三峡库区消落带农户生态休耕经济补偿意愿及影响因素研究

doi:10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2015.09.1123

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

针对农户开发利用消落带耕地对三峡库区的环境影响,从意愿角度对重庆市涪陵区、丰都区247户农户进行实地调研,采用多项Logistic回归模型分析法,定量分析农户对生态休耕经济补偿需求的影响因素,为构建三峡库区环境保护经济补偿机制提供建议。研究结果表明：① 农户的经济补偿需求意愿存在较大差异;② 生态休耕比较效益、家庭人口数、家庭年人均纯收入、生态休耕意愿指数、经济补偿期望值对农户生态休耕经济补偿需求影响显著。研究结论：三峡库区消落带的受访农户对生态休耕经济补偿的需求意愿较强,构建适当的经济补偿机制满足该地区农户的补偿诉求势在必行。

关键词: 消落带, 生态休耕, 经济补偿机制, 农户意愿

Abstract:

There is mainly slope land in the Three Gorges Reservoir, accounting for 68.8% of the total cultivated area, in which it has exceeded 25% that the slope is more than 25°. So the fundamental contradiction is intense after the reservoir storage, that is too many people and less land. When the rural resettlement have to make a choice between environmental protection and economic income, most people will choose the latter. Since unreasonable land use easily causes soil erosion and non-point source pollution, it will affect the water the reservoir environment security. According to the environmental impact of cultivation in the water-level fluctuation zone of Three Gorges Reservoir area, we established MNL regression to quantitative analyze the impact factors on the demand for an economic compensation of eco-fallow in order to provide recommendations, which is based on spot investigation of 247 households’ willingness in Fuling district and Fengdu district, Chongqing city. The results indicate: 1) There exists comparatively large differences amongst the household willingness on economic compensation demands which is influenced by household aging, the low comparative profit and the nonfarm income; 2) The obvious influences factors on the economic compensation mechanism of eco-fallow include comparative benefit of eco-fallow, household population, annual household net income per capita, eco-fallow willingness index, expected value of economic compensation. It is conclude: most of surveyed households are relatively strong demand for economic compensation. From the origin, the main reason is that the immigration policy did not consider the future development needs and make compensation according to the market principle in the background of that time. Now many contradictions gradually exposed in practice, the land resource rapidly decrease after reservoir storage and the immigrants lose the original income channels which result in some of immigrants become the new poverty-stricken family. So it is necessary to establish appropriate economic compensation mechanism to meet the appeal. We give some policy enlightenment for government: 1) Economic compensation must carry out against priority crowd who major engaged in farming rather than one-size-fits-all kind of compensation mode; 2) The low comparative profit is one of the main factors affecting household, for this reason the government should explore the water-level fluctuation zone by in eco-friendly manner based on environment protection; 3) The increase of households’ income will reduce dependency on land in water-level fluctuation zone, so the government must make practical efforts to transform the resources and locational advantages into actual productivity, gradually set up industrial development system.

Key words: water-level fluctuation, eco-fallow, economic compensation mechanism, household

中图分类号:

F219

尹珂, 肖轶. 三峡库区消落带农户生态休耕经济补偿意愿及影响因素研究[J]. 地理科学, 2015, 35(9): 1123-1129.

Ke YIN, Yi XIAO. Empirical Research on Household Willingness and Its Caused Factors for Economic Compensation of Eco-fallow in the Water-level Fluctuation Zone of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area[J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2015, 35(9): 1123-1129.

图/表 5

表1

表2

表3

表4

模型变量描述"

