印江县村域“三生用地”的利用结构与空间格局
|
摘要
【目的】探明印江县村域"三生用地"不同功能用地的结构和空间分布规律,为区域国土空间结构与功能的优化提供决策依据。【方法】以国家重点生态功能区之一的印江县351个村为解析尺度,按生态、生产和生活用地功能划分土地类型,运用计量地理学和GIS方法,计算"三生用地"多样性、优势度、组合数和组合类型、利用程度和区位度等指标,分析"三生用地"的结构和空间特征。【结果】①印江县村域"三生用地"多样化指数为0.81,多样性程度总体处于中等偏上水平;优势度指数为0.58,优势度总体呈中等偏下的状态。②"三生用地"组合类型集中在生态-生产生态双重组合类型、生产生态-生态的双重组合类型和生态单一类型。③"三生用地"利用程度为231,利用程度总体水平较高。④村域"三生用地"类型的区位差异明显,东部、南部地区生态用地区位优势突出,北部、西北部和中部地区生产生态用地区位优势突出,西部地区生活生态用地区位优势突出。【结论】对土地利用进行"三生用地"分类,运用计量地理模型及多样性、优势度、组合数与组合类型、利用程度和区位度5种指标能够较为全面地反映不同功能用地的结构和空间特征。
【Objective】The present paper aimed to explore the structure and spatial distribution pattern of ecological-living-productive land with different function at village level and provide the decision basis for optimization of spatial structure and function of national land in Yinjiang County.【Method】 The diversity, dominance, combination number and combination type of ecological-living-productive land were calculated by taking 351 villages as analysis scales in Yinjiang County, dividing land type according to ecological, productive and living function and using quantitative geography and GPS. The structure and spatial distribution of ecological-living-productive land were analyzed by the indexes of level and location degree.【Result】(i) The diversity index of ecological-living-productive land was 0.81 and the diversity index was at the above-average level overall. The dominant index was 0.58 and the dominance was at the below-average level overall.(ii) The combination types of ecological-living-productive land concentrated upon the ecological-productive ecological double combination type, productive ecological-ecological double combination type and single ecological type.(iii) The utilization degree of ecological-living-productive land was 231 with a higher overall level.(iv) The location difference among types of ecological-living-productive land at village level was obvious. The ecological land in east and south region was of obvious location advantage. The productive-ecological land in north, northwest and central region was of obvious location advantage. The living ecological land in west region was of obvious location advantage.【Conclusion】The structure and spatial distribution of the lands with different function can be calculated by the quantitative geographic model, diversity index, dominance, combination number and type, utilization level and location degree in land utilization classification of ecological-living-productive land.
【Objective】The present paper aimed to explore the structure and spatial distribution pattern of ecological-living-productive land with different function at village level and provide the decision basis for optimization of spatial structure and function of national land in Yinjiang County.【Method】 The diversity, dominance, combination number and combination type of ecological-living-productive land were calculated by taking 351 villages as analysis scales in Yinjiang County, dividing land type according to ecological, productive and living function and using quantitative geography and GPS. The structure and spatial distribution of ecological-living-productive land were analyzed by the indexes of level and location degree.【Result】(i) The diversity index of ecological-living-productive land was 0.81 and the diversity index was at the above-average level overall. The dominant index was 0.58 and the dominance was at the below-average level overall.(ii) The combination types of ecological-living-productive land concentrated upon the ecological-productive ecological double combination type, productive ecological-ecological double combination type and single ecological type.(iii) The utilization degree of ecological-living-productive land was 231 with a higher overall level.(iv) The location difference among types of ecological-living-productive land at village level was obvious. The ecological land in east and south region was of obvious location advantage. The productive-ecological land in north, northwest and central region was of obvious location advantage. The living ecological land in west region was of obvious location advantage.【Conclusion】The structure and spatial distribution of the lands with different function can be calculated by the quantitative geographic model, diversity index, dominance, combination number and type, utilization level and location degree in land utilization classification of ecological-living-productive land.
引文
[1]时振钦,邓伟,张少尧.近25年横断山区国土空间格局与时空变化研究[J].地理研究,2018,37(3):607-621.
[2]陈婧,史培军.土地利用功能分类探讨[J].北京师范大学学报(自然科学版),2005(5):536-540.
[3]李广东,方创琳.城市生态-生产-生活空间功能定量识别与分析[J].地理学报,2016,71(1):49-65.
[4]张红旗,许尔琪,朱会义.中国“三生用地”分类及其空间格局[J].资源科学,2015,37(7):1332-1338.
[5]刘继来,刘彦随,李裕瑞.中国“三生用地”分类评价与时空格局分析[J].地理学报,2017,72(7):1290-1304.
[6]ZHANG H Q,XU E Q,ZHU H Y. Ecological-living-productive land classification system in China[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology,2017,8(2): 121-128.
[7]于莉,宋安安,郑宇,等.“三生用地”分类及其空间格局分析——以昌黎县为例[J].中国农业资源与区划,2017,38(2):89-96.
[8]李睿康,黄勇,李阳兵,等.三峡库区腹地土地功能演变及其驱动机制分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(3):594-604.
[9]柴仲平,王雪梅,蒋平安.石河子市土地利用变化及其生态系统服务功能研究[J].西南农业学报,2009,22(4):1028-1032.
