国土空间开发建设适宜性评价研究进展

国土空间开发建设适宜性是优化国土空间开发格局、合理布局建设空间的依据,包括国土空间开发适宜性和建设用地适宜性两个方面。本文首先探讨二者的概念与内涵,然后从评价目标与视角、评价尺度与单元等多个角度梳理国土空间开发建设适宜性案例研究现状;进而总结归纳国土空间开发建设适宜性的指标体系及评价方法。分析发现：国土空间开发建设适宜性指标体系早期以工程地质条件为主,但目前涉及要素日益多元化,涵盖地质地貌、生态、经济、社会各方面;并已形成多要素叠置综合评价、空间作用及其趋势模拟、基于生态位的适宜性评价及参与式综合评价四种适宜性评价方法。今后应借鉴地理学、社会学、空间经济学、生态学等多学科理论,构建完善的国土空间开发建设适宜性研究体系,加强基础理论研究;推动指标体系规范与统一,完善评估框架与技术方法,研发开放式评价系统;构建可与空间管制政策对接的适宜性分类体系,扩展适宜性评价的案例研究和应用范围;同时应促进宏观空间开发适宜性和微观建设适宜性的统一和整合,响应“多规融合”的实践需求。

Progress in evaluating suitability of spatial development and construction land

Suitability of spatial development and construction land (SSDCL) is the scientific foundation for spatial development optimization and selection of space for building. This article introduces the SSDCL's concept and connotation, and summarizes case studies on this topic from multiple perspectives. It then analyzes and comments on the factors, indicator systems, and evaluation methods of SSDCL. The review shows that indicators for evaluation include physical geographic, ecological, economic, institutional, and social factors.Chinese scholars have not been paying enough attention to the social and behavioral factors and attitude and preference of the public. At present, there is a general lack of theoretical basis for the selection of indicators and classification of suitability, which compromise the scientific quality of SSDCL evaluation. Four evaluation frameworks have been used in evaluating suitability of spatial development and construction land. These include integrated overlay analysis of multiple indicators; simulation of spatial interaction and trend; suitability analysis based on ecological niche; and participatory comprehensive evaluation. Integrating the various evaluation frameworks to develop a system that takes into account both relationships among different stakeholder groups and the human-environment relationship should be emphasized in future research. The following measures can be implemented to promote the progress of SSDCL: (1) Establish an improved evaluation system of SSDCL and strengthen theoretical research to form a stronger foundation for an improved indicator system. (2) Improve the evaluation frameworks, technical methods, and standardization to increase the scientific quality of SSDCL evaluation. (3) Develop a classification system that meets the demands of spatial governance policy. (4) Expand the scope of SSDCL case study and applications. (5) Integrate the macro-scale territorial spatial development suitability evaluation and the micro-level construction land suitability evaluation in order to meet the practical requirements of multi-level plan integration.