基于能值的生态足迹方法在黑龙江和云南二省中的应用与分析  

Application of the Emergetic Ecological Footprint Method to Heilongjiang and Yunnan Provinces and Analysis

作　　者：王明全[1,2] 王金达[1] 刘景双[1] 赵卫[1,2] 顾康康[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]中国科学院东北地理与农业生态研究所,长春130012 [2]中国科学院研究生院,北京100049

出　　处：《自然资源学报》2009年第1期73-81,共9页Journal of Natural Resources

基　　金：国家重点基础研究计划资助项目(2004CB418507)

摘　　要：能值生态足迹(Emergetic ecological footprint,EEF)是利用能值理论对生态足迹方法(Eco-logical footprint,EF)的一种改进形式。以黑龙江和云南为研究对象,利用EEF和EF对2004年二省生态可持续状况进行了评价。结果表明EEF与EF在评价生态系统超载程度时结果悬殊较大:黑龙江EEF结果生态系统超载353%,而EF仅超载8.8%;云南EEF结果生态盈余923%,而EF结果系统超载6.0%。在目前消费水平下,按EEF计算黑龙江和云南分别能持续承载842×104和50 802×104人,而按EF计算则分别为3 507×104和4 166×104。虽然都以土地面积为核算单位,但两种方法所量化和表达的生态承载力的内涵发生了较大变化,二者研究的系统的边界也有所不同,因而所体现出的生态意义差距明显。EEF为评价生态可持续状况提供了一种新的思路,并且克服了EF的部分缺点,但是由于其自身的计算以及能值理论的特点,EEF评价结果也可能会与现实的生态可持续性状况有所偏差。As a policy guide and planning tool for sustainability, the ecological footprint （EF） method created by Wackernagel and Rees has been widely used with an ongoing discussion and modification. Emergetic ecological footprint （EEF） is one of the modified forms of EF based on emergy theory invented by H. T. Odum. In this paper, EEF is applied to evaluate the ecological sustainability of Heilongjiang and Yunnan provinces in 2004, and then the calculation results are compared to the conventional method EF in order to test its feasibility and validity. The evaluation results exhibit great differences about the conclusions between EEF and EF, especially about the conclusion by what order of magnitude human consumption is currently exceeding the ecological carrying capacity＇. For Heilongjiang province, the ecological carrying capacity has been exceeded by 353% according to EEF, but only 8.8% according to EF. For Yunnan province, there is still 923% of ecological remainder compared to the current consumption according to EEF but there has been 6. 0% of ecological deficit according to EF. To maintain sustainability, the maximum population that could be supported by Heilongjiang and Yunnan is 842 ×10^4 and 50802 ×10^4 respectively according to EEF, which has become 3507 ×10^4 and 4166 ×10^4 respectively according to EF. As a modification of EF, EEF still takes land area as the quantifying unit but it demonstrates the ecological carrying capacity entirely from a new perspective, and the system boundary in discussion has also been changed greatly, thus very different ecological implications can be derived from the two methods. EEF provides us a new way to measure the ecological sustainabilityand even to some detail, it compensates several drawbacks of EF, but sometimes it may fail to reflect the real ecological status due to the modified calculation form, implicating change, and even some special applications of emergy theory itself, thus it is should be careful to use it as a guide tool for sustainability.

关 键 词：承载力 生态足迹 能值 生态赤字/盈余 

分 类 号：X22[环境科学与工程—环境科学]