中国1999年生态足迹计算与发展能力分析

可持续发展的定量评估是可持续发展研究的关键领域，其核心是确定人类的生存是否处于生态系统的承载力范围之内．新近提出和发展起来的生态足迹指标是一种测算人类对自然利用程度的新的综合指标，该方法通过将区域的资源和能源消费转化为提供这种物质流所必需的各种生物生产土地的面积(生态足迹)，并同区域能提供的生物生产土地面积(生态承载力)进行比较，能定量判断一个区域的发展是否处于生态承载力的范围内．以中国和部分省(区市）1999年的统计数据为基础，对中国和部分省(区市)1999年的生态足迹计算结果表明，1999年中国的人均生态足迹为1．326hm^2，而人均生态承载力为0．681hm^2，人均生态赤字为0、645hm^2；分省的计算结果也表明大部分省(区市)的生态足迹超过了当地的生态承载力．生态赤字的存在表明，区域的经济社会发展处于一种不可持续的发展状态．同时，将生态足迹计算中得到的不同土地类型面积作为测算生态经济系统多样性的指标，测算了中国及部分省(区市)1999年生态足迹的多样性，并采用Ulanowicz的发展能力公式分析了各省的发展能力．发展能力是一个较好的预测产出的指标，增加多样性是增加发展能力的有效途径、另外，还分析了生态足迹的多样性与资源利用效益的关系，讨论了生态足迹及其多样性的政策含义．

Ecological footprint calculation and development capacity analysis of China in 1999

The ecological footprint method put forward and improved by William Rees and Mathis Wackernagel presents a methodologically simple but integrated framework for national natural capital accounting, which is capable of measuring the impact of Human's consumption on ecosystem. Based on the ecological footprint theory and calculation method, a flow network analysis method was introduced to illuminate the structure of complex ecological economic system, and the relationship among ecological footprint, diversity and development capacity was analyzed.In this paper, the ecological footprints of China and its provinces was calculated and compared with the national and local ecological carrying capacity. The results showed that the ecological footprints of China and most of its provinces were beyond the available ecological capacity, and China and its most provinces run 'national or regional ecological deficit'. In case of China, the national ecological deficit was 0.645 hm 2 per cap in 1999. Secondly, we introduced a flow network analysis method,taking various ecological productive area as note, and adopted Ulanowicz's development capacity formula to analyze the relationship among ecological footprint diversity, development capacity and output. The results demonstrated that Ulanowicz's development capacity was a good predictor of economic system output. At the same time, two distinct ways to change development capacity were produced. Increasing ecological footprint or increasing ecological footprint's diversity would both increase development capacity. Due to the fact that the ecological footprints had already been beyond bio capacities, the only way to increase development capacity was to increase ecological footprint's diversity. The positive relationship between ecological footprint diversity and resources utilization efficiency demonstrated that there was no conflict between increasing ecological footprint's diversity and reducing footprints while not comprising our quality of life.