土地分离与共享框架的研究现状及应用拓展

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.05.015

地理科学进展 ›› 2020, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (5): 880-888.doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.05.015

土地分离与共享框架的研究现状及应用拓展

胡甜^1,², 吴健生^1,^2,^*(), 彭建², 李卫锋³

^1. 北京大学城市规划与设计学院城市人居环境科学与技术重点实验室,广东深圳 518055
^2. 北京大学城市与环境学院地表过程与模拟教育部重点实验室,北京 100871
^3. 香港大学建筑学院城市规划与设计系,香港 999077

收稿日期:2019-04-01 修回日期:2019-09-27 出版日期:2020-05-28 发布日期:2020-07-28
通讯作者: 吴健生
作者简介:胡甜(1989— ),女,山东潍坊人,博士生,主要从事景观生态与土地利用研究。E-mail:tianahu@pku.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(41671180)

Development and prospect of the land-sparing versus land-sharing framework

HU Tian^1,², WU Jiansheng^1,^2,^*(), PENG Jian², LI Weifeng³

^1. Key Laboratory for Urban Habitat Environmental Science and Technology, School of Urban Planning and Design, Peking University, Shenzhen 518055, China
^2. Key Laboratory for Earth Surface Processes, Ministry of Education, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
^3. Department of Urban Planning and Design, Faculty of Architecture, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China

Received:2019-04-01 Revised:2019-09-27 Online:2020-05-28 Published:2020-07-28
Contact: WU Jiansheng
Supported by:
National Natural Science Foundation of China(41671180)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

“土地分离”与“土地共享”是2种不同的土地利用思维方式,反映人类土地利用的决策选择。中国有大量包含土地分离和共享思维的实践,但缺乏将这些实践案例纳入统一体系的研究范式。土地分离与共享框架最初用来探索粮食生产与生物多样性保护的权衡关系。经过10多年的发展,其理论内涵和研究内容不断丰富,是地理资源与环境领域重要的研究议题。论文在解析土地分离与共享框架内涵的基础上,综述土地分离与共享框架的相关研究成果,探讨土地分离与土地共享的策略选择。研究发现土地分离与共享相关研究存在从农业环境主题向城市管理主题转化的趋势,而且除了强调单一生物多样性保护和农业生产外,还有少数研究开始关注碳储存、土壤保持等其他生态系统服务类型;尽管土地分离与土地共享策略各有其优势和局限,但在目前的研究和实践中,土地分离比土地共享更受青睐。论文基于土地的多功能性进一步扩展该框架在城市用地管理中的应用,可为复杂社会—生态系统可持续发展提供路径指导。

关键词: 土地分离, 土地共享, 生态保护, 生物多样性, 自然栖息地, 土地利用决策

Abstract:

Land sparing and land sharing are two alternative land-use strategies, which was framed by Green in 2005. The land-sparing versus land-sharing framework was initially designed to explore trade-offs between food production and biodiversity conservation by means of the density-yield curve. A debate on whether the land-sparing strategy or the land-sharing strategy is optimal has been on-going in the last 10 years and it has enriched relevant theories. Considering that there are many land-sparing practices but limited relevant research to provide guidance for land management in China, in this article we introduced the land-sparing versus land-sharing framework as a new perspective. We reviewed 317 articles in the Web of Science database and conducted bibliometric analysis for a better understanding of the context, methodology, and principles of the framework. The current status and historical trend referring to major topics and research subjects were analyzed. We also summarized decision-making options in previous studies and further advanced the framework from two aspects, focusing on land multi-functionality and the parallel between agriculture and urban systems. We found that land-sparing strategy was more prominent comparing with land-sharing strategy in studies and practices around the world in spite of the pros and cons of each. The advanced framework in this study extended the research object from agriculture to urban, and integrated the diversity of ecosystem services. This study may provide some guidance for the sustainable development of the social-ecological system and enrich the theoretical basis of the land-sparing versus land-sharing framework.

Key words: land sparing, land sharing, ecological conservation, biodiversity, natural land, land use strategy

胡甜, 吴健生, 彭建, 李卫锋. 土地分离与共享框架的研究现状及应用拓展[J]. 地理科学进展, 2020, 39(5): 880-888.

HU Tian, WU Jiansheng, PENG Jian, LI Weifeng. Development and prospect of the land-sparing versus land-sharing framework[J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(5): 880-888.

