Spatiotemporal Evaluation of Socio-Ecological-Economic System Vulnerability: A County-Level Analysis of Chongqing, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Study Area and Data Source
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Data Sources
3. Methods
3.1. Establishment of the Indicator System
3.2. Evaluation Model of SEES Vulnerability
3.2.1. Subsystem Vulnerability Index
3.2.2. Composite Vulnerability Index
3.3. Vulnerability Classification
3.4. Vulnerability Spatial Variability
4. Results
4.1. Ecological System Vulnerability
4.2. Social System Vulnerability
4.3. Economic System Vulnerability
4.4. SEES Composite Vulnerability
4.5. Spatial Variability of Vulnerability
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Adger, W.N. Vulnerability. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2006, 16, 268–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, M.A.; Schoon, M.L.; Ke, W.; Börner, K. Scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2006, 16, 240–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hasibagen; Li, T.S.; Tong, B.Q. Man-land system vulnerability and development model of ecological regions. Econ. Geogr. 2013, 33, 149–154. [Google Scholar]
- Barking, J. Risk and vulnerability indicators at different scales: Applicability, usefulness and policy implications. Environ. Hazards 2007, 7, 20–31. [Google Scholar]
- Füssel, H.M.; Klein, R.J. Climate change vulnerability assessments: An evolution of conceptual thinking. Clim. Chang. 2006, 75, 301–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IPCC. Climate Change. The IPCC Second Assessment Report; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Connelly, A.; Carter, J.; Handley, J.F.; Hincks, S. Enhancing the Practical Utility of Risk Assessments in Climate Change Adaptation. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yang, J.; Guan, Y.Y.; Li, X.M.; Xi, J.C. Urban fringe area ecological vulnerability space-time evolution research: The case of Ganjingzi district, Dalian. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2018, 38, 778–787. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, J.; Yang, X.J.; Yin, S.; Wu, K.S.; Deng, M.Q.; Wen, X. The vulnerability evolution and simulation of social-ecological systems in a semi-arid area: A case study of Yulin City, China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2018, 28, 152–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Su, F.; Chu, Y.T.; Zhang, P.Y. Analysis of economic vulnerability and obstacle factors of typical tourism cities in China. Econ. Geogr. 2013, 33, 189–194. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, L.L.; Zheng, X.Q.; Zhang, C.X.; Lv, Y.Q. Early-warning of urban vulnerability in Tangshan city based on variable weight model. J. Nat. Resour. 2016, 31, 1858–1870. [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, W.Q.; Wang, K.; Yu, W.J.; Li, W.F.; Han, L.J.; Qian, Y.G. Understanding the social and ecological connections between cities and surrounding regions for urban and regional sustainability. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2017, 37, 5238–5245. [Google Scholar]
- Jonathan, W.L.; Ashley, S.E. Shifting perspectives in assessing socio-environmental vulnerability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2625. [Google Scholar]
- Li, T.Y. Spatial vulnerability based on the framework of the exposure-sensitivity-adaptive capacity: A case study of Lanzhou. Econ. Geogr. 2017, 37, 86–95. [Google Scholar]
- Fang, X.Q.; Yin, P.H. Review on the three key concepts of resilience, vulnerability and adaptation in the research of global environmental change. Prog. Geogr. 2007, 26, 11–22. [Google Scholar]
- Li, J.; Zhao, R.F.; Xie, Z.L. The comprehensive assessment of vulnerability in social-ecological system of Gansu province. Econ. Geogr. 2015, 35, 168–175. [Google Scholar]
