耕地生态补偿及空间效益转移研究
|
摘要
承载国家粮食安全和生态安全功能的耕地资源是一种准公共产品,其公共产品属性使得耕地边际私人收益与边际社会收益相偏离,导致耕地保护中不同利益主体的行为趋向及利益诉求偏向私人决策最优。而私人利益主体往往不会主动承担耕地保护责任,现实社会中强制性的行政命令使农民个人和地方政府承担了耕地保护的大部分成本,造成了社会非公平和利益非均衡性。
本研究在评述国内外生态补偿机制理论研究的基础上,遵循将经济活动所产生的外部性内部化的原则,运用福利经济学、资源环境经济学和生态经济学等理论,依据土地资源配置最优和解决外部性的方案,寻求生态补偿理论的支持,从社会公平和效率、利益主体福利均衡的角度,提出了构建耕地生态补偿机制的思路。与此同时,研究试图对耕地生态补偿制度的核心问题—耕地生态补偿的额度进行量化,为构建耕地生态补偿制度和国家确定合理补偿标准提供参考依据。
本文依据耕地资源保护的相关利益群体博弈,把耕地生态补偿分为区域内部耕地生态补偿和宏观跨区域耕地生态补偿,以此分担农民个人和地方政府所承担的耕地保护大部分成本。在此基础上,研究阐述了条件价值法(CVM)和选择实验法(CE)的基本原理、基本步骤及方法,并以武汉市远城区和中心城区为例,尝试运用CVM和CE两种方法对耕地资源生态补偿额度进行了定量研究。通过问卷设计、入户调查方式分别获取两种方法所需的一手数据资料,取得武汉市市民和农民耕地资源保护响应意愿,借助经济方法和统计工具,科学评估区域内部耕地生态补偿额度。在解决跨区域耕地生态补偿时,通过效益转移获取该区域的支付意愿与受偿意愿,依据区域内部供给者和消费者之间的意愿响应,确定区域生态服务产品赤字与盈余。
论文通过对相关理论的阐述和856份市民和农民问卷的统计计量分析得出如下结论：
(1)受访居民耕地生态服务与耕地保护政策的认知。受访居民已经认识到耕地生态系统的重要性,但受到教育程度、经济发展水平、传统习惯等方面的局限,受访者对耕地生态服务供给功能认知并不深刻。同时受访者对于耕地保护政策认知程度不高,如武汉市仅有2.14%受访者对耕地保护政策非常了解,57.25%的受访者对耕地保护政策一无所知。
(2)受访居民参与耕地保护意愿的主要影响因素。论文运用问卷调查所得数据,采用Logistic模型对受访居民(市民与农民)参与耕地保护响应意愿的影响因素进行实证分析。从整体上看,耕地保护响应意愿与受访者的环境意识、耕地保护政策的认知情况、个人经济能力有较强的相关性。随着环境意识的增强,认知程度与经济支付能力的提高,公众对耕地保护的偏好增强。
(3)基于不同角度和不同方法评估区域内部耕地生态补偿额度。①基于耕地外部效益的耕地生态补偿核算。运用方便易懂的条件价值法(CVM)揭示供给方和需求方的支付意愿和受偿意愿,其评估结果为：基于正外部性耕地生态补偿额度弹性区间值4183.35—9521.85元/hm2,基于负外部性耕地生态补偿弹性区间4076.7—10556.25元/hm2。②基于耕地保护属性的耕地生态补偿核算。运用选择实验法(CE)评估出耕地保护属性(耕地面积、耕地质量和耕地周边景观与生态环境)的边际价值以及各种属性组合成的假想状态整体价值。CE测算出最佳整体属性组合方案的价值为1681.95—6766.05元/hm2。结合CE与CVM两种方法整体属性测算结果的交集,确定最终的耕地生态补偿补偿额度的弹性区间为4183.35—6766.05元/hm2或者4076.7—6766.05元/hm2。
(4)估算跨区域耕地生态补偿额度。耕地生态补偿的微观利益主体消费者和供给者是市民和农民,农民是耕地生态补偿的客体,是获得补偿者,而市民是耕地生态补偿的主体,是支付补偿者,类似于条件价值法中不同的假想市场—支付意愿与受偿意愿。因此,依据CVM调查中农民受偿意愿(WTA)和市民的支付意愿(WTP)大小确定赤字与盈余区域,进而解决武汉远城区与中心城区跨区域耕地生态补偿的补偿标准问题。研究表明：中心城区应给予江夏区、东西湖区、黄陂区、蔡甸区、新洲区、汉南区生态补偿,其补偿额度分别为12186.07万元、4092.12万元、21769.24万元、8856.08万元、16348.88万元、3883.28万元。
Cultivated land resource which bearing national food security and ecological security function is a kind of quasi-public good. The public good attribute of farmland makes marginal private revenue which are the top-factor considered by stakeholders differ from marginal social revenue based on behavior trend and interests. In that case, private stakeholders are not willing to hold the responsibility of protection of farmland, while the mandatory policies of realistic society order individual farmers and local government bear most of the costs of cultivated land protection, which cause the unbalance between social injustice and interests.
