基于三维生态足迹的中国自然资本利用时空演变及驱动力分析

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2018.10.003

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目前基于三维生态足迹的中国省际自然资本利用研究,仅从生产视角测度评价了区域自然资本存量、流量利用的空间格局。本文以消费视角对2006-2015年中国30个省(市、自治区)及不同地类足迹深度、足迹广度进行动态评估,进而通过存量流量利用比和资本流量占用率刻画了中国自然资本利用可持续性现状,并利用全局和局部回归模型量化其驱动因素及因素效应的空间差异性。结果显示：①中国足迹深度从3.04升至4.17又降至4.06,存量资本消耗有减弱趋势;足迹深度大致表现为：东部>中部>西部,其中上海最高达30.69,青海最低为1.70;②中国足迹广度在0.36~0.39 ghm²/人之间波动;足迹广度总体表现为：西部>中部>东部,其中最大值为新疆0.81 ghm²/人,最小值为上海0.09 ghm²/人;③从组分构成看,化石能源用地和草地是存量资本消耗的主要方式,耕地和建设用地是流量资本占用的主要方式;④中国自然资本利用可持续性呈现变好趋势,省际呈东弱西强的格局;通过回归分析发现,生态足迹强度、城市化率、生态承载力是导致自然资本利用可持续性空间差异的显著因素,且这些因素的效应特征表现出不同的空间模式。生产视角和消费视角的测算结果相结合,可提供全面丰富的生态足迹信息,为相关实际应用提供一定的借鉴。

关键词: 三维生态足迹, 自然资本, 可持续性, 最小二乘法, 地理加权回归, 时空演变, 中国

Abstract:

Dynamic assessment of natural capital utilization can help to track consumption demand of residents and ecological sustainability of regions. To date, studies on natural capital utilization in China's provinces based on the three-dimensional ecological footprint has only measured and evaluated the spatial patterns of regional natural capital stock and flow from the perspective of production. In this study, the footprint depth and size of regions and different land use types in 30 provinces (municipalities, autonomous regions) of China from 2006 to 2015 were first calculated from the consumption perspective. Then the regional sustainability of natural capital utilization was characterized by utilization ratio of stock to flow and occupancy rate of capital flows. Lastly, the driving factors and effects of natural capital utilization were quantified by the methods of ordinary least squares (OLS) and geographically weighted regression (GWR). The results are as follows: (1) China's footprint depth was highly consistent with the changing trend of ecological footprint and ecological deficit—it showed a trend of first growing and then decreasing during 2006 to 2015, and the value changed from 3.04 to 4.06. The main reason is that the continuous rising trend of ecological pressure was reversed due to the reduced contribution of fossil energy land. Ecological footprint depth presented significant differences from east to west—in Shanghai it is up to 30.69 and in Qinghai it is a minimum of 1.70. (2) Ecological footprint size in China was influenced by resource endowments and showed a small fluctuation through time, with an overall pattern of western region > central region > eastern region in space, and the maximum and minimum footprint sizes were respectively 0.81 ghm² in Xinjiang and 0.09 ghm² in Shanghai. Natural capital flow can be improved greatly in the central and western regions. (3) The main components of footprint depth in Chinese provinces were fossil energy land and grassland, and the utilization degrees of other lands varied in different regions. The main components of footprint size in Chinese provinces were cultivated land and construction land, followed by woodland, grassland and water area accounting for a small proportion. (4) The sustainability of natural capital utilization has become better in China, and it showed the spatial pattern of "weak east and strong west". By using OLS regression and GWR, we found that the significant factors that affected the sustainability of natural capital utilization were the intensity of ecological footprint, urbanization rate, and ecological carrying capacity. The influence degree of these factors in different geographical locations showed spatial differences.

Key words: three-dimensional ecological footprint, natural capital, sustainability, ordinary least squares analysis, geographical weighted regression, spatiotemporal evolution, China

郑德凤, 刘晓星, 王燕燕, 吕乐婷. 基于三维生态足迹的中国自然资本利用时空演变及驱动力分析[J]. 地理科学进展, 2018, 37(10): 1328-1339.

