区域生态经济系统可持续发展测度方法及案例研究
|
摘要
人类面临的生态与社会矛盾不断加剧,生态经济系统可持续发展逐渐引起了全球的关注,并成为研究的热点问题之一。我国幅员辽阔,自然条件差异很大,社会经济发展又极不平衡,因此走生态与经济建设并行的区域可持续发展之路是我国的自身需要和必然选择。吴起县位于延安地区西北部,县内沟壑密布、土地破碎、以及长期以来的乱砍乱伐、超载放牧导致生态环境日趋恶化,严重制约了当地的社会经济发展。自1998年开始,吴起县积极响应党中央发出“再造一个山川秀美的西北地区”的伟大号召,成为全国退耕还林第一县,被水利部列为“全国水土保持生态环境建设示范县”。近年来,大规模的石油开采带动了当地经济发展,同时,也对生态环境造成了严重的污染。因此,研究生态经济系统可持续发展状况具有重要的现实意义。本文以吴起县为研究对象,利用生态足迹模型、能值分析理论和基于能值分析的生态足迹模型,定量分析、评价自1995年以来吴起县生态经济系统发展的可持续性。主要结论如下:
(1)生态足迹模型的评价结果表明,1995年以来吴起县的人均生态足迹呈现出快速增长的态势,2006年比1995年增加了2.9744hm~2,年均增长0.2540hm~2。而人均生态承载力呈现出较为缓慢的增长态势,2006年比1995年增加了0.8716hm~2,年均增长0.0792hm~2。12年间,人均生态足迹均高于人均生态承载力,一直表现为生态赤字。且生态赤字呈现增长的态势,从1995年的0.0181hm~2增加到2006年的1.7747hm~2,12年增长了1.7566hm~2,年均增长量为0.1597hm~2。自1995年以来,当地的石油产业发展迅速,拉动了电力的使用量,导致人均能源消费量大幅度上升,人均生态足迹呈现出上升的趋势。因人均生态承载力趋于稳定,所以人均生态赤字的变化主要取决于人均生态足迹的变化。吴起县的发展模式主要是通过消耗自然资源存量来弥补生态承载力的不足,其中能源消费主要以电力为主;生物资源的消费主要以农产品为主,这种对自然资源的过度依赖,是吴起县出现生态赤字的主要原因。自1995年以来均表现为生态赤字,说明生态经济系统整体上处于不可持续发展的状态。
(2)能值分析理论的评价结果表明,自1995年以来吴起县的生态经济系统能值产出率均大于1,说明生产过程产出的能值大于生态经济系统投入的能值。能值产出率在1.5～2.5之间波动,能值产出率较高,这主要是由于吴起县投入的购买能值(工业辅助能和可更新有机能)较低,无偿利用的环境资源能值很高;生态经济系统环境负荷率约为3.00,说明吴起县承受生态环境压力较小,进一步说明:吴起县在提高经济效益的同时,注意到了环境保护和提高生态效益,使得生态环境压力在其承受的范围之内;受能值产出率和环境负荷率变化趋势的影响,生态经济系统可持续发展指数均小于1,且可持续发展指数总体上呈现出非匀速下降的趋势,说明当地为资源消耗型发展且趋向于不可持续发展的方向,下降的趋势说明逐步向更不可持续方向发展。低投入换来高产出的表象并不是真正的高产出,这将最终导致生态经济系统进入不可持续状态。
(3)基于能值分析理论的生态足迹模型的评价结果表明,吴起县自1995年以来生态经济系统均表现为生态赤字,说明发展状态的不可持续,人均生态赤字和人均生态足迹曲线呈现出相同的变化趋势,说明吴起县的人均生态赤字主要取决于人均生态足迹。人均生态足迹最大的是耕地,而且12年来均高于其它类型的生物生产土地面积,表明当地居民对耕地的依赖性很强:其次是草地和建筑用地的人均生态足迹总体上呈现出上升的趋势:草地的人均生态足迹在2005年达到了0.6852hm~2,是2002年的6.68倍:建筑用地的人均生态足迹2005年达到了0.3956hm~2:林地的人均生态足迹在1995～2000年间呈现出逐年上升的趋势,在2000年达到了0.2620hm~2,之后出现了骤降趋势,在2003年之后开始回升:化石燃料用地的人均生态足迹呈现出逐年上升的趋势,由1995年的0.00004hm~2,上升到2005年的0.0712hm~2;水域的人均生态足迹在0.0044～0.0119hm~2之间,变化幅度较小,说明吴起县人们对水域的依赖性较弱。吴起县1995～2006年的人均生态赤字与人均生态足迹关系密切,而人均生态承载力的影响较小。但就生物资源消费量和能源资源消费量来比较,人均生态足迹主要受生物资源消费量的影响。人均生态足迹与降雨量有强负相关关系,与人口数量没有强负相关关系。吴起县自1995年以来均表现为生态赤字,说明吴起县经济发展处于不可持续状态。
(4)对所采用的三种评价方法的对比分析表明,吴起县自1995年以来均表现为生态赤字。但采用基于能值分析理论的生态足迹模型计算的生态赤字出现了较大的波动,这与当地的实际情况不符,说明了该方法不能真实地反映当地的可持续发展状况。将生态足迹模型与能值分析理论进行比较,发现生态足迹模型侧重于研究人类对于生态环境的需求量,全面地反映了人类生活质量与资源禀赋两方面的信息,与可持续发展研究联系得更为密切,更适合于可持续发展的测度研究,有着较好的应用前景,是三种方法中最好的一种。但是生态足迹模型存在诸如模型过于理想化以及不能够准确地反映生态系统的承载能力等问题,需要进一步完善。
With the ecology-society contradiction becomes worsen and worsen,the issue of development of agricultural eco-economic system has been aroused great attention in the world. China's social and economic development is very uneven and regional differences are significant because of the vast territory and various natural conditions in different areas.Therefore the sustainable development of both ecological construction and economic construction are of the same importance to China.Wuqi County is located in the north-west area in Yah'an district.It's mountainous physiognomy and broken land that is caused by over-deforestation and over-grazing animals have enormously constrained the local development.Since 1998 Wuqi government has actively responded to the call of the central committee of CPC-Rebuild a new and graceful North-west area and returned land for farming and forestry first and was honored "Model County for Conservation of Water and Soil and eco-environmental Construction" by Ministry of Water Resources.However,in recent years the massive oil production has brought not only some business benefit but serious pollution problems.Based on a research in Wuqi County the author adopts the ecological footprint model,emergy analysis and the model of ecological footprint calculation based on the theory of emergy analysis to discuss the possibility of its sustainable eco-economic development since 1995 till now.Following are the conclusions:
(1)The result from the ecological footprint model shows that since 1995 the average ecological footprint in Wuqi County has increased a lot:1995-2006 the increase is 2.9744hm~2 and the annual increase is 0.2540hm~2;while the average ecological capacity increases comparatively slow:1995～2006 the increase is 0.8716hm~2 and the annual increase is 0.0792hm~2.During the 12 years the average ecological footprint is higher than the average ecological capacity and the ecological deficit keeps increasing from 0.0181 hm~2 in 1995 to 1.7747 hm~2 in 2006 and the annual increase is 0.1597hm~2.Since 1995 the local oil production has led the massive use of power and a increase of average emergy consumption and the average ecological footprint is in an up-tendency.The average ecological deficit changes with the average ecological footprint for the stability of average ecological capacity.Its development relies on the natural resources consumption esp.the electronic power which is the key reason to the ecological deficit.It can be drawn that its eco-economic system is not in the sustainable development.
(2)The result from emergy analysis shows that since 1995 EYR of Wuqi County is more than 1, that is to say,EYR of producing is more than that of invest.EYR is between 1.5-2.5 and the high EYR is contributed to the low purchase emergy value(unrenewable industrial emergy and renewable organic emergy) and high environmental emergy value that is used without compensation.The environmental ELR is about 3.00 which show that its environmental pressure is not big and the government has paid attention to the environmental protection when enhancing the economic benefit. The sustainable development indexes are less than 1 and the general sustainable development index shows the non-constant velocity decline tendency;under the influence of EYR and ELR eco-system index of the sustainable development is less than 1 and the general sustainable developmental index shows non-velocity decline tendency.These show that the local development is based on the resources consumption and it cannot be called high-producing in a real sense.
(3)The result from the model of ecological footprint calculation based on the theory of emergy analysis shows that since 1995 the eco-economic system is in ecological deficit that is a sign of unsustainable development.The same tendency showed in the average ecological deficit and average ecological footprint indicates that its average ecological deficit is due to the average ecological footprint.The statistics also show that the local people mainly rely on the arable land to make a living.Second is the average ecological footprint of pasture and buildable area is in the up-going tendency.The average ecological footprint of agricultural products is up to 0.6852hm~2 in 2005 which is 6.68 times than that of 2002;the average ecological footprint of buildable area is up to 0.3956hm~2 in 2005 which is 3000 times than in 1995;the average ecological footprint of forest is in a up-tendency in 1995～2000 and up to 0.2620 hm~2 in 2000,the line keeps up-going though there is a steep down-going change in 2003;the average ecological footprint of fossil emergy is in a crease from 0.00004 hm~2 in 1995 to 0.0712 hm~2 2005;the average ecological footprint of water area is between 0.0044～0.0119 hm~2 that is a of a small change and shows that the local people rarely rely on the water area.There is a close relationship between the local average ecological deficit and the average ecological footprint,while the average ecological burden is small.However,as to the comparison of the ecological resources consumption and the emergy consumption,it can be concluded that the average ecological footprint is mainly influenced by ecological,resources consumption and there is no significant sign of the influence from the average emergy consumption.
