地缘合作背景下柬老越发展三角区农进林退动态特征

doi:10.18402/resci.2021.12.05

资源科学 ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (12): 2416-2427.doi: 10.18402/resci.2021.12.05

• “澜沧江—湄公河流域农业资源与环境”专栏 • 上一篇下一篇

地缘合作背景下柬老越发展三角区农进林退动态特征

李鹏¹^,²(), 祁月基¹^,², 封志明¹^,²(), 肖池伟¹, 冯京辉³

1.中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所,北京 100101
2.中国科学院大学资源与环境学院,北京 100049
3.长安大学地球科学与资源学院,西安 710000

收稿日期:2021-05-11 修回日期:2021-07-14 出版日期:2021-12-25 发布日期:2022-02-25
通讯作者: 封志明,男,河北平山人,博士,研究员,主要从事资源开发与区域发展研究。E-mail: fengzm@igsnrr.ac.cn
封志明,男,河北平山人,博士,研究员,主要从事资源开发与区域发展研究。E-mail: fengzm@igsnrr.ac.cn
作者简介:李鹏,男,江西永新人,博士,副研究员,主要从事资源遥感与边境地理研究。E-mail: lip@igsnrr.ac.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(41971242);澜沧江—湄公河合作专项;中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所“秉维”优秀青年人才计划(2018RC201);中国科学院青年创新促进会会员人才专项(CAS2020055)

Dynamic characteristics of agricultural expansion and forest loss in the Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Development Triangle Area under the context of geo-coorperation

LI Peng¹^,²(), QI Yueji¹^,², FENG Zhiming¹^,²(), XIAO Chiwei¹, FENG Jinghui³

1. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
2. School of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3. School of Earth Sciences and Resources, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710000, China

Received:2021-05-11 Revised:2021-07-14 Online:2021-12-25 Published:2022-02-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

1990年代以来地缘政治向地缘经济转变,“发展三角”应运而生。成立于1999年的柬埔寨—老挝—越南发展三角区在中南半岛多个三国发展区中最为成熟且备受关注。随着越南主导下的地缘经济合作持续推进,该发展三角区覆盖省份持续扩充,并经历了以农进林退为主的土地利用/覆被变化。相较于传统地缘经济研究,有关地缘经济合作与边境土地利用的影响-响应互动研究明显不足。本文选取美国国家开发署SERVIR-Mekong项目1988—2018年共7期土地覆被产品,以5年为间隔,基于GIS空间分析定量刻画该三角区近30年农进林退的时空动态特征。结果表明：①森林、农田和种植园/果园为主要覆被类型,且农进林退是该发展三角区主要的土地利用/覆被变化方式。②农进林退现象先增强后减弱,以发展三角区成立前后（1998—2003年）最为剧烈,且其在越柬境内呈西向与东向趋边性特征,柬越边境最明显。③越南境内农进林退规模最大,但就保护区而言,柬埔寨境内保护区受农进林退影响最大,柬越边境保护区尤甚。④80%以上的农进林退分布在丘陵平原,且具有向高海拔地区发展的趋势;在道路两侧10 km以内呈现随距离衰减的特征,近70%的农进林退发生在道路两侧6 km范围内。本文可为探索地缘经济合作与边境土地利用交叉互动提供研究视角与研究方法上的启示。

关键词: 柬老越发展三角区, 地缘经济合作, 边境土地利用, 农进林退, 影响-响应

Abstract:

“Development Triangle” comes into being with the transition from geopolitics to geo-economics since the 1990s. The Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Development Triangle Area (CLV-DTA) founded in 1999, is the most developed among the several DTAs in Mainland Southeast Asia and has attracted much attention from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), and the World Bank (WB) in their tenth biannual summit in 2018. With the continuous advance of geo-economic cooperation led by Vietnam, the involved provincial units in the CLV-DTA continue to expand from seven at its beginning, ten in 2004 and 13 in 2009, and has also experienced land use/cover changes dominated by agriculture expansion and forest loss. Compared with the traditional geo-economic analysis, the investigation in the interaction between geo-economic cooperation and border land use is obviously inadequate and requires in-depth examination. According to the four key nodes (1999, 2004, 2009 and 2018) with geo-influence in the CLV-DTA, seven years’ SERVIR-Mekong land cover data products launched by the United States Agency for International Development with a five-year interval during 1988-2018, were selected and applied to depict quantitatively the spatiotemporally dynamic characteristics of agricultural expansion and forest loss in this DTA in the past three decades with GIS-based spatial analyses. The results showed that: (1) Forest, cropland and plantation/orchards were the main types of land cover. Land use/cover changes are dominated by the way of agricultural expansion and forest loss. (2) Agricultural expansion and forest loss first strengthened and then gradually weakened, especially before and after the establishment of the CLV-DTA (1998-2003). It showed westward and eastward border-prone trends in Vietnam and Cambodia, respectively, with the Cambodia and Vietnamese border most noteable. (3) The area size of agricultural expansion and forest loss was largest in Vietnamese side of the CLV-DTA, followed by Cambodia and Laos, however, various protected areas in Cambodia suffered the most from agricultural expansion and forest loss and those adjacent to the Cambodia-Vietnam border in particular. (4) Over eighty percent of agricultural expansion and forest loss was occurred and re-occurred in the plains along the Mekong River sand its contiguous hilly area, while it also showed an ascending trend in elevation especially in the low- and medium mountains. As the distance to the available roads (including trails) increases, the quantity of agricultural expansion and forest loss declines steadily within 10 km on both sides, following a distance attenuation pattern, with nearly 70% of the occurrence of agricultural expansion and forest loss within 6 km. This study can provide guidances for exploring the cross interaction between geo-economic cooperation and border land use from research perspective and method.

Key words: Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Development Triangle Area, geo-economic cooperation, border land use, agricultural expansion and forest loss, impact-response

李鹏, 祁月基, 封志明, 肖池伟, 冯京辉. 地缘合作背景下柬老越发展三角区农进林退动态特征[J]. 资源科学, 2021, 43(12): 2416-2427.

LI Peng, QI Yueji, FENG Zhiming, XIAO Chiwei, FENG Jinghui. Dynamic characteristics of agricultural expansion and forest loss in the Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Development Triangle Area under the context of geo-coorperation[J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(12): 2416-2427.

图/表 6

表1

1988—2020年中南半岛5国及其邻国的地缘合作机制一览

年份	地缘政治经济机制/组织	中南半岛及其毗邻国家（打√表示涉及）
年份	地缘政治经济机制/组织	中	印	柬	老	缅	泰	越	孟	马
1988	泰国“变印支战场为市场”倡议			√	√	√	√	√
1991	柬埔寨和平协定	√		√	√	√	√	√
1991	印度“向东看”政策		√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
1992	”建立东盟自由贸易区“倡议	√		√	√	√	√	√		√
1992	大湄公河次区域经济合作	√		√	√	√	√	√
1993	中老缅泰“黄金四角”经济合作区	√			√	√	√
1993	泰—马—印（尼）经济三角区						√			√
1996	东盟—湄公河流域开发合作机制	√		√	√	√	√	√		√
1997	孟印缅斯泰经济合作组织		√			√	√		√
1999	柬老越发展三角区			√	√			√
1999	中国兴边富民战略	√		√	√	√	√	√
2000	中国“走出去”战略	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
	湄公河—恒河合作倡议		√	√	√	√	√	√
	北部湾经济合作组织	√						√		√
	柬老缅越四国合作机制			√	√	√		√
2003	柬老泰经济三角区（“翡翠三角”）			√	√		√
	柬老缅泰越五国合作机制			√	√	√	√	√
	柬老缅泰四国经济合作战略			√	√	√	√
2004	中越两廊一圈经济合作	√						√
	云南—越南五省市经济合作	√						√
	云南—老挝北部九省经济合作	√			√
	云南—泰北经济合作	√					√
2006	泛亚铁路政府间协定	√		√	√	√	√	√		√
2007	日本—湄公河地区伙伴关系计划			√	√	√	√	√
2009	湄公河下游倡议			√	√	√	√	√
2010	中国—东盟自由贸易区	√		√	√	√	√	√		√
	湄公河—印度经济走廊		√	√	√	√	√	√
	新一轮西部大开发战略	√
2012	区域全面经济伙伴关系协定	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
2013	中国“一带一路”倡议	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
2013	孟中印缅经济走廊倡议	√	√			√			√
2014	印度“东向行动”政策		√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
	澜沧江—湄公河合作机制	√		√	√	√	√	√
2015	东盟共同体			√	√	√	√	√		√
2017	印度洋—太平洋战略		√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
2020	区域全面经济伙伴关系协定	√		√	√	√	√	√		√

