Please wait a minute...
 
快速检索 图表检索 引用检索 高级检索
地理学报    2018, Vol. 73 Issue (12): 2315-2328     DOI: 10.11821/dlxb201812004
  城市与区域发展 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
基于“规模—密度—形态”的大连市城市韧性评估
修春亮1(),魏冶2,王绮3
1. 东北大学江河建筑学院,沈阳 110169
2. 东北师范大学地理科学学院,长春 130024
3. 长春大学管理学院,长春 130022
Evaluation of urban resilience of Dalian city based on the perspective of "Size-Density-Morphology"
XIU Chunliang1(),WEI Ye2,WANG Qi3
1. Jangho Architecture College, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110169, China
2. School of Geographical Sciences, Northeast Normal University, Changchun 130024, China
3. School of Management, Changchun University, Changchun 130022 , China
全文: PDF (1903 KB)   HTML
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)     
摘要 

以建设安全城市为目标,依据地理学和景观生态思想方法,构建基于“规模—密度—形态”的三维城市韧性研究框架,并对2000-2016年大连市各县市区的城市韧性进行评估。其中规模韧性利用生态基础设施工具进行度量,密度韧性利用生态足迹与生态承载力工具进行度量,形态韧性基于源汇景观平均距离指数进行度量。还对各年份三类韧性的组合形式进行综合评判。本文认为,“规模—密度—形态”三位一体的韧性评估方法可有效识别城市的韧性特征,是建立城市规划与城市韧性研究之间有效联系的纽带。研究发现:① 规模安全是城市空间扩张的基本约束条件;② 生态承载力是城市密度的安全阈值;③ “源—汇”景观的空间耦合是优良城市形态的基本特征;④ 是“规模—密度—形态”三个韧性的组合状况而不是某一单项指标决定城市的安全性。基于规模、密度、形态韧性及其组合特征判定,为未来大连的城市发展提出建议:① 严格限制中心城区与金州区开发强度,遏制其蔓延式增长趋势;② 严格控制海岸带开发,维持山体和绿色植被斑块的完整性;③ 促进市域均衡开发,提升城市整体韧性;④ 优化新市区开发战略,形成良好城市形态。

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
修春亮
魏冶
王绮
关键词 城市规模城市密度城市形态城市韧性安全发展大连市 
Abstract

Aiming at building a safe city, this study proposed a “Size-Density-Morphology” based three-dimensional urban resilience evaluation framework according to the theories and methods of geography and landscape ecology. By using the framework, the urban resilience of each county in Dalian city during 2000-2016 was evaluated. There are three kinds of urban resilience, namely size resilience, density resilience and morphology resilience. The size resilience could be measured by ecological infrastructure tools; the density resilience could be measured by ecological footprint and ecological carrying capacity; the morphology resilience could be measured by "Source-sink" landscape average distance index. In addition, this paper also analyzed the combining forms of the three types of resilience. This study demonstrates that the three-dimension evaluation framework has a unique capacity to identify the resilience characteristics of city, and it is a key bond which creates the connection of urban planning and urban resilience research. Findings are as follows: (1) The size safety is the primary constraint condition for urban spatial expansion. (2) Ecological carrying capacity is the safe threshold for urban density. (3) The spatial coupling of source and sink landscape is a basic feature of good urban morphology. (4) It is the combination of size-density-morphology resilience to determine the safety of the city rather than each single one. According to the analysis of combination characteristics of the "Size-Density-Morphology" resilience, four suggestions were put forward for the development of Dalian city in future. (1) Strictly limit the development intensity of central urban area and Jinzhou district to curb the urban sprawl trend; (2) Strictly control the development of the coastal zone and maintain the integrity of natural mountain and green vegetation patches; (3) Promote the balanced development on a whole city scale to improve the city's overall resilience; (4) Optimizing the development strategy of new urban area in order to form a good urban morphology.

Key wordsurban size    urban density    urban morphology    urban resilience    safe development    Dalian city
收稿日期: 2018-03-22      出版日期: 2018-12-14
基金资助:国家自然科学基金项目(41471141)
引用本文:   
修春亮, 魏冶, 王绮 . 基于“规模—密度—形态”的大连市城市韧性评估[J]. 地理学报, 2018, 73(12): 2315-2328.
XIU Chunliang, WEI Ye, WANG Qi . Evaluation of urban resilience of Dalian city based on the perspective of "Size-Density-Morphology"[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(12): 2315-2328.
