强人类干扰人工河流健康评价——以太浦河为例

Health assessment of artificial rivers under intensive human disturbances: A case study of the Taipu River

摘要

以太浦河为例，结合强人类干扰人工河流特性，系统解析其健康内涵，构建包含压力、状态、响应3个维度23项指标的健康评价指标体系，并结合熵权法和物元可拓模型对太浦河进行分段健康评价。结果表明：河段A～E的健康等级分别为非常健康、不健康、非常健康、健康、非常健康，整体表现为最上游和最下游最好，中间段最差的空间分布特征；太浦河全河段均存在生态护岸比例、水生植被覆盖度和岸线植被覆盖率偏低的问题，难以满足上位规划及地方相关技术规范或导则要求。建议从生态护岸改造、滨岸带水生植被构建、分区植被恢复管理等方面优先启动研究和治理工作。准确评价强人类干扰人工河流健康状态及其变化趋势，识别影响河流健康的关键因子，对这类河流的科学管理和保护具有重要意义。

Abstract

Artificial rivers under severe human disturbances have emerged as crucial regulatory entities impacting regional water security and ecological integrity against the backdrop of rapid global urbanization. These ecosystems are naturally fragile, which is exacerbated by intense anthropogenic disturbances, posing unique challenges to river health and management. River health assessment, which serves as a critical tool for diagnosing river health and associated problems, is required for scientific river conservation and management. However, there is a significant gap between theory and practice in terms of health assessments for artificial rivers subjected to high levels of human disturbance. First, the meaning of health for these rivers is still unclear, which leads to assessment indicator systems that are not applicable or specific. Second, existing evaluation criteria for artificial rivers are generally based on ecological health assessment frameworks designed for natural rivers, which fail to account for the absence of natural baselines for artificial rivers. Thus, it is essential to create a framework for health assessment specifically designed for artificial rivers under severe human disturbance. The Taipu River flows for 57.6 kilometers from East Taihu Lake to the Huangpu River, passing through Wujiang District (Jiangsu Province), Jiashan County (Zhejiang Province), and Qingpu District (Shanghai). As one of the largest artificial rivers in the Taihu basin, it is an important channel for allocating regional water resources. This research focused on the Taipu River within a 2 kilometer buffer zone along the shoreline, which was divided into five reaches from upstream to downstream. Based on the characteristics of artificial rivers under intensive human disturbances and the regional master planning, the connotation of the Taipu River's health was systematically analyzed. The pressure-state-response (PSR) model was used to create a health assessment index system with 23 indicators across three dimensions. Health status was graded into five categories based on relevant literature, standards, and expert opinions. The entropy weight method was used to determine the objective weights for each indicator. Finally, the health status and changing trends were analyzed by applying the fuzzy matter-element extension model. The results revealed that the weights of the indicators ranged from 0.020 to 0.094, with construction land having the highest weight and environmental protection investment having the lowest. Reach A was evaluated as very healthy (grade Ⅰ) overall, showing a pattern of "moderate pressure (grade Ⅲ) - good state (grade Ⅰ) - moderate response (grade Ⅲ)". Reach B was evaluated as unhealthy (grade Ⅳ) overall, with a deteriorating trend towards sick (grade Ⅴ). Among the 23 indicators, a total of 13 (approximately 56% of the total) were rated as grade Ⅳ or Ⅴ. Reach C was evaluated as very healthy (grade Ⅰ) overall, with the pattern of "high pressure (grade Ⅳ) - good state (grade Ⅰ) - high response (grade Ⅱ)". Reach D was evaluated as healthy (grade Ⅱ) overall, showing a pattern of "high pressure (grade Ⅳ) - good state (grade Ⅰ) - high response (grade Ⅱ)", with a development trend towards very healthy (grade Ⅰ). Reach E was evaluated as very healthy (grade Ⅰ) overall, exhibiting the highest membership degree for very healthy among the five reaches. All five reaches universally exhibited issues of low proportions of ecological revetments, low aquatic vegetation coverage, and low riparian vegetation coverage. The health assessment framework for the Taipu River is developed by taking into account both the natural and social characteristics of artificial rivers. Its current health status and development trends are evaluated, with key issues identified. It is recommended to prioritize governance efforts in the following areas: ecological bank reinforcement, construction of aquatic vegetation in the riparian zone, and zonal vegetation restoration. This study provides useful reference information for protecting other artificial rivers from human disturbances.

