省域间水-能源-食物稀缺风险的传导与综合效应评估以内蒙古-陕西-宁夏为例

Assessing the transmission and integrated effects of interprovincial water-energy-food scarcity risks: a case study of Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi, and Ningxia

  • 摘要: 跨省产业链分工与资源要素跨域流动使水-能源-食物稀缺风险不再局限于资源短缺发生地,而可能沿省域间产业联系外溢并形成系统性影响。为刻画省域间水-能源-食物稀缺风险的传导与综合效应,本文以内蒙古、陕西、宁夏为研究对象,构建跨省域水-能源-食物稀缺风险的核算与传导分析框架,在统一口径下量化三省初始稀缺风险,并基于供给驱动的Ghosh模型刻画稀缺风险沿省际产业链的传导路径,进而评估多资源约束下的综合稀缺风险。结果显示:(1)初始资源稀缺风险空间分异显著,水、能源、食物稀缺风险分别呈“内蒙古>陕西>宁夏”、“宁夏>陕西>内蒙古”、“陕西>内蒙古>宁夏”格局;(2)内蒙古是水稀缺风险最大输出方,向陕西、宁夏两省输出34.97 亿元,宁夏是能源稀缺风险最大的输出方,流出11.00 亿元,陕西则是食物稀缺风险最大的输出方,流出1.70 亿元;(3)综合稀缺风险分别为内蒙古(410.29 亿元)>陕西(226.75 亿元)>宁夏(158.97 亿元),且三省农业均为综合稀缺风险的核心承载者。研究表明,省域间水-能源-食物稀缺风险存在显著的跨资源联动特征,并可通过产业链发生跨域扩散与累积效应,单一省份的资源稀缺可能传导演变为跨区系统性风险。该框架可为跨省资源协同配置、关键链条风险预警与韧性提升提供量化依据,并可进一步用于不同政策与资源约束情景下的风险外溢评估与关键链条识别,为协同治理提供决策支撑。

     

    Abstract: Interprovincial industrial specialization and cross-regional flows of resource factors imply that scarcity risks related to water, energy, and food are no longer confined to the locations where shortages occur. Instead, such risks may spill over along interprovincial industrial linkages and give rise to systemic impacts. This study aims to assess both the transmission process and the integrated effects of water-energy-food scarcity risks across provinces and sectors, with Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi, and Ningxia selected as a representative regional case. Under a unified accounting framework, initial scarcity risks for water, energy, and food are quantified for the three provinces. The initial risks (in monetary terms) are then introduced as supply-side shocks in a multi-regional input-output model, and a supply-driven Ghosh model is applied to trace how scarcity risks are transmitted along interprovincial industrial chains. Building on this, integrated scarcity risk under multi-resource constraints is evaluated and its sectoral burden pattern is examined. The results indicate marked spatial heterogeneity in initial scarcity risks across resource dimensions. Initial water scarcity risk follows the pattern “Inner Mongolia > Shaanxi > Ningxia”, whereas initial energy scarcity risk exhibits the reverse pattern “Ningxia > Shaanxi > Inner Mongolia”. Initial food scarcity risk is highest in Shaanxi, followed by Inner Mongolia and then Ningxia (“Shaanxi > Inner Mongolia > Ningxia”). These contrasting rankings indicate resource-specific vulnerability profiles, implying that a single-resource lens may misidentify risk hotspots and underestimate cross-resource interactions. Transmission analysis further reveals the pivotal role of interprovincial industrial chains in shaping risk spillovers, with the main exporting province and the magnitude of outflows varying substantially by resource type. In the water scarcity risk network, Inner Mongolia is the largest exporter, transferring 3.50 billion CNY to Shaanxi and Ningxia. In the energy scarcity risk network, Ningxia is the largest exporter, with an outflow of 1.10 billion CNY. In the food scarcity risk network, Shaanxi is the largest exporter, with an outflow of 0.17 billion CNY. Across the three dimensions, provincial roles can switch between exporter and recipient, underscoring that spillover pathways are shaped by both sectoral structure and network position. These differences demonstrate strong resource specificity in the interprovincial risk-export pattern: a province does not necessarily act as the exporter or recipient across all resource dimensions; instead, the role depends on its industrial structure under the relevant constraint and its position in the interprovincial input-output network. Under simultaneous multi-resource constraints, integrated scarcity risk follows the order Inner Mongolia (41.03 billion CNY) > Shaanxi (22.68 billion CNY) > Ningxia (15.90 billion CNY). A consistent sectoral pattern is that agriculture is the principal bearer of integrated scarcity risk in all three provinces. This concentration suggests that monitoring and intervention should prioritize key chains connected to agriculture, while the framework can be extended to scenario-based assessments under alternative policy and resource-constraint settings. This implies that, when constraints on water, energy, and food are jointly considered, systemic risk is not evenly distributed across sectors but tends to concentrate in key sectors that are highly dependent on multiple resources and tightly connected to upstream–downstream production linkages, resulting in a “high concentration in a few sectors” burden pattern concentrated in a small number of sectors. Overall, the findings show that interprovincial scarcity risks related to water, energy, and food exhibit strong cross-resource linkages and can spread and accumulate across regions through industrial chains, such that scarcity in a single province may be transmitted and transformed into a cross-regional systemic risk. The proposed cross-provincial accounting and transmission framework provides an operational quantitative basis for cross-provincial resource coordination, early warning of critical risk chains, and resilience enhancement. It can be further applied to evaluate risk spillovers and identify key chains under alternative policy and resource-constraint scenarios, thereby informing collaborative governance and adaptive risk management.

     

/

返回文章
返回