耕地利用转型中的生物灾害脆弱性研究

doi:10.11821/dlxb202011007

Abstract

Abstract:

There is an urgent need to explore a novel field to enhance the comprehensive research of cultivated land use transition. Simultaneously, few studies on the coupling research of cultivated land use pattern and function transition have been done so far. Based on these considerations, we aim at presenting a novel field of cultivated land use transition research from the perspective of cultivated land use vulnerability to biological disasters (CLUVBD). First, this study integrates the motivations of profit-seeking and loss-avoiding and induced substitution in agricultural production from the perspective of agricultural biological disasters, thus establishing a theoretical framework of the transition in CLUVBD based on the socio-ecological interaction logic of "socio-economic environment - cultivated land use - feedback of biological disasters - disaster prevention and control". Then, CLUVBD transition was diagnosed and analyzed at the national, regional, and provincial levels between 1988 and 2017 using the logic growth model, single-factor simulation, and panel data regression model. Results show that CLUVBD transition is remarkable at both national and provincial levels. The value of CLUVBD at the national level firstly increased from 15.33% to 22.45% in 1988-2009 and then decreased from 22.40% to 19.49% in 2010-2017. The transition at the provincial level shows two typical pathways. Decrease of CLUVBD is mainly derived from the decline in exposure due to the narrowing of urban-rural income ratio and the increase in cultivated land area per capita of agricultural employee, followed by the increase of adaptive capacity due to the increase of retrieved grain loss ratio and the failure ratio of biological disaster prevention. Meanwhile, as CLUVBD value turns to decrease, the sensitivity increases, which is mainly due to the decline in crop diversity and the increase of fertilizer use intensity in cultivated land. The study demonstrates that CLUVBD is expected to become a novel field of comprehensive study on cultivated land use transition. In addition, the policy proposals on CLUVBD control are also discussed.

Key words: land use transition, cultivated land, biological disasters, induced substitution in agricultural production, vulnerability, spatio-temporal change

SONG Xiaoqing, SHEN Yajing, WANG Xiong, LI Xinyi. Vulnerability to biological disasters: A novel field of cultivated land use transition research[J].Acta Geographica Sinica, 2020, 75(11): 2362-2379.

Figures/Tables 12

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Tab. 1

Assessment index system of cultivated land use vulnerability to biological disasters

脆弱性	指标名称	指标属性	指标涵义	评价方法	单位
暴露度	耕地压力指数^{[41, 70]}	+	耕地稀缺性	$CLPI = f × d y × r × mci × PerCLA$ CLPI: 耕地压力指数; f: 粮食自给率; d: 人均粮食需求量; y: 粮食播面单产; r: 粮作比; mci: 复种指数; PerCLA: 人均耕地面积	-
	劳均耕地	-	耕地规模经营水平	$PCLAEA = CLA EA$ PCLAEA: 劳均耕地; CLA: 耕地面积; EA: 农业从业人员	hm²/人
	城乡收入比	+	城乡差距	$RIUR = IU IR$ RIUR: 城乡收入比; IU: 城镇居民家庭人均可支配收入; IR: 农村居民家庭人均纯收入	-
敏感性	作物多样性^{[15, 41]}	-	维持耕地生态系统功能的系统组分多样性水平	$Diversity = 1 - ∑ C i 2$ Diversity: 作物多样性指数; C_i: 作物i播种面积占农作物播种面积的比例	-
	耕地化肥使用强度	+	化学品对耕地生态系统的影响程度	$CFUI = ACFU CLA$ CFUI: 耕地化肥使用强度; ACFU: 化肥施用量(折纯量); CLA: 耕地面积	kg/hm²
	地均生物灾害发生面积	+	生物灾害发生强度	$RBDA = BDA CLA$ RBDA: 地均生物灾害发生面积; BDA: 作物病虫害等生物灾害发生面积; CLA: 耕地面积	-
应对能力	生物灾害防治率	-	生物灾害防治积极性	$RBDPCA = BDPCA TSAC$ RBDPCA: 地均生物灾害防治面积; BDPCA: 作物病虫害等生物灾害防治面积; TSAC: 农作物播种面积	-
	生物灾害防治失控率	+	生物灾害防治能力	$FRBDPC = BDA BDPCA$ FRBDPC: 生物灾害防治失控率; BDA: 作物病虫害等生物灾害发生面积; BDPCA: 作物病虫害等生物灾害防治面积	-
	生物灾害损失挽回率	-	生物灾害防治效率	$RRGL = RGL AGL + RGL$ RRGL: 粮食生物灾害损失挽回率; RGL: 粮食生物灾害损失挽回量; AGL: 粮食生物灾害实际损失量	-

