中国农业气象 ›› 2024, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (05): 549-561.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6362.2024.05.010

• 农业气象灾害 栏目 • 上一篇    下一篇

变暖环境下华北地区农业气象灾害风险评估Ⅰ:基于综合指标体系法农业干旱风险评估及适应对策建议

朱军,王金晨,张琪,黄少锋,杨再强   

  1. 南京信息工程大学生态与应用气象学院,南京 210044
  • 收稿日期:2023-06-06 出版日期:2024-05-20 发布日期:2024-05-09
  • 作者简介:朱军,E-mail:377541422@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(41977410);国家重点研究发展计划课题(2019YFC1510205)

Risk Assessment of Agrometeorological Disasters in North China Under Warming EnvironmentⅠ:Agricultural Drought Risk Assessment and Adaptation Countermeasures Based on Comprehensive Index System Method

ZHU Jun, WANG Jin-chen, ZHANG Qi, HUANG Shao-feng, YANG Zai-qiang   

  1. School of Ecology and Applied Meteorology, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China
  • Received:2023-06-06 Online:2024-05-20 Published:2024-05-09

摘要: 随着全球气候变化,干旱发生频率及强度持续增加,农业干旱灾害风险评估是当前防灾减灾的重要方法之一。基于自然灾害风险形成机理,构建华北农业干旱风险评估指标体系模型,利用内部检验法对模型进行稳健性检验,根据华北34个市农业干旱风险形成特点聚类分类,并提出相应的风险防范建议。结果表明:调整风险评估模型中的指标和方法时,华北地区34个市农业干旱风险排名变化幅度多为1~2.5位,模型稳健性较好;除防灾减灾能力较高的北京、天津外,华北中部和北部农业干旱风险最高,与危险性和脆弱性指标较高有关,河南北部以及山东南部农业干旱风险较低,主要得益于该地区各市危险性较低;华北34个市可分为6个农业干旱风险集群,集群分布在空间上无分散、跨市分布,城市聚集性较好,其中北部山区集群4干旱风险最高,与其极高的环境脆弱性和低防灾减灾能力有关,应在农业种植结构上适当降低农业种植面积并加大农业投入;位于中部和南部的集群2、5和6具有较高的粮食种植面积且粮食因干旱减产率较高,可通过增加农业投入、提高灌溉保证率等进一步降低农业干旱风险。

关键词: 干旱, 综合指标体系, 风险评估, 稳健性检验, 聚类分析

Abstract: Droughts are increasing in frequency and intensity as the global climate changes. Risk assessment for agricultural drought disasters is an important approach for disaster prevention and mitigation. Based on the formation mechanism of natural disaster risk, the index system model of agricultural drought risk assessment in North China was constructed, and the robustness of the established risk assessment model was tested by using the internal test method. Then based on the characteristics of agricultural drought risk formation in North China, the paper proposes corresponding risk prevention recommendations. The conclusions were as follows: when adjusting the indices and methods in the risk assessment model, the range of changes in the agricultural drought risk ranking for each city was mostly 1−2.5 places, and the model was relatively robust. With the exception of Beijing and Tianjin, which had the highest disaster prevention and mitigation capacity, central and northern China had the highest agricultural drought risk, which was previously linked to the high risk and vulnerability of these regions. The agricultural drought risk in northern Henan and southern Shandong is low, mainly due to the low risk. The 34 cities in North China can be divided into 6 agricultural drought risk clusters, which are not dispersed in space and cross-city distribution, and have good aggregation. Cluster 4, located in the northernmost mountainous areas, has the highest risk of drought, which is associated with high environmental vulnerability and low capacity for disaster prevention and mitigation, so agricultural areas should be reduced and agricultural input should be increased. Clusters 2, 5 and 6, located in the central and southern regions, have higher grain acreage and yields due to drought, so agricultural drought risk can be further reduced by increasing agricultural input and improving irrigation guarantee rate.

Key words: Drought, Comprehensive index system, Risk assessment, Robustness test, Cluster analysis