黄河几字湾地区可持续发展的动态演变及区域差异

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000–6060.2021.179

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

我国黄河几字湾地区资源环境保护与经济发展矛盾日益突出,人地关系日趋紧张,亟需寻求一条可持续发展道路。基于2009—2019年黄河几字湾地区20个市（县）的面板数据,通过构建可持续发展评价指标体系,运用熵权法、Kernel密度估计和Dagum基尼系数等方法,对黄河几字湾地区可持续发展的动态演变特征和区域差异进行研究。结果表明：（1）时间上可持续发展水平呈波动上升趋势;经济实力、社会民生、生态环境、创新驱动和对外开放5个维度的得分年均分别增长0.72%、1.90%、0.87%、-0.10%、-1.42%。（2）空间上呈现出“北高南低”的分布格局;45.00%的城市可持续发展水平有所提高,整体上呈良性演变态势。（3）总体基尼系数呈“下降-上升-下降”波动的下降趋势,区域差异有缩小趋势;区域间差异是总体差异的主要来源。

关键词: 可持续发展, 动态演变, 区域差异, Dagum基尼系数, 黄河几字湾地区

Abstract:

In Jiziwan (n-shape bent) region of the Yellow River in China, the contradiction between resource and environmental protection and economic development has become more prominent. The human-land relationship has also become more tense, requiring a sustainable development road. Mastering the status quo of its sustainable development level is the foundation of the region’s sustainable development. Therefore, this paper constructed an evaluation index system for sustainable development to scientifically measure its sustainable development level. Aiming at the geographical advantages of Jiziwan of the Yellow River, we incorporated innovation and opening to the outside world into the sustainable development index system, besides the following dimensions: economic strength, society and people’s livelihood, and ecological environment. Based on panel data from 2009 to 2019 of the 20 cities in Jiziwan of the Yellow River, we employed the entropy method to estimate the sustainable development level. On this basis, we used the Kernel density estimation method and GIS technology to reveal the temporal and spatial evolution features. Additionally, we employed the Dagum Gini coefficient method to analyze regional differences. The results are as follows. (1) The sustainable development level of Jiziwan of the Yellow River shows a fluctuating upward trend from 2009 to 2019. The region’s average comprehensive level score increases from 0.405 to 0.419. However, the sustainable development level of the 20 cities is generally low, with an average comprehensive level score of 0.428. Additionally, the average annual score increase of the five dimensions: economic strength, society and people’s livelihood, ecological environment, innovation, and opening to the outside world, are 0.72%、1.90%、0.87%、-0.10%、-1.42%, respectively. (2) The spatial distribution of the sustainable development level is not balanced and shows the distribution features of “high value in the northern area and low value in the southern area”. Specifically, cities with higher comprehensive level scores are mainly located in Inner Mongolia, such as Ordos and Baotou City. Conversely, cities with lower-level scores are mainly located in the Gansu Province, Shanxi Province, and Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region. From the evolution perspective, the sustainable development level of 45.00% of the cities has improved, and the overall trend is in a healthy evolution. (3) From the regional difference perspective, the average value of the overall Gini coefficient decreases from 0.139 in 2009 to 0.118 in 2019 and shows a downward trend of “decline-up-decline” fluctuations. This shows that the regional differences in Jiziwan of the Yellow River are shrinking. Meanwhile, the inter-regional differences account for a large proportion of the overall differences, indicating obvious reverse symmetry with intra-regional differences. The results of the study can provide policy suggestions for the sustainable development of Jiziwan of the Yellow River and further advance the coordinated development of the Yellow River Basin.

Key words: sustainable development, dynamic evolution, regional differences, Dagum Gini coefficient, Jiziwan of the Yellow River

李玲蔚,白永平,杨雪荻,张春悦,梁建设,王倩. 黄河几字湾地区可持续发展的动态演变及区域差异[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(2): 639-649.

LI Lingwei,BAI Yongping,YANG Xuedi,ZHANG Chunyue,LIANG Jianshe,WANG Qian. Dynamic evolution and regional differences of sustainable development in Jiziwan of the Yellow River[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(2): 639-649.

