流域生態系在支持水文調節與土壤保持等生態系服務方面扮演關鍵角色，氣候變遷卻深刻影響這些服務的供給，而服務供應變化與利益相關者脆弱性之間的空間連結，目前仍未被充分理解。本研究以臺灣南部曾文溪流域為案例，建構一套整合氣候情境分析、服務間權衡評估與利益相關者脆弱性識別的三層次評估框架，整合 InVEST 生態系服務模型、臺灣氣候變遷推估資訊平台（TCCIP）AR6 氣候情境資料及村里尺度社會經濟指標，評估基準期（2016–2020）與未來情境（2040–2049，涵蓋 SSP1-2.6、SSP2-4.5、SSP3-7.0、SSP5-8.5）下水文調節與土壤保持服務之變化。在服務與情境層次上，服務變化呈現顯著的非線性特徵，中度排放情境（SSP2-4.5）反而產生最劇烈的變化幅度；空間上，上游森林集水區對氣候擾動最為敏感，中游農業帶則成為多重服務退化的脆弱熱點，下游平原變化相對溫和。在服務與服務層次上，基流供應與逕流滯留在多數情境下呈權衡關係，逕流滯留與沉積物留存呈協同關係，但此關係隨特定情境逆轉；權衡集中於中下游農業帶、協同集中於中上游森林區的空間分布具有跨情境一致性。在服務與受益人層次上，51個高老化村里在所有中高排放情境下皆面臨逕流滯留能力下降，集中於中游左鎮、大內、南化等聚落，為跨情境一致的脆弱熱區；28個高灌溉需求村里則經歷情境間供需類型轉變，顯示基流供需分布具動態風險；不同受益者在相同情境下面臨相反處境，凸顯調適規劃需兼顧多元受益者的差異化需求。本研究村里尺度的三層次框架能捕捉社會人口異質性並對應既有治理機制，可推廣至臺灣其他流域，為流域治理與氣候調適規劃提供空間明確的科學依據。

Climate change profoundly affects watershed ecosystem services, yet the spatial linkages between service supply changes and stakeholder vulnerability remain inadequately understood. This study develops a three-tier assessment framework—integrating climate scenario analysis, inter-service trade-off evaluation, and stakeholder vulnerability identification—applied to the Zengwen River watershed in southern Taiwan. Results show that SSP2-4.5 produced the most dramatic service changes rather than the highest-emission pathways, with upstream forested catchments most sensitive and midstream agricultural zones emerging as vulnerability hotspots. Trade-offs between baseflow supply and flow retention concentrated in middle-to-lower agricultural reaches, while synergies between flow retention and sediment retention concentrated in middle-to-upper forested areas, both with cross-scenario spatial consistency. At the stakeholder tier, 51 aging villages consistently faced flow retention decline, while 28 irrigation-dependent villages experienced scenario-dependent supply-demand transitions, highlighting the necessity of balancing differentiated stakeholder needs in adaptation planning.

李明熹、林煥軒、詹于婷（2014）。利用日、月及年降雨量估算年降雨沖蝕指數。中華水土保持學報，45(2)，103-109。
李汝媜（2019）。集水區農業土地使用與水資源調節服務之關聯─以北勢溪流域為例。﹝碩士論文。國立臺北大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/v8qk69。
林俐玲、張舒婷（2008）。土壤沖蝕性指數估算公式之研究。中華水土保持學報，39(4)，355-366。
林怡甄（2023）。流域管理與生態安全觀點下流域特性差異之分析—以高屏溪流域為例。﹝碩士論文。國立成功大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/73z2cf。
周品樺（2024）。氣候與土地利用變遷下的生態系服務時空熱點與權衡關係—以陳有蘭溪流域為例。﹝碩士論文。國立臺灣大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/4q4y7m。
詹為巽、林俐玲、陳樹群（2019）。森林生態系服務效益評估―InVEST之運用。林業研究專訊，26(4)，51-56。
詹進發、王筱雯、羅柳墀（2023）。氣候變遷與農業環境於蘭陽溪流域生態系統之衝擊與調適策略研究（計畫編號：MOST 110-2410-H-003-110）。國立臺灣師範大學。
戴浚哲（2023）。洪水災害調適策略之效益與安全性評估―以屏東縣保力溪為例。﹝碩士論文。國立臺灣大學﹞臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統https://hdl.handle.net/11296/c7uehr。
經濟部水利署（2020）。出流管制技術手冊。經濟部水利署。
Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D., & Smith, M. (1998). Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. FAO, Rome, 300(9), D05109.
