生态安全视角下乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突时空格局演变分析

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000－6060.2023.263

干旱区地理 ›› 2024, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (1): 81-92.doi: 10.12118/j.issn.1000－6060.2023.263

生态安全视角下乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突时空格局演变分析

彭娅¹(),王娟娟²,王珊珊³,田柳兰¹,刘婕^1,⁴,毋兆鹏^1,⁴()

1.新疆师范大学地理科学与旅游学院，新疆乌鲁木齐 830054
2.昌吉回族自治州自然资源局，新疆昌吉 831100
3.新疆艺术学院附属中等艺术学校，新疆乌鲁木齐 830054
4.新疆干旱区湖泊环境与资源实验室，新疆乌鲁木齐 830054

收稿日期:2023-06-06 修回日期:2023-07-22 出版日期:2024-01-25 发布日期:2024-01-26
通讯作者: 毋兆鹏（1976-），男，博士，教授，主要从事3S技术与绿洲资源开发研究. E-mail: wuzhaopengxj@sina.com
作者简介:彭娅（1998-），女，硕士研究生，主要从事空间信息分析与应用研究. E-mail: 107622022210582@stu.xjnu.edu.cn
基金资助:
新疆维吾尔自治区高校科研基金项目(XJEDU2021I021);国家自然科学基金项目(41761113)

Spatiotemporal pattern evolution of land use conflict in Urumqi City from the perspective of ecological security

PENG Ya¹(),WANG Juanjuan²,WANG Shanshan³,TIAN Liulan¹,LIU Jie^1,⁴,WU Zhaopeng^1,⁴()

1. School of Geographical Sciences and Tourism, Xinjiang Normal University, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang, China
2. Bureau of Natural Resources, Changji Hui Autonomous Prefecture, Changji 831100, Xinjiang, China
3. Secondary Art School Affiliated with Xinjiang Art Institute, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang, China
4. Laboratory of Lake Environment and Resources in Arid Regions of Xinjiang, Urumqi 830054, Xinjiang, China

Received:2023-06-06 Revised:2023-07-22 Online:2024-01-25 Published:2024-01-26

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

从生态安全角度识别区域土地利用冲突，处理好城市发展和土地利用的协调关系，对实现区域可持续发展尤为重要。在土地利用冲突理论分析框架和“压力-状态-响应”（PSR）模型下，借助生态系统服务价值和生态风险评价因子构建了一个土地利用冲突测度模型，对2000、2010年和2020年乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突的时空演变格局分析方法，并且利用FLUS模型对2030年土地利用冲突变化进行模拟预测。结果表明：（1） 2000—2020年，乌鲁木齐市73%以上的面积是无冲突和轻度冲突区域。土地利用冲突的热点区由乌鲁木齐中心城区北部及西南地区蔓延至其南部及北部的山区林地周边、达坂城区盐湖两边的冲积扇附近，分布范围有所扩大；冷点区主要聚集于中心城区周边以及东、南部的山区林地范围内。（2）气候、地形地貌等自然因素仍是土地利用冲突强度空间分异的主导因素。（3）生态系统服务价值与土地利用冲突之间存在空间正相关，而生态风险与土地利用冲突之间则存在显著的空间负相关关系。（4） 2030年，虽然乌鲁木齐市的土地利用高度冲突区增幅最大，但无冲突、轻度冲突区仍居于优势地位。研究结果为乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突提供了一个诊断指标体系和方法，这对于深度了解乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突时空演变特征以及冲突机理提供了例证和科学支撑。

关键词: 土地利用冲突, 生态系统服务价值, 生态风险, FLUS模型, 乌鲁木齐市

Abstract:

It is crucial to identify regional land use conflicts from the perspective of ecological security and effectively manage the coordination between urban development and land use. This study develops a land use conflict measurement model within the theoretical analysis framework of land use conflict and the pressure-state-response model, incorporating ecosystem service value and ecological risk evaluation factors. The spatiotemporal evolution patterns of land use conflict in Urumqi City, Xinjiang, China, for 2000, 2010, and 2020 are analyzed. Furthermore, the future land use simulation model is employed to simulate and predict changes in land use conflict by 2030. The results indicate the following: (1) From 2000 to 2020, more than 73% of Urumqi’s area was conflict-free or mildly conflicted. During this period, hotspots of land use conflicts expanded from the northern and southwestern areas of Urumqi City to mountainous woodlands in the northern and southern regions, as well as near alluvial fans on both sides of Dabancheng District’s salt lake. The cold spot areas were primarily concentrated in the central urban region and within the mountainous woodland areas in the eastern and southern parts. (2) Natural factors such as climate, topography, and geomorphology remain the predominant drivers of spatial variations in land use conflict intensity. (3) A positive spatial correlation exists between the value of ecosystem services and land use conflict, whereas a significant negative spatial correlation exists between ecological risk and land use conflict. (4) In 2030, despite the substantial increase in Urumqi’s land use zones with a high conflict rate, areas characterized by minimal or no conflicts continue to maintain their dominant position. This study provides a diagnostic index system and methodology for analyzing the Urumqi land use conflict, and serves as an example and offers scientific support for an in-depth understanding of the spatiotemporal evolution characteristics and conflict mechanism of the Urumqi land use conflict.

Key words: land use conflict, ecosystem service value, ecological risk, FLUS model, Urumqi City

彭娅, 王娟娟, 王珊珊, 田柳兰, 刘婕, 毋兆鹏. 生态安全视角下乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突时空格局演变分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2024, 47(1): 81-92.

PENG Ya, WANG Juanjuan, WANG Shanshan, TIAN Liulan, LIU Jie, WU Zhaopeng. Spatiotemporal pattern evolution of land use conflict in Urumqi City from the perspective of ecological security[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2024, 47(1): 81-92.

图/表 15

图1

图2

图3

图4

表1

表2

图5

图6

图7

表3

图8

图9

图10

图11

图12

参考文献 38

[1]	Zhao S D, Zhang Y M. Ecosystems and human well-being: The achievements, contributions and prospects of the millennium ecosystem assessment[J]. Advances in Earth Science, 2006, 21(9): 895-902.
[2]	Pacheco F. Sustainable use of soils and water: The role of environmental land use conflicts[J]. Sustainability, 2020, 12(3): 1163, doi: 10.3390/su12031163
[3]	Fmpm A, Tm B. From conflict to conflicts: War-induced displacement, land conflicts, and agricultural productivity in post-war northern Uganda[J]. Land Use Policy, 2020, 101: 105149, doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105149.
[4]	Owens P L. Conflict as a social interaction process in environment and behaviour research: The example of leisure and recreation research[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1985, 5(3): 243-259. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(85)80025-6
[5]	Jiang S, Meng J, Zhu L. Spatial and temporal analyses of potential land use conflict under the constraints of water resources in the middle reaches of the Heihe River[J]. Land Use Policy, 2020, 97: 104-773.
[6]	Cendrero A. Land-use problems, planning and management in the coastal zone: An introduction[J]. Ocean & Shoreline Management, 1989, 12(5-6): 367-381.
[7]	Groot D. Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multi-functional landscapes[J]. Landscape Urban Plan, 2006, 75(3-4): 175-186. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.02.016
[8]	Tudor C A, Iojă I C, Pǎtru-Stupariu I, et al. How successful is the resolution of land-use conflicts? A comparison of cases from Switzerland and Romania[J]. Applied Geography, 2014, 47(1): 125-136. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.12.008
[9]	Ruth S D F, Jonathan A F, Gregory P A. Land-use choices: Balancing human needs and ecosystem function[J]. The Ecological Society of America, 2004, 2(5): 249-257.
[10]	于伯华, 吕昌河. 土地利用冲突分析: 概念与方法[J]. 地理科学进展, 2006, 25(3): 106-115.
	[Yu Bohua, Lü Changhe. The progress and prospect of land use conflicts[J]. Progress in Geographical Sciences, 2006, 25(3): 106-115.]
[11]	Campbell D J, Gichohi H, Mwangi A, et al. Land use conflict in Kajiado District, Kenya[J]. Land Use Policy, 2000, 17(4): 337-348. doi: 10.1016/S0264-8377(00)00038-7
[12]	陈文慧, 刘庆, 朱红梅, 等. 快速城市化进程中土地利用冲突时空演化特征与模拟预测——以长株潭城市群为例[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2017, 45(9): 286-291.
	[Chen Wenhui, Liu Qing, Zhu Hongmei, et al. Spatial-temporal evolution characteristics and simulation prediction of land use conflict in the process of rapid urbanization: A case study of Changsha Zhuzhou Xiangtan urban agglomeration[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 45(9): 286-291.]
[13]	Xiao D N, Chen W B, Guo F L. On the basic concepts and contents of ecological security[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2002, 13(3): 354-358.
[14]	常宇茜. 生态安全视角下河南镇平县土地利用冲突识别与分区调控研究[D]. 北京: 中国地质大学, 2022.
	[Chang Yuxi. Research on land use conflict identification and zoning regulation in Zhenping County, Henan Province from the perspective of ecological security[D]. Beijing: China University of Geosciences, 2022.]
[15]	杨永芳, 朱连奇. 土地利用冲突的理论与诊断方法[J]. 资源科学, 2012, 34(6): 1134-1141.
	[Yang Yongfang, Zhu Lianqi. The theory and diagnostic methods of land use conflicts[J]. Resource Science, 2012, 34(6): 1134-1141.]
[16]	Hammond A, Adriaanse A, Rodenburg E, et al. Environmental in dicators: A systematic approach to measuring and reporting on environmental policy performance in the context of sustainable development[M]. Washington D C: World Resource Institute, 1995.
[17]	彭佳捷, 周国华, 唐承丽, 等. 基于生态安全的快速城市化地区空间冲突测度——以长株潭城市群为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2012, 27(9): 1507-1519. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.09.008
	[Peng Jiajie, Zhou Guohua, Tang Chengli, et al. The analysis of spatial conflict measurement in fast urbanization region based on ecological security: A case study of Changsha Zhuzhou Xiangtan urban agglomeration[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2012, 27(9): 1507-1519.] doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.09.008
[18]	吴金华, 刘思雨, 白帅. 基于景观生态安全的神木市生态廊道识别与优化[J]. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(4): 1120-1127.
	[Wu Jinhua, Liu Siyu, Bai Shuai. Identification and optimization of ecological corridors in Shenmu City based on landscape ecological security[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2021, 38(4): 1120-1127.]
[19]	冯长春, 曹敏政, 谢婷婷. 不同生态保育尺度下铜陵市土地利用结构优化[J]. 地理研究, 2014, 33(12): 2217-2227. doi: 10.11821/dlyj201412001
	[Feng Changchun, Cao Minzheng, Xie Tingting. Optimization of land use structure in Tongling City based on different ecological conservation scales[J]. Geography Research, 2014, 33(12): 2217-2227.] doi: 10.11821/dlyj201412001
[20]	杨晓辉. 城市土地再开发过程中的利益冲突与规划调控策略研究[D]. 苏州: 苏州科技学院, 2014.
	[Yang Xiaohui. The strategy analysis of profit conflict and planning regulation in the progress of redevelopment of urban land[D]. Suzhou: Suzhou University of Science and Technology, 2014.]
[21]	徐馨裔, 刘志有, 董露, 等. 国土空间规划视角下产业结构与土地利用结构相互关系研究——以新疆乌鲁木齐市为例[J]. 生态经济, 2020, 36(4): 69-74.
	[Xu Xinyi, Liu Zhiyou, Dong Lu, et al. Research on the mutual relationship between industrial structure and land utilization structure from the perspective of national land space planning: Taking Urumqi of Xinjiang as an example[J]. Ecological Economy, 2020, 36(4): 69-74.]
[22]	Ma W, Jiang G, Chen Y, et al. How feasible is regional integration for reconciling land use conflicts across the urban-rural interface? Evidence from Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei metropolitan region in China[J]. Land Use Policy, 2020, 92, doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104433.
[23]	Adger W N. Vulnerability[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2006, 16(3): 268-281. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006
[24]	蔡运龙, 李军. 土地利用可持续性的度量——一种显示过程的综合方法[J]. 地理学报, 2003, 58(2): 305-313.
	[Cai Yunlong, Li Jun. Measurement of land use sustainability: A comprehensive method representing processes[J]. Acta Geography Sinca, 2003, 58(2): 305-313.]
[25]	裴彬, 潘韬. 土地利用系统动态变化模拟研究进展[J]. 地理科学进展, 2010, 29(9): 1060-1066. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2010.09.006
	[Pei Bin, Pan Tao. Land use system dynamic modeling: Literature review and future research direction in China[J]. Progress in Geography, 2010, 29(9): 1060-1066.] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2010.09.006
[26]	周子鑫, 朱传耿. 我国区域空间整合研究进展与展望[J]. 地域研究与开发, 2009, 28(5): 1-5.
	[Zhou Zixin, Zhu Chuangeng. Recent progress of studies on the regional spatial integration and its prospects in China[J]. Areal Research and Development, 2009, 28(5): 1-5.]
[27]	Qian Y, Xing W, Guan X, et al. Coupling cellular automata with area partitioning and spatiotemporal convolution for dynamic land use change simulation[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 722: 137738, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137738.
[28]	谢高地, 张彩霞, 张雷明, 等. 基于单位面积价值当量因子的生态系统服务价值化方法改进[J]. 自然资源学报, 2015, 30(8): 1243-1254.
	[Xie Gaodi, Zhang Caixia, Zhang Leiming, et al. Improvement of the evaluation method for ecosystem service value based on per unit area[J]. Journal of Natural Resource, 2015, 30(8): 1243-1254.]
[29]	谢高地, 张彩霞, 张昌顺, 等. 中国生态系统服务的价值[J]. 资源科学, 2015, 37(9): 1740-1746.
	[Xie Gaodi, Zhang Caixia, Zhang Changshun, et al. The value of ecosystem services in China[J]. Resource Science, 2015, 37(9): 1740-1746.]
[30]	O’Neill R V, Hunsaker C T, Timmins S P, et al. Scale problems in reporting landscape pattern at the regional scale[J]. Landscape Ecology, 1996, 11: 169-180. doi: 10.1007/BF02447515
[31]	王玲. 基于土地利用变化的上海市生态风险评价[J]. 农业科学研究, 2018, 39(1): 10-16.
	[Wang Ling. Ecological risk assessment based on land use change in Shanghai City[J]. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 39(1): 10-16.]
[32]	巩杰, 赵彩霞, 谢余初, 等. 基于景观格局的甘肃白龙江流域生态风险评价与管理[J]. 应用生态学报, 2014, 25(7): 2041-2048. pmid: 25345056
	[Gong Jie, Zhao Caixia, Xie Yuchu, et al. Ecological risk assessment and its management of Bailongjiang watershed, southern Gansu based on landscape pattern[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2014, 25(7): 2041-2048.] pmid: 25345056
[33]	肖琳, 田光进. 天津市土地利用生态风险评价[J]. 生态学杂志, 2014, 33(2): 469-476.
	[Xiao Lin, Tian Guangjin. Eco-risk assessment of land use in Tianjin City[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2014, 33(2): 469-476.]
[34]	田苗, 王鹏新, 严泰来, 等. Kappa系数的修正及在干旱预测精度及一致性评价中的应用[J]. 农业工程学报, 2012, 28(24): 1-7.
	[Tian Miao, Wang Pengxin, Yan Tailai, et al. Adjustment of Kappa coefficient and its application in precision and agreement evaluation of drought forecasting models[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2012, 28(24): 1-7.]
[35]	王国杰, 廖善刚. 土地利用强度变化的空间异质性研究[J]. 应用生态学报, 2006, 17(4): 4611-4614.
	[Wang Guojie, Liao Shangang. Spatial heterogeneity of land use intensity[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2006, 17(4): 4611-4614.]
[36]	唐宏, 乔旭宁, 杨德刚, 等. 土地利用变化时空特征与区域发展关系研究——以渭干河流域为例[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2012, 30(3): 205-213.
	[Tang Hong, Qiao Xuning, Yang Degang, et al. Characteristics of temporal and spatial dynamic changes of land use and their relationship with regional development: Case study in the Weigan River Basin[J]. Agricultural Research the Arid Areas, 2012, 30(3): 205-213.]
[37]	田柳兰, 王珊珊, 毋兆鹏. 基于多时相遥感数据的乌鲁木齐市生态安全格局构建[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(7): 1155-1165.
	[Tian Liulan, Wang Shanshan, Wu Zhaopeng. Construction of ecological security pattern in Urumqi based on multi-temporal remote sensing data[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(7): 1155-1165.]
[38]	王珊珊, 毋兆鹏. 基于生态安全的乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突识别[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2022, 61(1): 46-53.
	[Wang Shanshan, Wu Zhaopeng. Identification of land use conflicts based on ecological security in Urumqi City[J]. Hubei Agricultural Science, 2022, 61(1): 46-53.]