Defeng ZHENG, Xiaoxing LIU, Yanyan WANG, Leting LV. Spatiotemporal evolution and driving forces of natural capital utilization in China based on three-dimensional ecological footprint[J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2018, 37(10): 1328-1339.

图/表 10

表1

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

表2

表3

图7

参考文献 24

[1]	杜悦悦, 彭建, 高阳, 等. 2016. 基于三维生态足迹的京津冀城市群自然资本可持续利用分析[J]. 地理科学进展, 35(10): 1186-1196. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2016.10.002
	[Du Y Y, Peng J, Gao Y, et al.2016. Sustainability evaluation of natural capital utilization based on a three-dimensional ecological footprint model: A case study of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei metropolitan region[J]. Progress in Geography, 35(10): 1186-1196.] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2016.10.002
[2]	方恺. 2013. 生态足迹深度和广度: 构建三维模型的新指标[J]. 生态学报, 33(1): 267-274. doi: 10.5846/stxb201111051670
	[Fang K.2013. Ecological footprint depth and size: New indicators for a 3D model[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(1): 267-274.] doi: 10.5846/stxb201111051670
[3]	方恺. 2014. 1999-2008年G20国家自然资本利用的空间格局变化[J]. 资源科学, 36(4): 793-800.
	[Fang K.2014. Changes in the spatial distribution of natural capital use among G20 countries from 1999 to 2008[J]. Resources Science, 36(4): 793-800.]
[4]	方恺. 2015. 基于改进生态足迹三维模型的自然资本利用特征分析: 选取11个国家为数据源[J]. 生态学报, 35(11): 3766-3777. doi: 10.5846/stxb201308022011
	[Fang K.2015. Assessing the natural capital use of eleven nations: An application of a revised three-dimensional model of ecological footprint[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(11): 3766-3777.] doi: 10.5846/stxb201308022011
[5]	方恺, Heijungs Reinout.2012. 自然资本核算的生态足迹三维模型研究进展[J]. 地理科学进展, 31(12): 1700-1707. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2012.12.016
	[Fang K, Reinout H.2012. A review on three-dimensional ecological footprint model for natural capital accounting[J]. Progress in Geography, 31(12): 1700-1707.] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2012.12.016
[6]	方恺, 高凯, 李焕承. 2013. 基于三维生态足迹模型优化的自然资本利用国际比较[J]. 地理研究, 32(9): 1657-1667.
	[Fang K, Gao K, Li H C.2013. International comparison of natural capital use: A three-dimensional model optimization of ecological footprint[J]. Geographical Research, 32(9): 1657-1667.]
[7]	方恺, 李焕承. 2012. 基于生态足迹深度和广度的中国自然资本利用省际格局[J]. 自然资源学报, 27(12): 1995-2005. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.12.001
	[Fang K, Li H C.2012. Provincial pattern of China's natural capital use: A modification and application of ecological footprint depth and size[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 27(12): 1995-2005.] doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.12.001
[8]	靳相木, 柳乾坤. 2017. 基于三维生态足迹模型扩展的土地承载力指数研究: 以温州市为例[J]. 生态学报, 37(9): 2982-2993.
	[Jin X M, Liu Q K.2017. Analysis of a land carrying capacity index based on an expanded three-dimensional ecological footprint model: A case study of Wenzhou[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 37(9): 2982-2993.]
[9]	刘某承, 李文华, 谢高地. 2010. 基于净初级生产力的中国生态足迹产量因子测算[J]. 生态学杂志, 29(3): 592-597. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4831.2010.05.001
	[Liu M C, Li W H, Xie G D.2010. Estimation of China ecological footprint production coefficient based on net primary productivity[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 29(3): 592-597.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4831.2010.05.001
[10]	马明德, 马学娟, 谢应忠, 等. 2014. 宁夏生态足迹影响因子的偏最小二乘回归分析[J]. 生态学报, 34(3): 682-689. doi: 10.5846/stxb201211181613
