EN中文

经济地理 >

2025 , Vol. 45 >Issue 1: 177 - 183

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2025.01.018

三农、土地与生态

国土空间生态韧性研究进展与前沿分析

  • 欧阳晓 ,
  • 魏晓 ,
  • 谢花林 ,
  • 陈键
展开
  • 1.湖南财政经济学院 工程管理学院,中国湖南 长沙 410205;
    2.自然资源部 南方丘陵区自然资源监测监管重点实验室,中国湖南 长沙 410118;
    3.江西财经大学 应用经济学院,中国江西 南昌 330013;
    4.湖南工业大学 城市与环境学院,中国湖南 株洲 412007
欧阳晓（1990—）,男,博士,副教授,研究方向为国土空间演化及其生态韧性。E-mail：xiao.ouyang@foxmail.com
※ 谢花林（1979—）,男,博士,教授,研究方向为土地经济、生态产品价值实现等。E-mail：xiehl_2000@163.com

收稿日期: 2023-05-08

  修回日期: 2024-10-10

  网络出版日期: 2025-02-26

基金资助

国家自然科学基金青年项目（42201230）; 湖南省自然科学基金面上项目（2024JJ5060）; 自然资源部南方丘陵区自然资源监测监管重点实验室开放基金项目（NRMSSHR2024Z01、NRMSSHR2024Y05）; 湖南省研究生科研创新项目（CX20240921）

收起

Research Progress and Frontier Analysis of Ecological Resilience in Territorial Space

  • OUYANG Xiao ,
  • WEI Xiao ,
  • XIE Hualin ,
  • CHEN Jian
Expand
  • 1. School of Engineering Management,Hunan University of Finance and Economics,Changsha 410205,Hunan,China;
    2. Key Laboratory ofNatural Resources Monitoring and Supervision in Southern Hilly Region,Ministry of Natural Resources,Changsha 410118,Hunan,China;
    3. School of Applied Economics,Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics,Nanchang 330013,Jiangxi,China;
    4. College of Urban and Environment Sciences,Hunan University of Technology,Zhuzhou 412007,Hunan,China

Received date: 2023-05-08

  Revised date: 2024-10-10

  Online published: 2025-02-26

Fold

摘要

构建韧性国土空间是提高区域生态风险治理的新思路,如何从吸收、恢复或转换能力等方面提升国土空间生态韧性,是国土空间生态风险治理亟需解决的关键问题。文章在梳理国土空间生态韧性的概念内涵和评价方法的基础上,对国土空间生态韧性的理论框架、测度模型以及研究需求等方面进行了总结。研究发现不同学科对国土空间生态韧性研究上各有侧重,其中地理科学侧重于区域尺度的生态韧性研究,强调与社会—自然耦合,而生态学则更注重生态系统本身稳态变化的评估。国内研究侧重于抵抗力、恢复力和适应性3个维度衡量生态韧性,而国外研究则更加注重从韧性角度来研究城市建设和防灾减灾问题。基于此提出了3个国土空间生态韧性的重点研究方向：以机理解析为支撑,实现生态韧性的动态测度的新突破;以社会—自然过程耦合为引领,推动多要素、多层次、多目标的机制研究;以生态修复为导向,加强多学科融合和探索国土空间生态韧性应用模式,以期为实现人与自然和谐共生的现代化提供新的途径。

关键词： 国土空间演化; 生态韧性; 生态修复; 社会—自然过程耦合; 机理解析; 人与自然和谐共生; 研究进展

本文引用格式

欧阳晓 , 魏晓 , 谢花林 , 陈键 . 国土空间生态韧性研究进展与前沿分析[J]. 经济地理, 2025 , 45(1) : 177 -183 . DOI: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2025.01.018

