Coastal zone space coordination quantitative evaluation system based on two-dimensional coupling matrix

Abstract

The invention discloses a coastal zone space coordination quantitative evaluation system and method based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix, and the system comprises a basic data processing unit which is used for defining a functional region set and a habitat type set, obtaining a planning layer and a habitat layer, constructing a regular grid evaluation unit, and associating the attributes of the layers to a corresponding unit; the functional area conflict quantitative evaluation unit is used for determining an adjacency relation of the evaluation unit, constructing a functional area coordination judgment matrix, calculating a coordination coefficient and obtaining a unit coordination value and a total coordination degree of a research area; the function-habitat stress quantitative evaluation unit is used for determining a sea use intensity coefficient and a habitat vulnerability index, constructing a coupling evaluation matrix and calculating the habitat coordination degree of the unit and the total habitat coordination degree of the research area; and the iterative optimization unit is used for identifying conflicts according to a threshold value, adjusting planning, iteratively calculating the coordination degree and outputting a space planning optimization scheme.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present application belongs to the technical field of quantitative evaluation of coastal zone, more specifically, relates to a system and method for quantitatively evaluating spatial coordination of coastal zone based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix. BACKGROUND

[0002] With the acceleration of urbanization in coastal areas, the increase of industrial development intensity, and the increasing requirement of ecological protection, the ecological sensitive areas in the coastal zone are concentrated, the development and construction pressure is continuously increasing, and the natural environment change process is complex. Human development activities are frequent, which intensifies the impact of marine development on typical habitats with high ecological value and rich biodiversity. Under this development trend, establishing a technical system that can reflect the continuous distribution characteristics of land and sea space, identify functional layout conflicts, and evaluate the coordination of planning schemes is an important foundation for responding to the spatial pressure of ecological environment caused by development activities in the coastal zone.

[0003] The planning application of Xiamen Bay and other complex coastal zones shows that the current evaluation work related to coastal zone planning is mainly based on suitability evaluation, which is mainly used to determine the suitable use direction of various spaces. This evaluation method based on resource conditions has obvious shortcomings in the analysis of land-sea spatial coordination.

[0004] Firstly, the existing evaluation method lacks coupling analysis of development intensity and ecological vulnerability. Related technologies are mostly focused on single index evaluation or ecological protection boundary control, lacking quantitative analysis of the correlation between development activity intensity and ecological system vulnerability, and unable to reflect the actual impact of different development methods on habitats. For example, when facing multiple, such as 23 types of land-sea functional zones (A1-A23, covering urban concentrated construction areas, industrial and communication sea areas, etc.), the existing technology cannot quantitatively correlate the activity intensity coefficients of different functions with the vulnerability indexes of 18 types of typical coastal habitats (H1-H18, covering mangrove, amphioxus habitat, coral reef, etc.).

[0005] Secondly, the land-sea spatial evaluation system is independent of each other, and cannot reflect the cross-regional ecological impact. Traditional evaluation methods analyze land and sea as independent systems, with land planning focusing on urban development and marine functional zoning (MFZ) focusing on sea use demand. This leads to an inability to accurately measure the cross-border synergistic pressure of land-based urbanization development (such as A13 urban concentrated construction area) on nearshore sensitive habitats (such as H5 mangrove, H10 rare animal migration path) in the administrative boundary of the coastal zone.

[0006] Finally, the prior art lacks quantitative coordination evaluation tools and standardized analysis models. There is currently a lack of a standardized evaluation system that can quantify spatial conflicts between different land and sea use methods, and planning analysis is mainly based on qualitative description and spatial layer superposition, lacking quantitative evaluation methods for the coordination of various land and sea function zones. At the same time, there is a lack of standardized expert evaluation models, making it difficult to quantitatively determine the coordination degree of different functional layouts during planning compilation, and spatial resource allocation relies heavily on experience and lacks scientific data support.

[0007] In summary, the existing evaluation technology has the problems of single evaluation dimension, fragmented land and sea evaluation system, lack of quantitative coordination evaluation tools, etc. Ultimately, after the planning layout is implemented, the ecological high-protection-value region is irreversibly degraded due to high-intensity development pressure from land to sea, or different industrial activities (such as port logistics and coastal tourism) produce serious spatial competition conflicts. Therefore, in view of the above problems, a coastal belt spatial planning coordination evaluation method and system that can deeply couple the function zone intensity and habitat vulnerability and provide a standardized quantitative corresponding matrix are needed. SUMMARY

[0008] The present application aims to quantify the spatial conflict of functional zones and the degree of habitat stress, realize the discrimination of coastal belt spatial coordination, and automatically iterate and optimize the planning scheme, solve the problems of single evaluation dimension, insufficient quantification, and low optimization efficiency of the existing evaluation technology, and improve the scientificity and rationality of coastal belt spatial planning.

