古镇旅游地废弃物的环境影响研究——以不同生命周期阶段周庄、锦溪、千灯为例

doi:10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2015.011.1419

Abstract

Abstract:

According to different life cycle stages of the three ancient towns (Zhouzhuang, Jinxi, Qiandeng), the article selects five variable indicators (waste water, excrement, solid waste, SO₂ and NOx) and per capita income of monthly time series data from 2009 to 2013, uses Eviews 6.0 measurement software, and tests the environmental Kuznets curve fitting of tourism waste. The results are shown as follows. 1) There are differences between tourism waste emissions and per capita income in ancient town of different life cycle stages. The "U" curve relationship, "U" curve relationship and monotonically linear relationship existed between waste water, excrement and solid waste emissions and per capita income in the relatively mature stage of Zhouzhuang. The inflection point of "U" curve of waste water emissions is 28 197.63 t, the inflection point of "U" curve of excrement emissions is 10.82 t, and per capita income Ln(R) increased by 1%, solid waste emissions Ln(L) would increase by 0.051% of Zhouzhuang; Corresponding indicators showed the "inverted U" curve relationship, "N" type curve relationship and "N" type curve relationship in the stable development stage of Jinxi. The inflection point of "inverted U" curve of waste water emissions is 13 741.46 t, the two inflection points of "N" type curve of excrement emissions were 5.80 t and 5.54 t, the two inflection points of "N" type curve of solid waste emissions were 125.90 t and 124.81 t of Jinxi; Corresponding indicators showed the monotonically linear relationship, "inverted U" curve relationship and linear rise in the rapid development stage of Qiandeng. Per capita income Ln(R) increased by 1%, waste water emissions Ln(W_s) would increase by 0.124%, the inflection point of "inverted U" curve of excrement emissions is 12.15 t, per capita income Ln(R) increased by 1%, solid waste emissions Ln(L) would increase by 0.017% of Qiandeng; The environmental impact is small of waste gas in three ancient town. 2) One-way Granger causality relationship existed between tourism economic development and environmental quality change in the ancient towns with different life cycle stages. Per capita income was respectively the Granger cause of waste water, excrement and solid waste emissions, but waste water, excrement and solid waste emissions were not the Granger cause of per capita income in the three ancient towns. 3) The environmental impact of tourism waste are different in ancient town of different life cycle stages. Water environment index COD and NH₃-N showed a trend of decline, there was no significant difference between the interannual of TP in Zhouzhuang. There were no significant differences between the interannual of COD and NH₃-N in Jinxi. COD decreased significantly since 2009, NH₃-N showed a trend of increase, TP showed a trend of decline in Qiandeng. 4) Strengthening tourism waste management is the key factor to realize sustainable development of ancient town tourism.

Key words: tourism waste, environmental impact, environmental Kuznets curve, tourist economy, ancient water town

CLC Number:

F592.99

Hong ZHANG, Guo-lin HOU, Zhen-fang HUANG, Ye-lin FANG, Wei TU. Environmental Effect of Tourism Waste in Ancient Town: Case Study of Zhouzhuang, Jinxi, Qiandeng[J].SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2015, 35(11): 1419-1428.

Figures/Tables 6

Table 1

Comparison of basic characteristics of tourism in Zhouzhuang, Jinxi and Qiandeng"

旅游地	周庄	锦溪	千灯
旅游资源	① 主要景点：双桥、沈厅、张厅、富安桥、三毛茶楼、迷楼、全福讲寺等 ② 主要旅游活动：1996年开始连续举办中国周庄国际旅游艺术节,2005年,推出“夜游周庄”产品,2007年推出实景演出《四季周庄》	① 主要景点：莲池禅院、十眼桥、文昌阁、中国古砖瓦博物馆、张省美术馆等 ② 主要旅游活动：2000年开始连续举办旅游文化艺术节,并发展 “民间博物馆之乡” 特色旅游文化产业	① 主要景点：顾炎武故居、秦峰塔、延福寺、中国昆曲历史博物馆等 ② 主要旅游活动：2005年开始连续举办文化旅游节,并举办昆曲票友会等纪念活动
旅游市场	① 接待人次：自2009~2013年分别为337.7、589.7、484.1、495.9、446.8万人次（2010年世博会致客流增大,2012年下半年政策原因致客流减少） ② 市场客源结构：省外游客占54.1%,江苏省内游客占31.6%,海外游客占14.3%;旅游方式以团队游客为主,部分散客游	① 接待人次：自2009~2013年分别为：78.1、119.2、124.5、128.1、124.4万人次。 ② 市场客源结构：华东地区游客占38.4%,江苏省内游客占35.7%,其它省份游客占20.5%,海外游客占5.4%;旅游方式以团队游客为主,散客游为辅,部分自驾游	① 接待人次：自2009~2013年分别为：62.4、84.4、101.6、116.9、111.0万人次 ② 市场客源结构：江浙沪游客占79.7%,其它省份游客占17.9%,海外游客占2.4%;旅游方式以团队游客主,散客自驾游也较多
接待设施	能同时提供餐位15000张、标准床位4000张。工艺品商店、水上观光船、星级公厕、停车场等设施	现有40余家餐馆及旅社,旅游商店、星级公厕、停车场等设施	旅游商店、餐馆、停车场、公厕等设施
发展模式	股份制公司+企业+社区	有限责任公司+企业+社区	有限责任公司+企业+农户
发展阶段	相对成熟阶段	稳定发展阶段	快速发展阶段

Table 1

Table 2

Result of ADF unit root test of time series variables"

旅游地	变量	ADF统计值	1%临界值	5%临界值	P值	$D . W$	结论
周庄	Ln(R)	-1.680769	-3.503049	-2.893230	0.4376	2.166163	不平稳
	DLn(R)	-6.747405	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0000	1.925248	一阶单整
	Ln(W_s)	-0.552347	-3.502238	-2.892879	0.8748	2.063459	不平稳
	DLn(W_s)	-4.024232	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0025	1.959073	一阶单整
	Ln(F)	-0.234678	-3.503049	-2.893230	0.9291	1.960219	不平稳
	DLn(F)	-3.693701	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0066	1.869781	一阶单整
	Ln(L)	-2.249717	-3.502238	-2.892879	0.1906	1.879507	不平稳
	DLn(L)	-4.252520	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0012	2.053748	一阶单整
	Ln(W_SO2)	-1.853809	-3.503049	-2.893230	0.3526	2.117804	不平稳
	DLn(W_SO2)	-3.629272	-3.503879	-2.893589	0.0069	2.062409	一阶单整
	Ln(W_NOX)	-0.813561	-3.502238	-2.892879	0.8104	1.994613	不平稳
	DLn(W_NOX)	-9.521399	-3.502238	-2.892879	0.0000	1.999809	一阶单整
锦溪	Ln(R)	-1.920209	-3.571310	-2.922449	0.3206	2.279541	不平稳
	DLn(R)	-8.109260	-3.550396	-2.913549	0.0000	2.143535	一阶单整
	Ln(W_s)	-2.735964	-4.121303	-3.487845	0.2266	1.804427	不平稳
	DLn(W_s)	-6.877703	-4.127338	-3.490662	0.0000	2.051600	一阶单整
	Ln(F)	-2.522872	-4.121303	-3.487845	0.3165	1.901210	不平稳
	DLn(F)	-7.934740	-4.124265	-3.489228	0.0000	2.014911	一阶单整
	Ln(L)	-2.527550	-3.568308	-2.921175	0.1152	1.958813	不平稳
	DLn(L)	-4.908714	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0001	2.008433	一阶单整
	Ln(W_SO2)	-2.319341	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0591	2.210608	不平稳
	DLn(W_SO2)	-10.748380	-3.548208	-2.912631	0.0000	2.117184	一阶单整
	Ln(W_NOX)	-1.538903	-3.548208	-2.912631	0.5070	1.939436	不平稳
	DLn(W_NOX)	-10.316780	-3.548208	-2.912631	0.0000	1.955880	一阶单整
千灯	Ln(R)	-2.385576	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0618	1.939331	不平稳
	DLn(R)	-6.502976	-3.550396	-2.913549	0.0000	2.080174	一阶单整
	Ln(W_s)	-2.339961	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0568	2.100674	不平稳
	DLn(W_s)	-8.432927	-3.548208	-2.912631	0.0000	1.959398	一阶单整
	Ln(F)	-2.575920	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0537	1.911703	不平稳
	DLn(F)	-3.429813	-3.546099	-2.911730	0.0137	2.200682	一阶单整
	Ln(L)	-2.178498	-4.121303	-3.487845	0.4923	1.833554	不平稳
	DLn(L)	-7.436850	-4.124265	-3.489228	0.0000	1.996224	一阶单整
	Ln(W_SO2)	-2.505873	-4.124265	-3.489228	0.3244	1.958278	不平稳
	DLn(W_SO2)	-11.708950	-4.124265	-3.489228	0.0000	2.027944	一阶单整
	Ln(W_NOX)	-3.187026	-4.121303	-3.487845	0.0970	1.874285	不平稳
	DLn(W_NOX)	-8.086782	-4.124265	-3.489228	0.0000	2.000560	一阶单整

