地理学报 ›› 2015, Vol. 70 ›› Issue (5): 779-795.doi: 10.11821/dlxb201505009

• • 上一篇    下一篇

千岛湖社会—生态系统恢复力测度与影响机理

王群(), 陆林(), 杨兴柱   

  1. 安徽师范大学国土资源与旅游学院 旅游发展与规划研究中心,芜湖 241002
  • 收稿日期:2014-08-07 修回日期:2014-12-25 出版日期:2015-05-20 发布日期:2015-05-20
  • 作者简介:

    作者简介:王群(1979-), 女, 安徽肥西人, 副教授, 博士生, 主要研究方向为旅游生态环境管理研究。E-mail: junyang110771@163.com

  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金重点项目(41230631)

Study on measurement and impact mechanism of socio-ecological system resilience in Qiandao Lake

Qun WANG(), Lin LU(), Xingzhu YANG   

  1. Research Center of Tourism Planning and Development, College of National Territorial Resources and Tourism, Anhui Normal University, Wuhu 241002, Anhui, China
  • Received:2014-08-07 Revised:2014-12-25 Published:2015-05-20 Online:2015-05-20
  • Supported by:
    Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.41230631

摘要:

立足反映恢复力属性特征的盆地模型理论,构建基于稳定性景观的恢复力评价体系。从脆弱性、应对能力两大层面以及社会、经济、生态三大子系统入手,建立旅游地社会—生态系统恢复力测度指标体系,运用集对分析法,测度千岛湖旅游地社会—生态系统恢复力,甄别影响恢复力的主要因子,揭示旅游地社会—生态系统恢复力因子影响机理及曲线规律。结果表明:① 1987-2012年间千岛湖旅游地社会—生态系统脆弱性指数由0.4576缓慢上升至0.5622,应对能力指数由0.0282快速上升至0.9725,恢复力指数由0.1276稳步上升至0.8669,恢复力应是脆弱性与应对能力相互作用的结果。② 总脆弱性受生态子系统脆弱性影响最大,总应对能力受经济子系统应对能力影响最大,总恢复力受社会和经济子系统恢复力影响较大。总应对能力对恢复力起着决定性作用,其中社会和经济系统的应对能力作用更加突出。③ 恢复力因子影响曲线可分为线性递增和递减、非线性U型/倒U型递增和递减6种类型,不同阶段、不同因子对系统恢复力作用方式、性质、速率具有差异性,主要以非线性影响为主,且存在不确定性。

关键词: 旅游地社会—生态系统, 恢复力, 影响因子, 千岛湖

Abstract:

The primary goal of this study is to build a resilience evaluation system with stability landscape based on the theory of basin model which reflects the characteristics of resilience. The study proposes the socio-ecological system resilience indicators of tourist destination, including the fragility, and response capacity in social, economic and ecological subsystems. In particular, by adopting the set pair analysis, the paper empirically measures the socio-ecological system resilience, identifies the main factors influencing resilience, and illustrates the mechanism that influences the tourism socio-ecological system. In addition, the paper introduces curve distribution patterns of Qiandao Lake. The results are as follows: (1) During the period 1987-2012, the socio-ecological system fragility index in the Qiandao Lake slowly increased from 0.4576 to 0.5622, the index of adaptive capacity rose rapidly from 0.0282 to 0.9725, and the resilience index rose steadily from 0.1276 to 0.8669. The resilience should be the result of the interaction between fragility and response capability. (2) The total fragility is mostly affected by the ecological subsystem, whereas the total response capacity, by the economic subsystem. The social and economic subsystems, however, directly affect the total resilience. As a matter of fact, the total response capacity plays a decisive role in resilience, in which response capacity of social and economic subsystems are more significant, although the system itself also has certain resistance and resilience. (3) In each subsystem, the resilience factors are divided into two categories respectively with regard to the fragility and response capacity. The fragility consists of the base elements of the subsystems and the relevant variables brought about by tourism development. The response capacity mainly includes the input and storage factors in every subsystem. (4) In the socio-ecological system of tourist destination, the relationship between the impact factors and the resilience falls into roughly six curve types. On the one hand, there are two types of linear relationships between the resilience and ecological background conditions, social stability, industrial livelihood and ecological control measures. The one is in the trend of progressive increase and the other, of progressive decrease. On the other hand, U-shaped curves or inverted U-shaped curves, are mainly related to fragility indexes and response capacity indexes brought by tourism development. In terms of impact direction, rates and ways, the influence curve of resilience factors can be divided into four types, namely U-shaped increasing curve, U-shaped decreasing curve, inverted U-shaped curve which increases fast at first and then decreases slowly, and inverted U-shaped curve which increases slowly at first and then decreases fast. In conclusion, nonlinear effects still dominate. There are differences and uncertainty in the direction and rate of the factors. The results, in fact, further confirm the nonlinear thought of resilience and the applicability of the set pair analysis method.

Key words: tourism socio-ecological system, resilience, impact factors, Qiandao Lake