链接本文:  
http://www.geog.com.cn/CN/10.11821/dlxb201812004      或      http://www.geog.com.cn/CN/Y2018/V73/I12/2315
Fig. 1  研究区范围
区(市、县)名称 已开发建设用地面积(km2) 适宜建设用地面积(km2) 规模韧性指数(Rs)
2000 2010 2016 2000 2010 2016
大连中心城区 183.55 291.34 309.45 281.04 1.53 0.96 0.91
金州区 74.08 236.46 302.99 273.59 3.69 1.16 0.90
旅顺口区 11.63 86.68 94.60 161.50 13.89 1.86 1.71
瓦房店市 55.53 95.13 158.98 205.21 3.70 2.16 1.29
普兰店市 10.16 43.06 57.31 48.20 4.74 1.12 0.84
庄河市 14.03 28.35 56.00 47.48 3.38 1.67 0.85
长海县 9.67 10.46 11.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
大连全市 358.65 791.48 990.49 1017.02 2.84 1.28 1.03
Tab. 1  2000-2016年大连市各县市区规模韧性指数
区(市、县)名称 生态足迹[Ef] 生态承载力[Ec(1-12%)] 密度韧性指数(Rd)
2000 2010 2016 2000 2010 2016 2000 2010 2016
大连中心城区 3842412.21 9773527.04 6397387.43 75127.76 71131.18 70055.41 0.02 0.01 0.01
金州区 1492133.26 3728066.58 2522267.44 130626.70 128535.78 142131.97 0.09 0.03 0.06
旅顺口区 474346.42 1182884.71 745215.38 61999.24 61099.53 60224.95 0.13 0.05 0.08
瓦房店市 1711352.77 3400140.04 2160436.71 367041.04 366570.67 400203.67 0.21 0.11 0.19
普兰店市 1356540.76 3310310.74 2100360.89 280007.45 279357.10 303585.74 0.21 0.08 0.14
庄河市 1494760.98 2888994.79 1929076.00 423314.60 422974.08 452204.90 0.28 0.15 0.23
长海县 178162.28 286391.97 178739.34 19278.69 14627.93 15693.37 0.11 0.05 0.09
大连全市 10551708.68 24572325.87 16035499.19 1359395.48 1346306.27 1446116.01 0.13 0.05 0.09
Tab. 2  2000-2016年大连市各县市区密度韧性指数
区(市、县)名称 “源—汇”景观平均距离指数(Ld) 形态韧性指数(Rm)
2000 2010 2016 2000 2010 2016
大连中心城区 1012.48 1333.79 1326.63 1.17 0.89 0.89
金州区 1196.01 1281.79 1235.00 0.99 0.93 0.96
旅顺口区 862.81 982.52 969.95 1.38 1.21 1.22
瓦房店市 1669.13 1411.62 1321.07 0.71 0.84 0.90
普兰店市 1431.61 1634.74 1482.26 0.83 0.73 0.80
庄河市 2009.93 1362.69 1128.88 0.59 0.87 1.05
长海县 345.58 346.38 360.74 3.43 3.43 3.29
大连全市 1186.44 1296.99 1172.77 1.00 0.91 1.01
Tab. 3  2000-2016年大连市各县市区形态韧性指数
Fig. 2  2000年大连市各县市区规模—密度—形态韧性组合
Fig. 3  2010年大连市各县市区规模—密度—形态韧性组合
Fig. 4  2016年大连市各县市区规模—密度—形态韧性组合
[1] Rittel H W J, Webber M M. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 1973, 4(2): 155-169.http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF01405730
DOI: 10.1007/BF01405730     
[2] Shao Yiwen, Xu Jiang.Understanding urban resilience: A conceptual analysis based on integrated international literature review. Urban Planning International, 2015, 30(2): 48-54.
[邵亦文, 徐江. 城市韧性:基于国际文献综述的概念解析. 国际城市规划, 2015, 30(2): 48-54.]http://www.cqvip.com/QK/96357A/201502/664635715.html
[3] Holling C S.Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecological and Systematics, 1973: 1-23.http://www.jstor.org/stable/2096802
[4] Holling C S.Engineering Resilience versus ecological resilience// Schulze P C, Ebrary I. Engineering Within Ecological Constraints. National Academies Press, 1996.
[5] Walker B, Holling C S, Carpenter S R, et al.Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social-ecological systems. Ecology & Society, 2004, 9(2): 3438-3447.
[6] Gunderson L H, Holling C S.Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Washington DC: Island Press, 2002.
[7] Peng Chong, Yuan Minhang, Gu Chaolin, et al.Research progress on the theory and practice of regional resilience. Urban Planning Forum, 2015(1): 84-92.