Table 2

Table 3

Results of Johansen co-integration test of environmental quality indicators"

旅游地	环境变量	原假设	迹统计量	迹统计量 5%临界值	迹统计量P值	λ-max 统计量	λ-max 5%临界值	λ-max P值	协整关系个数
周庄	Ln(W_s)	无协整关系	24.69675	15.49471	0.0016	14.59538	14.26460	0.0443	2
	Ln(W_s)	至多一个	10.10137	3.841466	0.0015	10.10137	3.841466	0.0015	2
	Ln(F)	无协整关系	29.48802	15.49471	0.0002	15.21295	14.26460	0.0353	2
	Ln(F)	至多一个	14.27506	3.841466	0.0002	14.27506	3.841466	0.0002	2
	Ln(L)	无协整关系	32.04581	15.49471	0.0001	21.06682	14.26460	0.0036	2
	Ln(L)	至多一个	10.97899	3.841466	0.0009	10.97899	3.841466	0.0009	2
	Ln(W_SO2)	无协整关系	12.12076	15.49471	0.1512	10.65575	14.26460	0.1723	0
	Ln(W_SO2)	至多一个	1.465010	3.841466	0.2261	1.465010	3.841466	0.2261	0
	Ln(W_NOX)	无协整关系	13.73775	15.49471	0.0904	11.43865	14.26460	0.1336	0
	Ln(W_NOX)	至多一个	2.299106	3.841466	0.1294	2.299106	3.841466	0.1294	0
锦溪	Ln(W_s)	无协整关系	49.50185	14.26460	0.0000	49.50185	14.26460	0.0000	1
	Ln(W_s)	至多一个	2.321644	3.841466	0.1276	2.321644	3.841466	0.1276	1
	Ln(F)	无协整关系	51.92326	15.49471	0.0000	46.25800	14.26460	0.0000	2
	Ln(F)	至多一个	5.665258	3.841466	0.0173	5.665258	3.841466	0.0173	2
	Ln(L)	无协整关系	93.20493	15.49471	0.0000	75.65180	14.26460	0.0000	2
	Ln(L)	至多一个	17.55313	3.841466	0.0000	17.55313	3.841466	0.0000	2
	Ln(W_SO2)	无协整关系	13.35729	15.49471	0.1023	12.60880	14.26460	0.0898	0
	Ln(W_SO2)	至多一个	0.748490	3.841466	0.3870	0.748490	3.841466	0.3870	0
	Ln(W_NOX)	无协整关系	15.29407	15.49471	0.0536	14.16937	14.26460	0.0581	0
	Ln(W_NOX)	至多一个	0.924697	3.841466	0.3362	0.924697	3.841466	0.3362	0
千灯	Ln(W_s)	无协整关系	46.63281	15.49471	0.0000	32.99482	14.26460	0.0000	2
	Ln(W_s)	至多一个	13.63799	3.841466	0.0002	13.63799	3.841466	0.0002	2
	Ln(F)	无协整关系	40.18959	15.49471	0.0000	34.32170	14.26460	0.0000	2
	Ln(F)	至多一个	5.867898	3.841466	0.0154	5.867898	3.841466	0.0154	2
	Ln(L)	无协整关系	38.54746	15.49471	0.0000	36.99706	14.26460	0.0000	1
	Ln(L)	至多一个	1.550407	3.841466	0.2131	1.550407	3.841466	0.2131	1
	Ln(W_SO2)	无协整关系	12.85178	15.49471	0.1204	10.16797	14.26460	0.2011	0
	Ln(W_SO2)	至多一个	2.683815	3.841466	0.1014	2.683815	3.841466	0.1014	0
	Ln(W_NOX)	无协整关系	12.84806	15.49471	0.1205	9.216343	14.26460	0.2686	0
	Ln(W_NOX)	至多一个	3.631717	3.841466	0.0567	3.631717	3.841466	0.0567	0

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

EKC inspection results of environmental quality indicators and its per capita tourism income"

