耗散结构理论视野下北京城市综合韧性测度研究

doi:10.13776/jcnki.resourcesindustries.20240528.001

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 城市综合韧性定量测度是衡量城市韧性发展水平、指导城市生态文明建设的重要基础性工作。基于耗散结构理论视角，在分析城市巨系统的系统熵构成特征的基础上，选择社会韧性、经济韧性、生态韧性和基础设施韧性4大类21小类指标，运用熵权-TOPSIS模型开展北京市2016—2019年城市综合韧性定量测度。研究结果表明：1）2016—2019年北京市城市综合韧性水平逐年增长，韧性平均值呈“上升—平稳—上升”趋势，韧性指数介于0.30～0.76。2）北京市综合韧性指数最高的前3个区分别为朝阳区、海淀区和西城区，韧性指数分别为0.76、0.74和0.55；根据韧性指数高低，全市综合韧性水平可划分为低韧性、较低韧性、中等韧性、较高韧性和高韧性5级，其中低韧性与较低韧性辖区数占区总数的82%，全市总体韧性水平较低，且空间上不同区的韧性水平存在明显差异，呈“北低、东南较高、中心最高”的分布特点。3）全市各区不同类型的韧性水平受政府资金投入和自然资源本底条件影响，各具优势和不足，其中，朝阳区和海淀区社会、经济韧性水平较高，且朝阳区基础设施韧性水平相较其他区明显较高，而门头沟区、房山区和怀柔区等区的生态韧性更有优势。基于上述研究结果，提出如下政策建议：北京市应从控制系统内熵产生、增加系统负熵流输入两方面增强城市发展综合韧性，促进城市更新、基础设施改造升级与生态文明建设。

关键词: 城市韧性, 熵权法, TOPSIS模型, 耗散结构理论, 北京市

Abstract: Quantitative measurement of urban comprehensive resilience is a basic step in marking urban resilience level and leading urban eco-civilization construction. This paper, viewing from dissipative structure theory, selects social, economical, ecological and infrastructural resilience and their 21 sub-categories and uses entropy TOPSIS model to quantitatively measure Beijing's 2016 to 2019 urban comprehensive resilience based on urban giant system entropy. Beijing's 2016 to 2019 urban comprehensive resilience has been rising over time with its average showing a trend of “rising-stabilizing-rising”, resilience index between 0.30 to 0.76. Beijing's top 3 in urban comprehensive resilience index are Chaoyang, Haidian and Xicheng districts, at 0.76, 0.74 and 0.55 respectively. Beijing urban comprehensive level can be divided into five levels, low, relatively low, middle, relatively high and high based on the resilience index, of which low and relatively low are 82% of the total districts, suggesting an overall low resilience level and varying spatially, in a distributing pattern of “north-low, southeast-relatively-high, center-high”. Their resilience levels are impacted by governmental investments and natural resources abundance of advantages and disadvantages, of which Chaoyang and Haidian districts are relatively high, and Chaoyang's infrastructural resilience level is much higher than others, while Mentougou, Fangshan and Huairou districts are of more ecological resilience. This paper presents approaches to urban comprehensive resilience on controlling producing system's internal entropy, increasing inputting system's negative entropy, promoting urban reviving, upgrading infrastructures and ecological construction.

Key words: urban resilience, entropy, TOPSIS model, dissipative structure theory, Beijing city

中图分类号:

F290

问瀚之, 田毅, 李嘉琪, 等. 耗散结构理论视野下北京城市综合韧性测度研究[J]. 资源与产业, 2024, 26(4): 147-.

WEN Hanzhi, TIAN Yi, LI Jiaqi, et al.. MEASUREMENT OF BEIJING'S URBAN COMPREHENSIVE RESILIENCE BASED ON DISSIPATIVE STRUCTURE THEORY[J]. Resources & Industries, 2024, 26(4): 147-.

