| Dynamic analysis of ecological footprint and ecological capacity of arable land in Gaotai during 1990—2010 |
|
View Fulltext View/Add Comment Download reader |
| |
| DOI：10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2012.04.37 |
| Key Words: arable land ecological footprint ecological capacity ecological deficit Gaotai |
| Author Name | Affiliation | | ZHOU Liping | College of Resources and Environment, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou, 730070, China | | WANG Ping | College of Resources and Environment, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou, 730070, China | | LIU Shuying | College of Resources and Environment, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou, 730070, China | | ZHANG Xuexin | College of Resources and Environment, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou, 730070, China |
|
| Hits: 257 |
| Download times: 181 |
| Abstract: |
| In order to make clear the state of sustainable development of arable land in Gaotai, a study was conducted with the model of Ecological Footprint to dynamically analyse the ecological footprint, ecological capacity and ecological deficit of arable land in Gaotai during 1990—2010. The results showed that the average personal ecological footprint gradually increased from 0.4745 hm2 to 1.9271 hm2 during 1990—2010. Whereas, the average personal ecological capacity declined from 0.7095 hm2 to 0.6651 hm2 during the same period of time. A conclusion could be drawn that the ecological footprint and ecological capacity development were just in the opposite direction. In 1990, 1991 and 1996, the arable land presented an ecological surplus, and ecological deficit arose in 1995, which increased from 0.0220 hm2 to 1.262
0 hm2 during 1995—2010, and ecological deficit was up to maxmized in 2010. All these indicate that the utilization of arable land in Gaotai is increasing year by year, which is beyond the capacity of arable land ecological system, and the population is also increaseing one year after another, so the arable land ecological system is at risk, and the present utilizing model of arable land in Gaotai is not sustainable. |
|
|
|