旅游地	环境变量	参数估计β₀	参数估计β₁	参数估计β₂	参数估计β₃	R²	$D . W$	结论
周庄	Ln(W_s)	12.578580	-1.542690	0.255205	0	0.757818	0.944831	U型
	Ln(W_s)	(10.046540)^***	(-1.856348)^**	(1.868445)^**
	Ln(F)	4.816799	-1.846326	0.349961	0	0.801511	0.877140	U型
	Ln(F)	(1.602693)^*	(-1.925537)^*	(1.067379)^*
	Ln(L)	6.425336	0.050909	0	0	0.878931	0.989006	单调上升
	Ln(L)	(90.212720)^***	(2.229415)^**
锦溪	Ln(W_s)	5.018739	3.985564	-0.880637	0	0.624439	0.886332	倒U型
	Ln(W_s)	(1.253248)^*	(1.084849)^*	(-1.054942)^*
	Ln(F)	-7.306402	12.305150	-5.516249	0.814842	0.856681	0.929271	N型
	Ln(F)	(-5.437603)^*	(3.523812)^*	(-3.106968)^*	(1.490953)^*
	Ln(L)	-1.139595	8.154962	-3.693765	0.554886	0.759861	1.185696	N型
	Ln(L)	(-2.253579)^*	(1.289722)^*	(-1.261223)^*	(1.242099)^*
千灯	Ln(W_s)	9.510407	0.123869	0	0	0.727391	0.679305	单调上升
	Ln(W_s)	(19.782010)^***	(1.657146)^*
	Ln(F)	-5.017178	5.721732	-1.089167	0	0.774326	0.720732	倒U型
	Ln(F)	(-1.392825)^*	(2.094426)^**	(-2.116464)^**
	Ln(L)	3.979847	0.016508	0	0	0.700026	0.878459	上升
	Ln(L)	(3.660795)^***	(0.038728)

Table 5

Table 6

References 20

[1]	章锦河. 旅游废弃物生态影响评价——以九寨沟、黄山风景区为例[J].生态学报,2008,28(6):2764~2773.
[2]	黄震方,袁林旺,葛军连,等.海滨型旅游地环境承载力评价研究——以江苏海滨湿地生态旅游地为例[J].地理科学,2008,28(4):578~584. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-0690.2008.04.021
[3]	Alfred G,Gustav F,Josef L et al.Optimal periodic development of a pollution generating tourism industry[J]. European Journal of Operational Research,2001,134(3):582-591. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00279-4
[4]	Erdogan N,Baris E.Environmental protection programs and conservation practices of hotels in Ankara, Turkey[J].Tourism Management,2007,28(2):604-614. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2006.07.003
[5]	Ahmad A.The constraints of tourism development for a cultural heritage destination:The case of Kampong Ayer(Water Village) in Brunei Darussalam[J].Tourism Management Perspectives,2013,(8):106-113.
[6]	Yürüdür E,Dicle M.Settlements-natural environment relationships and tourism potential in Çamiçi (Tokat- Turkey)[J].Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,2011,(19):208-215.
[7]	Perry A.Will predicted climate change compromise the sustainability of Mediterranean tourism?[J].Journal of Sustainable Tourism,2006,14(4):367-375. doi: 10.2167/jost545.0
[8]	石强,钟林生,汪晓菲.旅游活动对张家界国家森林公园植物的影响[J].植物生态学报,2004,28(1):107~113. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2004.0016
[9]	Buckley R.Sustainable tourism:research and reality[J].Annals of Tourism Research,2012,39(2):528-546. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2012.02.003
[10]	周茜. 中国区域经济增长对环境质量的影响——基于东、中、西部地区环境库兹涅茨曲线的实证研究[J].统计与信息论坛,2011,26(10):45~51. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-3116.2011.10.008
[11]	章锦河,李曼,陈静,等.旅游废弃物的环境库兹涅茨效应分析——以黄山风景区为例[J].地理学报,2012,67(11):1537~1546. doi: 10.11821/xb201211010
[12]	Butler R W.The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution:implications for management of resources[J]. Canadian Geographer,1980,24(1):5-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0064.1980.tb00970.x
[13]	保继刚,郑海燕.苏州城市旅游地生命周期的系统动态研究[J].规划师,2004,20(11):12~16. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-0022.2004.11.003
[14]	汪德根,王金莲,陈田,等.乡村居民旅游支持度影响模型及机理——基于不同生命周期阶段的苏州乡村旅游地比较[J].地理学报,2011,66(10):1413~1426. doi: 10.11821/xb201110011
[15]	高铁梅. 计量经济分析方法与建模——EVIEWS 应用及实例[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2009:126~165.
[16]	Ning B Y,He Y Q.Tourism development and water pollution:case study in Lijiang ancient town[J].China Population,Resources and Environment,2007,17(5):123-127. doi: 10.1016/S1872-583X(08)60006-6
[17]	Davenport J,Davenport J L.The impact of tourism and personal leisure transport on coastal environments:a review[J].Estuarine,Coastal and Shelf Science,2006,(67):280-292. doi: 10.1016/j.ecss.2005.11.026
[18]	郭晖. 旅游景区垃圾收集清运探究[J].环境与可持续发展,2006,(4):10~11. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-288X.2006.04.004
[19]	Aall C.Energy use and leisure consumption in Norway:An analysis and reduction strategy[J].Journal of Sustainable Tourism,2011,19(6):729-745. doi: 10.1080/09669582.2010.536241
[20]	Saenz-de-Miera O,Rosselló J.Modeling tourism impacts on air pollution:The case study of PM10 in Mallorca[J].Tourism Management,2014,(40):273-281. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2013.06.012

