甘南高原乡村社会固有脆弱性及其影响因素

doi:10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2020.05.015

地理科学 ›› 2020, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (5): 804-813.doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2020.05.015

甘南高原乡村社会固有脆弱性及其影响因素

李花(), 赵雪雁(), 王伟军, 李巍

西北师范大学地理与环境科学学院,甘肃兰州 730070

收稿日期:2018-10-09 修回日期:2019-03-11 出版日期:2020-05-10 发布日期:2020-08-18
通讯作者: 赵雪雁 E-mail:lihuanwnu@163.com;zhaoxy@nwnu.edu.cn
作者简介:李花（1991-）,女,甘肃景泰人,博士研究生,主要从事生态经济与区域发展研究。E-mail: lihuanwnu@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(41661115);国家自然科学基金项目(41971268);中国科学院内陆河流域生态水文重点实验室开放基金项目(KLEIRB-2S-16-03)

Inherent Vulnerability of Rural Society in Gannan Plateau, China and Its Influencing Factors

Li Hua(), Zhao Xueyan(), Wang Weijun, Li Wei

College of Geography and Environment Science, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070, Gansu, China

Received:2018-10-09 Revised:2019-03-11 Online:2020-05-10 Published:2020-08-18
Contact: Zhao Xueyan E-mail:lihuanwnu@163.com;zhaoxy@nwnu.edu.cn
Supported by:
National Natural Science Foundation of China(41661115);National Natural Science Foundation of China(41971268);Key Laboratory of Ecohydrology of Inland River Basin, Chinese Academy of Sciences(KLEIRB-2S-16-03)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

开展社会固有脆弱性研究不仅有助于了解区域社会系统的可持续发展状态,更有助于寻求提高社会系统适应能力的恰当策略。通过构建乡村社会固有脆弱性分析框架和评价指标体系,并以甘南高原为研究区,在分析乡村社会固有脆弱性特征的基础上识别了其关键影响因子。结果表明：① 甘南高原乡村社会固有脆弱性呈“梭型”分异,其中,高、中、低脆弱性乡镇分别占18.95%、47.37%、33.68%。② 社会固有脆弱性存在明显的区域差异性,从农区-半农半牧区-牧区、高山峡谷区-山地丘陵区-山原区,社会固有脆弱性趋于增加;同时,随着少数民族聚居度降低、经济发展水平升高,社会固有脆弱性趋于降低。③ 社会固有脆弱性在空间上呈“北高南低”的不均衡分布,敏感性呈“中间高四周低”的集聚分布,适应能力呈相对均衡的“碎片化”分布。④ 气温、生育结构、民族结构、住房安全性、社会弱势群体比重、经济条件、信息可得性和参保比例是影响社会固有脆弱性的关键因子。最后,提出相应的对策建议。

关键词: 敏感性, 适应能力, 社会固有脆弱性, 甘南高原, 高寒生态脆弱区

Abstract:

The study of social inherent vulnerability (SIV) is not only helpful to understand the sustainable development states of regional social system, but also to seek appropriate countermeasures to improve the adaptability of social system. In view of this, this paper constructed an analytical framework of SIV and took Gannan Plateau, a tipical ecological fragile area which locdted in the farming-pastoral areas on the Tibet Plateau, as the study area. On the basis of comprehensively evaluating the inherent vulnerability of rural society and analyzing its spatial differentiation characteristics, this paper identified its key factors. The results showed that: 1)The inherent vulnerability of rural society in Gannan Plateau was ‘shuttle-shaped’, in which high, moderate and low vulnerability villages accounted for 18.95%, 47.37% and 33.68% respectively. 2)There were obvious regional differences in the SIV. From the perspective of the farming areas-farming-pastoral areas-pastoral area and alpine canyon areas-mountain hilly areas-hilly plateau area, the SIV tended to increase; At the same time, the SIV tended to decrease as the degree of ethnic minority inhabitation decreased and the level of economic development rises. 3)The SIV was distributed unevenly in ‘the north high and south low’, while the sensitivity was ‘high in the middle and low around’, and the adaptability was relatively balanced ‘fragmented’ distribution. 4)Temperature, fertility structure, ethnic structure, housing security, social vulnerable group proportion, economic condition, information availability and the proportion of insurance participation were the key factors affecting the SIV. Finally, the corresponding countermeasures and suggestions for different key factors were put forward.

