基于生态足迹模型修正的忻州市生态承载力空间差异变化
|
摘要
为了给忻州市矿粮复合区与重点生态功能区生态环境治理提供科学依据,在现有生态足迹模型中增加了包括废气、废水和固体废弃物科目的污染排放账户和水资源账户,重新确定了忻州各项生物账户全球平均产量与生产性土地均衡因子。采用修正后的生态足迹模型测算了忻州市14个县(区)生态足迹和生态承载力空间差异。主要结论为:人均生态足迹集中于能源资源相对丰富的县域,如静乐、河曲、保德、原平;忻州生态承载力主要来自于耕地与林地,人均生态承载力主要集中于相对资源富裕、人口较多的县域,如宁武、静乐、神池、五寨、岢岚、偏关;2004—2009年间生态赤字县域数量呈上升趋势,且整体上向严重赤字区、压力指数大于1的区域集中;依据区域经济活动对自然空间的占用率是否高于全市平均水平,可将忻州市分为两类区域,第一类包括河曲、保德、原平、静乐等4县超过全市平均水平,技术效率较低,对生态环境的扰动较大;另一类为其它8个县级单位,低于全市区平均水平,技术效率较高,对生态环境的影响较小。从能源利用与城镇发展角度分析了空间差异产生的原因。
The indices,waste gas,waste water,solid waste pollution subjects accounts and water resources accounts were added into the current ecological footprint model and the biological account,global average yields and productive land equalization factor were re-identifed to provide reference for mineral-grain compound area and key ecological functional areas comprehensive improvement in Xinzhou. Spatial differences of ecological footprint and ecological capacity among 14 counties( districts) in Xinzhou were estimated. The results were as follows: The ecological footprint per capita was mostly in the county with relatively rich energy resources,such as Jingle,Hequ,Baode,Yuanping. The ecological carrying capacity in Xinzhou was mainly derived from the cultivated land and the forest land,and the ecological capacity per capita concentrated on the resource-rich county with a relatively large population,such as Ningwu,Jingle,Wuzhai,Kelan,Pianguan. During 2004—2009,the number of counties( districts) with ecological deficit increased and trended towards the serious deficit area and the area with pressure index greater than l generally. According to whether the occupancy rate of natural space on regional economic activities is higher than the average level of the whole city,Xinzhou City can be divided into two categories. The first type includes four counties which exceed the average level of the whole city,such as Hequ,Baode,Yuanping and Jingle.The technical efficiency is lower and the disturbance to the ecological environment is greater in these areas. The second type is the other eight counties,which are lower than the average level of the whole city. The technical efficiency is greater and the impact to the ecological environment is lower in these areas. Finally,we analyzed the causes of spatial differences from the perspective of energy utilization and urban development. The findings might provide the scientific evidence for the mine-food complex area and the ecological environment of the key ecological function areas.
The indices,waste gas,waste water,solid waste pollution subjects accounts and water resources accounts were added into the current ecological footprint model and the biological account,global average yields and productive land equalization factor were re-identifed to provide reference for mineral-grain compound area and key ecological functional areas comprehensive improvement in Xinzhou. Spatial differences of ecological footprint and ecological capacity among 14 counties( districts) in Xinzhou were estimated. The results were as follows: The ecological footprint per capita was mostly in the county with relatively rich energy resources,such as Jingle,Hequ,Baode,Yuanping. The ecological carrying capacity in Xinzhou was mainly derived from the cultivated land and the forest land,and the ecological capacity per capita concentrated on the resource-rich county with a relatively large population,such as Ningwu,Jingle,Wuzhai,Kelan,Pianguan. During 2004—2009,the number of counties( districts) with ecological deficit increased and trended towards the serious deficit area and the area with pressure index greater than l generally. According to whether the occupancy rate of natural space on regional economic activities is higher than the average level of the whole city,Xinzhou City can be divided into two categories. The first type includes four counties which exceed the average level of the whole city,such as Hequ,Baode,Yuanping and Jingle.The technical efficiency is lower and the disturbance to the ecological environment is greater in these areas. The second type is the other eight counties,which are lower than the average level of the whole city. The technical efficiency is greater and the impact to the ecological environment is lower in these areas. Finally,we analyzed the causes of spatial differences from the perspective of energy utilization and urban development. The findings might provide the scientific evidence for the mine-food complex area and the ecological environment of the key ecological function areas.