Tab. 1

Tab. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Tab. 3

Tab. 4

Fig. 5

Tab. 5

Fig. 6

Tab. 6

References 84

[1]	Long Hualou. Land use transition: A new integrated approach of land use/cover change study. Geography and Geo-Information Science, 2003,19(1):87-90.
	[ 龙花楼. 土地利用转型: 土地利用/覆被变化综合研究的新途径. 地理与地理信息科学, 2003,19(1):87-90.]
[2]	Grainger A. National land use morphology: Patterns and possibilities. Geography, 1995,80(3):235-245.
[3]	Lambin E F, Meyfroidt P. Land use transitions: Socio- ecological feedback versus socio-economic change. Land Use Policy, 2010,27(2):108-118. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.09.003
[4]	Song Xiaoqing. Discussion on land use transition research framework. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2017,72(3):471-487. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201703009
	[ 宋小青. 论土地利用转型的研究框架. 地理学报, 2017,72(3):471-487.]
[5]	Li L C, Chhatre A, Liu J L. Multiple drivers and pathways to China's forest transition. Forest Policy and Economics, 2019,106:101962. Doi:org/ 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101962. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101962
[6]	Mather A S. Global Forest Resources. London: Belhaven, 1990.
[7]	Mather A S. The forest transition. Area, 1992,24(4):367-379.
[8]	Mather A S, Fairbairn J, Needle C L. The course and drivers of the forest transition: The case of France. Area, 1999,15(1):65-90.
[9]	Mather A S, Needle C L. The forest transition: A theoretical basis. Area, 1998,30(2):117-124. doi: 10.1111/area.1998.30.issue-2
[10]	Bertoni D, Aletti G, Ferrandi G, et al. Farmland use transitions after the CAP greening: A preliminary analysis using markov chains approach. Land Use Policy, 2018,79:789-800. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.012
[11]	Ge D Z, Wang Z H, Tu S S, et al. Coupling analysis of greenhouse-led farmland transition and rural transformation development in China's traditional farming area: A case of Qingzhou City. Land Use Policy, 2019,86:113-125.
[12]	Ge D Z, Long H L, Zhang Y N, et al. Farmland transition and its influences on grain production in China. Land Use Policy, 2018,70:94-105. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.010
[13]	Lu X, Shi Y Y, Chen C L, et al. Monitoring cropland transition and its impact on ecosystem services value in developed regions of China: A case study of Jiangsu Province. Land Use Policy, 2017,69:25-40. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.08.035
[14]	Ma L, Long H L, Tu S S, et al. Farmland transition in China and its policy implications. Land Use Policy, 2020,92:104470. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104470
[15]	Song Xiaoqing, Li Xinyi. Theoretical explanation and case study of regional cultivated land use function transition. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019,74(5):992-1010. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201905012
	[ 宋小青, 李心怡. 区域耕地利用功能转型的理论解释与实证. 地理学报, 2019,74(5):992-1010.]
[16]	Ernstson H, Leeuw S E V D, Redman C L, et al. Urban transitions: On urban resilience and human-dominated ecosystems. Ambio, 2010,39:531-545. doi: 10.1007/s13280-010-0081-9 pmid: 21141773
[17]	Long H L, Heilig G K, Li X B, et al. Socio-economic development and land-use change: Analysis of rural housing land transition in the transect of the Yangtse River, China. Land Use Policy, 2007,24(1):141-153. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.11.003
[18]	Su K C, Hu B Q, Shi K F, et al. The structural and functional evolution of rural homesteads in mountainous areas: A case study of Sujiaying village in Yunnan province, China. Land Use Policy, 2019,88:104100. Doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104100. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104100
[19]	Wen Y Y, Zhang Z F, Liang D, et al. Rural residential land transition in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region: Spatial-temporal patterns and policy implications. Land Use Policy, 2020,96:104700. Doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104700.
[20]	Long Hualou. Land use transition and land management. Geographical Research, 2015,34(9):1607-1618.
	[ 龙花楼. 论土地利用转型与土地资源管理. 地理研究, 2015,34(9):1607-1618.]
[21]	Long H L, Qu Y, Tu S S, et al. Development of land use transitions research in China. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2020,30(7):1195-1214.
[22]	Song Xiaoqing, Wu Zhifeng, Ouyang Zhu. Route of cultivated land transition research. Geographical Research, 2014,33(3):403-413.