图/表 8

图1

表1

表2

2009—2019年黄河几字湾地区可持续发展综合水平得分"

地区	2009年	2010年	2011年	2012年	2013年	2014年	2015年	2016年	2017年	2018年	2019年	平均值
大同市	0.357	0.346	0.379	0.378	0.401	0.413	0.396	0.387	0.441	0.376	0.397	0.388
朔州市	0.407	0.392	0.437	0.401	0.426	0.421	0.350	0.386	0.392	0.335	0.348	0.390
忻州市	0.306	0.390	0.359	0.319	0.339	0.327	0.298	0.323	0.340	0.326	0.288	0.329
临汾市	0.358	0.373	0.414	0.374	0.379	0.373	0.328	0.368	0.366	0.349	0.371	0.368
吕梁市	0.339	0.418	0.393	0.352	0.434	0.316	0.315	0.341	0.378	0.347	0.366	0.364
呼和浩特市	0.513	0.408	0.539	0.488	0.563	0.534	0.508	0.542	0.548	0.493	0.480	0.511
包头市	0.587	0.509	0.554	0.564	0.581	0.580	0.588	0.601	0.536	0.504	0.501	0.555
乌海市	0.399	0.387	0.459	0.465	0.495	0.492	0.470	0.490	0.446	0.448	0.461	0.456
鄂尔多斯市	0.628	0.572	0.683	0.686	0.702	0.625	0.590	0.621	0.584	0.584	0.556	0.621
巴彦淖尔市	0.346	0.393	0.405	0.400	0.438	0.487	0.518	0.492	0.436	0.414	0.460	0.435
二连浩特市	0.446	0.366	0.478	0.513	0.558	0.552	0.577	0.585	0.534	0.507	0.531	0.513
阿拉善左旗	0.569	0.498	0.553	0.524	0.561	0.571	0.587	0.560	0.589	0.600	0.591	0.564
延安市	0.414	0.345	0.355	0.373	0.411	0.411	0.409	0.430	0.442	0.388	0.367	0.395
榆林市	0.363	0.411	0.409	0.461	0.477	0.482	0.439	0.481	0.492	0.460	0.447	0.447
白银市	0.240	0.222	0.269	0.288	0.324	0.327	0.328	0.340	0.330	0.351	0.340	0.305
庆阳市	0.326	0.180	0.289	0.347	0.409	0.365	0.343	0.346	0.293	0.332	0.315	0.322
银川市	0.482	0.441	0.508	0.503	0.566	0.571	0.549	0.539	0.557	0.483	0.478	0.516
石嘴山市	0.387	0.359	0.414	0.389	0.473	0.425	0.432	0.432	0.422	0.406	0.390	0.412
吴忠市	0.363	0.313	0.339	0.351	0.385	0.380	0.359	0.362	0.377	0.358	0.374	0.360
中卫市	0.265	0.196	0.302	0.287	0.381	0.336	0.347	0.340	0.347	0.330	0.311	0.313
平均值	0.405	0.376	0.427	0.423	0.465	0.449	0.436	0.448	0.442	0.420	0.419	0.428

