论土地利用转型的研究框架

doi:10.11821/dlxb201703009

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

当前,土地变化研究尚缺乏统一的理论指导。探索土地利用转型理论对构建土地变化研究的理论基础具有重要意义。本文试图梳理土地利用转型研究的缘起、拓展及启示,辨析土地利用转型与土地利用变化的内涵差异,构建土地利用转型的研究框架。结果表明：① 耕地及城乡建设用地利用转型研究对构建土地利用转型的研究框架具有重要价值;② 土地利用转型与土地利用变化在基本类型、时间尺度、空间尺度、价值主体、驱动因素、轨迹特征和结果/影响方面存在显著差异;③ 土地利用转型的研究框架涵盖转型诊断、机制研究和效应研究。其中,转型诊断的关键在于,从数量变化视角、景观格局变化视角和经营格局变化视角,以及外部性视角和政策发展视角,构建土地利用空间形态及功能形态的分析指标和转型的诊断准则;转型机制表现为人口、经济、技术、制度、文化和区位因素等土地利用变化深层驱动因素的级联驱动效应。转型机制研究应当着重探讨土地利用空间转型与功能转型的互动机制环;土地利用转型效应包括社会、经济、环境3个方面;④ 1961-2011年法国耕地利用转型能够支撑本文提出的研究框架及中国耕地保护创新。

关键词: 土地利用转型, 土地变化科学, 格局, 功能, 研究框架

Abstract:

Land change has been a hot topic in geographical research. The overarching and convincing theories of land change science, however, have not emerged. Establishment of land use transition theory is of significance for the theory basis of land change science. This paper attempts to establish a research framework of land use transition based on summarizing the development and implications of land use transition research and clarifying the differences between land use transition and land use change. Results show that transition research of artificial ecosystems, such as cultivated land, rural housing land and urban land, is of significance. Land use transition is distinguished from land use change on several aspects, such as fundamental types, temporal scale, spatial scale, agents, driving forces, trajectory, and results or effects. Research framework of land use transition covers transition diagnosis, mechanism research and effects research. Key issues of transition diagnosis are the establishment of measuring indices and diagnosis principles of land use spatial and functional morphologies from the perspectives of quantity change, landscape pattern change and management pattern change, and of land use externality and land use policy development. Mechanism of land use transition behaves as cascading effects of underlying driving factors of land use change, including demographic, economic, technological, institutional, cultural, and location factors. Mechanism research should place emphasis on interaction between land use spatial transition and functional transition. Effects of land use transition covers at least 17 themes relating to social, economic and environmental dimensions. Cultivated land use transition in France in 1961-2011 confirms the research framework of land use transition and is beneficial to the innovation of cultivated land protection in China.

Key words: land use transition, land change science, pattern, function, research framework

宋小青. 论土地利用转型的研究框架[J]. 地理学报, 2017, 72(3): 471-487.

Xiaoqing SONG. Discussion on land use transition research framework[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2017, 72(3): 471-487.

