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
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.
. 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.
. Evaluation of urban resilience of Dalian city based on the perspective of "Size-Density-Morphology"[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica,
2018, 73(12): 2315-2328.
Holling CS.Resilience and stability of ecological systems. , 1973: 1-23.http://www.jstor.org/stable/2096802
ABSTRACT THIS REVIEW EXPLORES BOTH ECOLOGICAL THEORY AND THE BEHAVIOR OF NATURAL SYSTEMS TO SEE IF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES OF THEIR BEHAVIOR CAN YIELD DIFFERENT INSIGHTS THAT ARE USEFUL FOR BOTH THEORY AND PRACTICE. THE RESILIENCE AND STABILITY VIEWPOINTS OF THE BEHAVIOR OF ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS CAN YIELD VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO THE MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES. THE STABILITY VIEW EMPHASIZES THE EQUILIBRIUM, THE MAINTENANCE OF A PREDICTABLE WORLD, AND THE HARVESTING OF NATURE'S EXCESS PRODUCTION WITH AS LITTLE FLUCTUATION AS POSSIBLE. THE RESILIENCE VIEW EMPHASIZES DOMAINS OF ATTRACTION AND THE NEED FOR PERSISTENCE. BUT EXTINCTION IS NOT PURELY A RANDOM EVENT: IT RESULTS FROM THE INTERACTION OF RANDOM EVENTS WITH THOSE DETERMINISTIC FORCES THAT DEFINE THE SHAPE, SIZE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DOMAIN OF ATTRACTION. THE VERY APPROACH, THEREFORE, THAT ASSURES A STABLE MAXIMUM SUSTAINED YIELD OF A RENEWABLE RESOURCE, MIGHT SO CHANGE THESE CONDITIONS THAT THE RESILIENCE IS LOST OR IS REDUCED SO THAT A CHANCE AND RARE EVENT THAT PREVIOUSLY COULD BE ABSORBED CAN TRIGGER A SUDDEN DRAMATIC CHANGE AND LOSS OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE SYSTEM. A MANAGEMENT APPROACH BASED ON RESILIENCE, ON THE OTHER HAND, WOULD EMPHASIZE THE NEED TO KEEP OPTIONS OPEN, THE NEED TO VIEW EVENTS IN A REGIONAL RATHER THAN A LOCAL CONTEXT, AND THE NEED TO EMPHASIZE HETEROGENEITY. THE RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK DOES NOT REQUIRE A PRECISE CAPACITY TO PREDICT THE FUTURE BUT ONLY A QUALITATIVE CAPACITY TO DEVISE SYSTEMS THAT CAN ABSORB AND ACCOMMODATE FUTURE EVENTS IN WHATEVER UNEXPECTED FORM THEY MAY TAKE.
XiuC, ChengL, SongW.Vulnerability of large city and its implication in urban planning: A perspective of intra-urban structure. , 2011, 21(2): 204-210.http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11769-011-0451-7
Vulnerability is a new field and analytical tool in the study of urban safety. Analysis and assessment of vulnerability provide a new basis for urban planning. This study constructed a quantitative index system for assessing vulnerability, based on the city′s sensitivity and emergency response capacity. City size, density, and spatial form influence a city′s sensitivity to crises and risks, to which vulnerability is positively related. Levels of socio-economic development, infrastructures, and emergency management contribute to a city′s emergency response capacity, with which vulnerability is inversely associated. Vulnerability of 19 large Chinese cities was assessed. Harbin and Shenzhen demonstrated the highest and lowest vulnerability among 19 cities, while Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou ranked the 5th, the 9th and the 12th. Spatially, northern cities tended to be more vulnerable than southern cities. And the differences in vulnerability among cities were explored based on cities′ physical geography conditions, level of socio- economic development, infrastructures, regional status, history of disaster, history of urban planning and development, government policies, etc.
WalmsleyA.Greenways: Multiplying and diversifying in the 21st century. , 2006, 76(1-4): 252-290.http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0169204604001446
Building on the legacy of historic greenway planning in the U.S., several new initiatives have been taking shape and gaining recognition in the past decade. One is ‘Green Infrastructure’ planning which is a ‘must have’ inter-connected system of green spaces. Another is ‘Smart Conservation’—the counterpoint of another planning initiative that preceded it known as ‘Smart Growth’. This is the establishment of critical green corridors that should be preserved and maintained for predominantly ecological functions, in advance of or in conjunction with new development. ‘New Urbanism’ has focused on bringing order and coherence to escalating ‘Edge Cities’ on the urban fringe, based on walkable, mixed-use towns, villages and neighborhoods with integrated open-space systems. Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs) are transportation plans for accommodating regional growth around clustered ‘pedestrian pockets’ linked by transit systems. Both New Urbanism and TODs have applied similar principles to ‘brown sites’ and declining city neighborhoods. All these initiatives are different aspects of the greenway movement, expressing its many possibilities, enriching its original concepts, enlarging its credibility—if need be—and emphasizing its importance for and relevance to current issues of sustainability and ‘green’ planning and design. The author, a teacher/practitioner, discusses recent U.S. greenway examples at site, metropolitan and regional scales for which he has been the principal planner/designer or a consultant, and compares New Urbanism and TOD methodologies and approaches to established greenway-planning practices and the premises of Smart Conservation.