After making a comment on theoretical study of eco-compensation mechanism both at home and abroad, the paper constructs an eco- compensation mechanism of cultivated land with the principle of internalization of economic activity externality. In order to build up the mechanism, the paper uses theories including welfare economics, resources and environmental economics and ecological economics, then considers land optimal allocation and externality's solving scheme from the perspective of social justice and benefit equilibrium. Eco-compensation mechanism is to solve "free-rider" phenomenon of ecological product consumption free and to motivate the supply of public products in full, so ecological investors and protector can get a reasonable return. It can urge the welfare equilibrium of related interest groups, achieving a harmony between economic development and cultivated land resource protection goal.
The paper tries to solve the core problem of cultivated land eco-compensation mechanism which is to quantify eco-compensation standard. It also provides a reference for construction of eco-compensation mechanism and determines reasonable compensation standards. According to the game of related interest groups, eco-compensation for cultivated land can be divided into the region internal eco-compensation and trans-regional eco-compensation. The compensation can solve protection costs, which undertake by farmers and local governments nowadays. On basis of it, the study elaborates basic principles, basic steps and calculating methods of contingent valuation method (CVM) and choice experiments (CE), taking Wuhan as an example, and tries to use CVM and CE to calculate cultivated land eco-compensation criteria.
Through the questionnaire design and face to face interview to obtain data information which two methods require respectively, and to obtain the protection intend of citizens and farmers in Wuhan, through some econometric methods, the study assesses scientifically eco-compensation of cultivated land resource.
In order to solve trans-regional cultivated land eco-compensation, some data are needed in each area, but the survey time and place are been restricted. So the study acquires some data by benefits transfer method. In the end, it gets some data of Xinzhou and Hannan. Corresponding, the research can obtain willingness to accept (WTA) and willingness to pay (WTP)of each area. According to intend between the internal providers and consumers, it can determine deficit and surplus of regional ecological services products.
Based on the elaboration of theory and analysis of 856 questionnaires of citizens and farmers, the conclusions are as follows:
(1) The paper analyses cognitive status of respondents about farmland ecological service and farmland protection policy. Although respondents have realized the importance of farmland ecosystem, they don't realize it enough due to the limitations of educational level, economic development level and traditional habits of cultivated land ecological services. In our survey, there are only 2.14% of respondents who know the cultivated land protect policy very well,57.25% of respondents know nothing about it.
(2) Identification of main factors influencing respondents'willingness to protect cultivated land.Using the date collected by survey, we employ Logistic model as the measure to analyze influencing factors. According to the analyzing result, respondents' willingness has a strong relationship with their environmental awareness, farmland protection policy awareness and personal financial capability. Increase in the awareness of environment and the capacity of economic payment, the preference of protection farmland is enhanced.
(3) Estimation of the quantity of cultivated land region internal eco-compensation based on different angles and different methods.①Estimation cultivated land eco-compensation based on the external benefits of cultivated land. Use CVM to reveal WTP and WTA. According to the result by CVM, respondents' willingness to pay for farmland's positive externality is between 4183.35 and 9521.85 RMB/hm2. However it is between 4076.7 and 10556.25 RMB/hm2 for farmland's negative externality.②Estimation cultivated land eco-compensation based on the attributes of cultivated land protection. Use CE to assess value, which contain attributes of cultivated land protection (area, quality and ecological environment) and the various properties that all attributes combine. The result evaluates by CE shows that the eco-compensation should be between 1681.95 and 6766.05 RMB/hm2. In the end, we choose 4183.35-6766.05 RMB /hm2 or 4076.7-6766.05 RMB/hm2 as the elastic interval for eco-compensation.