	[ 宋小青, 吴志峰, 欧阳竹. 耕地转型的研究路径探讨. 地理研究, 2014,33(3):403-413.]
[23]	Field C B, Barros V R, Dokken D J, et al. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[24]	Carrão H, Naumann G, Barbosa P. Mapping global patterns of drought risk: An empirical framework based on sub-national estimates of hazard, exposure and vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 2016,39:108-124. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.04.012
[25]	Fitton N, Alexander P, Arnell N, et al. The vulnerabilities of agricultural land and food production to future water scarcity. Global Environmental Change, 2019,58:101944. Doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101944.
[26]	Formetta G, Feyen L. Empirical evidence of declining global vulnerability to climate-related hazards. Global Environmental Change, 2019,57:101920. Doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.05.004. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.05.004 pmid: 31417231
[27]	Mougou R, Mansour M, Iglesias A, et al. Climate change and agricultural vulnerability: A case study of rain-fed wheat in Kairouan, Central Tunisia. Regional Environmental Change, 2011,11(1):137-142. doi: 10.1007/s10113-010-0179-4
[28]	Savary S, Willocquet L, Pethybridge S J, et al. The global burden of pathogens and pests on major food crops. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 2019,3:430-439. doi: 10.1038/s41559-018-0793-y pmid: 30718852
[29]	Ministry of Agriculture of the People's Republic of China. China Agriculture Yearbook (1989-2018). Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 1989-2018.
	[ 中华人民共和国农业农村部. 中国农业年鉴(1989—2018). 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1989—2018.]
[30]	Carvajal-Yepes M, Cardwell K, Nelson A, et al. A global surveillance system for crop diseases: Global preparedness minimizes the risk to food supplies. Science, 2019,364(6447):1237-1239. doi: 10.1126/science.aaw1572 pmid: 31249049
[31]	Adger W N. Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 2006,16(3):268-281. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006
[32]	Foley J A, DeFries R, Asner G P, et al. Global consequences of land use. Science, 2005,309(22):570-574. doi: 10.1126/science.1111772
[33]	Song Xiaoqing, Ouyang Zhu. Route of multifunctional cultivated land management in China. Journal of Natural Resources, 2012,27(4):540-551. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.04.002
	[ 宋小青, 欧阳竹. 中国耕地多功能管理的实践路径探讨. 自然资源学报, 2012,27(4):540-551.]
[34]	Scherer L A, Verburg P H, Schulp C J E. Opportunities for sustainable intensification in European agriculture. Global Environmental Change, 2018,48:43-55. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.009
[35]	Tilman D, Balzer C, Hill J. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. PNAS, 2011,108(50):20260-20264. pmid: 22106295
[36]	Stallman H R, James Jr H S. Determinants affecting farmers' willingness to cooperate to control pests. Ecological Economics, 2015,117:182-192. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.07.006
[37]	Ren C C Liu S van Grinsven H, et al. The impact of farm size on agricultural sustainability. Journal of Cleaner production, 2019,220:357-367. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.151
[38]	Wu Y, Xi X, Tang X, et al. Policy distortions, farm size, and the overuse of agricultural chemicals in China. PNAS, 2018,115(27):7010-7015. pmid: 29915067
[39]	Hu Y, Li B B, Zhang Z H, et al. Farm size and agricultural technology progress: Evidence from China. Journal of Rural Studies, 2019. Doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.01.009. pmid: 12292354
[40]	Li Yaofeng, Zhang Yuhui. Dynamic mechanism of endogenous new agricultural operation subject driving the development of small farmer: Case study based on embeddedness theory. China Agricultural University Journal of Social Sciences Edition, 2020,37(1):38-47.
	[ 李耀锋, 张余慧. 内生型新型农业经营主体带动小农户发展的动力机制. 中国农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2020,37(1):38-47.]
[41]	Song X Q, Huang Y, Wu Z F, et al. Does cultivated land function transition occur in China? Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2015,25(7):817-835. doi: 10.1007/s11442-015-1204-9
[42]	Hayami Y, Ruttan V W. Agricultural Development: An International Perspective. 2nd ed. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1985.
[43]	Lambin E F, Turner B L, Geist H J, et al. The causes of land-use and land-cover change: Moving beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change, 2001,11:261-269. doi: 10.1016/S0959-3780(01)00007-3