Aryal, K., Maraseni, T., & Apan, A. (2022). How much do we know about trade-offs in ecosystem services? A systematic review of empirical research observations. Science of the Total Environment, 806, 151229.
Bagstad, K. J., Villa, F., Batker, D., Harrison-Cox, J., Voigt, B., & Johnson, G. W. (2014). From theoretical to actual ecosystem services: mapping beneficiaries and spatial flows in ecosystem service assessments. Ecology and Society, 19(2), 64.
Bennett, E. M., Peterson, G. D., & Gordon, L. J. (2009). Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecology Letters, 12(12), 1394–1404.
Brauman, K. A., Daily, G. C., Duarte, T. K. E., & Mooney, H. A. (2007). The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32(1), 67-98.
Chang, H., & Bonnette, M. R. (2016). Climate change and water-related ecosystem services: impacts of drought in California, USA. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 2(12), e01254.
Cole, L. J., Stockan, J., & Helliwell, R. (2020). Managing riparian buffer strips to optimise ecosystem services: A review. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 296, 106891.
Cord, A. F., Bartkowski, B., Beckmann, M., Dittrich, A., Hermans-Neumann, K., Kaim, A., ... & Volk, M. (2017). Towards systematic analyses of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: Main concepts, methods and the road ahead. Ecosystem Services, 28, 264-272.
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., ... & van den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387, 253-260.
Dade, M. C., Mitchell, M. G. E., McAlpine, C. A., & Rhodes, J. R. (2019). Assessing ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: The need for a more mechanistic approach. Ambio, 48, 1116–1128.
Ellison, D., Morris, C. E., Locatelli, B., Sheil, D., Cohen, J., Murdiyarso, D., ... & Sullivan, C. A. (2017). Trees, forests and water: Cool insights for a hot world. Global Environmental Change, 43, 51-61.
Geng, W., Li, Y., Zhang, P., Yang, D., Jing, W., & Rong, T. (2022). Analyzing spatio-temporal changes and trade-offs/synergies among ecosystem services in the Yellow River Basin, China. Ecological Indicators, 138, 108825.
Haase, D., Schwarz, N., Strohbach, M., Kroll, F., & Seppelt, R. (2012). Synergies, trade-offs, and losses of ecosystem services in urban regions: an integrated multiscale framework applied to the Leipzig-Halle Region, Germany. Ecology and Society, 17(3), 22.
Hamel, P., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Sim, S., & Mueller, C. (2015). A new approach to modeling the sediment retention service (InVEST 3.0): Case study of the Cape Fear catchment, North Carolina, USA. Science of the Total Environment, 524, 166-177.
Hamel, P., Guerry, A. D., Polasky, S., Han, B., Douglass, J. A., Hamann, M., ... & Daily, G. C. (2021). Mapping the benefits of nature in cities with the InVEST software. npj Urban Sustainability, 1(1), 25.
Hargreaves, G. H., & Samani, Z. A. (1985). Reference crop evapotranspiration from temperature. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 1(2), 96-99.
Hou, Y., Lü, Y., Chen, W., & Fu, B. (2017). Temporal variation and spatial scale dependency of ecosystem service interactions: a case study on the central Loess Plateau of China. Landscape Ecology, 32(6), 1201-1217.
Huang, L., Liao, F. H., Lohse, K. A., Larson, D. M., Fragkias, M., Lybecker, D. L., & Baxter, C. V. (2019). Land conservation can mitigate freshwater ecosystem services degradation due to climate change in a semiarid catchment: The case of the Portneuf River catchment, Idaho, USA. Science of the Total Environment, 651, 1796-1809.
Kareiva, P. (Ed.). (2011). Natural capital: Theory and practice of mapping ecosystem services. Oxford University Press.
Khoi, D. N., & Suetsugi, T. (2014). Impact of climate and land-use changes on hydrological processes and sediment yield—a case study of the Be River catchment, Vietnam. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 59(5), 1095-1108.
Koutroulis, A. G., Papadimitriou, L. V., Grillakis, M. G., Tsanis, I. K., Wyser, K., Caesar, J., & Betts, R. A. (2018). Simulating hydrological impacts under climate change: implications from methodological differences of a Pan European Assessment. Water, 10(10), 1331.
