摘要: 目的由于城市土地空间有限，城市绿地与人口的供需不匹配、不公平等问题日益显现。目前关于绿地供需关系的量化研究主要将城市公园作为研究对象，忽略了城市中山林、滨河绿地、绿道等居民使用更频繁的绿色开放空间。而城市绿色开放空间供需平衡是提升居民日常游憩空间的获得感和幸福感的关键，对未来城市绿地规划有重要意义、�/sec> 方法根据城市绿色开放空间的定义和分类，优化高斯两步移动搜索法，利用高精度人口栅格数据与公园兴趣点（POI）数据，以北京市海淀区为例，从人口需求、可达性等级、供给盲区、空间自相关等方面分析海淀区绿色开放空间供需关系及其空间配置状况、�/sec> 结果海淀区东南部中心城区需求量最大，但供给量最小；西北部需求量最小，但供给量最大；在可达性水平上，全区整体偏低，67%的区域内居民的游憩体验达不到平均水平，分布呈现西北高、东南低的两极分化趋势，其中西北部与中部地区可达性最高，东南部可达性最低。全区存�?3%的供给盲区空间。西部和东南部出现了严重的供大于需与供不应需的空间配错现象、�/sec> 结论�?）海淀区的可达性整体偏低，总体呈西北高、东南低的态势，其中可达性指数的高值区域集中分布在香山街道、温泉镇；可达性的低值区域集中在清河街道、西三旗街道、上地街道、中关村街道。（2）资源配置与供需关系严重失衡，其中供不应需的空间主要集中在东南部；供大于需的空间主要集中在西北部。（3）相较于公园绿地、小微绿地，城市中山林、绿道、滨河绿地对城市绿色空间供需关系影响更大。（4）在供给盲区分布上，针对各地区供给盲区形成的原因，提出挖掘潜力空间、利用腾退空间、建立便捷交通、利用社会力量等完善绿色开放空间供需平衡的未来优化方向，为城市绿地建设以及居民生活福祉提升提供依据、�/sec>

关键诌�
• 绿地/
• 公园/
• 城市绿色开放空闳�/a> /
• 可达�?/a> /
• 供需关系/
• 两部移动搜索泔�/a>

Abstract: ObjectiveDue to the limited space of urban land, the mismatch between the supply and demand of urban green space and the population, and the inequity are increasingly emerging. The current quantitative research on the relationship between supply and demand of green space mainly takes urban parks as the research object, ignoring the green open space that residents use more frequently, such as mountains, forests, riverside green spaces, and greenways in cities. The balance between supply and demand of urban green open space is the key to improving residents� sense of acquisition and happiness in daily recreational space, and is of great significance to future urban green space planning. MethodAccording to the definition and classification of urban green open space, the Gaussian two-step mobile search method was optimized, using high-precision population raster data and park POI data, taking Haidian District of Beijing as an example, from the population demand, accessibility level, the supply-demand relationship and spatial configuration of green open space in Haidian District were analyzed from the aspects of supply blind area and spatial autocorrelation. ResultThe central urban area in the southeast of Haidian District had the largest demand, but the smallest supply; the northwest had the smallest demand, but the largest supply; in terms of accessibility, the overall area was relatively low, and 67% of the residents recreation experience level did not reach the average, and the distribution showed a polarized trend of high in the northwest and low in the southeast, with the northwest and central regions having the highest accessibility and the southeast having the lowest accessibility. There was a 23% supply blind space in the whole area. In the west and southeast, there was a serious spatial mismatch of oversupply and undersupply. Conclusion(1) The accessibility of Haidian District is generally low, with a trend of high in the northwest and low in the southeast. The areas with high accessibility index are concentrated in Xiangshan Street and Wenquan Town; the low value of accessibility is concentrated in Xiangshan Street and Wenquan Town. The areas are concentrated in Qinghe Street, Xisanqi Street, Shangdi Street, and Zhongguancun Street. (2) The relationship between resource allocation and supply and demand is seriously unbalanced, and the space where supply exceeds demand is mainly concentrated in the southeast; the space where supply exceeds demand is mainly concentrated in the northwest. (3) Compared with park green space and small green space, urban forests, greenways, and riverside green spaces have a greater impact on the supply and demand relationship of urban green space. (4) In terms of the distribution of supply blind spots, according to the reasons for the formation of supply blind spots in various regions, we put forward the future optimization directions to improve the balance of supply and demand of green open space, such as exploiting potential space, utilizing vacated space, establishing convenient transportation, and utilizing social forces, so as to provide a basis for urban green space construction and the improvement of residents� living well-being.

