美国荒野风景河流的空间分布特征及其对中国的启示

doi:10.11821/dlyj020180905

地理研究 ›› 2020, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (1): 166-185.doi: 10.11821/dlyj020180905

美国荒野风景河流的空间分布特征及其对中国的启示

李鹏^1,^2,⁴, 赵敏^3,⁴(), 艾伦·沃森^2,⁴, 杨鹏^3,⁴, 余丹^1,⁴

^1. 云南大学工商管理与旅游管理学院,昆明650500
^2. 美国农业部林务局落基山研究院奥尔多·利奥波德荒野研究所,米苏拉MT 59801;
^3. 云南大学建筑与规划学院,昆明650500
^4. 国家林业和草原局国家公园管理局国家公园规划研究中心,昆明650216

收稿日期:2018-08-20 修回日期:2019-05-14 出版日期:2020-01-20 发布日期:2020-03-20
通讯作者: 赵敏
作者简介:李鹏（1969-）,男,湖南南县人,副教授,硕士生导师,研究方向为保护地与游憩、生态旅游。E-mail: leap58@yahoo.com
基金资助:
中国国家自然科学基金(4171111);美国富布莱特项目Fulbright Program(FSP-P000287)

Spatial characteristics of the national wild and scenic rivers system in the United States and its enlightenment to China

LI Peng^1,^2,⁴, ZHAO Min^3,⁴(), Alan Watson^2,⁴, YANG Peng^3,⁴, YU Dan^1,⁴

^1. School of Business and Tourism Management, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China
^2. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Server, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute, Missoula, MT 59801, USA
^3. School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, China
^4. National Park Administration of China, National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Planning and Research Center of National Park, Kunming 650216, China

Received:2018-08-20 Revised:2019-05-14 Online:2020-01-20 Published:2020-03-20
Contact: ZHAO Min

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

美国荒野风景河流体系是全球最早建立的河流保护地类型。经过50年发展,其完善的体系呈现出一定空间分布特征。将线状国家荒野风景河流（NWSR）抽象为点状单元,对208个NWSR单元进行空间计算,并与自然生态和社会经济等因素进行叠加分析。结果表明,美国已有40个州分布NWSR,其中以俄勒冈等3个州的数量分布最多,且集中分布于特定的区域：西部的太平洋海岸、落基山脉和山间高地3个自然地理区;极地、温湿润、干旱3个Ⅰ级生态区;太平洋西北部、加利福尼亚、阿拉斯加及五大湖4个流域。NWSR线密度与州域的人口密度、经济水平相关性不强,但与大坝建设密切相关。荒野思想影响了法案制定,法案指导了遴选标准,遴选标准又进一步影响了NWSR的空间分布。研究对中国的借鉴意义在于：应当明确保护地指导思想、关注价值突出区域、确定合适遴选标准、重视保护地系统规划等。

关键词: 荒野风景河流体系, 河流保护地, 空间分布规律, 河流线密度, 核密度

Abstract:

The Wild and Scenic Rivers System (NWSRS) of the United States designated the earliest protected river system in the world. After 50 years of existence, the system continues to grow and to fulfill the promise of the original legislation. National Wild and Scenic Rivers (NWSR) are linear, and cross boundaries, including federal, state and private lands, and represent a variety of ecosystems and serve a variety of human populations. This paper uses available NWSRS and other biophysical river data, US natural ecological and socio-economic data, GIS and other analysis softwares for development of graphical overlays and correlation analysis. There are currently 208 NWSRS units, unevenly distributed across the United States. Parameters of this system can be analyzed, based on a Kernel Density tool to calculate the density of selected features in a neighborhood around those line or point features. A linear density measure is the length of NWSRs in each state. Based on these analyses, this paper further discusses the relevance of this distribution to natural and socio-economic variables in the US. The results show that while the NWSRS units in 40 of 50 states, three states far exceed the others: Oregon, Alaska and California. There is only one unit of the NWSRS in each of 18 states in the United States, most of which are located in the eastern region. In addition, 10 states, concentrated in the Great Plains, do not have NWSRS units. High density of NWSRS units occurs in three physical geographical regions: the Pacific Coast, the high mountains, and the Rocky Mountains. Low densities of NWSRS units are found in the Plains and the Atlantic Plain. NWSRS units are distributed in Polar, Humid Temperate, Dry, Humid Tropical Domains; and only one ecological Division of the US has no NWSRS units. NWSRS units are mainly concentrated in four major continental watersheds: the Pacific Northwest, California, Alaska and Great Lake. The correlation between line density of NWSRS units and population density and level of economic development is not strong, but it is closely related to high dams. There are many reasons for the current spatial distribution of the NWSRS, especially the ideology behind political motivations for legislative protection. A guiding ideology for river conservation is needed, river designation recommendations must pay attention to key areas which have unique societal values and threats to those values, and establishing protected area selection criteria. A national system plan is needed.