	自变量	单位或赋值	影响方向预测	平均值
家庭特征因素	家庭人口数量x₁	人数	+	4.02
	家庭平均年龄x₂	家庭年龄总和/人口数：（10,20]=0;（20,30]=1;（30,40]=2;（40,50]=3;（50,79]=4	-	3.12
	家庭平均受教育程度x₃	家庭受教育程度总和/人口数：文盲=0;小学=1;初中=2;高中=3;大专及以上=4	+	1.92
	家庭年人均收入x₄	家庭年收入/人口数：（0,1000]=0;（1000,2000]=1;（2000,3000]=2;（3000,4000]=3;（4000,5000]=4;（5000,25000]=5	-	4.27
	农户职业x₅	纯农户=0;兼业=1	+	0.84
	家庭劳动力数x₆	人数	+	2.51
补偿意愿因素	生态休耕意愿指数x₇	不愿意生态休耕=0;愿意生态休耕=1	+	0.28
	库区环境保护责任认知x₈	不是责任主体=0;是责任主体=1	+	0.89
	经济补偿期望值x₉	补偿期望值[元/（hm²·a）]：（0,13]=0;（13,20]=1;（20,27]=2;（27,33]=3;（33,40]=4;（40,47]=5;（47,53]=6;（53,73]=7	+	2.31
	经济补偿依据x₁₀	田块=0;人口=1;其他=2	+	0.78
	补偿方式x₁₁	货币补偿=0;养老保险=1;货币补偿+养老保险=2	-	0.89
	补偿支付方式x₁₂	按年支付=0;一次性支付=1	+	0.56
耕地经济因素	作物种植人均纯收入x₁₃	家庭作物种植总收入/人口数（元/人）：（0,500]=0;（500,1000]=1;（1000,1500]=2;（1500,2000]=3;（2000,2500]=4;（2500,3000]=4	-	0.78
	作物产出投入比x₁₄	作物产出/作物投入：（0,0.5]=0;（0.5,1]=1;（1,1.5]=2;（1.5,2]=3	-	1.55
	生态休耕比较效益x₁₅	生态休耕效益相比耕地利用效益：低=0;一般=1;高=2	-	0.35
	人均耕地面积x₁₆	家庭耕地总面积/人口数（hm²/人）：（0.0.5]=0;（0.5,1]=1;（1,1.5]=2;（1.5,3]=3	-	1.64
	耕地破碎度x₁₇	耕地块数/耕地总面积（块/hm²）：（0,1]=0;（1,2]=1;（2,3]=2;（3,4]=3	+	1.21
	经济发展水平x₁₈	农村居民恩格尔系数：（0,0.5]=0;(0.5,0.59]=1;(0.59,1]=2	+	0.88

表4

表5

参考文献 19

[1]	周谐,杨敏,雷波,等.基于PSR模型的三峡水库消落带生态环境综合评价[J].水生态学杂志,2012,33(5):13~19.
[2]	Wilson Geoff A.The spatiality of multifunctional agriculture: A human geography perspective[J].Geoforum,2009,40(2):269-280. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2008.12.007
[3]	程宇光. 健全农业生态环境补偿制度的若干问题探析[J].生态经济,2010, (6):148~151.
[4]	祁新华,林荣平,程煜,等.贫困与生态环境相互关系研究述评[J].地理科学,2013,33(11):1498~1505.
[5]	Zhang Jingcheng,Wang Jihua,Gu Xiaohe,et al.An ecological based sustainability assessing system for cropping system[J].Mathematical and Computer Modelling,2011,54(3-4):1160-1166. doi: 10.1016/j.mcm.2010.11.049
[6]	董正举,严岩,段靖,等.国内外流域生态补偿机制比较研究[J].人民长江,2010,41(8):36~39. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4179.2010.08.010
[7]	Albrecht Matthias, Schmid Bernhard,Obrist Martin K, et al.Effects of ecological compensation meadows on arthropod diversity in adjacent intensively managed grassland[J].Biological Conservation,2010,143(3):642-649. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.11.029
[8]	Junge Xenia,Lindemann-Matthies Petra,Hunziker Marcel,et al.Aesthetic preferences of non-farmers and farmers for different land-use types and proportions of ecological compensation areas in the Swiss lowlands[J].Biological Conservation,2011,144(5):1430-1440. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2011.01.012
[9]	Amdur Liron,Bertke Elke,Freese Jan,et al.Agri-Environmental Policy Measures in Israel: The Potential of Using Market-Oriented Instruments[J].Environmental Management,2011,47(5):859-875. doi: 10.1007/s00267-011-9655-y
[10]	Zellweger-Fischer Judith,Kéry Marc,Pasinelli Gilberto.Population trends of brown hares in Switzerland: The role of land-use and ecological compensation areas[J].Biological Conservation,2011,144(5):1364-1373. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.11.021
[11]	陈萍,王兴玲,陈晓玲.基于栅格的鄱阳湖生态经济区洪灾脆弱性评价[J].地理科学,2012,32(8):958~964.
[12]	张伟,张宏业,张义丰.基于“地理要素禀赋当量”的社会生态补偿标准测算[J].地理学报,2010,65(10):1253~1265.
[13]	侯成成,赵雪雁,张丽.生态补偿对区域发展的影响——以甘南黄河水源补给区为例[J].自然资源学报,2012,27(1):50~61. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.01.006
[14]	肖建红,陈绍金,于庆东.基于生态足迹思想的皂市水利枢纽工程生态补偿标准研究[J].生态学报,2011,31(22):6696~6707.
[15]	陈端吕,彭保发,熊建新.环洞庭湖区生态经济系统的耦合特征研究[J].地理科学,2013,33(11):1338~1346.
[16]	禹雪中,冯时.中国流域生态补偿标准核算方法分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2011,21(9):14~19. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2011.09.003
[17]	胡春华,蒋建华,周文斌.环鄱阳湖区农家菜地土壤重金属风险评价及来源分析[J].地理科学,2012,32(6):771~776.
[18]	王海明,李贤伟,陈治谏,等.三峡库区坡耕地粮经果复合垄作对土壤侵蚀与养分流失的影响[J].水土保持学报,2010,24(3):1~4.
[19]	陈美球,邓爱珍,周丙娟,等.资源禀赋对农户耕地保护意愿的实证分析[J].农村经济,2007,(6):28~31.