引文
[1] Wackernagel M,Monfreda C,Erb K H,et al. Ecological footprint timeseries of Austria,the Philippines and South Korea for 1961-1999:comparing the conventional approach to an’acturl land area’approach[J]. Land Use Policy,2003,21(3):261-269.
[2] Rees W E.Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity:what urban economics leaves out[J]. Environment and Urbanization,1992,4(2):120-130.
[3]谢高地,曹淑艳,鲁春霞,等.中国生态资源承载力研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2011.
[4]周涛,王云鹏,龚健周,等.生态足迹的模型修正与方法改进述评[J].生态学报,2015,35(14):1-17.
[5]方恺.足迹家族:概念、类型、理论框架与整合模式[J].生态学报,2015,35(6):2741-2748.
[6]张恒义,刘卫东,林育欣,等.基于改进生态足迹模型的浙江省域生态足迹分析[J].生态学报,2009,29(5):2738-2748.
[7]郭晓娜,李泽红,董锁成,等.基于改进生态足迹因子的区域可持续性动态评估-以陕西省为例[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(2):142-146.
[8] Shannon C E,Weaver W.The mathematical theory of communication[M]. Urbana:University of Illinois Press,1949.
[9] Ulanowicz R E.Growth and development:ecosystems phenomenology[M]. New York:Springer-Verlag,2000.
[10]刘乐冕.炎陵县生态足迹动态分析与变化趋势研究[D].长沙:湖南农业大学,2009.
[11]杨屹,加涛.21世纪以来陕西生态足迹和承载力变化[J].生态学报,2015,12(24):1-11.
[12]山西省统计局.忻州统计年鉴[DB/OL].[2016-06-09].http://www.stats-sx.gov.cn/tjsj/tjnj/
[13]忻州市统计局国家统计局忻州调查队.忻州市2013年国民经济和社会发展统计公报[EB/OL].[2016-05-15].http://www.stats-sx.gov.cn/tjsj/tjgb/201706/t20170627_82919.shtml.
[14]忻州市环境保护局.忻州市环境状况公报[EB/OL].[2016-05-19〗http://hbj.sxxz.gov.cn/xxgk/hjzlgb/.
[15]山西省水利厅.山西水资源公报[EB/OL].[2016-05-27].http:∥www.sxwater.gov.cn/zncs/szyc/szygb/.
[16]联合国粮食及农业组织.全球主要农作物产量报告[EB/OL].[2015-01-24].http://www.fao.org/home/en/.
[17]谢鸿宇,叶慧珊.中国主要农产品全球平均产量的更新计算[J].广州大学学报(自然科学版),2008,7(1):76-80.
[18]张家其,王佳,吴宜进,等.恩施地区生态足迹和生态承载力评价[J].长江流域资源与环境,2014,23(5):603-608.
[19]郭荣中,申海建,杨敏华.基于灰色模型的长沙市生态足迹与生态承载力预测分析[J].水土保持研究,2015,22(4):195-200.
[20]焦雯珺,闵庆文,李文华.基于生态系统服务的生态足迹模型构建与应用[J].资源科学,2014,36(11):2392-2340.
[21]汪霞,张洋洋,怡欣,等.基于生态足迹模型的舟曲县生态承载力空间差异[J].兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2014,50(5):687-688.
[22]世界自然基金会.中国生态足迹报告2012[R].北京:中国科学院,2012.
[23]赵鹏宇,郭劲松,崔嫱,等.忻州市相对资源承载力的时空动态变化[J].水土保持研究. 2017,24(2):341-347.