Key words:
• green space/
• park/
• urban green open space/
• accessibility/
• supply and demand relationship/
• two mobile search methods

�?nbsp; 1公园绿地质心点分市�/p>

Figure 1.Centroid distribution of park green space

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 2滨河绿地质心点分市�/p>

Figure 2.Centroid distribution of riverside green space

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 4绿道质心点分市�/p>

Figure 4.Greenway centroid distribution

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 3山林质心点分市�/p>

Figure 3.Distribution of centroids of mountains and forests

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 5人口密度栅格国�/p>

Figure 5.Population density grid map

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 6绿色开放空间分布图

Figure 6.Distribution map of green open space

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 7海淀区可达性等级分布图

Figure 7.Distribution map of accessibility grades in Haidian District

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 81 500 m搜索域中的可达�?/p>

NS.可达性与人口密度关系不显著；H-H.高人口密度、高可达性指数集群；L-L.低人口密度、低可达性指数集群；L-H.低人口密度，高可达性指数集群；H-L.高人口密度、低可达性指数集群。括号内数据为集群个数。下同。NS, the relationship between accessibility and population density is not significant; H-H, high population density and high accessibility index cluster; L-L, low population density and low accessibility index cluster; L-H, low population density and high accessibility index cluster; H-L, high population density and low accessibility index cluster. The data in brackets represents the number of clusters. The same below.

Figure 8.Accessibility in the 1 500 m search domain

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 9500 m搜索域中的可达�?/p>

Figure 9.Accessibility in the 500 meter search domain

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

�?nbsp; 10可达性显性、隐性盲区分布图

Figure 10.Distribution of dominant and recessive blind spots in accessibility

下载: 全尺寸图牆�/a> 幻灯牆�/a>

[2]Timperio A, Ball K, Salmon J, et al. Is availability of public open space equitable across areas?[J]. Health & Place, 2007, 13(2): 335�?40. [3]章佳�? 基于改进可达性的城市公共绿色空间公平性研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2020.

Zhang J M. Study on equity of urban public green space based on improved accessibility estimation: a case of Shanghai[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2020. [4]唐勇. 城市开放空间规划及设计[J]. 规划�? 2002(10): 21�?7.

Tang Y. Planning of urban open space and its design[J]. Planners, 2002(10): 21�?7. [5]王晓�? 王建�? 关于城市开放空间优先的思考[J]. 中国园林, 2007(3): 53�?6.

Wang X J, Wang J G. On the priority of urban open spaces[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2007(3): 53�?6. [6]韩西�? 俞孔�? 伦敦城市开放空间规划中的绿色通道网络思想[J]. 新建�? 2004(5): 7�?.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3959.2004.05.002

Han X L, Yu K J. The Network of greenway in London’s open space planning[J]. New Architecture, 2004(5): 7�?. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-3959.2004.05.002 [7]陈筝, 赵双�? 提升心理健康的城市绿色开放空间规划设计[J]. 城市建筑, 2018(24): 51�?6. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-0232.2018.24.010

Chen Z, Zhao S R. Enhancing planning and design of mental-health urban green open spaces[J]. Urbanism and Architecture, 2018(24): 51�?6. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-0232.2018.24.010 [8]姚亚�? 李树�? 基于公共健康的城市绿色空间相关研究现状[J]. 中国园林, 2018, 34(1): 118�?24. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-6664.2018.01.029

Yao Y N, Li S H. Review on research of urban green space based on public health[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2018, 34(1): 118�?24. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-6664.2018.01.029 [9]马明, 蔡镇�? 健康视角下城市绿色开放空间研穵� 健康效用及设计应对[J]. 中国园林, 2016, 32(11): 66�?0.

Ma M, Cai Z Y. Research on health and urban green open space: health benefits and design strategy[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2016, 32(11): 66�?0. [10]王忙�? 王云�? 平衡还是匹配?生态智慧引导下的公园绿地供需关系多情景分析与优化[J]. 中国园林, 2021, 37(7): 37�?2. doi:10.19775/j.cla.2021.07.0037

Wang M M, Wang Y C. Balance or match? Multi-scenario analysis and optimization of supply and demand of park green space with ecological wisdom[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2021, 37(7): 37�?2. doi:10.19775/j.cla.2021.07.0037 [11]毕晨. 基于可达性的城市绿色开放空间游憩服务绩效评价与优化研究[D]. 南京: 南京林业大学, 2019.

