Open Access

Evaluation of ecosystem health in Futian mangrove wetland based on the PSR-AHP model

Haipeng Zhao
Haipeng Zhao
, 
Gang Wang
Gang Wang
, 
Yingjie Song
Yingjie Song
 and 
Qiang Zhao
Qiang Zhao
   | Aug 24, 2022
Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Published Online: Aug 24, 2022
Page range: 985 - 998
Received: Mar 03, 2022
Accepted: May 25, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns.2022.1.00012
Keywords
© 2022 Haipeng Zhao et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Fig. 1

Map of Futian Reserve.
Map of Futian Reserve.

Fig. 2

PSR model logic diagram.
PSR model logic diagram.

Fig. 3

Evaluation system block diagram based on AHP.
Evaluation system block diagram based on AHP.

Fig. 4

Comparison diagram of weighted score of each index of the pressure subsystem.
Comparison diagram of weighted score of each index of the pressure subsystem.

Fig. 5

Comparison diagram of weighted score of each index in the state subsystem.
Comparison diagram of weighted score of each index in the state subsystem.

Fig. 6

Comparison diagram of weighted scores of each index in the response subsystem.
Comparison diagram of weighted scores of each index in the response subsystem.

Mean random consistency index.

n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
RI 0 0 0.58 0.90 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45

Ecosystem health index and level of the reserve.

Item Pressure index State index Response index General health
Health index 0.256962 0.140323 0.307203 0.25262
Health level IV V IV IV

Classification of pressure evaluation.

Range of value Pressure classification
0–0.2 Mild stress
0.2–0.4 Small pressure
0.4–0.6 Medium pressure
0.6–0.8 High pressure
0.8–1.0 Extreme pressure

Classification of state evaluation.

Evaluation value State Definitions
0.8–1.0 A The ecosystem has stable structure and function, and the system possesses adequate strength to recover and regenerate.
0.6–0.8 B The ecosystem function is relatively perfect, and can recover after being commonly disturbed.
0.4–0.6 C Although damaged to a certain extent, the ecosystem can still maintain its basic functions.
0.2–0.4 D The structure and function of the ecosystem are degraded, biodiversity declines and environmental problems are serious.
0–0.2 E The structure and function of the ecosystem have almost collapsed, and the ecological environment has become seriously damaged.

Evaluation index selection of the state subsystem.

Criterion level Factor level Index level
State subsystem Biology and ecology Diversity of species
Environmental quality Water quality
Biological productivity Conversion between nutrient levels
Total energy conversion

Classification criteria and definitions of Futian mangrove wetland ecosystem evaluation.

Grade DI value State System feature
I ≥0.8 A The ecosystem has stable structure and function, and the system has adequate strength to recover and regenerate.
II 0.6–0.8 B The ecosystem function is relatively perfect, and can recover after being commonly disturbed.
III 0.4–0.6 C Although damaged to a certain extent, the ecosystem can still maintain its basic functions.
IV 0.2–0.4 D The structure and function of the ecosystem are degraded, biodiversity declines and environmental problems are serious.
V ≤0.2 E The structure and function of the ecosystem have almost collapsed, and the ecological environment has become seriously damaged.

Evaluation index selection of the pressure subsystem.

Criterion level Factor level Index level
Pressure subsystem Anthropic pressure Density of population
Per capita GDP
Urbanisation rate
Noise pollution
Light pollution
Natural pressure Mangrove pest
Extreme temperature weather per year

Evaluation index selection of response subsystem.

Criterion level Factor level Index level
Response subsystem Social response Proportion of the tertiary industry
Education level of the population
Investment in environmental pollution
Planning regulations and policies
Degree of public participation

Noise evaluation criteria of mangrove reserve (day).

Grade Evaluation standard value (dB(A)) Degree of membership
0 50 0
1 55 0.2
2 60 0.5
3 65 0.7
4 70 1.0

Weight of each index.

Criterion level Factor level Index level Degree of membership Weight Weighted rating
Pressure subsystem 0.41173 Anthropic pressure 0.36391 Density of population 0.55 0.04782 0.02630
Per capita GDP 1 0.09873 0.09873
Urbanisation rate 0.8 0.07902 0.06322
Noise pollution 0.6 0.05932 0.03559
Light pollution 0.8 0.07902 0.06322
Natural pressure 0.04782 Mangrove pest 0.5 0.03776 0.01888
Extreme temperature weather per year 0.1 0.01006 0.00100
State subsystem 0.20301 Biology and ecology 0.07902 Diversity of species 0.7 0.07902 0.05531
Environmental quality 0.07410 Water quality 0.6 0.07410 0.04446
Biological productivity 0.06938 Conversion between nutrient levels 0.6 0.05932 0.03559
Total energy conversion 0.1 0.01006 0.00100
Response subsystem 0.38526 Social response 0.38526 Proportion of the tertiary industry 1 0.09873 0.09873
Education level of the population 0.8 0.07902 0.06322
Investment in environmental pollution 0.7 0.06917 0.04842
Planning regulations and policies 0.7 0.06917 0.04842
Degree of public participation 0.7 0.06917 0.04842
eISSN:
2444-8656
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
Volume Open
Journal Subjects:
Life Sciences, other, Mathematics, Applied Mathematics, General Mathematics, Physics
Journal RSS Feed