Langhans, K. E., Schmitt, R. J., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Anderson, C. B., Bolaños, C. V., Cabezas, F. V., ... & Daily, G. C. (2022). Modeling multiple ecosystem services and beneficiaries of riparian reforestation in Costa Rica. Ecosystem Services, 57, 101470.
Lin, Y. P., Lin, P. C., Wuryandani, S., Lin, C. M., & Ros, G. H. (2025). Projecting food-energy-water sustainability through ecosystem service modeling under climate and land use change in a subtropical agricultural watershed. Agricultural Water Management, 318, 109737.
Mandle, L., Wolny, S., Bhagabati, N., Helsingen, H., Hamel, P., Bartlett, R., ... & Su Mon, M. (2017). Assessing ecosystem service provision under climate change to support conservation and development planning in Myanmar. PLoS ONE, 12(9), e0184951.
McElwee, P. D., Harrison, P. A., van Huysen, T. L., Alonso Roldán, V., Barrios, E.,"; et al. (2024). Summary for Policymakers of the Thematic Assessment Report on the Interlinkages among Biodiversity, Water, Food and Health. IPBES Secretariat, Bonn, Germany.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Momblanch, A., Beevers, L., Srinivasalu, P., Kulkarni, A., & Holman, I. P. (2020). Enhancing production and flow of freshwater ecosystem services in a managed Himalayan river system under uncertain future climate. Climatic Change, 162(2), 343-361.
Mooney, H., Larigauderie, A., Cesario, M., Elmquist, T., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Lavorel, S., ... & Yahara, T. (2009). Biodiversity, climate change, and ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 1(1), 46-54.
Natural Capital Project. (2026). InVEST 3.17.2. Stanford University, University of Minnesota, Chinese Academy of Sciences, The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, Stockholm Resilience Centre and the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
Ouyang, Z., Zheng, H., Xiao, Y., Polasky, S., Liu, J., Xu, W., ... & Daily, G. C. (2016). Improvements in ecosystem services from investments in natural capital. Science, 352(6292), 1455-1459.
Raudsepp-Hearne, C., Peterson, G. D., & Bennett, E. M. (2010). Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(11), 5242-5247.
Riis, T., Kelly-Quinn, M., Aguiar, F. C., Manolaki, P., Bruno, D., Bejarano, M. D., ... & Dufour, S. (2020). Global overview of ecosystem services provided by riparian vegetation. BioScience, 70(6), 501-514.
Seddon, N., Chausson, A., Berry, P., Girardin, C. A., Smith, A., & Turner, B. (2020). Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 375(1794), 20190120.
Thierry, H., Parrott, L., & Robinson, B. (2021). Next steps for ecosystem service models: integrating complex interactions and beneficiaries. FACETS, 6(1), 1649-1669.
Trenberth, K. E. (1999). Conceptual framework for changes of extremes of the hydrological cycle with climate change. Climatic Change, 42, 327-339.
Turkelboom, F., Leone, M., Jacobs, S., Kelemen, E., García-Llorente, M., Baró, F., ... & Rusch, V. (2018). When we cannot have it all: Ecosystem services trade-offs in the context of spatial planning. Ecosystem Services, 29, 566-578.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (2000). Hydrologic modeling system HEC-HMS: Technical reference manual (CPD-74B). Hydrologic Engineering Center.
Vaghefi, S. A., & Boano, F. (2025). A global assessment of freshwater ecosystem services under climate change. Ecological Indicators, 170, 113058.
Walker, G. (2012). Environmental justice: Concepts, evidence and politics. Routledge.
Wasko, C., Nathan, R., Stein, L., & O'Shea, D. (2021). Evidence of shorter more extreme rainfalls and increased flood variability under climate change. Journal of Hydrology, 603, 126994.
Webber, J. B. W. (2012). A bi-symmetric log transformation for wide-range data. Measurement Science and Technology, 24(2), 027001.
Wieland, R., Ravensbergen, S., Gregr, E. J., Satterfield, T., & Chan, K. M. (2016). Debunking trickle-down ecosystem services: the fallacy of omnipotent, homogeneous beneficiaries. Ecological Economics, 121, 175-180.
Wischmeier, W. H., & Smith, D. D. (1978). Predicting rainfall erosion losses: A guide to conservation planning (No. 537). U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Zhang, B., Zheng, L., Wang, Y., Li, N., Li, J., Yang, H., & Bi, Y. (2023). Multiscale ecosystem service synergies/trade-offs and their driving mechanisms in the Han River Basin, China: implications for watershed management. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(15), 43440-43454.