编号 lyqk011259

中文标题 城市生态风景林公众康养效益评价

作者 洪志猛  兰思仁  战韵竹 

作者单位 1. 福建省林业科学研究院 福州 35001;
2. 福建农林大学园林学院 福州 350002

期刊名称 中国城市林业 

年份 2023 

卷号 21

期号 6

栏目名称 研究论文 

中文摘要 城市生态风景林是公众主要的户外活动场所，在健康中国背景下，提高生态风景林康养效益具有重要意义。选择福州国家森林公园竹林、木荷林、针阔混交林及水杉林4种类型林分作为试验林，利用Ergo LAB仪器数据平台采集受试者的肌电（EMG）、皮肤电（EDA）、血容量脉搏（PPG）、呼吸频率（RESP）4项生理指标，探讨不同林分类型对公众康养效益的影响。结果表明：1）4种类型林分对生理指标康养恢复效果明显，分别达到72.92%、60.94%、57.29%、67.19%。2）4种类型林分的康养效益从好到差依次为竹林>水杉林>针阔混交林>木荷林，其中，竹林的EMG、EDA、PPG和RESP 4项生理康复指标均达到极显著差异（P<0.01）；水杉林的EDA、RESP指标达到极显著差异（P<0.01），EMG达到显著差异（P<0.05）；针阔混交林EMG达到显著差异；木荷林4项生理康养指标均无显著差异（P>0.05）。3）同一林分类型对不同年龄人群结构的康养效益也不同，老年人在竹林环境的EMG、PPG指标恢复效果显著，中年人在EDA、RESP指标恢复效果较好，而中年人和青年人恢复效果差异性不显著。综上可知，城市生态风景林在一定程度上对公众具有缓解压力作用，但不同林分类型康养效益存在差异，同一林分类型对不同年龄人群结构康养效益也存在差异。未来生态风景林林分改造应充分考虑不同林分类型差异性，设计适宜不同人群结构的林分康养环境，满足公众康养效益的需求。

关键词 城市生态风景林  森林康养  生理响应  效益评价  福州国家森林公园 

基金项目 省属公益类科研院所基本科研专项（闽财指〔2023〕600号），福建省林业科技推广项目（2021TG09）

英文标题 Evaluation on Public Health Benefits of Urban Landscape Ecological Forest

作者英文名 Hong Zhimeng, Lan Siren, Zhan Yunzhu

单位英文名 1. Fujian Academy of Forestry Sciences, Fuzhou 350012, China;
2. College of Landscape Architecture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China

英文摘要 Urban landscape ecological forest is the main place that the public select for outdoor activities. Under the background of Healthy China Initiative, it is significant to improve the health benefits of landscape ecological forest. In this paper, four types of landscape ecological forest including bamboo forest, Schima superba forest, coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest and Metasequoia glyptostroboides forest in Fuzhou National Forest Park are selected as experimental forests, and the data platform of Ergo LAB instrument is used to collect participants' physiological indicators of electromyography (EMG), electrocutaneous (EDA), photoplethysmography (PPG) and respiratory rate (RESP), to explore the impact of forest types on public health benefits. The results show:1) The effects of bamboo forest, S. superba forest, coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest, and M. glyptostroboides forest on the physiological rehabilitation indexes is obvious, and the recovery rates reach 72.92%, 60.94%, 57.29% and 67.19%, respectively; 2) The health benefits of the four forest types can be ordered from good to bad as bamboo forest >M. glyptostroboides forest > coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest > S. superba forest. The physiological rehabilitation indexes of EMG, EDA, PPG and RESP in bamboo forest environment are significantly different. The indexes of EDA and RESP of M. glyptostroboides forest are significantly different while the EMG is obviously different. The EMG of coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest is significantly different. There are no significant differences in the four physiological rehabilitation indexes of S. superba forest; and 3) People groups of different age structures have varied health benefits even the same forest type. The elders show a remarkable rehabilitation effect in terms of EMG and PPG in bamboo forest, the middle-aged persons have a relatively good effect in EDA and RESP, while there is no significant difference in the four indexes for young people. In general, urban landscape ecological forests have the certain effect in relieving pressure on the public, but different landscape ecological forests have the different health benefits and there are significantly different in the health benefits of the same forest type for people groups of different age structures. In the future, the improvement of landscape ecological forests should fully take the differentiation of forest types into account, design the forest environment that people groups of different age structures need, and meet the demand of the public for health benefit.

英文关键词 urban landscape ecological forest;forest-based health and wellness;physiological response;benefit evaluation;Fuzhou National Forest Park