[0009] In view of the above defects or improvement needs of the prior art, as a first aspect of the present application, the present application provides a coastal belt spatial coordination quantitative evaluation system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix, comprising: a basic data processing unit for completing the definition of a function zone set A and a habitat type set H, then acquiring a planning layer and a habitat layer of a region to be evaluated, and then creating a regular grid covering the region to be evaluated, wherein each grid cell is an evaluation unit, and the attribute information of the planning layer and the habitat layer is associated with the corresponding evaluation unit through a spatial connection operation; a function zone conflict quantitative evaluation unit for defining adjacent cells of each evaluation unit, comparing each function zone with each other to construct a function zone coordination judgment matrix, calculating the characteristic vector after consistency test, and obtaining the coordination coefficient CI after mapping to a preset interval, calculating the coordination value of each evaluation unit and the total coordination degree of the study area based on the coordination coefficient CI, and quantifying the spatial conflict degree between different function zones; The functional-habitat stress quantitative assessment unit is used to determine the marine use intensity coefficient and habitat vulnerability index of the functional area by combining the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) with expert scoring. The marine use intensity coefficient and vulnerability index are assigned to each assessment unit to construct the functional area-habitat coupling assessment matrix. Based on the marine use intensity coefficient and vulnerability index, the habitat coordination degree of a single assessment unit and the total habitat coordination degree of the study area are calculated to quantify the stress effect of the functional area on the habitat. The iterative optimization unit is used to set a conflict identification threshold, determine the conflict type based on the threshold, and adjust the planning attributes of the conflict area based on the preset optimization rules; recalculate the adjusted total coordination degree and total habitat coordination degree, compare the optimization effect, and iteratively execute the adjustment and calculation operations until the preset evaluation target is achieved, and output the coastal zone spatial planning optimization scheme.

[0010] Furthermore, the functional area set A and the habitat type set H are respectively: The functional zone set A covers all types of land and sea use functions in the coastal zone, including at least ecological protection, island development and utilization, urban construction, port and shipping, and agricultural protection. The habitat type set H covers typical coastal habitat types, including at least shoreline, wetland, vegetation, habitats related to rare animals, artificial built-up areas, and bare land.

[0011] Furthermore, the planning layer and the habitat layer are respectively: The planning layer is a vector area feature layer of the coastal zone spatial planning of the area to be evaluated, and its attribute table contains fields that describe the planning function type of each patch. The habitat layer is a vector areal feature layer of the current coastal habitat distribution in the area to be evaluated, and its attribute table includes a field for the habitat type for each patch.

[0012] Furthermore, the method for defining adjacent units of each evaluation unit is as follows: Using the neighborhood analysis method, let any evaluation unit be... ,in The spatial coordinates of this evaluation unit are determined by the formula. Define its adjacent unit set In the formula To preset the neighborhood distance threshold, To and Adjacent evaluation units are identified to clarify their adjacency relationships.

[0013] Furthermore, the calculation process for the coordination value of the individual evaluation unit is as follows: Based on the grid area of ​​the evaluation unit Preset benchmark area and the coordination coefficient of each adjacent functional area pair within the evaluation unit , through formula The coordination value of a single evaluation unit is calculated. ,in For the first The coordination value of each evaluation unit For the first The grid area of ​​each evaluation unit. As an evaluation unit The number of adjacent functional area pairs within the area; As an evaluation unit Inner The coordination coefficient for adjacent functional areas has a score range of [1, 10]. The smaller the value, the more obvious the conflict between functional areas.

[0014] Furthermore, the calculation process for the overall coordination degree of the study area is as follows: Based on the total area of ​​the study area Preset benchmark area and the coordination coefficient of adjacent functional area pairs within each evaluation unit , through formula The overall coordination degree of the study area was calculated. ,in To determine the overall coordination degree of patches in each functional zone within the study area, The total area of ​​the study area, This represents the total number of evaluation units within the study area. As an evaluation unit The number of adjacent functional area pairs within the area. As an evaluation unit Inner The coordination coefficient for adjacent functional areas has a score range of [1, 10]. The smaller the value, the more obvious the conflict between functional areas.

[0015] Furthermore, the method for determining the coordination coefficient is as follows: The functional areas in the functional area set are compared pairwise, and a coordination judgment matrix is ​​constructed using the scaling method. The largest eigenvalue of the judgment matrix is ​​calculated, and a consistency index is calculated based on the largest eigenvalue and the matrix order. Then, the consistency ratio is calculated by combining the average random consistency index. When the consistency ratio meets the preset threshold, the judgment matrix passes the consistency test. The eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue is solved, and the eigenvector is normalized to obtain the normalized eigenvector. A linear transformation is used to map the normalized eigenvector to a preset numerical range to obtain the coordination coefficient of each functional area pair. The magnitude of the coordination coefficient is negatively correlated with the degree of spatial conflict between the corresponding functional area pairs.