	选项	频数	百分比（%）		选项	频数	百分比（%）
性别	男	185	74.9	家庭人口数	2人及以下	22	8.9
性别	女	62	25.1		3~4人	75	30.4
					5~6人	117	47.4
年龄	22~30岁	18	7.3		6人以上	33	13.3
	31~40岁	36	14.6
	41~50岁	62	25.1	人均耕地面积	≤0.033 hm²	32	13.0
	51~60岁	94	38		0.033~0.067 hm²	70	28.3
	60岁以上	37	15		0.067~0.1 hm²	88	35.6
					>0.1 hm²	57	23.1
教育程度	小学3年级以下	47	19.0
	小学（3~6年级）	52	21.1	耕地破碎度	≤1	59	23.9
	初中（6~9年级）	120	48.6		1~2	77	31.2
	高中（9~12年级）	26	10.5		2~3	68	27.5
	大专及以上	2	0.8		>3	43	17.4

对消落带生态效益的认识		清楚知道	听说过,但并不完全清楚	不知道	总数
	人数	38	176	33	247
	比例（%）	15.38	71.26	13.36	100.00
对消落带耕地利用的态度		应加大保护,减少利用	应保护,适当利用	应完全保护,禁止利用	总数
	人数	80	142	25	247
	比例（%）	32.39	57.49	10.12	100.00

模型	需要部分经济补偿/不需要经济补偿				愿意完全经济补偿/不需要经济补偿
自变量	B	Wald	Sig	Exp(B)	B	Wald	Sig	Exp(B)
β₀	-2.7374	4.4247	0.0978	-	-3.1030	5.8342	0.0596	-
X₁	0.7161^*	1.1991	0.0167	3.3954	0.8914^*	1.9971	0.0357	3.7695
X₃	0.0867^**	0.2831	0.4601	0.3700	0.1328^**	0.8169	0.4746	0.4707
X₄	0.1116^**	1.4476	0.0000	4.9227	0.2324^**	1.0508	0.0046	5.7613
X₇	0.2806^**	3.7056	0.0048	0.5223	0.2775^**	4.2715	0.0664	0.5884
X₈	0.0645^*	2.2114	0.5348	2.2357	0.0702^*	3.5956	0.6359	2.4255
X₉	0.1373^***	5.3234	0.1114	1.1415	0.1708^***	5.4711	0.1288	1.2919
X₁₀	-0.0544^*	2.9316	0.2294	0.4021	-0.0733^*	4.2534	0.1450	0.4816
X₁₂	0.0381^*	0.5203	0.0146	0.7832	0.0260^*	0.9449	0.0391	0.7710
X₁₃	-0.0497^**	1.0337	0.0086	3.6060	-0.0399^**	3.5902	0.0000	3.8596
X₁₄	-0.0856^*	1.7203	0.0155	1.6170	-0.0934^*	1.8218	0.1764	1.8835
X₁₅	-1.0348^*	9.4276	0.0589	1.6119	-1.2801^*	11.7101	0.0473	2.3415
X₁₈	0.1755^**	5.4318	0.0011	0.1048	0.1836^**	4.0521	0.0442	0.2761