城市作为人类集聚活动的重要区域，其生态安全状态受自身社会经济属性和自然环境属性双重影响，城市生态安全的维持既需要区域内社会经济系统高效有序发展的强力支撑，也需要自然环境系统优质平稳运行的可靠保障。广州市作为粤港澳大湾区、泛珠三角经济区的核心城市，其高强度的社会经济活动与快速的城市化扩张过程极易造成生态环境受损，从而威胁城市生态安全。对广州市生态安全状况进行动态评估与调控，对于妥善解决城市发展过程中生态安全问题、提升城市及周边区域复合生态系统绿色协调发展具有重要的理论和现实意义。

基于此，本研究从广州市城市生态系统自身属性特征出发，重新定义了城市生态安全概念并解析其内涵，基于DPSIR（驱动力-压力-状态-影响-响应）模型，结合遥感解译、问卷调查、年鉴查阅等数据获取方式，构建了一套综合五维城市特性的生态安全动态评估框架模型，评估广州市2010-2018年生态安全的动态状况并提出合理性调控建议，主要研究结果如下：

（1）依据城市生态系统复合结构，构建了整合系统内部联系的DPSIR生态安全动态评估框架模型。该模型包含社会发展驱动力、生态环境压力、自然环境状态、景观格局影响和政府与公众响应模块等五个模块66个具体指标。与以往的安全评估模型相比，本研究通过纳入三维生态足迹模型、生态系统服务价值理论和景观格局指数等生态模型方法拓展了压力、状态、影响等模块的指标内涵，并充分考虑了城市社会经济属性与自然环境属性的交互影响作用。

（2）基于生态安全动态评估框架模型，构建评估标准，对广州市生态安全状况进行多维度、分模块评估。结果显示，对于社会发展驱动力模块，生态安全指数从0.339上升到0.374，生态安全状况从不安全上升到一般安全；对于生态环境压力模块，三维生态足迹模型核算结果显示广州市人均生态足迹为4.913 g·hm2，是中国人均水平的2.8倍，工业碳汇压力是主要的压力来源，整体生态压力呈上升趋势；对于自然环境状态模块，广州市生态系统服务价值量由2010年的276.36亿元下滑到2018年的264.26亿元，但水气声环境质量明显改善，其带动总体自然环境状态指数由0.348上升至0.373；对于景观格局影响模块，其指数从2010年的0.345下降至0.314后又升至2018年的0.335，景观格局指数显示其受人为干扰频繁且破碎化明显，指数值较低，处于生态不安全状态；最后，对于政府与公众响应模块，其指数由0.271上升至0.382，表明政府对环境质量改善的响应措施带动整体生态安全水平的提升。

（3）综合考虑五维模块动态变化和评估结果，核算生态安全综合评估指数，揭示广州市2010-2018年生态安全的动态状况并提出合理性调控建议。结果显示，广州市生态安全综合指数由2010年的0.332提升到2018年的0.365，城市生态状况呈现出一定程度改善，由不安全转为一般安全，能够基本满足社会经济发展要求。通过评估模块间横向比对与逻辑关联性分析，提出以下调控建议促进城市绿色健康发展：扭转人口增长负向生态驱动影响、推进农业农村资源优化整合、激发环境质量提升新动能；在现有土地利用格局与扩张规划的背景下以目前生态分区为基础，设置生态脆弱区、生态涵养区、生态屏障区、生态保障区，细化广州市整体空间分区。

The city as an important region of human agglomeration activities, its state of ecological security is influenced by both socio-economic and natural attributes. Urban ecological security needs not only the efficient and orderly development of the regional socio-economic system as a strong guarantee, but also the high-quality and stable operation of the natural environment system as a strong support. Guangzhou, as the core city of Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area and Pan-Pearl River Delta Economic Zone, its rapid urbanization process and high-intensity economic development pose a serious threat to ecological security. To conduct dynamic assessment and regulation of ecological security in Guangzhou, it is of great theoretical and practical significance to properly solve the ecological security problems in the process of urban development and to promote the green coordinated development of the compound ecosystem in the city and its surrounding areas.

This study redefines the concept of urban ecological security and analyzes its connotations from the characteristics of Guangzhou urban ecosystem. Based on the DPSIR (Driving Force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response) framework model, combined with data acquisition methods such as remote sensing interpretation, questionnaires and yearbook access, this study constructs a dynamic assessment framework model that integrates five-dimensional urban characteristics to assess the dynamic state of ecological security in Guangzhou from 2010 to 2018 and put forward rational regulation suggestions. The results are as follows:

(1) According to the complex structure of urban ecosystem, a dynamic assessment framework model of DPSIR was established, which integrates the internal relations of the system. The model includes five modules on social development drivers, eco-environmental pressures, natural environmental state, landscape pattern impacts and government and public response. It also has 66 specific indicators. Compared with the previous security assessment models, this study expands the index connotation of pressure, state and impact modules by incorporating research methods such as the three-dimensional ecological footprint model, ecosystem service value theory and landscape pattern index. This study fully considers the interaction of urban social economic attributes and natural environment attributes.

(2) Based on the framework model of ecological security dynamic assessment, the assessment criteria were constructed to assess the ecological security status of Guangzhou in multi-dimension and sub-module. Results show that for the social development drivers module, the ecological security index increased from 0.339 to 0.374, and the condition changed from insecurity to general security. For the eco-environmental pressures module, the calculation results of the three-dimensional ecological footprint model show that the per capita ecological footprint in Guangzhou is 4.913 ghm², which is 2.8 times of the per capita level in China. The industrial carbon sink pressure is the main source of pressure, and the overall ecological stress is on the rise. For the natural environmental state module, the value of ecosystem services in Guangzhou decreased from 27.636 billion yuan in 2010 to 26.426 billion yuan in 2018, while the overall state of the natural environment index increased from 0.348 to 0.373, driven by the significant improvement of water, gas and acoustic environmental quality. For the landscape pattern impacts module, the index decreased from 0.345 in 2010 to 0.314 and then increased to 0.335. The landscape pattern index shows that the human disturbance changes frequently and the fragmentation is obvious, the index value is low and it is in the state of ecological insecurity. For the government and public response module, the index increased from 0.271 to 0.382, indicating that the government's response measures to the environmental quality improvement led to the improvement of the overall level of ecological security.

(3) Comprehensively considering the dynamic changes of five-dimensional modules and the assessment results, an overall ecological security assessment index is constructed to reveal the dynamic state of ecological security in Guangzhou City from 2010 to 2018, and to propose reasonable regulations. The results show that the overall ecological security index of Guangzhou has increased from 0.332 in 2010 to 0.365 in 2018, and the ecological condition of the city has been improved to a certain extent. The condition changes from insecurity to general security, and that can basically meet the requirements of social and economic development. By assessing horizontal comparison and logical correlation analysis between the modules, the following suggestions are put forward to promote the green and healthy development of the city: First, strengthening policy guidance in reversing the negative impact of population growth to the ecological drive, promoting the optimal integration of agricultural and rural resources and stimulating environmental quality conditions to promote new growth drivers. Second, refining the whole spatial distribution of Guangzhou: Setting up ecological fragile area, ecological conservation area, ecological barrier area and ecological protection area based on the existing land use pattern, expansion plan and the current ecological zoning.