Key words: sensitivity, adaptability, social inherent vulnerability, Gannan Plateau, alpine ecological fragile area

中图分类号:

K901

李花, 赵雪雁, 王伟军, 李巍. 甘南高原乡村社会固有脆弱性及其影响因素[J]. 地理科学, 2020, 40(5): 804-813.

Li Hua, Zhao Xueyan, Wang Weijun, Li Wei. Inherent Vulnerability of Rural Society in Gannan Plateau, China and Its Influencing Factors[J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2020, 40(5): 804-813.

图/表 11

图1

图2

表1

图3

表2

图4

表3

图5

图6

表4

表5

参考文献 24

[1]	World Economic Forum. The global risks report 2018[EB/OL]. https://cn.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-report-2018. 2018-04-16.
[2]	黄晓军, 王晨, 胡凯丽. 快速空间扩张下西安市边缘区社会脆弱性多尺度评估[J]. 地理学报, 2018,73(6):1002-1017. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201806002
	[ Huang Xiaojun, Wang Chen, Hu Kaili. Multi-scale assessment of social vulnerability to rapid urban expansion in urban fringe: A case study of Xi'an. Acta Geograhica Sinica, 2018,73(6):1002-1017.]
[3]	IPCC. Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[4]	黄晓军, 黄馨, 崔彩兰, 等. 社会脆弱性概念、分析框架与评价方法[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014,33(11):1512-1525. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2014.11.008
	[ Huang Xiaojun, Huang Xin, Cui Cailan et al. The concept, analytical framework and assessment method of social vulnerability. Progress in Geography, 2014,33(11):1512-1525.]
[5]	李鹤, 张平宇, 程叶青. 脆弱性的概念及其评价方法[J]. 地理科学进展, 2008,27(2):18-25. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2008.02.003
	[ Li He, Zhang Pingyu, Cheng Yeqing. Concepts and assessment methods of vulnerability. Progress in Geography, 2008,27(2):18-25.]
[6]	Apotsos A. Mapping relative social vulnerability in six mostly urban municipalities in South Africa[J]. Applied Geography, 2019,105:86-101. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2019.02.012
[7]	Shukla R, Sachdeva K, Joshi P K. Inherent vulnerability of agricultural communities in Himalaya: A village-level hotspot analysis in the Uttarakhand state of India[J]. Applied Geography, 2016,74:182-198. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2016.07.013
[8]	Rajesh S, Jain S, Sharma P et al. Assessment of inherent vulnerability of rural communities to environmental hazards in Kimsar region of Uttarakhand, India[J]. Environmental Development, 2014,12(1):16-36. doi: 10.1016/j.envdev.2014.06.003
[9]	Rajesh S, Jain S, Sharma P. Inherent vulnerability assessment of rural households based on socio-economic indicators using categorical principal component analysis: A case study of Kimsar region, Uttarakhand[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2018,85:93-104. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.10.014
[10]	Antwi E K, Boakye-Danquah J, Owusu A B et al. Community vulnerability assessment index for flood prone savannah agro-ecological zone: A case study of Wa West District, Ghana[J]. Weather & Climate Extremes, 2015,10(PB):56-69. doi: 10.1002/wea.1955.10.issue-2
[11]	Huynh L T M, Stringer L C. Multi-scale assessment of social vulnerability to climate change: An empirical study in coastal Vietnam[J]. Climate Risk Management, 2018,20:165-180. doi: 10.1016/j.crm.2018.02.003
[12]	Dumenu W K, Obeng E A. Climate change and rural communities in Ghana: Social vulnerability, impacts, adaptations and policy implications[J]. Environmental Science and Policy, 2016,55:208-217. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.10.010