图/表 10

图1

表1

表2

图2

图3

表3

图4

图5

表4

图6

参考文献 86

[1]	Turner B L, Lambin E F, Reenberg A.The emergence of land change science for global environmental change and sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2007, 104(52): 20666-71. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0704119104 pmid: 18093934
[2]	Lambin E, Veldkamp A.Key findings of LUCC on its research questions. Global Change Newsletter, 2005, 63: 12-14.
[3]	Foster D, Swanson F, Aber J, et al.The importance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation. BioScience, 2003, 53(1): 77-88. doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0077:TIOLUL]2.0.CO;2
[4]	Perring M P, De Frenne P, Baeten L, et al.Global environmental change effects on ecosystems: The importance of land-use legacies. Global Change Biology, 2016, 22(4):1361-1371.
[5]	Seto K C, Reenberg A, Boone C G, et al.Urban land teleconnections and sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2012, 109(20):7687-92. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1117622109 pmid: 22550174
[6]	Güneralp B, Seto K C, Ramachandran M.Evidence of urban land teleconnections and impacts on hinterlands. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2013, 5(5): 445-451. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.08.003
[7]	Mather A S. Global Forest Resources. London: Belhaven, 1990.
[8]	Mather A S.The forest transition. Area, 1992, 24(4): 367-379. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1992.tb01723.x
[9]	Grainger A.National land use morphology: Patterns and possibilities. Geography, 1995, 80(3): 235-245. doi: 10.2307/215297
[10]	Long Hualou.Land use transition: A New integrated approach of land use/cover change study. Geography and Geo-Information Science, 2003, 19(1): 87-90. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-0504.2003.01.022
	[龙花楼. 土地利用转型: 土地利用/覆被变化综合研究的新途径. 地理与地理信息科学, 2003, 19(1): 87-90.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-0504.2003.01.022
[11]	Long Hualou, Li Xiubin.Analysis of regional land use transition: A case study in Transect of the Yangtze River. Journal of Natural Resources, 2002, 17(2): 144-149. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-3037.2002.02.003
	[龙花楼, 李秀彬. 区域土地利用转型分析: 以长江沿线样带为例. 自然资源学报, 2002, 17(2): 144-149.] doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-3037.2002.02.003
[12]	Long H L, Heilig G K, Li X, et al.Socio-economic development and land-use change: Analysis of rural housing land transition in the transect of the Yangtse River, China. Land Use Policy, 2007, 24(1): 141-153. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.11.003
[13]	DeFries R S, Foley J A, Asner G P. Land-use choices: Balancing human needs and ecosystem function. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2004, 2(5): 249-257. doi: 10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0249:LCBHNA]2.0.CO;2
[14]	Foley J A, DeFries R, Asner G P, et al. Global consequences of land use. Science, 2005, 309(22): 570-574. doi: 10.1126/science.1111772 pmid: 20
[15]	Lambin E F, Meyfroidt P.Land use transitions: Socio-ecological feedback versus socio-economic change. Land Use Policy, 2010, 27(2): 108-118. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.09.003
[16]	Long Hualou.Land use rransition and rural transformation development. Progress in Geography, 2012, 31(2): 131-138. doi: 10.11821/xb201204012
	[龙花楼. 论土地利用转型与乡村转型发展. 地理科学进展, 2012, 31(2): 131-138.] doi: 10.11821/xb201204012
[17]	Long Hualou.Land use transition and land management. Geographical Research, 2015, 34(9): 1607-1618. doi: 10.11821/d1yj201509001
	[龙花楼. 论土地利用转型与土地资源管理. 地理研究, 2015, 34(9): 1607-1618.] doi: 10.11821/d1yj201509001
[18]	Chen R S, Ye C, Cai Y L, et al.The impact of rural out-migration on land use transition in China: Past, present and trend. Land Use Policy, 2014, 40(4): 101-110. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.10.003
[19]	Liu Y S, Fang F, Li Y H.Key issues of land use in China and implications for policy making. Land Use Policy, 2014, 40(1): 6-12. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.03.013
[20]	Zhu F K, Zhang F R, Li C, et al.Functional transition of the rural settlement: Analysis of land-use differentiation in a transect of Beijing, China. Habitat International, 2014, 41(1): 262-271. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.07.011
[21]	Qu Futian, Chen Jianglong, Feng Shuyi.Economic Development and Sustainable Land Use. Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2001.
	[曲福田, 陈江龙, 冯淑怡. 经济发展与土地持续性利用. 北京: 人民出版社, 2001.]
[22]	Li Xiaoshun, Zhang Shaoliang, Wang Yinghong.Quantitative study of construction land increase limit year in the economic transition stage in China. Journal of Natural Resources, 2011, 26(7): 1085-1095. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2011.07.001
