资源环境承载力研究范式的分化与比较

研究目的：在自然资本成为可持续发展关键因素的背景下，梳理与审视资源环境承载力的研究范式。研究方 法：文献研究和比较分析。研究结果：（1）资源环境承载力的研究范式可以归纳为限制因子分析、多因素综合分析、生 态足迹分析、净初级生产力的人类占用分析和行星边界分析 5 类；（2）承载力不同范式之间存在递进、重叠和互补等关 系，其中限制因子分析为基础范式，限制因子与多因素综合、生态足迹与净初级生产力的人类占用、行星边界与传统承 载力范式之间均存在互补关系，同时各类范式之间还存在一定的重叠关系；（3）行星边界分析适用于全球生态安全和 可持续性责任划分议题，限制因子分析、生态足迹分析和净初级生产力的人类占用分析适用于国家、区域等大中尺度 资源和生态安全议题，多因素综合分析适用于社会经济协调发展议题。研究结论：上述资源环境承载力研究范式在理 论基础、量化方法和政策价值等方面各有侧重，未来亟需加强对不同范式之间交互关联和融合发展的研究。

Differentiation and Comparison of the Paradigms for the Carrying Capacity of Resources and the Environment

The purpose of this paper is to revisit the paradigms for the carrying capacity of resources and the environment (CCRE) in the context where natural capital has become the limiting factor of sustainable development. The research methods include literature review and comparative analysis. The results show that the major paradigms for CCRE can be classified as the limiting factor analysis, multi-factor synthesis, ecological footprint analysis, human appropriation of net primary production (HANPP) and the planetary boundaries framework. Three types of interactions among these CCRE paradigms are identified: evolving, overlapping and complementary. The limiting factor analysis serves as the basic paradigm for the other ones. There are complementary linkages between the limiting factor analysis and multi- factor synthesis, and between the ecological footprint analysis and HANPP. The planetary boundaries framework can be regarded as complementary to these four traditional CCRE paradigms. Meanwhile, there are also overlapping relationships among various paradigms to some extent. Overall, the planetary boundaries framework is appropriate for discourse on global ecological security and sustainability responsibility sharing; limiting factor analysis, ecological footprint analysis and HANPP are appropriate for studies at the sub-global scales, while multi-factor synthesis is appropriate for tackling socioeconomic issues at multiple scales. In conclusion, the above-mentioned five CCRE paradigms have own theoretical foundations, quantitative methods and policy implications. There is a need for enhancing the research on the interactions and integrations of different CCRE paradigms in the future.