期刊文献+

甘肃省城镇不同收入水平群体家庭生态足迹计算 被引量:32

The Calculation of Household Ecological Footprint of the Urban Residents Grouped by Income in Gansu
下载PDF
导出
摘要 生态足迹是测度环境可持续发展的新方法。家庭生态足迹H(ousehold EcologicalFootprint,H EF)是利用生态足迹方法研究家庭消费所产生的环境影响。通过计算不同收入水平群体的家庭生态足迹,比较不同收入水平群体H EF差异,可以进一步揭示各收入水平群体间存在的“生态足迹掠夺”和生态足迹占用公平性。在阐述家庭生态足迹内涵意义及计算方法的基础上,以甘肃省2002年城镇不同收入水平群体为例进行实证研究。通过计算得到甘肃省2002年不同收入群体的家庭生态足迹分别为:最高收入群1.412×106ghm 2,高收入群1.131×106ghm 2,较高收入群1.860×106ghm 2,中等收入1.793×106ghm 2,较低收入群1.536×106ghm 2,低收入群0.724×106ghm 2,最低收入群0.578×106ghm 2,全省平均1.265×106ghm 2;分析经济收入与家庭生态足迹的关系表明,每增加1000元人均可支配收入,将增大0.2ghm 2家庭生态足迹;引入生态足迹掠夺及总生态足迹掠夺,并进一步计算生态足迹不公平系数为0.24,表明收入不同引起的足迹消费的不公平不突出。 Ecological Footprint is a new tool used to measure the sustainable development of environment.The Ecological Footprint,according to its concept,analyses the impacts of the people on environment and sustainable development by transferring the impacts caused by people through what they have consumed in a period (usually one year).Household consumption,behavior of the member of a household to sustain the daily life,influencing by the household income is more common to us.Here we can also use the Ecological Footprint to analyses the impact of the household consumption on the environment.This paper not only calculates the Household Ecological Footprint (HEF) of urban residents grouped by income in Gansu in 2002,but also analyses the relationship between dominated income and HEF.As we know,the income of a household,actually the dominated income,predominates the consumption level and style,and then causes the different quantities and compositions of HEF.Further,we get the Ecological Footprint Depredation (EFD) which we define as the difference between each colony and HEF of the average dominated income colony and the total EFD which sums up the EFD of each group. We calculate the Ecological Footprint unjust coefficient which imitated the calculation of the Gini factor.The results shows that the HEF for each group is 1.412×10^6ghm^2(the highest income group), 1.131×10^6ghm^2(high), 1.860 ×10^6ghm^2 (higher), 1.793×10^6ghm^2(moderate), 1.536×10^6ghm^2 (lower),0.724 ×10^6ghm^2(low),0.578×10^6ghm^2(the lowest),and the provincial-average is 1.265×10^6ghm^2.Because of the size variations in each group,the total HEF of each group,as we showed in the text,is not ordered exactly to the per capita HEF.The Ecological Footprint unjust coefficient is 0.24 which shows that the unjust HEF of each group is not obvious.
出处 《自然资源学报》 CSCD 北大核心 2006年第3期408-416,共9页 Journal of Natural Resources
基金 国家自然科学重点基金(40235053) 国家自然科学基金(40201019)
关键词 家庭生态足迹 生态足迹掠夺 生态足迹不公平系数 可支配收入 家庭消费 Household Ecological Footprint(HEF) ecological footprint depredation ecological footprint unjust coefficient dominated income household consumption
  • 相关文献

参考文献11

二级参考文献40

  • 1苏筠,成升魁,谢高地.大城市居民生活消费的生态占用初探——对北京、上海的案例研究[J].资源科学,2001,23(6):24-28. 被引量:103
  • 2方一平.山地生态系统人文研究综述[J].山地学报,2001,19(1):75-80. 被引量:8
  • 3李勇.山东省城镇居民消费结构分析[J].山东师范大学学报(自然科学版),1997,12(1):17-21. 被引量:1
  • 4徐中民.可持续发展的衡量与水资源承载力[M].兰州:中国科学院兰州冰川冻土研究所,2000..
  • 5钟浩祥.笔谈西部大开发战略的土地与环境建设[J].山地学报,2000,18(5):385-407.
  • 6马安青.GIS支持下的高寒地区土地利用与土地承载力研究--以青海省海北州为例[M].陕西师范大学,2000..
  • 7Wackemagel M, Bee W E. Perceptual and structural barriers to in natural capital:economics from an ecological footprint perspective[J] .Ecological Economics, 1997,20(1):3-24.
  • 8Folke C, Jansson A,. Larsson J et al. Ecosystem appropriation by cities[J]. Ambio, 1997,26(3) : 167 - 172.
  • 9徐中民,生态经济工作论文(2001—01),2001年
  • 10Lieth H,Primary Productivity of the Biosphere,1975年

共引文献1567

同被引文献566

引证文献32

二级引证文献246

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部