地理学报

地理学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 77 ›› Issue (1): 164-181.doi: 10.11821/dlxb202201012

• 生态系统服务与环境健康 • 上一篇    下一篇

特大城市群生态空间及其生态承载状态的时空分异

王世豪1,2(), 黄麟3(), 徐新良1, 李佳慧2,3   

  1. 1.中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所 资源与环境信息系统国家重点实验室,北京 100101
    2.中国科学院大学,北京 100049
    3.中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所中国科学院陆地表层格局与模拟重点实验室,北京 100101
  • 收稿日期:2020-12-15 修回日期:2021-07-09 出版日期:2022-01-25 发布日期:2022-03-25
  • 通讯作者: 黄麟(1981-), 女, 四川宜宾人, 博士, 副研究员, 硕士生导师, 主要从事土地利用变化及其生态效应研究。E-mail: huanglin@igsnrr.ac.cn
  • 作者简介:王世豪(1995-), 男, 山东淄博人, 博士生, 主要从事生态环境遥感与信息系统研究。E-mail: wangsh.20b@igsnrr.ac.cn
  • 基金资助:
    中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(XDA20010202);中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(XDA20010302)

Spatio-temporal variation characteristics of ecological space and its ecological carrying status in mega-urban agglomerations

WANG Shihao1,2(), HUANG Lin3(), XU Xinliang1, LI Jiahui2,3   

  1. 1. State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
    2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    3. Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
  • Received:2020-12-15 Revised:2021-07-09 Published:2022-01-25 Online:2022-03-25
  • Supported by:
    Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences(XDA20010202);Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences(XDA20010302)

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

摘要：

快速城镇化导致中国城市群地区生态空间被大量挤占,生态承载压力加剧,已成为制约城市群健康发展的重要因素。本文界定并分析了京津冀、长三角、粤港澳大湾区、成渝、长江中游5个特大城市群三生空间结构分布特征,解析了1990—2020年生态空间时空分异及其变化的影响因素,进一步通过水资源供给、水质调节、空气质量调节、休闲游憩探讨了近30年生态空间综合承载状态及其时空分异特征。研究结果表明：① 不同形成发育阶段的城市群呈现差异性的三生空间面积结构比、以多中心组合为主的生活空间拓展演变模式,以及屏障式、紧密、离散、全包围式的生态空间结构。② 1990—2020年城市群生活空间面积持续大幅度增加而生产空间呈现相反趋势,除粤港澳大湾区以外,生态空间均表现出增加态势尤其近10年增势明显。三生空间面积结构及其时空变化特征,说明特大城市群生产、生态空间的主要功能从供给转向调节和文化,并反映了中国从快速城镇化到新型可持续城镇化的转变。③ 5个城市群分别有78.6%、73.1%、54.5%、56.3%和25.8%市域呈现严重超载的综合生态承载状态,其中水资源供给、水质调节是制约城市群生态承载水平的要因,未来需要重视城市群生态空间保留量及其合理布局以减缓生态承载压力。本文可为城市群绿色可持续发展、三生空间结构优化和配置提供科学依据。

关键词: 特大城市群, 三生空间结构, 生态空间, 生态承载力, 时空分异

Abstract:

The rapid urbanization of China's urban agglomerations in recent decades has resulted in over-occupied ecological space and increased ecological pressure, which has become an important factor restricting regional healthy development. This paper examines the structure and distribution characteristics of "production-living-ecological" spaces of five mega-urban agglomerations in China, namely, Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei (BTH), Yangtze River Delta (YRD), Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA), Chengdu-Chongqing (CY), and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River (MYR), and analyzes the spatial and temporal variation characteristics of ecological space and the influencing factors of its changes in 1990-2020. Then it explores the comprehensive ecological carrying capacity of water resource supply, water quality regulation, air quality regulation, and leisure and recreation space. The results show that: (1) Urban agglomerations at different developmental stages present different area ratios of the "production-living-ecological" spaces, living space expansion patterns dominated by multi-center combination, and structure of ecological space including barrier type, compact, discrete, and full enveloping type. (2) In the study period, the area of living space in urban agglomerations increased significantly while the area of production space decreased. The ecological space of all the urban agglomerations except the GBA increased. In the last 10 years, the increase of ecological space accelerated significantly. The spatial structure of "production-living-ecological" spaces and its characteristics of spatial and temporal evolution indicate that the main functions of production and ecological space in mega-urban agglomerations have shifted from supply to regulation and culture, and reflect the transition from rapid urbanization to new sustainable urbanization in China. (3) The ecologically overloaded cities in the BTH, YRD, GBA, CY, and MYR account for 78.6%, 73.1%, 54.5%, 56.3%, and 25.8% of the respective urban agglomeration. Water supply and water quality regulation are the main factors that restrict the ecological carrying capacity of BTH and YRD, while leisure and recreation services restrict the ecological carrying status of the GBA and CY urban agglomerations. In the future, we need to pay attention to the conservation and rational layout of ecological space to reduce the ecological pressure in urban agglomerations.

Key words: mega-urban agglomerations, structure of "production-living-ecological" spaces, ecological space, carrying capacity of ecological space, spatial and temporal differentiation