干旱区内陆河流域农户对水资源紧缺的感知及适应 ——以石羊河中下游为例

doi:10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2015.012.1622

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

内陆河流域水资源极为紧缺,理解农户对水资源紧缺的感知及适应策略选择倾向对于制定科学的水资源管理政策至关重要。以石羊河中下游为研究区,基于农户调查数据,分析了农户对水资源紧缺的感知及适应策略,并利用经济计量模型分析了农户的水资源紧缺性感知对其适应策略选择的影响。结果发现：① 农户感知到的水资源紧缺可能性、严重性、适应功效及适应成本均较高,但感知到的自我效能处于中等水平;② 水资源紧缺风险感知与适应功效感知、适应成本感知呈显著正相关,其与自我效能感知虽呈负相关,但并不显著;③ 农户的适应策略多样化指数达2.80,水资源紧缺严重性感知、适应功效感知、适应成本感知及自我效能感知与适应策略多样化指数呈显著正相关;④ 随着风险感知与适应功效感知的增强,农户首选收缩型策略的概率增大,但随着自我效能感知的增强,农户首选收缩型策略的概率降低。最后,提出了增强农户适应能力的对策建议及未来需进一步关注的问题。

关键词: 石羊河中下游, 农户, 水资源紧缺, 感知, 适应

Abstract:

In recent years, the farmer’s perception of environment change and their adaption strategies has been the research focus of the adaptation domain. Water resource shortage is the most serious environmental problem in the continental river basin of arid zone, it is badly in need of looking for the effective adaptation strategies in order to reduce the adverse impact of water resource shortage. Understanding the farmers’ perception of water resource shortage and adaption strategy selection is very important to determine the proper adaptation strategy and make scientific water resource management policy. Selecting the middle-lower reaches of the Shiyang River as the study case and through stratified random sampling survey, participatory rural appraisal and investigation of plots, 367 household are investigated and sampled. Based on the investigation data and the MPPACC (a socio - cognitive model of private proactive adaptation to climate change ) analysis framework which Grothmann and Patt provided, we analyze the farmers’ perception of water resource shortage and their adaption strategies, and analyze the impact of the farmers’ water resource shortage perception on theirs adaption strategies by multiple linear regression model and binary logistic model. The results show: 1)These perception index are relatively high which include the farmer’s water resource shortage possibility perception, severity perception ,adaption effect and adaption cost perception, the index of these perception is 4.65, 4.69, 4.19 and 4.38,respectively. However, the perception of self-efficacy is middle level and its index is 3.02; 2) The relationship between the farmers’ water resource shortage risk perception and the adaption effect perception , the adaption cost perception are significant positive correlation, but the relationship between the risk perception and the adaption cost perception is insignificant negative correlation; 3)The diversification index of the farmers’ adaption strategy is 2.80, and the relationship between the diversification index of adaption strategy and the farmers’ severity perception ,adaption effect perception, adaption cost perception and self-efficacy perception are significant positive correlation;4) These perceptions which include risk perception, adaption effect perception and self- self-efficacy perception significantly influence the type of first adaption strategy. With the index of risk perception and adaption effect perception strengthening, the probability of prefer choice of contract adaption strategy will increase. However, with the index of self-efficacy perception strengthening, the probability of prefer choice of contract adaption strategy will decrease. Finally, we present the measures and proposals about promoting the farmers’ adaption ability and some potential improvements in some further researches.

Key words: the middle-lower reaches of the Shiyang River, farmers, water resource shortage, perception, adaption

中图分类号:

X144

赵雪雁, 薛冰. 干旱区内陆河流域农户对水资源紧缺的感知及适应 ——以石羊河中下游为例[J]. 地理科学, 2015, 35(12): 1622-1630.

Xue-yan ZHAO, Bing XUE. Farmers’ Perception of Water Resource Shortage and Adaption in Continental River Basin of Arid Zone：A Case of the Middle-lower Reaches of the Shiyang River[J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2015, 35(12): 1622-1630.

