基于生态适应性循环三维框架的城市景观生态风险评价

doi:10.11821/dlxb201507003

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本研究以城市社会—生态系统为风险评价对象,引入生态适应性循环三维框架,将景观生态风险评价指标从单一的景观指数层面扩展至“潜力—连通度—恢复力”三维准则,并以深圳市为研究区,基于有序加权平均（OWA）算法对评价结果进行情景设置。研究结果显示,评价中干扰指标主要影响风险评价结果属性值域,而风险空间格局则受暴露指标制约;深圳全市景观生态风险整体呈现“西高东低”的分布格局,城市新建成区风险最高,大鹏半岛风险最低,羊台山与笔架山公园则是城区内部的相对风险低值区;基于OWA方法设置情景偏好,绘制“忽视”、“正常”及“重视”三种风险情景下的城市景观生态风险图。本研究基于生态适应性循环理念集成社会—生态系统时空动态干扰与暴露指标表征城市景观生态风险,并通过OWA方法变换主观偏好、降低评价不确定性,可以满足不同发展思路下的城市开发布局需求,从而为城市景观发展空间权衡提供决策支持。

关键词: 城市景观生态风险, 生态适应性循环, 有序加权平均, 城市发展空间权衡, 深圳市

Abstract:

As the city social-ecological system was regarded as the risk assessment target, a 3D framework of ecological adaptive cycle was built, which extended the landscape ecological risk assessment indicators to the potential-connectedness-resilience 3D criteria from the former landscape index level. Emphasis was placed on the principle of static spatial pattern with interactive dynamic trend from a geographical spatial analysis view. It was believed that the 3D framework could describe the pattern-process interaction with specific landscape elements much more clearly. Taking Shenzhen city as a study area, this study adopted the 3D framework of ecological adaptive cycle in building a landscape ecological risk assessment index system with the help of GIS spatial analysis method. Different scenarios were established based on the ordered weighted averaging (OWA) algorithm in the risk assessment. The results show that among the three scenarios, the concrete value of landscape ecological risk showed a similar distribution trend that the Dapeng Peninsula had the lowest landscape ecological risk in Shenzhen city; Yangtai Mountain and Bijiashan Park showed relatively low risks in the city area, even though the risks in each scenario were specifically different. This indicated that the choice of the specific threshold in "development" or "protection" largely depended on the city development strategy created by decision makers under current cognition. The emphasis of scenario tradeoff was extracting the risk and uncertainty interval rather than an optimal value. The development or protection methods through each of the specific planning objectives would be the ultimate goal of the ecological risk assessment at a regional scale. The evaluation in this study improved the landscape ecological risk assessment indices and methods based on the adaptive cycle concept, which reflected the spatiotemporal dynamics and exposure disturbed by human interference. Furthermore, the preference transform in OWA method reduced the uncertainty caused by the subjective risk assessment, which could improve the theoretical basis as well as maneuverability in urban planning. This study not only extended the landscape ecological risk assessment to spatial-temporal integration perspective, but also made a significant improvement in ecological risk assessment of landscape indicator system. Therefore, the results of this study could offer a powerful quantitative support for landscape development and protective measures effectively, such as city construction and demarcation of ecological control line.

Key words: urban landscape EcoRA, adaptive cycle, ordered weighted averaging, exploitation and protection, Shenzhen City

刘焱序, 王仰麟, 彭建, 张甜, 魏海. 基于生态适应性循环三维框架的城市景观生态风险评价[J]. 地理学报, 2015, 70(7): 1052-1067.

Yanxu LIU, Yanglin WANG, Jian PENG, Tian ZHANG, Hai WEI. Urban landscape ecological risk assessment based on the 3D framework of adaptive cycle[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2015, 70(7): 1052-1067.

