中文摘要：

从20世纪初期承载力概念提出，到21世纪作为描述发展限制的重要工具，从理论到实践，资源环境承载力研究走过百年，已成为衡量区域可持续发展的重要判据。本文简要回顾了资源环境承载力概念的源起与发展：系统梳理了从土地资源承载力、水资源承载力、环境承载力（容量），到资源环境承载力的研究进程；科学评述了基于生态足迹与虚拟土地、水足迹与虚拟水和能值分析与虚拟能量等方法开展的资源环境承载力研究的跨世纪进展。研究认为：资源环境承载力研究尚未形成一套统一的理论与方法体系，且研究结果的客观性与可比性一直存有争议。鉴于此，资源环境承载力研究应从理论到方法、从实践到应用，切实加强基础理论与承载机理、阈值率定与综合计量、技术标准与技术规范、定量评价与系统集成研究，以促进资源环境承载力研究的标准化与规范化、数字化与系统化，最终满足实用化与业务化的国家需求。

英文摘要：

Carrying Capacity（CC）was first coined in biology and ecology in the 1920s, and later developed rapidly in related sciences such as natural resources science and environment science. The concept of Resources and Environment Carrying Capacity （RECC） , from theoretical investigation to practical implementation, has become an effective and operational tool to describe development restrictions and quantify regional sustainable development. RECC research has become a hot topic methodologically and theoretically in ecology, geography and natural resource and environment. It primarily focuses on the ultimate limit of population and economic development on earth. After briefly looking at the origin of the concept and early headway, we summarize RECC research from land resource carrying capacity, water resource carrying capacity, and environmental carrying capacity （environment capacity）. The following evaluating methods, including ecological footprint and virtual land （or the biological productive land by ecological footprint）, water footprint and virtual water （or the global flow of virtual water）, emergy analysis and virtual energy （or energy equilibrium）, are considered as important research progresses in the past century. However, there is still lack of a standard set of evaluation theories and methodologies for RECC research in China and globally, leading to much debate over the objectivity and comparability of resultant figures. Conceming this issue, we propose that RECC research in the furore should pay more attention to enhancing exploratory studies in basic theories and carrying mechanisms, thresholds determination and synthetical calculation, technological standards/manuals setting, measurable assessment and systematical integration. More effort is needed to promote the standardization, digitalization and systematization of RECC research in China before according with national practical and operational demands.