(4)By adopting the three evaluation methods the research shows that Wuqi County has been in the ecological deficit since 1995.However,there exists a big wave in the model of ecological footprint calculation based on the theory of emergy analysis when the ecological deficit is calculated. Such a result is not in conformity with the local situation,which shows that the model of ecological footprint calculation based on the theory of emcrgy analysis doesn't reflect local sustainable development factually.With a further comparative analysis of the ecological footprint model and emergy analysis,the result shows that ecological footprint model emphasizes particularly on the demand of ecological environment of human,reveals the resource endowment and the living quality of people more comprehensively and connects with the study of sustainable development more closely.So the ecological footprint model is more suitable for the evaluation of sustainable development,and it has the prospect of application widely.The ecological footprint model is considered as the best evaluation method to evaluate the sustainable development.However,the ecological footprint model is too much idealistic and doesn't affect the ecological deficit accurately, which needs to be improved.
(1)生态足迹模型的评价结果表明,1995年以来吴起县的人均生态足迹呈现出快速增长的态势,2006年比1995年增加了2.9744hm~2,年均增长0.2540hm~2。而人均生态承载力呈现出较为缓慢的增长态势,2006年比1995年增加了0.8716hm~2,年均增长0.0792hm~2。12年间,人均生态足迹均高于人均生态承载力,一直表现为生态赤字。且生态赤字呈现增长的态势,从1995年的0.0181hm~2增加到2006年的1.7747hm~2,12年增长了1.7566hm~2,年均增长量为0.1597hm~2。自1995年以来,当地的石油产业发展迅速,拉动了电力的使用量,导致人均能源消费量大幅度上升,人均生态足迹呈现出上升的趋势。因人均生态承载力趋于稳定,所以人均生态赤字的变化主要取决于人均生态足迹的变化。吴起县的发展模式主要是通过消耗自然资源存量来弥补生态承载力的不足,其中能源消费主要以电力为主;生物资源的消费主要以农产品为主,这种对自然资源的过度依赖,是吴起县出现生态赤字的主要原因。自1995年以来均表现为生态赤字,说明生态经济系统整体上处于不可持续发展的状态。
(2)能值分析理论的评价结果表明,自1995年以来吴起县的生态经济系统能值产出率均大于1,说明生产过程产出的能值大于生态经济系统投入的能值。能值产出率在1.5～2.5之间波动,能值产出率较高,这主要是由于吴起县投入的购买能值(工业辅助能和可更新有机能)较低,无偿利用的环境资源能值很高;生态经济系统环境负荷率约为3.00,说明吴起县承受生态环境压力较小,进一步说明:吴起县在提高经济效益的同时,注意到了环境保护和提高生态效益,使得生态环境压力在其承受的范围之内;受能值产出率和环境负荷率变化趋势的影响,生态经济系统可持续发展指数均小于1,且可持续发展指数总体上呈现出非匀速下降的趋势,说明当地为资源消耗型发展且趋向于不可持续发展的方向,下降的趋势说明逐步向更不可持续方向发展。低投入换来高产出的表象并不是真正的高产出,这将最终导致生态经济系统进入不可持续状态。
(3)基于能值分析理论的生态足迹模型的评价结果表明,吴起县自1995年以来生态经济系统均表现为生态赤字,说明发展状态的不可持续,人均生态赤字和人均生态足迹曲线呈现出相同的变化趋势,说明吴起县的人均生态赤字主要取决于人均生态足迹。人均生态足迹最大的是耕地,而且12年来均高于其它类型的生物生产土地面积,表明当地居民对耕地的依赖性很强:其次是草地和建筑用地的人均生态足迹总体上呈现出上升的趋势:草地的人均生态足迹在2005年达到了0.6852hm~2,是2002年的6.68倍:建筑用地的人均生态足迹2005年达到了0.3956hm~2:林地的人均生态足迹在1995～2000年间呈现出逐年上升的趋势,在2000年达到了0.2620hm~2,之后出现了骤降趋势,在2003年之后开始回升:化石燃料用地的人均生态足迹呈现出逐年上升的趋势,由1995年的0.00004hm~2,上升到2005年的0.0712hm~2;水域的人均生态足迹在0.0044～0.0119hm~2之间,变化幅度较小,说明吴起县人们对水域的依赖性较弱。吴起县1995～2006年的人均生态赤字与人均生态足迹关系密切,而人均生态承载力的影响较小。但就生物资源消费量和能源资源消费量来比较,人均生态足迹主要受生物资源消费量的影响。人均生态足迹与降雨量有强负相关关系,与人口数量没有强负相关关系。吴起县自1995年以来均表现为生态赤字,说明吴起县经济发展处于不可持续状态。
(4)对所采用的三种评价方法的对比分析表明,吴起县自1995年以来均表现为生态赤字。但采用基于能值分析理论的生态足迹模型计算的生态赤字出现了较大的波动,这与当地的实际情况不符,说明了该方法不能真实地反映当地的可持续发展状况。将生态足迹模型与能值分析理论进行比较,发现生态足迹模型侧重于研究人类对于生态环境的需求量,全面地反映了人类生活质量与资源禀赋两方面的信息,与可持续发展研究联系得更为密切,更适合于可持续发展的测度研究,有着较好的应用前景,是三种方法中最好的一种。但是生态足迹模型存在诸如模型过于理想化以及不能够准确地反映生态系统的承载能力等问题,需要进一步完善。
With the ecology-society contradiction becomes worsen and worsen,the issue of development of agricultural eco-economic system has been aroused great attention in the world. China's social and economic development is very uneven and regional differences are significant because of the vast territory and various natural conditions in different areas.Therefore the sustainable development of both ecological construction and economic construction are of the same importance to China.Wuqi County is located in the north-west area in Yah'an district.It's mountainous physiognomy and broken land that is caused by over-deforestation and over-grazing animals have enormously constrained the local development.Since 1998 Wuqi government has actively responded to the call of the central committee of CPC-Rebuild a new and graceful North-west area and returned land for farming and forestry first and was honored "Model County for Conservation of Water and Soil and eco-environmental Construction" by Ministry of Water Resources.However,in recent years the massive oil production has brought not only some business benefit but serious pollution problems.Based on a research in Wuqi County the author adopts the ecological footprint model,emergy analysis and the model of ecological footprint calculation based on the theory of emergy analysis to discuss the possibility of its sustainable eco-economic development since 1995 till now.Following are the conclusions:
(1)The result from the ecological footprint model shows that since 1995 the average ecological footprint in Wuqi County has increased a lot:1995-2006 the increase is 2.9744hm~2 and the annual increase is 0.2540hm~2;while the average ecological capacity increases comparatively slow:1995～2006 the increase is 0.8716hm~2 and the annual increase is 0.0792hm~2.During the 12 years the average ecological footprint is higher than the average ecological capacity and the ecological deficit keeps increasing from 0.0181 hm~2 in 1995 to 1.7747 hm~2 in 2006 and the annual increase is 0.1597hm~2.Since 1995 the local oil production has led the massive use of power and a increase of average emergy consumption and the average ecological footprint is in an up-tendency.The average ecological deficit changes with the average ecological footprint for the stability of average ecological capacity.Its development relies on the natural resources consumption esp.the electronic power which is the key reason to the ecological deficit.It can be drawn that its eco-economic system is not in the sustainable development.
(2)The result from emergy analysis shows that since 1995 EYR of Wuqi County is more than 1, that is to say,EYR of producing is more than that of invest.EYR is between 1.5-2.5 and the high EYR is contributed to the low purchase emergy value(unrenewable industrial emergy and renewable organic emergy) and high environmental emergy value that is used without compensation.The environmental ELR is about 3.00 which show that its environmental pressure is not big and the government has paid attention to the environmental protection when enhancing the economic benefit. The sustainable development indexes are less than 1 and the general sustainable development index shows the non-constant velocity decline tendency;under the influence of EYR and ELR eco-system index of the sustainable development is less than 1 and the general sustainable developmental index shows non-velocity decline tendency.These show that the local development is based on the resources consumption and it cannot be called high-producing in a real sense.
(3)The result from the model of ecological footprint calculation based on the theory of emergy analysis shows that since 1995 the eco-economic system is in ecological deficit that is a sign of unsustainable development.The same tendency showed in the average ecological deficit and average ecological footprint indicates that its average ecological deficit is due to the average ecological footprint.The statistics also show that the local people mainly rely on the arable land to make a living.Second is the average ecological footprint of pasture and buildable area is in the up-going tendency.The average ecological footprint of agricultural products is up to 0.6852hm~2 in 2005 which is 6.68 times than that of 2002;the average ecological footprint of buildable area is up to 0.3956hm~2 in 2005 which is 3000 times than in 1995;the average ecological footprint of forest is in a up-tendency in 1995～2000 and up to 0.2620 hm~2 in 2000,the line keeps up-going though there is a steep down-going change in 2003;the average ecological footprint of fossil emergy is in a crease from 0.00004 hm~2 in 1995 to 0.0712 hm~2 2005;the average ecological footprint of water area is between 0.0044～0.0119 hm~2 that is a of a small change and shows that the local people rarely rely on the water area.There is a close relationship between the local average ecological deficit and the average ecological footprint,while the average ecological burden is small.However,as to the comparison of the ecological resources consumption and the emergy consumption,it can be concluded that the average ecological footprint is mainly influenced by ecological,resources consumption and there is no significant sign of the influence from the average emergy consumption.
(4)By adopting the three evaluation methods the research shows that Wuqi County has been in the ecological deficit since 1995.However,there exists a big wave in the model of ecological footprint calculation based on the theory of emergy analysis when the ecological deficit is calculated. Such a result is not in conformity with the local situation,which shows that the model of ecological footprint calculation based on the theory of emcrgy analysis doesn't reflect local sustainable development factually.With a further comparative analysis of the ecological footprint model and emergy analysis,the result shows that ecological footprint model emphasizes particularly on the demand of ecological environment of human,reveals the resource endowment and the living quality of people more comprehensively and connects with the study of sustainable development more closely.So the ecological footprint model is more suitable for the evaluation of sustainable development,and it has the prospect of application widely.The ecological footprint model is considered as the best evaluation method to evaluate the sustainable development.However,the ecological footprint model is too much idealistic and doesn't affect the ecological deficit accurately, which needs to be improved.