Key words: National Wild and Scenic River (NWSR), protected river system, spatial characteristics, river line density, Kernel Density

李鹏, 赵敏, 艾伦·沃森, 杨鹏, 余丹. 美国荒野风景河流的空间分布特征及其对中国的启示[J]. 地理研究, 2020, 39(1): 166-185.

LI Peng, ZHAO Min, Alan Watson, YANG Peng, YU Dan. Spatial characteristics of the national wild and scenic rivers system in the United States and its enlightenment to China[J]. GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH, 2020, 39(1): 166-185.

图/表 16

图1

图2

表1

图3

表2

图4

表3

表4

不同类型不同层级生态分区中的NWSR单元数量分布"

Ⅰ级生态区大区Domain		Ⅱ级生态区亚区Division			Ⅲ级生态区小区Province
编号/ 名称	NWSR 数量（个）	编号/ 名称	数量（个）		编号/ 名称	数量（个）
100/极地 Polar	25	120/冻土undra	11		125/白令冻土带（北） Bering Tundra (Northern)	1
					126/白令冻土带（南Bering Tundra （Southern））	1
					M121/布鲁克斯岭冻土带-极地荒漠 Brooks Range Tundra-Polar Desert	8
					M127/阿留申海洋草甸-荒野 Aleutian Oceanic Meadow-Heath	1
		130/亚北极\ Subarctic	14		131/育空山间高原台地 Yukon Intermountain Plateaus Tayga	2
					135/沿海槽湿润台地 Coastal Trough Humid Tayga	1
					M131/育空山间高原台地 Yukon intermountain Plateaus Tayga	3
					M135/阿拉斯加山脉湿润台地 Alaska Range Humid Tayga	4
					M139/上育空台地-草甸 Upper Yukon Tayga--Meadow	4
200/温湿润 Humid Temperate	121	210/温大陆性亚区 Warm Continental	26		212/劳伦混交林 Laurentian Mixed Forest	21
					M212/阿迪朗达克dirondack	5
		220/热大陆性亚区 Hot Continental	25		221/东部阔叶林（海生） Eastern Broadleaf Forest (Oceanic)	11
					222/东部阔叶林（陆生） Eastern Broadleaf Forest (Continental)	4
					M221/中阿巴拉契亚阔叶林 Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest	5
					M222/密苏里州阔叶林 Ozark Broadleaf Forest	5
		230/亚热带亚区 Subtropical	7		231/东南部混交林 Southeastern Mixed Forest	1
					232/外海岸平原混交林 Outer Coastal Plain Mixed Forest	4
					M231/沃希托混交林-草甸 Ouachita Mixed Forest-Meadow	2
		240/海洋亚区 Marine	35		M242/喀斯喀特混交林 Cascade Mixed Forest	35
		250/草原亚区 Prairie	1		251/草原稀树高原（温） Prairie Parkland (Temperate)	1
		260/地中海亚区 Mediterranean	27		261/加州沿海森林和灌木林 California Coastal Chaparral Forest and Shrub	1
					262/加州干旱草原 California Dry Steppe	1
					263/加州干旱草原 California Dry Steppe	2
Ⅰ级生态区大区Domain		Ⅱ级生态区亚区Division			Ⅲ级生态区小区Province
编号/ 名称	NWSR 数量（个）	编号/ 名称		数量（个）	编号/ 名称		数量（个）
					M261/内华达山区干草原-混交林 Sierran Steppe-Mixed Forest		16
					M262/加州沿海稀疏丛林 California Coastal Range Open Woodland		7
300/干旱Dry	58	310/热带/亚热带草原亚Tropical/Subtropical Steppe		4	313/科罗拉多高原半荒漠 Colorado Plateau Semi-Desert		2
					M313/亚利桑那-新墨西哥州山脉 Arizona-New Mexico Mountains		2
		320/热带/亚热带沙漠Tropical/Subtropical Desert		0			0
		330/温带草原 Temperate Steppe		54	331/大平原-帕卢斯干旱区 Great Plains-Palouse Dry		22
					332/大平原草原 Great Plains Steppe		1
					M331/南落基山脉草原 Southern Rocky Mountains Steppe		5
					M332/中落基山脉草原 Middle Rocky Mountains Steppe		18
					M333/北落基山脉森林草原 Northern Rocky Mountains Forest-Steppe		2
					341/山间半荒漠和荒漠 Intermountain Semi-Desert and Desert		1
					342/山间半荒漠 Intermountain Semi-Desert		24
		340/温带荒漠 Temperate Desert		1	M341/内华达-犹他州山脉半荒漠 Nevada-Utah Mountains Semi-Desert		1
400/热湿润 Humid Tropical	4	410/稀树草原 Savanna		4	411/大沼泽地 Everglades		1
		420/稀树草原山脉 Savanna Regime Mountains			M411/波多黎各 Puerto Rico		3