图/表 6

图1

图2

图3

图4

表1

图5

参考文献 30

[1]	Green R E, Cornell S J, Scharlemann, et al. Farming and the fate of wild nature [J]. Science, 2005,307:550-555.
[2]	Habel J C, Weisser W W, Eggermont H , et al. Food security versus biodiversity protection: An example of land-sharing from East Africa [J]. Biodiversity and Conservation, 2013,22(6-7):1553-1555.
[3]	冯喆, 许学工, 周建 , 等. 基于生态系统服务视角的“土地分离与共享框架”解析 [J]. 地理科学进展, 2016,35(9):1100-1108.
	[ Feng Zhe, Xu Xuegong, Zhou Jian , et al. Land sparing versus sharing framework from ecosystem service perspective. Progress in Geography, 2016,35(9):1100-1108. ]
[4]	Marr E J, Howley P, Burns C . Sparing or sharing? Differing approaches to managing agricultural and environmental spaces in England and Ontario [J]. Journal of Rural Studies, 2016,48:77-91.
[5]	Phalan B, Onial M, Balmford A , et al. Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: Land sharing and land sparing compared [J]. Science, 2011,333:1289-1291.
[6]	Balmford A, Green R, Phalan B . What conservationists need to know about farming [J]. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Science, 2012,279:2714-2724.
[7]	Dotta G, Phalan B, Silva T W , et al. Assessing strategies to reconcile agriculture and bird conservation in the temperate grasslands of South America [J]. Conservation Biology, 2018,30:618-627.
[8]	Sato C E, Wood J T, Stein J A , et al. Natural tree regeneration in agricultural landscapes: The implications of intensification [J]. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2016,230:98-104.
[9]	Norris F H, Stevens S P, Pfefferbaum B , et al. Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness [J]. American Journal of Community Psychology, 2008,41:127-150.
[10]	杨梅, 刘章勇 . 农业土地共享和土地分离及其潜在的生物多样性效应 [J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2017,25(6):787-794.
	[ Yang Mei, Liu Zhangyong . Agricultural land sharing/sparing and their potential effects on biodiversity. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2017,25(6):787-794. ]
[11]	Dauber J, Miyake S . To integrate or to segregate food crop and energy crop cultivation at the landscape scale? Perspectives on biodiversity conservation in agriculture in Europe [J]. Energy Sustainability and Society, 2016,6(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s13705-016-0089-5.
[12]	Zarrineh N, Abbaspour K C, Griensven A V , et al. Model-based evaluation of land management strategies with regard to multiple ecosystem services [J]. Sustainability, 2018,10(11):3844. doi: 10.3390/su10113844.
[13]	Hartman C . Land sharing in rural India [J]. Natural History, 1973,82(1):33-43.
[14]	Barral M P, Benayas J M R, Meli P, et al. Quantifying the impacts of ecological restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in agroecosystems: A global meta-analysis [J]. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2015,202:223-231.
[15]	Sushinsky J R, Rhodes J R, Possingham H P , et al. How should we grow cities to minimize their biodiversity impacts? [J]. Global Change Biology, 2013,19:401-410.
[16]	Didham R K, Barker G M, Bartlam S , et al. Agricultural intensification exacerbates spillover effects on soil biogeochemistry in adjacent forest remnants [J]. PLoS One, 2015,10(1):e0116474. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.011647
[17]	Vongvisouk T, Broegaard R B, Mertz O , et al. Rush for cash crops and forest protection: Neither land sparing nor land sharing [J]. Land Use Policy, 2016,55:182-192.
[18]	Rosemary H, Craig M, Michael D, et al. Why biodiversity declines as protected areas increase: The effect of the power of governance regimes on sustainable landscapes [J]. Sustainability Science, 2015,10(2):357-369.
[19]	Johansson O, Rauset G R, Samelius G , et al. Land sharing is essential for snow leopard conservation [J]. Biological Conservation, 2016,203:1-7.
[20]	Lamb A, Balmford A, Green R E , et al. To what extent could edge effects and habitat fragmentation diminish the potential benefits of land sparing? [J]. Biological Conservation, 2016,195:264-271. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.01.006
[21]	Soga M, Yamaura Y, Koike S , et al. Land sharing vs. land sparing: Does the compact city reconcile urban development and biodiversity conservation? [J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2014,51:1378-1386. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12280
[22]	The Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat. World urbanization prospects: The 2014 revision [R]. New York, USA: United Nations, 2014.
[23]	Brenda B L, Richard A F . Sharing or sparing? How should we grow the world's cities? [J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2013,50:1161-1168. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12118
[24]	Stott I, Soga M, Inger R , et al. Land sparing is crucial for urban ecosystem services [J]. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2015,13:387-393.
[25]	Caryl F M, Lumsden L F, Ree R , et al. Functional responses of insectivorous bats to increasing housing density support 'land-sparing' rather than 'land-sharing' urban growth strategies [J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2016,53:191-201.
[26]	Jager H I, Kreig J A F. Designing landscapes for biomass production and wildlife [J]. Global Ecology and Conservation, 2018,16:e00490. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00490.
[27]	Williams D R, Phalan B, Feniuk C , et al. Carbon storage and land-use strategies in agricultural landscapes across three continents [J]. Current Biology, 2018,28:2500-2505.
[28]	Quandt A . Farmers and forest conservation: How might land sparing work in practice? [J]. Society & Natural Resources, 2016,29:418-431.
[29]	Fischer J, Abson D J, Butsic V , et al. Land sparing versus land sharing: Moving forward [J]. Conservation Letters, 2013,7(3):149-157.
[30]	Tscharntke T, Tylianakis J M, Rand T A , et al. Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes: Eight hypotheses [J]. Biological Reviews, 2012,87(3):661-685.

方式	优势	局限
土地分离	减缓农业用地对自然栖息地的侵占速度保持生态功能完整性	存在溢出效应抑制自然更新过程公众对损失风险的关注和讨论相对减少
土地共享	避免边缘效应有利于保护敏感物种	土地利用效率低下对农场主的要求较高

土地分离与共享框架的研究现状及应用拓展

Development and prospect of the land-sparing versus land-sharing framework

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 30

相关文章 4

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	冯喆, 许学工, 周建, 高阳. 基于生态系统服务视角的“土地分离与共享框架”解析[J]. 地理科学进展, 2016, 35(9): 1100-1108.
[2]	孙鸿烈, 陈宜瑜, 于贵瑞, 于秀波. 国际重大研究计划与中国生态系统研究展望——中国生态大讲堂百期学术演讲暨2014年春季研讨会评述[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(7): 865-873.
[3]	王玉婷, 丁圣彦, 梁国付. 农田背景下景观结构对半自然生境生物多样性的多尺度影响[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(12): 1704-1716.
[4]	刘吉平, 吕宪国, 殷书柏. GAP分析：保护生物多样性的地理学方法[J]. 地理科学进展, 2005, 24(1): 41-51.