[44]	Scoones I, Smalley R, Hall R, et al. Narratives of scarcity: Framing the global land rush. Geoforum, 2019,101:231-241. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.06.006
[45]	Song X Q, Wu Z F. Modelling and mapping trends in grain production growth in China. Outlook on Agriculture, 2013,42(4):255-263. doi: 10.5367/oa.2013.0142
[46]	Yamada S, Ruttan V W. International comparisons of productivity in agriculture //Yamada S, Ruttan V W. New Developments in Productivity Measurement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980: 507-594.
[47]	Department of Price of National Development and Reform Commission . Data Compilation of the National Agricultural Costs and Returns (2002-2018). Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2002-2018.
	[ 国家发展和改革委员会价格司. 全国农产品成本收益资料汇编(2002—2018). 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2002—2018.]
[48]	Feng W L, Liu Y S, Qu L L. Effect of land-centered urbanization on rural development: A regional analysis in China. Land Use Policy, 2019,87:104072. Doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104072. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104072
[49]	Lewis W A. Economic development with unlimited supplies of labor. Manchester School 1954,22:139-191. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9957.1954.tb00021.x
[50]	Azadi H, Hasfiati P H L. Agricultural land conversion drivers: A comparison between less developed, developing and developed countries. Land Degradation & Development, 2011,22(6):596-604.
[51]	Li Y H, Chen C, Wang Y F, et al. Urban-rural transformation and farmland conversion in China: The application of the environmental Kuznets Curve. Journal of Rural Studies, 2014,36:311-317. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.10.005
[52]	Liu J Y, Kuang W H, Zhang Z X, et al. Spatiotemporal characteristics, patterns, and causes of land-use changes in China since the late 1980s. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2014,24(2):195-210. doi: 10.1007/s11442-014-1082-6
[53]	Ning J, Liu J Y, Kuang W H, et al. Spatiotemporal patterns and characteristics of land-use change in China during 2010-2015. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2018,28(5):547-562. doi: 10.1007/s11442-018-1490-0
[54]	Klasen S, Meyer K M, Dislich C, et al. Economic and ecological trade-offs of agricultural specialization at different spatial scales. Ecological Economics, 2016,122:111-120. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.01.001
[55]	Lambin E F, Meyfroidt P. Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. PNAS, 2011,108:3465-3472 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1100480108 pmid: 21321211
[56]	Li J, Zhang Z L, Jin X F, et al. Exploring the socioeconomic and ecological consequences of cash crop cultivation for policy implications. Land Use Policy, 2018,76:46-57. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.009
[57]	Su S L, Zhou X C, Wan C, et al. Land use changes to cash crop plantations: crop types, multilevel determinants and policy implications. Land Use Policy, 2016,50:379-389. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.10.003
[58]	Guo J H, Liu X J, Zhang Y, et al. Significant acidification in major Chinese croplands. Science, 2010,327:1008-1010. pmid: 20150447
[59]	Zuo L J, Zhang Z X, Carlson K M, et al. Progress towards sustainable intensification in China challenged by land-use change. Nature Sustainability, 2018,1:304-313. doi: 10.1038/s41893-018-0076-2
[60]	D'Acunto L, Andrade J F, Poggio S L, et al. Diversifying crop rotation increased metabolic soil diversity and activity of the microbial community. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2018,257:159-164. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2018.02.011
[61]	King A E, Hofmockel K S. Diversified cropping systems support greater microbial cycling and retention of carbon and nitrogen. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2017,240:66-76. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2017.01.040
[62]	Osterholz W R, Liebman M, Castellano M J. Can soil nitrogen dynamics explain the yield benefit of crop diversification? Field Crops Research, 2018,219:33-42. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2018.01.026
[63]	Roesch-McNally G E, Arbuckle J G, Tyndall J C. Barriers to implementing climate resilient agricultural strategies: The case of crop diversification in the U.S. Corn Belt. Global Environmental Change, 2018,48:206-215. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.12.002
[64]	Shaver I, Chain-Guadarrama A, Cleary K A, et al. Coupled social and ecological outcomes of agricultural intensification in Costa Rica and the future of biodiversity conservation in tropical agricultural regions. Global Environmental Change, 2015,32:74-86.
[65]	Sirami C, Gross N, Baillod A B, et al. Increasing crop heterogeneity enhances multitrophic diversity across agricultural regions. PNAS, 2019,116(33):16442-16447. pmid: 31358630
[66]	Storkey J Bruce T J A McMillan V E, et al. The future of sustainable crop protection relies on increased diversity of cropping systems and landscapes// Lemaire G, Carvalho P C D F, Kronberg S, et al. Agroecosystem Diversity: Reconciling Contemporary Agriculture and Environmental Quality. London: Academic Press, 2019: 199-209.
[67]	Tiemann L K, Grandy A S, Atkinson E E, et al. Crop rotational diversity enhances belowground communities and functions in an agroecosystem. Ecology Letters, 2015,18(8):761-771. pmid: 26011743
[68]	Su B Z, Li Y H, Li L Q, et al. How does nonfarm employment stability influence farmers' farmland transfer decisions? Implications for China's land use policy. Land Use Policy, 2018,74:66-72.
[69]	Liu Y, Yan B J, Wang Y, et al. Will land transfer always increase technical efficiency in China? A land cost perspective. Land Use Policy, 2019,82:414-421.
[70]	Cai Yunlong, Fu Zeqiang, Dai Erfu. The minimum area per capita of cultivated land and its implication for the optimization of land resource allocation. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2002,57(2):127-134.
	[ 蔡运龙, 傅泽强, 戴尔阜. 区域最小人均耕地面积与耕地资源调控. 地理学报, 2002,57(2):127-134.]
[71]	Song X Q, Yang L E, Xia F Z, et al. An inverted U-shaped curve relating farmland vulnerability to biological disasters: Implications for sustainable intensification in China. Science of the Total Environment, 2020,732(25):138829. Doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138829.
[72]	Lu Liangshu. New development of agriculture and food security. Food and Nutrition in China, 2003(11):11-14.
	[ 卢良恕. 中国农业新发展与食物安全. 中国食物与营养, 2003(11):11-14.]
[73]	Lu Liangshu. Study on Strategy of Rational Allocation of Regional Agricultural Resources, Comprehensive Treatment of Environment and Coordinative Development of Agricultural Regions in China. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 2008.
	[ 卢良恕. 中国区域农业资源合理配置、环境综合治理和农业区域协调发展战略研究. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2008.]
[74]	Jain S, Shukla S, Wadhvani R. Dynamic selection of normalization techniques using data complexity measures. Expert Systems With Applications, 2018,106:252-262.
[75]	Liu Jingyan, Zhang Ke, Wang Guihua. Comparative study on data standardization methods in comprehensive evaluation. Digital Technology and Application, 2018,36(6):84-85.
	[ 刘竞妍, 张可, 王桂华. 综合评价中数据标准化方法比较研究. 数字技术与应用, 2018,36(6):84-85.]
[76]	Holling C S. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1973,4:12-23.
[77]	Harris J M, Kennedy S. Carrying capacity in agriculture: Global and regional issues. Ecological Economics, 1999,29:443-461.
[78]	Murray J D. Mathematical Biology I: An Introduction, 3rd ed. Heidelberg: Springer, 2002.
[79]	Wang J, McCue S W, Simpson M J. Extended logistic growth model for heterogeneous populations. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 2018,445:51-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2018.02.027 pmid: 29481822
[80]	Ministry of Land and Resources of the People's Republic of China. China Land and Resources Statistical Yearbook (1996-2017). Beijing: Geological Press, 1996-2017.
	[ 中华人民共和国国土资源部. 中华人民共和国国土资源统计年鉴(1996—2008). 北京: 地质出版社, 1996—2017.]
[81]	Bi Yuyun, Zheng Zhenyuan. The actual changes of cultivated area since the foundation of New China. Resources Science, 2000,22(2):8-12.
	[ 毕于运, 郑振源. 建国以来中国实有耕地面积增减变化分析. 资源科学, 2000,22(2):8-12.]
[82]	Feng Zhiming, Liu Baoqin, Yang Yanzhao. A study of the changing trend of Chinese cultivated land amount and data reconstructing: 1949-2003. Journal of Natural Resources, 2005,20(1):35-43.
	[ 封志明, 刘宝勤, 杨艳昭. 中国耕地资源数量变化的趋势分析与数据重建: 1949—2003. 自然资源学报, 2005,20(1):35-43.]
[83]	National Bureau of Statistics of China. China Statistical Yearbook (1986-2009). Beijing: China Statistics Press, 1988-2018.
	[ 中华人民共和国国家统计局. 中国统计年鉴(1988—2018). 北京: 中国统计出版社, 1988—2018.]
[84]	Rudel T K, Coomes O T, Moran E, et al. Forest transitions: Towards a global understanding of land use change. Global Environmental Change, 2005,15(1):23-31.