引文
[1]胡宝清,严志强等.区域生态经济学理论、方法与实践[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,2005.
[2]张学文,叶元煦.区域可持续发展三维系统理论初探[J].哈尔滨工程大学学报,2002(23)2,126-129.
[3]冯年华.区域可持续发展理论与实证研究-基于创新与能力建设角度[D].南京:南京农业大学,2003.
[4]王雪梅,张志强,熊永兰.国际生态足迹研究态势的文献计量分析[J].地球科学进展,2007,22(8):872-878.
[5]王书华,毛汉英,王忠静.生态足迹研究的国内外近期进展[J].自然资源学报,2002,17(6):776-781.
[6]Wackernagel M,Onisto L,Bello P,et al.Ecological footprints of Nations[R].Toronto International Council for Local Environmental initiatives,1997,10-21.
[7]Hard P,Barg S,Hodge T,et al.Measure sustainable development:Review of current practice[R]:occasional paper number 17.1997(IISD),1-2,49-51.
[8]陶在朴(奥).生态包袱与生态足迹[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2003.
[9]吴隆杰,杨林,苏昕等.近年来生态足迹研究进展[J].中国农业大学学报,2006,11(11):1-8.
[10]Mathis Wackernagel,Onisto L,Bello P,Linares AC,et al.Ecological footprints of Nations:how much nature do they use?How much nature do they have?[M].Costa Rica:The Earth Council,1997.
[11]Mathis Wackernagel,Chad Monfreda,and Diana Deumling,Ecological footprints of Nations(November 2002 Uodate)[M].Redefining Progress,2002.
[12]WWF International,UNEO-WCMC,Redefining Progress et al.,Living Planet Report 2000[M],2000.
[13]Allocating ecological footprints to final consumption categories with inputoutput analysis[J].Ecological Economics.2006(56):9-48.
[14]Mackernagel M.the Ecological Footprint of Santiago de Chile.1998.
[15]刘钦普.基于生态足迹改进模型的江苏省耕地利用可持续性研究[D].南京:南京师范大学,2007.
[16]张志强.WWF《生命行星报告2006》分析[EB/OL].http://218.1.116.115:8080/dspace/bitstream/123456789/672/1/WWF%E3%80%8A %E7%94%9F%E5%91%BD%E8%A1%8C%E6%98%9F%E6%8A%A5%E5%91%8A 2006%E3%80%8B%E5%88%86%E6%9E%90.pdf.
[17]张志强.WWF《生命行星报告2004》分析[EB/OL].www.sciencetimes.com.cn/coll16/col143/ratical.htm12005/03/25.
[18]袁平.基于生态足迹模型的县级区域可持续发展评价-以内蒙古阿鲁科尔沁旗为例[D].北京:中国农科院研究生院,2005.
[19]李利锋.WWF开列生态足迹黑名单谁负有更大生态责任[N].www.sina.com.cn2004/10/28.
[20]杜铁.基于生态足迹的山西省可持续发展能力分析[D].太谷:山西农业大学,2005.
[21]徐中民,张志强,程国栋.生态理论方法与应用[M].郑州:黄河水利出版社,2003.
[22]徐中民,张志强,程国栋等.中国1999年生态足迹计算与发展能力分析[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(2):280-285.
[23]苏筠,成升魁,谢高地.大城市居民生活消费的生态占用初探[J].资源科学,2001,23(6):25-29.
[24]秦耀辰,牛树海.生态占用法在区域可持续发展评价中的运用于改进[J].资源科学,2003,25(1):1-8.
[25]李金平,王志石.澳门2001年生态足迹分析[J].自然资源学报,2003,18(2):197-203.
[26]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[J].地理科学进展,2003,22(6):618-626.
[27]赵先贵,肖玲.陕西省生态足迹和生态承载力动态研究[J].中国农业科学,2005,38(4):746-753.
[28]龙爱华,张志强,苏志勇.生态足迹评价及国际研究前沿[J].地球科学进展,2004,19(6):971-981.
[29]尹璇,倪晋仁,毛小苓.生态足迹研究述评[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2004.14(5):45-52.
[30]Odum H T.Environmental Accounting:Emergy and Environmental Decision Making[M].New York:JohnWiley& Sons,1996.
[31]S Ulgiati,H.T.Odumal.Emergy Use,environmental Loading and sustainability-An emergy analysis of Italy[J].Ecological Modeling,1994,73:215-268.
[32]Lan S F,Odun H.T.Emergy synthesis of the environmental resources basis and eeonomy in China[J].Ecol Sci,1994,14(1):63-74.
[33]Odum H.T,Odnm E.C.Ecology and Economy:"Emergy" Analysis and Public Policy in Texas[M].Texas:The Office of Natural Resourse and Texas Department of Agriculture,1987.163-171.
[34]Odum H.T,Odnm,E.C.Blisset M.Ecology and economy:emergy analysis and publicy in Texas L.B.Johnson.School of Public Affairs and Texas Dept,of Agriculture,University of Texas,Austin,1987.
[35]Ulgiati,Odum.H.T,ct al Emergy analysis of Italian agricultural system the role emergy quality and environmental inputs[M].Ecological physical chemistry.Proceedings of 2nd Intemational Workshop.Milan,Italy.Elserier,Amsterdam,1992,187-215.
[36]Brown M.T,Herendeen R.A.Embodied emergy analysis and emergy analysis:a comparative view[J]:Ecol Econ,1996,19:219-235.
[37]Brown M.T,Ulgiati S.Emergy-based and rations to evaluate sustainability:monitoring economies andtechnology toward environmentally sound innovation[J].Ecol Eng,1997,(9):51-69.
[38]Ulgiati S,Brown M.T.Quantifying the environmental support for dilution and abatement of process emissions:the case of electricity production[J].J CleanProd,2002,10:335-348.
[39]Bastianoni S,Marchettini,N.Emergy/exergy ratio as of the level of organization of systems[J].Ecological Modelling.1997,Vol.99(1):33-40.
[40]Bastianoni S,Marchettini,N.The problem of coproductional accounting by emergy analysis[J].Ecological Modelling.2000,Vol.129(2-3):187- 193.
[41]Wackernagel M,Rees W E.Perceptual and structual barriers to investing in natural capital:Economics from an ecological footprint perspective[J].Ecological Economics,1997,20:3-24.
[42]William E Rees.Revisiting carrying-capacity:Area-based indicators of sustainability[EB/OL].http//www.dieoff.com/page/110.Htm,1997.
[43]徐中民,张志强,程国栋.甘肃省19998年生态足迹计算与分析[J].地理学报,2000,55(5):607-616.
[44]Wackernagel M,Silverstein J.Big things first:focusing on the scale imperative with the ecological footprint[J].Ecological Economics,2000,32(3):391-394.
[45]Vuuren D P,Smeets EMW.Ecological footprints of Benin,Bhutan,Costa Rica and the Netherlands[J].Ecological Economics,2000,34(1):115-130.
[46]Wackernagel M,Onisto L,Bello P,et al.National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept[J].Ecological Economics,1999,29:375-390.
[47]罗贞礼,黄磺.可持续发展评价模型:生态足迹方法及其应用-以南方丘陵山区柳州市为例.热带地理,2004,24(2):140-144.
[48]岳东霞,李自珍,惠苍.甘肃省生态足迹和生态承载力发展趋势研究.西北植物学报,2004,24(3):454-463.
[49]Haberl H,Erb K H,Krausmann F.How to calculate and interpret ecological footprints for long periods of time:the case of Austria 1926-1995.Ecological Economics,2001,38:25-45.
[50]Wackernagel M,Monfreda C,Erb K H,Haberl H,Schulz N B.Ecological footprint time series of Austria,the Philippines,and South Korea for 1961-1999:comparing the conventional approach to an actual land area approach.Land Use Policy,2004,21:261-269.
[51]Wackernagel M,Monfreda C,Schulz N B,Erb K H,Haberl H,Krausmann F.Calculating national and global ecological footprint time series:resolving conceptual challenges.Land Use Policy,2004,21:271-278.
[52]蓝盛芳,钦佩.生态经济系统能值分析[J].应用生态学报,2001,12(1):129-131.
[53]蓝盛芳,钦佩,陆宏芳.生态经济系统能值分析[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2002.
[54]张芳怡,濮励杰,张健.基于能值分析理论的生态足迹模型及应用[J].自然资源学报,2006,21(4):653-660.
[55]赖亚飞.吴起县退耕还林工程效益评价及其绿色GDP核算[D].北京:北京林业大学,2007.
[56]吴旗县地方志编纂委员会.吴旗县志[M].西安:三秦出版社.
[57]吴旗县统计年鉴编委会.吴旗统计年鉴(1995-2006)[M].吴旗:吴旗县统计局.
[58]Hard P,Barg S,Hodge T,et al.Measuring sustainable development:Review of current practice[R]:occasional paper number 17.1997(IISD),1-2,,49-51.
[59]http://www.china.com.cn/chinese/zhuanti/hjgb/1105836.htm[EB/OL].2006-01-26.
[60]Wackernagel M.An evaluation of the ecological footprint[J].Ecological Economics,1999,31:315-320.
[61]Wackernagel M,Onisto L,Bello P,et al.Ecological footprint of nations commissioned by the earth council for the Rio~(+5) Forum[A].In:International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives Toronto.Rio~(+5) Forum[C].Rio de Jane iro:The Earth Council for the Rio~(+5) Forum,1997.3- 17.
[62]徐中民,陈东景,张志强等.中国1999年的生态足迹分析[J].土壤学报,2002,39(3):441-445.
[63]Ulgiati,S,Brown,M T.Monitioring patterns of sustainability in natural and man-made ecosystem[J].Ecological Modeling,1998,108:23-36.
[64]廖迎春,李海涛等.江西省生态经济系统的能值分析及其指标动研究[J].世界科技研究与发展,2006(4):101-107.
[65]付晓,吴刚,刘阳.生态学研究中的熵分析与能值分析理论[J].生态学报,2004,24(11):2621-2626.
[2]张学文,叶元煦.区域可持续发展三维系统理论初探[J].哈尔滨工程大学学报,2002(23)2,126-129.
[3]冯年华.区域可持续发展理论与实证研究-基于创新与能力建设角度[D].南京:南京农业大学,2003.
[4]王雪梅,张志强,熊永兰.国际生态足迹研究态势的文献计量分析[J].地球科学进展,2007,22(8):872-878.
[5]王书华,毛汉英,王忠静.生态足迹研究的国内外近期进展[J].自然资源学报,2002,17(6):776-781.
[6]Wackernagel M,Onisto L,Bello P,et al.Ecological footprints of Nations[R].Toronto International Council for Local Environmental initiatives,1997,10-21.
[7]Hard P,Barg S,Hodge T,et al.Measure sustainable development:Review of current practice[R]:occasional paper number 17.1997(IISD),1-2,49-51.
[8]陶在朴(奥).生态包袱与生态足迹[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2003.
[9]吴隆杰,杨林,苏昕等.近年来生态足迹研究进展[J].中国农业大学学报,2006,11(11):1-8.
[10]Mathis Wackernagel,Onisto L,Bello P,Linares AC,et al.Ecological footprints of Nations:how much nature do they use?How much nature do they have?[M].Costa Rica:The Earth Council,1997.
[11]Mathis Wackernagel,Chad Monfreda,and Diana Deumling,Ecological footprints of Nations(November 2002 Uodate)[M].Redefining Progress,2002.
[12]WWF International,UNEO-WCMC,Redefining Progress et al.,Living Planet Report 2000[M],2000.
[13]Allocating ecological footprints to final consumption categories with inputoutput analysis[J].Ecological Economics.2006(56):9-48.
[14]Mackernagel M.the Ecological Footprint of Santiago de Chile.1998.
[15]刘钦普.基于生态足迹改进模型的江苏省耕地利用可持续性研究[D].南京:南京师范大学,2007.
[16]张志强.WWF《生命行星报告2006》分析[EB/OL].http://218.1.116.115:8080/dspace/bitstream/123456789/672/1/WWF%E3%80%8A %E7%94%9F%E5%91%BD%E8%A1%8C%E6%98%9F%E6%8A%A5%E5%91%8A 2006%E3%80%8B%E5%88%86%E6%9E%90.pdf.
[17]张志强.WWF《生命行星报告2004》分析[EB/OL].www.sciencetimes.com.cn/coll16/col143/ratical.htm12005/03/25.
[18]袁平.基于生态足迹模型的县级区域可持续发展评价-以内蒙古阿鲁科尔沁旗为例[D].北京:中国农科院研究生院,2005.
[19]李利锋.WWF开列生态足迹黑名单谁负有更大生态责任[N].www.sina.com.cn2004/10/28.
[20]杜铁.基于生态足迹的山西省可持续发展能力分析[D].太谷:山西农业大学,2005.
[21]徐中民,张志强,程国栋.生态理论方法与应用[M].郑州:黄河水利出版社,2003.
[22]徐中民,张志强,程国栋等.中国1999年生态足迹计算与发展能力分析[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(2):280-285.
[23]苏筠,成升魁,谢高地.大城市居民生活消费的生态占用初探[J].资源科学,2001,23(6):25-29.
[24]秦耀辰,牛树海.生态占用法在区域可持续发展评价中的运用于改进[J].资源科学,2003,25(1):1-8.
[25]李金平,王志石.澳门2001年生态足迹分析[J].自然资源学报,2003,18(2):197-203.
[26]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[J].地理科学进展,2003,22(6):618-626.
[27]赵先贵,肖玲.陕西省生态足迹和生态承载力动态研究[J].中国农业科学,2005,38(4):746-753.
[28]龙爱华,张志强,苏志勇.生态足迹评价及国际研究前沿[J].地球科学进展,2004,19(6):971-981.
[29]尹璇,倪晋仁,毛小苓.生态足迹研究述评[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2004.14(5):45-52.
[30]Odum H T.Environmental Accounting:Emergy and Environmental Decision Making[M].New York:JohnWiley& Sons,1996.
[31]S Ulgiati,H.T.Odumal.Emergy Use,environmental Loading and sustainability-An emergy analysis of Italy[J].Ecological Modeling,1994,73:215-268.
[32]Lan S F,Odun H.T.Emergy synthesis of the environmental resources basis and eeonomy in China[J].Ecol Sci,1994,14(1):63-74.
[33]Odum H.T,Odnm E.C.Ecology and Economy:"Emergy" Analysis and Public Policy in Texas[M].Texas:The Office of Natural Resourse and Texas Department of Agriculture,1987.163-171.
[34]Odum H.T,Odnm,E.C.Blisset M.Ecology and economy:emergy analysis and publicy in Texas L.B.Johnson.School of Public Affairs and Texas Dept,of Agriculture,University of Texas,Austin,1987.
[35]Ulgiati,Odum.H.T,ct al Emergy analysis of Italian agricultural system the role emergy quality and environmental inputs[M].Ecological physical chemistry.Proceedings of 2nd Intemational Workshop.Milan,Italy.Elserier,Amsterdam,1992,187-215.
[36]Brown M.T,Herendeen R.A.Embodied emergy analysis and emergy analysis:a comparative view[J]:Ecol Econ,1996,19:219-235.
[37]Brown M.T,Ulgiati S.Emergy-based and rations to evaluate sustainability:monitoring economies andtechnology toward environmentally sound innovation[J].Ecol Eng,1997,(9):51-69.
[38]Ulgiati S,Brown M.T.Quantifying the environmental support for dilution and abatement of process emissions:the case of electricity production[J].J CleanProd,2002,10:335-348.
[39]Bastianoni S,Marchettini,N.Emergy/exergy ratio as of the level of organization of systems[J].Ecological Modelling.1997,Vol.99(1):33-40.
[40]Bastianoni S,Marchettini,N.The problem of coproductional accounting by emergy analysis[J].Ecological Modelling.2000,Vol.129(2-3):187- 193.
[41]Wackernagel M,Rees W E.Perceptual and structual barriers to investing in natural capital:Economics from an ecological footprint perspective[J].Ecological Economics,1997,20:3-24.
[42]William E Rees.Revisiting carrying-capacity:Area-based indicators of sustainability[EB/OL].http//www.dieoff.com/page/110.Htm,1997.
[43]徐中民,张志强,程国栋.甘肃省19998年生态足迹计算与分析[J].地理学报,2000,55(5):607-616.
[44]Wackernagel M,Silverstein J.Big things first:focusing on the scale imperative with the ecological footprint[J].Ecological Economics,2000,32(3):391-394.
[45]Vuuren D P,Smeets EMW.Ecological footprints of Benin,Bhutan,Costa Rica and the Netherlands[J].Ecological Economics,2000,34(1):115-130.
[46]Wackernagel M,Onisto L,Bello P,et al.National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept[J].Ecological Economics,1999,29:375-390.
[47]罗贞礼,黄磺.可持续发展评价模型:生态足迹方法及其应用-以南方丘陵山区柳州市为例.热带地理,2004,24(2):140-144.
[48]岳东霞,李自珍,惠苍.甘肃省生态足迹和生态承载力发展趋势研究.西北植物学报,2004,24(3):454-463.
[49]Haberl H,Erb K H,Krausmann F.How to calculate and interpret ecological footprints for long periods of time:the case of Austria 1926-1995.Ecological Economics,2001,38:25-45.
[50]Wackernagel M,Monfreda C,Erb K H,Haberl H,Schulz N B.Ecological footprint time series of Austria,the Philippines,and South Korea for 1961-1999:comparing the conventional approach to an actual land area approach.Land Use Policy,2004,21:261-269.
[51]Wackernagel M,Monfreda C,Schulz N B,Erb K H,Haberl H,Krausmann F.Calculating national and global ecological footprint time series:resolving conceptual challenges.Land Use Policy,2004,21:271-278.
[52]蓝盛芳,钦佩.生态经济系统能值分析[J].应用生态学报,2001,12(1):129-131.
[53]蓝盛芳,钦佩,陆宏芳.生态经济系统能值分析[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2002.
[54]张芳怡,濮励杰,张健.基于能值分析理论的生态足迹模型及应用[J].自然资源学报,2006,21(4):653-660.
[55]赖亚飞.吴起县退耕还林工程效益评价及其绿色GDP核算[D].北京:北京林业大学,2007.
[56]吴旗县地方志编纂委员会.吴旗县志[M].西安:三秦出版社.
[57]吴旗县统计年鉴编委会.吴旗统计年鉴(1995-2006)[M].吴旗:吴旗县统计局.
[58]Hard P,Barg S,Hodge T,et al.Measuring sustainable development:Review of current practice[R]:occasional paper number 17.1997(IISD),1-2,,49-51.
[59]http://www.china.com.cn/chinese/zhuanti/hjgb/1105836.htm[EB/OL].2006-01-26.
[60]Wackernagel M.An evaluation of the ecological footprint[J].Ecological Economics,1999,31:315-320.
[61]Wackernagel M,Onisto L,Bello P,et al.Ecological footprint of nations commissioned by the earth council for the Rio~(+5) Forum[A].In:International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives Toronto.Rio~(+5) Forum[C].Rio de Jane iro:The Earth Council for the Rio~(+5) Forum,1997.3- 17.
[62]徐中民,陈东景,张志强等.中国1999年的生态足迹分析[J].土壤学报,2002,39(3):441-445.
[63]Ulgiati,S,Brown,M T.Monitioring patterns of sustainability in natural and man-made ecosystem[J].Ecological Modeling,1998,108:23-36.
[64]廖迎春,李海涛等.江西省生态经济系统的能值分析及其指标动研究[J].世界科技研究与发展,2006(4):101-107.
[65]付晓,吴刚,刘阳.生态学研究中的熵分析与能值分析理论[J].生态学报,2004,24(11):2621-2626.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |