Abstract
Under the goal of sustainable development, optimum population rests on the comprehensive carrying capacity of many factors, such as ecology, economy, and land, etc. Recently, the ecological environment of the Northeast Asia has been deteriorating seriously, because of the fall of its ecological carrying capacity resulted from human activities. The ecological carrying capacity of the Northeast Asia is directly related to its ecological environment and socioeconomic sustainability. The ecological carrying capacity is based on the net primary productivity (NPP) of natural vegetation which can reflect the productive and recovery capacity, and thus is the index of the ecological integrity of natural system. Based on the above purposes and the assessment method, this paper studies the distribution and the change of the ecological footprint (EF) and the ecological carrying capacity in the Northeast Asia. The change of per capita EF shows a trend of decline in the Far East of Russia, Japan, and Mongolia, but the original value is still higher in the front row. It is more than 3 hm2 and showed an upward trend in the Northeast China and South Korea. North Korea is the most stable and the lowest EF is about 2 hm2. As a whole situation of the Northeast Asia, we can see in addition to a small part where its ecological carrying capacity is near 0, in the northern areas and the most regions of Northeast Asia, the ecological carrying capacity is between 0 and 30 hm2/km2. In the most central region of the Northeast Asian the ecological carrying capacity is between 30 and 50 hm2/km2. In the southeastern and midwestern areas, the ecological carrying capacity is between 80 and 100 hm2/km2. The ecological carrying capacity even exceeded 150 hm2/km2 in southern areas. In the southwest region there is a large bareland area, the ecological carrying capacity is near 0.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Chen B, Chen GQ, Yang ZF (2007) Ecological footprint accounting for energy and resource in China. Energy Policy 35:1599–1699 (in Chinese)
Costanza R, Norton BG, Haskell BD (1992) Ecosystem health: new goals for environmental management. Island Press, Washington DC, pp 223–238
FAO Proceedings (1997) Land quality indicators and their use in sustainable agriculture and rural development. In: Proceedings the workshop organized by the Land and Water Development Division FAO Agriculture Department, No. 2:5
FAOSTAT. http://faostat.fao.org/
Rees WE (1992) Ecological footprint and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out. Environ Urban 4(2):121–130
Seidl I, Tisdell CA (1999) Carrying capacity reconsidered: from Malthus’ population theory to cultural carrying capacity. Ecol Econ 31:395–408
Yue D, Xu X, Li Z (2005) Spatiotemporal analysis of ecological footprint and biological capacity of Gansu, China 1991–2015: down from the environmental cliff. Ecol Econ 1:1–14 (in Chinese)
Zhang Y, Yang Z, Yu X (2006) Measurement and evaluation of interactions in complex urban ecosystem. Ecol Model 1:1–13
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bai, Z., Weijie, L. (2018). The Ecological Footprint and Carrying Capacity in Northeast Asia. In: Himiyama, Y. (eds) Exploring Sustainable Land Use in Monsoon Asia. Springer Geography. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5927-8_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5927-8_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-5926-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-5927-8
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)