.00	42.81	70.88
2016	-0.13	0.66	0.18	0.08	4.00	253.00	42.81	70.88
2017	-0.35	0.64	0.17	0.06	4.00	253.00	42.81	70.88
2018	-0.26	0.65	0.21	0.08	4.00	253.00	42.81	70.88
2019	-0.24	0.61	0.22	0.07	2.00	253.00	41.04	71.59
2020	-0.25	0.64	0.18	0.07	4.00	253.00	42.81	70.88

中国西北干旱生态移民区跨流域调水生态效益研究——以黄花滩生态移民区为例

Ecological benefits of inter-basin water transfer in arid ecological migration regions of northwest China: A case of Huanghuatan ecological immigrant area

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 12

参考文献 33

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	郑孟林, 赵勇, 杨霞. 中国西北干旱区夏季降水异常的主模态年代际变化及其联系环流[J]. 干旱区地理, 2025, 48(9): 1511-1520.
[2]	邹翔, 张雨婷, 徐璐. 2000—2022年呼伦贝尔植被覆盖时空动态及其对气候因子的响应[J]. 干旱区地理, 2025, 48(6): 963-972.
[3]	郑孟林, 赵勇, 杨霞. 1961—2022年中国西北干旱区夏季降水变化特征[J]. 干旱区地理, 2025, 48(3): 367-379.
[4]	黄云博, 张翀, 王玉丹. 渭河流域植被覆盖变化趋势及其对土壤干湿状况的响应[J]. 干旱区地理, 2024, 47(5): 841-849.
[5]	胡瑞媛, 畅建霞, 郭爱军, 王义民. 塔里木河干流生态系统变化与生态效益分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2024, 47(4): 622-633.
[6]	吴海娟, 郑芳, 易洁琰. 生态移民村镇居民居住满意度及其影响因素研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(8): 1387-1396.
[7]	董丽, 王满旺, 东梅. 基于生态足迹法的宁夏生态移民区可持续发展能力研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(6): 1004-1012.
[8]	陈淑君,许国昌,吕志平,马铭悦,李晗羽,朱玉岩. 中国植被覆盖度时空演变及其对气候变化和城市化的响应[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(5): 742-752.
[9]	董春媛, 黄海涛, 乔荣荣, 罗立辉, 常学礼. 宁夏沿黄绿洲景观多样性时空变化与尺度依赖性[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(1): 76-85.
[10]	王振, 李均力, 张久丹, 吴浩儒, 郭雪飞. 输水漫溢对塔里木河中游胡杨林恢复的影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(1): 94-102.
[11]	张久丹, 李均力, 包安明, 白洁, 刘铁, 黄粤. 2013—2020年塔里木河流域胡杨林生态恢复成效评估[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(6): 1824-1835.
[12]	刘玉婷,张齐飞,刘景时,关含笑,孟凡雪. 近20 a新疆南部植被覆盖度时空特征及对气候因素的响应——以塔什库尔干塔吉克自治县为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(5): 1481-1489.
[13]	程静,王鹏,陈红翔,韩永贵. 半干旱区生态风险时空演变及其影响因素的地理探测——以宁夏盐池县为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(5): 1637-1648.
[14]	张伟,周亮,孙东琪,胡凤宁. 干旱区生态移民空间迁移特征与生态影响——以甘肃省古浪县为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(2): 618-627.
[15]	孙丽蓉,周冬梅,岑国璋,马静,党锐,倪帆,张军. 基于地理探测器模型的疏勒河流域景观生态风险评价及驱动因素分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(5): 1384-1395.