---

作 者 ：方广玲, 香宝, 唐古拉, 赵卫, 胡钰, 张立坤, 金霞

期 刊 ：草地学报 2015年 23卷 1期 页码：5-13

关键词：可持续发展；生态足迹；生态承载力；生态监测指标；西藏；

Keywords:Sustainable development, Ecological footprints, Biological capacity, Ecological monitoring index, Tibet,

摘 要 ：为西藏建立一套行之有效地生态监测指标体系,帮助管理部门及时而准确地了解该地区的生态状况与变化,以1996,2000,2005和2010年土地利用数据为基础,采用生态足迹模型定量评价地区可持续发展情况,采用压力-状态-响应概念模型,构建生态监测指标体系.结果表明:1996年西藏地区人均生态足迹与承载力分别为1.444和6.628 hm²,2010年分别为4.051和5.350 hm²,生态盈余迅速减少;耕地和草地生态足迹占总生态足迹的绝大部分比重;1996—2005年,耕地生态供给一直处于盈余状态,而到2010年,耕地的生态足迹达到其承载力的近3倍,2000年以前草地承载力明显大于足迹,到2010年草地资源人均生态赤字为0.055 hm².西藏地区可持续发展能力在逐年下降,草地资源利用、社会经济发展规模扩大和矿产资源开发带来的生态压力不断增大,与此同时,草地、森林和农田等自然生态系统的承载能力却在下降.

Abstract:Tibet is a significantly ecological shelter zone of China. Therefore, it is urgent to establish an appropriately ecological monitoring index system of assisting the relevant administration in supervising the ecological status and variation promptly and precisely. In the context of this research work, the ability of sustainable development was quantitatively evaluated using the ecological footprint model and the ecological monitoring index system was built based on the "stress-status-response" model with the data in the year of 1996, 2000, 2005 and 2010 in Tibet area. The results indicated that the per capita ecological footprint and biological capacity were 1.444 and 6.628 hm² in 1996, and were 4.051 and 5.350 hm² in 2010, while the ecological surplus rapidly decreased. The crop land and grass land dominated the entire ecological footprints as seen in the results. The ecological supply of crop land was surplus from 1996 to 2005, however, its ecological footprint was approximately 3 times of its capacity in 2010. For the situation of grass land, the biological capacity was larger than the ecological footprint before 2000, and the per capita deficit of grass land resources was around 0.055 hm². The above analyses demonstrated that the sustainable development capacity of Tibet decreased with years. The over-use of grass land, the expansion scales of the economic and social development, and the exploitation of mineral resources increased the pressure in the ecosystem of Tibet, while the biological capability of natural ecosystem, such as grass land, forest and crop land continually degenerated in the meantime.

---