表2

图2

表3

图3

图4

图5

参考文献 37

[1]	朱婧, 孙新章, 何正. SDGs框架下中国可持续发展评价指标研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2018, 28(12):9-18.
	[ Zhu Jing, Sun Xinzhang, He Zheng. Research on China’s sustainable development evaluation indicators in the framework of SDGs[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2018, 28(12):9-18. ]
[2]	Yu Y, Pi Y Y, Yu X, et al. Climate change, water resources and sustainable development in the arid and semi-arid lands of Central Asia in the past 30 years[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2019, 11(1):1-14. doi: 10.1007/s40333-018-0073-3
[3]	郭淑芬, 马宇红. 资源型区域可持续发展能力测度研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2017, 27(7):72-79.
	[ Guo Shufen, Ma Yuhong. Comprehensive evaluation for sustainable development capacity of resource-based region[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2017, 27(7):72-79. ]
[4]	陆大道, 樊杰. 区域可持续发展研究的兴起与作用[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2012, 27(3):290-300.
	[ Lu Dadao, Fan Jie. The rise and effects of regional sustainable development studies in China[J]. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2012, 27(3):290-300. ]
[5]	李恒吉, 曲建升, 庞家幸, 等. 甘肃省人口-经济-社会-资源-环境系统耦合协调及可持续发展时空综合测度研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(6):1622-1634.
	[ Li Hengji, Qu Jiansheng, Pang Jiaxing, et al. Spatial-temporal synthetic measurement of coupling coordination and sustainable development of population-economy-society-resource-environment system in Gansu Province[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(6):1622-1634. ]
[6]	何爱红, 王亦龙, 向党, 等. 基于生态足迹的宁夏回族自治区可持续发展评价[J]. 干旱区地理, 2013, 36(5):906-912.
	[ He Aihong, Wang Yilong, Xiang Dang, et al. Sustainable development evaluation based on ecological footprint: A case study of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2013, 36(5):906-912. ]
[7]	Jing Z R, Wang J M. Sustainable development evaluation of the society-economy-environment in a resource-based city of China: A complex network approach[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 263(22):121510, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121510. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121510
[8]	Song Y C, Wang H, Yan Y, et al. Sustainable development evaluation of the Baotou water resource based on entropy method[J]. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2015, 737:723-727. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.737
[9]	Chang Y, Dong S. Evaluation of sustainable development of resources-based cities in Shanxi Province based on unascertained measure[J]. Sustainability, 2016, 8(6):585-602. doi: 10.3390/su8060585
[10]	鹿晨昱, 张琳, 薛冰, 等. 辽宁省区域可持续发展时空综合测度研究[J]. 经济地理, 2015, 35(8):32-39.
	[ Lu Chenyu, Zhang Lin, Xue Bing, et al. Space-time synthetic measurement of regional sustainable development in Liaoning Province[J]. Economic Geography, 2015, 35(8):32-39. ]
[11]	Wei J F, Ding Z W, Meng Y W, et al. Regional sustainable assessment at city level based on CSDIS (China sustainable development indicator system) concept in the new era, China[J]. Chinese Geographical Science, 2020, 30(6):976-992. doi: 10.1007/s11769-020-1158-4
[12]	陆大道, 孙东琪. 黄河流域的综合治理与可持续发展[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(12):2431-2436. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201912001
	[ Lu Dadao, Sun Dongqi. Development and management tasks of the Yellow River Basin: A preliminary understanding and suggestion[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019, 74(12):2431-2436. ] doi: 10.11821/dlxb201912001
[13]	汪芳, 安黎哲, 党安荣, 等. 黄河流域人地耦合与可持续人居环境[J]. 地理研究, 2020, 39(8):1707-1724. doi: 10.11821/dlyj020200217
	[ Wang Fang, An Lizhe, Dang Anrong, et al. Human-land coupling and sustainable human settlements in the Yellow River Basin[J]. Geographical Research, 2020, 39(8):1707-1724. ] doi: 10.11821/dlyj020200217
[14]	崔盼盼, 赵媛, 夏四友, 等. 黄河流域生态环境与高质量发展测度及时空耦合特征[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(5):49-57.
	[ Cui Panpan, Zhao Yuan, Xia Siyou, et al. Level measures and temporal and spatial coupling analysis of ecological environment and high quality development in the Yellow River Basin[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(5):49-57. ]
[15]	马海涛, 徐楦钫. 黄河流域城市群高质量发展评估与空间格局分异[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(4):11-18.
	[ Ma Haitao, Xu Xuanfang. High-quality development assessment and spatial heterogeneity of urban agglomeration in the Yellow River Basin[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(4):11-18. ]
[16]	刘琳轲, 梁流涛, 高攀, 等. 黄河流域生态保护与高质量发展的耦合关系及交互响应[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(1):176-195.
	[ Liu Linke, Liang Liutao, Gao Pan, et al. Coupling relationship and interactive response between ecological protection and high-quality development in the Yellow River Basin[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2021, 36(1):176-195. ]
[17]	任保平, 杜宇翔. 黄河流域经济增长-产业发展-生态环境的耦合协同关系[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2021, 31(2):119-129.
	[ Ren Baoping, Du Yuxiang. Coupling coordination of economic growth, industrial development and ecology in the Yellow River Basin[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2021, 31(2):119-129. ]
[18]	刘传明, 马青山. 黄河流域高质量发展的空间关联网络及驱动因素[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(10):91-99.
	[ Liu Chuanming, Ma Qingshan. Spatial association network and driving factors of high quality development in the Yellow River Basin[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(10):91-99. ]