[13]	Abid M, Schilling J, Scheffran J et al. Climate change vulnerability, adaptation and risk perceptions at farm level in Punjab, Pakistan[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2016,547:447-460. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.11.125 pmid: 26836405
[14]	Berrouet L, Villegas-Palacio C, Botero V. A social vulnerability index to changes in ecosystem services provision at local scale: A methodological approach[J]. Environmental science & policy, 2019,93:158-171.
[15]	黄建毅, 苏飞. 城市灾害社会脆弱性研究热点问题评述与展望[J]. 地理科学, 2017,37(8):1211-1217. doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2017.08.011
	[ Huang Jianyi, Su Fei. The review and prospect on the hot issues of urban social vulnerability to disasters. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2017,37(8):1211-1217.]
[16]	张倩. 牧民应对气候变化的社会脆弱性:以内蒙古荒漠草原的一个嘎查为例[J]. 社会学研究, 2011,26(6):171-195.
	[ Zhang Qian. Herders' social vulnerability to climate change: A case of desert grassland in Inner Mongolia. Sociological Studies, 2011,26(6):171-195.]
[17]	杨艳茹, 王士君, 陈晓红. 石油城市经济系统脆弱性动态演变及调控途径研究:以大庆市为例[J]. 地理科学, 2015,33(4):456-463.
	[ Yang Yanru, Wang Shijun, Chen Xiaohong. Dynamic evolution and control approaches of petroleum city's dynamic city's economic system vulnerability: A case study of Daqing City. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2015,33(4):456-463.]
[18]	何艳冰, 黄晓军, 翟令鑫, 等. 西安快速城市化边缘区社会脆弱性评价与影响因素[J]. 地理学报, 2016,71(8):1315-1328. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201608003
	[ He Yanbing, Huang Xiaojun, Zhai Lingxin et al. Assessment and influencing factors of social vulnerability to rapid urbanization in urban fringe: A case study of Xi'an. Acta Geograhical Sinica, 2016,71(8):1315-1328.]
[19]	杨振, 丁启燕, 王念, 等. 中国人口健康脆弱性地区差异与影响因素分析[J]. 地理科学, 2018,38(1):135-142. doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2018.01.015
	[ Yang Zhen, Ding Qiyan, Wang Nian et al. Distribution characteristics of health vulnerability and its influence factors in China. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2018,38(1):135-142.]
[20]	葛怡, 张海波, 窦闻, 等. 中国空气污染的社会脆弱性评估:概念模型、指标体系与影响因素[J]. 风险灾害危机研究, 2017(3):133-151.
	[ Ge Yi, Zhang Haibo, Dou Wen et al. Social vulnerability assessment of air pollution in China: Conceptual model, index system, and influencing factors. Journal of Risk,Disaster and Crisis Research, 2017(3):133-151.]
[21]	Fang Chuanglin, Wang Yan, Fang Jiawen. A comprehensive assessment of urban vulnerability and its spatial differentiation in China[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2016,26(2):153-170. doi: 10.1007/s11442-016-1260-9
[22]	杨新军, 张慧, 王子侨. 基于情景分析的西北农村社会-生态系统脆弱性研究:以榆中县中连川乡为例[J]. 地理科学, 2015,35(8):952-959.
	[ Yang Xinjun, Zhang Hui, Wang Ziqiao. Vulnerability assessment of rural social-ecological system based on scenario analysis: A case study of Zhonglianchuan town in Yuzhong county. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2015,35(8):952-959.]
[23]	Brooks N. Vulnerability, risk and adaptation: A conceptual framework[R]. Working Paper 38. Norwich: Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia, 2003.
[24]	王劲峰, 徐成东. 地理探测器:原理与展望[J]. 地理学报, 2017,72(1):116-134. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201701010
	[ Wang Jinfeng, Xu Chengdong. Geodetector: Principle and prospective. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2017,72(1):116-134.]