变量	变量类型	变量含义	变量属性	单位
CLVBD	因变量	耕地利用生物灾害脆弱性	-	-
Temp	自变量	气温	控制变量	oC
Precip		降水量		mm
ProLand		土地生产率,即单位耕地面积种植业增加值		万元/hm²
ProLabor		劳动生产率,即单位农业从业人员种植业增加值		万元/人
PerGDP		人均GDP	核心变量	万元/人
PerGDP²		人均GDP的二次方		(万元/人)²

变量	均值	中间值	最大值	最小值	标准差	横截面数
CLVBD	28.67	28.25	50.59	13.34	7.05	870
Temp	14.29	15.10	25.40	4.20	5.07	870
Precip	901.61	787.05	2939.70	74.90	525.08	870
ProLand	1.37	0.89	8.39	0.04	1.39	870
ProLabor	0.62	0.41	3.48	0.04	0.58	870
PerGDP	2.04	1.04	12.90	0.06	2.33	870
PerGDP²	9.55	1.07	166.39	0.00	20.65	870

自变量名称	自变量属性	参数估计值	标准差	t值	P值
Temp	控制变量	-0.252004	0.244870	-1.029134	0.3037
Precip		0.000069	0.000621	0.111802	0.9110
ProLand		2.397000	0.232688	10.30136	0.0000
ProLabor		-3.820744	0.601890	-6.347908	0.0000
PerGDP	核心变量	1.570417	0.382706	4.103459	0.0000
PerGDP²		-0.066274	0.025634	-2.585370	0.0099
a		28.72717	3.642856	7.885891	0.0000

对照组	省级行政区名称	耕地资源禀赋(hm²/人)	自然环境因素	经济社会发展水平(万元/人)	转型拐点特征值
对照组	省级行政区名称	耕地资源禀赋(hm²/人)	自然环境因素	经济社会发展水平(万元/人)	人均GDP (万元/人)	脆弱性值 (%)	曲率
对照组1	北京市	0.43	黄淮海平原	4.48	8.56	34.82	0.35
	河北省	0.43		1.66	2.60	29.21	1.70
对照组2	上海市	0.32	长江中下游地区	4.95	5.61	39.93	0.41
	江苏省	0.30		2.91	4.67	33.80	0.58
对照组3	浙江省	0.31	长江中下游地区	3.05	2.53	31.16	0.76
	江西省	0.30		1.30	1.76	24.71	2.25