[19]	李小建, 文玉钊, 李元征, 等. 黄河流域高质量发展: 人地协调与空间协调[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(4):1-10.
	[ Li Xiaojian, Wen Yuzhao, Li Yuanzheng, et al. High-quality development of the Yellow River Basin from a perspective of economic geography: Man-land and spatial coordination[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(4):1-10. ]
[20]	杨永春, 张旭东, 穆焱杰, 等. 黄河上游生态保护与高质量发展的基本逻辑及关键对策[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(6):9-20.
	[ Yang Yongchun, Zhang Xudong, Mu Yanjie, et al. The basic logic and core strategies of ecological protection and high-quality development in the upper reaches of the Yellow River[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(6):9-20. ]
[21]	于法稳, 方兰. 黄河流域生态保护和高质量发展的若干问题[J]. 中国软科学, 2020(6):85-95.
	[ Yu Fawen, Fang Lan. Issues regarding the ecological protection and high-quality development of Yellow River Basin[J]. China Soft Science, 2020(6):85-95. ]
[22]	安树伟, 张双悦. 黄河“几”字弯区域高质量发展研究[J]. 山西大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2021, 44(2):134-144.
	[ An Shuwei, Zhang Shuangyue. On the high-quality development of the bend area of the Yellow River[J]. Journal of Shanxi University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition ), 2021, 44(2):134-144. ]
[23]	韩文文, 刘小鹏, 裴银宝, 等. 基于生态足迹的宁夏生态环境可持续发展研究[J]. 水土保持研究, 2016, 23(5):285-290.
	[ Han Wenwen, Liu Xiaopeng, Pei Yinbao, et al. Study on ecological environment sustainable development in Ningxia based on theory of ecological footprint[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 23(5):285-290. ]
[24]	刘家旗, 茹少峰. 基于生态足迹理论的黄河流域可持续发展研究[J]. 改革, 2020, 319(9):139-148.
	[ Liu Jiaqi, Ru Shaofeng. Sustainability evaluation based on ecological footprints theory in Yellow River Basin[J]. Reform, 2020, 319(9):139-148. ]
[25]	姚喜军, 吴全, 靳晓雯, 等. 内蒙古土地资源利用现状评述与可持续利用对策研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2018, 32(9):76-83.
	[ Yao Xijun, Wu Quan, Jin Xiaowen, et al. The current situation of land resource utilization in Inner Mongolia and its sustainable utilization measures[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2018, 32(9):76-83. ]
[26]	彭程, 陈志芬, 吴华瑞, 等. 基于ESDA的城市可持续发展能力时空分异格局研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016, 26(2):144-151.
	[ Peng Cheng, Chen Zhifen, Wu Huarui, et al. Spatial-temporal differentiation of urban sustainable development in China based on ESDA[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2016, 26(2):144-151. ]
[27]	徐辉, 师诺, 武玲玲, 等. 黄河流域高质量发展水平测度及其时空演变[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(1):115-126.
	[ Xu Hui, Shi Nuo, Wu Lingling, et al. High-quality development level and its spatiotemporal changes in the Yellow River Basin[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(1):115-126. ]
[28]	胡正塬. 第四极——中国黄河几字湾战略经济区[M]. 北京: 中共中央党校出版社, 2013: 3.
	[ Hu Zhengyuan. The fourth growth pole: The Yellow River strategic economic zone along the Ji shaped bend of China[M]. Beijing: Central Party School Press, 2013: 3. ]
[29]	邵超峰, 陈思含, 高俊丽, 等. 基于SDGs的中国可持续发展评价指标体系设计[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2021, 31(4):1-12.
	[ Shao Chaofeng, Chen Sihan, Gao Junli, et al. Design of China’s sustainable development evaluation index system based on the SDGs[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2021, 31(4):1-12. ]
[30]	汪涛, 张家明, 刘炳胜. 国家可持续发展议程创新示范区评价指标体系研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2020, 30(12):17-26.
	[ Wang Tao, Zhang Jiaming, Liu Bingsheng. Evaluation index system of national innovation demonstration zones for the 2030 agenda for sustainable development[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2020, 30(12):17-26. ]
[31]	汪涛, 张家明, 禹湘, 等. 资源型城市的可持续发展路径——以太原市创建国家可持续发展议程示范区为例[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2021, 31(3):24-32.
	[ Wang Tao, Zhang Jiaming, Yu Xiang, et al. Sustainable development pathway of resource-based cities: A case study of Taiyuan innovation demonstration zone for national sustainable development agenda[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2021, 31(3):24-32. ]
[32]	谭俊涛, 张新林, 刘雷, 等. 中国资源型城市转型绩效测度与评价[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(7):57-64.
	[ Tan Juntao, Zhang Xinlin, Liu Lei, et al. Research on the urban transformation performance of China’s resource-based cities[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(7):57-64. ]
[33]	张文彬, 李国平. 中国区域经济增长及可持续性研究——基于脱钩指数分析[J]. 经济地理, 2015, 35(11):8-14.
	[ Zhang Wenbin, Li Guoping. Study on the regional economic growth and its sustainability in China: Analyses based on the decoupling index[J]. Economic Geography, 2015, 35(11):8-14. ]
[34]	Yang Z, Yang H, Wang H. Evaluating urban sustainability under different development pathways: A case study of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2020, 61(10):102226, doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102226. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102226
[35]	Petkovová L, Hartman D, Pavelka T. Problems of aggregation of sustainable development indicators at the regional level[J]. Sustainability, 2020, 12(17):1-20. doi: 10.3390/su12010001
[36]	孙才志, 童艳丽, 刘文新. 中国绿色化发展水平测度及动态演化规律[J]. 经济地理, 2017, 37(2):15-22.
	[ Sun Caizhi, Tong Yanli, Liu Wenxin. Measurement of green development level and its dynamic evolution rule in China[J]. Economic Geography, 2017, 37(2):15-22. ]
[37]	汪侠, 徐晓红. 长江经济带经济高质量发展的时空演变与区域差距[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(3):5-15.
	[ Wang Xia, Xu Xiaohong. Spatial-temporal evolution and regional disparity of economic high-quality development in the Yangtze River Economic Belt[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(3):5-15. ]

