PDF Download

[1]ZHAO Pengyu,BU Xiuqin,CUI Qiang,et al.Change in the Ecological Footprint and Carrying Capacity in Xinzhou from 2004 to 2013[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2017,24(04):373-378.

Copy

Change in the Ecological Footprint and Carrying Capacity in Xinzhou from 2004 to 2013

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 24 Number of periods: 2017 04 Page number: 373-378 Column: Public date: 2017-08-28

Title:: Change in the Ecological Footprint and Carrying Capacity in Xinzhou from 2004 to 2013

Author(s):: ZHAO Pengyu¹, BU Xiuqin², CUI Qiang¹, ZHANG Junqing¹, WANG Cuiping³, FENG Wenyong¹; 1. Department of Tourism Management, Xinzhou Teachers University, Xinzhou, Shanxi 034000, China;
2. Scientific Research Academy of Guanxi Environmental Protection, Nanning 530000, China;
3. Northwest Institute of Forest Survey, Planning and Design, State Forestry Administration, Xi’an 710048, China

Keywords:: ecological footprint; ecological carrying capacity; ecological surplus and loss; development capacity; Xinzhou

CLC:: X171.4

DOI:: -

Abstract:: Waste gas, waste water, solid waste pollution subjects accounts and water resources accounts are added in the Modified Ecological Footprint Model, the biological account, global average yields and productive land equalization factor in Xinzhou were re-identified, and the ecological footprint and capacity of each account were calculated. The results are shown as follows. (1) Per capita ecological footprint growth of Xinzhou is obvious, rising from 20 042.098 8 hm² per capita in 2004 to 5.388 9 hm² per capita in 2013, per capita ecological carrying capacity remained at 1.28 hm², per capita ecological surplus and loss performed as the ecological deficit, and the deficit rose from 0.800 9 hm² per capita to 4.103 8 hm² per capita. (2) The ecological footprint account performed the difference in 10 years. The ecological surpluses had arable land, forestland, building land, water resources, the other three types of ecological surplus decreased exception of water. The grassland, water, energy land, pollution consumptive land presented as ecological deficit in addition to the pollution ecological deficit stabilized at a certain range. The grassland, water, energy and land use had the trend of a rapid increase, resulting in increase of ecological deficit. (3) The whole Xinzhou ecological pressure index increased from 1.62 in 2004 to 4.19 in 2013, the ecological diversity index decreased from 1.261 to 0.855, the GDP ecological footprint declined from 4.355 hm² / Million Yuan to 2.563 hm² / Million Yuan. Those facts reveal that the distribution of the ecological footprint is increasingly unbalanced and the ecosystem becomes unstable; meanwhile, the resource utilization is gradually improving, capacity development index rises from 2.646 to 4.609, which also explains the city’s sustainable development in a good state.

References:: [1] 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.
[2] 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.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
[5] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] 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.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 1900-01-01