(4) Estimation of the quantity of cultivated land trans-regional eco-compensation.It is citizens and farmers who are the main consumers and suppliers of micro interests of cultivated land eco-compensation. Farmers are the object of cultivated land eco-compensation, who should receive compensation; however citizens are the subject of cultivated land eco-compensation, who should pay compensation. It is similar to the different hypothetical market of CVM-to pay or accept willingness. Therefore, on the basis of WTA and WTP of CVM, we can determine deficit and surplus to solve trans-regional eco-compensation problem. The research shows that central city of Wuhan should give Qiangxia district, Dongxihu district, Huangpi district, Caidian district, Xinzhou district, Hannan district eco-compensation amount for 121.8607 million RMB, 40.9212 million RMB,217.6924 million RMB,88.5608 million RMB,163.4888 million RMB,38.8328 million RMB respectively.
本研究在评述国内外生态补偿机制理论研究的基础上,遵循将经济活动所产生的外部性内部化的原则,运用福利经济学、资源环境经济学和生态经济学等理论,依据土地资源配置最优和解决外部性的方案,寻求生态补偿理论的支持,从社会公平和效率、利益主体福利均衡的角度,提出了构建耕地生态补偿机制的思路。与此同时,研究试图对耕地生态补偿制度的核心问题—耕地生态补偿的额度进行量化,为构建耕地生态补偿制度和国家确定合理补偿标准提供参考依据。
本文依据耕地资源保护的相关利益群体博弈,把耕地生态补偿分为区域内部耕地生态补偿和宏观跨区域耕地生态补偿,以此分担农民个人和地方政府所承担的耕地保护大部分成本。在此基础上,研究阐述了条件价值法(CVM)和选择实验法(CE)的基本原理、基本步骤及方法,并以武汉市远城区和中心城区为例,尝试运用CVM和CE两种方法对耕地资源生态补偿额度进行了定量研究。通过问卷设计、入户调查方式分别获取两种方法所需的一手数据资料,取得武汉市市民和农民耕地资源保护响应意愿,借助经济方法和统计工具,科学评估区域内部耕地生态补偿额度。在解决跨区域耕地生态补偿时,通过效益转移获取该区域的支付意愿与受偿意愿,依据区域内部供给者和消费者之间的意愿响应,确定区域生态服务产品赤字与盈余。
论文通过对相关理论的阐述和856份市民和农民问卷的统计计量分析得出如下结论：
(1)受访居民耕地生态服务与耕地保护政策的认知。受访居民已经认识到耕地生态系统的重要性,但受到教育程度、经济发展水平、传统习惯等方面的局限,受访者对耕地生态服务供给功能认知并不深刻。同时受访者对于耕地保护政策认知程度不高,如武汉市仅有2.14%受访者对耕地保护政策非常了解,57.25%的受访者对耕地保护政策一无所知。
(2)受访居民参与耕地保护意愿的主要影响因素。论文运用问卷调查所得数据,采用Logistic模型对受访居民(市民与农民)参与耕地保护响应意愿的影响因素进行实证分析。从整体上看,耕地保护响应意愿与受访者的环境意识、耕地保护政策的认知情况、个人经济能力有较强的相关性。随着环境意识的增强,认知程度与经济支付能力的提高,公众对耕地保护的偏好增强。
(3)基于不同角度和不同方法评估区域内部耕地生态补偿额度。①基于耕地外部效益的耕地生态补偿核算。运用方便易懂的条件价值法(CVM)揭示供给方和需求方的支付意愿和受偿意愿,其评估结果为：基于正外部性耕地生态补偿额度弹性区间值4183.35—9521.85元/hm2,基于负外部性耕地生态补偿弹性区间4076.7—10556.25元/hm2。②基于耕地保护属性的耕地生态补偿核算。运用选择实验法(CE)评估出耕地保护属性(耕地面积、耕地质量和耕地周边景观与生态环境)的边际价值以及各种属性组合成的假想状态整体价值。CE测算出最佳整体属性组合方案的价值为1681.95—6766.05元/hm2。结合CE与CVM两种方法整体属性测算结果的交集,确定最终的耕地生态补偿补偿额度的弹性区间为4183.35—6766.05元/hm2或者4076.7—6766.05元/hm2。
(4)估算跨区域耕地生态补偿额度。耕地生态补偿的微观利益主体消费者和供给者是市民和农民,农民是耕地生态补偿的客体,是获得补偿者,而市民是耕地生态补偿的主体,是支付补偿者,类似于条件价值法中不同的假想市场—支付意愿与受偿意愿。因此,依据CVM调查中农民受偿意愿(WTA)和市民的支付意愿(WTP)大小确定赤字与盈余区域,进而解决武汉远城区与中心城区跨区域耕地生态补偿的补偿标准问题。研究表明：中心城区应给予江夏区、东西湖区、黄陂区、蔡甸区、新洲区、汉南区生态补偿,其补偿额度分别为12186.07万元、4092.12万元、21769.24万元、8856.08万元、16348.88万元、3883.28万元。
Cultivated land resource which bearing national food security and ecological security function is a kind of quasi-public good. The public good attribute of farmland makes marginal private revenue which are the top-factor considered by stakeholders differ from marginal social revenue based on behavior trend and interests. In that case, private stakeholders are not willing to hold the responsibility of protection of farmland, while the mandatory policies of realistic society order individual farmers and local government bear most of the costs of cultivated land protection, which cause the unbalance between social injustice and interests.