	[李效顺, 张绍良, 汪应宏. 中国经济转型阶段建设用地增长极限计量研究. 自然资源学报, 2011, 26(7): 1085-1095.] doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2011.07.001
[23]	Song Xiaoqing.Cultivated land transition in China: Dual deconstruction from spatial and functional perspectives [D]. Beijing: University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2013.
	[宋小青. 中国耕地转型: 空间与功能双重解构[D]. 北京: 中国科学院大学, 2013.]
[24]	Song Xiaoqing, Ouyang Zhu.Route of multifunctional cultivated land management in China. Journal of Natural Resources, 2012, 27(4): 540-551. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.04.002
	[宋小青, 欧阳竹. 中国耕地多功能管理的实践路径探讨. 自然资源学报, 2012, 27(4): 540-551.] doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.04.002
[25]	Long Hualou, Li Tingting.Analysis of the coupling of farmland and rural housing land transition in China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2012, 67(2): 201-210.
	[龙花楼, 李婷婷. 中国耕地和农村宅基地利用转型耦合分析. 地理学报, 2012, 67(2): 201-210.]
[26]	Braimoh A K, Vlek P LG.Land Use and Soil Resources. Sweden: Springer, 2008. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-6778-5_9
[27]	Houghton R A.The worldwide extent of land-use change. BioScience, 1994, 44(5): 305-313. doi: 10.2307/1312380
[28]	Vitousek P M, Mooney H A, Lubchenco J, et al.Human domination of earth's ecosystems. Science, 1997, 277(25): 494-499.
[29]	Walker R T.Land use transition and deforestation in developing countries. Geographical Analysis, 1987, 19(1): 18-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.1987.tb00111.x
[30]	Grainger A.The forest transition: an alternative approach. Area, 1995, 27(3): 242-251. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1995.tb01815.x
[31]	Bae J S, Joo R W, Kim Y S.Forest transition in South Korea: Reality, path and drivers. Land Use Policy, 2012, 29(1): 198-207. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.06.007
[32]	Kauppi P E, Ausubel J H, Fang J, et al.Returning forests analyzed with the forest identity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2006, 103(46): 17574-17579. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0608343103 pmid: 17101996
[33]	Mather A S, Fairbairn J, Needle C L.The course and drivers of the forest transition: The case of France. Area, 1999, 15(1): 65-90. doi: 10.1016/S0743-0167(98)00023-0
[34]	Mather A S, Needle C L.The forest transition: a theoretical basis. Area, 1998, 30(2): 117-124.
[35]	Meyfroidt P, Lambin E F.Forest transition in Vietnam and displacement of deforestation abroad. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009, 106(38): 16139-16144. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0904942106 pmid: 19805270
[36]	Palo M, Vanhanen H.World Forests from Deforestation to Transition? Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 2000. doi: 10.1007/978-94-010-0942-3
[37]	Yeo I Y, Huang C Q.Revisiting the forest transition theory with historical records and geospatial data: A case study from Mississippi (USA). Land Use Policy, 2013, 32(1): 1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.09.017
[38]	Zhang Y Q.Deforestation and forest transition: Theory and evidence in China//Palo M, Vanhanen H. World Forests from Deforestation to Transition? Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2000: 41-65. doi: 10.1007/978-94-010-0942-3_3
[39]	He Weifeng, Yan Jianzhong, Zhou Hong, et al.The micro-mechanism of forest transition: A case study in the mountainous areas of Chongqing. Journal of Natural Resources, 2016, 31(1): 102-113.
	[何威风, 阎建忠, 周洪, 等. 森林转型的微观机制: 以重庆市山区为例. 自然资源学报, 2016, 31(1): 102-113.]
[40]	Rudel T K, Coomes O T, Moran E, et al.Forest transitions: towards a global understanding of land use change. Global Environmental Change, 2005, 15(1): 23-31. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.11.001
[41]	Li Xiubin, Zhao Yuluan.Forest transition, agricultural land marginalization and ecological restoration. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2011, 21(10): 91-95. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2011.10.014
	[李秀彬, 赵宇鸾. 森林转型、农地边际化与生态恢复. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2011, 21(10): 91-95.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2011.10.014
[42]	DeFries Ruth S, Asner Gregory P, Houghton Richard. Trade-offs in land-use decisions: towards a framework for assessing multiple ecosystem responses to land-use change//DeFries Ruth S, Asner Gregory P, Houghton Richard. Ecosystems and Land Use Change. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, 2004: 1-9. doi: 10.1029/153GM02
[43]	Martens P, Rotmans J.Transitions in a Globalising World. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers, 2002: 117-135. doi: 10.1023/A:1019677316775
[44]	Jepsen M R, Kuemmerle T, Müller D, et al.Transitions in European land-management regimes between 1800 and 2010. Land Use Policy, 2015, 49(4): 53-64. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.07.003