表1

图1

表2

柬老越发展三角区各类保护区一览

	名称	面积/km²	类型	级别	涉及省份
越南	A Yun Pa	471.07	建议或待定的保护区	省级	嘉莱省
	Bac Plei Ku	148.31	建议或待定的保护区	省级	嘉莱省
	Bu Gia Map	220.72	国家公园	国家级	平福省
	Chu Hoa	207.71	建议或待定的保护区	省级	多乐省
	Chu Prong	501.08	建议或待定的保护区	省级	嘉莱省
	Chu Yang Sin	610.46	国家公园	国家级	多乐省
	Dak Mang	304.24	建议或待定的保护区	省级	达农省
	Ea So	366.88	自然保护区	国家级	多乐省
	Ho Lak	98.57	其他防护等级	省级	多乐省
	Kon Cha Rang	166.11	自然保护区	国家级	嘉莱省
	Kon Ka Kinh	444.12	国家公园	国家级	嘉莱省
	Mom Ray	508.29	国家公园	国家级	昆嵩省
	Nam Ca	255.95	自然保护区	国家级	达农省
	Nam Nung	108.83	自然保护区	国家级	达农省
	Ngoc Linh (Kon Tum)	521.81	自然保护区	国家级	昆嵩省
	Nui Ba Ra	27.09	建议或待定的保护区	省级	平福省
	Yok Don	1419.75	国家公园	国家级	多乐省
	Yok Don Extension	516.51	国家公园	国家级	达农省
柬埔寨	Lomphat	2668.69	野生动物保护区	国家级	腊塔纳基里、蒙多基里省
	Mondulkiri	4521.67	保护林	国家级	蒙多基里、腊塔纳基里省
	Phnom Namlyr	602.12	野生动物保护区	国家级	蒙多基里、腊塔纳基里省
	Phnom Prich	2335.61	野生动物保护区	国家级	蒙多基里省
	Seima Biodiversity Conservation Area	3181.61	可持续经营区	国家级	蒙多基里、桔井省
	Snuol	801.28	野生动物保护区	国家级	桔井省
	Stung Treng	156.36	宗教场所	国家级	上丁省
	Virachey	3516.34	国家公园	国家级	腊塔纳基里、上丁省
老挝	Xe Ban Nouan	2179.64	国家生物多样性保护区	国家级	沙拉湾省
	Xe Piane	1016.98	国家生物多样性保护区	国家级	占巴塞、阿速坡省
	Xe Sap	1091.16	国家生物多样性保护区	国家级	沙拉湾、塞公省
	Dong Ampham	1396.40	国家生物多样性保护区	国家级	阿速坡、塞公省
	Dong Hua Sao	2808.63	国家生物多样性保护区	国家级	占巴塞省
	Dong Xienth	1650.78	国家生物多样性保护区	国家级	沙拉湾、占巴塞省