TzoulasK, KorpelaK, VennS, et al.Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review. , 2007, 81(3): 167-178.http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0169204607000503
Europe is a highly urbanised continent. The consequent loss and degradation of urban and peri-urban green space could adversely affect ecosystems as well as human health and well-being. The aim of this paper is to formulate a conceptual framework of associations between urban green space, and ecosystem and human health. Through an interdisciplinary literature review the concepts of Green Infrastructure, ecosystem health, and human health and well-being are discussed. The possible contributions of urban and peri-urban green space systems, or Green Infrastructure, on both ecosystem and human health are critically reviewed. Finally, based on a synthesis of the literature a conceptual framework is presented. The proposed conceptual framework highlights many dynamic factors, and their complex interactions, affecting ecosystem health and human health in urban areas. This framework forms the context into which extant and new research can be placed. In this way it forms the basis for a new interdisciplinary research agenda.
YuKongjian."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.]
Rees WE, WackernagelM.Urban ecological footprints: Why cities cannot be sustainable and why they are a key to sustainability. , 1996, 16(s4-6): 223-248.http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0195925596000224
The ecological footprint method put forward and improved by William Rees and Mathis Wackernagel presents a methodologically simple but integrated framework for national natural capital accounting, which is capable of measuring the impact of Human's consumption on ecosystem. Based on the ecological footprint theory and calculation method, a flow network analysis method was introduced to illuminate the structure of complex ecological economic system, and the relationship among ecological footprint, diversity and development capacity was analyzed.In this paper, the ecological footprints of China and its provinces was calculated and compared with the national and local ecological carrying capacity. The results showed that the ecological footprints of China and most of its provinces were beyond the available ecological capacity, and China and its most provinces run 'national or regional ecological deficit'. In case of China, the national ecological deficit was 0.645 hm per cap in1999. Secondly, we introduced a flow network analysis method,taking various ecological productive area as note, and adopted Ulanowicz's development capacity formula to analyze the relationship among ecological footprint diversity, development capacity and output. The results demonstrated that Ulanowicz's development capacity was a good predictor of economic system output. At the same time, two distinct ways to change development capacity were produced. Increasing ecological footprint or increasing ecological footprint's diversity would both increase development capacity. Due to the fact that the ecological footprints had already been beyond bio capacities, the only way to increase development capacity was to increase ecological footprint's diversity. The positive relationship between ecological footprint diversity and resources utilization efficiency demonstrated that there was no conflict between increasing ecological footprint's diversity and reducing footprints while not comprising our quality of life.
ZhaoZhenyu, SongDonglin.Development sustainability analysis of Chinese fossil energy on ecological footprint model (1990-2006). , 2010, 30(1): 75-79.
ChenLiding, FuBojie, ZhaoWenwu.Source-sink landscape theory and its ecological significance. , 2006, 26(5): 1444-1449.http://new.med.wanfangdata.com.cn/Paper/Detail?id=PeriodicalPaper_zggdxxxswz-swx200802002
Exploring the relationships between landscape pattern and ecological processes is the key topic of landscape ecology, for which, a large number of indices as well as landscape pattern analysis model were developed. However, one problem faced by landscape ecologists is that it is hard to link the landscape indices with a specific ecological process. Linking landscape pattern and ecological processes has become a challenge for landscape ecologists. “Source” and “sink” are common concepts used in air pollution research, by which the movement direction and pattern of different pollutants in air can be clearly identified. In fact, for any ecological process, the research can be considered as a balance between the source and the sink in space. Thus, the concepts of “source” and “sink” could be implemented to the research of landscape pattern and ecological processes. In this paper, a theory of sourcesink landscape was proposed, which include: (1) In the research of landscape pattern and ecological process, all landscape types can be divided into two groups, “source” landscape and “sink” landscape. “Source” landscape contributes positively to the ecological process, while “sink” landscape is unhelpful to the ecological process. (2) Both landscapes are recognized with regard to the specific ecological process. “Source” landscape in a target ecological process may change into a “sink” landscape as in another ecological process. Therefore, the ecological process should be determined before “source” or “sink” landscape were defined. (3) The key point to distinguish “source” landscape from “sink” landscape is to quantify the effect of landscape on ecological process. The positive effect is made by “source” landscape, and the negative effect by “sink” landscape. (4) For the same ecological process, the contribution of “source” landscapes may vary, and it is the same to the “sink” landscapes. It is required to determine the weight of each landscape type on ecological processes. (5) The sourcesink principle can be applied to non-point source pollution control, biologic diversity protection, urban heat island effect mitigation, etc. However, the landscape evaluation models need to be calibrated respectively, because different ecological processes correspond with different source-sink landscapes and evaluation models for the different study areas. This theory is helpful to further study landscape pattern and ecological process, and offers a basis for new landscape index design.
<p>生态足迹作为一种非货币化的生态系统评估工具，是近年来国际上一种重要的判别可持续发展程度的生物物理量方法。产量因子是生态足迹计算中的一个重要参数，其准确与否直接影响到计算结果的可靠性与可比性。随着生态足迹方法的广泛应用，其标准化和本地化成为迫切需要。为了便于区域水平上的生态足迹空间分析，本文采用中国2001年1 km MODIS数据，根据植被的净初级生产力，计算出全国和不同省份各种土地类型的产量因子。结果表明：就中国产量因子而言，由于中国农地生产力水平高于全球平均水平，其产量因子为1.74，而其余几种类型土地的产量因子均<1，分别为林地0.86，畜牧地0.51，渔场0.74；就不同省份而言，由于区域内不同土地利用类型的相对生产能力不同，产量因子各不相同。</p>