首页关于本刊影响因子及获奖投稿须知订阅及广告专辑与专题学术会议绿色发表通道优秀论文 
徐建英,孔明,刘新新,王清.生计资本对农户再参与退耕还林意愿的影响——以卧龙自然保护区为例.生态学报,2017,37(18):6205~6215 本文二维码信息
二维码(扫一下试试看!)
生计资本对农户再参与退耕还林意愿的影响——以卧龙自然保护区为例
The effect of livelihood capital on the willingness of farmers to re-enroll in the Grain for Green Program: A Case study in Wolong Nature Reserve
投稿时间:2016-06-23  
DOI: 10.5846/stxb201606231232
关键词生计资本  退耕还林  再参与意愿  自然资本  金融资本
Key WordsGrain for Green Program  sustainable livelihood framework  willingness to re-enroll  natural capital  financial capital
基金项目国家自然科学基金资助项目(41271552)
作者单位E-mail
徐建英 首都师范大学资源环境与旅游学院, 北京 100048 xu-jianying@163.com 
孔明 首都师范大学资源环境与旅游学院, 北京 100048  
刘新新 首都师范大学资源环境与旅游学院, 北京 100048  
王清 首都师范大学资源环境与旅游学院, 北京 100048  
摘要点击次数 249
全文下载次数 87
摘要:
运用参与式农户评估方法,以卧龙自然保护区为例,研究了生计资本对于农户再次参与下一轮退耕还林意愿的影响。研究结果表明约77%的农户愿意再次参与退耕工程,愿意再参与退耕的农户和不愿意再参与退耕的农户生计资本具有显著差异性。逻辑斯蒂回归结果表明,自然资本、金融资本以及社会资本对农户的再参与意愿有显著影响,但是作用方式不同:其中自然资本对农户再参与有着显著的负影响,金融资本、社会资本对农户再参与意愿有显著的正影响。生计资本二级指标中,农户拥有的耕地面积、现金收入、家庭村委会成员数量以及劳动力受教育程度对农户的再参与意愿具有显著影响,其中农户拥有的耕地面积对其再参与意愿具有显著负影响,且贡献较大((β=-23.041)),而现金收入、家庭村委会成员数量以及劳动力受教育程度对农户再参与意愿具有显著正影响,以现金收入的影响最大(β=38.591),其次分别是家庭村委会成员数量(β=13.625)和劳动力的受教育程度(β=7.717)。最后,论文探讨了生计资本及其组成指标对于农户再参与意愿的作用机制,建议降低农户对于土地资源的依赖,提高非农业收入和补偿标准,提高劳动力素质以及优化区域发展环境来提高农户的再参与意愿。
Abstract:
Local farmers are key stakeholders in the "Grain for Green Program," with their perceptions and willingness to re-enroll playing an important role in implementation of the next stage of this program. To discern local farmers' heterogeneous responses to the program and discover the reasons behind their responses, sustainable livelihood framework was utilized in the present study to analyze the essential elements having greatest significance on the farmers' responses. The sustainable livelihood framework includes five types of capital: natural, human, physical, financial, and social, with each capital composed of various indicators. Logistic regressions were utilized to identify essential indicators encompassing close relationships with local responses. The results revealed that 77% of respondents were willing to re-enroll in the next stage of the Grain for Green Program. The types of capital they possessed were significantly different between those who were willing to re-enroll in the program and those who were not, implying that capitals have distinct effects on respondents' willingness to re-enroll. Specifically, natural capital had a negative effect on respondents' willingness to re-enroll in the program, while financial capital and social capital had positive effects. Among the indicators composing the different types of capital, farmland size had the largest negative effect (β=-23.041) and cash income had the largest positive effect (β=38.591). In addition, the number of village committee memberships in the household and labor education attainment had positive effects on respondents' willingness to re-enroll (β=13.625 and β=7.717, respectively). With regard to cash income, it was demonstrated that the ratio of farm income to total cash income had negative effects (β=-13.627) on respondents' willingness to re-enroll, while the ratio of payment and non-farm income to total cash income had positive effects (β=13.603 and β=11.996, respectively). Furthermore, spatial distribution of the number of respondents willing to re-enroll into the program was allocated unevenly, with villages located further from the main road having a greater number of respondents willing to re-enroll than those who were closer to the main road. The above results disclose the complicated background related to farmers' willingness to re-enroll in the Grain for Green Program, with the underlying mechanisms discussed. The conclusions from the present study are that local dependence on the agricultural industry needs to decrease, while education attainment, payment and non-farm income, and information accessibility need to improve to implement and sustain the program. In addition, it is necessary to take into account spatial differences in sustaining or advancing the program. Larger numbers of farmers' residing in remote villages are willing to re-enroll in the program and their farmland and forested land is suitable for Giant Panda habitat. Therefore, it is recommended to advance the next stage program in remote villages, while sustaining the program in villages close to the main road.
HTML 查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器

您是本站第 66297259 位访问者

Copyright © 2005-2019   京ICP备06018880号
地址:北京海淀区双清路18号
  邮编:100085    电话:010-62941099
  E-mail : shengtaixuebao@rcees.ac.cn
本系统由北京勤云科技发展有限公司提供技术支持