Land Use Change in Hanjiang River Basin: Spatio-temporal Characteristics and Its Ecological Security Assessment

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0647

Abstract

Abstract:

The study aims to reveal the spatio-temporal change characteristics of land use and the ecological security assessment of the change in Hanjiang River Basin, and provide a scientific basis for the sustainable use of land resources in the basin. Based on the exploration of land use change and its driving forces obtained by transfer matrix and principal component analysis, the evaluation index system of land ecological security was established by using pressure—state—response model, to further evaluate the land ecological security. The results showed that from 1980 to 2020, the construction land and the cultivated land, the two most significant land types in Hanjiang River Basin, increased by 1301.61 km² and decreased by 1013.89 km² respectively. They converted to each other and spatially concentrated in Chaoshan plain in the southeast of the basin. Economic development and population growth were the two main factors promoting the urbanization process of the basin, and aggravated the contradiction between the construction land and the ecological land. From 2000 to 2019, the level of land ecological security in Hanjiang River Basin changed following a path of “relatively unsafe—unsafe—relatively unsafe”, indicating that the land ecological environment was gradually improved after deterioration. In conclusion, in Hanjiang River Basin, the land ecological security is closely related to the land use change and has been in an unstable state for a long term. So it is necessary to adjust the land use pattern to alleviate the pressure on land ecological security.

Key words: Hanjiang River Basin, land use change, ecological security assessment, driving force, spatio-temporal change characteristics, pressure-state-response model

GUAN Yafang, JIAO Yang, ZANG Chuanfu. Land Use Change in Hanjiang River Basin: Spatio-temporal Characteristics and Its Ecological Security Assessment[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(20): 91-99.

Figures/Tables 8

References 36

[1]	中华人民共和国生态环境部. 2020中国生态环境状况公报[EB/OL].(2021-05-26)[2022-05-25]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/hjzl/sthjzk/zghjzkgb.html.
[2]	张虹波, 刘黎明. 土地资源生态安全研究进展与展望[J]. 地理科学进展, 2006, 25(5):77-85.
[3]	谢花林. 土地利用生态安全格局研究进展[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(12):305-6311.
[4]	赵文武, 傅伯杰, 陈利顶, 等. 黄土丘陵沟壑区集水区尺度土地利用格局变化的水土流失效应[J]. 生态学报, 2004(7):1358-1364.
[5]	RICHEY J E, NOBRE C, DESER C. Amazon River discharge and climate variability:1903-1985[J]. Science, 1989, 246(4926):101-103. doi: 10.1126/science.246.4926.101 URL
[6]	喻锋, 李晓兵, 王宏, 等. 皇甫川流域土地利用变化与生态安全评价[J]. 地理学报, 2006, 61(6):645-653.
[7]	HE D, HOU K, WEN J F, et al. A coupled study of ecological security and land use change based on GIS and entropy method—a typical region in Northwest China, Lanzhou[J]. Environmental science and pollution research, 2021, 29(4):6347-6359. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-16080-x
[8]	CHAI J, WANG Z Q, ZHANG H W. Integrated Evaluation of coupling coordination for land use change and ecological security: a case study in Wuhan city of Hubei province, China[J]. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2017, 14(11):1435. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14111435 URL
[9]	蒙吉军, 赵春红, 刘明达. 基于土地利用变化的区域生态安全评价——以鄂尔多斯市为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2011, 26(4):578-590.
[10]	WANG H, LONG H L, LI X B, et al. Evaluation of changes in ecological security in China’s Qinghai Lake Basin from 2000 to 2013 and the relationship to land use and climate change[J]. Environmental earth sciences, 2014, 72(2):341-354. doi: 10.1007/s12665-013-2955-1 URL
[11]	张浚茂, 臧传富. 东南诸河流域1990—2015年土地利用时空变化特征及驱动机制[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(24):9339-9350.
[12]	邵伟, 黄亮, 罗昊, 等. 韩江流域生态环境保护定位研究[J]. 环境与发展, 2019, 31(6):191-192.
[13]	鲁春阳, 齐磊刚, 桑超杰. 土地利用变化的数学模型解析[J]. 资源开发与市场, 2007, 23(1):25-27.
[14]	张诗晓, 张浚茂, 张文康, 等. 泛珠江流域土地利用时空变化特征及驱动因子[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(2):573-580.
[15]	曹新向, 郭志永, 雒海潮. 区域土地资源持续利用的生态安全研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2004, 18(2):192-195.
[16]	杨春红, 张正栋, 田楠楠, 等. 基于P-S-R模型的汕头市土地生态安全评价[J]. 水土保持研究, 2012, 19(3):209-214.
[17]	后雪峰, 屈清, 江英志, 等. 基于P-S-R模型的揭阳市城市生态安全评价[J]. 南宁师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 37(3):83-89.
[18]	ZHAO Y Z, ZOU X Y, CHENG H, et al. Assessing the ecological security of the Tibetan plateau: Methodology and a case study for Lhaze County[J]. Journal of environmental management, 2006, 80(2):120-131. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.08.019 URL
[19]	周迎雪, 李贻学, 孙仪阳, 等. 基于不同评价模型的土地生态安全评价——以山东半岛蓝色经济区为例[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016, 26(11):207-210.
[20]	徐美, 朱翔, 李静芝. 基于DPSIR-TOPSIS模型的湖南省土地生态安全评价[J]. 冰川冻土, 2012, 34(5):1265-1272.
[21]	李秀霞, 张希. 基于熵权法的城市化进程中土地生态安全研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2011, 25(9):13-17.
[22]	吴景全, 吴铭婉, 臧传富. 西北诸河流域土地利用变化及土地生态安全评估[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(5):1471-1482.
[23]	SHI X Q, ZHAO J Z, OUYANG Z Y. Assessment of eco-security in the Knowledge Grid e-science environment[J]. Journal of systems and software, 2005, 79(2):246-252. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2005.04.031 URL
[24]	张正栋. 广东韩江流域土地利用与土地覆盖变化综合研究[D]. 广州:中国科学院研究生院: 广州地球化学研究所, 2007:47-48.
[25]	张正栋, 周永章, 夏斌, 等. 韩江流域下游耕地变化趋势及其驱动力——以汕头市为例[J]. 水土保持研究, 2007, 14(1):17-20.
[26]	胡华科, 郑春燕, 凌益芬. 55年来梅州市耕地变化与驱动力分析[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2006, 34(15):3774-3775,3777.
[27]	HE C Y, LIU Z F, TIAN J, et al. Urban expansion dynamics and natural habitat loss in China: a multiscale landscape perspective[J]. Global change biology, 2014, 20(9):2886-2902. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12553 pmid: 24643992
[28]	XU L Y, YIN H, LI Z X, et al. Land ecological security evaluation of Guangzhou, China[J]. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2014, 11(10):10537-10558. doi: 10.3390/ijerph111010537 pmid: 25321873
[29]	WEN M X, ZHANG T, LI L, et al. Assessment of land ecological security and analysis of influencing factors in Chaohu Lake Basin, China from 1998-2018[J]. Sustainability, 2021, 13(1):358. doi: 10.3390/su13010358 URL
[30]	LI Z T, YUAN M J, HU M M, et al. Evaluation of ecological security and influencing factors analysis based on robustness analysis and the BP-DEMALTE model: A case study of the Pearl River Delta urban agglomeration[J]. Ecological indicators, 2019, 101:595-602. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.01.067 URL
[31]	LIANG P, LIMING D, GUIJIE Y. Ecological security assessment of Beijing based on PSR model[J]. Procedia environmental sciences, 2010, 2:832-841. doi: 10.1016/j.proenv.2010.10.094 URL
[32]	MOARRAB Y, SALEHI E, AMIRI M J, et al. Spatial-temporal assessment and modeling of ecological security based on land-use/cover changes(case study: Lavasanat watershed)[J]. International journal of environmental science and tTechnology, 2021, 19(5):3991-4006.
[33]	WU Y Z, ZHANG T C, ZHANG H, et al. Factors influencing the ecological security of island cities: a neighborhood-scale study of Zhoushan Island, China[J]. Sustainable cities and society, 2020, 55:102029. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102029 URL
[34]	LU Y, WANG X R, XIE Y J, et al. Integrating future land use scenarios to evaluate the spatio-temporal dynamics of landscape ecological security[J]. Sustainability, 2016, 8(12):1242. doi: 10.3390/su8121242 URL
[35]	史培军, 王静爱, 冯文利, 等. 中国土地利用/覆盖变化的生态环境安全响应与调控[J]. 地球科学进展, 2006, 21(2):111-119. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2006.02.0111
[36]	喻锋, 李晓兵, 陈云浩, 等. 皇甫川流域土地利用变化与土壤侵蚀评价[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(6):1947-1956.

土地利用类型		2020年
土地利用类型		耕地	林地	草地	水域	城乡、工矿、居民用地	未利用土地	海洋	减少量
1980年	耕地	9130.411	20.132	4.708	106.795	882.243	0.010	0	1013.888
	林地	17.492	28776.161	53.647	31.964	287.510	14.756	0	405.370
	草地	3.857	123.346	4252.496	9.388	86.018	0.360	0	222.969
	水域	6.691	2.084	1.974	977.243	36.378	0	0	47.127
	城乡、工矿、居民用地	0.473	0.538	0.204	0.833	713.993	0	0	2.048
	未利用土地	0.275	1.416	1.062	0.075	2.315	38.759	0	5.143
	海洋	0.573	0.011	0.147	5.292	7.150	0	0	13.172
	增加量	29.362	147.527	61.742	154.346	1301.612	15.126	0	—

土地利用类型		2020年
土地利用类型		耕地	林地	草地	水域	城乡、工矿、居民用地	未利用土地	海洋	减少量
1980年	耕地	9130.411	20.132	4.708	106.795	882.243	0.010	0	1013.888
	林地	17.492	28776.161	53.647	31.964	287.510	14.756	0	405.370
	草地	3.857	123.346	4252.496	9.388	86.018	0.360	0	222.969
	水域	6.691	2.084	1.974	977.243	36.378	0	0	47.127
	城乡、工矿、居民用地	0.473	0.538	0.204	0.833	713.993	0	0	2.048
	未利用土地	0.275	1.416	1.062	0.075	2.315	38.759	0	5.143
	海洋	0.573	0.011	0.147	5.292	7.150	0	0	13.172
	增加量	29.362	147.527	61.742	154.346	1301.612	15.126	0	—

影响因素	分析指标	主成分
影响因素	分析指标	F₁	F₂	F₃
人口	X₁ 常住人口	0.938	-0.303	0.071
	X₂ 人口密度	0.905	-0.409	0.047
	X₃ 人口自然增长率	0.532	-0.076	0.716
	X₄ 城镇化率	0.966	-0.157	0.113
经济发展	X₅ GDP	0.982	0.058	0.143
	X₆ 人均GDP	0.984	0.063	0.122
	X₇ 农村居民人均可支配收入	0.964	0.171	0.166
	X₈ 工业增加值	0.965	-0.113	0.172
产业结构与政策	X₉ 粮食总产量	-0.836	0.385	0.006
	X₁₀ 第一产业占GDP的比重	-0.905	0.397	-0.030
	X₁₁ 第二产业占GDP的比重	0.175	-0.966	-0.003
	X₁₂ 第三产业占GDP的比重	0.893	0.425	0.037
人类活动强度	X₁₃ 固定资产投资	0.954	0.179	0.203
	X₁₄ 地方一般公共预算收入	0.964	-0.017	0.114
	X₁₅ 地方一般公共预算支出	0.958	0.172	0.201
	X₁₆ 人均耕地面积	-0.937	0.327	-0.060
环境因素	X₁₇ 气温	0.089	0.810	-0.072
环境因素	X₁₈ 降水	-0.007	-0.032	0.920

影响因素	分析指标	主成分
影响因素	分析指标	F₁	F₂	F₃
人口	X₁ 常住人口	0.938	-0.303	0.071
	X₂ 人口密度	0.905	-0.409	0.047
	X₃ 人口自然增长率	0.532	-0.076	0.716
	X₄ 城镇化率	0.966	-0.157	0.113
经济发展	X₅ GDP	0.982	0.058	0.143
	X₆ 人均GDP	0.984	0.063	0.122
	X₇ 农村居民人均可支配收入	0.964	0.171	0.166
	X₈ 工业增加值	0.965	-0.113	0.172
产业结构与政策	X₉ 粮食总产量	-0.836	0.385	0.006
	X₁₀ 第一产业占GDP的比重	-0.905	0.397	-0.030
	X₁₁ 第二产业占GDP的比重	0.175	-0.966	-0.003
	X₁₂ 第三产业占GDP的比重	0.893	0.425	0.037
人类活动强度	X₁₃ 固定资产投资	0.954	0.179	0.203
	X₁₄ 地方一般公共预算收入	0.964	-0.017	0.114
	X₁₅ 地方一般公共预算支出	0.958	0.172	0.201
	X₁₆ 人均耕地面积	-0.937	0.327	-0.060
环境因素	X₁₇ 气温	0.089	0.810	-0.072
环境因素	X₁₈ 降水	-0.007	-0.032	0.920

地类	逐步回归方程	显著水平
城镇用地	Y₁= -0.305×10^-15+1.366X₁-0.764X₈	R²=0.997，F=521.280
其他建设用地	Y₂= -0.503×10^-15+1.319X₄-0.364X₆+0.045X₁₅	R²=0.994，F=507.857
旱地	Y₃= 1.003-0.996X₁	R²=1，F=6470.296
水田	Y₄= 0.980-0.994X₁	R²=0.991，F=343.564
有林地	Y₅= 1.081-1.061X₂	R²=0.903，F=29.025
农村居民点	Y₆= 0.074+0.985X₂	R²=0.949，F=37.579