CAJ | 학술논문

目的评估广东省各区县对于洪灾的脆弱性.方法利用第六次人口普查资料、2010年广东统计年鉴、2010年广东卫生统计年鉴、中国疾病预防控制信息系统的数据.采用主、客观方法确定各指标的权重,分别计算出各个地区的洪灾脆弱性(Ⅵ),最后将两种不同权重赋值方法得到的结果进行比较.结果确定13个条目作为洪灾脆弱性评估的指标,包括6个敏感性条目、5个适应性条目和2个暴露性条目.占权重较大的指标(主观权重/客观权重)为:≥65岁人口比例(0.31/0.30),≤4岁人口比例(0.16/0.23),婴儿死亡率(0.18/0.20),人均国内生产总值(0.33/0.21),文盲占15岁以上人口比例(0.19/0.28),洪灾历史发生频率(0.75/0.75).采用主观权重方法计算的洪灾Ⅵ的平均值为0.35,标准差为0.10；采用客观权重方法计算的平均值为0.31,标准差为0.08,两种权重赋值方法计算得到的Ⅵ具有很高的一致性(ICC=0.975,P＜0.01).从广东省整体情况来看,Ⅵ在0.30 ～0.39范围内的区县较多,主观Ⅵ＞0.50或客观Ⅵ ＞0.40的地区需要重点防范洪灾,包括沿海部分地区、北江流域地区、东江的东部支流地区以及珠三角北部地区,其中梅州市大埔县,茂名市的电白县和茂港区是洪灾脆弱性较高的3个地区,Ⅵ值分别为(主观Ⅵ/客观Ⅵ)0.55/0.45、0.54/0.48、0.54/0.48.河源、东莞、肇庆、惠州的部分区县洪灾脆弱性较低,其中河源市源城区对于洪灾的脆弱性最低,其次是东莞市区、肇庆市的端州区和广宁县,Ⅵ值分别为(主观Ⅵ/客观Ⅵ):0.15/0.12、0.18/0.16、0.18/0.16、0.17/0.15.不同脆弱性等级的地区指标存在差异(P＜0.05).结论广东省不同地区洪灾脆弱性差异较大,洪灾防控应当优先考虑脆弱地区.
목적 평고광동성각구현대우홍재적취약성.방법 이용제륙차인구보사자료、2010년엄동통계년감、2010년엄동위생통계년감、중국질병예방공제신식계통적수거.채용주、객관방법학정각지표적권중,분별계산출각개지구적홍재취약성(Ⅵ),최후장량충불동권중부치방법득도적결과진행비교.결과 학정13개조목작위홍재취약성평고적지표,포괄6개민감성조목、5개괄응성조목화2개폭로성조목.점권중교대적지표(주관권중/객관권중)위:≥65세인구비례(0.31/0.30),≤4세인구비례(0.16/0.23),영인사망솔(0.18/0.20),인균국내생산총치(0.33/0.21),문맹점15세이상인구비례(0.19/0.28),홍재역사발생빈솔(0.75/0.75).채용주관권중방법계산적홍재Ⅵ적평균치위0.35,표준차위0.10；채용객관권중방법계산적평균치위0.31,표준차위0.08,량충권중부치방법계산득도적Ⅵ구유흔고적일치성(ICC=0.975,P＜0.01).종광동성정체정황래간,Ⅵ재0.30 ～0.39범위내적구현교다,주관Ⅵ＞0.50혹객관Ⅵ ＞0.40적지구수요중점방범홍재,포괄연해부분지구、북강류역지구、동강적동부지류지구이급주삼각북부지구,기중매주시대포현,무명시적전백현화무항구시홍재취약성교고적3개지구,Ⅵ치분별위(주관Ⅵ/객관Ⅵ)0.55/0.45、0.54/0.48、0.54/0.48.하원、동완、조경、혜주적부분구현홍재취약성교저,기중하원시원성구대우홍재적취약성최저,기차시동완시구、조경시적단주구화엄저현,Ⅵ치분별위(주관Ⅵ/객관Ⅵ):0.15/0.12、0.18/0.16、0.18/0.16、0.17/0.15.불동취약성등급적지구지표존재차이(P＜0.05).결론 광동성불동지구홍재취약성차이교대,홍재방공응당우선고필취약지구.
Objective To evaluate the vulnerability to floods in Guangdong province at district level.Methods Data were collected from the sixth census,the 2010 Statistical Yearbook of Guangdong,the 2010 Health Statistics Yearbook of Guangdong and China Disease Prevention and Control information systems,etc.The weight of each indicator was determined based on subjective method and objective method respectively; and finally the results of the two methods were compared.Results 13 indicators were selected for the assessment of vulnerability to floods,including 6 sensitivity indicators,5 adaptability indicators and 2 exposure indicators.Indicators with large weight (subjective weight/objective weight) were the proportion of population older than 65 years old (0.31/0.30),the proportion of population older than 65 years old (0.16/0.23),infant mortality rate (0.18/0.20),the total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita (0.33/0.21 ),the proportion of illiterate in the population older than 15 years old (0.19/0.28),history frequency of floods (0.75/0.75).The mean vulnerability index (Ⅵ) calculated by subjective method was 0.35 with the standard deviation of 0.10 ; the mean vulnerability index calculated by objective method was 0.31 with the standard deviation of 0.08.The two weighting methods showed consistent results of vulnerability index (ICC=0.975,P ＜0.01 ).Ⅵ of most districts dropped in the interval of 0.30-0.39.Districts with subjective Ⅵ ＞ 0.50 or objective Ⅵ ＞ 0.40 should pay more attention to floods,including parts of the coastal areas,Beijiang River Basin,the eastern tributary area of Dongjiang River and the northern part of Pearl River Delta.Dapu district of Meizhou (0.55/0.45 ),Dianbai district and Maogang district of Maōming (0.54/0.48) were most vulnerable.Districts of Heyuan,Dongguan,Zhaoqing and Huizhou were less vulnerable,Yuancheng district of Heyuan showed least vulnerable to floods (0.15/0.12 ) followed by Dongguan ( 0.18/0.16 ),Duanzhou district ( 0.18/0.16 ) and Guangning ( 0.17/0.15 ) district of Zhaoqing.The score of indicators differed among different level of vulnerability (P＜ 0.05 ).Conclusion Different regions of Guangdong province showed different vulnerability to floods,vulnerable areas should be priority in the prevention and control of floods.