京津唐地区地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性变化研究
|
摘要
研究灾害脆弱性的变化有助于深入理解灾害及灾害风险的形成机制。在重新审视承灾体系统灾害脆弱性的分析层次和描述角度之后,深化了对地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性的影响因素和描述指标的再认识,完善了以主成分分析为核心技术的分析该类脆弱性时空变化的数理方法。以此为基础,以1985、1995、2000和2004年为代表时期,对京津唐地区20多年来的地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性的变化做了进一步的分析和总结。主要结论是:研究区地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性20多年来的时空变化可分解为少数几种脆弱性模式的变化;1985年以来,该类脆弱性的空间分异格局整体稳定;但是,各地自身脆弱与否的程度20多年来的变化却很显著——各大中城市市区的脆弱程度显著增强,其他地区整体减弱,且变化幅度前者显著大于后者;研究区地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性的时空变化主要受该地区的人口和经济特别是工商业经济的增长、城市化发展和产业结构的调整等3方面因素所驱动。
Study on disaster vulnerability changes is greatly helpful for understanding disasters and disaster risk mechanism.On the basis of re-examination of the levels of analysis and descriptive hierarchies for the vulnerability of disaster-bearing human & social systems,the impacting factors and their descriptive indexes of the regional macroscopic vulnerability to earthquake disasters (RSMVED) are re-recognized,and the methodology centered on principal component analyzing technique for exploring the spatial & temporal change features of this kind of vulnerability is improved.Based on these more fully explainnations and this more perfect methodology,the spatial & temporal changes and their driving forces of RSMVED of Beijing-Tianjin-Tangshan region,China,during the past 20 years are analyzed and summarized with evidences in detail by taking 1985,1995,2000 and 2004 as the representative time references.The result shows that the spatial and temporal changes of RSMVED of the studied area,from 1985 to 2004,can always be separated into the changes of several main vulnerability patterns.Further analysis indicates the spatial difference structures of RSMVED of this area,in the past 20 years,are rather stable.However,the vulnerability in different areas of this region have changed markedly in resent 20 years.The vulnerabilities in the urban areas of major cities have significantly increased,while vulnerabilities in the other areas have decreased.The amplitude of changes of the former is larger than that of the latter.As far as the change driving forces of RSMVED is concerned,this paper suggested that it is the population and economy increases,urbanization development and industry structure adjustment are the three main ones.It is thought that the changes of regional macroscopic vulnerability to earthquake disasters in the studied region are mainly affected by population and economy increases,urbanization development and industry structure adjustmen.
Study on disaster vulnerability changes is greatly helpful for understanding disasters and disaster risk mechanism.On the basis of re-examination of the levels of analysis and descriptive hierarchies for the vulnerability of disaster-bearing human & social systems,the impacting factors and their descriptive indexes of the regional macroscopic vulnerability to earthquake disasters (RSMVED) are re-recognized,and the methodology centered on principal component analyzing technique for exploring the spatial & temporal change features of this kind of vulnerability is improved.Based on these more fully explainnations and this more perfect methodology,the spatial & temporal changes and their driving forces of RSMVED of Beijing-Tianjin-Tangshan region,China,during the past 20 years are analyzed and summarized with evidences in detail by taking 1985,1995,2000 and 2004 as the representative time references.The result shows that the spatial and temporal changes of RSMVED of the studied area,from 1985 to 2004,can always be separated into the changes of several main vulnerability patterns.Further analysis indicates the spatial difference structures of RSMVED of this area,in the past 20 years,are rather stable.However,the vulnerability in different areas of this region have changed markedly in resent 20 years.The vulnerabilities in the urban areas of major cities have significantly increased,while vulnerabilities in the other areas have decreased.The amplitude of changes of the former is larger than that of the latter.As far as the change driving forces of RSMVED is concerned,this paper suggested that it is the population and economy increases,urbanization development and industry structure adjustment are the three main ones.It is thought that the changes of regional macroscopic vulnerability to earthquake disasters in the studied region are mainly affected by population and economy increases,urbanization development and industry structure adjustmen.
引文
[1]Cutter S L,Mitchell J T,Scott MS.Revealing the vulnerability of people and places:a case study of Georgetown county,South Carolina[J].Annals of the Association of American Geogra-phers,2000,90(4):713-737.
[2]White G F,Katers R W,Burton I.Knowing better and losing e-ven more:the use of knowledge in hazards management[J].En-vironmental Hazards,2001,3(3/4):81-92.
[3]Fothergill A,Peek L A.Poverty and disasters in the United States:Areviewof recent sociological findings[J].Natural Haz-ards,2004,32(1):89-110.
[4]Thomalla F,Downing T,Spanger-siegfried E,et al.Reducing hazard vulnerability:towards a common approach between disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation[J].Disasters,2006,30(1):39-48.
[5]Wisner B,Blakie P,Cannon T,et al.At risk:natural haz-ards,people s vulnerability and disaster[M].2nd ed.Rout-ledge,London,2004.
[6]陈颙,陈棋福,陈凌.地震损失预测评估中的易损性分析[J].中国地震,1999,15(2):97-105.
[7]史培军.三论灾害研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,2002,11(3):1-9.
[8]Inter-Agency Secretariat of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction(UN/ISDR).Living with risk:Aglobal reviewof dis-aster reduction initiatives(2004version)[M/OL].Geneva,Switzerland:United Nations Publications,2004[2009-12-08].http://www.unisdr.org/eng/about-isdr/bd-lwr-2004-eng.htm.
[9]UN/ISDR.Hyogo framework for action2005-2015:building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters(HFA)[R/OL].Kobe,Japan,2005[2009-12-08].http://www.unisdr.org/eng/hfa/hfa.htm.
[10]International Panel on Climate Change(IPCC).Climate change2007:the physical science basis summary for policymakers,con-tribution of working group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[R].Paris,France,2007.
[11]SUG W,WANG G Q,MAZ J.Some preliminary discussion on natural disaster risk and its assessment[C]//Beijing Normal Uni-versity,Society for Risk Analysis,Japan Section,Department of Earth Science,National Natural Science Foundation of China,ed,Risk research and management in Asian perspective:pro-ceedings of the first China-Japan conference on risk assessment and management.Beijing:International Academic Publishers,1998:224-231.
[12]苏桂武,朱林,马宗晋,等.京津唐地区地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性变化的初步研究——空间变化[J].地震地质,2007,29(1):15-33.
[13]苏桂武,马宗晋,朱林,等.京津唐地区地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性空间分异的变化[J].地质科技情报,2008,27(2):1-11.
[14]美国应用技术委员会.加利福尼亚未来地震的损失估计[M].曹新玲,毛国敏,金学申,等译.北京:地震出版社,1991.
[15]Fah D,Kind F,Lang K,et al.Earthquake scenarios for the city of Basel[J].Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2001,21(5):405-413.
[16]Mouroux P,Brun B L.Presentation of RISK-UE project[J].Bull Earthquake Eng,2006,4(4):323-339.
[17]邓砚,苏桂武,聂高众.地震应急的影响因素分析[J].灾害学,2005,20(2):7-33
[18]苏桂武,邓砚,聂高众.中国地震应急宏观分区的初步研究[J].地震地质,2005,27(3):382-395.
[19]苏桂武,马宗晋,王若嘉,等.汶川地震灾区民众认知与响应地震灾害的特点及其减灾宣教意义:以四川省德阳市为例[J].地震地质,2008,30(4):877-894.
[20]王若嘉,苏桂武,张书维,等.云南普洱地区中学生认知与响应地震灾害特点的初步研究:以2007年宁洱6.4级地震灾害为例[J].灾害学,2009,24(1):133-138.
[21]黄嘉佑.气象统计分析与预报方法[M].2版.北京:气象出版社,2000.
[22]十年尺度中国地震灾害损失预测研究组.中国地震灾害损失预测图集[M].北京:科学出版社,1995.
[2]White G F,Katers R W,Burton I.Knowing better and losing e-ven more:the use of knowledge in hazards management[J].En-vironmental Hazards,2001,3(3/4):81-92.
[3]Fothergill A,Peek L A.Poverty and disasters in the United States:Areviewof recent sociological findings[J].Natural Haz-ards,2004,32(1):89-110.
[4]Thomalla F,Downing T,Spanger-siegfried E,et al.Reducing hazard vulnerability:towards a common approach between disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation[J].Disasters,2006,30(1):39-48.
[5]Wisner B,Blakie P,Cannon T,et al.At risk:natural haz-ards,people s vulnerability and disaster[M].2nd ed.Rout-ledge,London,2004.
[6]陈颙,陈棋福,陈凌.地震损失预测评估中的易损性分析[J].中国地震,1999,15(2):97-105.
[7]史培军.三论灾害研究的理论与实践[J].自然灾害学报,2002,11(3):1-9.
[8]Inter-Agency Secretariat of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction(UN/ISDR).Living with risk:Aglobal reviewof dis-aster reduction initiatives(2004version)[M/OL].Geneva,Switzerland:United Nations Publications,2004[2009-12-08].http://www.unisdr.org/eng/about-isdr/bd-lwr-2004-eng.htm.
[9]UN/ISDR.Hyogo framework for action2005-2015:building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters(HFA)[R/OL].Kobe,Japan,2005[2009-12-08].http://www.unisdr.org/eng/hfa/hfa.htm.
[10]International Panel on Climate Change(IPCC).Climate change2007:the physical science basis summary for policymakers,con-tribution of working group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[R].Paris,France,2007.
[11]SUG W,WANG G Q,MAZ J.Some preliminary discussion on natural disaster risk and its assessment[C]//Beijing Normal Uni-versity,Society for Risk Analysis,Japan Section,Department of Earth Science,National Natural Science Foundation of China,ed,Risk research and management in Asian perspective:pro-ceedings of the first China-Japan conference on risk assessment and management.Beijing:International Academic Publishers,1998:224-231.
[12]苏桂武,朱林,马宗晋,等.京津唐地区地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性变化的初步研究——空间变化[J].地震地质,2007,29(1):15-33.
[13]苏桂武,马宗晋,朱林,等.京津唐地区地震灾害区域宏观脆弱性空间分异的变化[J].地质科技情报,2008,27(2):1-11.
[14]美国应用技术委员会.加利福尼亚未来地震的损失估计[M].曹新玲,毛国敏,金学申,等译.北京:地震出版社,1991.
[15]Fah D,Kind F,Lang K,et al.Earthquake scenarios for the city of Basel[J].Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2001,21(5):405-413.
[16]Mouroux P,Brun B L.Presentation of RISK-UE project[J].Bull Earthquake Eng,2006,4(4):323-339.
[17]邓砚,苏桂武,聂高众.地震应急的影响因素分析[J].灾害学,2005,20(2):7-33
[18]苏桂武,邓砚,聂高众.中国地震应急宏观分区的初步研究[J].地震地质,2005,27(3):382-395.
[19]苏桂武,马宗晋,王若嘉,等.汶川地震灾区民众认知与响应地震灾害的特点及其减灾宣教意义:以四川省德阳市为例[J].地震地质,2008,30(4):877-894.
[20]王若嘉,苏桂武,张书维,等.云南普洱地区中学生认知与响应地震灾害特点的初步研究:以2007年宁洱6.4级地震灾害为例[J].灾害学,2009,24(1):133-138.
[21]黄嘉佑.气象统计分析与预报方法[M].2版.北京:气象出版社,2000.
[22]十年尺度中国地震灾害损失预测研究组.中国地震灾害损失预测图集[M].北京:科学出版社,1995.
版权所有：© 2023 中国地质图书馆 中国地质调查局地学文献中心