[10]de GROOT R.Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable,multifunctional landscapes[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2006,75(3/4): 175-186.
[11]王考,姚云峰,包金兰.县级尺度“三生”用地动态变化及其空间集聚特征[J].水土保持通报,2018,38(1):306-312,329.
[12]黄金川,林浩曦,漆潇潇.面向国土空间优化的三生空间研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2017,36(3):378-391.
[13]袁月.连片贫困区“生态-生产-生活”承载力综合评价研究[D]. 武汉:华中师范大学,2017:16-40.
[14]赵中华. 基于主体功能区战略的勐海县国土空间三生功能分区及管治研究[D].昆明:云南大学,2016:35-46.
[15]林华荣,冯艳芬.广东湛江霞街村“三生空间”的识别与分析[J].广州大学学报(自然科版),2018,17(1):82-87,94.
[16]COSTANZA R, DARGE R, DEGROOT R,et al.The value of the word's ecosystem services and natural capital[J].Nature,1997,387(6630):253-260.
[17]傅伯杰.黄土区农业景观空间格局分析[J].生态学报,1995(2):113-120.
[18]宋戈,王盼盼.松嫩高平原县域土地利用空间格局地形梯度特征分析——以巴彦县为例[J].地理科学,2017,37(8):1218-1225.
[19]封志明,杨艳昭,宋玉,等.中国县域土地利用结构类型研究[J].自然资源学报,2003(5):552-561,645.
[20]刘纪远.西藏自治区土地利用[M].北京:科学出版社,1992:60.
[21]宋戈,孙丽娜,雷国平.基于计量地理模型的松嫩高平原土地利用特征及其空间布局[J].农业工程学报,2012,28(3):243-250.
[22]陈浩,董廷旭.四川省少数民族自治州土地利用结构的计量地理分析[J].贵州师范大学学报(自然科学版),2016,34(4):1-9.
[23]敖登高娃,李跃进,兀良哈·巴雅尔.脆弱草原带农牧交错区村域尺度土地利用结构定量分析[J].农业工程学报,2017,33(6):222-231.
[2]陈婧,史培军.土地利用功能分类探讨[J].北京师范大学学报(自然科学版),2005(5):536-540.
[3]李广东,方创琳.城市生态-生产-生活空间功能定量识别与分析[J].地理学报,2016,71(1):49-65.
[4]张红旗,许尔琪,朱会义.中国“三生用地”分类及其空间格局[J].资源科学,2015,37(7):1332-1338.
[5]刘继来,刘彦随,李裕瑞.中国“三生用地”分类评价与时空格局分析[J].地理学报,2017,72(7):1290-1304.
[6]ZHANG H Q,XU E Q,ZHU H Y. Ecological-living-productive land classification system in China[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology,2017,8(2): 121-128.
[7]于莉,宋安安,郑宇,等.“三生用地”分类及其空间格局分析——以昌黎县为例[J].中国农业资源与区划,2017,38(2):89-96.
[8]李睿康,黄勇,李阳兵,等.三峡库区腹地土地功能演变及其驱动机制分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(3):594-604.
[9]柴仲平,王雪梅,蒋平安.石河子市土地利用变化及其生态系统服务功能研究[J].西南农业学报,2009,22(4):1028-1032.
[10]de GROOT R.Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable,multifunctional landscapes[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2006,75(3/4): 175-186.
[11]王考,姚云峰,包金兰.县级尺度“三生”用地动态变化及其空间集聚特征[J].水土保持通报,2018,38(1):306-312,329.
[12]黄金川,林浩曦,漆潇潇.面向国土空间优化的三生空间研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2017,36(3):378-391.
[13]袁月.连片贫困区“生态-生产-生活”承载力综合评价研究[D]. 武汉:华中师范大学,2017:16-40.
[14]赵中华. 基于主体功能区战略的勐海县国土空间三生功能分区及管治研究[D].昆明:云南大学,2016:35-46.
[15]林华荣,冯艳芬.广东湛江霞街村“三生空间”的识别与分析[J].广州大学学报(自然科版),2018,17(1):82-87,94.
[16]COSTANZA R, DARGE R, DEGROOT R,et al.The value of the word's ecosystem services and natural capital[J].Nature,1997,387(6630):253-260.
[17]傅伯杰.黄土区农业景观空间格局分析[J].生态学报,1995(2):113-120.
[18]宋戈,王盼盼.松嫩高平原县域土地利用空间格局地形梯度特征分析——以巴彦县为例[J].地理科学,2017,37(8):1218-1225.
[19]封志明,杨艳昭,宋玉,等.中国县域土地利用结构类型研究[J].自然资源学报,2003(5):552-561,645.
[20]刘纪远.西藏自治区土地利用[M].北京:科学出版社,1992:60.
[21]宋戈,孙丽娜,雷国平.基于计量地理模型的松嫩高平原土地利用特征及其空间布局[J].农业工程学报,2012,28(3):243-250.
[22]陈浩,董廷旭.四川省少数民族自治州土地利用结构的计量地理分析[J].贵州师范大学学报(自然科学版),2016,34(4):1-9.
[23]敖登高娃,李跃进,兀良哈·巴雅尔.脆弱草原带农牧交错区村域尺度土地利用结构定量分析[J].农业工程学报,2017,33(6):222-231.