基于“三生”适宜性的县域土地利用冲突识别与分析

doi:10.31497/zrzyxb.20210512

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

精准识别潜在土地利用冲突有利于预警权衡和协调冲突用地,有利于科学进行国土空间规划。以“三调”修正数据为基础,基于生产、生活、生态视角,构建高植被覆盖率县域生产、生活、生态即“三生”适宜性评价模型与土地利用冲突识别矩阵,并选取横峰县进行实证分析。结果表明:（1）横峰县“三生”适宜性用地的空间分布与面积构成差异显著,且存在明显的空间叠加特征,暗示着研究区土地利用存在冲突;（2）从潜在冲突识别的结果来看,土地利用适宜区、冲突激烈区、冲突中度区、冲突一般区及冲突微弱区面积占比分别为64.02%、9.66%、17.19%、1.66%、7.48%;（3）各个冲突类型区空间分布、表现形式的差异性决定了冲突和解的对策也需因地制宜。研究结果可为相关及类似县域的国土空间规划提供理论参考。

关键词: 生产—生活—生态, 适宜性评价, 潜在土地利用冲突, 识别, 高植被覆盖率区

Abstract:

Accurate identification of potential land-use conflicts is conducive to early warning, trade-off and coordination of conflict land, so as to promote the scientific planning of land space. In this paper, based on the revised data of the third national land survey, and assuming that a county should at least have ecological function, productivity and suitability for living (ecological-production-living suitability), we proposed an empirical model to identify and diagnose potential land use conflicts in tourism resorts by taking Hengfeng county with high vegetation coverage as an example. The land-use conflict recognition matrix was used in the research, and it includes five zones at different conflicting levels: zone without conflict, zone with intense conflicts, zone with moderate conflicts, zone with general conflicts, and zone with weak conflicts. The results show that: (1) The spatial distribution and area composition of the "Production-Living-Ecological" suitable land in the study county are significantly different, and there are obvious spatial superimposition and conversion characteristics, which indicates the existence of competitions and conflicts in land use. (2) According to the land-use conflict recognition matrix results, the zone without conflict, zone with intense conflicts, zone with moderate conflicts, zone with general conflicts, and zone with weak conflicts accounted for 64.02%, 9.66%, 17.19%, 1.66%, and 7.48%, respectively. Among them, suitable zone for land use are relatively large, the zones with intense, moderate and general levels are reflected in the conflicts between production and life, which are in the transitional stage of human production, life and ecology. (3) The difference in the spatial distribution and manifestation of various conflict types in the study area determines that the countermeasures for conflict reconciliation must adapt to local conditions and be suitable for land use. In other words, targeted measures should be taken in areas with weak, intense, moderate and general conflicts. The research results can provide a theoretical reference for the evaluation of the "Production-Living-Ecological" suitability of land use in counties with high vegetation coverage, as well as a basis for land space planning in asimilar counties.

Key words: "Production-Living-Ecological", suitability evaluation, potential land-use conflict, identification, area with high vegetation coverage

王检萍, 余敦, 卢一乾, 张田, 郑亚萍. 基于“三生”适宜性的县域土地利用冲突识别与分析[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(5): 1238-1251.

WANG Jian-ping, YU Dun, LU Yi-qian, ZHANG Tian, ZHENG Ya-ping. Recognition and analysis of land use conflicts at county level based on "Production-Living-Ecological" suitability[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2021, 36(5): 1238-1251.

图/表 8

图1

表1

表2

表3

图2

表4

图3

表5

参考文献 31

[1]	张小丹, 吴克宁, 赵瑞, 等. 县域耕地健康产能评价. 水土保持研究, 2020,27(3):294-300.
	[ ZHANG X D, WU K N, ZHAO R, et al. Evaluation of healthy productivity of cultivated land in counties. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020,27(3):294-300.]
[2]	于伯华, 吕昌河. 土地利用冲突分析:概念与方法. 地理科学进展, 2006,25(3):106-115.
	[ YU B H, LYU C H. Analysis of land use conflict: Concepts and methods. Progress in Geography, 2006,25(3):106-115.]
[3]	周德, 徐建春, 王莉. 近15年来中国土地利用冲突研究进展与展望. 中国土地科学, 2015,29(2):21-29.
	[ ZHOU D, XU J C, WANG L. Process of land use conflict research in China during the past fifteen years. China Land Science, 2015,29(2):21-29.]
[4]	赵旭, 汤峰, 张蓬涛, 等. 基于CLUE-S模型的县域生产—生活—生态空间冲突动态模拟及特征分析. 生态学报, 2019,39(16):5897-5908.
	[ ZHAO X, TANG F, ZHANG P T, et al. Dynamic simulation and characteristics analysis of county-production-life-ecological space conflict based on CLUE-S model. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019,39(16):5897-5908.]
[5]	PETRESCU-MAG R M, PETRECU D C, AZADI H, et al. Agricultural land use conflict management: Vulnerabilities, law restrictions and negotiation frames: A wake-up call. Land Use Policy, 2018,76:600-610. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.040
[6]	DUNK A V D, GRET-REGAMEY A, DALANG T, et al. Defining a typology of peri-urban land-use conflicts: A case study from Switzerland. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2011,101:149-156. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.02.007
[7]	SHIRAISHI K, SHIRLEY R G, KAMMEN D M, et al. Geospatial multi-criteria analysis for identifying high priority clean energy investment opportunities: A case study on land-use conflict in Bangladesh. Applied Energy, 2019,235:1457-1467. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.10.123
[8]	DELGADO-MATAS C, MOLA-YUDEGO B, GRITTEN D, et al. Land use evolution and management under recurrent conflict conditions: Umbundu agroforestry system in the Angolan Highlands. Land Use Policy, 2014,42:460-470. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.07.018
[9]	NEUMANN P, MASON C W . Managing land use conflict among recreational trail users: A sustainability study of cross-country skiers and fat bikers. Journal of Outdoor, 2019,28:1-10.
[10]	BROWN G, RAYMOND C M . Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2014,122:196-208. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.007
[11]	苏伟忠, 马丽雅, 陈爽, 等. 城市生态空间冲突分析与系统优化方法. 自然资源学报, 2020,35(3):601-613.
	[ SU W Z, MA L Y, CHEN S, et al. Urban ecological space conflict analysis and system optimization method. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020,35(3):601-613.]
[12]	张磊, 陈晓琴, 董晓翠, 等. 三生互斥视角下工业用地空间布局优化: 以天津市为例. 地理与地理信息科学, 2019,35(3):112-119.
	[ ZHANG L, CHEN X Q, DONG X C, et al. Optimization of industrial land spatial layout from the perspective of mutual exclusion: Taking Tianjin as an example. Geography and Geo-Information Science, 2019,35(3):112-119.]
[13]	王建英, 邹利林, 李梅凎. 基于“三生”适宜性的旅游度假区潜在土地利用冲突识别与治理. 农业工程学报, 2019,35(24):279-288.
	[ WANG J Y, ZOU L L, LI M G. Identification and governance of potential land use conflicts in tourist resorts based on "Production-Living-Ecological" suitability. Transactions of the CSAE, 2019,35(24):279-288.]
[14]	宋振江, 李争, 杨俊. 矿粮复合区土地利用冲突强度测算研究: 以江西省德兴铜矿和永平铜矿污染区域为例. 中国农业资源与区划, 2018,39(3):78-85, 200.
	[ SONG Z J, LI Z, YANG J. Research on the calculation of conflict intensity of land use in mining and grain compound area: Taking Dexing Copper Mine and Yongping Copper Mine Contaminated Areas in Jiangxi province as an example. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2018,39(3):78-85, 200.]
[15]	李俏, 吴秀芹, 王曼曼. 荒漠化地区县级潜在土地利用冲突识别. 北京大学学报: 自然科学版, 2018,54(3):616-624.
	[ LI Q, WU X Q, WANG M M. Identification of potential land use conflicts at the county level in desertification areas. Journal of Peking University: Natural Science Edition, 2018,54(3):616-624.]
[16]	邹利林, 刘彦随, 王永生. 中国土地利用冲突研究进展. 地理科学进展, 2020,39(2):298-309. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.02.011
	[ ZOU L L, LIU Y S, WANG Y S. Research progress of land use conflicts in China. Progress in Geography, 2020,39(2):298-309.]
[17]	梁发超, 刘诗苑, 刘黎明. 基于用地竞争力的闽南地区乡村景观功能冲突的识别. 农业工程学报, 2017,33(9):260-267.
	[ LIANG F C, LIU S Y, LIU L M. Identification of rural landscape functional conflicts in Southern Fujian based on land use competitiveness. Transactions of the CSAE, 2017,33(9):260-267.]
[18]	代亚强, 陈伟强, 高涵, 等. 基于用地倾向性评价的农村潜在土地利用冲突识别研究: 以西峡县东坪村为例. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019,28(10):2410-2418.
	[ DAI Y Q, CHEN W Q, GAO H, et al. Research on identification of potential land use conflicts in rural areas based on evaluation of land use propensity: Taking Dongping village in Xixia county as an example. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze River Basin, 2019,28(10):2410-2418.]
[19]	戴智勇. 丘陵山区“三生”空间土地利用特征及其冲突评价. 重庆: 西南大学, 2019: 98.
	[ DAI Z Y. Spatial land use characteristics and conflict evaluation of "Production-Living-Ecological" in hilly and mountainous areas. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2019: 98.]
[20]	冯宇, 毕如田, 王瑾, 等. 流域矿业开采引发的土地利用空间冲突及优化配置. 中国土地科学, 2016,30(11):32-40.
	[ FENG Y, BI R T, WANG J, et al. Land use spatial conflicts and optimal allocation caused by mining in the basin. China Land Science, 2016,30(11):32-40.]
[21]	刘琼, 吴斌, 欧名豪, 等. 土地利用总体规划与城市规划冲突的利益关系及协调: 基于规划管理者和规划编制者的问卷调查和深度访谈. 中国土地科学, 2014,28(4):3-9.
	[ LIU Q, WU B, OU M H, et al. Interest relationship and coordination between the conflict between land use planning and urban planning: Based on questionnaire survey and in-depth interviews by plan managers and planners. China Land Science, 2014,28(4):3-9.]
[22]	阮松涛, 吴克宁. 城镇化进程中土地利用冲突及其缓解机制研究: 基于非合作博弈的视角. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2013,23(s2):388-392.
	[ RUAN S T, WU K N. Research on land use conflict and its mitigation mechanism in the process of urbanization: Based on the perspective of non-cooperative game. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2013,23(s2):388-392.]
[23]	黄安, 许月卿, 卢龙辉, 等. “生产—生活—生态”空间识别与优化研究进展. 地理科学进展, 2020,39(3):503-518. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.03.014
	[ HUANG A, XU Y Q, LU L H, et al. Research progress on spatial identification and optimization of "Production-Life-Ecology". Progress in Geography, 2020,39(3):503-518.]
[24]	李欣, 方斌, 殷如梦, 等. 江苏省县域“三生”功能时空变化及协同/权衡关系. 自然资源学报, 2019,34(11):2363-2377.
	[ LI X, FANG B, YIN R M, et al. The spatio-temporal changes and synergy/trade-off relationship of the "Production-Life-Ecology" function at the county level in Jiangsu province. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019,34(11):2363-2377.]
[25]	刘春芳, 王奕璇, 何瑞东, 等. 基于居民行为的三生空间识别与优化分析框架. 自然资源学报, 2019,34(10):2113-2122.
	[ LIU C F, WANG Y X, HE R D, et al. The "Production-Life-Ecology" space identification and optimization analysis framework based on residents' behavior. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019,34(10):2113-2122.]
[26]	戴文远, 江方奇, 黄万里, 等. 基于“三生空间”的土地利用功能转型及生态服务价值研究: 以福州新区为例. 自然资源学报, 2018,33(12):2098-2109.
	[ DAI W Y, JIANG F Q, HUANG W L, et al. Research on land use function transformation and ecological service value based on "Production-Life-Ecology" space: Taking Fuzhou New District as an example. Journal of Natural Resources, 2018,33(12):2098-2109.]
[27]	横峰县统计局. 横峰县统计年鉴, 2019.
	[ Hengfeng County Statistics Bureau. Hengfeng County Statistical Yearbook, 2019.]
[28]	江西省统计局, 江西省统计年鉴2019. https://www.yearbookchina.com/navibooklist-n3019111811-1.html.
	[ Jiangxi Provincial Bureau of Statistics, Jiangxi Provincial Statistical Yearbook 2019. https://www.yearbookchina.com/navibooklist-n3019111811-1.html.]
[29]	上饶市统计局, 上饶市统计年鉴2019. https://www.yearbookchina.com/navibooklist-n3019122823-1.html.
	[ Shangrao City Statistics Bureau, Shangrao City Statistical Yearbook 2019. https://www.yearbookchina.com/navibooklist-n3019122823-1.html.]
[30]	周娜娜. 无棣县“三生”空间演变特征与优化研究. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2019: 75.
	[ ZHOU N N. Study on the spatial evolution characteristics and optimization of "Production-Living-Ecological" in Wudi county. Taian: Shandong Agricultural University, 2019: 75.]
[31]	赵越, 罗志军, 李雅婷, 等. 赣江上游流域景观生态风险的时空分异: 从生产—生活—生态空间的视角. 生态学报, 2019,39(13):4676-4686.
	[ ZHAO Y, LUO Z J, LI Y T, et al. Study of the spatial-temporal variation of landscape ecological risk in the upper reaches of the Ganjiang River Basin based on the "Production-Living-Ecological Space". Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019,39(13):4676-4686.]

数据名称	涉及数据	数据来源	其他
遥感影像数据	横峰县遥感影像	地理空间数据云下载	拍摄时间2019年4月19日,轨道号120/40,Landsat 8 影像,云量<10%
地形数据	坡度、坡向、地形位指数	地理空间数据云下载	数据空间分辨率30 m×30 m,进行预处理、坐标转换等
矢量化数据	土地利用数据、气温、降雨等数据	自然资源局、地理国情监测云平台	在“三调”数据基础上再进行实地调研并修正
地理坐标数据	与教育基础设施距离、与医疗设施距离	百度地图地理坐标器	在ArcGIS中进行矢量上图并做裁剪、位置校准等
社会经济数据	土地生产率	《横峰县统计年鉴》（2019年）^[27]、《江西省统计年鉴》（2019年）^[28]及《上饶市统计年鉴》（2019年）^[29]	根据公式计算

目标层	因素层		指标	因子分级及分值				权重
目标层	因素层		指标	100	80	60	40	权重
生产适宜性	自然气候	多年平均气温/°C		≥21	>18~21	>15~18	≤15	0.0537
	自然气候	多年平均降雨量/mm		≥1800	>1700~1800	>1600~1700	≤1600	0.0351
	地块适宜性	灌溉条件/mm		100	250	400	550	0.0408
		坡度/(°)		<3	3~8	8~15	15~25	0.0432
		坡向		阳坡	半阳坡	半阴坡	阴坡	0.0315
		土地生产率		≥0.41	>0.39~0.41	>0.35~0.39	≤0.35	0.0552
	开发便利度	距道路距离/m		500	1500	3000	5000	0.0302
	开发便利度	距居民点距离/m		500	1500	3000	5000	0.0436
生活适宜性	自然因素	地形位指数		≤0.54	0.54~0.62	0.62~0.72	≥0.72	0.0348
	社会因素	城镇中心的距离/m		500	1500	3000	5000	0.0682
		与教育基础设施的距离/m		500	1500	3000	5000	0.0697
		与医疗设施的距离/m		500	1500	3000	5000	0.0715
		交通便捷度/m		500	1500	3000	5000	0.0891
生态适宜性	自然因素	用地类型		03、04、除1202外的12、除1109外的11	02	01、1202	05、06、 07、08、 09、10、 1109	0.0449
	自然因素	景观破碎度		规则性好	规则性较好	规则性一般	规则性差	0.0612
	环境质量	植被指数		≥0.5	>0.25~0.5	>0.15~0.25	≤0.15	0.0606
	环境质量	生物丰度		≥0.57	>0.35~0.57	>0.25~0.35	≤0.25	0.0512
	区位因素	与建设用地的距离/m		5000	3000	1500	500	0.0709
	区位因素	距水体距离/m		5000	3000	1500	500	0.0445

一级冲突类型区代码	一级冲突类型区	二级冲突类型区代码	二级冲突类型区	“三生”适宜性组合
一级冲突类型区代码	一级冲突类型区	二级冲突类型区代码	二级冲突类型区	生产	生活	生态
S	用地适宜区	S₁	生产适宜区	最适宜	较/一般/不适宜	较/一般/不适宜
			生产适宜区	较适宜	一般/不适宜	一般/不适宜
		S₂	生活适宜区	较/一般/不适宜	最适宜	较/一般/不适宜
		S₂	生活适宜区	一般/不适宜	较适宜	一般/不适宜
		S₃	生态适宜区	较/一般/不适宜	较/一般/不适宜	最适宜
		S₃	生态适宜区	一般/不适宜	一般/不适宜	较适宜
L	冲突激烈区	L₁	生产与生活强烈冲突区	最适宜	最适宜	较/一般/不适宜
		L₂	生产与生态强烈冲突区	最适宜	较/一般/不适宜	最适宜
		L₃	生活与生态强烈冲突区	较/一般/不适宜	最适宜	最适宜
		L₄	“三生”强烈冲突区	最适宜	最适宜	最适宜
Z	冲突中度区	Z₁	生产与生活中度冲突区	较适宜	较适宜	一般/不适宜
		Z₂	生产与生态中度冲突区	较适宜	一般/不适宜	较适宜
		Z₃	生活与生态中度冲突区	一般/不适宜	较适宜	较适宜
		Z₄	“三生”中度冲突区	较适宜	较适宜	较适宜
M	冲突一般区	M₁	生产与生活一般冲突区	一般适宜	一般适宜	不适宜
		M₂	生产与生态一般冲突区	一般适宜	不适宜	一般适宜
		M₃	生活与生态一般冲突区	不适宜	一般适宜	一般适宜
		M₄	“三生”一般冲突区	一般适宜	一般适宜	一般适宜
T	冲突微弱区	T₁	冲突微弱区	不适宜	不适宜	不适宜/一般适宜
				一般适宜	不适宜	不适宜
				不适宜	一般适宜	不适宜

土地利用类型	生产适宜性				生活适宜性				生态适宜性				总计
土地利用类型	不适宜	一般适宜	较适宜	最适宜	不适宜	一般适宜	较适宜	最适宜	不适宜	一般适宜	较适宜	最适宜	总计
1	555.91	850.01	4236.93	6644.48	2161.77	1047.20	4695.15	4383.21	11492.80	337.15	383.94	73.43	12287.33
2	106.88	178.90	522.35	594.06	302.96	147.41	614.90	336.92	31.40	30.44	33.26	1307.09	1402.19
3	16533.78	9870.09	9765.37	5108.70	17515.62	8706.62	10857.55	4198.16	5.52	7577.85	14287.41	19407.16	41277.95
4	38.39	89.29	166.42	178.34	92.69	94.50	169.01	116.24	4.76	236.00	61.08	170.61	472.44
5	6.27	21.57	51.10	29.51	57.90	3.34	6.41	40.79	106.58	1.07	0.74	0.06	108.44
6	113.82	192.28	341.08	270.44	189.01	184.95	341.22	202.45	868.33	19.04	24.58	5.68	917.63
7	57.26	297.63	1102.75	1334.79	415.28	175.05	759.76	1442.34	2636.07	96.36	53.55	6.44	2792.43
8	9.69	43.71	99.34	83.21	14.03	3.62	14.53	203.76	230.83	3.83	1.00	0.29	235.95
9	5.37	11.28	35.16	40.10	13.63	5.83	32.77	39.68	32.42	36.87	18.99	3.64	91.91
10	144.80	213.92	720.23	810.43	373.63	198.23	625.49	692.02	1560.15	150.26	140.92	38.05	1889.38
11	1875.11	73.14	397.35	622.96	707.53	307.48	1098.97	854.59	206.77	742.92	382.45	1636.43	2968.57
12	47.73	187.06	477.50	246.90	135.41	82.20	468.28	273.31	117.38	450.67	83.43	307.70	959.19
总计	19495.01	12028.89	17915.59	15963.93	21979.46	10956.44	19684.04	12783.48	17293.01	9682.47	15471.35	22956.58	65403.41

二级冲突类型	面积/hm²	比例/%	二级冲突类型	面积/hm²	比例/%
S	41871.31	64.02	S₁	12667.02	19.37
			S₂	8876.06	13.57
			S₃	20328.23	31.08
L	6315.39	9.66	L₁	5785.25	8.85
			L₂	251.52	0.38
			L₃	266.03	0.41
			L₄	12.60	0.02
Z	11243.57	17.19	Z₁	4377.93	6.69
			Z₂	1979.36	3.03
			Z₃	2278.32	3.48
			Z₄	2607.96	3.99
M	1082.94	1.66	M₁	407.44	0.62
			M₂	161.07	0.25
			M₃	351.88	0.54
			M₄	162.55	0.25
T	4890.20	7.48	T	4890.20	7.48