表2

图2

图3

图4

参考文献 27

[1]	冯京辉, 李鹏, 肖池伟, 等. 地缘经济背景下泰国及其毗邻国家边境农业扩张与集约化抵边特征[J]. 地球信息科学学报, 2021, 23(3):479-491. doi: 10.12082/dqxxkx.2021.200306
	[ Feng J H, Li P, Xiao C W, et al. Border-prone characteristics of agricultural expansion and intensification in the borders of Thailand and its neighboring countries (Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar) under the context of geo-economy[J]. Journal of Geo-Information Science, 2021, 23(3):479-491.]
[2]	肖池伟, 饶滴滴, 刘怡媛, 等. 地缘经济合作背景下的中国磨憨-老挝磨丁口岸地区建设用地扩张[J]. 地球信息科学学报, 2019, 21(10):1576-1585. doi: 10.12082/dqxxkx.2019.190053v
	[ Xiao C W, Rao D D, Liu Y Y, et al. Construction land expansion in the Mohan-Boten port area between China and Laos in the geo-economic cooperation context[J]. Journal of Geo-Information Science, 2019, 21(10):1576-1585.]
[3]	摆万奇, 赵士洞. 土地利用变化驱动力系统分析[J]. 资源科学, 2001, 23(3):39-41.
	[ Bai W Q, Zhao S D. An analysis on driving force system of land use changes[J], 2001, 23(3):39-41]
[4]	刘郑伟, 付梅臣, 丁茜. 边境贸易地区土地利用变化驱动力演变研究[J]. 资源科学, 2018, 40(4):729-736.
	[ Liu Z W, Fu M C, Ding Q. Driving force evolution of land use change in a border trade area of China[J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(4):729-736.]
[5]	Kuemmerle T, Chaskovskyy O, Knorn J, et al. Forest cover change and illegal logging in the Ukrainian Carpathians in the transition period from 1988 to 2007[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2009, 113(6):1194-1207. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2009.02.006
[6]	Kuemmerle T, Hostert P, Radeloff V C, et al. Cross-border comparison of post-socialist farmland abandonment in the Carpathians[J]. Ecosystems, 2008, 11(4):614-628. doi: 10.1007/s10021-008-9146-z
[7]	Kuemmerle T, Müller D, Griffiths P, et al. Land use change in southern Romania after the collapse of socialism[J]. Regional Environmental Change, 2009, 9(1):1-12. doi: 10.1007/s10113-008-0050-z
[8]	Kuemmerle T, Radeloff V C, Perzanowski K, et al. Cross-border comparison of land cover and landscape pattern in Eastern Europe using a hybrid classification technique[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2006, 103(4):449-464. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2006.04.015
[9]	Dara A, Baumann M, Kuemmerle T, et al. Mapping the timing of cropland abandonment and recultivation in northern Kazakhstan using annual Landsat time series[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2018, 213:49-60. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2018.05.005
[10]	Grogan K, Pflugmacher D, Hostert P, et al. Cross-border forest disturbance and the role of natural rubber in mainland Southeast Asia using annual Landsat time series[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2015, 169:438-453. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2015.03.001
[11]	Munteanu C, Kuemmerle T, Boltiziar M, et al. Forest and agricultural land change in the Carpathian region: A meta-analysis of long-term patterns and drivers of change[J]. Land Use Policy, 2014, 38:685-697. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.01.012
[12]	马恩朴, 蔡建明, 林静, 等. 远程耦合视角下的土地利用/覆被变化解释[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(3):421-431. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201903002
	[ Ma E P, Cai J M, Lin J, et al. Explanation of land use/cover change from the perspective of tele-coupling[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019, 74(3):421-431.]
[13]	Nepstad D C, Stickler C M, Almeida O T. Globalization of the Amazon soy and beef industries: Opportunities for conservation[J]. Conservation Biology, 2006, 20(6):1595-1603. pmid: 17181794
[14]	Klarenberg G, Muñoz-Carpena R, Campo-Bescós M.A, et al. Highway paving in the southwestern Amazon alters long-term trends and drivers of regional vegetation dynamics[J]. Heliyon, 2018, DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00721. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00721