- Frazier, T.G.; Thompson, C.M.; Dezzani, R.J. A framework for the development of the SERV model: A spatially explicit resilience-vulnerability model. Appl. Geogr. 2014, 51, 158–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattarai, K.; Conway, D. Urban vulnerabilities in the Kathmandu valley, Nepal: Visualizations of human/hazard interactions. J. Geogr. Inform. Syst. 2010, 2, 63–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fang, C.L.; Wang, Y. A comprehensive assessment of urban vulnerability and its spatial differentiation in China. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2015, 70, 236–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, L.; Wang, W.; Zhang, Y.S. The Spatio-temporal evolution about urban vulnerability on the northeast region since northeast revitalization. Econ. Geogr. 2014, 34, 69–77. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, D.M.; Shi, Y.Z.; Li, W.L.; Yang, X.J. Spatiotemporal change of vulnerability in counties of northwest China. Prog. Geogr. 2017, 36, 405–415. [Google Scholar]
- Tian, Y.P.; Chang, H. Bibliometric analysis of research progress on ecological vulnerability in China. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2012, 67, 1515–1525. [Google Scholar]
- Tian, Y.P.; Xiang, Q.C.; Wang, P. Regional coupled human-natural systems vulnerability and its evaluation indexes. Geogr. Res. 2013, 32, 55–63. [Google Scholar]
- Wen, X.L.; Yang, X.L.; Wang, Z.Q. Assessment on the vulnerability of social-ecological systems in a mountainous city depending on multi-targets adaption. Geogr. Res. 2016, 35, 299–312. [Google Scholar]
- Wei, X.X.; Zhao, J.; Wei, W.; Jie, B.B. Spatial and temporal changes of ecological vulnerability per county unit in China. Acta Sci. Circumstantiac. 2016, 36, 726–739. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, X.H.; Zhou, H.H.; Wang, X. The Vulnerability and coordination of the coupling of environment, economy and society in county: A case of Qiqihar city of Heilongjiang Province. Hum. Geogr. 2018, 33, 94–101. [Google Scholar]
- Guan, D.J.; Su, W.C.; Wang, H.J. Eco-environment vulnerability assessment of karst regions in Chongqing. Res. Agric. Mod. 2006, 27, 432–435. [Google Scholar]
- Ma, J.; Li, C.X.; Wei, H.; Ma, P.; Yang, Y.J.; Ren, Q.S.; Zhang, W. Dynamic evaluation of ecological vulnerability in the Three Gorges Reservoir region in Chongqing Municipality, China. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2015, 35, 7117–7129. [Google Scholar]
- Li, H.L.; Ma, B.B.; Xue, D.Q.; Jiang, J.; Liu, J.H. The spatial differentiation and determinants of urban vulnerability in northwest China under the background of the silk road economic belt. Econ. Geogr. 2018, 38, 66–73. [Google Scholar]
- Li, P.X.; Fan, J. Regional ecological vulnerability assessment based on VSD model: A case study of Xijiang river economic belt in Guangxi. J. Nat. Resour. 2014, 29, 779–788. [Google Scholar]
- Du, T.; Xie, X.J.; Liang, H.Y.; Huang, A.; Han, Q.F. County economy comprehensive evaluation and spatial analysis in Chongqing city based on entropy weight-TOPSIS and GIS. Econ. Geogr. 2014, 34, 40–47. [Google Scholar]
- Li, J.; Liao, H.P.; Cai, J.; Li, T.; Zhang, T. Distribution Characteristic on Terrain Gradient of Land Use Pattern and Change in the Fringe of Mountainous Cities: A Case Study of Banan District in Chongqing. Resour. Environ. Yangtze Basin 2018, 27, 296–305. [Google Scholar]
- Rabby, Y.W.; Hossain, M.D.B.; Hasan, M.U.I. Social vulnerability in the coastal region of Bangladesh: An investigation of social vulnerability index and scalar change effects. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2019, 41, 101329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, S.; Ge, J.; Li, W.M.; Bai, M. Historic environmental vulnerability evaluation of traditional villages under geological hazards and influencing factors of adaptive capacity: A district-level analysis of Lishui, China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, Q.J. Vulnerability evaluation of the tourism economic system in western regions. Commer. Res. 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Q.; Liu, Q.; Yin, S.; Zhang, J.; Yang, X.; Gao, Y. Vulnerability and influencing factors of rural transportation environment in Qinling-Daba mountainous areas: A case study of Luonan county in Shaanxi province. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2019, 74, 1236–1251. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, Z.; Jing, Y.D.; Bi, R.T.; Gao, Y.; Wang, P. The discovery of spatial association patterns of resource and environment information based on grid data. J. Geog. Geoinf. Sci. 2018, 20, 28–36. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.; Li, H.Y.; He, Y.Z.; Ma, X.S.; Zhou, M.M. Sustainable development ability and its spatiotemporal differentiations of rural human settlements in Chongqing Municipality from 1997 to 2015. Prog. Geogr. 2019, 38, 556–566. [Google Scholar]
