|
| 恢复类耕地潜力影响因子诊断与重点区域识别——以安徽省利辛县为例 |
| Diagnosis of impact factors and identification of key areas for potential recovery of cultivated land：a case study of Lixin County，Anhui Province |
| 投稿时间：2025-01-06 |
| DOI：10.13254/j.jare.2025.0014 |
| 中文关键词: 耕地恢复 即可恢复地类 工程恢复地类 潜力分区 影响因子 |
| 英文关键词: cultivated land restoration recoverable land engineerable recoverable land potential zoning impact factor |
| 基金项目:安徽省社会科学创新发展研究课题（2024CX062）；自然资源部江淮耕地资源保护与生态修复重点实验室开放课题（ARPE-2023-KF04） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 422 |
| 全文下载次数: 277 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 为探究恢复类耕地的分布特征和恢复潜能，本研究以第三次全国国土调查标注的“即可恢复”和“工程恢复”地类为基础数据，利用景观格局分析、模糊综合评价和地统计分析对安徽省利辛县恢复类耕地进行因子诊断与重点区域识别。结果表明：利辛县恢复类耕地破碎度高，主要分布在县域西南部、高速公路沿线及县域北部毗邻区；即可恢复地类在总规模、集中连片度和斑块大小方面高于工程恢复地类。农业生产适宜性、生态技术能力、社会经济水平是耕地恢复潜力的判定依据，基于自然本底和修复工具的不同，即可恢复和工程恢复的上述权重分别为0.730 6、0.188 4、0.081 0和0.071 9、0.649 1、0.279 0。利辛县即可恢复潜力中、高值区占比共计53.76%，集中于县域中部和北部；工程恢复潜力以中、低值区为主，占比共计55.44%，从中部向西东扩散。耕地恢复潜力存在由北向南呈现出高-低-高的分布态势；东西向以高速公路为轴，由内向外呈高-低-高空间异质性分布特征。研究表明，平原地区恢复类耕地分布受交通路网、河流和生态园地影响的可能性较大。即可恢复属性地类在识别恢复潜力重点区域中起主导作用，恢复潜力重点区域分布在自然禀赋条件好、经济发展水平来构成主要约束，同时农民恢复意愿与可行性较高的区域。本研究提出的基于恢复视角、统筹恢复类耕地的补充耕地潜力研究框架能够较精准地识别出影响因子和重点区域，可为区域治理和耕地管控提供新的思路。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| To explore the distribution characteristics and restoration potential of recovery attribute land, this study utilized data from the “recoverable”and“engineerable recoverable”land categories annotated in the Third National Land Survey. Landscape pattern analysis, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, and geostatistical analysis were employed to diagnose influencing factors and identify key areas of recovery attribute land in Lixin County, Anhui Province. The results showed that the recovery attribute land in Lixin County exhibited high fragmentation, primarily distributed in the southwestern part of the county, along the expressway, and in the adjacent northern areas. The recoverable land category surpassed the engineerable recoverable land category in terms of total scale, concentration, and patch size. Agricultural production suitability, ecological technical capacity, and socio-economic level were identified as the primary criteria for evaluating cultivated land restoration potential. Based on differences in natural conditions and restoration tools, the weights for these factors in recoverable land and engineerable recoverable land were 0.730 6, 0.188 4, 0.081 0 and 0.071 9, 0.649 1, 0.279 0, respectively. The medium and high-value zones of recoverable land potential account for 53.76% of the total, concentrated in the central and northern parts of the county, while the engineerable recoverable land potential was dominated by medium and low-value zones, accounting for 55.44% and showing a diffusion pattern from the central area toward the west and east. The restoration potential of cultivated land exhibited a highlow-high distribution pattern from north to south and a high-low-high spatial heterogeneity along the east-west axis centered on the expressway. The study concludes that the distribution of recovery attribute land in plain areas is likely influenced by transportation networks, rivers, and ecological gardens. The recoverable land category plays a dominant role in identifying key areas for restoration potential. These areas are primarily characterized by favorable natural endowments, relatively moderate economic conditions that do not pose significant constraints, and a combination of both strong willingness and high feasibility for agricultural restoration. The proposed research framework, based on a restoration perspective and integrating recovery attribute land, can accurately identify influencing factors and key areas, providing new insights for regional governance and cultivated land management. |
| HTML
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