[45]	Anette R, Nina A F.Globalizing land use transitions: The soybean acceleration. Geografisk Tidskrift, 2011, 111(1): 85-92. doi: 10.1080/00167223.2011.10669524
[46]	Azadi H, Ho P, Hasfiati L.Agricultural land conversion drivers: A comparison between less developed, developing and developed countries. Land Degradation & Development, 2011, 22(6): 596-604. doi: 10.1002/ldr.1037
[47]	Long Hualou, Li Xiubin.Rural housing land transition in transect of the Yangtse River. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2005, 60(2): 179-188. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0375-5444.2005.02.001
	[龙花楼, 李秀彬. 长江沿线样带农村宅基地转型. 地理学报, 2005, 60(2): 179-188.] doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0375-5444.2005.02.001
[48]	Ernstson H, Se V D L, Redman C L, et al. Urban transitions: on urban resilience and human-dominated ecosystems. Ambio, 2010, 39(8): 531-545. doi: 10.1007/s13280-010-0081-9 pmid: 21141773
[49]	Song Xiaoqing, Ouyang Zhu.Connotation of multifunctional cultivated land and its implications for cultivated land Protection. Progress in Geography, 2012, 31(7): 859-868. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2012.07.004
	[宋小青, 欧阳竹. 耕地多功能内涵及其对耕地保护的启示. 地理科学进展, 2012, 31(7): 859-868.] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2012.07.004
[50]	Song Xiaoqing, Wu Zhifeng, Ouyang Zhu.Changes of cultivated land function in China since 1949. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014, 69(4): 435-447.
	[宋小青, 吴志峰, 欧阳竹. 1949年以来中国耕地功能变化. 地理学报, 2014, 69(4): 435-447.]
[51]	Li Xiubin.Explanation of land use changes. Progress in Geography, 2002, 21(3): 195-203. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-6301.2002.03.001
	[李秀彬. 土地利用变化的解释. 地理科学进展, 2002, 21(3): 195-203.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-6301.2002.03.001
[52]	Xiang Jingwei, Li Jiangfeng, Zeng Jie.Spatial difference and its influence factors of cultivated land transition of poverty counties in west of Hubei. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2016, 32(1): 272-279. doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2016.01.038
	[向敬伟, 李江风, 曾杰. 鄂西贫困县耕地利用转型空间分异及其影响因素. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(1): 272-279.] doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2016.01.038
[53]	Chen Long, Zhou Shenglu, Zhou Bingbing, et al.Characteristics and driving forces of regional land use transition based on the leading function classification: A case study of Jiangsu province. Economic Geography, 2015, 35(2): 155-162. doi: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2015.02.022
	[陈龙, 周生路, 周兵兵, 等. 基于主导功能的江苏省土地利用转型特征与驱动力. 经济地理, 2015, 35(2): 155-162.] doi: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2015.02.022
[54]	Lambin E F, Turner B L, Geist H J, et al.The causes of land-use and land-cover change: Moving beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change, 2001, 11(4): 261-269. doi: 10.1016/S0959-3780(01)00007-3
[55]	Wiggering H, Dalchow C, Glemnitz M, et al.Indicators for multifunctional land use: Linking socio-economic requirements with landscape potentials. Ecological Indicators, 2006, 6(1): 238-249. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.08.014
[56]	Geist H J, Lambin E F.Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. Bioscience, 2002, 52(2): 143-150.
[57]	Meyer W B, Turner B L.Human population growth and global land-use/cover change. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1992, 23(1): 39-61.
[58]	Qasim M, Hubacek K, Termansen M.Underlying and proximate driving causes of land use change in district Swat, Pakistan. Land Use Policy, 2013, 34(12): 146-157. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.02.008
[59]	Vliet J V, Groot H L F D, Rietveld P, et al. Manifestations and underlying drivers of agricultural land use change in Europe. Landscape & Urban Planning, 2015, 133: 24-36. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.09.001
[60]	Williamson O E.Transaction cost economics: How it works; where it is headed. De Economist, 1998, 146(1): 23-58.
[61]	Williamson O E.The new Institutional economics: Taking stock, looking ahead. Journal of Economic Literature, 2000, 38(3): 595-613.
[62]	Zhao Chaoying, Zhou Yi.Strategy of Sustainable Development on Land and Resources, Environment, Ecology and Population. Beijing: China Land Press, 2002: 73.
	[赵超英, 周毅. 国土资源、环境、生态与人口可持续发展战略. 北京: 中国大地出版社, 2002: 73.]
[63]	Fischer J, Abson D J, Butsic V, et al.Land sparing versus land sharing: Moving forward. Conservation Letters, 2014, 7(3): 149-157. doi: 10.1111/conl.12084
[64]	Grau R, Kuemmerle T, Macchi L.Beyond 'land sparing versus land sharing': Environmental heterogeneity, globalization and the balance between agricultural production and nature conservation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2013, 5(5): 477-483. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.06.001
[65]	Law E A, Meijaard E, Bryan B A, et al.Better land-use allocation outperforms land sparing and land sharing approaches to conservation in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biological Conservation, 2015, 186: 276-286. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.03.004
[66]	Phalan B, Green R E.Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: Land sharing and land sparing compared. Science, 2011, 333(6047): 1289-1291. doi: 10.1126/science.1208742 pmid: 21885781
[67]	Ballet J, Bazin D, Dubois J L, et al.A note on sustainability economics and the capability approach. Ecological Economics, 2011, 70(11): 1831-1834. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.05.009
[68]	Bartelmus P.Use and usefulness of sustainability economics. Ecological Economics, 2010, 69(11): 2053-2055. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.019
[69]	Baumgärtner S, Quaas M.What is sustainability economics? Ecological Economics, 2010, 69(3): 445-450. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.019
[70]	Baumgärtner S, Quaas M.Sustainability economics: General versus specific, and conceptual versus practical. Ecological Economics, 2010, 69(11):2056-2059. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.018
[71]	Long Kaisheng, Chen Ligen.The theoretical development and basic category of ecological rent. Environmental Science and Management, 2010, 35(10): 137-140. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-1212.2010.10.035
	[龙开胜, 陈利根. 生态地租的理论发展及基本范畴. 环境科学与管理, 2010, 35(10): 137-140.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-1212.2010.10.035
[72]	Long Kaisheng, Zhao Yali, Zhang Honghui, et al.Spatial difference and its influencing factors in ecological land rent in China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2012, 67(8): 1125-1136. doi: 10.11821/xb201208010
	[龙开胜, 赵亚莉, 张鸿辉, 等. 中国生态地租空间分异及其影响因素分析. 地理学报, 2012, 67(8): 1125-1136.] doi: 10.11821/xb201208010
[73]	Platt R H.Land Use and Society: Geography, Law, and Public Policy. Washington: Island Press, 3rd ed. 2014, 62.
[74]	Melick, Fujita, Jintrawet, et al. Land use transition, livelihoods, and environmental services in montane mainland Southeast Asia. Mountain Research & Development, 2014, 26(3): 278-284. doi: 10.1659/0276-4741(2006)26[278:LUTLAE]2.0.CO;2
[75]	Xu J, Sharma R, Fang J, et al.Critical linkages between land-use transition and human health in the Himalayan region. Environment International, 2008, 34(2): 239. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2007.08.004 pmid: 17868868
[76]	Liu Y, Lu S, Chen Y.Spatio-temporal change of urban-rural equalized development patterns in China and its driving factors. Journal of Rural Studies, 2013, 32(32): 320-330. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.08.004
[77]	Zhou Y, Liu Y, Wu W, et al.Effects of rural-urban development transformation on energy consumption and CO2, emissions: A regional analysis in China. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015, 52: 863-875. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.158
[78]	Liu Y, Long H, Li T, et al.Land use transitions and their effects on water environment in Huang-Huai-Hai Plain, China. Land Use Policy, 2015, 47: 293-301. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.04.023
[79]	Loïc P, Maruska A, Luigi M, et al.Spatial predictions of land-use transitions and associated threats to biodiversity: The case of forest regrowth in mountain grasslands. Applied Vegetation Science, 2013, 16(2): 227-236. doi: 10.1111/j.1654-109X.2012.01215.x pmid: 23617194
[80]	Long H L, Liu Y S, Hou X G, et al.Effects of land use transitions due to rapid urbanization on ecosystem services: Implications for urban planning in the new developing area of China. Habitat International, 2014, 44: 536-544. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.10.011
[81]	Liu Jiyuan, Kuang Wenhui, Zhang Zengxiang, et al.Spatiotemporal characteristics, patterns and causes of land use changes in China since the late 1980s. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014, 69(1): 3-14. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201401001
	[刘纪远, 匡文慧, 张增祥, 等. 20世纪80年代末以来中国土地利用变化的基本特征与空间格局. 地理学报, 2014, 69(1): 3-14.] doi: 10.11821/dlxb201401001
[82]	Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2013-03-03.
[83]	National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies., 2013-03-03.
[84]	OECD. Co-operative Approaches to Sustainable Agriculture. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1998.
[85]	OECD. Multifunctionality: Towards an Analytical Framework. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2001.
[86]	Vereijken P H.Transition to multifunctional land use and agriculture. Njas Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 2003, 50(2): 171-179.