Three Criteria | Conceptual Connotation |
---|---|
Exposure | Refers to the extent to which a system is disturbed by external risks such as natural disasters, industrial and agricultural pollution; the size of exposure is determined by the characteristics of external stress factors and the stability of the system itself. |
Sensitivity | Refers to the extent to which the system is affected by external risk factors and is an attribute of the system itself. A very stable system has low sensitivity and low system vulnerability. |
Capacity | Refers to the system’s ability to deal with external pressure and system resilience after stress. Capacity mainly emphasizes the adaptation of human society to disaster risks. The greater the potential for adaptation, the stronger the system’s ability to recover, the lower the vulnerability. |
Target Layer | Criterion Layer | Index Layer | Weight | Index Properties | Indicator Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
SEES vulnerability | Ecological system vulnerability | Low-risk area of geological hazards/county area | 0.0225 | Exposure (+) | The higher the level of areas prone to geological hazards, the higher the exposure and the greater the probability of regional disasters. |
Moderate risk area of geological hazards/county area | 0.02528 | Exposure (+) | |||
High-risk area of geological hazards/county area | 0.01887 | Exposure (+) | |||
Multi-year average precipitation erosivity/agricultural output value | 0.02212 | Exposure (+) | The greater the erosivity of precipitation, the more sensitive the area is to soil erosion | ||
Average temperatures from June to September | 0.02597 | Exposure (+) | High temperature easily contributes to forest fires and make people have heatstroke threatening human’s health | ||
Consumption of Chemical Pesticides /arable land area | 0.02465 | Exposure (+) | Improper use of pesticides and fertilizers can lead to soil pollution and eutrophication of water, and increase potential exposure in the region. | ||
Consumption of Chemical Fertilizers /arable land area | 0.02515 | Exposure (+) | |||
Topographic index | 0.02585 | Sensitivity (+) | Elevation and slope are important basic factors and contribute to the development of geological hazards | ||
Soil conservation | 0.02614 | Sensitivity (–) | With better soil conservation, less soil erosion occurs and the stronger the regional adaptation capacity | ||
Water conservation | 0.02608 | Sensitivity (–) | The richer the water resources, the lower the exposure, the stronger the ability to cope with risks and hazards | ||
Groundwater resources | 0.02598 | Sensitivity (–) | |||
Average annual precipitation | 0.02577 | Sensitivity (–) | |||
Soil organic matter | 0.02525 | Sensitivity (–) | The higher the soil organic matter content and the more land is available with slopes land below 15°, the better the quality of arable land | ||
<15° slope arable land area/total arable land area | 0.02591 | Sensitivity (–) | |||
Per capita water resources | 0.02625 | Sensitivity (–) | The richer the water resources, the stronger the ability to cope with risk hazards | ||
Per capita arable land area | 0.02564 | Sensitivity (–) | The more per capita arable land area, the greater the grain output and the stronger the ability to recover from disasters | ||
Per capita food production | 0.02552 | Sensitivity (–) | |||
Vegetation coverage | 0.02555 | Exposure (–) | Areas with high vegetation coverage are conducive to maintaining soil to avoid soil erosion | ||
Economic system vulnerability | Proportion of primary industry in GDP | 0.02475 | Sensitivity (+) | The higher the output value of primary and secondary industries, the higher the potential exposure of the economy | |
Proportion of secondary industry in GDP | 0.02588 | Sensitivity (+) | |||
Proportion of tertiary industry in GDP | 0.02623 | Sensitivity (–) | |||
