地理学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 76 ›› Issue (4): 973-991.doi: 10.11821/dlxb202104013

• 地缘关系与区域发展 • 上一篇    下一篇

珠三角地区城镇化与生态韧性的耦合协调研究

王少剑(), 崔子恬, 林靖杰, 谢金燕, 苏坤   

  1. 中山大学地理科学与规划学院 广东省城市化与地理环境空间模拟重点实验室,广州 510275
  • 收稿日期:2020-03-01 修回日期:2020-12-18 出版日期:2021-04-25 发布日期:2021-06-25
  • 作者简介:王少剑(1986-), 男, 河南驻马店人, 博士, 副教授, 博士生导师, 中国地理学会会员(S110011019M), 研究方向为城市地理、城市与区域规划。E-mail: 1987wangshaojian@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    中央高校基本科研业务青年教师重点培育项目(191gzd09);广东省特支计划;广州市珠江科技新星(201806 010187)

Coupling relationship between urbanization and ecological resilience in the Pearl River Delta

WANG Shaojian(), CUI Zitian, LIN Jingjie, XIE Jinyan, SU Kun   

  1. Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Urbanization and Geo-simulation, School of Geography and Planning, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China
  • Received:2020-03-01 Revised:2020-12-18 Published:2021-04-25 Online:2021-06-25
  • Supported by:
    Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities(191gzd09);Guangdong Special Support Program;Pearl River S&T Nova Program of Guangzhou(201806 010187)

摘要:

城市韧性是新兴的研究话题,其实质为城市面对不确定性扰动的抵抗、恢复及适应能力。本文构建“规模—密度—形态”三维城市生态韧性评价体系,借鉴物理学耦合模型测算2000—2015年珠三角城市城镇化与生态韧性的耦合协调度,并对其时空变化特征进行深入探讨。结果表明:2000—2015年珠三角各市的城镇化水平总体不断提升,生态韧性水平持续降低,两者耦合协调度总体由基本协调向基本失调下滑。在空间分布上,珠三角地区城镇化与生态韧性的耦合协调度呈现出以珠江入海口城市为中心、向外围递增的圈层式格局。从生态韧性子系统对城镇化与生态韧性耦合协调的作用来看,规模韧性主要起反向阻滞作用;形态韧性的协调影响力主要为正向,且随时间推移不断增强;密度韧性的正向协调影响力持续下降,且在低于零值后负向增长。以新型城镇化引领区域协调发展,并通过严守三区三线、适应生态承载力、合理布局城市绿地等方法提高生态韧性,是未来珠三角实现城镇化与生态韧性协调可持续发展的主要路径。

关键词: 城镇化, 生态韧性, 规模韧性, 密度韧性, 形态韧性, 耦合协调度模型, 珠三角

Abstract:

Urban resilience is an emerging research topic of urban studies, and its essence is the ability of cities to resist, recover and adapt to uncertain disturbances. This paper first constructs a "Size-Density-Morphology" urban ecological resilience evaluation system, and then uses the coupling coordination degree model to measure the degree of coupling coordination between urbanization and ecological resilience in the Pearl River Delta from 2000 to 2015, and conducts an in-depth discussion on its temporal and spatial characteristics. The results show that: (1) From 2000 to 2015, the urbanization level of cities in the study area generally increased while the level of ecological resilience declined. The coupling coordination degree between the two systems decreased from basic coordination to basic imbalance. (2) In terms of spatial distribution, the coupling coordination degree between ecological resilience and urbanization of cities presented a circle pattern that centered on the cities at the mouth of the Pearl River and increased toward the periphery. (3) Ecological resilience subsystems played different roles in the coupling coordination between urbanization and ecological resilience. Specifically, size resilience mainly played a reverse blocking role; the influence of morphological resilience was mainly positive and continued to increase over time; the effect of density resilience was positive and continued to decline and further became negative after falling below zero. Leading the coordinated development of regions with new urbanization, and improving ecological resilience by strictly observing the three areas and three lines, adapting to ecological carrying capacity, and rationally arranging urban green spaces, are the main path for achieving coordinated and sustainable development of urbanization and ecological resilience in the Pearl River Delta in the future.

Key words: urbanization, ecological resilience, size resilience, density resilience, morphological resilience, coupling coordination model, Pearl River Delta