目标	维度	指标层	指标含义	单位	权重	指标性质	均值
社会固有脆弱性	敏感性S	S₁温度	年平均气温	℃	0.030	负向	3.72
		S₂降水	年降水量	mm	0.021	负向	562.18
		S₃海拔	平均海拔	m	0.020	正向	3052.48
		S₄地形	平均坡度	°	0.032	正向	19.76
		S₅植被覆盖度	2013-2017年年均植被覆盖度变化率	%	0.026	正向	-3.07
		S₆健康状况	死亡率	‰	0.099	正向	5.20
		S₇抚养结构	15岁以下儿童与60岁以上老人占比	%	0.033	正向	37.52
		S₈生育结构	多孩妇女比重	%	0.036	正向	25.82
		S₉民族结构	少数民族比重	%	0.114	正向	69.46
		S₁₀就业结构	从事一产人口占比	%	0.058	正向	41.57
		S₁₁住房安全性	砖瓦房比例	%	0.050	负向	58.47
		S₁₂自然资源依赖性	野生资源采集量	kg/人	0.159	正向	26.17
		S₁₃社会弱势群体比重	社会保障人口占比	%	0.322	正向	12.19
	适应能力A	A₁劳动力	劳动力占比	%	0.062	正向	64.06
		A₂教育程度	劳动力初中以上学历占比	%	0.074	正向	24.34
		A₃住房条件	人均住房面积	m²/人	0.101	正向	33.69
		A₄经济条件	人均生产总值	元/人	0.151	正向	7300.36
		A₅科技水平	每千人拥有的农业科技人员数	人/1000人	0.089	正向	1.61
		A₆交通可得性	通公路的村子占比	%	0.017	正向	91.64
		A₇教育可得性	每千人中小学生在校数	人/1000人	0.285	正向	159.30
		A₈医疗可得性	每千人拥有的卫生床位数	张/1000人	0.089	正向	1.70
		A₉电力可得性	通电户数占比	%	0.020	正向	93.29
		A₁₀信息可得性	通电话户数占比	%	0.095	正向	59.76
		A₁₁参保比例	参与农村医疗保险人口占比	%	0.017	正向	86.11

类型	敏感性指数	适应能力指数	社会固有脆弱性指数	乡镇数量（个）	比例（%）
高敏感-高适应型	0.368	0.335	1.104	23	24.2
低敏感-高适应型	0.204	0.329	0.633	21	22.1
低敏感-低适应型	0.219	0.203	1.110	23	24.2
高敏感-低适应型	0.342	0.201	1.771	28	29.5
总体	0.288	0.262	1.198	95	100

区域		敏感性指数			适应能力指数			社会固有脆弱性指数			乡镇数
区域		均值	标准差		均值	标准差		均值	标准差		数量	占比（%）
按农业区划分区	农区	0.207	0.056		0.236	0.061		0.965	0.420		35	36.84
	半农半牧区	0.356	0.088		0.303	0.078		1.233	0.380		26	27.37
	牧区	0.319	0.054		0.259	0.092		1.412	0.579		34	35.79
按地形分区	山原区	0.311	0.044		0.263	0.095		1.350	0.522		29	30.53
	丘陵区	0.278	0.093		0.264			0.064	1.141			0.567	36	37.89
	峡谷区	0.278	0.115		0.260			0.088	1.120			0.381	30	31.58
按少数民族聚集程度分区	低度聚居区	0.191	0.042	0.236	0.066	0.901	0.371	26	27.37
	中度聚居区	0.301	0.07	0.289		0.104	1.181		0.479	20		21.05
	高度聚居区	0.334	0.078	0.266		0.075	1.363		0.515	49		51.58
按经济发展水平分区	低水平区	0.259	0.077	0.224	0.057	1.267	0.577	49	51.58
	中等水平区	0.317	0.088	0.288		0.082	1.174		0.408	36		37.89
	高水平区	0.323	0.120	0.359		0.070	0.951		0.405	10		10.53

探测指标	q	P	探测指标	q	P
S₁	0.105	0.091	S₁₃	0.219	0.010
S₂	0.077	0.424	A₁	0.112	0.125
S₄	0.022	0.792	A₃	0.077	0.241
S₈	0.197	0.006	A₄	0.118	0.048
S₉	0.253	0.000	A₈	0.097	0.122
S₁₁	0.331	0.000	A₁₀	0.167	0.021
S₁₂	0.144	0.238	A₁₁	0.213	0.000