图/表 9

图1

图2

表1

表2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

参考文献 51

[1]	U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. Framework for ecological risk assessment.Washington, DC: Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/630/R-92/001. 1992.
[2]	U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment.Washington, DC: Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/630/R-95/002F. 1998.
[3]	Hunsaker C T, Graham R L, Suter II G W, et al. Assessing ecological risk on a regional scale. Environmental Management, 1990, 14(3): 325-332.
[4]	Graham R L, Hunsaker C T, O'neill R V, et al. Ecological risk assessment at the regional scale. Ecological Applications, 1991: 196-206.
[5]	Dou Yue, Dai Erfu, Wu Shaohong.Assessment on vulnerability of ecosystems to land use change: A case study of Huadu District, Guangzhou City. Geographical Research, 2012, 31(2): 311-322.
	[窦玥, 戴尔阜, 吴绍洪. 区域土地利用变化对生态系统脆弱性影响评估: 以广州市花都区为例. 地理研究, 2012, 31(2): 311-322.]
[6]	Lei Y, Wang J, Yue Y, et al.How adjustments in land use patterns contribute to drought risk adaptation in a changing climate: A case study in China. Land Use Policy, 2014, 36: 577-584.
[7]	Gonzalez J R, Palahí M, Pukkala T.Integrating fire risk considerations in forest management planning in Spain: A landscape level perspective. Landscape Ecology, 2005, 20(8): 957-970.
[8]	Bechmann M, Stålnacke P, Kværnø S, et al.Integrated tool for risk assessment in agricultural management of soil erosion and losses of phosphorus and nitrogen. Science of the Total Environment, 2009, 407(2): 749-759.
[9]	Kingwell R, John M.The influence of farm landscape shape on the impact and management of dry land salinity. Agricultural Water Management, 2007, 89(1): 29-38.
[10]	Li Xiehui, Li Jingyi.Analysis on regional landscape ecological risk based on GIS: A case study along the lower reaches of the Weihe River. Arid Zone Research, 2008, 25(6): 899-903.
	[李谢辉, 李景宜. 基于GIS的区域景观生态风险分析: 以渭河下游河流沿线区域为例. 干旱区研究, 2008, 25(6): 899-903.]
[11]	Wang Mei'e, Chen Weiping, Peng Chi. Urban ecological risk assessment: A review. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2014, 25(3): 911-918.
	[王美娥, 陈卫平, 彭驰.城市生态风险评价研究进展. 应用生态学报. 2014, 25(3): 911-918. ]
[12]	Rinner C, Hussain M.Toronto's urban heat island: Exploring the relationship between land use and surface temperature. Remote Sensing, 2011, 3(6): 1251-1265.
[13]	Yin Zhan'e, Xu Shiyuan, Yin Jie, et al. Small-scale based scenario modeling and disaster risk assessment of urban rainstorm water-logging. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2010, 65(5): 553-562.
	[尹占娥, 许世远, 殷杰, 等. 基于小尺度的城市暴雨内涝灾害情景模拟与风险评估. 地理学报, 2010, 65(5): 553-562.]
[14]	Chen Peng, Pan Xiaoling.Ecological risk analysis of regional landscape in inland river watershed of arid area: A case study of Sangong River Basin in Fukang. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2003, 22(4): 116-120.
	[陈鹏, 潘晓玲. 干旱区内陆河流域区域景观生态风险分析: 以阜康三工河流域为例. 生态学杂志, 2003, 22(4): 116-120.]
[15]	Lu Yuan, Su Wenjing, Hua Cui, et al.Landscape ecological risk assessment for upper Zuojiang River Basin. Tropical Geography, 2010, 30(5): 496-503.
	[卢远, 苏文静, 华璀, 等. 左江上游流域景观生态风险评价. 热带地理, 2010, 30(5): 496-503.]
[16]	Xie Hualin.Spatial characteristic analysis of land use eco-risk based on landscape structure: A case study in the Xingguo County, Jiangxi Province. China Environmental Science, 2011, 31(4): 688-695.
	[谢花林. 基于景观结构的土地利用生态风险空间特征分析: 以江西兴国县为例. 中国环境科学, 2011, 31(4): 688-695.]
[17]	Hu Hebin, Liu Hongyu, Hao Jingfeng, et al. The urbanization effects on watershed landscape structure and their ecologicalrisk assessment. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(12): 3432-3440.
	[胡和兵, 刘红玉, 郝敬锋, 等. 流域景观结构的城市化影响与生态风险评价. 生态学报, 2011, 31(12): 3432-3440.]
[18]	Gao Bin, Li Xiaoyu, Li Yugang, et al.Assessment of ecological risk of coastal economic developing zone in Jinzhou Bay based on landscape pattern. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(12): 3441-3450.
	[高宾, 李小玉, 李玉刚, 等. 基于景观格局的锦州湾沿海经济开发区生态风险分析. 生态学报, 2011, 31(12): 3441-3450.]
[19]	Wen Xiaojin, Yang Haijuan, Liu Yanxu, et al.Industrialization process and ecological risk pattern in a rich energy region of northern Shaanxi, Northwest China. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2013, 32(6): 1578-1586.
	[温晓金, 杨海娟, 刘焱序, 等. 陕北能源富集区工业化过程与生态风险格局. 生态学杂志, 2013, 32(6): 1578-1586.]
[20]	Landis W G.The frontiers in ecological risk assessment at expanding spatial and temporal scales. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 2003, 9(6): 1415-1424.
[21]	Cumming G S.Spatial resilience: integrating landscape ecology, resilience, and sustainability. Landscape Ecology, 2011, 26(7): 899-909.
[22]	Gunderson L H, Holling C S.Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Washington D. C.: Island Press, 2002.
[23]	Sun Jing, Wang Jun, Yang Xinjun.An overview on the resilience of social-ecological systems. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2007, 27(12): 5371-5381.
	[孙晶, 王俊, 杨新军. 社会—生态系统恢复力研究综述. 生态学报, 27(12): 5371-5381.]
[24]	Yager R R.On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans. On Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1988, 18(1): 183-190.
[25]	Zhou Hongjian, Shi Peijun, Wang Jing'ai, et al. River network change and its ecological effects in Shenzhen Region in recent 30 years. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2008, 63(9): 969-980.
	[周洪建, 史培军, 王静爱, 等. 近30年来深圳河网变化及其生态效应分析. 地理学报, 2008, 63(9): 969-980.]