一级类型	二级类型	耕地	林地	草地	水域	建设用地	未利用地
供给服务	食物生产	12.50	3.23	1.47	11.76	0.00	0.15
供给服务	原料生产	5.88	7.65	2.06	3.38	0.00	0.44
调节服务	水资源供给	0.29	3.97	1.18	121.88	0.00	0.29
	气体调节	9.85	24.99	7.50	11.32	0.29	1.62
	气候调节	5.29	74.54	19.70	33.67	0.00	1.47
	净化环境	1.47	21.91	6.47	81.60	1.47	4.56
	水文调节	3.97	49.10	14.41	1503.13	0.44	3.09
支持服务	土壤保持	15.14	30.29	9.12	13.67	0.29	1.91
	维持养分循环	1.76	2.35	0.74	1.03	0.00	0.15
	生物多样性	1.91	27.64	8.23	37.49	0.29	1.76
文化服务	美学景观	0.88	12.06	3.68	27.79	0.15	0.74
合计		58.96	257.73	74.54	1846.72	2.94	16.17

年份	无冲突	轻度冲突	中度冲突	高度冲突	重度冲突
2000	0.84	0.75	0.80	0.76	0.79
2010	0.87	0.80	0.78	0.79	0.76
2020	0.85	0.79	0.89	0.82	0.76

年份	拟合模型	块金值（C₀）	基台值（C₀+C）	C₀/(C₀+C)	变程（A₀）	决定系数（R²）	残差（RSS）/10^-7
2000	指数	0.00107	0.00499	0.2144	18600	0.7970	6.5430
2010	高斯	0.00284	0.00672	0.4226	39000	0.9490	3.9990
2020	指数	0.00267	0.00546	0.4890	19900	0.9810	1.1400

生态安全视角下乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突时空格局演变分析

Spatiotemporal pattern evolution of land use conflict in Urumqi City from the perspective of ecological security

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 15

参考文献 38

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	田柳兰, 王珊珊, 毋兆鹏. 基于多时相遥感数据的乌鲁木齐市生态安全格局构建[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(7): 1155-1165.
[2]	马丽娜, 张飞云, 翟玉鑫, 滕伦, 康建国. 1980—2020年新疆土地利用变化下生态系统服务价值时空演变分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(2): 253-263.
[3]	梁樑, 郭晓淞, 陈汉杰, 徐皓帆, 周衍波, 谢邵文, 杨芬, 韦朝阳. 乌鲁木齐市核心城区绿地土壤重金属累积特征及生态风险[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(11): 1868-1878.
[4]	隋露, 蒲春玲, 刘志有, 柏鹏飞, 刘涛. 基于PLUS模型的乌鲁木齐市生态服务价值权衡协同探究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(1): 159-168.
[5]	张晓东,赵志鹏,赵银鑫,高学花,马玉学,刘乃静,吉卫波. 银川市景观生态风险评价与生态安全格局优化构建[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(5): 1626-1636.
[6]	程静,王鹏,陈红翔,韩永贵. 半干旱区生态风险时空演变及其影响因素的地理探测——以宁夏盐池县为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(5): 1637-1648.
[7]	张凯莉,冯荣荣,刘潭,张志成,韩佳宁,刘康. 黄河流域城市化与生态系统服务价值协调性及障碍因素研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(4): 1254-1267.
[8]	李桉孛,万瑜,张俊,李如琦,芒苏尔·艾热提,李娜. 1961—2019年乌鲁木齐市暴雪环流分型及其成因分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(2): 379-388.
[9]	赵永玉,阿里木江·卡斯木,高鹏文,梁洪武. 基于地理探测器的乌鲁木齐市城区扩展及影响因素分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(6): 1729-1739.
[10]	安斯文,马彩虹,袁倩颖,滑雨琪. 生态移民区“三生”用地变化对生态系统服务的影响——以宁夏红寺堡区为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(6): 1836-1846.
[11]	苗运玲,宫恒瑞,王健,葛怡成,李如琦. 2012-2019年乌鲁木齐市夏季降水日变化特征[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(5): 1222-1230.
[12]	孙丽蓉,周冬梅,岑国璋,马静,党锐,倪帆,张军. 基于地理探测器模型的疏勒河流域景观生态风险评价及驱动因素分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(5): 1384-1395.
[13]	张帅,汪洋,夏婷婷,常雪儿,李稚. 塔里木河生态输水条件下土地利用/覆被变化对生态系统服务价值的影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(3): 739-749.
[14]	王波,杨太保. 1980—2018年银川市生态系统服务价值评价及驱动力分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(2): 552-564.
[15]	王一山,张飞,陈瑞,齐亚霄,刘长江. 乌鲁木齐市土地生态安全综合评价[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(2): 427-440.