[0016] Furthermore, the calculation process for the habitat harmony degree of the individual evaluation unit is as follows: Based on the functional zone marine use intensity coefficients corresponding to each habitat within the evaluation unit habitat vulnerability index The habitat harmony degree of a single evaluation unit is calculated using a formula. : in For the first The degree of habitat harmony in each evaluation unit As an evaluation unit Inner Marine use intensity coefficient corresponding to the functional zone of the habitat. As an evaluation unit Inner The habitat vulnerability index corresponding to a species habitat. As an evaluation unit The total number of species in the endohabitat.

[0017] Furthermore, the calculation process for the total habitat harmony degree is as follows: Based on habitat harmony of all evaluation units within the study area , through formula The total habitat harmony degree of the study area was calculated. ,in The overall coordination degree of each functional zone with all habitats within the study area. This represents the total number of evaluation units within the study area. For the first The degree of habitat harmony in each evaluation unit.

[0018] As a second aspect of the present invention, a method for quantitatively assessing the spatial coordination of coastal zones based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix is ​​also provided, applicable to any of the coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment systems based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix described in any one of the claims, comprising: S1. Collect and process coastal zone spatial planning data and habitat status data, construct a two-dimensional coupling matrix of functional zone coordination and functional habitat stress, and calculate the corresponding coordination coefficients; S2. Based on the grid area of ​​the evaluation unit, the number of adjacent functional area pairs, and the coordination coefficient, calculate the coordination value of a single evaluation unit and the overall coordination degree of the study area; S3. Based on the functional zone sea use intensity coefficient and habitat vulnerability index, calculate the habitat coordination degree of a single evaluation unit and the total habitat coordination degree of the study area; S4. Integrate the coordination results of functional zone dimension and habitat dimension to form a two-dimensional comprehensive assessment result, and complete the quantitative determination of the spatial coordination of the coastal zone.

[0019] In summary, compared with the prior art, the above-described technical solutions conceived by this invention can achieve the following beneficial effects: 1. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix of this invention constructs an "intensity-vulnerability" coupling mapping system covering functional zones and coastal habitats, and establishes a multi-dimensional correlation between changes in the physical attributes of human activities, pollutant emission intensity, and resource acquisition frequency and the functionality, resistance, and resilience of their corresponding habitats. Through refined quantitative identification, it achieves scientific early warning of the degree of stress on specific habitats in different functional zones, breaking through the limitations of the vague "human-land relationship" description in traditional assessment systems, and providing accurate quantitative criteria for the strict adherence to coastal ecological red lines and the early avoidance of ecological risks.

[0020] 2. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix of this invention extracts the spatial compatibility characteristics between different types of human activities and assigns standardized, quantified coordination coefficient scores (1-10 points) to construct a conflict screening and layout optimization model for coastal zone planning schemes. By scientifically measuring the mutually exclusive correlation between development functions and protection objectives, it assists planners in eliminating highly conflicting layouts during the scheme formulation stage. This scientifically guides planning schemes to significantly reduce spatial redundancy in polluting functional zones, greatly improving the scientific nature of coastal zone spatial resource allocation and the decision-making efficiency for sustainable resource utilization.

[0021] 3. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a dual-dimensional coupling matrix of the present invention realizes the calculation of the degree of coordination in two dimensions through functional zone conflict quantitative assessment unit and functional habitat stress quantitative assessment unit. The former constructs a functional zone coordination judgment matrix, obtains the coordination coefficient through verification and calculation, and completes the solution of unit coordination value and regional overall coordination degree; the latter determines the intensity of marine use and habitat vulnerability index through hierarchical analysis and assignment, constructs a coupling matrix and calculates habitat coordination degree. The two indicators quantify spatial conflict and ecological stress respectively, realize multi-dimensional collaborative assessment, and make the results more consistent with the actual spatial relationship of the coastal zone. Attached Figure Description

[0022] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the method for quantitative assessment of coastal zone spatial coordination based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix, according to an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 2 This refers to the coordination coefficient between the land and sea functional zones in this embodiment of the invention. Figure 3 This is a system unit diagram of an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0023] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are merely illustrative and not intended to limit the invention. Furthermore, the technical features involved in the various embodiments of this invention described below can be combined with each other as long as they do not conflict with each other.

[0024] Example 1 Please refer to Figure 1 This embodiment 1 provides a quantitative assessment system for coastal zone spatial coordination based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix, including: a basic data processing unit, a functional zone conflict quantitative assessment unit, a function-habitat stress quantitative assessment unit, and an iterative optimization unit; this embodiment 1 further elaborates on the above units.

[0025] (1) Basic data processing unit Before conducting a quantitative assessment of coastal spatial coordination, a unified and standardized data foundation needs to be established to ensure the accuracy and consistency of subsequent analyses. The basic data processing unit first systematically defines the functional and ecological objects involved in the assessment, determining the functional zone set A and habitat type set H. Functional zone set A comprehensively covers all types of land and sea use functions in the coastal terrestrial and marine areas, including 23 representative coastal land and sea use functions (A1-A23), encompassing marine protected areas, developed islands, concentrated urban construction areas, port and shipping areas, and farmland protected areas. It can fully reflect the development, utilization, and protection management needs within the region. Habitat type set H includes 18 representative coastal habitats (H1-H18), covering bedrock / estuary coasts, mangroves, salt marshes, seagrass beds, rare animal migration routes, built-up areas, and bare land; it takes into account both natural ecological spaces and spaces affected by human disturbance, providing a complete object system for the two-dimensional assessment.

[0026] After defining the target area, the basic data processing unit acquires the core spatial data of the area to be evaluated, namely the planning layer and the habitat layer. The planning layer uses a coastal spatial planning vector area feature layer, expressing the planning and control content of different spatial ranges in the form of area patches. Its attribute table has a dedicated field to clearly record the planning function type corresponding to each patch, which can intuitively and accurately reflect the planning positioning and management requirements of the area. The habitat layer uses a current habitat distribution vector area feature layer of the same area, also reflecting the spatial distribution range of the actual habitat in the form of area patches. The attribute table includes a field to identify the habitat type, truly reflecting the current distribution status of the coastal ecological space. Both types of layers use a standardized vector format to ensure data standardization and compatibility.

[0027] To achieve a uniform and quantifiable assessment across the entire area, it is necessary to transform the continuous spatial range into standardized evaluation units. The basic data processing unit utilizes Geographic Information System (GIS) tools to create a regular grid covering the entire area to be assessed, dividing the study area into uniformly sized and regularly shaped grid cells. Each cell serves as an independent evaluation unit. For example, using GIS software, a 100m × 100m regular grid (Fishnet) covering the entire study area can be created, with each grid cell representing an evaluation unit. Based on this, spatial connectivity operations are performed, matching and associating the spatial location and attribute information of the planning layer and habitat layer with the corresponding evaluation units. This ensures that each evaluation unit simultaneously carries both planning function information and habitat type information. This processing method achieves the normalization and integration of multi-source spatial data, unifies the assessment scale and data format, eliminates analytical biases caused by fragmented spatial boundaries and inconsistent data formats, and provides stable and unified data support for subsequent quantitative assessments of functional area conflicts, functional habitat stress, and iterative optimization.

[0028] (2) Functional Area Conflict Quantitative Assessment Unit After completing the basic data processing and evaluation unit division, it is necessary to conduct a quantitative assessment of the spatial conflicts between functional zones. This is one of the core dimensions of coastal zone spatial coordination assessment. The functional zone conflict quantitative assessment unit realizes the quantification of the degree of spatial conflict between functional zones through a series of standardized operations. The specific process is as follows.

[0029] First, this unit clarifies the adjacent units of each evaluation unit, establishing a spatial relationship basis for functional area conflict analysis. For example, the 8-neighborhood analysis method is used to define adjacent units, meaning that the adjacent units of each evaluation unit are the eight surrounding evaluation units directly connected to its edges or corners. This definition method can comprehensively cover the spatial relationships around the evaluation unit and accurately reflect the mutual influence between adjacent functional areas. Based on the 8-neighborhood analysis method, the scope of the selected area can be determined according to the actual implementation needs of the technical personnel. Specifically, the method for defining the adjacent units of each evaluation unit is as follows: Let any evaluation unit be ,in The spatial coordinates of this evaluation unit are determined by the formula. Define its adjacent unit set In the formula To preset the neighborhood distance threshold, To and Adjacent evaluation units are identified to clarify their adjacency relationships.