图/表 7

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

参考文献 20

[1]	Eriksen S.Sustainable adaptation: Emphasising local and global equity and environmental integrity[J]. IHDP Update,2009,(2): 40-44.
[2]	Smit B, Wandel J.Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2006, 16(3) :282~292. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.008
[3]	Wardekker J A, Petersen A C, et al.Ethics and public perception of climate change: Exploring the Christian voices in the US public debate[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2009, 19(4): 512-521. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.07.008
[4]	Jones L, Boyd E.Exploring social barriers to adaptation: Insights from Western Nepal[J]. Global Environmental Change,2011, 21(4):1262-1274. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.06.002
[5]	Ole M, Cheikh M, Anette R, et al.Farmer’s perception of climate change and agricultural adaptation strategies in rural Sahel[J]. Environmental Management,2009, 43(5):804-816. doi: 10.1007/s00267-008-9197-0
[6]	Gandure S, Walker S, Both J J..
[7]	Below T B, Mutabazi K D, et al.Can farmers’ adaptation to climate change be explained by socioeconomic household-level variables?[J].Global Environmental Change, 2012, 22(1): 223-235.
[8]	Tucker C M, Eakin H, Castellanos E J.Perceptions of risk and adaptation: coffee producers, market shocks, and extreme weather in Central America and Mexico[J]. Global Environmental Change ,2010,20( 1): 23-32. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.07.006
[9]	Park S E, Marshall N A, Jakku E, et al.Informing adaptation responses to climate change through theories of transformation[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2012,22(1):115-126. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.10.003
[10]	Kelkar U, Narula K K, Sharma V P, et al.Vulnerability and adaptation to climate variability and water stress in Uttarakhand State, India[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2008,18(4): 56-574. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.09.003
[11]	刘昌明,李中锋.民勤绿洲的生态修复必须强化石羊河全流域水资源综合管理[J].中国水利,2013,(5):16~18. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1123.2013.05.008
[12]	张学斌,石培基,罗君,等. 基于景观格局的干旱内陆河流域生态风险分析——以石羊河流域为例[J].自然资源学报,2014,29(3):410~419. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2014.03.005
[13]	Grothmann T, Patt A.Adaptive capacity and human cognition: The process of individual adaptation to climate change[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2005, 15(3):199-21. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2005.01.002
[14]	Kuruppu N, Liverman,D.Mental preparation for climate adaptation: The role of cognition and culture in enhancing adaptive capacity of water management in Kiribati[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2011, 21(2) :657-669. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.12.002
[15]	Wheeler S, Zuo A, Bjornlund H.Farmers’ climate change beliefs and adaptation strategies for a water scarce future in Australia[J]. Global Environmental Change, 2013, 23(2):537-547. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.11.008
[16]	徐中民,龙爱华.中国社会化水资源稀缺评价[J].地理学报,2004,59(6):982~988. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0375-5444.2004.06.022
[17]	Motsholapheko M R, Kgathi D L, Vanderpost C.Rural livelihoods and household adaptation to extreme flooding in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth,2011, 36(36): 984-995. doi: 10.1016/j.pce.2011.08.004
[18]	Nelson R, Kokic P, Elliston L, et al.Structural Adjustment: a vulnerability index for Australian broadacre agriculture[J]. Australian Commodities, 2005, 12(1):171-179.
[19]	赵雪雁. 生计资本对农牧民生活满意度的影响——以甘南高原为例[J].地理研究,2011,30(4):687~698. doi: 10.11821/yj2011040011
[20]	阎建忠,吴莹莹,张镱锂,等.青藏高原东部样带农牧民生计的多样化[J].地理学报,2009,64(2):221~233. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0375-5444.2009.02.009

农户类型	家庭规模(人/户)	劳动力数量 (人/户)	劳动力受教育程度（%）					人均年收入（元）
农户类型	家庭规模(人/户)	劳动力数量 (人/户)	文盲		小学	初中	高中	大专及以上
中游受访户	4.71	2.81	6.18	43.23	34.46	11.95	4.18	8332.84
下游受访户	4.63	3.38	4.41	21.10	26.46	25.67	22.36	6103.15
全体受访户	4.67	3.10	5.19	30.87	29.99	19.61	14.34	7193.63

指标		测度问题	赋值	均值	标准差
风险感知	严重性感知	水资源紧缺对生计的损害是否严重?	根本不严重为1,不太严重为2;一般为3;较严重为4;非常严重为5	4.65	0.58
风险感知	可能性感知	未来水资源紧缺程度加剧的可能性有多大?	根本不可能为1;不太可能为2;一般为3;有可能为4;肯定会为5	4.69	0.56
适应感知	适应效能感知	适应行动减轻水资源紧缺负面影响的效果如何?	非常低为1;较低为2;一般为3;较强为4;非常强为5	4.19	0.85
	自我效能感知	适应水资源紧缺的能力有多大?	非常低为1;较低为2;一般为3;较强为4;非常强为5	3.02	1.02
	适应成本感知	采取适应行动的预期成本有多大?	非常低为1;较低为2;一般为3;较高为4;非常高为5	4.38	0.67

农户类型	水资源紧缺风险感知			水资源紧缺适应感知
农户类型	严重性感知		可能性感知	适应功效感知	自我效能感知	适应成本感知
中游受访户	4.74	4.77		4.24	3.01	4.52
下游受访户	4.56	4.61		4.13	3.04	4.26
全体受访户	4.65	4.69		4.19	3.02	4.38

水资源紧缺性感知	严重性感知	可能性感知	适应功效感知	自我效能感知	适应成本感知
严重性感知	1.000	0.446^***	0.122^**	-0.027	0.337^***
可能性感知	0.446^***	1.000	0.174^***	0.037	0.235^***
适应功效感知	0.122^**	0.174^***	1.000	0.266^***	0.086^*
自我效能感知	-0.027	0.037	0.266^***	1.000	0.174^***
适应成本感知	0.337^***	0.235^***	0.086^*	0.174^***	1.000
适应策略多样化指数	0.057^*	0.023	0.122^**	0.141^***	0.124^**

适应策略	中游			下游			全体受访户
适应策略	选择该策略		首选该策略		选择该策略	首选该策略	选择该策略	首选该策略
关井压田	71.51	45.81		86.17	56.91		79.02	51.50
采用节水技术	58.66	22.35		83.51	25.00		71.39	18.26
发展特色林果业	34.43	19.55		49.47	9.04		43.60	14.17
种植低耗水作物	44.69	12.29		63.83	9.04		54.50	10.63
弃耕	26.26	0		31.93	0		29.16	0
适应策略多样化指数	2.42		3.15			2.80