中国农业水-地-能关系的生态足迹和承载能力

IF 7 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Ecological Indicators Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112786
Xiaolei Ma , Hongxian Yuan
{"title":"中国农业水-地-能关系的生态足迹和承载能力","authors":"Xiaolei Ma ,&nbsp;Hongxian Yuan","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Agriculture is the largest water and land using sector in China. From the perspective of energy utilization, agriculture serves both as a carbon source and a carbon sink sector. This paper employs the methods of agricultural water pollution ecological footprint and carrying capacity, biology ecological footprint and carrying capacity, as well as energy ecological footprint and carrying capacity to measure the spatio-temporal patterns of resource utilization and ecological pressure index of agricultural water-land-energy in china. The main conclusions are: (1) In 2020, China’s agricultural biological ecological footprint (BEF) was the highest, constituting nearly 66 % of the total and demonstrating an upward trend. The agricultural water pollution ecological footprint (PEF) was also significant, at approximately 33 %, but it exhibited a declining trend. In contrast, the agricultural energy ecological footprint (EEF) was the lowest. (2) Over the past 20 years, the per capita agricultural total ecological footprint (TEF) increased by 114.63 %. The per unit area agricultural ecological footprint changed slightly, ranging from 3.16 to 3.63 hm<sup>2</sup>. The ecological efficiency of agricultural economy had been greatly improved. (3) The TEF in Henan, Heilongjiang and Shandong provinces ranked among the highest level in China. However, the regions with the highest level of agricultural total ecological capacity (TEC) were Sichuan, Tibet and Hunan. (4) Tianjin and Henan provinces experience the highest agricultural ecological stress, with stress indices (TEF/TEC) reaching 1.42 and 1.14, respectively, indicating that the supply of agricultural ecological resources within these regions significantly lags behind their exploitation and utilization, which is unfavorable for the agricultural sustainable development. The results can unveil the temporal and spatial dynamics of agricultural resource pressure along with its underlying causes, while also offering strategies and recommendations for fostering sustainable agricultural development.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"168 ","pages":"Article 112786"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ecological footprint and carrying capacity of agricultural water-land-energy nexus in China\",\"authors\":\"Xiaolei Ma ,&nbsp;Hongxian Yuan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112786\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Agriculture is the largest water and land using sector in China. From the perspective of energy utilization, agriculture serves both as a carbon source and a carbon sink sector. This paper employs the methods of agricultural water pollution ecological footprint and carrying capacity, biology ecological footprint and carrying capacity, as well as energy ecological footprint and carrying capacity to measure the spatio-temporal patterns of resource utilization and ecological pressure index of agricultural water-land-energy in china. The main conclusions are: (1) In 2020, China’s agricultural biological ecological footprint (BEF) was the highest, constituting nearly 66 % of the total and demonstrating an upward trend. The agricultural water pollution ecological footprint (PEF) was also significant, at approximately 33 %, but it exhibited a declining trend. In contrast, the agricultural energy ecological footprint (EEF) was the lowest. (2) Over the past 20 years, the per capita agricultural total ecological footprint (TEF) increased by 114.63 %. The per unit area agricultural ecological footprint changed slightly, ranging from 3.16 to 3.63 hm<sup>2</sup>. The ecological efficiency of agricultural economy had been greatly improved. (3) The TEF in Henan, Heilongjiang and Shandong provinces ranked among the highest level in China. However, the regions with the highest level of agricultural total ecological capacity (TEC) were Sichuan, Tibet and Hunan. (4) Tianjin and Henan provinces experience the highest agricultural ecological stress, with stress indices (TEF/TEC) reaching 1.42 and 1.14, respectively, indicating that the supply of agricultural ecological resources within these regions significantly lags behind their exploitation and utilization, which is unfavorable for the agricultural sustainable development. The results can unveil the temporal and spatial dynamics of agricultural resource pressure along with its underlying causes, while also offering strategies and recommendations for fostering sustainable agricultural development.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Indicators\",\"volume\":\"168 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112786\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Indicators\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X24012433\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X24012433","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

农业是中国最大的用水和用地部门。从能源利用的角度看,农业既是碳源部门,也是碳汇部门。本文采用农业水污染生态足迹与承载力、生物生态足迹与承载力、能源生态足迹与承载力等方法,测算了中国农业水-地-能源的资源利用时空格局和生态压力指数。主要结论有(1)2020 年,中国农业生物生态足迹(BEF)最高,占总量的近 66%,且呈上升趋势。农业水污染生态足迹(PEF)也很重要,约占 33%,但呈下降趋势。相比之下,农业能源生态足迹(EEF)最低。(2)近 20 年来,人均农业总生态足迹(TEF)增加了 114.63%。单位面积农业生态足迹变化不大,从 3.16 到 3.63 hm2 不等。农业经济的生态效益大大提高。(3) 河南省、黑龙江省和山东省的 TEF 位居全国前列。但农业总生态容量(TEC)最高的地区是四川、西藏和湖南。(4) 天津市和河南省的农业生态压力最大,压力指数(TEF/TEC)分别达到 1.42 和 1.14,表明这些地区的农业生态资源供给明显滞后于开发利用,不利于农业可持续发展。研究结果可以揭示农业资源压力的时空动态及其内在原因,同时也为促进农业可持续发展提供了策略和建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ecological footprint and carrying capacity of agricultural water-land-energy nexus in China
Agriculture is the largest water and land using sector in China. From the perspective of energy utilization, agriculture serves both as a carbon source and a carbon sink sector. This paper employs the methods of agricultural water pollution ecological footprint and carrying capacity, biology ecological footprint and carrying capacity, as well as energy ecological footprint and carrying capacity to measure the spatio-temporal patterns of resource utilization and ecological pressure index of agricultural water-land-energy in china. The main conclusions are: (1) In 2020, China’s agricultural biological ecological footprint (BEF) was the highest, constituting nearly 66 % of the total and demonstrating an upward trend. The agricultural water pollution ecological footprint (PEF) was also significant, at approximately 33 %, but it exhibited a declining trend. In contrast, the agricultural energy ecological footprint (EEF) was the lowest. (2) Over the past 20 years, the per capita agricultural total ecological footprint (TEF) increased by 114.63 %. The per unit area agricultural ecological footprint changed slightly, ranging from 3.16 to 3.63 hm2. The ecological efficiency of agricultural economy had been greatly improved. (3) The TEF in Henan, Heilongjiang and Shandong provinces ranked among the highest level in China. However, the regions with the highest level of agricultural total ecological capacity (TEC) were Sichuan, Tibet and Hunan. (4) Tianjin and Henan provinces experience the highest agricultural ecological stress, with stress indices (TEF/TEC) reaching 1.42 and 1.14, respectively, indicating that the supply of agricultural ecological resources within these regions significantly lags behind their exploitation and utilization, which is unfavorable for the agricultural sustainable development. The results can unveil the temporal and spatial dynamics of agricultural resource pressure along with its underlying causes, while also offering strategies and recommendations for fostering sustainable agricultural development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Indicators
Ecological Indicators 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1163
审稿时长
78 days
期刊介绍: The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published. • All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices. • New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use. • Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources. • Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators. • Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs. • How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes. • Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators. • Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.
期刊最新文献
Urban forest indicator assessment for nature-based solutions to connect biodiversity and people Drivers of prehistoric cultural evolution in the Chengdu Plain: Fire events and environmental changes during the middle and late Holocene A novel integrated socio-ecological-economic index for assessing heat health risk Long-term water quality dynamics and trend assessment reveal the effectiveness of ecological compensation: Insights from China’s first cross-provincial compensation watershed Tracking ecosystem stability across boreal Siberia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1