After making a comment on theoretical study of eco-compensation mechanism both at home and abroad, the paper constructs an eco- compensation mechanism of cultivated land with the principle of internalization of economic activity externality. In order to build up the mechanism, the paper uses theories including welfare economics, resources and environmental economics and ecological economics, then considers land optimal allocation and externality's solving scheme from the perspective of social justice and benefit equilibrium. Eco-compensation mechanism is to solve "free-rider" phenomenon of ecological product consumption free and to motivate the supply of public products in full, so ecological investors and protector can get a reasonable return. It can urge the welfare equilibrium of related interest groups, achieving a harmony between economic development and cultivated land resource protection goal.
The paper tries to solve the core problem of cultivated land eco-compensation mechanism which is to quantify eco-compensation standard. It also provides a reference for construction of eco-compensation mechanism and determines reasonable compensation standards. According to the game of related interest groups, eco-compensation for cultivated land can be divided into the region internal eco-compensation and trans-regional eco-compensation. The compensation can solve protection costs, which undertake by farmers and local governments nowadays. On basis of it, the study elaborates basic principles, basic steps and calculating methods of contingent valuation method (CVM) and choice experiments (CE), taking Wuhan as an example, and tries to use CVM and CE to calculate cultivated land eco-compensation criteria.
Through the questionnaire design and face to face interview to obtain data information which two methods require respectively, and to obtain the protection intend of citizens and farmers in Wuhan, through some econometric methods, the study assesses scientifically eco-compensation of cultivated land resource.
In order to solve trans-regional cultivated land eco-compensation, some data are needed in each area, but the survey time and place are been restricted. So the study acquires some data by benefits transfer method. In the end, it gets some data of Xinzhou and Hannan. Corresponding, the research can obtain willingness to accept (WTA) and willingness to pay (WTP)of each area. According to intend between the internal providers and consumers, it can determine deficit and surplus of regional ecological services products.
Based on the elaboration of theory and analysis of 856 questionnaires of citizens and farmers, the conclusions are as follows:
(1) The paper analyses cognitive status of respondents about farmland ecological service and farmland protection policy. Although respondents have realized the importance of farmland ecosystem, they don't realize it enough due to the limitations of educational level, economic development level and traditional habits of cultivated land ecological services. In our survey, there are only 2.14% of respondents who know the cultivated land protect policy very well,57.25% of respondents know nothing about it.
(2) Identification of main factors influencing respondents'willingness to protect cultivated land.Using the date collected by survey, we employ Logistic model as the measure to analyze influencing factors. According to the analyzing result, respondents' willingness has a strong relationship with their environmental awareness, farmland protection policy awareness and personal financial capability. Increase in the awareness of environment and the capacity of economic payment, the preference of protection farmland is enhanced.
(3) Estimation of the quantity of cultivated land region internal eco-compensation based on different angles and different methods.①Estimation cultivated land eco-compensation based on the external benefits of cultivated land. Use CVM to reveal WTP and WTA. According to the result by CVM, respondents' willingness to pay for farmland's positive externality is between 4183.35 and 9521.85 RMB/hm2. However it is between 4076.7 and 10556.25 RMB/hm2 for farmland's negative externality.②Estimation cultivated land eco-compensation based on the attributes of cultivated land protection. Use CE to assess value, which contain attributes of cultivated land protection (area, quality and ecological environment) and the various properties that all attributes combine. The result evaluates by CE shows that the eco-compensation should be between 1681.95 and 6766.05 RMB/hm2. In the end, we choose 4183.35-6766.05 RMB /hm2 or 4076.7-6766.05 RMB/hm2 as the elastic interval for eco-compensation.
