可持续发展评估的新方法：“甜甜圈”理论的中国案例分析

doi:10.31497/zrzyxb.20220205

自然资源学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (2): 334-347.doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20220205

• 新时期自然资源利用与管理 • 上一篇下一篇

可持续发展评估的新方法：“甜甜圈”理论的中国案例分析

邵庆龙¹(), 李默²^,³, 康鹏⁴, 郭海男¹()

1. 深圳大学管理学院,深圳 518060
2. 香港中文大学（深圳）人文社科学院,深圳 518172
3. 新南威尔士大学土木与环境工程学院,悉尼 NSW2052
4. 中南林业科技大学生命科学与技术学院,南方林业生态应用技术国家工程实验室,长沙 410004

收稿日期:2020-12-01 修回日期:2021-04-12 出版日期:2022-02-28 发布日期:2022-02-16
通讯作者: 郭海男（1988- ）,女,辽宁大连人,博士,助理教授,研究方向为服务运作管理、流程优化与决策分析等。E-mail: guohn403@126.com
作者简介:邵庆龙（1989- ）,男,广东深圳人,博士,副研究员,研究方向为可持续发展评价、海洋经济与管理等。E-mail: shao.qinglong@foxmail.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(71903131);国家自然科学基金项目(71701132);广东省自然科学基金项目(2021A1515010987)

New approach of sustainability evaluation: A Chinese case study of the "Doughnut Theory"

SHAO Qing-long¹(), LI Mo²^,³, KANG Peng⁴, GUO Hai-nan¹()

1. College of Management, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, Guangdong, China
2. School of Humanities and Social Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Shenzhen 518172, Guangdong, China
3. School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
4. Faculty of Life Science and Technology, National Engineering Laboratory for Applied Technology of Forestry & Ecology in South China, Central South University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha 410004, China;

Received:2020-12-01 Revised:2021-04-12 Online:2022-02-28 Published:2022-02-16

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

“甜甜圈”理论是行星边界可持续发展评估体系中不可或缺的一部分。在原有的15个社会经济系统评估维度的基础上,针对不同研究样本概括了每个维度对应的具体指标,并总结了指标阈值设定的方法,包括惯例的延续、经验的借鉴以及典型样本的参考等。在此基础上,利用统计年鉴和中国综合社会调查（CGSS）数据,创新性地将“十二五”规划文件中相关指标的预期值设定为阈值,揭示了中国在收入水平和工作机会方面已达到最优状态,贫困问题得到了一定程度的解决,但水资源和能耗方面表现不佳;中国南部地区“自西向东”可持续发展程度越来越高,中国北部则是“自北往南”。社会经济系统需要在内容的丰富、理论的深化和阈值的客观设定等方面进一步完善。

关键词: 行星边界, “甜甜圈”理论;, 社会经济系统, 阈值, 安全操作空间, 案例分析

Abstract:

The socio-economic sphere is an indispensable part of Planetary Boundary (PB) sustainability evaluation system. In this context, this article makes a comprehensive review of theoretical and empirical literature regarding the existing socio-economic sphere. First, an evaluation has been made for a total of 15 socio-economic sphere dimensions proposed by the "Doughnut Theory". Second, based on the different types of research samples in terms of industrial, national, and cross-country aspects, we illustrated and analyzed one or more specific indicators corresponding to each dimension. Finally, we summarize the indicator threshold setting methods, including the continuation of conventions, the reference of experiences and the reference of typical samples. On the basis of summarizing and evaluating previous research results, this article takes 30 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities in China as samples for the first time, using statistical yearbooks and the Chinese General Social Survey (CGSS) data to compare the corresponding indicators in the "Twelfth Five-Year Plan" (2011-2015) official document as the threshold, so that the sustainability status of China's socio-economic sphere under the PB framework has been evaluated. The results show that China has reached the optimal state in terms of income level and job opportunities, and the poverty problem has been partially alleviated, but the performance of water resources and energy consumption is not good. In terms of the improvement of sustainability level, Southern China shows a trend of "from west to east", while Northern China presents a trend of "from north to south". The socio-economic sphere needs to be further improved in terms of content enrichment, theoretical deepening, and objective setting of thresholds.