[26]	Bu Xinguo, Wang Yanglin, Wu Jiansheng.The effect of landform on landscape pattern vertical differentiation in rapidly urbanized Shenzhen City. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2008, 63(1): 75-82.
	[卜心国, 王仰麟, 吴健生. 深圳快速城市化中地形对景观垂直格局的影响. 地理学报, 2008, 63(1): 75-82.]
[27]	Liu Zhenhuan, Wang Yanglin, Peng Jian, et al.Using ISA to analyze the spatial pattern of urban land cover change: A case study in Shenzhen. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2011, 66(7): 961-971.
	[刘珍环, 王仰麟, 彭建,等. 基于不透水表面指数的城市地表覆被格局特征: 以深圳市为例. 地理学报, 2011, 66(7): 961-971.]
[28]	Chang Qing, Li Shuangcheng, Wang Yanglin, et al.Green landscape evolution and its diving factors in Shenzhen. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2012, 67(12): 1611-1622.
	[常青, 李双成, 王仰麟, 等. 基于稳定映射分析的深圳绿色景观时空演化及启示. 地理学报, 2012, 67(12): 1611-1622.]
[29]	Lorz C, Fürst C, Galic Z, et al.GIS-based probability assessment of natural hazards in forested landscapes of central and south-eastern Europe. Environmental Management, 2010, 46(6): 920-930.
[30]	Martín-Martín C, Bunce R G, Saura S, et al.Changes and interactions between forest landscape connectivity and burnt area in Spain. Ecological Indicators, 2013, 33: 129-138.
[31]	Saura S, Estreguil C, Mouton C, et al.Network analysis to assess landscape connectivity trends: Application to European forests (1990-2000). Ecological Indicators, 2011, 11: 407-416.
[32]	Folke C.Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change, 2006, 16: 253-267.
[33]	Turner II B J. Vulnerability and resilience: Coalescing or paralleling approaches for sustainability science? Global Environmental Change, 2010, 20: 570-576.
[34]	Gurung R B, Breidt F J, Dutin A, et al.Predicting Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) curves for ecosystem modeling applications. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2009, 113(10): 2186-2193.
[35]	Hutchinson M F.Anusplin Version 4.2 User Guide. Cauberra: Australian National University, 2001.
[36]	Wischmeier W H.A soil erodibility nomograph for farmland and construction sites. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 1971, 26: 189-193.
[37]	McGarigal K, Cushman S A, Ene E. FRAGSTATS v4: Spatial pattern analysis program for categorical and continuous maps. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, 2012.
[38]	Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S.Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: Towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landscape Ecology, 2006, 21(7): 959-967.
[39]	Saura S, Torné J.Conefor Sensinode 2.2: A software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environmental Modeling and Software, 2009, 24(1): 135-139.
[40]	Marulli J, Mallarach J M.A GIS methodology for assessing ecological connectivity: Application to the Barcelona Metropolitan Area. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2005, 71(2): 243-262.
[41]	Wei Hai, Qin Bo, Peng Jian, et al.Evaluation on comprehensive exploitation suitability of low-slope hilly land based on GRNN model and neighborhood calculation: A case study of Wumeng Mountain continuous poverty-stricken region. Geographical Research, 2014, 33(5): 831-841.
	[魏海, 秦博, 彭建, 等. 基于GRNN 模型与邻域计算的低丘缓坡综合开发适宜性评价: 以乌蒙山集中连片特殊困难片区为例. 地理研究, 2014, 33(5): 831-841.]
[42]	Cai Bofeng, Yu Rong.Advance and evaluation in the long time series vegetation trends research based on remote sensing. Journal of Remote Sensing, 2009, 13(6): 1170-1186.
	[蔡博峰, 于嵘. 基于遥感的植被长时序趋势特征研究进展及评价. 遥感学报, 2009, 13(6): 1170-1186.]
[43]	Yuan Lihua, Jiang Weiguo, Shen Wenming, et al.The spatio-temporal variations of vegetation cover in the Yellow River Basin from 2000 to 2010. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(24): 7798-7806.
	[袁丽华, 蒋卫国, 申文明, 等. 2000-2010 年黄河流域植被覆盖的时空变化. 生态学报, 2013, 33(24): 7798-7806.]
[44]	Zarghami M, Szidarovszky F.Fuzzy quantifiers in sensitivity analysis of OWA Operator. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 2008, 54(4): 1006-1018.
[45]	Yager R R.Quantifier guided aggregation using OWA operators. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 1996, 11(1): 49-73.
[46]	Yager R R.Nonmonotonic OWA operators. Soft Computing, 1999, 3(3): 87-196
[47]	Liu Yanxu, Peng Jian, Han Yinan, et al.Suitability assessment for building land consolidation on gentle hillside based on OWA operator: A case in Dali Bai Nationality Borough in Yunnan, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014, 34(12): 3188-3197.
	[刘焱序, 彭建, 韩忆楠, 等. 基于OWA 的低丘缓坡建设开发适宜性评价: 以云南大理白族自治州为例. 生态学报, 2014, 34(12): 3188-3197.]
[48]	Wu Jiansheng, Qiao Na, Peng Jian, et al.Spatial variation of landscape eco-risk in open mine area. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(12): 3816-3824.
	[吴健生, 乔娜, 彭建, 等. 露天矿区景观生态风险空间分异. 生态学报, 2013, 33(12): 3816-3824.
[49]	Wu Jiansheng, Zong Minli, Peng Jian.Assessment of mining area's ecological vulnerability based on landscape pattern: A case study of Liaoyuan, Jilin Province of Northeast China. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2012, 31(12) : 3213-3220.
	[吴健生, 宗敏丽, 彭建. 基于景观格局的矿区生态脆弱性评价: 以吉林省辽源市为例. 生态学杂志, 2012, 31(12) : 3213-3220. ]
[50]	Pan Yajing, Wang Yanglin, Peng Jian, et al.Research progress in ecological risk assessment of mining area. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2012, 32(20): 6566-6574.
	[潘雅婧, 王仰麟, 彭建, 等. 矿区生态风险评价研究述评. 生态学报, 2012, 32(20): 6566-6574.]
[51]	Peng Jian, Wu Jiansheng, Pan Yajing, et al.Evaluation for regional ecological sustainability based on PSR model: Conceptual framework. Progress in Geography, 2012, 31(7): 933-940.
	[彭建, 吴健生, 潘雅婧, 等. 基于PSR模型的区域生态持续性评价概念框架. 地理科学进展, 2012, 31(7): 933-940.]