旅游地	原假设	F 统计量值	伴随概率（p）	结论
周庄	Ln(R)不是Ln(W_s)的Granger原因	4.28323	0.0343	拒绝原假设^**
	Ln(W_s)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	0.60476	0.5499	接受原假设
	Ln(R)不是Ln(F)的Granger原因	3.11514	0.0613	拒绝原假设^*
	Ln(F)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	0.67156	0.5795	接受原假设
	Ln(R)不是Ln(L)的Granger原因	3.23762	0.0539	拒绝原假设^*
	Ln(L)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	0.64924	0.5871	接受原假设
锦溪	Ln(R)不是Ln(W_s)的Granger原因	6.40115	0.0103	拒绝原假设^**
	Ln(W_s)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	2.24155	0.1442	接受原假设
	Ln(R)不是Ln(F)的Granger原因	6.59243	0.0179	拒绝原假设^**
	Ln(F)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	1.06321	0.3790	接受原假设
	Ln(R)不是Ln(L)的Granger原因	18.13320	0.0000	拒绝原假设^***
	Ln(L)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	2.01310	0.1240	接受原假设
千灯	Ln(R)不是Ln(W_s)的Granger原因	17.01628	0.0020	拒绝原假设^***
	Ln(W_s)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	0.55022	0.5801	接受原假设
	Ln(R)不是Ln(F)的Granger原因	12.41151	0.0027	拒绝原假设^***
	Ln(F)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	0.60631	0.5790	接受原假设
	Ln(R)不是Ln(L)的Granger原因	5.94703	0.0123	拒绝原假设^*
	Ln(L)不是Ln(R)的Granger原因	2.88488	0.1554	接受原假设

旅游地	水环境指标	2009年	2010年	2011年	2012年	2013年
周庄	COD/(mg/L)	190.25±22.23b	205.83±6.34c	201.25±3.11c	172.75±39.63b	145.63±10.50a
	NH₃-N/(mg/L)	52.67±6.96c	46.50±1.57c	47.50±1.45c	30.00±13.49a	37.50±12.82b
	TP/(mg/L)	3.00±0.38a	3.00±0.12a	3.08±0.19a	2.85±0.54a	3.13±0.23a
锦溪	COD/(mg/L)	191.81±28.34a	193.94±24.88a	215.35±41.12a	192.32±28.86a	213.92±14.11a
	NH₃-N/(mg/L)	25.82±5.58a	25.34±3.95a	25.14±4.85a	22.03±5.02a	26.09±5.53a
	TP/(mg/L)	2.99±0.51b	3.31±0.77b	2.57±0.65a	3.01±0.53b	3.50±0.33b
千灯	COD/(mg/L)	397.12±86.58b	222.17±11.96a	224.43±22.96a	240.61±32.81a	222.21±39.99a
	NH₃-N/(mg/L)	19.43±4.46a	19.22±4.16a	28.69±1.93b	28.25±1.49b	27.04±3.69b
	TP/(mg/L)	4.68±2.25b	8.95±2.57c	4.93±2.10b	3.30±0.49a	2.30±0.43a

Environmental Effect of Tourism Waste in Ancient Town: Case Study of Zhouzhuang, Jinxi, Qiandeng

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Cited

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 6

References 20

Related Articles 4

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	Zhao-feng WANG, Han YU. Disparity of Regional Response of Tourism Industry in Southwest China [J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2013, 33(3): 322-328.
[2]	CHE Xiu-zhen, CHEN Xiao-dan, XIE Lin-shen, SHEN Yi-qing. Recycle Economy Indicator System in Environmental Impact Assessment [J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2009, 29(5): 646-650.
[3]	ZHAO Ying-xue, DONG Yu-xiang. Tourisim Land Use Change and Its Eco-environmental Impacts [J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2009, 29(2): 294-299.
[4]	SONG Tao, ZHENG Ting-Guo, TONG Lian-Jun. Theoretical Analysis and Econometric Testing on Relationship of Environmental Pollution and Economic Growth [J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2007, 27(2): 156-162.