探测指标	S₁	S₂	S₄	S₈	S₉	S₁₁	S₁₂	S₁₃	A₁	A₃	A₄	A₈	A₁₀
S₂	0.261
S₄	0.217	0.138
S₈	0.406	0.391	0.377
S₉	0.492	0.435	0.442	0.398
S₁₁	0.535	0.545	0.444	0.627	0.650
S₁₂	0.363	0.332	0.324	0.440	0.406	0.572
S₁₃	0.333	0.407	0.334	0.462	0.385	0.607	0.368
A₁	0.257	0.309	0.309	0.339	0.371	0.602	0.317	0.390
A₃	0.239	0.295	0.272	0.393	0.380	0.569	0.266	0.362	0.285
A₄	0.315	0.364	0.344	0.326	0.409	0.554	0.259	0.392	0.372	0.276
A₈	0.274	0.372	0.332	0.514	0.521	0.557	0.338	0.534	0.363	0.319	0.369
A₁₀	0.477	0.465	0.395	0.497	0.606	0.549	0.362	0.527	0.517	0.344	0.365	0.442
A₁₁	0.416	0.331	0.360	0.473	0.527	0.508	0.513	0.491	0.382	0.445	0.415	0.341	0.457

甘南高原乡村社会固有脆弱性及其影响因素

Inherent Vulnerability of Rural Society in Gannan Plateau, China and Its Influencing Factors

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 11

参考文献 24

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	丁振民, 姚顺波. 生态系统服务弹性敏感性系数的合理性与决策属性探讨[J]. 地理科学, 2019, 39(10): 1672-1679.
[2]	曹永强, 高璐, 袁立婷, 李维佳. 辽宁省潜在蒸散发量及其敏感性规律分析[J]. 地理科学, 2017, 37(9): 1422-1429.
[3]	邝远华, 汪丽娜, 陈晓宏, 刘丙军. 水资源可持续性的参数敏感性分析[J]. 地理科学, 2016, 36(6): 910-916.
[4]	邱海军, 曹明明, 刘闻, 王彦民, 郝俊卿, 胡胜. 基于三种不同模型的区域滑坡灾害敏感性评价及结果检验研究[J]. 地理科学, 2014, 34(1): 110-115.
[5]	王炳亮, 李国胜. 辽河三角洲不同干湿气候区参考蒸散发敏感因子时空变化[J]. 地理科学, 2013, 33(9): 993-998.
[6]	赵雪雁. 不同生计方式农户的环境影响——以甘南高原为例[J]. 地理科学, 2013, 33(5): 545-552.
[7]	王远东, 侯西勇, 施平, 于良巨. 海平面上升背景下环渤海海岸敏感性研究[J]. 地理科学, 2013, 33(12): 1514-1523.
[8]	吴浩, 周璐, 史文中, 陈晓玲, 杨海生, 程志萍, 叶露萍. 基于正交试验设计的土地利用变化元胞自动机模拟过程的尺度敏感性分析[J]. 地理科学, 2013, 33(10): 1252-1258.
[9]	赵冠伟, 陈颖彪, 陈健飞, 李江涛. CA-Markov模型的空间尺度敏感性研究[J]. 地理科学, 2011, 31(8): 897-902.
[10]	阎建忠, 喻鸥, 吴莹莹, 张镱锂. 青藏高原东部样带农牧民生计脆弱性评估[J]. 地理科学, 2011, 31(7): 858-867.
[11]	卢岩君, 秦承志, 邱维理, 朱阿兴. 基于少量典型样点土壤属性空间分布推测模型中的土壤属性参数敏感性分析[J]. 地理科学, 2011, 31(12): 1549-1554.
[12]	齐玉春, 董云社, 金钊, 肖胜生, 彭琴, 何亚婷, 刘欣超. 生物结皮对内蒙古沙地灌丛草地土壤呼吸特征的影响[J]. 地理科学, 2010, 30(6): 898-903.
[13]	王小丹, 钟祥浩, 刘淑珍, 高攀, 杨莉. 西藏高原生态功能区划研究[J]. 地理科学, 2009, 29(5): 715-720.
[14]	朱传耿, 仇方道, 马晓冬, 王振波, 李志江, 孟召宜, 闫庆武. 地域主体功能区划理论与方法的初步研究[J]. 地理科学, 2007, 27(2): 136-141.
[15]	尹海伟, 徐建刚, 陈昌勇, 孔繁花. 基于GIS的吴江东部地区生态敏感性分析[J]. 地理科学, 2006, 26(1): 64-69.