Key words: Planetary Boundary (PB), "Doughnut Theory", socio-economic sphere, threshold, safe operating space, case study

邵庆龙, 李默, 康鹏, 郭海男. 可持续发展评估的新方法：“甜甜圈”理论的中国案例分析[J]. 自然资源学报, 2022, 37(2): 334-347.

SHAO Qing-long, LI Mo, KANG Peng, GUO Hai-nan. New approach of sustainability evaluation: A Chinese case study of the "Doughnut Theory"[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2022, 37(2): 334-347.

图/表 6

图1

表1

表2

表3

图2

图3

参考文献 51

[1]	吴大放, 胡悦, 刘艳艳, 等. 城市开发强度与资源环境承载力协调分析: 以珠三角为例. 自然资源学报, 2020,35(1):82-94.
	[ WU D F, HU Y, LIU Y Y, et al. Empirical study on the coupling coordination between development intensity and resources-and-environment carrying capacity of core cities in Pearl River Delta. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020,35(1):82-94.]
[2]	毕明丽, 谢高地, 姚翠友. 人类可持续发展指数的改进及国际比较. 自然资源学报, 2020,35(5):1017-1029.
	[ BI M L, XIE G D, YAO C Y. Improvement of human sustainable development index and international comparison. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020,35(5):1017-1029.]
[3]	FAO. Millennium Development Goals. URL:http://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/mdg/goal-1/en/(accessed 17.01.21.
[4]	UNDP. Sustainable Development Goals. URL: https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html(accessed 17.01.21).
[5]	NASH K L, CVITANOVIC C, FULTON E A, et al. Planetary boundaries for a blue planet. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 2017,1:1625-1634.
[6]	ENGSTRÖ G, GARS J, KRISHNAMURTHY C, et al. Carbon pricing and planetary boundaries. Nature Communications, 2020,11:1-11.
[7]	LADE S J, STEFFEN W, DE VRIES W, et al. Human impacts on planetary boundaries amplified by earth system interactions. Nature Sustainability, 2020,3:119-128.
[8]	陈先鹏, 方恺, 彭建, 等. 资源环境承载力评估新视角: 行星边界框架的源起、发展与展望. 自然资源学报, 2020,35(3):513-531.
	[ CHEN X P, FANG K, PENG J, et al. New insights into assessing the carrying capacity of resources and the environment: The origin, development and prospects of the planetary boundaries' framework. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020,35(3):513-531.]
[9]	张军泽, 王帅, 赵文武, 等. 地球界限概念框架及其研究进展. 地理科学进展, 2019,38(4):465-476.
	[ ZHANG J Z, WANG S, ZHAO W W, et al. Review on the conceptual framework of planetary boundaries and the development of its research. Progress in Geography, 2019,38(4):465-476.]
[10]	诸大建. 在“行星边界”内追求可持续发展目标的实现. 可持续发展经济导刊, 2019, (7):53-56.
	[ ZHU D J. Pursue sustainable development goals within planetary boundaries. China Sustainability Tribune, 2019, (7):53-56.]
[11]	诸大建. 用国际可持续发展研究的新成果和通用语言解读生态文明. 中国环境管理, 2019, (3):5-12.
	[ ZHU D J. Explaining eco-civilization from the frontier research and international perspective of sustainable development. Chinese Journal of Environmental Management, 2019, (3):5-12.]
[12]	方恺. 基于足迹家族和行星边界的主要国家环境可持续性多维评价. 生态环境学报, 2014,23(11):1868-1875.
	[ FANG K. Multidimensional assessment of national environmental sustainability based on footprint family and planetary boundaries. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2014,23(11):1868-1875.]
[13]	ROCKSTRÖM J, STEFFEN W, NOONE K, et al. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 2009,461(7263):472-475.
[14]	STEFFEN W, RICHARDSON K, ROCKSTRÖM J, et al. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 2015,347(6223):1-10.
[15]	BAUM S D, HANDOH I C. Integrating the planetary boundaries and global catastrophic risk paradigms. Ecological Economics, 2014,107:13-21.
