基于能值分析的哈尔滨所辖市县土地资源生态安全评价

科学评价城市扩张冲击下所辖市县的土地资源生态安全，对合理利用土地资源，促进城市所辖市县经济、社会、生态持续稳定健康发展具有重要意义。以哈尔滨所辖市县为研究区，运用能值分析法和“压力—状态—影响—响应（PSIR）”模型构建土地资源生态安全评价体系和土地资源生态安全可持续能值指数（EULESI），结合可持续发展能值指数（EISD）与EULESI进行相关性分析，从而对2004—2011年研究区近8 a土地资源生态安全状态进行评价。结果表明:（1）可持续发展能值指标（EISD）与EULESI二者相关性系数为0.84，具有极强相关性，相较于EISD指数，EULESI指数对土地资源生态安全评价研究更具有敏感性和代表性，同时作为评价土地资源生态安全水平指标具有科学性，可用于其他类似地区的相关研究评价指标；（2）2004—2011年城市扩张后的研究区土地资源生态安全总体呈递减趋势，土地资源生态安全水平波动较大，处于较不稳定发展阶段，总体处于较不安全水平。具体而言，2004—2006年研究区土地资源生态安全处于较安全水平；2007—2008年处于较不安全水平；2009—2010年均处于临界安全水平；2011年数值为近8 a来最低值，处于较不安全水平，土地资源生态环境受到严重威胁。总而言之，能值分析法能够客观揭示各个指标自身涵义，有效避免评价过于主观性，研究结果符合研究区实际情况。

Ecological Security Evaluation of Land Resources in the Cities and Counties Under the Jurisdiction of Harbin Based on Energy Analysis

Scientific evaluation of urban expansion impact of land resource ecological security of cities and counties has a great significance of the rational use of land resources, and promoting cities and counties under the jurisdiction of the municipality in the economic, social, ecological, steady and healthy development. This paper selected cities and counties under the jurisdiction of Harbin as a study case. Based on pressure-state-impact-respose (PSIR) model and by using energy analysis method, the land resources ecological security evaluation system and enery-based urban land resource ecological security index (EULESI) were constructed, it was the analysis of correlation to energy the context of sustainable development index (EISD) and EULESI, and the variation of land resources ecological security level of the study area in 2004—2011 was evaluated. The correlation of EISD and EULESI is 0.84, which showed the strong correlation. Compared to EISD index, EULESI is more sensitive and representative to the land resource ecological security evaluation. At the same time, as the evaluation of land resource ecological security is more scientific, and it can be used for the evaluation of other similar area. The results show that the degree of land resources ecological security of the study area had been overall gradually decreasing trend from 2004 to 2011, indicating a great fluctuation and a less stable developing stage, but overall it was at a less secure. In 2004—2006, the land resource ecological security of the study area was at the safer level, and then it was at a relatively unsafe level in 2007—2008; after two years, it was located somewhere in the level of criticality safety; the EULESI index was the lowest value for nearly 8 years, less unsafe level, and then the land resource ecological environment was being a seriously threatened. All in all, energy analysis can objectively understand the meanings of the various indices, and effectively avoiding evaluation is too subjective, the results of this study area meet with the actual situation.