地区名称	脆弱性变化幅度	因子贡献
		暴露度				敏感性				应对能力
		小计	耕地压力指数(+)	劳均耕地(-)	城乡收入比(+)	小计	作物多样性(-)	化肥使用强度(+)	生物灾害发生强度(+)	小计	生物灾害防治率(-)	生物灾害防治失控率(+)	生物灾害损失挽回率(-)
全国	-2.91	1.13	0.00	0.21	0.92	-0.35	-0.14	-0.23	0.03	0.22	0.00	0.13	0.08
东北平原区	-3.06	5.26	0.01	-0.04	5.28	-3.93	-3.63	-0.40	0.11	-0.33	-1.02	10.09	-9.41
黄淮海平原区	-4.59	1.71	1.26	-0.21	0.66	-0.74	-0.09	-0.57	-0.08	0.04	0.00	-0.08	0.12
长江中下游地区	-5.93	0.49	-0.08	0.10	0.46	0.46	-0.07	0.22	0.31	0.05	0.00	0.02	0.04
华南区	-4.30	0.71	-0.01	-0.11	0.83	-0.05	-0.13	-0.09	0.17	0.35	0.00	0.04	0.31
四川盆地及周边地区	-6.36	0.95	0.00	0.35	0.59	-0.02	-0.02	0.00	0.00	0.07	0.00	0.06	0.01
云贵高原区	-1.38	7.36	0.01	2.77	4.59	-7.78	-5.33	-2.43	-0.02	1.42	0.31	-0.22	1.33
黄土高原区	-1.46	1.80	0.00	0.10	1.70	-1.74	-0.51	-1.23	-0.01	0.95	0.00	0.83	0.12
北方干旱半干旱区	-0.92	1.07	0.00	-0.02	1.09	-0.51	-0.74	0.23	0.00	0.44	0.00	0.17	0.39

Vulnerability to biological disasters: A novel field of cultivated land use transition research

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 12

References 84

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

[1]	YANG Ren, PAN Yuxin. Spatial patterns, formation mechanism and coping strategies of rural vulnerability in China at the county level [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2021, 76(6): 1438-1454.
[2]	LONG Hualou, CHEN Kunqiu. Urban-rural integrated development and land use transitions: A perspective of land system science [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2021, 76(2): 295-309.
[3]	LIAO Liuwen, GAO Xiaolu, LONG Hualou, TANG Lisha, CHEN Kunqiu, MA Enpu. A comparative study of farmland use morphology in plain and mountainous areas based on farmers' land use efficiency [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2021, 76(2): 471-486.
[4]	WANG Cheng, HE Yanzhou. Spatio-temporal differentiation and differentiated regulation of the vulnerability of rural production space system in Chongqing [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2020, 75(8): 1680-1698.
[5]	MA Chunyue, Mamat Sawut, YAO Jie, Gulnur Isak. Spatio-temporal changes of cotton production in China from 1950 to 2015 [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2020, 75(8): 1699-1710.
[6]	QU Shijin, HU Shougeng, LI Quanfeng. Stages and spatial patterns of urban built-up land transition in China [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2020, 75(7): 1539-1553.
[7]	WANG Qun, YIN Mahua, YANG Xingzhu, YAO Zhaozhao. Spatio-temporal evolution and impact mechanism of socio-ecological system vulnerability in poor mountainous tourist distinations: Taking Dabie Mountain Area as example [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019, 74(8): 1663-1679.
[8]	YANG Qingqing,LIU Qian,YIN Sha,ZHANG Jian,YANG Xinjun,GAO Yanhui. Vulnerability and influencing factors of rural transportation environment in Qinling-Daba mountainous areas: A case study of Luonan county in Shaanxi province [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019, 74(6): 1236-1251.
[9]	SONG Xiaoqing,LI Xinyi. Theoretical explanation and case study of regional cultivated land use function transition [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019, 74(5): 992-1010.
[10]	LONG Hualou, GE Dazhuan, WANG Jieyong. Progress and prospects of the coupling research on land use transitions and rural transformation development [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019, 74(12): 2546-2559.
[11]	QU Yi,LONG Hualou. A framework of multi-disciplinary comprehensive research on recessive farmland transition in China [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(7): 1226-1241.
[12]	YANG Xiaojing,XU Zongxue,ZUO Depeng,CAI Siyang. Assessment on the risk of agricultural drought disaster in the three provinces of Northeast China [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(7): 1324-1337.
[13]	WU Di, WANG Nuo, YU Anqi, GUAN Lei. Vulnerability and risk management in the Maritime Silk Road container shipping network [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(6): 1133-1148.
[14]	HUANG Xiaojun, WANG Chen, HU Kaili. Multi-scale assessment of social vulnerability to rapid urban expansion in urban fringe: A case study of Xi'an [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(6): 1002-1017.
[15]	YIN Zhan'e,TIAN Pengfei,CHI Xiaoxiao. Multi-scenario-based risk analysis of precipitation extremes in China during the past 60 years (1951-2011) [J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(3): 405-413.