[16]	FANG K, HEIJUNGS R, SNOO G R D. Understanding the complementary linkages between environmental footprints and planetary boundaries in a footprint-boundary environmental sustainability assessment framework. Ecological Economics, 2015,114:218-226.
[17]	MACE G M, REYERS B, ALKEMADE R, et al. Approaches to defining a planetary boundary for biodiversity. Global Environmental Change, 2014,28:289-297.
[18]	LEWIS S L. We must set planetary boundaries wisely. Nature, 2012, 485: 417, https://www.nature.com/articles/485417a#citeas.
[19]	ASARA V, OTERO L, DEMARIA F, et al. Socially sustainable degrowth as a social-ecological transformation: Repoliticizing sustainability. Sustainability Science, 2015,10:375-384.
[20]	RAWORTH K. A safe and just space for humanity: Can we live within the doughnut?. Oxfam Discussion Papers, 2012, Doi: 10.5822/978-1-61091-458-1_3.
[21]	RAWORTH K. Doughnut economics: Severn ways to think like a 21st-Century economist. London: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2017: 320.
[22]	BERGH V D, JEROEN C J M. Environment versus growth: A criticism of "degrowth" and a plea for "a-growth". Ecological Economics, 2011,70(5):881-890.
[23]	SEKULOVA F, KALLIS G, RODRIGUEZ-LABAJOS B, et al. Degrowth: From theory to practice. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2013,38:1-6.
[24]	邵庆龙. 无增长的繁荣: 基于蒂姆·杰克逊思想的评述. 经济资料译丛, 2018, (2):92-97.
	[ SHAO Q L. Prosperity without growth: Comments for Tim Jackson's theories. Journal of Translation from Foreign Literature of Economics, 2018, (2):92-97.]
[25]	HOORNWEG D, HOSSEINI M, KENNEDY C, et al. An urban approach to planetary boundaries. Ambio, 2016,45:567-580.
[26]	O'NEILL D W, FANNING A W, LAMB W F, et al. A good life for all within planetary boundaries. Nature Sustainability, 2018,1:89-95.
[27]	DEARING J A, WANG R, ZHANG K, et al. Safe and just operating spaces for regional social-ecological systems. Global Environmental Change, 2014,28:227-238.
[28]	COLE M J, BAILEY R M, NEW M G. Tracking sustainable development with a national barometer for South Africa using a downscaled "safe and just space" framework. PNAS, 2014: E4399-E4408, Doi: 10.1073/pnas.1400985111.
[29]	国家统计局. 2016. 2016年中国统计年鉴,http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2016/indexch.htm.
	[ NBS. China Statistical Yearbook 2016,http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2016/indexch.htm.]
[30]	中国人民大学中国调查与数据中心. 中国综合社会调查, http://cgss.ruc.edu.cn/(accessed 22.11.20.
	[ National Survey Research Center. Chinese General Social Survey, http://cgss.ruc.edu.cn/(accessed 22.11.20).]
[31]	ONS. Personal well-being in the UK: 2015 to 2016, Office for National Statistics. London, 2016.
[32]	CHEN J. Subjective motivations for mass political participation in urban China. Social Science Quarterly, 2000,81:645-662.
[33]	郑磊, 朱志勇. 教育是否促进了中国公民的政治选举投票参与: 来自CGSS2006调查数据的证据. 北京大学教育评论, 2013,11(2):165-185.
	[ ZHENG L, ZHU Z Y. Does education promote Chinese citizens' political election voting? Evidence from CGSS2006 survey data. Peking University Education Review, 2013,11(2):165-185.]
[34]	WB. World Development Indicators Database. 2020, http://data.worldbank.org/news/new-country-classifications (accessed 11.10.20.
[35]	MO H. Engel's coefficient at wealthy level in China: Official. China News Service, 2017-10-10, http://www.ecns.cn/cns-wire/2017/10-10/276477.shtml.
[36]	罗翔, 李崇明, 万庆, 等. 贫困的“物以类聚”: 中国的农村空间贫困陷阱及其识别. 自然资源学报, 2020,35(10):2460-2472.
	[ LUO X, LI C M, WAN Q, et al. "Birds of a feather flock together": China's rural spatial poverty trap and its identification. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020,35(10):2460-2472.]