准则(权重)	风险	指标(权重)	内涵	归一化
潜力(0.413)	暴露	坡度(0.209)	滑坡等地质灾害	正向
		土地利用类型(0.112)	人类活动方式	正向
		植被盖度(0.223)	绿色植被空间分布	反向
	干扰	降雨侵蚀力(0.056)	潜在水土流失威胁	正向
		辐射亮温(0.132)	地表热环境影响	正向
		夜间灯光强度(0.268)	经济社会发展情况	正向
连通度(0.327)	暴露	Shannon多样性(0.110)	景观类型空间变异性	反向
	暴露	景观连通重要性(0.322)	生态用地连通程度	反向
	干扰	建设用地距离(0.212)	城市开发对周边的干扰	反向
	干扰	景观生态邻接系数(0.356)	景观类型间的增益效果	正向
恢复力(0.260)	暴露	植被盖度变化趋势(0.667)	绿色植被空间恢复程度	反向
恢复力(0.260)	干扰	夜间灯光强度变化趋势(0.333)	社会经济发展程度	正向

风险受体	风险源
风险受体	林地/草地	耕地/园地	水域/滩涂	待开发土地	建设用地
林地/草地	0	0.4	0.1	0.6	0.9
耕地/园地	0	0.1	0.2	0.6	0.8
水域/滩涂	0	0.5	0	0.6	0.9
待开发土地	0	0	0	0.7	1
建设用地	0	0	0.4	0.8	1