EN中文

地理研究 >

2017 , Vol. 36 >Issue 5: 899 - 912

DOI: https://doi.org/10.11821/dlyj201705008

研究论文

西部乡村旅游社区社会景观敏感度分析——以甘南郎木寺镇为例

  • 陈诚 ,
  • 赵振斌 ,
  • 黄燕
展开
  • 陕西师范大学旅游与环境学院,西安 710062
通讯作者:赵振斌（1965- ）,男,陕西洛南人,教授,博士生导师,研究方向为人文地理和社区旅游。E-mail:

作者简介：陈诚（1990- ）,男,安徽桐城人,硕士,研究方向为GIS与社区旅游。E-mail:

收稿日期: 2016-10-24

  要求修回日期: 2017-02-21

  网络出版日期: 2017-05-20

基金资助

国家自然科学基金项目（41171126,41571174）

收起

Social landscape sensitivity analysis of western tourism community: A case study of Langmusi town in Gannan

  • CHEN Cheng ,
  • ZHAO Zhenbin ,
  • HUANG Yan
Expand
  • College of Tourism and Environment, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an 710062, China

Received date: 2016-10-24

  Request revised date: 2017-02-21

  Online published: 2017-05-20

Copyright

《地理研究》编辑部
Fold

摘要

旅游开发使得乡村旅游社区社会构成复杂化,多人群的空间竞争与冲突日益明显。如果能够建立社会景观敏感度的指标,对旅游开发干扰下社会问题出现的可能性进行评估,将对乡村旅游社区规划管理有重要的意义。利用参与式制图和半结构访谈的方法,对甘南郎木寺镇的藏族居民、回族居民、游客和经营者四类群体进行景观价值调查,最终获得396份访谈表和填图。在此基础上,利用地方竞争理论和景观价值理论构建旅游社区社会景观敏感度模型,并基于GIS工具计算和揭示其空间特征。研究表明：① 社会景观敏感度分析从社会互动和空间格局两个方面对旅游社区进行评价,一定程度上能够表征社会景观的格局与效应,为旅游社区规划管理提供依据;② 研究揭示的景观敏感区域空间上呈现斑状分布,承载着多人群的关注和竞争关系,与社区资源分布、多人群文化认同和环境心理因素相联系;③ 田野调查,多人群地方竞争理论和PPGIS空间分析技术的结合,为地方感研究提供了新的视角,也为社会景观研究提供了新的机遇。

关键词： 社会景观; 参与式制图; 景观价值; 敏感度; 郎木寺镇

本文引用格式

陈诚 , 赵振斌 , 黄燕 . 西部乡村旅游社区社会景观敏感度分析——以甘南郎木寺镇为例[J]. 地理研究, 2017 , 36(5) : 899 -912 . DOI: 10.11821/dlyj201705008

Abstract

Tourism development makes the social composition of rural tourism community more complex, where multi-groups compete and conflict with each other. It will be meaningful for planning and management of rural tourism community to develop the index of social landscape sensitivity and evaluate the possibility of the social problem under the disturbance of tourism development. Using participatory mapping technique and semi-structure interview, we investigated the local Tibetan residents, Hui residents, tourists and merchants at Langmusi town in Gannan. Finally, we obtained 396 sets of questionnaires, interviews and mappings that measured landscape values. On this basis, theories of place contention and landscape value provide a theoretical framework to develop a social landscape sensitivity model for the tourism community. Then based on the GIS tools, we calculate and reveal its spatial characteristics. The results show that: (1) Social landscape sensitivity analysis, which evaluates the tourism community from social interaction and spatial pattern, reflects the patterns and effects of social landscape to a certain extent and provides evidence of tourism planning and management; (2) Sensitive areas of landscape in this study show a patchy distribution of multi-groups' attention and competition, which is associated with the distribution of community resources, cultural identity and environmental psychological factors. (3) The combination of field work, multi-groups' competition theory and PPGIS spatial analysis technology provides a new perspective for the study of sense of place, and also provides new opportunities for the study of social landscape.

Key words： social landscape; participatory mapping; landscape value; sensitivity; Langmusi town

1 引言

社会景观是地域和人群构成的社会空间,是感知、态度、价值观和行为的综合体[1,2]。由于多人群互动,社会景观具有明显的竞争特征[3,4]。随着现代社会流动性的增强,社会景观结构日趋复杂化,社会竞争和冲突越发显著。乡村旅游社区作为一种具有传统乡土性的社会景观类型,在游客的凝视下发生着显著的变化,成为社会竞争与矛盾频发的典型区域[5]。已有研究表明,旅游开发导致的多群体介入,使得乡村社会冲突的可能性增加,并表现出了明显的空间特征[6]。如果能够建立社会景观敏感度的指标,对旅游开发干扰下社会问题出现的可能性进行评估,对乡村旅游社区规划管理有重要的意义。
敏感度（sensitivity）概念已被用于多学科的研究当中。在土壤学中,敏感度被用于评价土壤结构对土壤侵蚀的影响[7];在心理学研究中,敏感度指对他人情绪的感知与觉察能力,可用于评估人际互动当中个体相互影响的水平[8]。与地理学相关的敏感度研究主要集中于景观研究领域。在景观规划研究中,景观敏感度多表示视觉景观敏感度,是对景观被注意到的程度的量度,它是景观醒目程度的综合反映。俞孔坚从相对坡度、距离、视域中出现机率和醒目程度对南太行山峡谷景观敏感度进行综合评价,为景观保护及建设规划提供重要依据[9];在景观生态学中,景观敏感度主要指生态敏感度[10],用来表示生态系统对自然环境变化和人类活动干扰的反应程度,说明发生区域生态环境问题的难易程度和可能性大小[11,12]。目前国内外对生态敏感度的研究已从生态学领域单一的生态敏感问题发展到多个生态因子敏感度的综合评价[13-15],其综合评价方法多运用德尔菲法（Delphi Method）[16]、层次分析法[17]、极大值法[12]等,研究尺度从国家[11]、流域[17]、省域[18]延伸至市县域[19],主要应用于区域功能区划分[18]、土地利用规划[20]、旅游景区规划[16]、自然保护区管理[15]等。
虽然地理学研究已经注意到了景观敏感度的研究,但目前还主要集中于物质景观或自然景观领域,对于社会景观敏感度的相关研究还比较欠缺。本文拟借鉴景观生态学研究中的景观敏感度概念,利用地方竞争理论和景观价值理论构建旅游社区社会景观敏感度模型,基于公众参与式地理信息系统（public participation geographic information system,PPGIS）技术和实地访谈获取案例地数据,计算和指示旅游社区多群体互动导致的社会景观敏感区域及其空间特征,为案例地旅游社区规划开发提供参考。

2 研究方法与数据来源

2.1 模型构建

地方感研究一直在人文地理学和环境心理学等领域广受关注。现有的研究主要关注了地方感的一致性,并将其作为社区认同,集体行动的依据,但忽视了不同人群间地方感的差异性和竞争性。在地方政治学研究中,多人群涉入的地方具有竞争性,人群、权利和政治常在此交织作用[3,4,21],这种竞争性源于地方不单纯是简单的物质要素载体,而且是一个被社会文化和意识持续建构的结果[22],是多人群感知与认同互动的产物[21]。
地方意义是地方的显著特征[23],通过探究不同人群对地方表征意义的差异性和多样性来认识地方的竞争和政治特质被认为是一种有效途径[3,4]。针对具体的地方空间,不同人群基于自身的信仰、价值观、文化背景以及土地利用方式,赋予其不一样的意义,促使同一地方内部存在差异有时甚至是相悖的意义构成。由于人基于意义行动[22,24],相异的意义结构影响下的地方被多人群争夺,地方的竞争性由此而发。景观价值（landscape value）作为抽象地方意义的具体形式,被认为是地方感的重要组成[24-26],反映人的主观价值取向及其空间关联,与人群对地方内具体土地利用活动的期望和意愿紧密联系,反映不同人群对现实和未来土地利用合理性的判断[3,26,27]。多种景观价值重叠,反映多种利用意愿和利用方式预期的相互竞争,因此,地方竞争性的认识可通过对景观价值的分析来体现。对于某社区空间,当不同群体在此赋予大量的多种景观价值形成多价值富集场所时,这种基于人群对地方发展不同认识的价值富集区可指示多群体竞争的强度和位置,为判断潜在的社会冲突倾向提供了可能。
旅游开发导致旅游社区的进入性增强、人口异质性增大,致使乡村旅游社区多群体竞争明显。为了表征与预测这种多群体竞争态势及其效应,借鉴景观生态学研究中的景观敏感度概念,将社会景观敏感度定义为：某旅游社区在受到开发干扰时,如土地利用方式改变,新的旅游开发活动或管理政策的实施,在公众中引发关注,引起争议,甚至导致人群冲突等响应行为的可能性。从已有的理论和实践角度来看,社区当中多人群关注和竞争的空间场所,在旅游开发管理过程中引起社会矛盾和冲突的可能性增大[28],基于此,本文构建了社会景观敏感度复合二维模型（图1）。模型中用社区空间承载的景观价值（反映不同土地利用类型的意愿）多样性表示人群对地方的竞争程度,用景观价值的富集程度代表人群对地方的关注程度：多种利用意愿重叠,竞争明显,且社会关注度高的地点,这些地方的开发容易引起矛盾与冲突,景观敏感度高;利用意愿单一和社会关注度不高的地点,在实施开发管理措施时,不易引起社会问题,则景观敏感度低。
Fig. 1 The conceptual model of social landscape sensitivity

