Acta Geographica Sinica ›› 2015, Vol. 70 ›› Issue (2): 333-346.doi: 10.11821/dlxb201502013

• Orginal Article • Previous Articles    

Research progress and prospect on measuring urban ecological land demand

Jian PENG1,2(), An WANG2, Yanxu LIU1, Jing MA1, Jiansheng WU1,2   

  1. 1. Laboratory for Earth Surface Processes, Ministry of Education, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
    2. Key Laboratory for Environmental and Urban Sciences, School of Urban Planning and Design, Shenzhen Graduate School, Peking University, Shenzhen 518055, Guangdong, China
  • Received:2014-06-14 Revised:2014-09-16 Online:2015-02-20 Published:2015-02-20
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.41271195]


As a fundamental supplying carrier of natural ecosystem services in urban areas, ecological land couples human social development and natural ecological succession based on the inherent correlation between land use and land cover. Thus spatial optimization of ecological land has gradually become a vital and comprehensive approach to address the conflicts between urban development and ecological conservation. The measurement of urban ecological land demand can directly determine the equilibrium between supply and demand for ecological land, which is a significant step in overall planning and management of urban ecological land. After a systematic review of the concept of ecological land, the similarities and differences between ecological demands and ecological land demands are discussed in this paper. Then a conceptual space-function framework for measuring urban ecological land demand is proposed. Within this framework methodologies of measuring urban ecological land fall into three categories, namely experimental predication, ecosystem services and spatial patterns. In details, the category of experimental predication includes legal quota and historical trend methods. The methods of ecological footprint and carbon-oxygen equilibrium belong to the category of ecosystem services, while the method of ecological security pattern is included in the spatial patterns category. By methodological principles analysis, the advantages and disadvantages of these methods are comparatively discussed and summarized in terms of comprehensiveness, representativeness, threshold and area, and location. Finally, four key directions of future research are presented: urban ecological land classification related to ecological functions, comprehensive efficiency measurement on urban ecological land focusing on spatial patterns of ecological land, functional tradeoff of urban ecological land using multi-target scenarios, and urban ecological hinterland recognition based on ecological land supply-demand balance analysis.

Key words: urban ecological land demand measurement, experimental predication, ecosystem services, ecological security pattern, urban ecological hinterland, research progress and prospect