表4

图5

表5

图6

表6

图7

表7

图8

图9

参考文献 42

[1]	李鸿源, 胡通哲, 施上粟 . 水域生态工程. 北京: 中国水利水电出版社, 2012.
	[ Li Hongyuan, Hu Tongzhe, Shi Shangli . Water Ecological Engineering. Beijing: China Water & Power Press, 2012.]
[2]	张振明, 刘俊国, 申碧峰 , 等. 永定河(北京段) 河流生态系统服务价值评估. 环境科学学报, 2011,31(9):1851-1857.
	[ Zhang Zhenming, Liu Junguo, Shen Bifeng , et al. Evaluation of ecosystem services of the Yongding River in Beijing. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 2011,31(9):1851-1857.]
[3]	Armatas C A, Campbell R M, Watson A E , et al. An integrated approach to valuation and tradeoff analysis of ecosystem services for National Forest decision-making. Ecosystem Services, 2018,33:1-18.
[4]	Nel J L, Roux D J, Maree G , et al. Rivers in Peril inside and outside protected areas: A systematic approach to conservation assessment of river ecosystems. Diversity and Distributions, 2007,13(3):341-352.
[5]	Nigel D . Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, 2008.
[6]	Vörösmarty C J, McIntyre P B, Gessner M O , et al. Global threats to human water wecurity and river biodiversity. Nature, 2010,467(7315):555.
[7]	Noe L . Canadas Heritage Rivers: Newfoundland and Labrador: Breakwater Books Ltd, 1995.
[8]	Hughey K F D, Rennie H G, Williams N J . New Zealand's ‘Wild and Scenic Rivers’: Geographical aspects of 30 years of water conservation orders. New Zealand Geographer, 2014,70(1):22-32.
[9]	Stein J L, Stein J A, Nix H A . Wild rivers in Australia. International Journal of Wilderness, 2001,7(1):20-24.
[10]	Palmer T . A legacy of river. International Journal of Wilderness, 2017,23(2):4-9.
[11]	American Rivers, National Park Service . Use and economic importance of the wild and scenic Chattooga river. https://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Document/fetch/documentid/271/.raw , 2003.
[12]	Cordell H K, Bergstrom J C, Ashley G A , et al. Econonmic effects of river recreation on local economies. Water Resources Bulletin, 1990,23(1):53-60.
[13]	Smith J W, Moore R L . Perceptions of community benefits from two wild and scenic rivers. Environmental Management, 2011,47(5):814-827.
[14]	United States Department of Agriculture. Wild and scenic rivers and the use of eminent domain. , 1998.
[15]	Bowker J M, Bergstrom J C . Wild and scenic rivers: An economic perspective. International Journal of Wilderness, 2017,23(2):22-33.
[16]	Pracheil B M, McIntyre P B, Lyons J D . Enhancing conservation of large-river biodiversity by accounting for tributaries. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2013,11(3):124-128.
[17]	Brown T C, Daniel T C . Landscape aesthetics of Riparian environments: Relationship of flow quantity to scenic quality along a wild and scenic river. Water Resources Research, 1991,27(8):1787-1795.
[18]	Abell R, Allan J D, Lehner B . Unlocking the potential of protected areas for freshwaters. Biological Conservation, 2007,134(1):48-63.
[19]	Gimblett H R, Scott C A, Hammersley M . Dam removal on the Lower White Salmon River: Rewilding, sacred spaces, and “Outstandingly Remarkable Values”. International Journal of Wilderness, 2017,23(2):34-40.
[20]	Verbos R, Vadala C, Mali P , et al. The visitor use management framework: Application to wild and scenic rivers. International Journal of Wilderness, 2017,23(2):10-15.
[21]	Perry D E . Reframing the wild and scenic rivers act ecosystem-based resilience and adaptation. International Journal of Wilderness, 2017,23(2):41-48.
[22]	Fredrickson B, Lacroix K M . Wild and scenic rivers into the next 50 years: Lessons from the re-watering and restoration of Fossil Creek. International Journal of Wilderness, 2017,23(2):16-21.
[23]	朱里莹, 徐姗, 兰思仁 . 中国国家级保护地空间分布特征及对国家公园布局建设的启示. 地理研究, 2017,36(2):307-320.
	[ Zhu Liying, Xu Shan, Lan Siren . Spatial distribution characteristics of national protected areas and the inspirations to national parks in China. Geographical Research, 2017,36(2):307-320.]
