PDF Download

[1]LI Yu-qing,SONG Ge,WANG Yue,et al.Ecological Security Evaluation of Land Resources in the Cities and Counties Under the Jurisdiction of Harbin Based on Energy Analysis[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2014,21(03):267-272,278.

Copy

Ecological Security Evaluation of Land Resources in the Cities and Counties Under the Jurisdiction of Harbin Based on Energy Analysis

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 21 Number of periods: 2014 03 Page number: 267-272,278 Column: Public date: 2014-06-28

Title:: Ecological Security Evaluation of Land Resources in the Cities and Counties Under the Jurisdiction of Harbin Based on Energy Analysis

Author(s):: LI Yu-qing^1,3, SONG Ge^1,2,3, WANG Yue^1,3, WANG Xue-wei^1,3; 1. College of Resources and Environment, Northeast Agriculture University, Harbin 150030, China;
2. Institute of Land Management, Northeasten University, Shenyang 110819, China;
3. Rural Development Research Center, Northeast Agriculture University, Harbin 150030, China

Keywords:: energy analysis; land resources ecological security; cities and counties under the jurisdiction of Harbin

CLC:: F301.24

DOI:: -

Abstract:: Scientific evaluation of urban expansion impact of land resource ecological security of cities and counties has a great significance of the rational use of land resources, and promoting cities and counties under the jurisdiction of the municipality in the economic, social, ecological, steady and healthy development. This paper selected cities and counties under the jurisdiction of Harbin as a study case. Based on pressure-state-impact-respose (PSIR) model and by using energy analysis method, the land resources ecological security evaluation system and enery-based urban land resource ecological security index (EULESI) were constructed, it was the analysis of correlation to energy the context of sustainable development index (EISD) and EULESI, and the variation of land resources ecological security level of the study area in 2004—2011 was evaluated. The correlation of EISD and EULESI is 0.84, which showed the strong correlation. Compared to EISD index, EULESI is more sensitive and representative to the land resource ecological security evaluation. At the same time, as the evaluation of land resource ecological security is more scientific, and it can be used for the evaluation of other similar area. The results show that the degree of land resources ecological security of the study area had been overall gradually decreasing trend from 2004 to 2011, indicating a great fluctuation and a less stable developing stage, but overall it was at a less secure. In 2004—2006, the land resource ecological security of the study area was at the safer level, and then it was at a relatively unsafe level in 2007—2008; after two years, it was located somewhere in the level of criticality safety; the EULESI index was the lowest value for nearly 8 years, less unsafe level, and then the land resource ecological environment was being a seriously threatened. All in all, energy analysis can objectively understand the meanings of the various indices, and effectively avoiding evaluation is too subjective, the results of this study area meet with the actual situation.

References:: [1] 李秀霞,张希.基于熵权法的城市化进程中土地生态安全研究[J].干旱区资源与环境,2011,25(9):13-17.
[2] Bryant C R, Russwurm L J, Mcleuan A G. The City’s Countryside:Land and Its Management in the Rural-Urban Fringe[M]. Longman, London, 1982.
[3] Jogo W, Hassan R. Balancing the use of wetlands for economic well-being and ecological security:The case of the Limpopo wetland in southern Africa Original Research Article[J]. Ecological Economics,2010,69(7):1569-1579.
[4] Mohamed A B A A, Sharifi M A, van Keulen H. An integrated agro-economic and agro-ecological methodology for land use planning and policy analysis[J].International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation,2000,2(2):87-103.
[5] Ye L, Van Ranst E. Production scenarios and the effect of soil degradation on long-term food security in China[J]. Global Environmental Change,2009,11,19(4):464-481.
[6] 刘勇,刘兆友,徐萍.区域土地资源生态安全评价:以浙江嘉兴市为例[J].资源科学,2004,26(3):69-75.
[7] 张虹波,刘黎明.土地资源生态安全研究进展与展望[J].地理科学研究进展,2006,25(5):77-83.
[8] 刘世梁,郭旭东,连纲,等.黄土高原典型脆弱区生态安全多尺度评价[J].应用生态学报,2007,18(7):1554-1559.
[9] 马倩,张洋,赵枫.基于PSR模型的干旱区绿洲城市生态安全评价:以乌鲁木齐市为例[J].土壤通报,2011,10, 42(5):1225-1230.
[10] 曲福田,赵海霞,朱德明.江苏省土地生态安全问题及对策研究[J].自然生态保护,2005(2):57-59.
[11] 邓爱珍,陈美球,林建平.鄱阳湖区土地资源生态安全评价[J].江西农业大学学报,2006,28(5):787-792.
[12] 王文琴.黄山市土地资源生态安全评价及安全水平预测[D].安徽芜湖:安徽师范大学,2010.
[13] 周飞,郭良珍,陈士银,等.湛江市土地资源生态安全评价与限制因素[J].水土保持研究,2010,17(5):202-206,211.
[14] 郑敬刚,许淑娜,喻铮铮,等.中原经济区核心区土地资源生态安全评价[J].水土保持研究,2013,20(3):273-277.
[15] 孙奇奇,宋戈,齐美玲.基于主成分分析的哈尔滨市土地生态安全评价[J].水土保持研究,2012,19(1):234-238.
[16] 左太安,苏维词,马景娜,等.三峡重庆库区针对水土流失的土地资源生态安全评价[J].水土保持学报,2010,24(2):74-78.
[17] 余建,房莉,仓定帮,等.熵权模糊物元模型在土地生态安全评价中的应用[J].农业工程学报,2012,28(5):260-266.
[18] 杨春红,张正栋,田楠楠,等.基于P-S-R模型的汕头市土地生态安全评价[J].水土保持研究,2012,19(3):209-214.
[19] 陈西蕊,张蓉珍.基于PSR模型的陕西省土地资源生态安全动态评价[J].南方农业学报,2011,42(2):224-228.
[20] 张智光.基于生态-产业共生关系的林业生态安全测度方法构想[J].生态学报,2012,32(4):1326-1336.
[21] 蓝盛芳,钦佩,陆宏芳.生态经济系统能值分析[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2002.
[22] 蓝盛芳,钦佩.生态系统的能值分析[J].应用生态学报,2001,12(1):129-131.
[23] 陆宏芳,蓝盛芳,陈飞鹏,等.农业生态系统能量分析[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(1):159-162.
[24] 陆宏芳,叶正,赵新峰,等.城市可持续发展能力的能值评价新指标[J].生态学报,2003,23(7):1363-1368.
[25] 高长波,陈新庚,韦朝海,等.广东省生态安全状态及趋势定量评价[J].生态学报,2006,26(7):2191-2197.
[26] 任志远,黄青,李晶.陕西省生态安全及空间差异定量分析[J].地理学报,2005,60(4):597-606.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 1900-01-01