GIS Support Planning of Red Stone Park, China

摘要：ABSTRACT: Landscape planning is considered as a procedure of defense taking place among defenders of various processes. Defending by security patterns (SPs) --strategic portions and positions -- may significantly increase the efficiency of safeguarding the processes of our concern. SPs are defined and identified based on the threshold-type quality of the dynamics of the processes. Alternative change models are proposed based on SPs. Decision making based on SPs is also discussed. The SP approach is illustrated by the case study of the Red Stone National Park, China, in which a defending procedure among ecologists (defenders of ecological processes), tourists (defenders of visual perceptual processes) and farmers (defenders of agricultural conversion processes) is simulated. Integrated with the SP approach, GIS shows great potential for supporting decision making in landscape changes.

( This paper is printed from: Geographic Information Research：Bridging the Atlantic (Craglia, M. and Hellen, C. Eds.)Tayor &Francis. pp. 480-494.1997

INTRODUCTION SECURITY PATTERNS AND SP APPROACH
Landscape planning is considered a procedure of defense involving defenders of various processes. How can we defend the processes of our concern more effectively while maximising opportunities for changes? This paper tries to answer this question using the concept of security patterns (SPs) and demonstrates how GIS can be combined with the SP approach in landscape planning.
By definition, SPs are the spatial patterns composed of strategic portions, positions, critical scales (sizes), numbers, shapes and inter-relationships that are associated with certain thresholds in the non-linear dynamics of processes in the landscapes. SPs have or potentially have a critical significance in safeguarding certain processes, e.g. the process of species dispersal, spread of fire and other disturbances, visual perception and preference, agricultural conversion, etc.
In terms of their significance for the processes of our concern, security landscape components have three basic characteristics:
(i) Initiative, the quality of a portion or position whose occupation is likely to give it the advantage of initiating certain processes;
(ii) Efficiency, the quality of a position or portion whose occupation will give it the advantage of less cost in energy and materials and be much more effective in promoting or controlling certain processes;
(iii) Co-ordination, the quality of a position or portion whose occupation will give it the advantage of effective spatial communication among neighboring elements.
SPs are multi-leveled. Each individual process in the landscape has its own security patterns (Figure 1), and these individual SPs may compete and overlap spatially.
Furthermore, each individual process has SPs at various security levels.
Figure 1 A presumed hierarchy of landscape security patterns
The concept of SPs is based on two assumptions concerning spatial patterns and processes: (a) landscape patterns effect processes, and (b) there are strategic landscapes associated with some thresholds in the dynamics of certain processes.
Numerous observations suggest that the spatial patterns of a landscape influence various ecological processes such as species dispersal and population dynamics (Forman and Godron, 1986; Turner, 1989); human processes such as residential development and demographic dynamics (e.g. Berry and Horton, 1970), and visual perceptual processes (Gibson, 1950; Lynch, 1960).
Not all portions and positions of the landscape are equally important in terms of their influence on individual processes, some are more important than others, and some are strategically critical. Examples of such strategic portions and positions include the inlets and outlets of a basin and breaks in a corridor that have critical values for ecological processes (Forman and Godron, 1986; Merriam, 1984); the conspicuous land marks, narrow defiles, gorges and bridges that have significant visual perceptual effects (Stein and Niederland, 1989; Tuan, 1974); as well as certain places that have a strategic significance for economic processes (Taaffe and Gauthier, 1973).
It is important to note , however, that in some cases various processes in the landscape may be controlled by spatial patterns that are not intuitively obvious nor visually apparent to a human observer. It is assumed that some kinds of thresholds exist in the trajectories of the dynamics of processes. At some points (in terms of number, size, shape and inter-distance of landscape elements), a slight change in landscape property produces sudden changes in the response of the process. Such thresholds have been recognized in urban development (Kozlowski, 1986). Similar to thresholds, other concepts have been proposed that may also be useful in understanding my ideas concerning the strategic landscape and security patterns such as safe minimum standards (SMS) (Bishop, Fullerton, et al, 1974; Ciriacy-Wantrup, 1968), carrying capacity, and ultimate environmental thresholds (UETs) (Kozlowski and Hill, 1993), etc.
It is thus reasonable to assume that:
(1) landscape patterns associated with these critical thresholds or constraints are likely to be strategically critical in controlling or promoting certain processes;
(2) landscape design and management following these strategically critical patterns can more effectively safeguard or control the processes.
Therefore, it is worthwhile to identify and apply SPs in landscape planning. The following two aspects of exploration become the major focus of this paper:
(1) How can we define and identify SPs and what are they?
(2) How can we apply SPs in landscape planning to achieve a less detrimental landscape, while at the same time, maximally making changes acceptable to decision makers and/or developers?
These two aspects of inquiry compose an approach to landscape planning which I call the SP approach, or the approach of security patterns. It is an approach to defending various processes of our concern, aiming at a good balance of acceptable changes and a securer landscape through identifying and applying security patterns (SPs). The SP approach tries to establish 'stop signs' in the procedures of decision making for various landscape changes, and to safeguard the security of the processes at critical points. In a certain sense, defining SPs is a strategy of spatial defense, an operational weapon of negotiation aimed at a less harmful change by controlling critical points, or 'frontiers'. Defense by these SPs is expected to be more effective in safeguarding the landscape processes of our concern. GIS has great potential when combined with the SP approach in landscape planning and decision making (see Yu, 1995c for more detailed discussion on the SP concept).
A case study of the Red Stone National Park in south China, is used to illustrate the SP approach. This case is selected since it dramatically represents a defensible procedure of landscape change among defenders of three interacting, and often competing, processes in landscapes, including ecological, visual and agricultural conversion processes .

DEFENDING THE SECURITY OF PROCESSES IN RED STONE NATIONAL PARK: A CASE STUDY
Red Stone National Park is 313 square kilometers in size (Figure 2). The dominant regional natural vegetation is composed of sub-tropical
Figure 2 The landscape of the Red Stone National Park in South China
evergreen forests which have been seriously destroyed at the peripheral area with some isolated remnant patches scattered in the remote areas. The landscape is made up of hundreds of heavily eroded rocky hills, square with flat top and steep slopes. This unique land form is the primary factor affecting the distribution of soil, vegetation, wildlife habitats, visual quality and agriculture. The remnant biological islands are extremely valuable in terms of biodiversity conservation and landscape restoration. The visual quality is extraordinary . It is one of the major tourist attractions in south China. The fertile soil and sub-tropical climate make this land one of the most productive agricultural areas. About twenty thousand farmers live in seventy villages scattered in the small alluvial planes in this hilly landscape. The problems this national park now faces are typical of other national protected areas, namely, the conflicts between development , ecological and visual conservation. Landscape planning in this park is a defensible procedure dramatically taking place among defenders of various processes. As a result, this case study a an illustrative example for the SP approach.
Three processes are concerned in this case study: ecological, visual perceptual, and agricultural. The objectives in this case study are to explore an effective way of defending various landscape processes in this national park by identifying and applying SPs, and to demonstrate how GIS can be integrated into the defensible procedure of landscape change and decision making.
Security patterns in the Red Stone National Park
Ecological SPs: Ecologists' Defensive Frontiers