	[Ma M D, Ma X J, Xie Y Z, et al.2014. Analysis the relationship between ecological footprint (EF) of Ningxia and influencing factors: Partial least-squares regression[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 34(3): 682-689.] doi: 10.5846/stxb201211181613
[11]	马维兢, 刘斌, 杨德伟, 等. 2017. 基于三维生态足迹模型的流域自然资本动态评估: 以福建省九龙江流域为例[J]. 资源科学, 39(5): 871-880.
	[Ma W J, Liu B, Yang D W, et al.2017. Dynamic evaluation of natural capital using the three-dimension ecological footprint model: The Jiulong River Basin in Southeast China[J]. Resources Science, 39(5): 871-880.]
[12]	孙才志, 张智雄. 2017 中国水生态足迹广度、深度评价及空间格局[J]. 生态学报, 37(21): 7048-7060. doi: 10.5846/stxb201608101640
	[Sun C Z, Zhang Z X.2017. Assessment of water ecological footprint size, depth, and spatial pattern in China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 37(21): 7048-7060. doi: 10.5846/stxb201608101640
[13]	孙克, 徐中民. 2016. 基于地理加权回归的中国灰水足迹人文驱动因素分析[J]. 地理研究, 35(1): 37-48.
	[Sun K, Xu Z M.2016. The impacts of human driving factors on grey water footprint in China using a GWR model[J]. Geographical Research, 35(1): 37-48.]
[14]	谢鸿宇. 2008. 生态足迹评价模型的改进和应用[M]. 北京: 化学工业出版社.
	[Xie H Y.2008. Improvement and application of ecological footprint evaluation model[M]. Beijing, China: Chemical Industry Press.]
[15]	徐中民, 程国栋, 张志强. 2006. 生态足迹方法的理论解析[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 16(6): 69-78. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2006.06.015
	[Xu Z M, Cheng G D, Zhang Z Q.2006. A resolution to the conception of ecological footprint[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 16(6): 69-78.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2006.06.015
[16]	张星星, 曾辉. 2017. 珠江三角洲城市群三维生态足迹动态变化及驱动力分析[J]. 环境科学学报, 37(2): 771-778.
	[Zhang X X, Zeng H.2017. Dynamic of three dimensional ecological footprint in the Pearl River Delta and its driving factors[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 37(2): 771-778.]
[17]	Daly H E, Farley J.2004. Ecological economics: Principles and applications[M]. Washington, DC: Island Press.
[18]	Fotheringham A S, Brunsdon C, Charlton M.2002. Geographically weighted regression: The analysis of spatially varying relationships[M]. New York: John Wiley.
[19]	Lin, D. Hanscom, L. Martindill, J.et al.2018. Working guidebook to the national footprint accounts. 2018 edition[M]. Oakland, CA: Global Footprint Network.
[20]	Mancini M S, Galli A, Niccolucci V, et al.2017. Stocks and flows of natural capital: Implications for ecological footprint[J]. Ecological Indicators, 77: 123-128. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.01.033
[21]	Niccolucci V, Bastianoni S, Tiezzi E B P, et al.2009. How deep is the footprint? A 3D representation[J]. Ecological Modelling, 220(20): 2819-2823. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.07.018
[22]	Niccolucci V, Galli A, Reed A, et al.2011. Towards a 3D national ecological footprint geography[J]. Ecological Modelling, 222(16): 2939-2944. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.04.020
[23]	Rees W E.1992. Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: What urban economics leaves out[J]. Environment and Urbanization, 4(2): 121-130. doi: 10.1177/095624789200400212
[24]	Wackernagel M, Rees W E.1996. Our ecological footprint: Reducing human impact on the earth[M]. Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Publishers.

自变量	系数估计	标准差	t统计量	显著性p
常数项	-72.994	58.027	-1.26	0.221
第二产业比重	0.011	0.095	0.11	0.910
城市化率	0.255	0.113	2.26	0.034
城镇居民人均消费支出	6.565	6.281	1.05	0.307
生态承载力	-1.722	0.970	-1.77	0.089
资本存量	-0.412	1.098	-0.38	0.711
生态足迹强度	10.679	4.099	2.61	0.016