Abstract

Building resilient territorial space is a new idea to improve regional ecological risk management. Therefore, how to improve the ecological resilience of territorial space from the aspects of absorption, recovery or conversion capacity is a key issue that needs to be solved in the management of ecological risks of territorial space. This study sorted out the connotation and evaluation methods of territory space ecological resilience, and summarized its theoretical framework, measurement model, and research needs. It was indicated that different subjects had different focuses on the study of spatial ecological resilience of the national territory, the discipline of geographical science focused on the research of ecological resilience at the regional scale, emphasized on the coupling with society-nature, while the discipline of ecology payed more attention to the assessment of homeostatic changes of the ecosystem itself. Domestic studies focused on the three dimensions of resistance, resilience and adaptability to measure ecological resilience. Foreign studies, on the other hand, focused more on urban construction and disaster prevention and mitigation from the perspective of resilience. Based on the above, it proposed three key research directions of ecological resilience in territorial space: 1) A new breakthrough of dynamic measurement of ecological resilience is proposed based on mechanism analysis. 2) Guided by the coupling of society-nature, it should promote the multi-factor, multi-level and multi-objective mechanism research. 3) Guided by ecological restoration, it should strengthen multidisciplinary integration and explore the application model of ecological resilience in territorial space, so as to provide a new way for realizing the modernization of harmonious coexistence between man and nature.

Key words： territorial space evolution; ecological resilience; ecological restoration; society-nature process coupling; mechanism analysis; harmony between humanity and nature; research progress