诊断路径	分析视角	分析指标	诊断准则
土地利用空间转型诊断	数量变化视角	地类面积	从快速流失转向流失趋缓、停滞甚至恢复增长或从快速扩张转向扩张趋缓甚至停滞
	数量变化视角	地类面积的年变化率	从快速流失转向流失趋缓、停滞甚至恢复增长或从快速扩张转向扩张趋缓甚至停滞
	景观格局变化视角	斑块数量、斑块密度、斑块平均面积、最大斑块指数、斑块形状指数、分裂指数、聚合度指数等	从快速破碎化转向破碎化趋缓、停滞甚至连片集中规整
	经营格局变化视角	人均地类面积	从细碎化转向集中规模经营
		户均地类地块数
		用地单位平均经营土地利用类型面积
土地利用功能转型诊断	外部性视角	单位面积土地利用类型的商品性产出,如地均粮食产量、地均GDP、地均工业产值等	商品性产出增长的同时,非商品性产出维持稳定甚至增长^{[24, 55]}
	外部性视角	单位面积土地利用类型的非商品性产出,如单位面积土地C固持量、非生产性生境小区面积比重、单位面积化学品使用量(负向指标)	商品性产出增长的同时,非商品性产出维持稳定甚至增长^{[24, 55]}
	政策发展视角	生物性产品生产功能、国民经济贡献功能、家庭经济贡献功能、社会安定维护功能、就业保障功能、生态安全维护功能、景观休闲功能等功能类型数及组合结构	基于土地利用政策反推的规范或需求范畴的土地利用功能多样化的同时,基于指标监测的实证或供给范畴的土地利用功能向生态、景观类功能逐步凸显的方向演化,且两大范畴的功能协同演化^[50]

转型效应	研究主题
社会效应	农民生计^[74]、减贫、公共健康^[75]、粮食安全、城乡一体化^[76]…
经济效应	经济增长、产业转型、居民收入、农业增长、能源消费^[77]…
环境效应	水环境^[78]、土壤环境、碳排放^[77]、洪水、农业减灾、生物多样性^[79]、区域生态安全^[80]…

类型 (hm²)	农场				农业用地
类型 (hm²)	1979年	1988年	2000年	2010年	1979年	1988年	2000年	2010年
<20	766.73	556.73	325.11	211.40	5455.23	3757.24	1825.84	1237.12
20~50	347.32	288.06	137.81	87.90	10962.17	9348.06	4666.14	2986.67
50~100	114.08	128.26	122.14	97.40	7683.39	8708.91	8661.98	7036.39
100~200	29.04	37.08	64.30	72.60	3797.58	4863.63	8655.37	9970.64
≥200	5.50	6.64	14.45	20.60	1598.20	1917.95	4046.98	5734.58