## 3 Results
### Factors Influencing Forest Ecological Security  
#### 3.5.1 Prefecture-Specific Influences  
Forest ecological security was influenced differently by the influencing factors in 16 prefectures based on gray correlation degree (Tables 3 and 4), thereby suggesting huge differences in the influencing factors in these prefectures. The major influencing factors in Nujiang included the percentage of natural forest stock (0.993), forest coverage (0.976), natural forest acreage (0.964), intensity of chemical fertilizer application (0.944), and intensity of government forestry investment (0.924). The gray correlation degree of forest state index in this prefecture was greater than that of its forest pressure index, thereby indicating that humans were not the main pressure factor that threatened forest ecological security in Nujiang. Meanwhile, the major influencing factors in Qujing, which obtained the lowest forest ecological security index in the whole of Yunnan, included forest ecological service function value per unit acreage (0.988), forest coverage (0.987), mixed forest percentage (0.983), forest age composition (0.974), and annual average temperature (0.957), thereby suggesting that forest pressure was not the main influencing factor. The major influencing factors in Lijiang, which obtained a high ecological security index, included percentage of secondary industries (1), number of days when the air quality reached or exceeded level II (0.987), forest coverage (0.981), population density (0.979), percentage of the primary industry (0.977), and annual average temperature (0.968). In sum, forest status and forest pressure indicators had the greatest influence on forest ecological security in these prefectures. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Forest Status**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Pressure**} \\ \cline{2-9}
**Prefectures** & **Forest** & **Percentage of** & **Percentage of** & **Percentage of** & **Population** & **Percentage of** & **Forest** & **Percentage of Nature** \\  & **Coverage/\%** & **Nature Forest** & **Nature Forest** & **Public** & **Density/** & **Secondary** & **Intensity/** & **Reserve** \\  & & & **Accage/\%** & **Accumulation/\%** & **Forest/\%** & **(People/km\({}^{2}\))** & **Industry/\%** & **(10,000 m\({}^{2}\))** & **Acreage/\%** \\ \hline Qujing & 43.33 & 60.09 & 52.33 & 52.13 & 209 & 39.39 & 29.02 & 9.56 \\ Baoshan & 65.01 & 58.42 & 68.27 & 21.81 & 135 & 34.79 & 50.66 & 5.52 \\ Zhaotong & 34.98 & 52.12 & 51.92 & 45.93 & 242 & 43.5 & 20.88 & 4.82 \\ Kunming & 48.76 & 69.54 & 75.18 & 60.47 & 317 & 39.98 & 12.48 & 1.32 \\ Wenshan & 42.24 & 70.07 & 70.15 & 33.82 & 115 & 35.91 & 52.37 & 2.99 \\ Puer & 68.83 & 71.79 & 78.65 & 25.87 & 59 & 34.8 & 153.95 & 1.83 \\ Honghe & 47.27 & 68.73 & 78.42 & 39.17 & 144 & 45.25 & 59.58 & 5.64 \\ Dehong & 68.78 & 67.84 & 79.06 & 28.29 & 114 & 24.56 & 24.88 & 4.62 \\ Lincong & 64.69 & 68.64 & 85.33 & 26.84 & 106 & 33.82 & 39.31 & 8.56 \\ Dai & 60.81 & 51.95 & 60.23 & 42.95 & 125 & 39.53 & 31.98 & 2.87 \\ Yuxi & 56.7 & 77.03 & 83.88 & 52.46 & 158 & 54.95 & 15.73 & 6.58 \\ Chuviong & 65.86 & 65.53 & 64.27 & 44.89 & 96 & 38.25 & 43.14 & 6.63 \\ Lijiang & 68.48 & 68.69 & 72.41 & 48.58 & 62 & 39.78 & 30.80 & 1.98 \\ Xishuangban & 80.79 & 63.59 & 78.74 & 55.41 & 61 & 28.17 & 44.34 & 20.24 \\ Diqing & 75.03 & 97.17 & 99.15 & 92.25 & 18 & 34.95 & 15.70 & 13.81 \\ Nujiang & 75.31 & 92.91