(4) Estimation of the quantity of cultivated land trans-regional eco-compensation.It is citizens and farmers who are the main consumers and suppliers of micro interests of cultivated land eco-compensation. Farmers are the object of cultivated land eco-compensation, who should receive compensation; however citizens are the subject of cultivated land eco-compensation, who should pay compensation. It is similar to the different hypothetical market of CVM-to pay or accept willingness. Therefore, on the basis of WTA and WTP of CVM, we can determine deficit and surplus to solve trans-regional eco-compensation problem. The research shows that central city of Wuhan should give Qiangxia district, Dongxihu district, Huangpi district, Caidian district, Xinzhou district, Hannan district eco-compensation amount for 121.8607 million RMB, 40.9212 million RMB,217.6924 million RMB,88.5608 million RMB,163.4888 million RMB,38.8328 million RMB respectively.
引文
1. 阿德莱德.布赖.行为心理学入门[M].四川：四川人民出版社,1987
2. 蔡春光,陈功,乔晓春等.单边界、双边界二分式条件价值评估方法的比较[J].中国环境科学,2007,27(1)：39-43.
3. 蔡剑辉.论森林生态服务的经济补偿[J].林业经济,2003,6：43-45.
4. 蔡银莺,李晓云,张安录.湖北省农地资源价值研究[J].自然资源学报,2007,22(1)：121-130.
5. 蔡银莺,李晓云,张安录.农地城市流转对区域生态系统服务价值的影响[J].农业现代化研究2005,26(3)：186-189.
6. 蔡银莺,张安录.农地生态与农地价值关系[M].北京：科学出版社,2010,4.
7. 蔡银莺,张安录.武汉市农地非市场价值评估[J].生态学报,2007,27(2)：763-773.
8. 蔡银莺,张安录.湖北省农地存在价值的CVM估值研究[A].节能环保和谐发展--2007中国科协年会论文集(二)[C],2007.
9. 蔡运龙,霍雅勤.中国耕地价值重建方法与案例研究.地理学报,2006,61(10)：1084-1092.
10.蔡运龙,俞奉庆.中国耕地问题的症结与治本之策.中国土地科学,2004,18(3)：13-17.
11.蔡运龙等.中国耕地问题的症结与治本之策[J].中国土地科学,2004,(3)：13-17.
12.曹明德,黄东.论土地资源生态补偿[J].法制与社会发展,2007(3)：96-105.
13.陈波,王雅鹏.湖北省粮食补贴方式改革的调查分析[J].经济问题,2006,3：50-52.
14.陈建成,刘进宝等.30年来中国农业经济政策及其效果分析[J].中国人资源环境,2008.18(5)：1-6.
15.陈丽,曲福田,师学义.土地利用规划中的利益均衡问题[J].中国土地科学,2006,20(5)：42-47.
16.陈旻,方斌,葛雄灿.耕地保护区域经济补偿的框架研究[J].中国国土资源经济,2009,4：15-18
17.陈亚恒.占补耕地数量质量折算方法研究[D].河北农业大学硕士论文,2008,16.
18.陈源泉,高旺盛.农业生态补偿的原理与决策模型初探[J].中国农学通报,2007,23(10)：163-166.
19.陈志刚,黄贤金等.耕地保护补偿意愿及其影响机理研究[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(6)：20-25.
20.程明.北京跨界水源功能区生态补偿标准初探*以官厅水库流域怀来县为例[J].湖北经济学院学报,2010,7(5)：11-12.
21.程淑兰,石敏俊,王新艳.应用两阶段二分式虚拟市场评价法消除环境价值货币评估的偏差[J].资源科学,2006,28(2)：191-198.
22.戴星翼,俞厚末,董梅.生态服务的价值实现[M].北京：科学出版社,2005,78-91.
23.邓坤枚,石培礼,谢高地.长江上游森林生态系统水源涵养量与价值的研究[J].资源科学,2002,24(6)：68-73.
24.丁成日.美国土地开发权转让制度及其对中国耕地保护的启示[J].中国土地科学,2008,22(3)：75-80.