[彭翀, 袁敏航, 顾朝林, . 区域韧性的理论与实践研究进展, 城市规划学刊, 2015(1): 84-92.]
[8] Zheng Yan, Lin Chenzhen.The theory foundation and evaluation method of the resilient city. City, 2017(6): 22-28.
[郑艳, 林陈贞. 韧性城市的理论基础与评估方法, 城市, 2017(6): 22-28.]http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/chengs201706004
[9] Xiu Chunliang, Zhu Xiangling.Countering the sudden calamity: Human resident security and the policy of metropolis. Human Geography, 2003, 18(5): 26-30.
[修春亮, 祝翔凌. 针对突发灾害: 大城市的人居安全及其政策. 人文地理, 2003, 18(5): 26-30.]http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/rwdl200305006
[10] Duan Jin, Li Zhiming, Lu Bo.Some implication to the optimization of urban formation from SARS epidemic. City Planning Review, 2003, 27(7): 61-63.
[段进, 李志明, 卢波. 论防范城市灾害的城市形态优化: 由SARS引发的对当前城市建设中问题的思考. 城市规划, 2003, 27(7): 61-63.]http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-CSGH200307017.htm
[11] Li Bingyi, Zhang Lin.Insight from SARS for China's urban planning. City Planning Review, 2003, 27(7): 71-72.
[李秉毅, 张琳. SARS爆发对我国城市规划的启示. 城市规划, 2003, 27(7): 71-72.]http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical_csgh200307016.aspx
[12] Xiu C, Cheng L, Song W.Vulnerability of large city and its implication in urban planning: A perspective of intra-urban structure. Chinese Geographical Science, 2011, 21(2): 204-210.http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11769-011-0451-7
[13] Walmsley A.Greenways: Multiplying and diversifying in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2006, 76(1-4): 252-290.http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0169204604001446
[14] Tzoulas K, Korpela K, Venn S, et al.Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2007, 81(3): 167-178.http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0169204607000503
[15] Mell I C.Can green infrastructure promote urban sustainability? Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Engineering Sustainability, 2009, 162(1): 23-34.http://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/10.1680/ensu.2009.162.1.23
[16] Shi Peijun, Yu Deyong, Jiang Yuan, et al.Landscape Urbanization and the Construction of Ecological Infrastructure: Case of Shenzhen. Beijing: Science Press, 2012.
[史培军, 于德永, 江源, . 景观城市化与生态基础设施建设: 以深圳为例. 北京: 科学出版社, 2012.]http://bookask.com/book/827671.html
[17] Yu Kongjian."Anti-planning" Approach. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2005.
[俞孔坚. “反规划”途径.北京: 中国建筑工业出版社, 2005.]
[18] Rees W E, Wackernagel M.Urban ecological footprints: Why cities cannot be sustainable and why they are a key to sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 1996, 16(s4-6): 223-248.http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0195925596000224
[19] Xiong Deguo, Xian Xuefu, Jiang Yongdong.Discussion on ecological footprint theory applied to regional sustainable development evaluation. Progress in Geography, 2003, 22(6): 618-626.
[熊德国, 鲜学福, 姜永东. 生态足迹理论在区域可持续发展评价中的应用及改进. 地理科学进展, 2003, 22(6): 618-626.]http://www.cqvip.com/Main/Detail.aspx?id=10549387
[20] Xu Zhongmin, Zhang Zhiqiang, Cheng Guodong.Ecological footprint calculation and development capacity analysis of China in 1999. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14(2): 280-285.
[徐中民, 张志强, 程国栋, . 中国1999年生态足迹计算与发展能力分析. 应用生态学报, 2003, 14(2): 280-285.]http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/yystxb200302028
[21] Zhao Zhenyu, Song Donglin.Development sustainability analysis of Chinese fossil energy on ecological footprint model (1990-2006). Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2010, 30(1): 75-79.
[赵震宇, 宋冬林. 中国化石能源使用可持续性评估: 基于1990-2006年数据. 地理科学, 2010, 30(1): 75-79.]http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-DLKX201001010.htm
[22] Chen Liding, Fu Bojie, Zhao Wenwu.Source-sink landscape theory and its ecological significance. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2006, 26(5): 1444-1449.http://new.med.wanfangdata.com.cn/Paper/Detail?id=PeriodicalPaper_zggdxxxswz-swx200802002
[23] Zhang Fang, Xu Weifeng, Li Guangming, et al.Analysis of ecological footprint and ecological carrying capacity of Shanghai in 2003. Journal of Tongji University (Natural Science), 2006, 34(1): 80-84.
