地理科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (2): 334-341.doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2019.02.018

• • 上一篇    下一篇

藏、汉对比视角下的城市空间环境认知研究——以中国西藏日喀则市为例

杨永春1,2(), 孙燕1, 李建新1, 唐艳1, 张薇1,3, 王伟伟4,5   

  1. 1.兰州大学资源环境学院, 甘肃 兰州 730000
    2. 兰州大学西部环境教育部重点实验室, 甘肃 兰州 730000
    3. 内蒙古师范大学旅游学院, 内蒙 呼和浩特 010022
    4. 中国科学院西北生态环境资源研究院沙漠与沙漠化重点实验室, 甘肃 兰州 730003
    5. 中国科学院大学, 北京 100049
  • 收稿日期:2017-12-14 修回日期:2018-02-15 出版日期:2019-02-20 发布日期:2019-02-10
  • 作者简介:

    作者简介:杨永春(1969-),男,陕西白水人,教授,博导,主要研究方向为城市发展、转型与规划。E-mail:yangych@1zu.edu.cn

  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(41571155)资助

Urban Spatial Environmental Cognition of both Tibetan and Han from a Comparative Perspective: A Case Study of Shigatse in Tibet

Yang Yongchun1,2(), Sun Yan1, Li Jianxin1, Tang Yan1, Zhang Wei1,3, Wang Weiwei4,5   

  1. 1. College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, China
    2. Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of West China’s Environmental System, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, China;
    3. College of Tourism, Inner Mongolia Normal University, Hohehot 010022, Inner Mongolia, China
    4. Key Laboratory of Deser t and Desertification, Northwest Institute of Eco-environment and Resources, Lanzhou 730003, Gansu, China
    5. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
  • Received:2017-12-14 Revised:2018-02-15 Online:2019-02-20 Published:2019-02-10
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China (41571155).

摘要:

以分布式认知理论为基础,采用质性研究法、数量分析法以及GIS空间分析技术,探讨日喀则市藏族、汉族居民对城市空间环境认知的异同性。研究表明,藏族对城市空间环境的认知得分高于汉族对城市空间环境的认知得分。藏族、汉族对城市空间环境的认知水平可分为高、中、低3类。认知空间呈现圈层结构与混合结构模式,可分为藏汉一致性、藏族独立以及汉族独立3种认知空间类型。影响居民对城市空间环境的认知因素有共性因素和差异性因素。景观走廊质量、宜居性、基础设施两项是藏族居民关注的主要影响因素,汉族居民更关注公共服务设施的服务能力以及对当地文化的融入感。

关键词: 藏、汉族居民, 分布式认知理论, 质性研究法, 城市空间环境认知, 西藏日喀则市

Abstract:

In minority areas, it is a vital topic to explore the cognition of urban spatial environment, which has substantial implications for urban development in the context of rapid urbanization in China. Meanwhile, Tibetan Plateau cities have the features of ecological vulnerability, cultural uniqueness and the harmonious relationship between human and environment. Based on the distributed cognition theory, we study the differences of urban spatial environment cognition between Tibetan and Han by taking Shigatse as an example and using both qualitative and quantitative research methods. The results indicate that: 1) The Tibetan Cognitive score on urban spatial environment is higher than the Han, which is the result of the geographical and cultural embeddedness of the Tibetan and Han residents. Tibetan and Han residents’ cognitive level can be divided into three categories: high, medium and low. 2) The cognitive models are featured by circle and mixed pattern in the urban space. The circle model is mainly found in the urban main area. While the mixed pattern is found in the south of ZhaDe Road, and the south of ZhaDe road where the government developed and exploited in order to meet the need of urban space expansion. Meanwhile, there are three types of cognitive space: Tibetan and Han consistent cognitive space, Tibetan independent cognitive space and Han independent cognitive space. Among them, Tibetan and Han consistent cognitive space is featured by high cognitive level in the central urban area and low cognitive level in the south of ZhaDe Road. Tibetan independent cognitive space is complex, trivial and diverse. On the contrary, the Han independent cognitive space is simple, regular and single. 3) The difference between Tibetan and Han residents’ cognition is a consequence of impacts of geographical and cultural environment. Common and different factors all affect Tibetan and Han cognition. Common factors consist of the sense of security, residential centrality, and foreign exchange. However, there are different cognitive factors between Tibetan and Han. Compare with Han, Tibetan are more likely to concern about the landscape corridor, livability and infrastructure quality. However, Han incline to be aware of the public service facilities and local culture integration.

Key words: Tibetan and Han resident, distributed cognitive theory, qualitative research method, urban spatial environmental cognition, Shigatse in Tibet

中图分类号: 

  • K901.2