关键词

强人类干扰 / 人工河流 / 健康评价 / 压力-状态-响应模型 / 太浦河

Key words

intensive human disturbance / artificial river / health assessment / PSR model / the Taipu River

参考文献

[1] 华祖林, 董越洋, 褚克坚. 高度人工化城市河流生态水位和生态流量计算方法[J]. 水资源保护, 2021, 37(1): 140-144. DOI: 10.3880/j.issn.1004-6933.2021.01.020.

[2] 石天. 长江下游典型人工河与干流汇流河段地貌演变特征及趋势分析[D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2020.

[3] 吴思萱, 曾庆慧, 胡鹏, 等. 伊通河城区段底栖动物完整性对水质的响应时滞[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2023, 21(1): 160-171. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2023.0017.

[4] 孙亚玲, 贾小明, 王娟, 等. 甘肃省河流健康特性分析及评价体系重构[J]. 中国水利, 2025(1): 66-72. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1123.2025.01.011.

[5] Wen Ce, Zhen Zhuo, Zhang Ling, et al. A bibliometric analysis of river health based on publications in the last three decades[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2023, 30(6): 15400-15413. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-022-23267-3.

[6] 唐克旺. 河湖健康问题与建设水生态文明[J]. 中国水利, 2016(4): 1-3. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1123.2016.04.002.

[7] 张向徐, 韩美, 倪娟, 等. 基于文献计量和可视化分析的河流生态健康评价研究进展与展望[J]. 西安理工大学学报, 2024, 40(1): 1-14. DOI: 10.19322/j.cnki.issn.1006-4710.2024.01.001.

[8] 王景豪. 强人类活动地区河流健康评估研究[M]. 郑州: 华北水利水电大学, 2021.

[9] 韩笑字, 武玮, 李振卿, 等. 变化环境下小清河干流河流健康综合评价[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2023, 21(3): 570-580. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2023.0057.

[10] 丁航, 银森录, 易雨君. 水生态健康评价中基准的确定方法探究[J]. 水利水电技术（中英文）, 2025, 56(1): 51-60. DOI: 10.13928/j.cnki.wrahe.2025.01.005.

[11] 段雨佳, 何毅, 赵杰, 等. 人类活动对秦岭月河流域径流变化的影响分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(4): 605-614. DOI: 10.13866/j.azr.2023.04.09.

[12] 刘娇娇, 刘军志, 宋超, 等. 河流碳循环模型研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 2024, 39(2): 111-123. DOI: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2024.013.

[13] 鲁浩天, 郝子垚, 刘萌硕, 等. 基于Ecopath模型的北方典型中小河流生态系统营养结构与能量流动分析[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2023, 39(11): 1453-1463. DOI: 10.19741/j.issn.1673-4831.2022.0881.

[14] 罗坤. 城市化背景下河流健康评价研究[D]. 重庆: 重庆理工大学, 2017.

[15] 王旭, 王恒嘉, 王永刚, 等. 基于大型底栖动物完整性指数（B-IBI）的密云水库上游河流（北京段）水生态健康评价[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2022, 38(2): 157-167. DOI: 10.19741/j.issn.1673-4831.2020.0881.

[16] 钱纯纯, 毕佳蕾, 陈文召. 长三角生态绿色一体化战略下太浦河岸线保护与利用研究[J]. 水利规划与设计, 2021(12): 23-26. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-2469.2021.12.005.

[17] 周宏伟. 太浦河水源地取水安全水利工程联合调控优化研究[M]. 北京: 科学技术文献出版社, 2020.

[18] 于宏宇, 刘丰, 吴巍巍, 等. 长三角一体化示范区生态系统服务时空变化及权衡分析[J]. 中国水利水电科学研究院学报（中英文）, 2024(6): 590-650. DOI: 10.13244/j.cnki.jiwhr.20240020.

[19] 陶果丰, 薛万来, 袁博, 等. 基于遥感技术的水生态空间健康综合评价体系[J]. 遥感学报, 2025, 29(3）: 689-699. DOl: 10.11834/jrs.20243340.

[20] 孙晓初, 裴青宝, 刘世思, 等. 中小河流生态岸线评价体系研究[J]. 人民长江, 2025, 56(4): 99-104. DOI: 10.16232/j.cnki.1001-4179.2025.04.013.

[21] 张媛媛, 刘建卫, 逢晓腾, 等. 基于组合赋权和物元可拓模型的东北河流健康评价[J]. 中国农村水利水电, 2025(2): 31-36. DOI: 10.12396/znsd.240860.

[22] 连心桥, 朱广伟, 杨文斌, 等. 土地利用对太湖入流河道营养盐的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2021, 42(10): 4698-4707. DOI: 10.13227/j.hjkx.202101065.