Bi C. Performance evaluation and optimization of urban green open space recreation service based on accessibility: taking the downtown area of Nanjing City as an example[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Forestry University, 2019. [12]Walter G H. How accessibility shapes land use[J]. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1959, 25(2): 73�?6. doi:10.1080/01944365908978307 [13]Knaapen J P, Scheffer M, Harms B. Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning[J]. Landscape & Urban Planning, 1992, 23(1): 1�?6. [14]俞孔�? 段铁�? 李迪�? �? 景观可达性作为衡量城市绿地系统功能指标的评价方法与案例[J]. 城市规划, 1999(8): 7�?0, 42, 46.

Yu K J, Duan T W, Li D H, et al. Landscape accessibility as a measurement of the function of green space system[J]. City Planning Review, 1999(8): 7�?0, 42, 46. [15]Luo W, Wang F. Measures of spatial accessibility to health care in a GIS environment: synthesis and a case study in the Chicago Region[J]. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2016, 30(6): 865�?84. [16]Oh K, Jeong S. Assessing the spatial distribution of urban parks using GIS[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2007, 82(1): 25�?2. [17]刘常�? 李小�? 韩东. 城市公园可达性研穵� 方法与关键问题[J]. 生态学�? 2010, 30(19): 5381�?390.

Liu C F, Li X M, Han D. Accessibility analysis of urban parks: methods and key issues[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(19): 5381�?390. [18]Dai D. Black residential segregation, disparities in spatial access to health care facilities, and late-stage breast cancer diagnosis in metropolitan Detroit[J]. Health & Place, 2010, 16(5): 1038�?052. [19]翟宇�? 周聪�? 基于实例的城市公园可达性评价模型比较[J]. 中国园林, 2019, 35(1): 78�?3.

Zhai Y J, Zhou C H. Comparison among urban park accessibility evaluation models based on empirical cases[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2019, 35(1): 78�?3. [20]杨建�? 宋岑�? 焦洪�? 基于可达性测度的公园绿地服务公平性时空分析[J]. 测绘与空间地理信�? 2017, 40(12): 21�?4. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-5867.2017.12.006

Yang J S, Song C C, Jiao H Z. Spatial-temporal analysis of green space service equity based on accessibility[J]. Geomatics & Spatial Information Technology, 2017, 40(12): 21�?4. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-5867.2017.12.006 [21]Luo W, Qi Y. An enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method for measuring spatial accessibility to primary care physicians[J]. Health & Place, 2009, 15(4): 1100�?107. [22]Dai D. Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where to intervene?[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2011, 102(4): 234�?44. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.05.002 [23]李孟�? 杨令�? 魏冶. 高斯两步移动搜索法的模型研究: 以上海市绿地可达性为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2016, 35(8): 990�?96. doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2016.08.008

Li M T, Yang L B, Wei Y. Improved Gaussian based 2-step floating catchment area method: a case study of green space accessibility in Shanghai[J]. Progress in Geography, 2016, 35(8): 990�?96. doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2016.08.008 [24]任家�? 王云. 基于改进两步移动搜索法的上海市黄浦区公园绿地空间可达性分析[J]. 地理科学进展, 2021, 40(5): 774�?83. doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.05.005

Ren J Y, Wang Y. Spatial accessibility of park green space in Huangpu District of Shanghai based on modified two-step floating catchment area method[J]. Progress in Geography, 2021, 40(5): 774�?83. doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.05.005 [25]Tenerelli P, Gallego J F, Ehrlich D. Population density modelling in support of disaster risk assessment[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015, 13: 334�?41. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.07.015 [26]赵兵, 李露�? 曹林. 基于 GIS 的城市公园绿地服务范围分析及布局优化研究: 以花桥国际商务城为例[J]. 中国园林, 2015, 31(6): 95�?9.

Zhao B, Li L L, Cao L. GIS-based analysis of city park green space service range and layout optimization: a case study in Huaqiao international business city[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2015, 31(6): 95�?9. [27]魏冶, 修春�? 高瑞, �? 基于高斯两步移动搜索法的沈阳市绿地可达性评价[J]. 地理科学进展, 2014, 33(4): 479�?87. doi:10.11820/dlkxjz.2014.04.005

Wei Y, Xiu C L, Gao R, et al. Evaluation of green space accessibility of Shenyang using Gaussian based 2-step floating catchment area method[J]. Progress in Geography, 2014, 33(4): 479�?87. doi:10.11820/dlkxjz.2014.04.005