25.丁四保,王昱.区域生态补偿的基础理论与实践问题研究[M].北京：科学出版社,2010：130-133
26.董长瑞.西方经济学[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2003,190.
27.董运来,赵慧娥,王大超.国外农业补贴的经验及借鉴[J].沈阳工业大学学报,2008,1(4)：335-340.
28.董祚继.18亿亩耕地红线不容动摇[J].党政干部文摘,2009,8：32-33.
29.杜娟.云南经济开发与环境管理指南[M].昆明市：云南大学出版社,2003：84-90.
30.冯艳芬,王芳,杨木壮.生态补偿标准研究.地理与地理信息科学,2009,25(4)：84-88.
31.弗·冯·维塞尔.自然价值[M].北京：商务印书馆,1987：110-115.
32.高鸿业.西方经济学(微观部分)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007：378-396.
33.高旺盛.农业宏观分析方法与应用[M].北京：中国农业大学出版社,2009.07.
34.顾岗,陆根法,蔡邦成.南水北调东线水源地保护区建设的区际生态补偿研究[J].生态经济,2006(2)：43-45.
35.哈尔·R·范里安,费方域等译.微观经济学：现代观点[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2006,491-495.
36.洪尚群,马丕京,郭慧光.生态补偿制度的探索[J].环境科学与技术,2001,5：40-43.
37.侯小凤,陈伟琪等.沿海农业区施用农药的环境费用分析及管理对策[J1.厦门大学学报(自然科学版),2004,8(43)：236-241.
38.侯元兆.菲律宾林地利用与配置决策：总经济价值评价和效益转移法的应用.(森林资源核算下)[A].北京市：中国科学技术出版社,2004,07：118.
39.胡耀岭,杨广.我国保护耕地资源的政府间博弈分析[J].未来与发展,2009,2：9-13.
40.黄富祥,康慕谊,张新时.退耕还林还草过程中的经济补偿问题探讨[J].生态学报,2002,22(4)：471-478
41.黄烈佳,张安录.农地价值与农地城市流转决策若干问题探讨[J].地理与地理信息科学,2006,22(2)：88-91.
42.姜广辉,孔祥斌,张凤荣.耕地保护经济补偿机制分析[A].主体功能区规划与耕地保护,2008年中国土地学会学术年会论文集：316-322
43.姜广辉,孔祥斌.耕地保护经济补偿机制分析[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(7)：24-27.
44.杰弗瑞.A.杰里,菲利普.J.瑞尼,王根蓓译.高级微观经济理论[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2001.11：251-300.
45.金建君,王志石.澳门固体废物管理的经济价值评估[J].中国环境科学,2005,25(6)：751-755.
46.金建君,王志石.选择试验模型法在澳门固体废弃物管理中的应用[J].环境科学,2006,27(4)：820-825.
47.柯水发.农户参与退耕还林行为理论与实证研究[M].北京：中国农业出版社,2007：184-190.
48.赖力,黄贤金,刘伟良.生态补偿理论、方法研究进展[J].生态学报2008,28(6)：870-2876.
49.李长健,伍文辉.土地资源可持续利用中的利益均衡：土地发展权配置[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,14(2)：60-64.
50.李翠珍,孔祥斌,孙宪海.北京市耕地资源价值体系及价值估算方法[J].地理学报,2008,63(3)：321-329.
51.李明阳,郑阿宝.我国公益林生态效益补偿政策与法规问题探讨[J].南京林业大学学报(人文社会科学版),2003,3(2)：57-61.
52.李文华,李芬,李世东等.森林生态效益补偿的研究现状与展望[J].自然资源学报,2006,,21(5)：677-687.
53.李晓光,苗鸿等.生态补偿标准确定的主要方法及其应用[J].生态学报,2009,29(8)：4431-4438.
54.李效顺,曲福田等.中国耕地资源变化与保护研究------基于土地督察视角的考察[J].自然资源学报,2009,24(3)：337-401.
55.李新文,王健.微观经济学[M].北京：中国农业出版社,2005,08：237-241.
56.李秀霞,刘金国.农用地转用生态补偿价格评估实证研究[J].吉林大学学报,2007,37(5)：998-1001.
57.李仲广.旅游经济学模型与方法[M].北京：中国旅游出版社,2006.06
58.林勃.耕地保护政策博弈分析[J].现代商贸工业,2009,20：50-52.