[0030] Subsequently, a functional area coordination judgment matrix is ​​constructed and coordination coefficients are determined. For example... Figure 2As shown, a 23×23 functional zone coordination matrix was constructed based on the 23 types of coastal land and sea use functions included in the functional zone set. Five local marine spatial planning experts with backgrounds in environmental science, marine science, ecology, physical geography, and planning used a scale of 1-9 to compare each pair of functional zones pairwise. They provided objective scores based on the spatial adaptability and mutual interference levels of each type of functional zone, forming a functional zone coordination judgment matrix. After the matrix was constructed, a consistency check was performed. The check standard was a consistency ratio of less than 0.1 to ensure the matrix was logically sound and consistent, avoiding subjective bias in the expert scores. After passing the check, the eigenvectors of the matrix were calculated and mapped to the preset interval [1, 10] to obtain the coordination coefficients corresponding to each pair of functional zones. The coordination coefficient score corresponds to a specific coordination level: 2 points indicates weak coordination (high conflict), 6 points indicates general coordination, and 10 points indicates high coordination (functional complementarity or zero interference). The smaller the value, the more obvious the spatial conflict between the corresponding two pairs of functional zones.

[0031] Specifically, the coordination coefficient is calculated as follows: The coordination coefficient was first calculated by experts comparing the 23 functional areas pairwise, and a 23×23 judgment matrix was constructed using the 1-9 scaling method. Matrix elements Indicates functional area relative functional areas The consistency of the matrix. Then, the largest eigenvalue of the matrix is ​​calculated. And through formula Calculate the consistency index Then through Calculate the consistency ratio ,in Let be the order of the matrix. As the average random consistency index, when When the matrix passes the consistency check, the matrix is ​​considered to have passed the consistency check.

[0032] After the test is passed, solve the characteristic equation. This yields the eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue. and through The eigenvectors are normalized to obtain normalized eigenvectors. .

[0033] Finally, a linear transformation is used to normalize the eigenvectors. Mapped to The interval is used to obtain the coordination coefficient of each functional zone pair. The calculation formula is: ,in The range of values ​​is The smaller the value, the more obvious the spatial conflict between the two pairs of functional areas; the larger the value, the higher the degree of coordination.

[0034] Next, the coordination value of each individual evaluation unit is calculated to quantify functional area conflicts at the unit level. The coordination value of each individual evaluation unit is calculated based on the grid area of ​​the evaluation unit. Preset benchmark area and the coordination coefficient of each adjacent functional area pair within the evaluation unit , through formula The coordination value of a single evaluation unit is calculated. ,in For the first The coordination value of each evaluation unit For the first The grid area of ​​each evaluation unit, with a preset benchmark area. The relevant technical personnel shall make a unified confirmation based on the needs of the research. As an evaluation unit The number of adjacent functional area pairs within the area; As an evaluation unit Inner The coordination coefficient for adjacent functional areas ranges from 1 to 10, with smaller values ​​indicating more pronounced conflicts between functional areas. It characterizes the overall coordination level among various functional areas within a single evaluation unit, reflecting the severity of conflicts within that unit and providing unit-level quantitative data for subsequent overall regional assessment.

[0035] Finally, the overall coordination degree of the study area is calculated to achieve a comprehensive quantification of functional zone conflicts at the regional level. The overall coordination degree calculation is based on the total area of ​​the study area. Preset benchmark area and the coordination coefficient of adjacent functional area pairs within each evaluation unit , through formula The overall coordination degree of the study area was calculated. ,in To determine the overall coordination degree of patches in each functional zone within the study area, The total area of ​​the study area, This represents the total number of evaluation units within the study area. As an evaluation unit The number of adjacent functional area pairs within the area. As an evaluation unit Inner The coordination coefficient for adjacent functional areas has a score range of [1, 10]. The smaller the value, the more obvious the conflict between functional areas.

[0036] By employing dual quantification at both the unit and regional levels, the coordination level of functional zones at different spatial scales is presented, providing core quantitative basis for the functional dimension of the two-dimensional assessment of coastal spatial coordination. At the same time, expert qualitative knowledge is transformed into standardized quantitative indicators, solving the problems of strong subjectivity and non-reproducibility of indicators in traditional assessments.

[0037] (3) Functional-Habitat Stress Quantitative Assessment Unit After completing the horizontal spatial conflict assessment between functional zones, it is also necessary to conduct a stress degree analysis from the perspective of the vertical impact of functional development on ecological habitats, so as to comprehensively reflect the adaptation relationship between coastal spatial development and ecological protection. The functional habitat stress quantitative assessment unit focuses on the coupling relationship between intensity and vulnerability, and realizes the quantitative assessment of habitat stress effects through a standardized process, providing ecological dimension support for the two-dimensional coordinated evaluation.