参考文献

[1] Holling C S.Resilience and stability of ecological systems[J]. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics,1973,4(1):1-23.
[2] Zhang X L,Li H.Urban resilience and urban sustainability:what we know and what do not know?[J]. Cities,2018,72:141-148.
[3] Ouyang X,Xu J,Li J,et al.Land space optimization of urban-agriculture-ecological functions in the Changsha-Zhuzhou-Xiangtan Urban Agglomeration,China[J]. Land Use Policy,2022,117:106112.
[4] 刘彦随. 现代人地关系与人地系统科学[J]. 地理科学,2020,40(8):1221-1234.
[5] 陈世栋,袁奇峰. 都市生态圈层结构及韧性演进:理论框架与广州实证[J]. 规划师,2017,33(8):25-30.
[6] Fu Z,Li D,Hararuk O,et al.Recovery time and state change of terrestrial carbon cycle after disturbance[J]. Environmental Research Letters,2017,12(10):1-12.
[7] 王士莹,谢保鹏,杨洁,等. 基于生态韧性的国土空间生态保护修复分区研究:以洮河流域为例[J]. 生态学杂志,2024,43(6):1870-1880
[8] 修春亮,魏冶,王绮. 基于“规模—密度—形态”的大连市城市韧性评估[J]. 地理学报,2018,73(12):2315-2328.
[9] 彭翀,陈梦雨,王强,等. 长短周期下长江中游城市群经济韧性时空演变及影响因素研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境,2024,33(1):14-26.
[10] 夏楚瑜,董照樱子,陈彬. 城市生态韧性时空变化及情景模拟研究——以杭州市为例[J]. 生态学报,2022,42(1):116-126.
[11] 王松茂,牛金兰. 黄河流域城市生态韧性时空演变及其影响因素[J]. 生态学报,2023,43(20):8309-8320.
[12] 彭文斌,曹笑天. 城市更新作用下生态韧性时空分异及其影响效应——以环长株潭城市群为例[J]. 经济地理,2023,43(10):44-52.
[13] 王婷,邹紫涵,周国华,等. 高质量发展下城市生态韧性的测度框架[J]. 湖南师范大学自然科学学报,2022,45(5):33-40.
[14] Folke C.Resilience:The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analysese[J]. Global Environmental Chang,2006,16(3),253-267.
[15] Tong X,Brandt M,Yue Y,et al.Forest management in southern China generates short term extensive carbon sequestration[J]. Nature Communications,2020,11(1):1-10.
[16] 傅伯杰,刘焱序. 系统认知土地资源的理论与方法[J]. 科学通报,2019,64(21):2172-2179.
[17] 宋永永,庞先峰,唐宇,等. 能源富集区社会—生态系统韧性演化与机理——以榆林市为例[J]. 经济地理,2024,44(1):32-44.
[18] Yao Y,Liu Y X,Fu F Y,et al.Declined terrestrial ecosystem resilience[J]. Global Change Biology,2024,30(4):e17291.
[19] 郑艳,翟建青,武占云,等. 基于适应性周期的韧性城市分类评价——以我国海绵城市与气候适应型城市试点为例[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(3):31-38.
[20] 邓楚雄,刘唱唱,李忠武. 生态修复背景下流域国土空间韧性研究思路[J]. 中国土地科学,2022,36(5):11-20.
[21] 冯一凡,冯君明,李翅. 生态韧性视角下绿色空间时空演变及优化研究进展[J]. 生态学报,2023,43(14):5648-5661.
[22] 曾穗平,王琦琦,田健. 应对气候变化的韧性国土空间规划理论框架与规划响应研究[J]. 规划师,2023,39(2):21-29.
[23] Meyer K,Hoyer-Leitzel A,Iams S,et al.Quantifying resilience to recurrent ecosystem disturbances using flow-kick dynamics[J]. Nature Sustainability,2018,1(11):671-678.
[24] 白晓航,赵文武,尹彩春. 稳态转换视角下生态系统服务变化过程与作用机制[J]. 生态学报,2022(15):1-12.
[25] 樊杰,蒋子龙. 面向“未来地球”计划的区域可持续发展系统解决方案研究——对人文—经济地理学发展导向的讨论[J]. 地理科学进展,2015,34(1):1-9.
[26] Strassburg B B N,Iribarrem A,Beyer H L,et al. Global priority areas for ecosystem restoration[J]. Nature,2020,586:724-729.
[27] Liu Z,Bai G,Liu Y,et al.Long-term study of ecological restoration in a typical shallow urban lake[J]. Science of The Total Environment,2022,846:157505.
[28] 欧阳晓,朱翔. 中国城市群城市用地扩张时空动态特征[J]. 地理学报,2020,75(3):571-588.
[29] Troisi O,Ciasullo M V,Carrubbo L,et al.Meta-management for sustainability in territorial ecosystems:The case of Libera's social reuse of territory[J]. Land Use Policy,2019,84:138-153.
[30] McPhearson T,Andersson E,Elmqvist T,et al. Resilience of and through urban ecosystem services[J]. Ecosystem Services,2015,12:152-156.
[31] Bai Y,Wong C P,Jiang B,et al.Developing China's ecological redline policy using ecosystem services assessments for land use planning[J]. Nature Communications,2018,9(1):1-13.
[32] 宋爽,王帅,傅伯杰,等. 社会—生态系统适应性治理研究进展与展望[J]. 地理学报,2019,74(11):2401-2410.
[33] Allesina S,Bondavalli C. Steady state of ecosystem flow networks:A comparison between balancing procedures[J]. Ecological Modelling,2003,165(2-3:)221-229.
[34] 王晨旭,刘焱序,于超月,等. 国土空间生态修复布局研究进展[J]. 地理科学进展,2021,40(11):1925-1941.
[35] 彭建,吕丹娜,董建权,等. 过程耦合与空间集成:国土空间生态修复的景观生态学认知[J]. 自然资源学报,2020,35(1):3-13.
[36] 周旭,彭建,翟紫含. 国土空间生态修复关键技术初探[J]. 中国土地,2021(8):30-33.
[37] Keeler B L,Hamel P,McPhearson T,et al. Social-ecological and technological factors moderate the value of urban nature[J]. Nature Sustainability,2019,2:29-38.
[38] Anderegg W R L,Konings A G,Trugman A T,et al. Hydraulic diversity of forests regulates ecosystem resilience during drought[J]. Nature,2018,561:538-541.
[39] Migliavacca M,Musavi T,Mahecha M D,et al.The three major axes of terrestrial ecosystem function[J]. Nature,2021,598:468-472.
[40] Chung M G,Frank K A,Pokhrel Y,et al.Natural infrastructure in sustaining global urban freshwater ecosystem services[J]. Nature Sustainability,2021,4:1068-1075.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