参考文献

陈长坤, 陈以琴, 施波, 等, 2018. 雨洪灾害情境下城市韧性评估模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 28（4）: 1-6.〔CHEN C K, CHEN Y Q, SHI B, et al., 2018. A model for evaluating urban resilience to rainstorm flood disasters[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 28(4): 1-6.〕

陈鹏, 赵洪阳, 张继权, 等, 2020. 城市内涝灾害受灾人口评估方法与实证研究: 以哈尔滨市道里区为例[J]. 地理科学, 40（1）: 158-164.〔CHEN P, ZHAO H Y, ZHANG J Q, et al., 2020. Assessment method and empirical study on the population affected by urban waterlogging disaster: Daoli district of Harbin as an example[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 40(1): 158-164.〕

郭羽羽, 罗福周, 钟兴润, 2021. 基于熵权-正态云模型的城市安全韧性评估研究[J]. 灾害学, 36（4）: 168-174.〔GUO Y Y, LUO F Z, ZHONG X R, 2021. Study on urban safety resilience assessment based on entropy weightnormal cloud model[J]. Journal of Catastrophology, 36(4): 168-174.〕

黄亚江, 李书全, 项思思, 2021. 基于AHP-PSO模糊组合赋权法的地铁火灾安全韧性评估[J]. 灾害学, 36（3）: 15-20, 40.〔HUANG Y J, LI S Q, XIANG S S, 2021. Evaluation of subway fire safety resilience based on AHP-PSO fuzzy combination weighting method[J]. Journal of Catastrophology, 36(3): 15-20, 40.〕

李亚, 翟国方, 2017. 我国城市灾害韧性评估及其提升策略研究[J]. 规划师, 33（8）: 5-11.〔LI Y, ZHAI G F, 2017. China's urban disaster resilience evaluation and promotion[J]. Planners, 33(8): 5-11.〕

孟晓静, 陈鑫, 陈佳静, 等, 2023. 组合赋权-TOPSIS在洪涝灾害下城市区域韧性评估中的应用[J]. 安全与环境学报, 23（5）: 1465-1473.〔MENG X J, CHEN X, CHEN J J, et al., 2023. Application of combination weighting and TOPSIS in the assessment of urban regional resilience under flood disaster[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 23(5): 1465-1473.〕

彭翀, 林樱子, 吴宇彤, 等, 2021. 基于“成本-能力-能效”的长江经济带城市韧性评估[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 30（8）: 1795-1808.〔PENG C, LIN Y Z, WU Y T, et al., 2021. Urban resilience evaluation of the Yangtze River economic belt based on “cost-capacity-efficiency”[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 30(8): 1795-1808.〕

屈金芝, 张艳松, 张艳, 等, 2022. 基于熵权法TOPSIS模型中国钛资源供应安全评价[J]. 资源与产业, 24（1）: 26-36.〔QU J Z, ZHANG Y S, ZHANG Y, et al., 2022. Supply security of China’s titanium resource based on entropy TOPSIS model[J]. Resources & Industries, 24(1): 26-36.〕

王光辉, 刘怡君, 王红兵, 2014. 基于耗散结构理论的城市风险形成及演化机理研究[J]. 城市发展研究, 21（11）: 81-86.〔WANG G H, LIU Y J, WANG H B, 2014. Study on formation and evolution mechanism of urban risk based on dissipative structure theory[J]. Urban Development Studies, 21(11): 81-86.〕

肖圣, 多玲花, 邹自力, 2023. 基于“风险-连通性-潜力”的南昌市生态韧性评估[J]. 应用生态学报, 34（3）: 733-741.〔XIAO S, DUO L H, ZOU Z L, 2023. Assessment of ecological resilience in Nanchang based on “riskconnectivitypotential”[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 34(3): 733-741.〕

徐江, 邵亦文, 2015. 韧性城市: 应对城市危机的新思路[J]. 国际城市规划, 30（2）: 1-3.〔XU J, SHAO Y W, 2015. Resilient cities: a new shift to urban crisis management[J]. Urban Planning International, 30(2): 1-3.〕

徐姗, 员鑫淼, 邓羽, 2023. 北京城市功能空间演进的结构模式与聚合规律[J]. 地理学报, 78（8）: 2092-2104.〔XU S, YUAN X M, DENG Y, 2023. Evolution of urban functional space in Beijing: modes and aggregation laws[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 78(8): 2092-2104.〕

徐志胜, 冯凯, 白国强, 等, 2004. 关于城市公共安全可持续发展理论的初步研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 14（1）: 3-6.〔XU Z S, FENG K, BAI G Q, et al., 2004. Preliminary study on sustainable development theory of urban community safety[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 14(1): 3-6.〕

叶进, 曹陇华, 常丽霞, 2008. 耗散结构对生态风险管理的启示[J]. 科学·经济·社会（2）: 70-74, 78.〔YE J, CAO L H, CHANG L X, 2008. Enlightenment of dissipative structure on the ecological risk management[J]. Science Economy Society(2): 70-74, 78.〕

湛垦华, 沈小峰, 1982. 普利高津与耗散结构理论[M]. 西安: 陕西科学技术出版社.

