游憩导向下国土空间生态修复的理论与模式

doi:10.31497/zrzyxb.20210802

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

游憩导向下国土空间生态修复是将受损生态空间保护与休闲空间融合的重要手段,是构建山水林田湖草命运共同体与提高人类福祉的重要内容。基于国内外研究现状,界定了游憩导向下国土空间生态修复的概念,提出其应遵循生态系统服务理论、人地关系地域系统理论、区位理论、景观基因理论、大地艺术理论五大理论逻辑。基于实践案例归纳了游憩导向下生态修复模式类型、特征与问题,并提出实践模式的五大优化路径,包括明确功能适宜、效益最优的修复导向,建立多级空间尺度联动的传导机制,提升游憩导向下生态修复地的地方嵌入性,加强修复效果的动态监测评估,构建可持续的建设与运营管理模式,以期为游憩导向下国土空间生态修复和保护提供理论和实践参考。

关键词: 游憩导向, 国土空间生态修复, 理论支撑, 实践模式, 优化路径

Abstract:

Recreation oriented ecological restoration (ROER) of national territorial space is an important mean of integrating the protection of damaged ecological space with human leisure function. It is also an important content in building a life community of common destiny of mountains, rivers, forests, farmlands, lakes and grasslands, and improving human well-being. Based on the present research at home and abroad, this paper defined the concept of ROER of geographical space, and pointed out that this kind of ecological restoration should follow the guidance of five theories: ecosystem services theory, man-land relationship areal system theory, location theory, landscape gene theory and earth art theory. Based on practical cases, we summarized the types, characteristics and problems of ROER of land space. Then, we put forward five optimization paths for the practice patterns to identify the restoration orientation with appropriate functions and optimal benefits, to establish a multi-level space scale of transmission mechanism, to promote the local embeddedness of ROER, to strengthen the dynamic monitoring and evaluation of the restoration effects, and to build a sustainable construction and operation management mode, which can provide theoretical and practical references for the ROER and protection of national territorial space.

Key words: recreation orientation, ecological restoration of national territorial space, theoretical support, practice mode, optimization path

郑鑫, 王甫园, 王开泳. 游憩导向下国土空间生态修复的理论与模式[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(8): 1923-1936.

ZHENG Xin, WANG Fu-yuan, WANG Kai-yong. Study on the theory and model of recreation oriented ecological restoration of national territorial space[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2021, 36(8): 1923-1936.

图/表 6

图1

图2

表1

按尺度划分的修复模式示例及启示

尺度	尺度举例	案例地	修复背景及修复要点	生态修复模式	修复效果	修复启示
宏观	青藏高原、云贵高原、长江流域、黄河流域、珠江流域、城市群等	三北防护林工程^[42]	涵盖我国三北地区（西北、华北和东北）13个省（自治区、直辖市）,建设总面积占国土面积的42.4%。以“政府主导、群众主体、部门协作、社会参与”的建设机制,协同推进生态治理与民生改善	地域整体生态功能（如防风固沙、水源涵养、土壤保持等）修复型	从1978—2018年,累计完成的造林面积达 4614万hm²,有效缓解风沙危害和水土流失问题;通过发展特色林果业、森林旅游经济,累计接待游客3.8亿人,吸纳农村劳动力3.13亿人,对群众稳定脱贫贡献率达27%	重视地域整体生态功能修复,结合旅游景观的营造配置生态游憩空间,以生态促发展,实现生态效益与社会经济效益的统一
中观	地级市、县市区	北京门头沟区^[43]	北京市重要产煤区,煤炭开采导致河床干涸、植被破坏严重。2004年起开展综合生态修复工程,将全区81%的区域划定为生态保护红线范围,开展河道污染、面源污染等多方面同步治理	城市生态网络修复利用型	成功修复46个废弃矿山,修复面积达 0.1万hm²。2017年起,将区域内永定河修复为5750 m²的亲水绿地公园	顺应城市生态系统,充分挖掘区域景观文化基因,修复与构建生态游憩网络,促进城市文化系统与生态系统耦合协调
微观	乡镇街道、工业废弃地、生态破坏地	威海华夏城^[44,45]	威海龙山区域曾是大型露天采石场,含 44处矿坑。2003年启动生态修复,采取政府、企业等多资本融合的治理模式,秉持多元文化融合的修复理念	文化旅游场地导向型修复	国家5A级景区。2017年接待游客200.2万人次,收入达1.9亿元。通过旅游经济带动周边13个村集体经济收入年均增长14.8%	把握场地的时空背景进行精细化修复,通过游憩导向下生态空间赋予场地文化符号,增进人类对修复空间的认同感和归属感

表1

图3

表2

按被破坏地类型划分的案例模式示例及启示

被破坏地类型	案例地	修复背景及修复要点	生态修复模式	修复效果	修复启示
煤矿塌陷地	徐州潘安湖^[47]	曾拥有高达250处煤矿、生态赤字严重。2010年起将生态与居民休闲游憩融合,对塌陷地进行生态修复和综合整治	“塌陷地就势利用+城市湿地公园开发”修复模式	国家4A级湿地公园,带动徐州上百个采煤塌陷区生态修复治理工程实施	顺应塌陷地地形,就势改造成湖泊景观,并推进场地景观化和休闲化,实现湿地保持及游憩的复合功能
废弃采石场	上海辰山矿坑花园^[48]	20世纪50年代初至80年代中期,大规模采石导致辰山山体破坏严重,产生多处巨大矿坑。2000年起,保留受损地貌并结合中国山水画的意境,采用后工业景观设计进行生态整治与修复	“景观设计+文化展示”修复模式	融合自然景观与采石文化的“修复式花园”,成为上海辰山植物园中的著名景点	提炼废弃工业厂址景观文化基因,进行功能和景观再造,赋予休闲活动与科普教育的新意义
受污染土壤	武汉市金口垃圾填埋场^[49]	长期治理的不规范严重威胁居民生活环境,2005年关闭封场。2013年启动生态修复,采用规范封场技术和好氧修复技术,在1~3年内完成厌氧降解（自然降解周期要50~100年）	“技术修复+城市节庆活动空间开发”修复模式	修复后成为武汉园博会国际园的荆山景区	重点攻关修复技术以修复受污染环境,在此基础上再将其开辟为城市公共空间或休闲空间
石油泄漏地区	美国西雅图煤气厂公园^[50,51]	1906—1956年被用作提炼汽油的主要工厂。1972年开始生态修复,修复土壤、栽种植被等还原生态系统健康,保留工业建筑元素并进行景观功能再造	“土壤修复+工业遗产旅游开发”修复模式	兼具自然、艺术与工业特色的都市滨水景观公园	优先修复土壤结构和功能,促进工业遗产的游憩利用
荒废河道	北京市东城区前门三里河^[52]	曾是老北京城护城河重要的泄水河道,后被填埋荒废。2016年启动生态修复工程,保留河道周边百年大杂院和植被,按河道原有肌理和流向改造还原	“水系修复+滨河休闲空间开发”修复模式	融合流域修复与居民传统文化,再现“水穿街巷、庭院人家”景观	恢复河道自然肌理,活化岸线,连接居民生活空间
沙化地	银川鸣翠湖国家湿地公园^[53]	曾是万亩荒沙盐碱泽地,1999年起,通过补充水源、封育治理、恢复植被等进行生态修复	“水源涵养+生态旅游发展”修复模式	国家4A级景区,黄河流域、西部地区首家国家湿地公园,中国最美的六大湿地公园之一	防治沙化地水土流失,提升水源涵养功能,植入生态解说与环境教育功能

表2

表3

参考文献 59

[1]	方莹, 王静, 黄隆杨, 等. 基于生态安全格局的国土空间生态保护修复关键区域诊断与识别: 以烟台市为例. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(1): 190-203.
	[FANG Y, WANG J, HUANG L Y, et al. Determining and identifying key areas of ecosystem preservation and restoration for territorial spatial planning based on ecological security patterns: A case study of Yantai city. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020, 35(1): 190-203.]
[2]	彭建, 吕丹娜, 董建权, 等. 过程耦合与空间集成: 国土空间生态修复的景观生态学认知. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(1): 3-13.
	[PENG J, LYU D N, DONG J Q, et al. Processes coupling and spatial integration: Characterizing ecological restoration of territorial space in view of landscape ecology. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020, 35(1): 3-13.]
[3]	王晓玉, 冯喆, 吴克宁, 等. 基于生态安全格局的山水林田湖草生态保护与修复. 生态学报, 2019, 39(23): 8725-8732.
	[WANG X Y, FENG Z, WU K N, et al. Ecological conservation and restoration of life community theory based on the construction of ecological security pattern. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(23): 8725-8732.]
[4]	王军, 应凌霄, 钟莉娜. 新时代国土整治与生态修复转型思考. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(1): 26-36.
	[WANG J, YING L X, ZHONG L N. Thinking for the transformation of land consolidation and ecological restoration in the New Era. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020, 35(1): 26-36.]
[5]	王甫园, 王开泳. 城市化地区生态空间可持续利用的科学内涵. 地理研究, 2018, 37(10): 1899-1914. doi: 10.11821/dlyj201810002
	[WANG F Y, WANG K Y. The scientific connotation of sustainable utilization of ecological space in urbanized areas. Geographical Research, 2018, 37(10): 1899-1914.]
[6]	SMYTH P, MISHRA V, QIAN X L. The environment and well-being in urban China. Ecological Economics, 2008, 68(1-2): 547-555. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.05.017
[7]	王欣, 陈明明, 张斌. 绍兴东湖造园历史及园林艺术研究. 中国园林, 2013, 29(3): 109-114.
	[WANG X, CHEN M M, ZHANG B. Shaoxing East Lake garden history and garden art research. Chinese Garden, 2013, 29(3): 109-114.]
[8]	刘滨谊, 张亭. 矿山旅游发展规划的思考与实践. 旅游论坛, 2008, 1(2): 200-206.
	[LIU B Y, ZHANG T. Thinking and practice of mine tourism development planning. Tourism Forum, 2008, 1(2): 200-206.]
[9]	SCHAICH H, BIELING C, PLIENINGER T. Linking ecosystems services with cultural landscape research. Gaia-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 2010, 19(4): 269-277. doi: 10.14512/gaia.19.4.9
[10]	DANIEL T C, MUHAR A, ARNBERGER A, et al. Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2012, 109(23): 8812-8819.
[11]	LOURES L, PANAGOPOULOS T. Sustainable reclamation of industrial areas in urban landscapes. Sustainable Development and Planning Iii, Vols 1 and 2, 2007, 102: 791-800.
[12]	DE S C. The greening of urban post-industrial landscapes: Past practices and emerging trends. Local Environment, 2007, 19(10): 1049-1067. doi: 10.1080/13549839.2014.886560
[13]	KEELER B L, WOOD S A, POLASKY S, et al. Recreational demand for clean water: Evidence from geotagged photographs by visitors to lakes. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2015, 13: 76-81. doi: 10.1890/140124
[14]	PUEYO R J, GARCIA X, RIBAS A, et al. Ecological restoration of a coastal wetland at a mass tourism destination. Will the recreational value increase or decrease?. Ecological Economics, 2018, 148: 1-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.02.002
[15]	ALLAN J D, SMITH S D, MCINTYRE P B, et al. Using cultural ecosystem services to inform restoration priorities in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2015, 13(8): 418-424. doi: 10.1890/140328
[16]	WILLIS C. The contribution of cultural ecosystem services to understanding the tourism-nature-wellbeing nexus. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 2015, 10: 38-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jort.2015.06.002
[17]	BUNNELL D B, BARBIERO R P, LUDSIN S A, et al. Changing ecosystem dynamics in the Laurentian Great Lakes: Bottom-up and top-down regulation. BioScience, 2014, 64(1): 26-39. doi: 10.1093/biosci/bit001
[18]	LOURES L, PANAGOPOULOS T, BURLEY J B. Assessing user preferences on post-industrial redevelopment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2016, 43(5): 871-892. doi: 10.1177/0265813515599981
[19]	陈可石, 刘轩宇. 基于生态修复的城市滨河区景观改造研究. 生态经济, 2014, 30(7): 188-192.
	[CHEN K S, LIU X Y. Study on the landscape reconstruction of urban riverside based on Ecological Restoration. Ecological Economy, 2014, 30(7): 188-192.]
[20]	苟翡翠, 周燕. 近郊型河流景观的生态修复: 以德国德莱萨姆河为例. 中国园林, 2018, 34(8): 33-38.
	[GOU F C, ZHOU Y. Ecological restoration of suburban river landscape: A case study of Delessam River in Germany. Chinese Garden, 2018, 34(8): 33-38.]
[21]	王煜琴, 王霖琳, 李晓静, 等. 废弃矿区生态旅游开发与空间重构研究. 地理科学进展, 2010, 29(7): 811-817.
	[WANG Y Q, WANG L L, LI X J, et al. Research on the development and spatial reconstruction of ecotourism in abandoned mining areas. Progress in Geography, 2010, 29(7): 811-817.]
[22]	冯萤雪, 史芳, 曹颖. 矿业棕地公园生态安全格局建构与评价分析. 哈尔滨工业大学学报, 2017, 49(10): 177-181.
	[FENG Y X, SHI F, CAO Y. Construction and evaluation of the ecological security pattern of mining brownfield park. Journal of Harbin University of Technology, 2017, 49(10): 177-181.]
[23]	钱一武. 北京市门头沟区生态修复综合效益价值评估研究. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2011.
	[QIAN Y W. A study on the evaluation of comprehensive benefits of ecological restoration in Mentougou district of Beijing. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2011.]
[24]	程琳琳, 刘昙昙, 杨丽铃, 等. 产业转型背景下的矿业废弃地开发利用模式和战略: 以北京市门头沟区为例. 中国矿业, 2018, 27(7): 70-74, 80.
	[CHEN L L, LIU T T, YANG L L, et al. Mining wasteland development and utilization mode and strategy in the context of industrial transformation: Taking Mentougou district of Beijing as an example. China Mining, 2018, 27(7): 70-74, 80.]
[25]	周聪惠, 应博华, 冒宇飞, 等. 垃圾填埋场再生游憩地“后修复”阶段管控体系研究. 规划师, 2018, 34(11): 113-120.
	[ZHOU C H, YING B H, MAO Y F, et al. Study on the management and control system of "post restoration" stage of landfill regeneration and recreation area. Planner, 2018, 34(11): 113-120.]
[26]	张朝枝, 曹静茵, 罗意林. 旅游还是游憩? 我国国家公园的公众利用表述方式反思. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(9): 1797-1806.
	[ZHANG C Z, CAO J Y, LUO Y L. Tourism or recreation? Reflection on the expression of public use in China's national parks. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019, 34(9): 1797-1806.]
[27]	吴鹏. 论生态修复的基本内涵及其制度完善. 东北大学学报: 社会科学版, 2016, 18(6): 628-632.
	[WU P. On the basic connotation and system improvement of ecological restoration. Journal of Northeast University: Social Sciences Editio, 2016, 18(6): 628-632.]
[28]	赵婧. 统筹山水林田湖草一体化保护修复. 中国自然资源报, 2020-06-12.
	[ZHAO J. Integrated conservation and restoration of landscape, forest, field, lake and grass. China Natural Resources News, 2020-06-12.]
[29]	Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well--being: Synthesis. Washington D C: Island Press, 2005.
[30]	谢高地, 鲁春霞, 冷允法, 等. 青藏高原生态资产的价值评估. 自然资源学报, 2003, 18(2): 189-196.
	[XIE G D, LU C X, LENG Y F, et al. Valuation of ecological assets in the Qinghai Tibet Plateau. Journal of Natural Resources, 2003, 18(2): 189-196.]
[31]	DAILY G C. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Washington D C: Island Press, 1997.
[32]	戴尔阜, 王晓莉, 朱建佳, 等. 生态系统服务权衡/协同研究进展与趋势展望. 地球科学进展, 2015, 30(11): 1250-1259.
	[DAI E F, WANG X L, ZHU J J, et al. Progress and perspective on ecosystem services trade-offs. Advances in Earth Science, 2015, 30(11): 1250-1259.]
[33]	SANDIFER P A, SUTTON-GRIER A E, WARD B P. Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation. Ecosystem Services, 2015, 12: 1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.12.007
[34]	吴传钧. 人地关系与经济布局: 吴传钧文集. 北京: 学苑出版社, 2008.
	[WU C J. Man-earth Relationship and Economic Allocation: Collections of Wu Chuanjun. Beijing: Xueyuan Press, 2008.]
[35]	樊杰. “人地关系地域系统”是综合研究地理格局形成与演变规律的理论基石. 地理学报, 2018, 73(4): 597-607. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201804001
	[FAN J. "Territorial System of Human-environment Interaction": A theoretical cornerstone for comprehensive research on formation and evolution of the geographical pattern. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(4): 597-607.]
[36]	袁华斌, 岑国璋. 经济地理学. 成都: 电子科技大学出版社, 2017: 8.
	[YUAN H B, CEN G Z. Economic Geography. Chengdu: University of Electronic Science and Technology Press, 2017: 8.]
[37]	周春山, 高军波. 转型期中国城市公共服务设施供给模式及其形成机制研究. 地理科学, 2011, 31(3): 272-279.
	[ZHOU C S, GAO J B. Provision pattern of Chinese urban public service facilities and its formation mechanism during transitional period. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2011, 31(3): 272-279.]
[38]	范水生. 休闲农场区位选择与评价模型的构建研究. 福建农林大学学报: 哲学社会科学版, 2008, 11(5): 54-58.
	[FAN S S. Set-up of the model of location choosing and evaluation for leisure farms. Journal of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University: Philosophy and Social Sciences, 2008, 11(5): 54-58.]
[39]	刘沛林. 古村落文化景观的基因表达与景观识别. 衡阳师范学院学报: 社会科学, 2003, (4): 1-8.
	[LIU P L. Gene expression and landscape recognition of ancient village cultural landscape. Journal of Hengyang Normal University: Social Science, 2003, (4): 1-8.]
[40]	曹帅强, 邓运员. 基于景观基因“地域机制”的客家文化保护与传承开发: 以湖南省炎陵县为例. 地域研究与开发, 2017, 36(4): 164-170.
	[CAO S Q, DENG Y Y. The protection and inheritance of Hakka culture based on the "regional mechanism" of landscape gene: Taking Yanling county of Hunan province as an example. Areal Research and Development, 2017, 36(4): 164-170.]
[41]	徐琳. 大地艺术及其对景观设计的影响. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2009.
	[XU L. Earth art and its influence on landscape design. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2009.]
[42]	李如意. 三北防护林历时40年, 京津冀沙尘暴降至每年0.1天. 北京日报, 2018-12-24.
	[LI R Y. In the past 40 years, sandstorms in Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei decreased to 0.1 day per year. Beijing Daily, 2018-12-24.]
[43]	门头沟修复生态环境, 守好首都建设发展的第一道生态屏障. 门头沟为民服务中心, 2018-06-14.
	[Mentougou will restore the ecological environment and guard the first ecological barrier for the construction and development of the capital. Mentougou Service Center for the people, 2018-06-14.]
[44]	王德刚. 旅游是文化传承生态保护的重要载体. 中国旅游报, 2018-06-18(003).
	[WANG D G. Tourism is an important carrier of cultural heritage and ecological protection. China Tourism News, 2018-06-18(003).]
[45]	中华人民共和国文化和旅游部. 殷殷嘱托牢记心头全域旅游再上层楼, 2018-06-20.
	[Ministry of Culture And Tourism of the People's Republic of China. Global travel entrust to remember my heart talk again, 2018-06-20.]
[46]	彭少麟. 恢复生态学. 北京: 气象出版社, 2007, 10: 1.
	[PENG S L. Restoration Ecology. Beijing: Meteorological Press, 2007, 10: 1.]
[47]	杨瑞东. 城市发展转型下的徐州采煤塌陷区整治与生态修复. 山西建筑, 2019, 45(9): 193-195.
	[YANG R D. Renovation and ecological restoration of coal mining subsidence area in Xuzhou under the transformation of urban development. Shanxi Architecture, 2019, 45(9): 193-195.]
[48]	朱育帆, 孟凡玉. 矿坑花园. 园林, 2010, (5): 28-31.
	[ZHU Y F, MENG F Y. Mine garden. Garden, 2010, (5): 28-31.]
[49]	曹丽, 陈娜, 胡朝辉, 等. 垃圾填埋场: 世界最大的生态修复案例: 以武汉市金口垃圾填埋场为例. 城市管理与科技, 2016, 18(3): 24-27.
	[CAO L, CHEN N, HU C H, et al. Landfill: The largest case of ecological restoration in the world: Taking Jinkou landfill in Wuhan as an example. Urban Management and Technology, 2016, 18(3): 24-27.]
[50]	ALEXANDER G G, ALLAN J D. Ecological success in stream restoration: Case studies from the midwestern united states. Environment Management, 2007, 40(2): 245-255.
[51]	朱怡晨, 李振宇. 西雅图煤气厂公园: 从滨水工业遗址到都市景观公园. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/vc7qMlqWfpijjTukjX1R_w, 2016-12-12.
	[ZHU Y C, LI Z Y. Seattle gas works park: From waterfront industrial sites to urban landscape park. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/vc7qMlqWfpijjTukjX1R_w, 2016-12-12.]
[52]	北京: 修复前门三里河再现河道历史景观. 中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部, 2017-06-14.
	[Beijing: Restoration of Sanli River in Qianmen to reappear the historical landscape of the river. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People's Republic of China, 2017-06-14.]
[53]	蒲波. 艺术如何修复生态织补城市. 中国艺术报, 2015-10-30(S01).
	[PU B. How art can repair the ecological city. China Art Daily, 2015-10-30(S01).]
[54]	戴培超, 张绍良, 刘润, 等. 生态系统文化服务研究进展: 基于web of science分析. 生态学报, 2019, 39(5): 1863-1875.
	[DAI P C, ZHANG S L, LIU R, et al. Research progress of ecosystem cultural services based on web of science. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(5): 1863-1875.]
[55]	关军洪, 郝培尧, 董丽, 等. 矿山废弃地生态修复研究进展. 生态科学, 2017, 36(2): 193-200.
	[GUAN J H, HAO P Y, DONG L, et al. Research progress in ecological restoration of mine wasteland. Ecological Science, 2017, 36(2): 193-200.]
[56]	宋晶. 德国鲁尔区城市产业遗存地再开发的考察与启示. 上海: 同济大学, 2007.
	[SONG J. Investigation and enlightenment on the redevelopment of urban industrial remains in Ruhr district, Germany. Shanghai: Tongji University, 2007.]
[57]	刘法英, 顾慈阳. 生态修复的问题和对策. 环境保护与循环经济, 2012, (11): 21-23.
	[LIU F Y, GU C Y. Problems and countermeasures of ecological restoration. Environmental Protection and Circular Economy, 2012, (11): 21-23.]
[58]	万柏林西山地区华丽蜕变成“网红”生态文化旅游带. 山西晚报, 2019-06-11.
	[The west mountain area of Wanbailin has been transformed into an ecological and cultural tourism belt of " online celebrity". Shanxi Evening News, 2019-06-11.]
[59]	汪芳, 蒋春燕, 卫然. 文化景观安全格局:概念和框架. 地理研究, 2017, 36(10): 20-28.
	[WANG F, JIANG C Y, WEI R. Cultural landscape security pattern: Concept and structure. Geographical Research, 2017, 36(10): 20-28.]

空间类型	空间特征	修复模式
城市内部型	位于城市内部,所在的城市城镇化水平较高,居民日常休闲需求大,如城市内部受污染地块、荒废沟渠等	开辟自然与人文相结合的生态游憩空间,如城市公园、滨河休闲廊道等
市场驱动型	一般位于大都市郊区,邻近客源市场,或邻近交通枢纽、快速交通干线,可达性较好,如大都市边缘区工业废弃地、采煤塌陷地等	结合修复地所在城市的客源市场需求,建设城郊型生态休闲空间,如郊野公园、旅游景区等
资源依托型	修复地周边自然或人文旅游资源较丰富,品位较高,辐射带动效应明显,如5A级旅游景区内部或周边生态空间的修复	充分利用现有景区的辐射带动能力,建设与周边游憩资源主题和功能互补的生态游憩空间
环境适应型	修复地地表生态环境改变较大,原貌恢复难度大,治理成本高,如采煤塌陷地、废弃矿坑等	顺应修复地的地表形态展开修复,结合区域人口游憩需求打造湿地公园、矿山公园等
产业带动型	以农林牧副渔产业为修复目标,可实施“产业+休闲”的多功能修复模式,如采煤塌陷地、沙化地、受污染海岛等	修复后推进区域产业与旅游业融合,如发展休闲农业、休闲渔业等