{"title":"基于三维景观视角的多山城市生态脆弱性诊断","authors":"Peijia Peng , Xun Lin , Yu Bao","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2026.107920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In fragile karst mountain cities, the conflict between intense development activities and ecosystem integrity poses significant challenges to sustainable design. Although urban expansion is often studied through two-dimensional landscape patterns, the critical role of three-dimensional spatial structures remains poorly understood, limiting effective ecological engineering interventions. This study focuses on Guiyang's built-up area from 2010 to 2023, establishing a foundation for ecosystem restoration planning by diagnosing ecological vulnerability mechanisms. By integrating the PSR model with spatial analysis techniques (geodetector, bivariate spatial autocorrelation analysis, and GTWR), we quantified the spatiotemporal dynamics of ecological vulnerability and elucidated the influence mechanisms of both two-dimensional and three-dimensional landscape patterns. The findings provide actionable insights for ecological engineering practice: (1) From 2010 to 2023, Guiyang's built-up area exhibited a distinct landscape pattern characterized by intensive, orderly development in the core zone and fragmented expansion in peripheral areas. Overall ecological vulnerability intensified, manifesting as a spatiotemporal pattern of expansion from the center to the periphery. (2) Three-dimensional building indicators—BN, BCR, FAR, and BRI—exhibit stronger explanatory power for ecological vulnerability, indicating that vertical urban expansion is the dominant driver of ecological fragility; (3) Natural topography exhibits a double-edged sword effect: contiguous vegetation in complex terrain can serve as natural buffers, while specific topographies in southern and peripheral areas require targeted engineering measures to prevent exacerbating anthropogenic pressures. (4) While two-dimensional landscape patterns are not direct pressure sources, high concentrations of developed land significantly amplify vulnerability. Landscape composition uniformity shows a significant negative correlation with ecological vulnerability, with high-vulnerability zones consistently occurring in overlapping areas of high building density and spatial concentration. The mechanism revealed in this study—“three-dimensional building drivers—two-dimensional pattern regulation—natural topography constraints”—provides a scientific framework for future ecological engineering practices. This framework aims to mitigate ecological vulnerability in karst mountain cities and promote sustainable ecosystem design.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11490,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Engineering","volume":"226 ","pages":"Article 107920"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnosing urban ecological vulnerability in multi-mountainous city from a 3D landscape perspective\",\"authors\":\"Peijia Peng , Xun Lin , Yu Bao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2026.107920\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In fragile karst mountain cities, the conflict between intense development activities and ecosystem integrity poses significant challenges to sustainable design. Although urban expansion is often studied through two-dimensional landscape patterns, the critical role of three-dimensional spatial structures remains poorly understood, limiting effective ecological engineering interventions. This study focuses on Guiyang's built-up area from 2010 to 2023, establishing a foundation for ecosystem restoration planning by diagnosing ecological vulnerability mechanisms. By integrating the PSR model with spatial analysis techniques (geodetector, bivariate spatial autocorrelation analysis, and GTWR), we quantified the spatiotemporal dynamics of ecological vulnerability and elucidated the influence mechanisms of both two-dimensional and three-dimensional landscape patterns. The findings provide actionable insights for ecological engineering practice: (1) From 2010 to 2023, Guiyang's built-up area exhibited a distinct landscape pattern characterized by intensive, orderly development in the core zone and fragmented expansion in peripheral areas. Overall ecological vulnerability intensified, manifesting as a spatiotemporal pattern of expansion from the center to the periphery. (2) Three-dimensional building indicators—BN, BCR, FAR, and BRI—exhibit stronger explanatory power for ecological vulnerability, indicating that vertical urban expansion is the dominant driver of ecological fragility; (3) Natural topography exhibits a double-edged sword effect: contiguous vegetation in complex terrain can serve as natural buffers, while specific topographies in southern and peripheral areas require targeted engineering measures to prevent exacerbating anthropogenic pressures. (4) While two-dimensional landscape patterns are not direct pressure sources, high concentrations of developed land significantly amplify vulnerability. Landscape composition uniformity shows a significant negative correlation with ecological vulnerability, with high-vulnerability zones consistently occurring in overlapping areas of high building density and spatial concentration. The mechanism revealed in this study—“three-dimensional building drivers—two-dimensional pattern regulation—natural topography constraints”—provides a scientific framework for future ecological engineering practices. This framework aims to mitigate ecological vulnerability in karst mountain cities and promote sustainable ecosystem design.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Engineering\",\"volume\":\"226 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107920\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857426000303\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/2/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857426000303","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Diagnosing urban ecological vulnerability in multi-mountainous city from a 3D landscape perspective
In fragile karst mountain cities, the conflict between intense development activities and ecosystem integrity poses significant challenges to sustainable design. Although urban expansion is often studied through two-dimensional landscape patterns, the critical role of three-dimensional spatial structures remains poorly understood, limiting effective ecological engineering interventions. This study focuses on Guiyang's built-up area from 2010 to 2023, establishing a foundation for ecosystem restoration planning by diagnosing ecological vulnerability mechanisms. By integrating the PSR model with spatial analysis techniques (geodetector, bivariate spatial autocorrelation analysis, and GTWR), we quantified the spatiotemporal dynamics of ecological vulnerability and elucidated the influence mechanisms of both two-dimensional and three-dimensional landscape patterns. The findings provide actionable insights for ecological engineering practice: (1) From 2010 to 2023, Guiyang's built-up area exhibited a distinct landscape pattern characterized by intensive, orderly development in the core zone and fragmented expansion in peripheral areas. Overall ecological vulnerability intensified, manifesting as a spatiotemporal pattern of expansion from the center to the periphery. (2) Three-dimensional building indicators—BN, BCR, FAR, and BRI—exhibit stronger explanatory power for ecological vulnerability, indicating that vertical urban expansion is the dominant driver of ecological fragility; (3) Natural topography exhibits a double-edged sword effect: contiguous vegetation in complex terrain can serve as natural buffers, while specific topographies in southern and peripheral areas require targeted engineering measures to prevent exacerbating anthropogenic pressures. (4) While two-dimensional landscape patterns are not direct pressure sources, high concentrations of developed land significantly amplify vulnerability. Landscape composition uniformity shows a significant negative correlation with ecological vulnerability, with high-vulnerability zones consistently occurring in overlapping areas of high building density and spatial concentration. The mechanism revealed in this study—“three-dimensional building drivers—two-dimensional pattern regulation—natural topography constraints”—provides a scientific framework for future ecological engineering practices. This framework aims to mitigate ecological vulnerability in karst mountain cities and promote sustainable ecosystem design.
期刊介绍:
Ecological engineering has been defined as the design of ecosystems for the mutual benefit of humans and nature. The journal is meant for ecologists who, because of their research interests or occupation, are involved in designing, monitoring, or restoring ecosystems, and can serve as a bridge between ecologists and engineers.
Specific topics covered in the journal include: habitat reconstruction; ecotechnology; synthetic ecology; bioengineering; restoration ecology; ecology conservation; ecosystem rehabilitation; stream and river restoration; reclamation ecology; non-renewable resource conservation. Descriptions of specific applications of ecological engineering are acceptable only when situated within context of adding novelty to current research and emphasizing ecosystem restoration. We do not accept purely descriptive reports on ecosystem structures (such as vegetation surveys), purely physical assessment of materials that can be used for ecological restoration, small-model studies carried out in the laboratory or greenhouse with artificial (waste)water or crop studies, or case studies on conventional wastewater treatment and eutrophication that do not offer an ecosystem restoration approach within the paper.