[张芳, 徐伟峰, 李光明, . 上海市2003年生态足迹与生态承载力分析. 同济大学学报(自然科学版), 2006, 34(1): 80-84.]http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/tjdxxb200601016
[24] Bai Yu.Assessment of eco-efficiency of tianjin land use master plan based on ecological footprint model. Economic Geography, 2012, 32(10): 127-132.
[白钰. 基于生态足迹的天津市土地利用总体规划生态效用评价. 经济地理, 2012, 32(10): 127-132.]http://www.cqvip.com/QK/93124X/201210/43778206.html
[25] Guo Xiurui, Yang Jurong, Mao Xianqiang.Calculation and analysis of urban ecological footprint: A case study of Guangzhou. Geographical Research, 2003, 22(5): 654-661.
[郭秀锐, 杨居荣, 毛显强. 城市生态足迹计算与分析: 以广州为例. 地理研究, 2003, 22(5): 654-661.]http://www.cqvip.com/Main/Detail.aspx?id=8397734
[26] Dalian Statistics Bureau.Dalian Statistics Yearbook 2001. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2001.
[大连统计局. 大连统计年鉴2001.北京: 中国统计出版社, 2001.]
[27] Dalian Statistics Bureau.Dalian Statistics Yearbook 2011. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2011.
[大连统计局. 大连统计年鉴2011.北京: 中国统计出版社, 2011.]
[28] Dalian Statistics Bureau.Dalian Statistics Yearbook 2017. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2017.
[大连统计局. 大连统计年鉴2017.北京: 中国统计出版社, 2017.]
[29] Liu Moucheng, Li Wenhua.Calculation of equivalence factor used in ecological footprint for China and its provinces based on net primary production. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2010, 26(5): 401-406.
[刘某承, 李文华. 基于净初级生产力的中国各地生态足迹均衡因子测算. 生态与农村环境学报, 2010, 26(5): 401-406.]http://www.cqvip.com/Main/Detail.aspx?id=35515131
[30] Liu Moucheng, Li Wenhua, Xie Gaodi.Estimation of China ecological footprint production coefficient based on net primary productivity. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2010, 29(3): 592-597.
[刘某承, 李文华, 谢高地.基于净初级生产力的中国生态足迹产量因子测算. 生态学杂志. 2010, 29(3): 592-597.]http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxzz201003030
[1] 张亮靓,孙斌栋. 极化还是均衡:重塑大国经济地理的战略选择——城市规模分布变化和影响因素的跨国分析[J]. 地理学报, 2017, 72(8): 1419-1431.
[2] 杨俊,解鹏,席建超,葛全胜,李雪铭,马占东. 基于元胞自动机模型的土地利用变化模拟——以大连经济技术开发区为例[J]. 地理学报, 2015, 70(3): 461-475.
[3] 盛科荣, 孙威. 基于理论模型与美国经验证据的城市增长序贯模式[J]. 地理学报, 2013, 68(12): 1632-1642.
[4] 龙瀛,沈振江,毛其智,党安荣. 基于约束性CA方法的北京城市形态情景分析[J]. 地理学报, 2010, 65(6): 643-655.
[5] 刘妙龙, 陈雨, 陈鹏, 陈捷. 基于等级钟理论的中国城市规模等级体系演化特征[J]. 地理学报, 2008, 63(12): 1235-1245.
[6] 吕拉昌,王建军,魏也华. 全球化与新经济背景下的广州市空间结构[J]. 地理学报, 2006, 61(8): 798-808.
[7] 李郇, 徐现祥, 陈浩辉. 20世纪90年代中国城市效率的时空变化[J]. 地理学报, 2005, 60(4): 615-625.
[8] 刘纪远,王新生,庄大方,张稳,胡文岩. 凸壳原理用于城市用地空间扩展类型识别[J]. 地理学报, 2003, 58(6): 885-892.
[9] 冯健. 杭州城市形态和土地利用结构的时空演化[J]. 地理学报, 2003, 58(3): 343-353.
[10] 谈明洪,吕昌河. 以建成区面积表征的中国城市规模分布[J]. 地理学报, 2003, 58(2): 285-293.
[11] 李思名. 全球化、经济转型和香港城市形态的转化[J]. 地理学报, 1997, 64(S1): 52-61.
[12] 沈道齐, 崔功豪 . 中国城市地理学近期进展 [J]. 地理学报, 1990, 57(2): 163-171.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 2013 《地理学报》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发