摘要:基于水足迹视角，测度了中国31个省份2000-2018年的水生态足迹广度、深度及水生态压力，采用ESTDA框架对其时空动态特征进行分析。结果表明：①研究期内，中国水生态足迹总量呈波动上升态势；水生态承载力波动幅度较大，空间分布格局整体呈现自东南向西北逐渐较少的趋势。②水生态足迹广度与水生态承载力呈同步变化趋势，整体上已接近水资源可提供的流量资本上限，各省市水生态足迹深度差异较大。③研究期内，水生态压力指数小于1的区域与水生态足迹深度为1的区域相吻合，水生态压力指数大于1的区域主要分布在华北及西北地区。④LISA时间路径表明，水生态足迹广度、深度及水生态压力的整体空间格局均具有较强的稳定性；三者的局部空间结构在空间依赖方向上的稳定性依次加强；空间格局演化的空间整合性呈现水生态足迹深度 > 水生态压力 > 水生态足迹广度，空间上，水生态足迹广度正向协同增长省份主要集中于南方省份，而水生态足迹深度和水生态压力正向协同增长区则分布于华北、西北地区；各要素的空间分布格局表现出较强的路径依赖及锁定特征。



Abstract:In this paper, the 3D water ecological footprint model was adapted to measure the water ecological footprint size, depth, water ecological carry capacity, and water ecological pressure among 31 provinces in China from 2000 to 2018 from the perspective of water footprint. The Exploratory Time-Space Data Analysis (ESTDA) model was used to analyze the spatial change characteristics of water ecological footprint size, depth and water ecological footprint pressure in 31 provinces of China. The results showed that:(1) during the study period, the total water ecological footprint of China indicated a fluctuating and ascending tendency. The water ecological carrying capacity fluctuated greatly, and the spatial distribution pattern presented a trend of gradually decrease from southeast to northwest. (2) The water ecological footprint size and water ecological carry capacity changed simultaneously, and were close to the upper limit of flow capital that water resources can provide. There were great differences of water ecological footprint depth in provinces during study period. The water ecological footprint depth of 15 southern provinces was 1, while the rest of the provinces needed to use the water resource stock capital to make up for the shortage of water flow capital. (3) The area with water ecological pressure index less than 1 coincided with the area with depth of 1 of the water ecological footprint. The regions with water ecological pressure index greater than 1 were mainly distributed in North China and Northwest China. (4) The LISA (Local Indicators of Spatial Association) time path showed that the overall spatial pattern of the water ecological footprint size, depth and water ecological pressure had strong stability; the stability of the three local spatial structure in spatial dependence direction was strengthened in turn. The spatial integration of spatial pattern evolution presented water ecological footprint depth > water ecological pressure > water ecological footprint size, in terms of space. The provinces with positive and co-growth of water ecological footprint were mainly concentrated in southern, while the areas with positive and co-growth of water ecological footprint depth and water ecological pressure were distributed in north and northwest China. The spatial distribution pattern of each feature showed strong path dependence and locking characteristics.





PDF全文下载地址:

https://www.ecologica.cn/stxb/article/pdf/stxb202005111180