[0038] This unit first determines the marine use intensity coefficients of functional zones to reflect the degree of disturbance to the coastal ecological environment caused by different development activities. An assessment system is established, comprising three primary indicators: the degree of change in natural attributes, pollution intensity, and resource acquisition frequency. Each primary indicator is further subdivided into corresponding secondary indicators, forming a complete evaluation framework. Experts with a background in marine spatial planning were invited to score the relative intensity of various functional zones under each indicator using the 19-scale method. Then, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used to construct a judgment matrix and conduct consistency checks. After meeting the check requirements, eigenvectors are calculated and normalized. The initial scores obtained from the weighted summation are mapped to the range of 1 to 10 through range standardization, ultimately forming the marine use intensity coefficients corresponding to 23 functional zones. Higher values ​​indicate greater disturbance intensity to the habitat by that functional zone.

[0039] While determining the marine use intensity coefficient, this unit further calculates the habitat vulnerability index. A vulnerability assessment framework is constructed with ecosystem functionality, resistance, and resilience as core dimensions. The same expert group conducts relative vulnerability assessments on 18 typical coastal habitats, employing the same hierarchical analysis and standardization process as the marine use intensity coefficient. The results are mapped to a range of 1 to 10, yielding vulnerability indices for each habitat type. Higher values ​​indicate greater sensitivity to external disturbances and greater difficulty in recovery after damage. After calculating both types of parameters, a mapping table is established, corresponding the planning function types in the planning layer to the functional area set A (A1-A23) in this embodiment. The intensity coefficient I corresponding to Table 1 is assigned as a new field to each planning function patch, as shown in Table 1. Similarly, the habitat types in the habitat layer are mapped to the habitat type set H (H1-H18), and a vulnerability index V is assigned, as shown in Table 2.

[0040] In a preferred embodiment, the functional zone type can be determined according to the "Guidelines for the Compilation of Provincial Coastal Zone Comprehensive Protection and Utilization Plans (Trial)" and the "Guidelines for the Classification of Land and Sea Use in Territorial Spatial Survey, Planning, and Land Use Control (Trial)" (Ministry of Natural Resources, 2020b). Furthermore, a higher land and sea use intensity coefficient indicates a greater functional impact of the plan.

[0041] The higher the vulnerability index value, the more vulnerable the habitat.

[0042] Finally, habitat coordination degree is calculated based on the assigned evaluation units. First, a coupled evaluation matrix is ​​constructed, corresponding to 23 functional zones and 18 habitat types, to identify the spatial overlap between high-intensity development functions and highly vulnerable habitats. At the unit level, the habitat coordination degree of each evaluation unit is calculated by combining the marine use intensity coefficient and habitat vulnerability index. This reflects the level of habitat stress caused by development activities within a local area. Specifically, the calculation process for the habitat coordination degree of a single evaluation unit is based on the marine use intensity coefficient of the functional zones corresponding to each habitat within the evaluation unit. habitat vulnerability index The habitat harmony degree of a single evaluation unit is calculated using a formula. : in For the first The degree of habitat harmony in each evaluation unit As an evaluation unit Inner Marine use intensity coefficient corresponding to the functional zone of the habitat. As an evaluation unit Inner The habitat vulnerability index corresponding to a species habitat. As an evaluation unit The total number of species of endohabitat.

[0043] At the regional level, the habitat coordination scores of all evaluation units are aggregated to obtain the overall habitat coordination score for the entire study area. This overall score quantifies the comprehensive stress effect of functional zoning on various coastal habitats. Specifically, the calculation of the overall habitat coordination score is based on the habitat coordination scores of all evaluation units within the study area. , through formula The total habitat harmony degree of the study area was calculated. ,in The overall coordination degree of each functional zone with all habitats within the study area. This represents the total number of evaluation units within the study area. For the first The degree of habitat harmony in each evaluation unit.

[0044] By calculating at both the unit and regional levels, a quantitative expression of the vertical stress relationship of functional habitats is achieved, providing a quantitative basis for ecological dimensions for subsequent comprehensive judgment of spatial coordination and planning optimization.

[0045] (4) Iterative optimization unit After completing the quantitative assessment of functional zone conflicts and functional habitat stress, it is necessary to automatically adjust and continuously optimize the identified incompatible areas to form a closed-loop assessment and improvement mechanism. Based on the coordination degree calculation results, the iterative optimization unit optimizes the conflict areas by setting clear judgment criteria and adjustment rules, and finally forms a scientific and feasible coastal zone spatial planning scheme.

[0046] This unit first establishes conflict hotspot identification rules, comparing the previously calculated coordination values ​​with preset thresholds to accurately locate conflict areas. For the functional area conflict dimension, the coordination value of a single evaluation unit is compared with the set conflict threshold; values ​​exceeding the threshold are identified as functional layout conflict areas. The default threshold value can be set to 6. For the functional habitat stress dimension, the habitat coordination degree of a single evaluation unit is compared with the corresponding stress threshold; values ​​exceeding the threshold are identified as habitat stress conflict areas. The default threshold value can be set to 50. Through this dual-dimensional threshold determination, different types of conflict hotspots can be distinguished, providing clear targets for subsequent differentiated optimization.