[15]	Perz S G, Qiu Y L, Xia Y B, et al. Trans-boundary infrastructure and land cover change: Highway paving and community-level deforestation in a tri-national frontier in the Amazon[J]. Land Use Policy, 2013, 34:27-41. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.01.009
[16]	Perz S G, Selaya G, Muñoz-Carpena R, et al. Scientists and Stakeholders, Data and Diagnostics: Crossing Boundaries for Modeling the Impacts of Highway Paving in a Tri-national Frontier in the Amazon[A]. Perz S G. Collaboration Across Boundaries for Social-Ecological Systems Science[M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019.
[17]	Leisz S J, Rounds E, Thi Bich Yen N, et al. Telecouplings in the east-west economic corridor within borders and across[J]. Remote Sensing, 2016, DOI: 10.3390/rs8121012. doi: 10.3390/rs8121012
[18]	封志明, 刘晓娜, 姜鲁光, 等. 中老缅交界地区橡胶种植的时空格局及其地形因素分析[J]. 地理学报, 2013, 68(10):1432-1446.
	[ Feng Z M, Liu X N, Jiang L G, et al. Spatial-temporal analysis of rubber plantation and its relationship with topographical factors in the border region of China, Laos and Myanmar[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2013, 68(10):1432-1446.]
[19]	Xiao C W, Li P, Feng Z M, et al. Is the phenology-based algorithm for mapping deciduous rubber plantations applicable in an emerging region of northern Laos?[J]. Advances in Space Research, 2020, 65(1):446-457. doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2019.09.022
[20]	李秋萍, 陆汝成, 李冠, 等. 边境土地利用变化及其与贸易发展互动关系研究进展[J]. 中国土地科学, 2015, 29(8):16-23.
	[ Li Q P, Lu R C, Li G, et al. Research progress on regional land-use change along national border and it’s interactive relationship with frontier trade development[J]. China Land Science, 2015, 29(8):16-23.]
[21]	毛汉英. 中国周边地缘政治与地缘经济格局和对策[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(3):289-302. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2014.03.001
	[ Mao H Y. Geopolitical and geo-economic situation in the surrounding areas and China’s strategies[J]. Progress in Geography, 2014, 33(3):289-302.]
[22]	黎鹏. 提升沿边开放与加强跨国区域合作研究: 以CAFTA背景下中国西南边境跨国区域区为例[M]. 北京: 经济科学出版社, 2012.
	[ Li P. Research on Improving Border Opening and Strengthening Transnational Regional Cooperation: Taking China’s Southwest Border Transnational Regional Area under the Background of CAFTA as an Example[M]. Beijing: Economic Science Press, 2012.]
[23]	刘晓娜, 封志明, 姜鲁光. 中老缅泰“黄金四角”地区土地利用与土地覆被变化研究进展[J]. 地理科学进展, 2013, 32(2):191-202. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2013.02.005
	[ Liu X N, Feng Z M, Jiang L G. Review of land use and land cover change of Golden Economic Quadrangle Region in the border of China, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand[J]. Progress in Geography, 2013, 32(2):191-202.]
[24]	梁薇. 柬埔寨:2018年回顾与2019年展望[J]. 东南亚纵横, 2019, (1):29-35.
	[ Liang W. Cambodia: Review of 2018 and prospect of 2019[J]. Crossroads: Southeast Asian Studies, 2019, (1):29-35.]
[25]	方芸. 革新开放以来老挝与越南特殊关系的新发展[J]. 东南亚纵横, 2010, (1):44-50.
	[ Fang Y. New developments of Laos-Vietnam special relationship in the reform era[J]. Southeast Asian Studies, 2010, (1):44-50.]
[26]	Cramb R, Manivong V, Newby J C, et al. Alternatives to land grabbing: Exploring conditions for smallholder inclusion in agricultural commodity chains in Southeast Asia[J]. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 2017, 44(4):939-967. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2016.1242482
[27]	Karger D N, Wilson A M, Mahony C, et al. Global daily 1 km land surface precipitation based on cloud cover-informed downscaling[DB/OL]. Scientific Data, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-01084-6.

地缘合作背景下柬老越发展三角区农进林退动态特征

Dynamic characteristics of agricultural expansion and forest loss in the Cambodia-Laos-Vietnam Development Triangle Area under the context of geo-coorperation

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 27

相关文章 0

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0