[23] Rumki K, Somen D. Assessment of wetland ecosystem health in Rarh Region, India through P-S-R (pressure-state-response) model[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 951： 175700. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.175700.

[24] Xiao Ruiming, Qiao Yuxuan, Dong Xiaobin, et al. Ecosystem health assessment of the Manas River basin: Application of the CC-PSR model improved by coupling coordination degree[J]. Land, 2024, 13(8): 1336. DOI: 10.3390/land13081336.

[25] Chen Lei, Liu Leizhen, Liu Shasha, et al. The application of remote sensing technology in inland water quality monitoring and water environment science: Recent progress and perspectives[J]. Remote Sensing, 2025, 17(4): 667. DOI: 10.3390/rs17040667.

[26] Song Fei, Zhang Wenyong, Yuan Tenggang, et al. UAV quantitative remote sensing of riparian zone vegetation for river and lake health assessment: A review[J]. Remote Sensing, 2024, 16(19): 3560. DOI: 10.3390/rs16193560.

[27] 徐健. 苏南镇域水系水质综合评价法研究: 以同里水系为例[D]. 苏州: 苏州科技大学, 2013.

[28] 兰建洪, 刘丰, 郭晓玮, 等. 清林径水库表层沉积物营养盐分布特征及污染评价[J]. 中国水利水电科学研究院学报, 2021, 19(2): 269-275. DOI: 10.13244/j.cnki.jiwhr.20190176.

[29] 刘生辉. 锑在太浦河沉积物-水界面的空间分布特征及迁移转化机制[D]. 上海: 上海师范大学, 2024.

[30] 贺湛斐, 童春富. 太浦河大型底栖动物群落组成及时空分布特征[J]. 生态学报, 2023, 43(11): 4619-4631. DOI: 10.5846/stxb202202060299.

[31] 张卫国, 杨淇翔, 张修宇. 基于改进年内展布法的河道基本生态需水过程分析研究[J]. 水电能源科学, 2024, 42(7): 16-19. DOI: 10.20040/i.cnki.1000-7709.2024.20240380.

[32] 谢伊涵, 李根, 杨梦杰, 等. 基于PSR和物元可拓模型的跨界河流健康评价: 以太浦河干流为例[J]. 华东师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2020(1): 110-122. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.201831013.

[33] 林炳青. 基于分布式水文模型的流域水生态功能区划与河流健康评价[D]. 福州: 福建师范大学, 2020.

[34] 徐亨. 通航河流健康评价体系研究及应用[D]. 舟山: 浙江海洋大学, 2023.

[35] 席浩郡, 袁一斌, 昝晓辉, 等. 基于生态完整性和社会服务功能的柏条河-府河河流健康评价[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, 2022, 58(6): 1111-1120. DOI: 10.13209/j.0479-8023.2022.104.

[36] 张祖鹏, 张泽贤, 刘思远, 等. 太湖流域河流健康评价指标体系研究及应用[J]. 人民长江, 2023, 54(11): 8-15. DOI: 10.16232/j.cnki.1001-4179.2023.11.002.

[37] SL/T 793− 2020 河湖健康评估技术导则[S].

[38] 山红翠, 盛东, 罗金明. 基于PSR模型的湖南省水生态安全评估[J]. 水资源开发与管理, 2024(10）: 46-75. DOl: 10.16616/j.cnki.10-1326/TV.2024.10.09.

[39] Wu Xue, Liu Shiliang, Sun Yongxiu, et al. Ecological security evaluation based on entropy matter-element model: A case study of Kunming City, south-west China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2019, 102： 469-478. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.02.057.

[40] 杜龙飞, 张劲, 渠晓东, 等. 综合评价法在北京丰台区城市河流水生态环境质量评价中的应用研究[J]. 环境科学研究, 2025, 38(2): 318-331. DOI: 10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2024.10.09.

[41] 陈丹. 黄浦江上游省际河流太浦河的水环境影响因素与保护协调机制[D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2016.

[42] 李柱, 汪鹏合, 常东洋. 太浦河清水绿廊生态建设方案研究[J]. 科技创新与应用, 2023(31): 146-149. DOI: 10.19981/j.CN23-1581/G3.2023.31.035.

[43] Yu Hongyu, Liu Feng, Wu Weiwei, et al. Study on calculation of nonpoint source pollution load into Taipu River based on InVEST model[J]. Sustainability, 2026, 18(1): 31. DOI: 10.3390/su18010031.

基金资助

水利部重大科技项目(SKS-2022068)

上海勘测设计研究院有限公司科研项目(2024HJ（83）-002)

上海勘测设计研究院有限公司科研项目(2024SL（81）-001)