图1 社会景观敏感度概念模型

2.2 研究区概况

郎木寺镇位于甘肃碌曲县与四川若尔盖县交界处,是四川与甘肃两省分治的一个小镇。本文调研的区域包括郎木寺镇及其附近区域（图2）,面积约20 km2,海拔3400 m左右,涉及郎木寺镇政府驻地郎木村（包含仁贡玛、加科、卡哇、吉可河4个村民小组）,四川红星乡内冻卡村和回民村。镇区内有两座规模较大的藏传寺院——赛赤寺和格尔底寺,分属于甘肃和四川两省管辖,对外宣传中皆称“郎木寺”,此外还有一座位于回民村内的清真寺。镇区周围比较有名的景点有大峡谷、红石崖、晒经台、白塔、天葬台等。
Fig. 2 The scope of the research area

图2 研究区范围

郎木寺镇旅游发展始于20世纪90年代初,每年的5-10月为旅游旺季,随着美国传教士著作《Tibet life》的出版,郎木寺的“东方小瑞士”称号开始在西方叫响,随之成为国外游客在甘南的主要旅游目的地。2001-2008年郎木寺主要接待外宾,并于2005年成为西北五省中唯一入选中央电视台举办的“中国魅力名镇”前20名的魅力名镇。2008年以后,国外游客数量急剧下降,郎木寺镇旅游业进入调整期。自2010年起,随着国内游客与日俱增,当地旅游业逐步恢复并繁荣,旅游业已经成为郎木寺镇继畜牧业之后的第二大支柱产业。

2.3 数据来源

PPGIS是在GIS技术支撑下,为当地和边缘化人群在规划和决策过程中实现公众参与[29]。参与式制图（participatory mapping）是PPGIS数据获取的主要手段[30]。本文的数据获取采用参与式制图结合半结构化访谈的方法对当地藏族居民、回族居民、游客和经营者四类群体进行调查。调查工具包括一张比例尺为1:5000包含详细注记的卫星地图（图2）,一套代表不同景观价值编号的不干胶贴点,一份记录受访者人口学特征和填图访谈内容的调查表。本文所用的景观价值类型在参考Brown等的景观价值分类的基础上[31,32],结合当地社区实际,采用了8种景观价值类型（表1）。在调查过程中,第一,调查人员给受访者展示地图,要求受访者在图上确定方位,找出现在的位置或者家的位置,如果有困难,调查人员帮助介绍地图信息和主要地物标志,帮助受访者建立空间概念;第二,调查人员向受访者介绍8种景观价值的含义（表1）,要求受访者用不干胶贴点标出对自己来说有价值的地方;第三,针对每个贴在图上的标记点,调查人员要求受访者叙述选择这一地方的原因,调查人员记录主要的访谈内容。
Tab. 1 The description of landscape values

表1 景观价值描述

序号 专题价值 描述（以下均在地图范围内）
1 美学（风景）价值 风景优美,能为人们提供审美享受的地方
2 历史文化价值 历史悠久,有遗迹、传说故事或名人事件,能够体现当地传统文化特色的地方
3 经济（生计）价值 能够为人们提供收入或就业机会的地方
4 个人成就价值（居民） 能够体现您通过劳动取得成就,或者是您和父辈劳动和奋斗积攒成果,让您觉得有成就感的地方
5 精神信仰价值 让您感到神圣、不可冒犯、心怀敬意的地方
6 地方适应价值 让您有下列感觉的地方：熟悉、放松、方便、安全、习惯
7 社会交往价值 您和别人经常交流沟通,促进感情的地方
8 情感依恋价值 让您舍不得,有归属感、亲切感的地方
课题组于2014年7月3日-15日来郎木寺镇开展调研工作,分别对当地藏族居民、回族居民、游客和经营者进行了访谈。访谈采用立意抽样方法,样本的选择遵循以下原则：第一,样本在人口统计学特征上相对均衡;第二,四个群体样本量相当;第三,选取重游或者游览结束后的初次游客;第四,重点调查居住时间较长的外来经营者。共发放402份问卷,回收有效问卷396份,问卷有效率98.5%,其中藏族居民102份,回族居民96份,游客99份,外来经营者99份。

2.4 研究方法

2.4.1 密度制图与栅格计算 密度制图是指根据输入的要素数据集计算整个区域的数据集状况,从而产生一个连续的密度表面。根据插值原理不同,密度分析可以分为核密度分析和点密度分析。核密度估计依据核密度函数进行,该函数可以在样本点和给定搜索半径的邻域范围内拟合一个平滑的曲面。这种方法比一般的内插方法能够产生更为可靠的密度估计结果[33]。核密度估计可以表示为：
f s = ∑ i = 1 n 1 h 2 k s - c i h （1）
式中：f (s)为景观价值点s处的核密度计算函数;h为距离衰减阈值（即搜索半径）;n为与景观价值点s的距离小于或等于h的要素点数;k函数表示空间权重函数。核密度估计存在两个关键参量：空间权重函数k与距离衰减阈值h。研究表明权重函数的选择对分析结果影响不大,需要注意的是距离衰减阈值的选择[34]。本文采用核密度分析的方法对点数据进行处理,根据研究区比例尺大小,参考已有研究[26,31],在ArcGIS中设置输出栅格大小为30 m,搜索半径为90 m,生成景观价值密度图。
栅格计算是栅格数据处理和分析最为常用的方法,也是建立复杂应用模型的基本模块[35],主要分为数学运算和函数运算。根据建立的数学模型,利用ArcGIS中的栅格计算器对景观价值密度图进行数学运算和函数运算。
本文通过密度制图和栅格计算生成的景观价值密度图、景观价值多样性图和社会景观敏感度图均采用并采用自然间断点分级法（natural breaks classification）进行显示,此分类基于Jenks的“自然间断点分级法”,根据数据中固有的自然分组,在数据值的差异相对较大的位置处设置其边界,使每个类中数值方差较小[36]。
2.4.2 社会景观敏感度计算 本文借鉴生态学中Shannon-Wiener的“多样性指数”来度量景观价值多样性[37],景观价值富集程度则用景观价值密度和值表示,社会景观敏感度（social landscape sensitivity,SLS）由归一化的景观价值多样性与景观价值密度相乘得到,上述计算基于栅格数据实现,计算公式分别为式（2）~式（4）。
栅格中景观价值密度和值：
V c = ∑ i = 1 n V i （2）
栅格中景观价值多样性：
H = - ∑ i = 1 n P i ln P i （3）
社会景观敏感度：
SLS = H H max × V c V max （4）
式中：Vi代表某个栅格中景观价值i的密度值;n为该栅格中景观价值类型的总数;Vc为该栅格中所有景观价值密度的和值;Pi代表某个栅格中景观价值i密度值占该栅格所有价值总密度值的比例,即Pi = Vi/Vc;H为该栅格的景观价值多样性指数;Hmax表示所有栅格中景观价值多样性指数最大值;Vmax为所有栅格中景观价值密度和值的最大值;SLS为栅格的社会景观敏感度。

3 结果分析

3.1 调查样本构成

调查共获得问卷填图396套。从样本构成来看,男女比例分别占57.83%和42.17%,男女性别比例基本均衡;年龄构成上,30岁以上的调查对象占48.73%;受教育程度上72.98%的受访者具有初中及以上学历（表2）。
Fig. 3 The distribution of landscape value in Langmusi town

图3 郎木寺镇的景观价值分布图

Tab. 2 The demographic feature of samples

表2 样本基本特征

特
征
项		 类
别		 藏族居民 回族居民 经营者 游客 总体
人数 占样本
比例（%）		 人数 占样本
比例（%）		 人数 占样本
比例（%）		 人数 占样本
比例（%）		 人数 占样本
比例（%）
性
别		 男 62 60.78 54 56.25 65 65.66 48 48.48 229 57.83
女 40 39.22 42 43.75 34 34.34 51 51.52 167 42.17
年
龄		 18岁以下 15 14.71 14 14.58 6 6.06 6 6.06 41 10.35
19~29岁 46 45.10 27.08 38.38 52.53 40.91
30~44岁 21 20.59 27.08 36.36 37.37 30.30
45~59岁 14 13.73 17.71 17.17 4.04 13.13
60岁以上 6 5.88 13.54 2.02 0 5.30
教
育
程
度		 小学及以下 37 36.27 39 40.63 31 31.31 0 0 107 27.02
初中 22 21.57 26.04 38.38 4.04 22.47
中专或高中 25 24.51 18.75 22.22 14.14 19.95
大专 12 11.76 9.38 4.04 27.27 13.13
本科 6 5.88 5.21 4.04 45.45 15.15
硕士及以上 0 0 0 0 9.09 2.27
总计 102 100 100 100 100 100
通过参与式制图采集调查获得的景观价值点共4671个（表3、图3）,从价值点在四类群体中的分布来看,藏民价值点1283个,回民价值点1253个,外来经营者价值点1130个,游客价值点1005个,四类人群的价值点数量相对均衡;从景观价值类型来看,美学（风景）价值823个,历史文化价值669个,经济（生计）价值606个,个人成就价值（居民）179个,精神信仰价值683个,地方适应价值611个,社会交往价值564个,情感依恋价值536个。美学价值、精神信仰价值、历史文化价值获得的价值点较多,而个人成就价值点较少。
Tab. 3 The spatial data of landscape value

表3 景观价值空间数据

代码 专题价值 各类群体表述的景观价值（个）
藏民 回民 经营者 游客 合计
B 美学（风景）价值 229 211 209 174 823
C 历史文化价值 174 190 163 142 669
D 经济（生计）价值 165 166 146 129 606
E 个人成就价值（不包括游客） 72 72 35 0 179
F 精神信仰价值 159 151 182 191 683
G 地方适应价值 173 161 140 137 611
H 社会交往价值 165 166 130 103 564
I 情感依恋价值 146 136 125 129 536
合计 1283 1253 1130 1005 4671

3.2 景观价值密度

景观价值密度图反映的是四类人群感知景观价值的空间分布及其聚集程度,同一地点被赋予的景观价值点越多,密度值就越高,代表该地点社会关注度越集中,重要性越高。在ArcGIS中将四类人群在纸质地图上所标记的8个专题价值点全部矢量化,再用核密度分析工具生成景观价值密度图并将其归一化。
从图4来看,景观价值密度值表现出一种集聚分布的格局,由高到低呈深蓝—紫红—浅黄色,大部分区域呈现浅黄色的低值,高值区域集中明显。赛赤寺、格尔底寺和清真寺区域呈深蓝色,密度值在0.74~1之间,在图3上呈现3个明显的密度高值核心。上述3个地点外围及主街和大峡谷次之,其密度值分布在0.60~0.74之间,天葬台和回民村区域则具有一定的密度水平,密度值分布在0.54~0.60之间,除此之外,大部分区域在图上呈现小于0.54的密度值。具体来说,赛赤寺和格尔底寺是两座藏传佛教寺庙,是当地所有景点的核心,受到四类人群的普遍关注,具有极高的重要性;清真寺是当地穆斯林做礼拜的地方,除此之外还承担了回族居民大部分的邻里交往和婚丧嫁娶等活动,受到回民的高度关注;主街上店铺和旅游接待设施集中,是居民日常生活工作离不开的地方,也是游客密集分布的区域,被赋予了较多的价值,具有较高的重要性;大峡谷自然景观优美,除了吸引游客游览以外,因离居住区距离较近,当地居民常在此聊天聚会,已成为日常生活休闲的一部分,也具有较高的重要性。天葬台是当地藏族居民举行独特葬仪的地方,是藏族居民的精神性场所。郎木寺天葬台也是国内少数对游客未作禁止参观规定的天葬台,受到游客关注,其表现出一定程度的重要性。回民村是回族居民聚居的地方,部分民宅也用于旅游接待,受到游客和当地回族居民的关注,也表现出一定程度的重要性。
Fig. 4 The density map of landscape value in Langmusi town

图4 郎木寺镇的景观价值密度图

3.3 景观价值多样性

该指标反映同一地点景观价值的多样性程度。多样性程度越高的地方表示其被感知的景观价值类型越丰富,其承载的土地利用意愿也就越复杂,多人群的竞争越激烈。从图5来看,图上蓝色和红色区域连续成片,地方较多,从景观价值多样性数值大小来看,高值和低值分布比较均衡;从景观价值多样性分布来看,形成若干聚集分布的区域。具体来说,在赛赤寺、格尔底寺、主要街道—清真寺—回民村一带以及大峡谷区域这些镇区核心区域形成四个高值片区,这些地方高值区域连续稳定,集中在0.69~1之间;另外在天葬台、红石崖、赛赤寺北面草原、大峡谷东面森林草原、白龙江源头以及移民新村一带的景观价值多样性指数整体较高,数值范围较广,其值多分布在0.46~1之间。景观价值多样性较低的地方大多分布在高值区域的外围。
Fig. 5 The diversity distribution of landscape value in Langmusi town

图5 郎木寺镇景观价值多样性分布图

就景观价值多样性指数高的地方来说,赛赤寺位于郎木寺镇的甘肃部分,具有250多年的历史;格尔底寺位于郎木寺镇的四川部分,有着600多年的历史,寺中五世格尔登活佛肉身殿是郎木寺景点中的精华;两座寺庙都被赋予了很高的历史文化价值和精神信仰价值,寺庙中都有精美的殿堂、壁画,被赋予较多的美学价值。作为当地著名的旅游景点,两座寺庙的经济价值也被较多地体现。在当地人心目中,两座寺庙具有很高的地位,是他们日常生活中的一部分,被感知较多的是情感依恋价值、地方适应价值和社会交往价值。总体来说,两座寺庙的景观价值类型丰富,价值多样性高。
主街—清真寺—回民村这一带大多是当地居民的生活居住区域,具有一定的地方适应价值、情感依恋价值和社会交往价值。主街上店铺较多,分布着餐馆、宾馆、茶馆以及一些特色商品店铺,能够给居民提供工作机会,被赋予更多的经济价值和个人成就价值。清真寺建于清朝末年,20世纪80年代重修,除了精神信仰价值以外,其历史文化价值也被较多的感知。
大峡谷风景优美,又有仙女洞、老虎洞等这样的传说故事,具有极高的风景价值和一定的历史文化价值,同时作为当地居民日常生活的一部分,其地方适应价值、情感依恋价值以及社会交往价值也较为丰富。天葬台已有400多年的历史,具有较高的历史文化价值。天葬是藏族丧葬文化的重要形态,具有很高的精神信仰价值,同时,天葬台及其周围草原,被感知的风景价值较多,总体来说其景观价值多样性较高。红石崖是一处
典型的丹霞地貌,其独特的景观被赋予较多的风景价值,作为当地特色景观,也被赋予一定的地方适应价值和情感依恋价值。白龙江源头、赛赤寺北面草原和大峡谷东面森林草原风景优美,当地居民也常在此休闲娱乐,具有一定的美学价值和地方适应价值,其中当地居民常去大峡谷东面森林采药、挖虫草,这为当地居民提供了生计来源,具有较高的经济价值。移民新村作为当地回民、藏民搬迁后的新家,其地方适应价值和情感依恋价值较高。

3.4 社会景观敏感度

社会景观敏感度高的地方表示多种利用意愿重合,且社会关注集中,开发活动的社会响应强烈,引起社会矛盾和冲突的可能性大。由图6可以看出,社会景观敏感度在格尔底寺、赛赤寺、清真寺和大峡谷一带形成显著的高值区域,敏感度高值在0.56~0.86之间;敏感度较高的地方在天葬台和主街、回民村一带,敏感度主要在0.42~0.55之间;敏感度中等的区域包括红石崖、白龙江源头、赛赤寺北面草原、大峡谷东面森林草原,这些地方的敏感度主要分布在0.32~0.41之间。
Fig. 6 The spatial distribution of social landscape sensitivity in Langmusi town

图6 郎木寺镇的社会景观敏感度

赛赤寺、格尔底寺和清真寺在研究区域内承载了景观价值密度和多样性的最高值,使得这些地方成为社会景观敏感度的高值区。这些地方是郎木寺旅游吸引力所在,受到不同人群的广泛关注,同时,多种景观价值叠加使得不同人群对这些地方的利用意愿或利用方式预期竞争明显,如宗教文化保护和旅游开发,朝觐活动与游客观赏,宗教世俗化与恪守传统等方面。大峡谷区域分布着景观价值密度和多样性的高值,也呈现出颇高的景观敏感度,大峡谷作为主要的自然景点,是多数游客的必游之地,也存在游客的进入与宗教胜迹保护,扩大游客容量与保护生态环境,游客利用与居民生活间的矛盾与竞争。主街一带的景观价值密度高,多样性较高,总体形成较高的景观敏感度。主街是当地旅游服务设施集中地带,是游客的集中区域,社会关注度高。主街也承载着多种价值,导致不同利用方式的竞争也很明显,如商业化开发与乡土性保持,社区生活与旅游服务,旅游空间、社区空间与宗教空间重叠等方面;天葬台的景观价值密度中等,多样性指数较高,形成较高的景观价值敏感度。由于天葬台的神秘性,使其受到游客和旅游经营者的关注,天葬台的特殊性使得宗教禁忌与旅游开发,社区认同感保持与游客深度体验间竞争明显,矛盾突出;回民村的景观价值密度中等,属多样性的高值区,总体形成较高的景观价值敏感度,回民村旅游接待活动中吸引的大量游客对当地回民日常生活带来一定的困扰;在敏感度中等的区域,如红石崖、白龙江源头、赛赤寺北面草原和大峡谷东面森林草原,尽管这些地方具有较高的景观价值多样性,但由于这些区域的景观价值密度较低,总体上形成中等的景观价值敏感度。这些区域普遍存在游客介入与原生态保护的两难选择。

4 讨论与结论

4.1 结论

本文将敏感度概念引入到社会景观研究领域,从社区多人群互动和空间格局两个角度进行分析,对民族旅游社区社会因素所导致的敏感区域进行评估和甄别。构建的社会景观敏感度模型借鉴了景观生态敏感度概念,并引入社会因子（关注程度和竞争程度）及其空间组合表征社会景观敏感状况,为认识和评价旅游社区的社会空间特征提供了可能。研究揭示的敏感区域是社区内公众关注度高,利用意愿竞争显著的区域。这类区域在社区旅游开发规划或政策的影响下,容易引起群体利益损失或增益,或造成环境心理的损害,由此引起矛盾与冲突的可能性高。本文主要结论如下：
第一,社会景观敏感度分析从社会互动和空间格局两个方面对旅游社区进行评价,一定程度上能够表征社会景观的格局与效应,为旅游社区规划管理提供依据;第二,研究揭示的景观敏感区域空间上呈现斑状分布,承载着多人群的关注和竞争关系,与社区资源分布、多人群文化认同和环境心理因素相联系;第三,田野调查,多人群地方竞争理论和PPGIS空间分析技术的结合,为地方感研究提供了新的视角,也为社会景观研究提供了新的机遇。

4.2 讨论

本文揭示了案例地社区若干社会景观敏感度高值区域,空间上呈现斑状分布。这些区域即包括宗教场所（格尔底寺、赛赤寺和清真寺）、旅游接待设施集中地（主街、回民村）,也包括天葬台这种特殊场所和大峡谷、红石崖、草原等自然景观区域。这些区域又大致可分两种类型：一类是资源富集的区域,如主街集中了经济资源和公共资源,大峡谷、红石崖集中了生态资源;另一类是与地方文化认同和多人群环境心理相联系的区域,如佛教寺庙、清真寺和天葬台,影响居民的地方感和身份认同,同时也影响游客的旅游体验质量。就现状情况看,由于开发活动的进行,上述敏感区域已经出现了不同程度的矛盾与冲突：寺庙作为当地主要的景点吸引着游客造访,一定程度上干扰了正常的僧侣生活,引起了僧侣和藏族居民对于传统保护的担忧;另一方面,寺庙参与旅游接待,收取门票,又引起游客对文化景观商业化的不满。主街是郎木寺游客的集中地,旅游接待的需求的增长使得传统踏板房景观已经消失,取而代之的是3层~5层的水泥建筑,加之环境污染、社会风气改变,引起众多社区居民和经营者的反对。由于郎木寺天葬台没有相关限制措施,游客和部分经营者的介入,导致了僧侣和社区信众的反感,出现了对游客的驱离现象。在未来的开发中,如何协调敏感区域保护与开发的关系,在不同人群中达成共识,是影响案例地旅游持续发展的重要因素。社会景观敏感度分析具有一定的实际的规划管理指导意义。
从数据层面看,社会景观敏感度模型由景观价值多样性和和景观价值密度（关注程度）共同度量,当景观价值多样性和景观价值密度均为高值的时候,才表现为很高的社会景观敏感度,如赛赤寺、格尔底寺和清真寺。当二者中一个数值较低时,其景观敏感度也不显著,如晒经台区域是价值多样性的高值区,但因其景观价值密度较低,所得的景观敏感度也就不太显著。景观价值多样性（利用意愿竞争）仅与景观价值类型有关,这就使得一定区域内只要存在多种类型的景观价值点,就有可能产生多样性高值,因此景观价值多样性分布图上呈现出丰富的高值区域。景观价值密度与某空间位置被人群赋予的价值点数量有关,空间上集中明显。从本文来看,景观价值密度的高值区一般也是价值类型多样性高值区,而价值类型多样性的高值区域不一定对应景观价值密度的高值区,因此,价值密度（社会关注度）对敏感区域的指示作用更显著。
虽然关注度指示作用显著,但景观价值类型组合是影响利用意愿竞争及其性质的根本因素。如前所述,景观价值是人群的价值取向的空间关联,反映人的土地利用意愿。在本文所涉及的8种景观价值类型中,不同的类型指示了相同或不同的利用意愿。对于社区居民来说,个人成就价值、地方适应价值、社会交往价值和情感依恋价值关乎个人和群体的实际利益和地方认同,承载这类价值的地方具有排他性,从社区居民角度应该受到保护,然而,这类地方也是游客形成旅游地方感的空间,游客倾向于前往这类地方获得深度旅游体验,游客需求会引起开发活动的出现。就美学价值、历史文化价值和精神价值而言,本地居民群体、外来游客和旅游经营者群体都表现出了多种矛盾的利用愿望,居民一方面担心地方宗教文化场所和自然风光的破坏,另一方面又积极利用文化和自然资源投身于旅游开发之中;外来游客一方面希望有更好的旅游设施和景点开发,另一方面又希望保持生态和文化的原真性。这种矛盾性也使得基于价值重叠的人群竞争复杂化。经济价值对于当地居民和经营者来说,是积极的参与旅游激励因素,然而,这种因素也导致了社区旅游的商业化现象,破坏了旅游体验的原真性,引起诸多社会问题的出现。
本文基于景观价值指示不同人群土地利用意愿的理论展开,实际上,景观价值与利用意愿间的关系具有复杂性,随着人群不同、场所不同和社区开发阶段不同发生变化。但本文仅从总体上把握了多种价值空间复合对利用意愿竞争的指示作用,更为细致的相互联系还有待进一步探究。另外,利用意愿也不仅仅是简单的开发或保护二元划分,如果能够细化利用意愿类型,可能更有利于解释社区面临的竞争和社会问题,这都需要后续更为系统深入的研究。

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

参考文献

原文顺序 | 文献年度倒序 | 文中引用次数倒序
[1]
Palang H, Alumäe H, Printsmann A, et al.Social landscape: Ten years of planning 'valuable landscapes' in Estonia. Land Use Policy, 2011, 28(1): 19-25.This paper gives an overview of theme planning on designating valuable landscapes in Estonia (1999-2003) and traces its impacts through the decade up to the present. We claim that in addition to the mapped list of valuable landscapes and their attributes as we have described them, this planning exercise called forth changes in society as well as in landscapes and their appreciation. As the project applied participatory planning tools unprecedented in post-communist Estonia, the Estonian word for landscape (maastik) is now being used more in everyday language, according to the way its meaning altered in the process. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

DOI

[2]
Ryan R L.The social landscape of planning: Integrating social and perceptual research with spatial planning information. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2011, 100(4): 361-363.During the past decades, there have been tremendous strides in the sophistication and power of analyzing, displaying, and interpreting spatial information, particularly Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The vast majority of this work has focused on the physical landscape where increasingly complex models are able to predict, describe, and assess the implications of future planning issues related to watersheds, urban growth, and other planning issues. However, this increasing sophistication in the power of landscape modeling remains disconnected from the sociopolitical realities of the communities and regions which are the subject of these studies. There is a research need to integrate public perceptions and attitudes with the type of information typically found in a landscape assessment. This essay reviews the different types of social and perceptual research that landscape planners have conducted and concludes with recommendations for research avenues that are necessary to describe the social landscape in spatial terms. Landscape planners in the future will need to know as much about the social landscape as they do the physical landscape before embarking on planning actions. (C) 2011 Elsevier BM. All rights reserved.

DOI

[3]
Yung L, Freimund W A, Belsky J M.The politics of place: Understanding meaning, common ground, and political difference on the Rocky Mountain Front. Forest Science, 2003, 49(6): 855-866.A major challenge of forest policy and management is effectively understanding different people's viewpoints on natural resource use and conservation, and how those viewpoints contribute to conflict and conflict resolution. In response to this challenge, the concept of place is gaining currency in natural resource research. The study of place promises an integrative approach to understanding people's relationships with particular areas. Realizing the potential of place research to inform forest policy and management means conceptualizing place as an of shared and contested meanings. A politics of place is attentive to different and potentially conflicting meanings, and how senses of place may be connected to larger political struggles. This study examines people's images, values, and interests with respect to the Rocky Mountain Front in . In this case study, discourse about placenames provided a window into the politics of place. Results illustrate the ways in which place meanings are connected to people's ideas about property, conservation, and governance. Knowledge of the politics of place can inform forest policy and management and contribute to a more sophisticated understanding of natural resource conflict and the potential effectiveness of decision-making processes.

DOI

[4]
Anderson N M, Williams K J H, Ford R M. Community perceptions of plantation forestry: The association between place meanings and social representations of a contentious rural land use. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2013, 34: 121-136.A characteristic of land use disputes is the different ways a contentious land use is interpreted and represented by opposing groups. While there is evidence that land use conflict is partly explained by differences in place meanings, there is little understanding of how competing place meaning might explain different beliefs about a land use. In this study social representation theory and place theory provide a framework to examine the association between meanings attributed to the rural landscape and different beliefs about large scale plantation forestry. A mixed-method approach involving a visual-based Q-sorting task, word association task and qualitative analysis of interview questions was used to investigate shared place meanings attributed to the rural landscape and social representations of plantation forestry. Analysis of thirty-one semi-structured interviews conducted with rural and regional residents of north-west Tasmania, Australia, identified an association between shared place meanings and the way plantation forestry was represented: plantation forestry was more likely to be represented as posing an unacceptable risk by those attributing a range of lifestyle and amenity related meanings to the rural landscape, while participants attributing meanings more focused on production were likely to represent plantation forestry as both risk and benefit. These results support the contention that shared place meanings provide the context in which a controversial land use is socially interpreted in a way that conforms to the meanings of the group.

DOI

[5]
高艳, 赵振斌. 民族旅游社区空间的竞争性: 基于地方意义的视角. 资源科学, 2016, 38(7): 1287-1296.文章以郎木寺为调研区域,采用相片引导的半结构化访谈方式获取调查数据。借助质性分析软件NVivo10.0对访谈内容进行分析,依据特征将地方划分为11种类目,并构建8大类及39小类地方意义类目。研究结果显示：自然景点、佛教寺院、丧葬地点、清真寺、食宿地点和村子家乡是受访者认为最重要的地方;“地方特色”、“精神性”、“群体联系”及“情感与体验”构成了受访者地方意义的主体;不同人群对郎木寺地方意义的表征各有侧重,显示出了明显的差异性：当地居民（藏族与回族）依靠宗教和社区生活形成地方感,而外来者（游客与经营者）则主要依靠原生态文化和生计形成地方感;以游客为代表的外来者和以藏族居民为代表的当地居民对地方意义的表征存在竞争关系,这种地方意义的竞争反映了不同人群关于地方权力的博弈,成为郎木寺地方身份变化的动力,也为认识当地旅游开发过程中的复杂社会现象提供了途径。

DOI

[Gao Yan, Zhao Zhenbin.Space competition in the national tourism community and place meaning. Resources Science, 2016, 38(7): 1287-1296.]

[6]
褚玉杰, 赵振斌, 张铖, 等. 旅游社区多群体态度差异和冲突倾向的空间特征: 以西安汤峪镇为例. 地理学报, 2016, 71(6): 1045-1058.lt;p>随着乡村旅游的快速发展,乡村旅游社区逐步成为多群体竞争与冲突的场所,其内部多群体的态度差异成为指示社区冲突的重要指标。本文以西安汤峪镇为例,采用参与式制图（Participatory Mapping）和半结构访谈方法对当地居民、度假购房业主和游客3类群体的旅游开发态度和景观价值感知进行调查,最终获得315套访谈表与填图,共提取空间信息点5518个。基于对Brown等土地利用冲突倾向指标模型的修订,并结合地理空间分析方法探讨旅游社区态度差异和冲突倾向的空间特征。结论显示：① 旅游开发态度及其差异具有明显的地点指向性,并与景观价值的空间感知相关联。旅游开发冲突倾向空间上并非均匀分布,而是呈斑状格局,高值集中于社区旅游开发核心区域,且强度由开发的核心区域向外围区域减弱;② 潜在冲突地点的形成既有传统冲突因素的影响,又有特殊空间因素的作用,旅游开发要素的空间结构、多人群景观价值的空间感知、社区旅游发展阶段和相关人群的涉入程度都会影响冲突空间的形成;③ 参与式制图与深度访谈结合的方法能够帮助获得多人群主观数据,为认识态度和旅游开发冲突的空间特征提供了新的技术支撑。</p>

DOI

[Chu Yujie, Zhao Zhenbin, Zhang Cheng, et al.Spatial features of preference difference and conflict potential among multi-groups in tourism community: A case of Tangyu town in Xi'an. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2016, 71(6): 1045-1058.]

[7]
Temme A J A M, Vanwalleghem T. LORICA: A new model for linking landscape and soil profile evolution: Development and sensitivity analysis. Computers & Geosciences, 2016, 90: 131-143.Soils and landscapes evolve in tandem. Landscape position is a strong determinant of vertical soil development, which has often been formalized in the catena concept. At the same time, soil properties are strong determinants of geomorphic processes such as overland erosion, landsliding and creep. We present a new soilscape evolution model; LORICA, to study these numerous interactions between soil and landscape development. The model is based on the existing landscape evolution model LAPSUS and the soil formation model MILESD. The model includes similar soil formation processes as MILESD, but the main novelties include the consideration of more layers and the dynamic adaption of the number of layers as a function of the soil profile's heterogeneity. New processes in the landscape evolution component include a negative feedback of vegetation and armouring and particle size selectivity of the erosion eposition process. In order to quantify these different interactions, we present a full sensitivity analysis of the input parameters. First results show that the model successfully simulates various soil andscape interactions, leading to outputs where the surface changes in the landscape clearly depend on soil development, and soil changes depend on landscape location. Sensitivity analysis of the model confirms that soil and landscape interact: variables controlling amount and position of fine clay have the largest effect on erosion, and erosion variables control among others the amount of chemical weathering. These results show the importance of particle size distribution, and especially processes controlling the presence of finer clay particles that are easily eroded, both for the resulting landscape form as for the resulting soil profiles. Further research will have to show whether this is specific to the boundary conditions of this study or a general phenomenon.

DOI

[8]
Koenig A M, Eagly A H.Stereotype threat in men on a test of social sensitivity. Sex Roles, 2005, 52(7-8): 489-496.lt;a name="Abs1"></a>This study provides evidence of stereotype threat in men on a test of a feminine ability called social sensitivity, that is, the ability to decode nonverbal cues. Men who were told that the test assessed social sensitivity and produced better scores for women than men performed worse on the test than did men who were told that the test assessed information processing. Because social sensitivity can be an automatic skill and stereotype threat uses mental capacity, this effect was moderated by self-reported strategy usage. Men<img src="/content/W8P6431603W72474/xxlarge8217.gif" alt="rsquo" align="BASELINE" border="0">s performance worsened in the threat condition only when they reported more deliberative and less intuitive strategies for decoding nonverbal cues.

DOI

[9]
俞孔坚. 景观敏感度与阀值评价研究. 地理研究, 1991, 10(2): 38-51.景观敏戚度是景观被注意到的程度的量度,景观阀值是景观对外界干扰的抵御能力的量度,它们是风景旅游区景观保护规划的基本依据。以南太行山峡谷景观为例,文章探讨了景观敏感度和景观阀值的评价原理与方法,以及基于达两项评价的景观保护规划。

DOI

[Yu Kongjian.Evaluation on landscape sensibility and its threshold. Journal of Geographical Research, 1991, 10(2): 38-51.]

[10]
周锐, 李月辉, 胡远满, 等. 基于景观敏感度的森林公园景点评价. 应用生态学报, 2008, 19(11): 2460-2466.采用GIS空间分析技术，结合地形特征，选择相对坡度、相对距离、互视性、视觉几率和醒目程度5个分量，基于景观敏感度的测定原理和方法，对猴石国家森林公园内的主要景点进行了景观敏感度定量评价.结果表明：在猴石公园现有的23个景点中，景观敏感度综合评价为Ⅰ级的景点0个;景观敏感度综合评价为Ⅱ级的景点10个，占景点总数的43.5%，这类景点及其周围景观均需受到严格保护，以维持景观的自然特征;景观敏感度综合评价为Ⅲ级的景点有8个，占景点总数的34.8%，这类景点周围可结合自然景观发展人文景观，建设较宽的游览道，也可开发小规模的人工建筑，但建筑风格应与周围的自然景观协调统一，即在保护好自然景观的同时，实施开发建设;景观敏感度综合评价为Ⅳ和Ⅴ级的景点共计5个，占景点总数的21.7%，这两类景点周围可开展更大规模的综合性旅游设施和游道建设，为自然景观增色生辉.通过多角度定量化的景观敏感度评价，丰富了景观视觉评价和景观感知研究的理论，同时，为旅游区及森林公园总体开发建设和景观规划提供了重要依据和科学指导.

[Zhou Rui, Li Yuehui, Hu Yuanman, et al.Evaluation of view points in forest park based on landscape sensitivity. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2008, 19(11): 2460-2466.]

[11]
欧阳志云, 王效科, 苗鸿. 中国生态环境敏感性及其区域差异规律研究. 生态学报, 2000, 20(1): 10-13.我国日益恶化的生态环境越来越引起社会各界的关注，如何对生态环境问题采取有效的综合整治策略，已经成为科学界面的一个挑战，本研究首先综述了我国主要生态环境问题－水土流失、沙漠化、盐渍化和酸雨的空间分布格局和空间相关性，提出了生态敏感性的概念，分析了影响我国主要生态环境问题敏感性的因素，特别是气候对生态环境敏感性的影响，综合地提出了中国生态环境敏感性化区，并探讨了各分区的特点。

DOI

[Ouyang Zhiyun, Wang Xiaoke, Miao Hong.China's eco-environmental sensitivity and its spatial heterogeneity. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2000, 20(1): 10-13.]

[12]
潘峰, 田长彦, 邵峰, 等. 新疆克拉玛依市生态敏感性研究. 地理学报, 2011, 66(11): 1497-1507.基于地理信息系统空间分析、栅格运算与叠加方法,针对克拉玛依市土壤侵蚀、土地沙漠化、土壤盐渍化和生物多样性减少等区域自然环境演变过程中出现的生态问题,考虑油田开发这一人类活动影响因素,定量研究克拉玛依市综合生态敏感性空间特征。研究结果表明：(1) 土壤侵蚀敏感性以中、高和极高敏感性为主,高和极高敏感性分布在克拉玛依区和独山子区大部,乌尔禾区北部,白碱滩区西侧狭长区域。地形坡降迅速、水力侵蚀强、无植被或疏林地广泛分布,是土壤侵蚀敏感性较高的主要原因。(2) 土地沙漠化以中、高敏感性为主,高和极高敏感性分布在白碱滩区西部和南部,克拉玛依区北部和西部区域。土壤基质多为沙粒,且植被覆盖率较低是土地沙漠化敏感性高的主要原因。(3) 土壤盐渍化敏感性以中、高和极高等级为主,极高和高度敏感性分布在白碱滩区东南部,克拉玛依区东部和北部,以及乌尔禾区东部。蒸发量远大于降水量,人类活动剧烈,是土壤盐渍化敏感性高的主要原因。(4) 生物多样性以轻度和中度敏感性为主,高和极高敏感性分布于克拉玛依区东部和南部区域。这些区域植被生长茂盛、物种数量较为丰富,是重点生态保护区域。(5) 油田开发区域的生态敏感性高,分布在乌尔禾区北部油田,白碱滩区西部油田,克拉玛依区西北部油田和独山子区中部油田。油田开发带来的生态问题包括工业&ldquo;三废&rdquo;动植物生境破坏和水资源短缺等。(6) 综合自然演化和人为开发的敏感性,研究区以高、中度敏感性为主,极高和高敏感性分布在克拉玛依区中部和北部,白碱滩区西南部区域。

DOI

[Pan Feng, Tian Changyan, Shao Feng, et al.Evaluation of ecological sensitivity in Karamay, Xinjiang, Northwest China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2011, 66(11): 1497-1507.]

[13]
Muzik I.Sensitivity of hydrologic systems to climate change. Canadian Water Resources Journal, 2001, 26(2): 233-252.If climate change occurs, it could seriously impact water resources in Canada. In this paper I examine the change in flood probabilities in a study watershed in central Alberta in response to increases resulting from global warming in the mean and standard deviations of rainfall depths of storms of various durations. A 25% increase in the mean and a 50% increase in the standard deviation of storm rainfalls were selected based on the assumption that climates typical of southern Alberta, Montana and Colorado would extend northward to central Alberta. Lumped and semi-distributed modelling of the study watershed was used in a Monte Carlo simulation of floods resulting from the new climatic scenario. Simulation results show that modest increases in storm rainfall could result in large changes in flood magnitudes. Consequences of such flow increases on the capacity of a small dam spillway are illustrated.

DOI

[14]
王娇, 程维明, 祁生林, 等. 基于USLE和GIS的水土流失敏感性空间分析: 以河北太行山区为例. 地理研究, 2014, 33(4): 614-624.以USLE方程为理论指导，遥感影像为主要数据源，基于ArcGIS 进行水土流失敏感性空间分析。选择降雨侵蚀力、土地利用类型、坡度、植被覆盖度等影响因子构建水土流失敏感性评价指标体系，在考虑不同因子影响作用大小的情况下，运用空间分析的方法按标准将水土流失敏感性分为五级；并以河北太行山区为例进行研究，利用危险性指数表征研究区水土流失敏感性大小，分析研究区在不同地理背景下的水土流失敏感区的空间分布特征。研究表明：河北太行山区的水土流失敏感性危险性指数为3.97；空间上水土流失敏感性分等级呈现明显的条带状分布；中度敏感区所占面积比例最大，为39.2%；整体水土流失敏感性中度偏重。

DOI

[Wang Jiao, Cheng Weiming, Qi Shenglin, et al.Sensitive evaluation and spatial analysis of soil and water loss based on USLE and GIS: Taking Taihang Mountain area of Hebei province as an example. Geographical Research, 2014, 33(4): 614-624.]

[15]
宋晓龙, 李晓文, 白军红, 等. 黄河三角洲国家级自然保护区生态敏感性评价. 生态学报, 2009, 29(9): 836-846.

[Song Xiaolong, Li Xiaowen, Bai Junhong, et al.The ecological sensitivity evaluation in Yellow River Delta National Natural Reserve. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2009, 29(9): 836-846.]

[16]
钟林生, 唐承财, 郭华. 基于生态敏感性分析的金银滩草原景区旅游功能区划. 应用生态学报, 2010, 21(7): 1813-1819.lt;p>基于2008年青海省金银滩草原景区自然生态和社会经济的统计数据，从保护区级别、植被类型、地形坡度、土地利用类型4个方面构建了草原景区生态敏感性评价指标体系，采用GIS技术对具有较高旅游价值与生态功能的金银滩草原景区进行了生态敏感性评价与区划，对每个敏感区的生态环境特征与生态敏感性进行了分析，并对金银滩草原景区进行旅游功能区划.结果表明：金银滩草原景区可划分为高度生态敏感区、中度生态敏感区和低度生态敏感区；基于生态敏感性评价结果，将景区划分为3类旅游功能区（生态旅游限制区、生态旅游适度区和大众旅游区）和6类旅游功能亚区（湿地保护类、原生态观光类、农牧旅游类、草原旅游类、城镇旅游类和乡村旅游类）.</p>

[Zhong Linsheng, Tang Chengcai, Guo Hua.Tourism function zoning of Jinyintan Grassland Scenic Area in Qinghai province based on ecological sensitivity analysis. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2010, 21(7): 1813-1819.]

[17]
李德旺, 李红清, 雷晓琴, 等. 基于GIS技术及层次分析法的长江上游生态敏感性研究. 长江流域资源与环境, 2013, 22(5): 633-639.lt;p>选择在大尺度范围的长江上游开展生态敏感性研究，为长江上游水电开发的水资源保护及管理提供技术支撑及科学依据。在系统、翔实的辨识和分析长江上游区重要生境和生态敏感区的基础上，采用GIS技术与层次分析法结合的方式，筛选、识别和构建了生态敏感度评价指标体系，构建了敏感度的计算方法和综合评价方法，从而将属性数据库和空间图形数据库相关联，生成基于各评价单元生态敏感性专题评价成果图，从而揭示长江上游生态敏感性空间格局，为开展长江上游水电开发生态制约因素分析提供理论基础。研究表明：长江上游不敏感区、轻度敏感区、中度敏感区、高度敏感区和极度敏感区分别占长江上游总面积的74.14%、6.76%、8.25%、493%和593%。金沙江流域是长江上游区生态敏感性最高区域，其次是长江上游干流区和赤水河流域；长江流域生态敏感区重点分布于上游区，长江上游干支流水资源利用中需重视对各类生态敏感区的生态保护</p>

[Li Dewang, Li Hongqing, Lei Xiaoqin, et al.Ecological sensitivity in the upper Changjiang River with GIS technology and hierarchy analysis method. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2013, 22(5): 633-639.]

[18]
李东梅, 高正文, 付晓, 等. 云南省生态功能类型区的生态敏感性. 生态学报, 2010, 30(1): 138-145.

[Li Dongmei, Gao Zhengwen, Fu Xiao, et al.Characteristic of ecological sensitivity in Yunnan ecological zones. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(1): 138-145.]

[19]
尹海伟, 徐建刚, 陈昌勇, 等. 基于GIS的吴江东部地区生态敏感性分析. 地理科学, 2006, 26(1): 64-69.区域可持续发展的基础是生态环境的可持续,而生态敏感性区划是制定生态环境规划的前提和基础。文章借助GIS技术,选择有区域代表性的生态因子,采用因子叠加法,对吴江东部地区的生态敏感性进行了深入分析,按生态敏感度的高低将研究区划分为5级极高敏感区、高敏感区、中敏感区、低敏感区和非敏感区,并提出了分区保护与建设的建议,为研究区生态环境保护和产业经济布局提供有价值的参考。研究结果表明,极高和高生态敏感区面积占研究区的48.63%,说明研究区生态敏感性总体上很高。

DOI

[Yin Haiwei, Xu Jiangang, Chen Changyong, et al.GIS-based ecological sensitivity analysis in the east of Wujiang city. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2006, 26(1): 97-103.]

[20]
朱东国, 谢炳庚, 陈永林. 基于生态敏感性评价的山地旅游城市旅游用地策略: 以张家界市为例. 经济地理, 2015, 35(6): 184-189.

[Zhu Dongguo, Xie Binggeng, Chen Yonglin.The strategy of tourism land in mountain tourism city based on evaluation of ecological sensitivity: A case study of Zhangjiajie city. Economic Geography, 2015, 35(6): 184-189.]

[21]
Masuda J R, Garvin T.Whose Heartland? The politics of place in a rural-urban interface. Journal of Rural Studies, 2008, 24(1): 112-123.lt;h2 class="secHeading" id="section_abstract">Abstract</h2><p id="">This article advances a conceptualization of the rural&ndash;urban interface that is centred on a historically and spatially informed politics of place situated within local&ndash;global connections. The research is a case study of an inter-municipal development plan called Alberta's Industrial Heartland. Located near the City of Edmonton, in Alberta, Canada, the study area has been characterized by tremendous social, cultural, and economic shifts over the past century, from agriculture, to country residential in-migration, to intensive industrial development in response to the increasing importance of Alberta on the global energy market. A series of interviews conducted with residents, political officials, and other stakeholders documents how parallel, yet contested definitions of the &lsquo;Heartland&rsquo; underpinned a &lsquo;politics of place&rsquo; over land use change at the rural&ndash;urban interface.</p>

DOI

[22]
Sack R D. Place, Modernity, the Consumer's World: A Relational Framework for Geographical Analysis. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.

[23]
Williams D R, Stewart S I.Sense of place: An elusive concept that is finding a home in ecosystem management. Journal of Forestry, 1998, 96(5): 18-23.Sense of place" offers resource managers a way to identify and respond to the emotional and spiritual bonds people form with certain spaces. We examine reasons for the increasing interest in the concept and offer four broad recommendations for applying sense of place to ecosystem management. By initiating a discussion about sense of place, managers can build a working relationship with the public that reflects the complex web of lifestyles, meanings, and social relations endemic to a place.

DOI

[24]
DuPuis M, Vandergeest P. Creating the Countryside: The Politics of Rural and Environmental Discourse. Temple University Press, 1996.What does it mean to save nature and rural life? Do people know what they are trying to save and what they mean by "save"? As the answers to these questions become more and more unclear, so, too do the concepts of "environment," "wilderness," and "country." From the abuse of the Amazon rain forest to how Vermont has been marketed as the ideal rural place, this collection looks at what the countryside is, should be, or can be from the perspective of people who are actively involved in such debates. Each contributor examines the underlying tendencies and subsequent policies that separate country from city, developed land from wilderness, and human activity from natural processes. The editors argue in their introduction that these dualistic categories limit our ability to think about environmental and rural problems and hamper our ability to formulate practical, realistic, and just solutions.This book's interpretive approach to the natural world explores why people make artificial distinctions between nature and culture, and how people can create new forms of sustainable development in terms of real problems and real places. E.Melanie DuPuis is Economic Development Policy Analyst covering environmental policy at the New York State Department of Economic Development. Peter Vandergeest is Senior Fellow on the Faculty of Environmental Studies at York University, and Assistant Professor of Pacific and Asian Studies at the University of Victoria.

DOI

[25]
Greider T, Garkovich L.Landscapes: The social construction of nature and the environment. Rural Sociology, 1994, 59(1): 1-24.Abstract A theoretical framework is provided to understand a cultural group's definition of and relationship with nature and the environment. The framework draws on a social constructionist perspective that includes aspects of phenomenology and symbolic interactionism to define "landscape" as the symbolic environment created by a human act of conferring meaning on nature and the environment. This landscape reflects the selfdefinitions of the people within a particular cultural context. Attention is directed to transformation of the physical environment into landscapes that reflect people's definitions of themselves and on how these landscapes are reconstructed in response to people's changing definitions of themselves. Case studies from sociology and anthropology illustrate the social construction of nature and the environment. A discussion of the applied implications of the theoretical framework in social impact assessment and the global implications in the shifting power struggle over competing landscapes concludes the paper.

DOI

[26]
van Riper C J, Kyle G T, Sutton S G, et al. Mapping outdoor recreationists' perceived social values for ecosystem services at Hinchinbrook Island National Park, Australia. Applied Geography, 2012, 35(1): 164-173.Coastal ecosystems are increasingly faced with human impacts. To better understand these changing conditions, biophysical and economic values of nature have been used to prioritize spatial planning efforts and ecosystem-based management of human activities. Less is known, however, about how to characterize and represent non-material values in decision-making. We collected on-site and mailback s...

DOI

[27]
Raymond C M, Brown G.Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2014, 122: 196-208.The number of public participation GIS (PPGIS) applications to inform local and regional land, use planning has increased significantly over the last decade. An important rationale for undertaking, participatory mapping is to anticipate and identify areas of potential land use conflict. To date, there, has not been a systematic evaluation of methods for identifying land use conflict potential with PPGIS data. This study uses data from a regional planning study in Australia to describe and evaluate alternative methods for identifying land use conflict potential. A simple, two dimensional model of land use conflict is presented and operationalized with spatial data to provide a heuristic device for regional land-use planning practitioners. Land use conflict is posited to derive from differences in landscape values and land use preferences that can be formulated into different conflict indices and presented in maps. We demonstrate application of the conflict mapping model using residential and industrial development in the region as examples. The spatial distribution of landscape values, values compatibility scoring, land use preference differences, and a combined values and preferences scoring index are all viable methods for identifying and mapping the potential for land use conflict. The preferred method for assessing the potential for land use conflict is one that integrates two dimensions: land use preference directionality (supporting or opposing) and the importance or intensity of landscape values. We discuss the strengths and limitations of each conflict mapping method.

DOI

[28]
Masso A D, Dixon J, Pol E.On the contested nature of place: 'Figuera's Well', 'The Hole of Shame' and the ideological struggle over public space in Barcelona. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2011, 31(3): 231-244.This paper explores some of the discursive practices through which the place meanings are formulated, warranted and, above all, contested. Drawing particularly on the work of the social psychologist Michael Billig, we present a rhetorical analysis of newspaper reports and interview accounts about the 'development' of a contested public space in Barcelona, known locally both as Figuera's Well and the Hole of Shame. This analysis explores a number of rhetorically opposed constructions of the nature, purpose and appropriate beneficiaries of this place, whose implications are discussed both within the context of local power struggles and within the context of wider ideological struggles over the nature of public spaces in Barcelona. We argue that a rhetorical perspective reveals how practices of attributing meaning and value to places are often more conflict-ridden, action-oriented, and politically-charged than is implied by much research in environmental psychology. Belatedly, we argue that environmental psychologists need to complement a 'weak' conception of the role of conflict in the formation of public space (focused on subjective differences in environmental tastes, preferences and values) with a 'strong' conception of the role of conflict (focused on ideological struggles over access, equality and inclusion). (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

DOI

[29]
Brown G. Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) for regional and environmental planning: Reflections on a decade of empirical research. Journal of Urban and Regional Information Systems Association, 2012, 25(2): 7-18.INTRODUCTION This paper reflects on more than a decade of public participation geographic...

[30]
Sieber R.Public participation geographic information systems: A literature review and framework. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 2006, 96(3): 491-507.Public participation geographic information systems (PPGIS) pertains to the use of geographic information systems (GIS) to broaden public involvement in policymaking as well as to the value of GIS to promote the goals of nongovernmental organizations, grassroots groups, and community-based organizations. The article first traces the social history of PPGIS. It then argues that PPGIS has been socially constructed by a broad set of actors in research across disciplines and in practice across sectors. This produced and reproduced concept is then explicated through four major themes found across the breadth of the PPGIS literature: place and people, technology and data, process, and outcome and evaluation. The themes constitute a framework for evaluating current PPGIS activities and a roadmap for future PPGIS research and practice.

DOI

[31]
Alessa L, Kliskey A, Brown G.Social-ecological hotspots mapping: A spatial approach for identifying coupled social-ecological space. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2008, 85(1): 27-39.lt;h2 class="secHeading" id="section_abstract">Abstract</h2><p id="">This paper advances the concept of a coupled social&ndash;ecological system (SES), where human and biophysical systems are closely linked, to examine and explain variations in landscape values perceived by people in their region. In this paper, we describe an approach that allows the mapping of SES by linking survey research with geographic information systems (GIS) to provide spatial representations of social and ecological system convergence. Using survey data that measured landscape values from multiple communities on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, we identify geographical areas where both human-perceived and physically measured ecological values overlap and are referred to as social&ndash;ecological &ldquo;hotspots&rdquo;. Community landscape values, collected as point data, were used to generate point density maps to produce hotspot surfaces for each value. These value surfaces were spatially cross-correlated with other communities&rsquo; value surfaces and with an ecological map layer (net primary productivity) to demonstrate social&ndash;ecological mapping. Moderate spatial cross-correlation coefficients were found between most landscape values by community with 18 hotspot surfaces pairings exhibiting strong positive spatial cross correlations. Moderately significant, positive linear relationships were found between perceived biological values and net primary productivity for three of six communities. The exploratory spatial analysis presented in this paper is a first step in identifying and describing the presence of SES in a regional context. We conclude the paper by discussing the potential managerial and ecological implications of coupled social&ndash;ecological systems including system resilience and vulnerability, and the limitations of the approach that need to be considered.</p>

DOI

[32]
Brown G, Brabyn L.The extrapolation of social landscape values to a national level in New Zealand using landscape character classification. Applied geography, 2012, 35(1): 84-94.The human perception and valuation of landscapes is a complex process but has been pragmatically advanced through public participation GIS (PPGIS). PPGIS methods have the capacity to generate spatial data to empirically examine relationships between human landscape values and physical landscape character. In 2011, PPGIS methods were used to identify a range of social landscape values for two regions in southern New Zealand, Otago and Southland. Seven of these landscape values were analysed to identify significant relationships with physical landscape character from the New Zealand Landscape Classification system. In this paper we examine methods to extrapolate landscape values from this regional data set to a national level using these landscape value and character relationships. In the absence of empirical value data at a national level, we examine two quantitative approaches for extrapolating landscape values: (1) landscape component weights based on the percentage of value counts found within landscape components, and (2) landscape component weights based on the ratio of landscape values to the landscape area. We prepare and present maps of seven landscape values for the entire country of New Zealand to demonstrate the method. We conclude that landscape value extrapolation can assist impact assessment for land use change but should be kept simple for decision support.

DOI

[33]
Zhu X, Pfueller S, Whitelaw P, et al.Spatial differentiation of landscape values in the Murray River Region of Victoria, Australia. Environmental Management, 2010, 45(5): 896-911.This research advances the understanding of the location of perceived landscape values through a statistically based approach to spatial analysis of value densities. Survey data were obtained from a sample of people living in and using the Murray River region, Australia, where declining environmental quality prompted a reevaluation of its conservation status. When densities of 12 perceived landscape values were mapped using geographic information systems (GIS), valued places clustered along the entire river bank and in associated National/State Parks and reserves. While simple density mapping revealed high value densities in various locations, it did not indicate what density of a landscape value could be regarded as a statistically significant hotspot or distinguish whether overlapping areas of high density for different values indicate identical or adjacent locations. A spatial statistic Getis&#8211;Ord Gi* was used to indicate statistically significant spatial clusters of high value densities or &#8220;hotspots&#8221;. Of 251 hotspots, 40% were for single non-use values, primarily spiritual, therapeutic or intrinsic. Four hotspots had 11 landscape values. Two, lacking economic value, were located in ecologically important river red gum forests and two, lacking wilderness value, were near the major towns of Echuca-Moama and Albury-Wodonga. Hotspots for eight values showed statistically significant associations with another value. There were high associations between learning and heritage values while economic and biological diversity values showed moderate associations with several other direct and indirect use values. This approach may improve confidence in the interpretation of spatial analysis of landscape values by enhancing understanding of value relationships.

DOI PMID

[34]
禹文豪, 艾廷华, 杨敏, 等. 利用核密度与空间自相关进行城市设施兴趣点分布热点探测. 武汉大学学报: 信息科学版, 2016, 41(2): 221-227.

[Yu Wenhao, Ai Tinghua, Yang Min, et al.Detecting: "Hot spots" of facility POIs based on Kernel density estimation and spatial autocorrelation technique. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 2016, 41(2): 221-227.]

[35]
汤国安, 杨昕. ArcGIS地理信息系统空间分析实验教程(第二版). 北京: 科学出版社, 2012.

[Tang Guoan, Yang Xin.ArcGIS Geographic Information System Spatial Analysis Experiment Tutorial (2nd ed). Beijing: Science Press, 2012.]

[36]
De Smith M J, Goodchild M F, Longley P. Geospatial Analysis: A Comprehensive Guide to Principles, Techniques and Software Tools. Leicester: Troubador Publishing Ltd., 2007.

[37]
Shannon C E, Weaver W.The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1949.

Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