西安市资源环境成本时空差异性分析

Temporal and Spatial Differences of Resources Depletion Value&Environmental Cost of Xi'an City in China

结合SEEA理论与方法,核算了中国西部城市——西安市1997-2009年的主要资源环境成本,基于市、县2级尺度探究其时空差异性,并计算了资源环境成本占GDP比例情况。结果表明:①按1990年可比价,西安市资源环境成本由177197.9万元增大到396031.8万元,年均增长率10.29%,高于同期GDP(7.25%)增长率。②资源耗减成本大于环境退化成本,但前者比重有所降低,由84.84%降为69.45%。③各区县占总成本比例差异明显。2009年,占西安市资源环境成本比重大于15%的是雁塔区,居于10%～15%的是未央区、莲湖区、户县;居于5%～10%的是新城区、碑林区、长安区、灞桥区、临潼区;其他区县小于5%。④据资环密度可将西安市分为3个圈层:碑林区、新城区、莲湖区属于I圈,灞桥区、未央区、雁塔区属于II圈,其他各区属于III圈;资环密度I圈集聚、II圈和III圈渐次降低;资源环境成本总量I圈最小,II圈和III圈比重相当;按组分分析,能源耗减成本总量在I圈较低,II圈和III圈较高,耕地耗减成本主要产生于II圈和III圈,污染成本I圈<II圈<III圈,生态成本集中于III圈。⑤资源环境成本占GDP比例1997年为7.58%,2005年达到11.27%,之后降低,2009年降为9.05%,呈现出环境库兹涅茨曲线特征,空间上I圈<II圈<III圈。

This paper accounted the main components of resources depletion value environmental costs（R-E cost） of Xi＇an city in western China from 1997 to 2009 based on SEEA,analyzed temporal and spatial differences of R-E cost at city and county scales respectively,and calculated the ratio of R-E cost to GDP.The results are obtained as follows.（1） The R-E cost of Xi＇an city has soared from 1.771979 billion yuan RMB to 3.960318 billion yuan RMB at comparable prices of 1990,with an annual rate of 10.29%,more than the GDP growth rate（7.25%） of the same period.（2） Resources depletion value is higher than environmental degradation cost.The proportion of resources depletion value reduced from 84.84%to 69.45%;（3） R-E cost proportion of each county was different.In 2009,Yanta District accounted for over 15%,Weiyang District,Lianhu District and Huxian County had 10%-15%,Chang＇an,Baqiao and Lintong districts had 5%-10%;other counties took up less than 5%.4） The R-E cost distribution can be divided into three circles according to cluster analysis of R-E density.Beilin,Xincheng and Lianhu districts are located in circle I,districts of Baqiao,Weiyang and Yanta are situated in circle II,and other counties are in circle III. The density of R-E cost in circle I is much higher than that in circles II and III.However,the amount of R-E cost in circle I is much lower than that in circles II and III.Energy consumption cost in circle I is lower than that in circles II and III.Land consumption cost occurred mainly in circles II and III.Pollution cost is listed in the order of circle Icircle IIcircle III,and the ecological cost is mainly observed in circle III;5） R-E cost accounted for 7.58%of GDP in 1997,this figure was up to 11.27%in 2005 and fell to 9.05%in 2009,presenting a＂Kuznets curve＂pattern;the ratio of R-E cost to GDP is listed in the order of circle Icircle IIcircle III.