地理科学进展 ›› 2012, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (12): 1700-1707.doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2012.12.016

• 生态环境 • 上一篇    下一篇

自然资本核算的生态足迹三维模型研究进展

方恺1,2, Heijungs Reinout1   

  1. 1. 荷兰莱顿大学环境科学系, 莱顿2333CC;
    2. 吉林大学环境与资源学院, 长春130012
  • 收稿日期:2012-06-01 修回日期:2012-09-01 出版日期:2012-12-25 发布日期:2012-12-25
  • 作者简介:方恺(1986-),男,博士研究生,主要研究方向为生态经济学。E-mail:fang@cml.leidenuniv.nl
  • 基金资助:

    国家公派留学基金项目(20113005)。

A Review on Three-Dimensional Ecological Footprint Model for Natural Capital Accounting

FANG Kai1,2, HEIJUNGS Reinout1   

  1. 1. Institute of Environmental Sciences, Leiden University, Leiden 2333CC, Netherlands;
    2. College of Environment and Resources, Jilin University, Changchun 130012, China
  • Received:2012-06-01 Revised:2012-09-01 Online:2012-12-25 Published:2012-12-25

摘要: 自然资本核算是可持续发展量化研究的重要课题。近年来颇具影响力的生态足迹方法, 为测度人类占用自然资本的状况提供了可行的途径。本文首先回顾了生态足迹方法应用于自然资本核算的研究成果, 然后从概念、计算方法和优缺点等方面评述了该领域的国际最新进展——生态足迹三维模型, 针对其存在的问题提出了改进和补充方案:①通过明确生态赤字与生态盈余在自然资本性质方面的差异, 将存量资本和流量资本的分类测度扩展到具体的地类层面, 改进了区域尺度上的足迹深度、足迹广度和生态足迹计算方法, 以避免可能存在的生态赤字与生态盈余错误抵消的情况;②构建了人均历史累积足迹广度、足迹广度基尼系数和理论足迹广度3 项新指标, 以分别表征人均自然资本占用的历史累积水平、区域自然资本占用的不公平程度和自然资本存量持续减少对自然资本流量的潜在影响。最后分析了上述新增指标的局限性, 以及自然资本存量方面需要进一步探索的问题。

关键词: 改进, 进展, 三维模型, 生态足迹, 自然资本

Abstract: Natural capital accounting is one of the key research topics in the field of quantitative sustainability assessment. The ecological footprint, which has reached considerable popularity over the past few years, offers us an opportunity to evaluate the natural capital appropriated by humanity. This paper first introduces the research achievements of the ecological footprint applied to the natural capital measurement. Afterwards a three-dimensional ecological footprint model, the latest development in relevant fields, is introduced in terms of its concept, calculation method and main characteristics. In response to the existing shortcomings and deficiencies we identify, the paper makes a great contribution to the model modification and extension in the following two aspects. One attempt is to modify the calculation methods of three key indicators-regional footprint depth, regional footprint size and regional ecological footprint, so as to avoid underestimating the depletion rate of natural capital stocks, and to avoid the possibility that the ecological deficit and ecological surplus are partly offset by each other because they are in different natures from a perspective of natural capital. The differences exist in results before and after the modification of the three-dimensional ecological footprint model, where a fundamental change is that the classification and measure of the capital stocks and capital flows are extended to the specific land types within a given region. The other attempt is to build three indicators, namely Per Capita Historical Cumulative Footprint Size, Gini Coefficient of Footprint Size, and Theoretical Footprint Size. They are designed for representing the historically cumulative appropriation of natural capital, the inter-regional inequalities in natural capital appropriation, and the impact of decline in natural capital stocks on natural capital flows, respectively. Finally, this paper discusses the limitations of the three emerging indicators, and proposes some priorities for further improvement on measuring the use of natural capital stocks.

Key words: ecological footprint, modification, natural capital, research progress, three-dimensional model