张振, 张以晨, 张继权, 等, 2023. 基于熵权法和TOPSIS模型的城市韧性评估: 以长春市为例[J]. 灾害学, 38（1）: 213-219.〔ZHANG Z, ZHANG Y C, ZHANG J Q, et al., 2023. Urban resilience assessment based on entropy weight method and TOPSIS model: take Changchun city as an example[J]. Journal of Catastrophology, 38(1): 213-219.〕

郑艳, 2017. 新型城镇化背景下我国韧性城市建设的思考[J]. 城市与减灾（4）: 61-65.

CUTTER S L, ASH K D, EMRICH C T, 2014. The geographies of community disaster resilience[J]. Global Environmental Change, 29: 65-77.

GRIMM N B, FAETH S H, GOLUBIEWSKI N E, et al., 2008. Global change and the ecology of cities[J]. Science, 319: 756760.

OUYANG M, DUE-AS-OSORIO L, MIN X, 2012. A three-stage resilience analysis framework for urban infrastructure systems[J]. Structural Safety, 36/37(1): 23-31.

[1]	王成军, 杨倩, 冯涛, 等. 黄河流域矿产资源开发-经济-环境耦合协调发展及时空演化研究[J]. 资源与产业, 2024, 26(4): 10-20.
[2]	赵敏, 储佩佩. 中国省域农村产业融合水平的空间收敛性与分异特征[J]. 资源与产业, 2023, 25(1): 51-66.
[3]	吕添贵, 孔安妮, 汪立. 基于DPSIR-TOPSIS模型的区域生态安全时空演化及影响因素研究[J]. 资源与产业, 2022, 24(2): 30-41.
[4]	张颖, 李晓格. 碳达峰碳中和目标下北京市森林碳汇潜力分析[J]. 资源与产业, 2022, 24(1): 15-25.
[5]	屈金芝, 张艳松, 张艳, 等. 基于熵权法TOPSIS模型中国钛资源供应安全评价[J]. 资源与产业, 2022, 24(1): 26-36.
[6]	马瑞. 新发展理念视角下黄河流域9省高质量发展评价与空间分布研究[J]. 资源与产业, 2022, 24(1): 160-171.
[7]	崔文婧, 闫晶晶, 沙景华, 等. 基于熵权TOPSIS模型的天津市海洋资源环境承载力评价[J]. 资源与产业, 2020, 22(6): 9-17.
[8]	华坚, 庞丽. 科技金融视角下长江经济带经济高质量发展研究[J]. 资源与产业, 2020, 22(4): 12-22.
[9]	彭薇. 基于DPSIR-ENTROPY-TOPSIS模型的区域技术创新综合评价研究——来自广东省21市的经验证据[J]. 资源与产业, 2019, 21(5): 101-112.
[10]	姜长军,李贻学. 基于熵值法TOPSIS模型的陕西省资源环境承载力研究[J]. 资源与产业, 2017, 19(3): 53-59.
[11]	于湲，周训，沈晔，等. 基于数学统计法和对井功率法的北京市地热供暖潜力初探[J]. 资源与产业, 2017, 19(2): 82-88.
[12]	刘静，雷涯邻.. 北京市地热资源勘查开发现状及问题[J]. 资源与产业, 2016, 18(5): 51-.
[13]	许加强，于光，何大义. 绿色矿山的多专家综合评价方法探讨——以新汶矿业集团华丰矿山为例 [J]. 资源与产业, 2016, 18(1): 61-68.
[14]	潘莉，曹楠，李玉仙，刘钦甫. 北京多水源水量调度模型研究[J]. 资源与产业, 2015, 17(6): 62-66.
[15]	李冉，何大义，许加强. 基于最小叉熵的资源环境承载力多专家综合评价方法[J]. 资源与产业, 2015, 17(4): 69-74.