[24]	Rudemo M . Empirical choice of histograms and kernel density estimators. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 1982: 65-78.
[25]	邹琳, 曾刚, 曹贤忠 , 等. 长江经济带的经济联系网络空间特征分析. 经济地理, 2015,35(6):1-7.
	[ Zou Lin, Zeng Gang, Cao XianZhong , et al. Research on spatial characteristic of the economic relation network of Yangtze Economic Zone. Economic Geography, 2015,35(6):1-7.]
[26]	曹卫斌, 叶朋, 赵慧 . 全国河流的密度统计方法. 水利水电工程设计, 2015, ( 2):53-55.
	[ Cao Weibin, Ye Peng, Zhao Hui . Staitistics methods of river density in the country. Design of Water Resources & Hydroelectric Engineering, 2015, ( 2):53-55.]
[27]	刘国明, 杨效忠, 林艳 , 等. 中国国家森林公园的空间集聚特征与规律分析. 生态经济, 2010, ( 2):131-134.
	[ Liu Guoming, Yang Xiaozhong, Lin Yan , et al. The spatial concentration characteristics and the rule analysis on the national forest park in China. Ecological Economy, 2010, ( 2):131-134.]
[28]	王远飞何洪林. 空间数据分析方法. 北京: 科学出版社, 2007.
	[ Wang Yuanfei, He Honglin. Spatial Data Analysis Method. Beijing: Science Press, 2007.]
[29]	潘竟虎, 张建辉 . 中国国家湿地公园空间分布特征与可接近性. 生态学杂志, 2014,33(5):1359-1367.
	[ Pan Jinghu, Zhang Jianhui . Spatial distribution characteristics and accessibility of national wetland parks in China. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2014,33(5):1359-1367.]
[30]	付励强, 孔石, 宗诚 , 等. 中国湿地保护区与湿地公园空间分布差异. 湿地科学, 2015,13(3):356-363.
	[ Fu Liqiang, Kong Shi, Zong cheng , et al. The difference of spatial distribution of wetland nature reserves and wetland parks in China. Wetland Science, 2015,13(3):356-363.]
[31]	焦怡雪 . 美国历史环境保护中的非政府组织. 国外城市规划, 2003,18(1):59-63.
	[ Jiao Yixue . The non-governmental organizations of historic preservation in U.S.A. Urban Planning International, 2003,18(1):59-63.]
[32]	Bonham C H . The wild and scenic rivers act and the Oregon trilogy. Public Land & Resources Law Review, 2000,21:109-144.
[33]	Atwood W W . The Physiographic Provinces of North America. Boston: Ginn and Company, 1940.
[34]	Bailey R G . Ecogeographic Analysis: A Guide to the Ecological Division of Land for Resource Management. Washington DC: USDA Forest Service, 1988.
[35]	孙小银, 周启星, 于宏兵 , 等. 中美生态分区及其分级体系比较研究. 生态学报, 2010,30(11):3010-3017.
	[ Sun Xiaoyin, Zhou Qixing, Yu Hongbing , et al. Comparative study on ecoregion and its classification systems between China and USA. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010,30(11):3010-3017.]
[36]	李鹏, 何琳思, 赵敏 , 等. 基于自然区域特征和生态代表性的加拿大国家公园动态反馈遴选机制. 热带地理, 2017,37(4):569-579.
	[ Li Peng, He Linsi, Zhao Min , et al. National park selection mechanism in Canada based on system feedback. Tropical Geography, 2017,37(4):569-579.]
[37]	李鹏, 张端, 戴向前 , 等. 美国荒野风景河流体系发展阶段及其主要影响因素. 南水北调与水利科技, 2018,16(99):182-190.
	[ Li Peng, Zhang Duan, Dai Xiangqian , et al. Development stages of U.S. national wild and scenic rivers system and main influencing factors. South-to-North Water Transfers and Water Science & Technology, 2018,16(99):182-190.]
[38]	Primack R B . Essentials of Conservation Biology. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, 2006.
[39]	Myers N . Threatened biotas: " Hot Spots" in tropical forests. The Environmentalist, 1988,8(3):187-208.
[40]	雷富民, 卢建利, 刘耀 , 等. 中国鸟类特有种及其分布格局. 动物学报, 2002,48(5):599-610.
	[ Lei Fumin, Lu Jianli, Liu Yao , et al. Endemic bird species to China and their distribution. Current Zoology, 2002,48(5):599-610.]
[41]	Stein B A, Kutner L S, Adams J S. Precious Heritage: The Status of Biodiversity in the United States. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand, 2000.
[42]	李鹏, 张端, 赵敏 , 等. 自然保护地非完全中央集权政府治理模式研究: 以美国荒野风景河流体系为例. 北京林业大学学报, 2019,18(1):60-69.
	[ Li Peng, Zhang Duan, Zhao Min , et al. Natural protected area: National wild and scenic rivers system in USA as a case. Journal of Beijing Forestry University (Social Sciences), 2019,18(1):60-69.]

州名	缩写	州名	缩写	州名	缩写	州名	缩写	州名	缩写
亚拉巴马	AL	爱达荷	ID	密歇根	MI	纽约	NY	南达科他	SD
阿拉斯加	AK	伊利诺伊	IL	明尼苏达	MN	北卡罗来纳	NC	田纳西	TN
亚利桑那	AZ	印第安纳	IN	密西西比	MS	北达科他	ND	德克萨斯	TX
阿肯色	AR	艾奥瓦	IA	密苏里	MO	俄亥俄	OH	犹他	UT
加利福尼亚	CA	堪萨斯	KS	蒙大拿	MT	俄克拉何马	OK	佛蒙特	VT
科罗拉多	CO	肯塔基	KY	内布拉斯加	NE	俄勒冈	OR	弗吉尼亚	VA
康涅狄格	CT	路易斯安那	LA	内达华	NV	宾夕法尼亚	PA	华盛顿	WA
特拉华	DE	缅因	ME	新罕布什尔	NH	波多黎各	PUR	西弗吉尼亚	WV
佛罗里达	FL	马里兰	MD	新泽西	NJ	罗得岛	RI	威斯康星	WI
佐治亚	GA	马萨诸塞	MA	新墨西哥	NM	南卡罗来纳	SC	怀俄明	WY
夏威夷	HI

发展阶段	NWSR发展单元数量（个）	重点发展州
第一阶段（1968—1978年）	18	爱达荷
第二阶段（1979—1988年）	51	阿拉斯加、加利福尼亚
第三阶段（1989—1998年）	85	俄勒冈、密执安
第四阶段（1999—2008年）	11	波多黎各
第五阶段（2009—2018年）	43	俄勒冈、爱达荷、加利福尼亚

自然区域	太平洋海岸	山间高地	落基山脉	内陆平原	加拿大地盾	海岸平原	阿巴拉契亚高地	夏威夷	波多黎各
国土面积（万km²）	72.41	209.64	90.93	351.44	12.45	145.77	77.94	1.66	0.91
面积占比（%）	7.52	21.77	9.44	36.49	1.29	15.13	8.09	0.17	0.09
NWSR单元数量（个）	60	60	20	28	6	13	18	0	3
数量占比（%）	28.85	28.85	9.62	13.46	2.88	6.25	8.65	0	1.44

流域	子流域	面积（km²）	面积占比（%）	NWSR 数量	NWSR数量占比（%）	NWSR 长度（km）	NWSR长度占比（%）
西北太平洋沿海流域 Pacific Northwest		729953	7.58	82	39.42	5008.50	24.45
加利福尼亚 California		442411	4.59	26	12.50	3370.21	16.45
大盆地 Great Basin		378628	3.93	0	0.00	0.00	0.00
里奥格兰德 Rio Grande		386212	4.01	4	1.92	507.64	2.48
克萨斯-海湾 Texas-Gulf		478907	4.97	0	0.00	0.00	0.00
南部大西洋海湾流域 South Atlantic Gulf		743574	7.72	9	4.33	523.41	2.55
Souris-Red Rainy 苏里斯-红河流域		157315	1.63	0	0.00	0.00	0.00
五大湖 Great Lakes		293054	3.04	17	8.17	1094.76	5.34
北部大西洋沿海流域 North Atlantic	北部大西洋沿海流域中部 Mid Atlantic	275058	2.86	5	2.40	914.39	4.46
	新英格兰 New England	167356	1.74	9	4.33	584.07	2.85
科罗拉多河 Colorado River	科罗拉多河上游Upper Colorado	301698	3.13	0	0.00%	0.00	0.00
	科罗拉多河下游Lower Colorado	401029	4.16	3	1.44	364.60	1.78
密苏里流域 Missouri Drainage Basin	密苏里河Missouri	1390335	14.44	5	2.40	1383.26	6.75
	阿肯色-红-白河 Arkansas White Red	667035	6.93	9	4.33	414.64	2.02
	密西西比河上游Upper Mississippi	508915	5.28	1	0.48	405.47	1.98
	密西西比河下游Lower Mississippi	261150	2.71	1	0.48	25.26	0.12
	田纳西河Tennessee	112226	1.17	1	0.48	72.89	0.36
	俄亥俄河Ohio	429480	4.46	8	3.85	639.90	3.12
阿拉斯加Alaska		1481347	15.38	25	12.02	5164.89	25.21
波多黎各Puerto Rico		9104	0.09	3	1.44	14.32	0.07
夏威夷Hawaii		16635	0.17	0	0.00	0.00	0.00
合计		9631420	1	208	100.00	20488.20	100.00

			Zscore（Pop）	Zscore（L_NWSR）
斯皮尔曼等级相关系数	Zscore（Pop）	相关系数	1.000	0.117
		显著性（双尾）	.	0.420
		N	50	50
	Zscore（L_NWSR）	相关系数	0.117	1.000
		显著性（双尾）	0.420	.
		N	50	50

美国荒野风景河流的空间分布特征及其对中国的启示

Spatial characteristics of the national wild and scenic rivers system in the United States and its enlightenment to China

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 16

参考文献 42

相关文章 8

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	湛东升, 张文忠, 张娟锋, 李佳洺, 谌丽, 党云晓. 北京市公共服务设施集聚中心识别分析[J]. 地理研究, 2020, 39(3): 554-569.
[2]	陈烨烽, 王艳慧, 王小林. 中国贫困村测度与空间分布特征分析[J]. 地理研究, 2016, 35(12): 2298-2308.
[3]	马林兵, 魏慧丽, 曹小曙. 基于FCD数据的城市有效路网密度评价——以广州荔湾区和越秀区为例[J]. 地理研究, 2015, 34(3): 541-554.
[4]	王泽宇, 崔正丹, 孙才志, 韩增林, 郭建科. 中国海洋经济转型成效时空格局演变研究[J]. 地理研究, 2015, 34(12): 2295-2308.
[5]	董丞妍, 谭亚玲, 罗明良, 翟有龙. 中国“癌症村”的聚集格局[J]. 地理研究, 2014, 33(11): 2115-2124.
[6]	蒋天颖. 浙江省区域创新产出空间分异特征及成因[J]. 地理研究, 2014, 33(10): 1825-1836.
[7]	王瑶莉, 高松, 刘瑜. 青岛城市道路邻近中心性及其应用方法[J]. 地理研究, 2013, 32(3): 452-464.
[8]	高爽, 魏也华, 陈雯, 赵海霞. 发达地区制造业集聚和水污染的空间关联——以无锡市区为例[J]. 地理研究, 2011, 30(5): 902-912.