一级指标	二级指标	指标属性	权重
经济实力	国内生产总值（GDP）增速/%	+	0.035
	人均GDP/元	+	0.033
	人均社会消费品零售额/元	+	0.033
	规模以上工业增加值增速/%	+	0.036
	一般公共预算收入占GDP比重/%	+	0.035
	第二产业占GDP比重/%	+	0.036
	第三产业占GDP比重/% 重工业产值比重/% 劳动生产率/元·人^-1	+ + +	0.035 0.036 0.032
社会民生	常住人口城镇化率/%	+	0.035
	城乡居民人均可支配收入比	–	0.035
	恩格尔系数/%	–	0.035
	城乡居民人均消费性支出/元	+	0.034
	城镇登记失业率/%	–	0.035
	人均教育财政支出/元每千人医疗机构床位/张	+ +	0.035 0.034
生态环境	水资源总量/10⁸ m³	+	0.033
	建成区绿化覆盖率/%	+	0.035
	污水处理率/%	+	0.036
	生活垃圾无害化处理率/%	+	0.036
	空气质量优良天数比/%	+	0.036
	单位GDP能耗/吨标准煤·（10⁴元）^-1 工业固体废物综合利用率/%	– +	0.036 0.036
创新驱动	研究与试验发展（R&D）人员占从业人员比重/%	+	0.033
	每万人专利授权量/件	+	0.034
	科学技术支出/10⁴元	+	0.034
对外开放	当年新签项目个数/个	+	0.031
	外商直接投资占GDP比重/%	+	0.033
	贸易依存度/%	+	0.033

年份	总体区域差异	区域间差异	区域内差异	超变密度	贡献率/%
年份	总体区域差异	区域间差异	区域内差异	超变密度	区域间差异	区域内差异	超变密度
2009	0.139	0.098	0.024	0.017	70.46	17.56	11.98
2010	0.136	0.101	0.021	0.014	74.02	15.35	10.63
2011	0.131	0.097	0.020	0.015	73.86	15.00	11.14
2012	0.127	0.095	0.020	0.012	74.68	15.76	9.56
2013	0.112	0.085	0.017	0.010	75.49	15.36	9.15
2014	0.121	0.096	0.015	0.010	79.35	12.44	8.21
2015	0.131	0.110	0.014	0.007	84.11	10.30	5.59
2016	0.123	0.104	0.013	0.005	84.77	10.78	4.45
2017	0.114	0.089	0.015	0.010	78.07	13.41	8.52
2018	0.110	0.089	0.015	0.006	81.25	13.57	5.18
2019	0.118	0.096	0.014	0.007	81.80	12.24	5.96