[37]	李小云, 徐进. 消除贫困:中国扶贫新实践的社会学研究. 社会学研究, 2020,35(6):20-43.
	[ LI X Y, XU J. Eradicating absolute poverty: A sociological study of China's new practice of poverty alleviation. Sociological Studies, 2020,36(6):20-43.]
[38]	许可. 外交部:中国对世界减贫贡献率超过70%. 新华社, 2020-10-20, http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2020-10/20/content_5552568.htm(accessed 13.11.20.
	[ XU K. Foreign Ministry: China has contributed more than 70% of the world's poverty reduction. Xinhua News Agency, 2020-10-20,http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2020-10/20/content_5552568.htm(accessed 13.11.20).]
[39]	和音. 为加速全球减贫进程贡献智慧和力量. 人民日报, 2020-12-16, 第003版,http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2020-12/16/content_5569717.htm.
	[ HE Y. To contribute wisdom and strength to accelerating the global poverty eradication process. The People's Daily, 2020-12-16, version 003, http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2020-12/16/content_5569717.htm.]
[40]	张扬, 秦川申. 基本养老保险与居民主观幸福感: 基于广义精确匹配方法 (CEM) 的实证研究. 实证社会科学, 2020,7(1):40-56.
	[ ZHANG Y, QIN C S. Basic pension insurance and residents' subjective well-being: An empirical study based on Coarsened Exact Matching. Social Science Research, 2020,7(1):40-56.]
[41]	蒲晓红, 赵海堂. 基本养老保险对居民幸福感的影响及其机制研究. 社会保障研究, 2020, (3):24-33.
	[ PU X H, ZHAO H T. Study on the influence of basic pension insurance on happiness and its mechanism. Social Security Studies, 2020, (3):24-33.]
[42]	施美程. 天津人口增长变化特征及其影响研究. 城市, 2019, (11):45-53.
	[ SHI M C. Study on the variation characteristics and influence of population growth in Tianjin. City, 2019, (11):45-53.]
[43]	广东省统计局. 2020. 2020广东统计年鉴,http://stats.gd.gov.cn/gdtjnj/content/post_3098041.html.
	[ GSB. Guangdong Statistical Yearbook 2020, http://stats.gd.gov.cn/gdtjnj/content/post_3098041.html.]
[44]	海南省统计局. 2020. 2020海南统计年鉴,http://stats.hainan.gov.cn/tjj/tjsu/ndsj/.
	[ HSB. Hainan Statistical Yearbook 2020, http://stats.hainan.gov.cn/tjj/tjsu/ndsj/.]
[45]	秦德君. 上海治理70年: 从民主建政到“卓越的全球城市”: 上海超大型城市基层治理进程与线路. 上海行政学院学报, 2020,21(5):41-50.
	[ QIN D J. The 70 years of Shanghai governance: From democratic government construction to "Prominent Global Metropolis": The process and path of grassroots governance of megacity like Shanghai. The Journal of Shanghai Administration Institute, 2020,21(5):41-50.]
[46]	易成栋, 任建宇, 高璇. 房价、住房不平等与居民幸福感: 基于中国综合社会调查2005年、2015年数据的实证研究. 中央财经大学学报, 2020, (6):105-117.
	[ YI C D, REN J Y, GAO X. Housing price, housing inequality and residents' happiness: An empirical research based on CGSS data in 2005 and 2015. Journal of Central University of Finance & Economics, 2020, (6):105-117.]
[47]	陈惠雄. 通往幸福之路: 全面建成小康社会的结构逻辑与公共政策涵义. 财经论丛, 2021, (4):106-112.
	[ CHEN H X. The road to happiness: The structural logic and public policy implications of building a well-off society in an all-round way. Collected Essays on Finance and Economics, 2021, (4):106-112.]
[48]	GLEESON T, WANG-ERLANDSSON L, ZIPPER S C. The water planetary boundary: Interrogation and revision. One Earth, 2020,2:223-234.
[49]	STOKNES P E, ROCKSTRÖM J. Redefining green growth within planetary boundaries. Energy Research & Social Science, 2018,44:41-49.
[50]	LI M, WIEDMANN T, HADJIKAKOU M. Towards meaningful consumption-based planetary boundary indicators: The phosphorus exceedance footprint. Global Environmental Change, 2019,54:227-238.
[51]	HACHAICHI M, BAOUNI T. Downscaling the planetary boundaries (Pbs) framework to city scale-level: De-risking MENA region's environment future. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 2020,5:1-13.