[0047] After identifying conflict areas, the units automatically adjust according to preset multi-level optimization rules. The optimization prioritizes ecological protection. For highly vulnerable habitat areas, such as those with a vulnerability index V of 8 or higher, the corresponding functions are directly adjusted to ecological protection-related types, ensuring strict avoidance of key ecological spaces. For areas with excessive marine use intensity and significant habitat disturbance, such as those with an intensity coefficient I greater than 7, they are adjusted to functional types with lower development intensity within the same category, reducing ecological stress. Simultaneously, combined with neighborhood smoothing rules, low-conflict functional types are selected from adjacent areas around the conflict unit for local replacement, ensuring the adjusted functional layout is coordinated with the surrounding space and avoiding new spatial conflicts.

[0048] After completing one round of planning attribute adjustments, the unit recalculates the overall coordination degree and overall habitat coordination degree of the entire study area, comparing the adjusted results with those before optimization to determine whether the optimization effect meets the preset objectives. If the requirements are not met, the process of conflict identification, rule adjustment, and indicator recalculation continues, gradually reducing the conflict level and improving the overall coordination degree through multiple iterations. When all indicators meet the preset evaluation objectives, the iteration process terminates, and the unit outputs the final coastal zone spatial planning optimization scheme, providing directly applicable quantitative results and decision support for actual planning management.

[0049] Example 2 Please refer to Figure 3 This embodiment 2 provides a method for quantitative assessment of coastal zone spatial coordination based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix, applicable to any of the coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment systems based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix described above, including: S1. Collect and process coastal zone spatial planning data and habitat status data, construct a two-dimensional coupling matrix of functional zone coordination and functional habitat stress, and calculate the corresponding coordination coefficients; S2. Based on the grid area of ​​the evaluation unit, the number of adjacent functional area pairs, and the coordination coefficient, calculate the coordination value of a single evaluation unit and the overall coordination degree of the study area; S3. Based on the functional zone sea use intensity coefficient and habitat vulnerability index, calculate the habitat coordination degree of a single evaluation unit and the total habitat coordination degree of the study area; S4. Integrate the coordination results of functional zone dimension and habitat dimension to form a two-dimensional comprehensive assessment result, and complete the quantitative determination of the spatial coordination of the coastal zone.

[0050] Those skilled in the art will readily understand that the above description is merely a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, and improvements made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A quantitative assessment system for the spatial coordination of coastal zones based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix, characterized in that, include: The basic data processing unit is used to define the functional area set A and the habitat type set H, and then obtain the planning layer and habitat layer of the area to be evaluated. Subsequently, a regular grid covering the area to be evaluated is created, where each grid cell is an evaluation unit, and the attribute information of the planning layer and habitat layer is associated with the corresponding evaluation unit through spatial connection operations; The functional area conflict quantification assessment unit is used to define the adjacent units of each evaluation unit, construct the functional area coordination judgment matrix by comparing each functional area pairwise, calculate the feature vector after consistency test and map it to the preset interval to obtain the coordination coefficient CI, and calculate the coordination value of a single evaluation unit and the total coordination degree of the study area based on the coordination coefficient CI to quantify the degree of spatial conflict of different functional areas. The functional-habitat stress quantitative assessment unit is used to determine the marine use intensity coefficient and habitat vulnerability index of the functional area by combining the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) with expert scoring. The marine use intensity coefficient and vulnerability index are assigned to each assessment unit to construct the functional area-habitat coupling assessment matrix. Based on the marine use intensity coefficient and vulnerability index, the habitat coordination degree of a single assessment unit and the total habitat coordination degree of the study area are calculated to quantify the stress effect of the functional area on the habitat. The iterative optimization unit is used to set a conflict identification threshold, determine the conflict type based on the threshold, and adjust the planning attributes of the conflict area based on preset optimization rules. The overall coordination degree and overall habitat coordination degree are recalculated and adjusted. The optimization effect is compared and the adjustment and calculation operations are iteratively executed until the preset evaluation goal is achieved, and the coastal zone spatial planning optimization scheme is output.

2. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix according to claim 1, characterized in that, The functional area set A and the habitat type set H are respectively: The functional zone set A covers all types of land and sea use functions in the coastal zone, including at least ecological protection, island development and utilization, urban construction, port and shipping, and agricultural protection. The habitat type set H covers typical coastal habitat types, including at least shoreline, wetland, vegetation, habitats related to rare animals, artificial built-up areas, and bare land.

3. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix according to claim 1, characterized in that, The planning layer and habitat layer are respectively: The planning layer is a vector area feature layer of the coastal zone spatial planning of the area to be evaluated, and its attribute table contains fields that describe the planning function type of each patch. The habitat layer is a vector areal feature layer of the current coastal habitat distribution in the area to be evaluated, and its attribute table includes a field for the habitat type for each patch.

4. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method for defining adjacent units of each evaluation unit is as follows: Using the neighborhood analysis method, let any evaluation unit be... ,in The spatial coordinates of this evaluation unit are determined by the formula. Define its adjacent unit set In the formula To preset the neighborhood distance threshold, To and Adjacent evaluation units are identified to clarify their adjacency relationships.

5. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation process for the coordination value of a single evaluation unit is as follows: Based on the grid area of ​​the evaluation unit Preset benchmark area and the coordination coefficient of each adjacent functional area pair within the evaluation unit , through formula The coordination value of a single evaluation unit is calculated. ,in For the first The coordination value of each evaluation unit For the first The grid area of ​​each evaluation unit. As an evaluation unit The number of adjacent functional area pairs within the area; As an evaluation unit Inner The coordination coefficient for adjacent functional areas has a score range of [1, 10]. The smaller the value, the more obvious the conflict between functional areas.

6. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation process for the overall coordination degree of the study area is as follows: Based on the total area of ​​the study area Preset benchmark area and the coordination coefficient of adjacent functional area pairs within each evaluation unit , through formula The overall coordination degree of the study area was calculated. ,in To determine the overall coordination degree of patches in each functional zone within the study area, The total area of ​​the study area, This represents the total number of evaluation units within the study area. As an evaluation unit The number of adjacent functional area pairs within the area. As an evaluation unit Inner The coordination coefficient for adjacent functional areas has a score range of [1, 10]. The smaller the value, the more obvious the conflict between functional areas.

7. A quantitative assessment system for coastal zone spatial coordination based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix as described in claim 5 or 6, characterized in that, The method for determining the coordination coefficient is as follows: The functional areas in the functional area set are compared pairwise, and a coordination judgment matrix is ​​constructed using the scaling method. The largest eigenvalue of the judgment matrix is ​​calculated, and a consistency index is calculated based on the largest eigenvalue and the matrix order. Then, the consistency ratio is calculated by combining the average random consistency index. When the consistency ratio meets the preset threshold, the judgment matrix passes the consistency test. Find the eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue, and normalize the eigenvector to obtain the normalized eigenvector; A linear transformation is used to map the normalized feature vector to a preset numerical range to obtain the coordination coefficient of each functional area pair. The magnitude of the coordination coefficient is negatively correlated with the degree of spatial conflict between the corresponding functional area pairs.

8. The coastal zone spatial coordination quantitative assessment system based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation process for the habitat harmony degree of a single evaluation unit is as follows: Based on the functional zone marine use intensity coefficients corresponding to each habitat within the evaluation unit habitat vulnerability index The habitat harmony degree of a single evaluation unit is calculated using a formula. : in For the first The degree of habitat harmony in each evaluation unit As an evaluation unit Inner Marine use intensity coefficient corresponding to the functional zone of the habitat. As an evaluation unit Inner The habitat vulnerability index corresponding to a species habitat. As an evaluation unit The total number of species of endohabitat.

9. A quantitative assessment system for coastal zone spatial coordination based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix according to claim 8, characterized in that, The calculation process for the total habitat harmony is as follows: Based on habitat harmony of all evaluation units within the study area , through formula The total habitat harmony degree of the study area was calculated. ,in The overall coordination degree of each functional zone with all habitats within the study area. This represents the total number of evaluation units within the study area. For the first The degree of habitat harmony in each evaluation unit.

10. A method for quantitatively assessing the spatial coordination of coastal zones based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix, applied to a quantitative assessment system for the spatial coordination of coastal zones based on a two-dimensional coupling matrix as described in any one of claims 1-9, characterized in that, include: S1. Collect and process coastal zone spatial planning data and habitat status data, construct a two-dimensional coupling matrix of functional zone coordination and functional habitat stress, and calculate the corresponding coordination coefficients; S2. Based on the grid area of ​​the evaluation unit, the number of adjacent functional area pairs, and the coordination coefficient, calculate the coordination value of a single evaluation unit and the overall coordination degree of the study area; S3. Based on the functional zone sea use intensity coefficient and habitat vulnerability index, calculate the habitat coordination degree of a single evaluation unit and the total habitat coordination degree of the study area; S4. Integrate the coordination results of functional zone dimension and habitat dimension to form a two-dimensional comprehensive assessment result, and complete the quantitative determination of the spatial coordination of the coastal zone.

Images