起始页码 91

截止页码 97

投稿时间 2023/8/24

作者简介 洪志猛(1976-),男,硕士,高级工程师,主要从事观赏园艺和森林生态研究。Email:328180160@qq.com

通讯作者介绍 兰思仁(1963-),男,教授,博士生导师,主要从事风景园林规划与设计研究。Email:lsr9636@163.com

E-mail lsr9636@163.com

DOI 10.12169/zgcsly.2023.08.24.0003

参考文献 [1] KARJALAINEN E,SARJALA T,RAITIO H.Promoting human health through forests:overview and major challenges[J].Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine,2010,15(1):1-8.
[2] TSUNETSUGU Y,LEE J,PARK B J,et al.Physiological and psychological effects of viewing urban forest landscapes assessed by multiple measurements[J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2013,113:90-93.
[3] 刘艳波,王焕琦,王洪俊,等.长白山二道白河区森林康养对人体免疫功能的影响[J].中国城市林业,2021,19(6):105-109.
[4] 李少宁,李嫒,时聪,等.城市森林不同林分对空气负离子及臭氧浓度交互效应响应机制研究[J].西南林业大学学报(自然科学),2023,43(4):74-80.
[5] 石美丽,种培芳.城市森林公园生态服务价值评价:以合肥市滨湖森林公园为例[J].国土与自然资源研究,2023(4):81-85.
[6] 王冰,赵新新.不同配置模式的城市森林植被对PM_2.5的吸附研究[J].沈阳农业大学学报,2022,53(2):204-212.
[7] 王亚飞,邱尔发,韩玉丽.基于EKC曲线的北京市绿地生态服务价值研究[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2017,41(2):181-186.
[8] GAUDIO N,GENDRE X,SAUDREAU M,et al.Impact of tree canopy on thermal and radiative microclimates in a mixed temperate forest:a new statistical method to analyse hourly temporal dynamics[J].Agricultural & Forest Meteorology,2017,237/238:71-79.
[9] DE ABREU-HARBICH L V,LABAKI L C,MATZARAKIS A.Effect of tree planting design and tree species on human thermal comfort in the tropics[J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2015,138:99-109.
[10] 郝培显,刘雨沙,王琛,等.城市森林环境对正负情绪状态影响的Meta分析[J].林业与生态科学,2023,38(1):106-115.
[11] 朱玉洁,翁羽西,傅伟聪,等.声景感知对森林公园健康效益的影响:以福州国家森林公园为例[J].林业科学,2021,57(3):9-17.
[12] 张月娟,袁庆叶,刘艺芳,等.森林康养区空气负氧离子与环境因素相关性研究:以北京松山自然保护区为例[J].林业科技,2023,48(1):52-57.
[13] 刘兴诏,林丽丽,董建文,等.国家森林公园生态系统服务评估:以福州国家森林公园为例[J].石河子大学学报(自然科学版),2019,37(5):596-603.
[14] 李永宁,张宾兰,秦淑英,等.郁闭度及其测定方法研究与应用[J].世界林业研究,2008,21(1):40-46.
[15] SCHROEDER H,DANIEL T C.Progress in predicting the perceived scenic beauty of forest landscapes[J].Forest Science,1981,27(1):71-80.
[16] 王雁,陈鑫峰.心理物理学方法在国外森林景观评价中的应用[J].林业科学,1999,35(5):110-117.
[17] ULRICH R S,SIMONS R F,LOSITO B D,et al.Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments[J].Journal of Environmental Psychology,1991,11(3):201-230.
[18] 令有为.皮肤电指标在人员选拔问卷中的应用研究[D].兰州:西北师范大学,2019
[19] PARK B J,TSUNETSUGU Y,MORIKAWA T,et al.Physiological and psychological effects of walking in stay-in forest therapy[J].Japanese Journal of Hygiene,2014,69(2):98-103.
[20] WANG X B,SHI Y X,ZHANG B,et al.The influence of forest resting environments on stress using virtual reality[J].International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,2019,16(18):3263.
[21] CACKOWSKI J M,NASAR J L.The restorative effects of roadside vegetation:implications for automobile driver anger and frustration[J].Environment and Behavior,2003,35(6):736-751.
[22] 胡菲菲,朱舒欣,何双玉,等.基于Hiscite和CNKI计量化分析的中外森林康养实证研究比较[J].中国城市林业,2021,19(5):46-52
[23] 宋菊芳,吴金宁,李坤林,等.社区尺度下城市绿地对老年人健康的影响机制[J].中国城市林业,2023,21(3):82-87.
[24] 董玉萍,刘合林,齐君.城市绿地与居民健康关系研究进展[J].国际城市规划,2020,35(5):70-79.
[25] 宋阳,王成,段文军,等.基于动物行为表现的四种森林群落环境的康养效果[J].生态学杂志,2018,37(12):3556-3565.
[26] 吴楚才,吴章文,罗江滨.植物精气研究[M].北京:中国林业出版社,2006.
[27] 殷倩,俞益武,高岩,等.3种杉科植物挥发性有机化合物成分[J].东北林业大学学报,2013,41(6):23-26.
[28] 袁兴华,梁柏,谢正生.木荷鲜花香气化学成分研究初报[J].广东林业科技,2008,24(5):41-44.
[29] 李卿.森林医学[M].北京:科学出版社,2013
[30] SONG X H,LI H,LI C R,et al.Effects of VOCs from Leaves of Acer truncatum Bunge and Cedrus deodara on human physiology and psychology[J].Urban Forestry & Urban Greening,2016,19:29-34.
[31] CHIANG Y C,LI D Y,JANE H A.Wild or tended nature?The effects of landscape location and vegetation density on physiological and psychological responses[J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2017,167:72-83.
[32] 林葳.基于康养效益的竹林景区微观空间结构与人体适应性研究[D].雅安:四川农业大学,2020.
[33] HUANG S P,QI J D,LI W, et al.The contribution to stress recovery and attention restoration potential of exposure to urban green spaces in low-density residential areas[J].International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,2021,18(16):8713.
[34] 姜涛,杨雪,吕兵洋,等.观赏竹景观对不同人群的视觉生理影响[J].竹子研究汇刊,2016,35(1):58-62.

PDF全文 浏览全文