作者	社会经济系统维度
作者	水资源	收入	教育	恢复力	发言权	工作机会	能耗	社会公正	性别平等	健康	食品	幸福感	社会参与	流动与联通	公共安全
Raworth^[20]	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
Dearing等^[27]	√	√	√			√	√			√	√
Cole等^[28]	√	√	√		√	√	√	√		√	√				√
Hoornweg等^[25]		√	√			√	√	√	√	√				√	√
O'Neill等^[26]		√	√		√	√	√	√		√	√	√	√

指标	阈值的设定	文献来源
水资源	100%家庭在200 m范围内可以用到自来水	Cole等^[28]
收入	国家贫困线（每人每月577兰特）以上的人口占比	Cole等^[28]
收入	95%的人口每天收入高于1.90美元	O'Neill等^[26]
教育	拥有7年以上教育经历的成人（20岁以上）	Cole等^[28]
教育	95%的适龄人口初中入学率	O'Neill等^[26]
发言权	0.8以上	O'Neill等^[26]
工作机会	15~64岁成人就业率	Cole等^[28]
	年轻人失业率低于12.8%	Hoornweg等^[25]
	失业率低于6%	Hoornweg等^[25] O'Neill等^[26]
能耗	100%的家庭可以用到电	Cole等^[28]
	能源强度低于8.9	Hoornweg等^[25]
	95%的人口可以用到电	O'Neill等^[26]
社会公正	100%家庭有产权房或电冰箱	Cole等^[28]
	基尼系数在0.2以下;居住在贫民窟的人口占比在18%以内	Hoornweg等^[25]
	基尼系数在0.3以下	O'Neill等^[26]
性别平等	女性入学率在95%以上	Hoornweg等^[25]
健康	1岁以下婴儿的疫苗接种率;100%家庭有马桶或通风坑厕	Cole等^[28]
	5岁以下婴儿死亡率低于17%	Hoornweg等^[25]
	人均预期寿命65岁以上;95%的人口可获得优质的医疗设备和条件	O'Neill等^[26]
食品	100%家庭拥有充足食物	Cole等^[28]
食品	每人每天2700 cal以上	O'Neill等^[26]
幸福感	坎特里尔阶梯表（0~10之间）6.5以上	O'Neill等^[26]
社会参与	90%以上的人口可以获得家人和朋友的支持	O'Neill等^[26]
流动与联通	人均家庭汽车拥有量高于0.2;人均每天乘载公共交通的次数高于0.35;使用互联网的人口比例高于50%;每十万人中交通事故死亡人数低于8.6	Hoornweg等^[25]
公共安全	晚上在家附近散步时的安全感程度	Cole等^[28]
公共安全	每十万人中火灾死亡人数低于0.5;每十万人中凶杀案死亡人数低于3.05	Hoornweg等^[25]