[24]赵鹏宇,步秀芹,崔嫱,等.2004-2013忻州市生态足迹和承载力变化[J].水土保持研究. 2017,24(4):373-378.
[25]赵鹏宇,刘晓东,步秀芹,等.忻州市相对资源承载力的空间结构差异———基于相对资源承载力模型的改进[J].资源与产业. 2017,19(3):60-66.
[2] Rees W E.Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity:what urban economics leaves out[J]. Environment and Urbanization,1992,4(2):120-130.
[3]谢高地,曹淑艳,鲁春霞,等.中国生态资源承载力研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2011.
[4]周涛,王云鹏,龚健周,等.生态足迹的模型修正与方法改进述评[J].生态学报,2015,35(14):1-17.
[5]方恺.足迹家族:概念、类型、理论框架与整合模式[J].生态学报,2015,35(6):2741-2748.
[6]张恒义,刘卫东,林育欣,等.基于改进生态足迹模型的浙江省域生态足迹分析[J].生态学报,2009,29(5):2738-2748.
[7]郭晓娜,李泽红,董锁成,等.基于改进生态足迹因子的区域可持续性动态评估-以陕西省为例[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(2):142-146.
[8] Shannon C E,Weaver W.The mathematical theory of communication[M]. Urbana:University of Illinois Press,1949.
[9] Ulanowicz R E.Growth and development:ecosystems phenomenology[M]. New York:Springer-Verlag,2000.
[10]刘乐冕.炎陵县生态足迹动态分析与变化趋势研究[D].长沙:湖南农业大学,2009.
[11]杨屹,加涛.21世纪以来陕西生态足迹和承载力变化[J].生态学报,2015,12(24):1-11.
[12]山西省统计局.忻州统计年鉴[DB/OL].[2016-06-09].http://www.stats-sx.gov.cn/tjsj/tjnj/
[13]忻州市统计局国家统计局忻州调查队.忻州市2013年国民经济和社会发展统计公报[EB/OL].[2016-05-15].http://www.stats-sx.gov.cn/tjsj/tjgb/201706/t20170627_82919.shtml.
[14]忻州市环境保护局.忻州市环境状况公报[EB/OL].[2016-05-19〗http://hbj.sxxz.gov.cn/xxgk/hjzlgb/.
[15]山西省水利厅.山西水资源公报[EB/OL].[2016-05-27].http:∥www.sxwater.gov.cn/zncs/szyc/szygb/.
[16]联合国粮食及农业组织.全球主要农作物产量报告[EB/OL].[2015-01-24].http://www.fao.org/home/en/.
[17]谢鸿宇,叶慧珊.中国主要农产品全球平均产量的更新计算[J].广州大学学报(自然科学版),2008,7(1):76-80.
[18]张家其,王佳,吴宜进,等.恩施地区生态足迹和生态承载力评价[J].长江流域资源与环境,2014,23(5):603-608.
[19]郭荣中,申海建,杨敏华.基于灰色模型的长沙市生态足迹与生态承载力预测分析[J].水土保持研究,2015,22(4):195-200.
[20]焦雯珺,闵庆文,李文华.基于生态系统服务的生态足迹模型构建与应用[J].资源科学,2014,36(11):2392-2340.
[21]汪霞,张洋洋,怡欣,等.基于生态足迹模型的舟曲县生态承载力空间差异[J].兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2014,50(5):687-688.
[22]世界自然基金会.中国生态足迹报告2012[R].北京:中国科学院,2012.
[23]赵鹏宇,郭劲松,崔嫱,等.忻州市相对资源承载力的时空动态变化[J].水土保持研究. 2017,24(2):341-347.
[24]赵鹏宇,步秀芹,崔嫱,等.2004-2013忻州市生态足迹和承载力变化[J].水土保持研究. 2017,24(4):373-378.
[25]赵鹏宇,刘晓东,步秀芹,等.忻州市相对资源承载力的空间结构差异———基于相对资源承载力模型的改进[J].资源与产业. 2017,19(3):60-66.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |