中国主要城市低碳发展与可持续发展的关系研究
文献类型：学位论文
| 作者 | 陈喆菲 |
| 学位类别 | 博士 |
| 答辩日期 | 2016-05 |
| 授予单位 | 中国科学院研究生院 |
| 授予地点 | 北京 |
| 导师 | 邓红兵 |
| 关键词 | 碳清单，指标体系，Spearman秩相关，耦合 Carbon inventory Index system Spearman rank correlation Coupling |
| 其他题名 | Study on Relationship between Low-Carbon Development and Sustainable Development of Main Cities in China |
| 学位专业 | 生态学 |
| 中文摘要 | 城市是人类经济活动的中心，随着城市化进程的加快，一些相关的环境问题日益突出，城市低碳发展和可持续发展已成为必然选择。对城市低碳发展水平及可持续发展水平进行科学的评价有助于了解城市发展状况及其影响因素，可为城市发展实践提供参考。分析城市低碳发展及可持续发展的关系，探讨其耦合机制，具有理论价值，对城市的协调发展也具有指导意义。论文通过对北京市和厦门市的案例研究，对其低碳发展水平及可持续发展水平进行了评价与比较，并对其低碳发展和可持续发展的关系进行了探讨。在此基础上，基于其他学者对中国主要城市的相关评价结果，探讨了指标体系及评价方法对可持续发展评价结果的影响，并对中国城市低碳发展与可持续发展进行了耦合。一些主要结果如下： （1）能源活动是案例城市最主要的排放源，占城市碳排放总量的 98%左右；工业生产过程中的碳排放和农业生产过程碳排放分别为北京和厦门排放的第二位，表明这两个城市在产业结构上存在一定的差异。从碳排放量来看，北京市温室气体排放总量远高于厦门市，这主要是由于两个城市在城市规模、GDP体量及人口数量存在较大差别。北京和厦门在用能结构上也存在区别，厦门市碳排放量较大的行业是能源工业和交通运输，而北京市则是工业和居民生活；而城市的用能结构不同，所采取的低碳发展措施也应有所侧重。 （2）在评价的两个年份北京市的低碳发展水平高于厦门市，而且从 2008年到 2010年，北京市的低碳发展水平上升而厦门市下降。厦门市在城市生活污水和生活垃圾处理方面一直优于北京市，而且公众对厦门市的环境保护满意率也较高。但北京市在资源环境和低碳经济发展层面优于厦门市。厦门市应该在低碳经济发展和资源环境方面加大投入，特别是进一步挖掘减排潜力，而北京市应该在社会进步方面加大投入。 （3）北京市的可持续发展水平在此期间有所增强，其中得分上升比较明显的指标有市辖区人均 GDP、城市化率、生活污水集中处理率和建成区绿化覆盖率，表明北京市在此期间除经济得到较大发展外，针对自身可持续发展能力建设比较薄弱的方面也做了很多努力并取得明显成效。厦门市在此期间可持续发展水平则有所下降，其中下降最为明显的是市辖区教育支出占 GDP的比重。两个城市低碳发展水平和可持续发展水平的变化趋势一致，某种程度上说明低碳发展和可持续发展密切相关。 （4）研究表明通过 Spearman秩相关分析对不同研究结果进行比较是可行的。同一研究对中国 35个主要城市在不同时间的排名结果相关性极高且极显著，即整体上的排名结果在短时间内没有较大改变，这在某种程度上也说明可持续发展能力建设是一个需要长期努力的过程。在可持续发展评价研究中，评价方法的不同会导致评价结果的较大差异，表明评价的目的及由此确定的评价方法是开展相关研究的关键。 （5）大部分被评价的城市低碳发展水平与可持续发展水平比较均衡，某种程度上这也说明了低碳发展与可持续发展的联系较为密切。兰州、哈尔滨与乌鲁木齐低碳发展水平与可持续发展水平明显失衡，福州、南京、天津和深圳也接近失衡；这些城市在今后的发展中需要注意处理好低碳发展及可持续发展的关系，协调发展。我国大部分主要城市属于强可持续发展—强低碳发展的耦合方式，表现为低碳发展与可持续发展相互促进。属于弱可持续发展—弱低碳发展耦合方式的 6个城市都表现出资源受限或者资源枯竭的特点，其中部分城市过去走的是高耗能、高强度开发的发展模式，但其可持续发展水平并没有得到有效提高。耦合结果还表明，低碳发展水平高，其可持续发展水平也会较高，印证了低碳发展是实现可持续发展的有效途径。结果还表明弱的低碳发展水平不足以支撑强度的甚至是中度的可持续发展，所以今后中国城市发展必须重视低碳建设。 |
| 英文摘要 | Cities are centers of human economic activities. With the accelerated civilization progress,relative environmental problems aggravated at the same time. Low-carbon development or sustainable development has become the inevitable choice of cities. Scientific evaluation of cities’ low-carbon development or sustainable development level helps to acknowledge state and influencing factors of cities’ development. It can also provide statistic references to cities’development practice. To analyze relationship between cities’ low-carbon development and sustainable development, as well as their coupling mechanism are not only valuable in theory but also in practice. By evaluating and comparing Beijing and Xiamen’s low-carbon development level and sustainable level, the essay discussed the relationship between low-carbon development and sustainable development. Basing on case study, combining other scholars’ relative evaluation results of critical cities in China, the essay discussed the impact of index systems and evaluation methods on the result of sustainable development. Also, the essay coupled cities low-carbon development and sustainable development in China. Here follows the main conclusion. (1) Energy consumption is the largest emission source of both cities in this case study and it takes 98% of the total carbon emission. Industrial production and agriculture production are the second largest emission source in Beijing and Xiamen correspondingly which indicates difference in industrial structure of the two cities. As for carbon emission, Beijing discharges far more greenhouse gases than Xiamen. It is mainly because these two cities are different in city scale, GDP and population size. Energy use structure is quite different in Beijing and Xiamen. Carbon emission in Xiamen is mainly from energy industry, while it is mainly from industry and the lives of residents in Beijing. Difference in energy use structure indicates measures taken for low-carbon development should be different. (2) Low-carbon development level of Beijing is higher than Xiamen in the evaluated two years. Meanwhile, from 2008 to 2010, Beijing’s low-carbon development level is increasing while Xiamen’s is decreasing. Xiamen is better in urban sewage and domestic garbage disposal,as well as public satisfactory rate to urban environment. However, Beijing excels Xiamen in resources environment and low-carbon economic development. It is necessary for Xiamen to increase input in low-carbon economic development and resources environment, especially in emission reduction, while social progress is required in Beijing. (3) Beijing’s sustainable development level increased during this time period. Indexes with obviously increased score are GDP per capital in municipal districts, urbanization rate,domestic sewage centralized treatment rate and green coverage ratio in built up area. It indicates that Beijing not only developed rapidly in economy, but also succeeded in sustainable development capacity construction which it was once weak in. During the same time period,Xiamen’s sustainable development level decreased, in which, the biggest drop is percentage that education expenditure takes in GDP. The variation tendency of low-carbon development level and sustainable development level of both cities keeps the same, which to a certain degree shows that low-carbon development and sustainable development are closely relevant to each other. (4) The study indicates that using Spearman rank correlation to compare results in different study is feasible. In the same study, correlation of 35 main cities’ ranking results in different time periods is extremely high and significant. In other words, overall ranking results do not change in a short term. It also indicates that sustainable development capacity construction requires long time of hard working. In studies of sustainable development, differences in evaluation methods can lead to large difference in results, which indicates that the objective and evaluation methods basing on the objective are keys of relative studies. (5) Most evaluated cities are relative balance in low-carbon development and sustainable development level. It indicates that low-carbon development is closely related to sustainable development to some degree. Low-carbon development and sustainable development in Lanzhou, Harbin, and Urumchi are out of balance. Fuzhou, Nanjing, Tianjin and Shenzhen are close to unbalance. These cities should take care of the relationship between low-carbon development and sustainable development in the future development. Most cities in China can be categorized into Strong sustainable-Weak carbon development coupling mode. It indicates mutual promotion of low-carbon and sustainable development. The 6 cities belonging to Weak sustainable-Weak low-carbon development coupling mode are restricted or exhausted in resources. Some of which had followed high energy consumption and high intensity exploitation development mode, but its sustainable development level did not improve efficiently. Coupling results also indicates that cities with low-carbon development level are generally high in sustainable development level. This result verifies that low-carbon development is an efficient approach of sustainable development. The result also shows that weak low-carbon development level is not sufficient to support high intense or even moderate sustainable development. It is necessary to pay attention to low-carbon construction in future development of cities in China. |
| 源URL | [http://ir.rcees.ac.cn/handle/311016/36782]  |
| 专题 | 生态环境研究中心_城市与区域生态国家重点实验室 |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | 陈喆菲. 中国主要城市低碳发展与可持续发展的关系研究[D]. 北京. 中国科学院研究生院. 2016. |
入库方式： OAI收割
来源：生态环境研究中心
浏览0
下载0
收藏0
其他版本
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。