社会经济指标	单位	指标选取标准	阈值	数据来源
幸福感	%	问题A36：“总的来说,您觉得您的生活是否幸福?” 将选择“比较幸福”和“非常幸福”的受访者比例作为幸福标准	各省/自治区/直辖市70% 以上人口占比	CGSS2015
发言权	%	问题A44：“上次居委会选举/村委会选举,您是否参加了投票?” 将回答“是”的受访者比率作为拥有发言权的标准	49.6%以上的居民参与过上次的居委会或村委会选举
社会参与	%	问题A61：“您目前是否参加了城市/农村基本养老保险?” 将回答“参加了”的受访者比例作为社会参与标准	59%以上的居民参与养老保险
健康	%	参与基本医疗险的人口比率,即基本医疗险覆盖人口除以城镇总人口的值	80%以上的城镇基本医疗保险参与率	2016年中国统计年鉴
性别平等	—	女性人口除以男性人口的值	0.9346以上的比率（女性/男性）
工作机会	%	各省、自治区和直辖市的2015年就业率	95%以上的城镇登记就业率
收入	$	2015年的日人均可支配收入	100%的人口每天收入超过1.90美元
社会公正	%	1-1/2（农村恩格尔系数+城市恩格尔系数）	70%以上（恩格尔系数低于0.30）
教育	‱	每万人专利数,即专利总数除以当地人口数	3.3（每万人发明专利数）
能耗	%	燃气普及率	94%以上的城镇燃气普及率
水资源	%	城镇用水普及率	95%以上的城镇用水普及率

可持续发展评估的新方法：“甜甜圈”理论的中国案例分析

New approach of sustainability evaluation: A Chinese case study of the "Doughnut Theory"

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 51

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	陈先鹏, 方恺, 彭建, 刘爱原. 资源环境承载力评估新视角:行星边界框架的源起、发展与展望[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(3): 513-531.
[2]	马伟东, 刘峰贵, 周强, 陈琼, 刘飞, 陈永萍. 1961—2017年青藏高原极端降水特征分析[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(12): 3039-3050.
[3]	胡银根, 余依云, 王聪, 吴欣. 基于成本收益理论的宅基地自愿有偿退出有效阈值——以改革试点区宜城市为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(6): 1317-1330.
[4]	张军泽, 陈锡云, 岳辉, 冯冲. 不同恢复模式下红壤区森林植被盖度变化的阈值效应分析[J]. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(11): 2403-2414.
[5]	冯浩源, 石培基, 周文霞, 陈佳银, 张学斌. 水资源管理“三条红线”约束下的城镇化水平阈值分析——以张掖市为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2018, 33(2): 287-301.
[6]	李斌, 陈午, 许新宜, 王红瑞, 韩冬梅. 基于生态功能的水资源三级区水资源开发利用率研究[J]. 自然资源学报, 2016, 31(11): 1918-1925.
[7]	杜继丰, 袁中友. 基于耕地多功能需求的巨型城市区耕地保护阈值探讨——以珠江三角洲为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2015, 30(8): 1255-1266.
[8]	高永年, 鲍桂叶, 王静, 严长清, 金志丰, 杨兴典, 黄琪. 江苏沿海地区可承载城乡建设用地能力及匹配性评价[J]. 自然资源学报, 2015, 30(8): 1278-1288.
[9]	何月, 樊高峰, 张小伟, 李正泉, 高大伟. 浙江省植被物候变化及其对气候变化的响应[J]. 自然资源学报, 2013, 28(2): 220-233.
[10]	戴靓, 陈东湘, 吴绍华, 李如海, 周生路, 陈逸, 黄贤金. 水资源约束下江苏省城镇开发安全预警[J]. 自然资源学报, 2012, 27(12): 2039-2047.
[11]	王西琴, 张远. 中国七大河流水资源开发利用率阈值[J]. 自然资源学报, 2008, 23(3): 500-506.
[12]	马其芳, 黄贤金, 于术桐, 陈逸. 物质代谢研究进展综述[J]. 自然资源学报, 2007, 22(1): 141-152.
[13]	李纪宏, 刘雪华. 基于最小费用距离模型的自然保护区功能分区[J]. 自然资源学报, 2006, 21(2): 217-224.
[14]	陈百明, 周小萍. 全国及区域性人均耕地阈值的探讨[J]. 自然资源学报, 2002, 17(5): 622-628.
[15]	陈百明, 张凤荣. 中国土地可持续利用指标体系的理论与方法[J]. 自然资源学报, 2001, 16(3): 197-203.