Percentage of forest value in agricultural value | 0.02616 | Sensitivity (–) | Industrial structure adjustment reduces the sensitivity of economic exposure | ||
Per capita disposable income of urban residents | 0.02573 | Capacity (–) | The higher the income of urban and rural residents, the lower the sensitivity of exposure | ||
Per capita disposable income of rural residents | 0.02559 | Capacity (–) | |||
Fixed assets investment | 0.02616 | Capacity (–) | Economic structure adjustment reduces economic vulnerability | ||
Total retail sales of consumer goods | 0.02619 | Capacity (–) | Income and consumption levels indirectly reflect the living standards of people in a region; areas with high living standards have the low economic vulnerability | ||
Financial revenue and expenditure ratio | 0.02552 | Capacity (–) | |||
Per capita GDP | 0.02623 | Sensitivity (–) | |||
Social system vulnerability | Construction land area/total area | 0.02115 | Exposure (+) | High potential exposure of population and economic activities in areas with a high proportion of construction land | |
Construction completion area | 0.02335 | Exposure (+) | |||
Number of females/numbers of permanent residents at the end of the year | 0.02514 | Sensitivity (+) | Women have weaker physical resistance and overall economic strength than that of men, thus making it harder for women to recover after disasters | ||
Population density | 0.01571 | Sensitivity (+) | Populations with high population densities have a high probability of being potentially dangerous | ||
Current number of primary school students | 0.02595 | Capacity (–) | Those with high education levels have a stronger ability to respond to disasters and stronger resilience after disasters | ||
Current number of students in ordinary secondary schools | 0.02589 | Capacity (–) | |||
Number of health beds per 10,000 people | 0.02625 | Capacity (–) | Areas with better health and welfare institutions have an easier time recovering after disasters | ||
Number of beds for social welfare adoption units per 10,000 people | 0.02604 | Capacity (–) | |||
Number of community service facilities per 10,000 people | 0.02632 | Capacity (–) | |||
Road network density | 0.02602 | Capacity (–) | Reflects the level of road development in an area, and roads are closely related to post-disaster evacuation ability | ||
Natural growth rate of population | 0.02527 | Sensitivity (+) | Population growth pressure | ||
Total employment at the end of the year/number of permanent residents at the end of the year | 0.02598 | Capacity (–) | Unemployed residents are less able to recover from disasters |
Degree of Ecological Vulnerability | Grade | Vulnerability Index |
---|---|---|
Slightly vulnerable | I | <0.2 |
Mildly vulnerable | II | 0.2–0.4 |
Moderately vulnerable | III | 0.4–0.6 |
Highly vulnerable | IV | 0.6–0.8 |
Extremely vulnerable | V | >0.8 |
Coefficient Variation | 2005 | 2010 | 2015 |
---|---|---|---|
Ecological system vulnerability | 15.72 | 14.99 | 17.17 |
Social system vulnerability | 3.61 | 9.55 | 7.22 |
Economic system vulnerability | 9.01 | 13.60 | 22.19 |
SEES vulnerability | 4.47 | 5.67 | 5.20 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, C.; He, Q.; Li, Y. Spatiotemporal Evaluation of Socio-Ecological-Economic System Vulnerability: A County-Level Analysis of Chongqing, China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3912. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093912
Liu C, He Q, Li Y. Spatiotemporal Evaluation of Socio-Ecological-Economic System Vulnerability: A County-Level Analysis of Chongqing, China. Sustainability. 2020; 12(9):3912. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093912
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Chunxia, Qingqing He, and Yuechen Li. 2020. "Spatiotemporal Evaluation of Socio-Ecological-Economic System Vulnerability: A County-Level Analysis of Chongqing, China" Sustainability 12, no. 9: 3912. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093912
APA StyleLiu, C., He, Q., & Li, Y. (2020). Spatiotemporal Evaluation of Socio-Ecological-Economic System Vulnerability: A County-Level Analysis of Chongqing, China. Sustainability, 12(9), 3912. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093912