59.刘克田.经济论谈[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2001,380-384.
60.刘青.江河源区生态系统服务价值与生态补偿机制研究[D].南京大学博士论文,2007.
61.刘然,朱丽霞.中央与地方利益均衡分析[J].云南行政学院学报,2005,3：25-28.
62.刘书楷.土地经济学[M].北京：中国农业出版社,1996.
63.刘文卿.实验设计[M].北京市：清华大学出版社,2004.
64.刘亚萍.生态旅游区游憩资源经济价值评价研究[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2008,9：43-61.
65.刘治国,李国平.陕北地区非再生能源资源开发的环境破坏损失价值评估[J].统计研究,2006,3：61-66.
66.卢升高,吕军.环境生态学[M].杭州市：浙江大学出版社,2004：193-195.
67.陆红生.土地管理学总论[M].北京：中国农业出版社,2002,156-160.
68.陆小华.信息财产权--民法视角中的新财富保护模式[M].北京市：法律出版社,2009.04.
69.马爱慧,蔡银莺,张安录.基于土地优化配置模型的耕地生态补偿及核算框架构建[J].中国人口资源环境,2010,10：97-101.
70.马爱慧,蔡银莺,张安录等.两型社会建设跨区域土地生态补偿[J].中国土地科学,2010,7：66-70
71.毛锋,曾香.生态补偿的机理与准则[J].生态学报,2006,26(11)：3841-3846.
72.毛显强,钟瑜,张胜.生态补偿的理论探讨[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2002,12(4)：38-41
73.毛显强,钟瑜.生态补偿的经济博弈分析[A].生态补偿机制与政策设计国际研讨会论文集,2008.147-155.
74.美国估价学会著：不动产估价[M]北京：地质出版社,2001,3
75.孟召宜,朱传耿,渠爱雪等.我国主体功能区生态补偿思路研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,18(2)：139-144.
76.苗翠翠.基于效益转移方法的旅游资源价值评价研究[D].大连理工大学硕士论文,2009.
77.阂庆文,甄霖,杨光梅.自然保护区生态补偿研究与实践进展[J].生态与农村环境学报,2007,23(1)：81-84.
78.牛海鹏,张安录.耕地保护的外部性及其测算—以河南省焦作市为例[J].资源科学,2009,31(8)：1400-1408.
79.欧阳志云,王如松,赵景柱.生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价[J].应用生态学报,1999,10(5)：635-640.
80.潘少兵.生态补偿机制建立的经济学原理及补偿模式[J].安庆师范学院学报,2008,1.27(10)：6-9.
81.彭丽娟.生态效益涵义初探[J].湖南林业科技,2005,32(4)：76-79.
82.钱忠好.中国农地保护：理论与政策分析[J].管理世界,2003,10：60-70.
83.钱忠好.中国农地保护政策的理性反思[J].中国土地科学,2003,17(5)：14-18.
84.曲福田,冯淑怡,俞红.土地价格及分配关系与农地非农化经济机制研究—以经济发达地区为例[J].中国农村经济,2001,12：54-60.
85.任勇,冯东方,俞海.中国生态补偿理论与政策框架设计[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2008,7：1-7.
86.沈满洪.资源与环境经济学[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2007,49-61.
87.师学义,王万茂.土地利用规划的利益均衡理念[N].中国国土资源报(理论周刊),2005,09.
88.宋蕾,李峰.矿产资源生态补偿现状及对策研究[J].兰州商学院学报,2006,22(4)：24-27.
89.宋敏,张安录.湖北省农地资源正外部性价值量估算[J].长江流域资源与环境,2009,18(4)：314-320.
90.苏明达,吴佩瑛.愿意支付价值最佳效率指标之建构与验证[J].台湾农业经济丛刊.2004,9(2)：27-60.
91.孙发平,曾贤刚.中国三江源区生态价值及补偿机制研究[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2009.04.
92.孙新章,谢高地等.中国生态补偿的实践及其政策取向[J].资源科学,2006,28(4)：25-30。
93.谭术魁,涂姗.征地冲突中利益相关者的博弈分析—以地方政府与失地农民为例[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(11)：27-37.
94.唐健,卢艳霞.我国耕地保护制度研究理论与实证[M].北京：中国大地出版社,2006.06：12-14.
95.田春,李世平.论耕地资源的生态效益补偿[J].农业现代化研究,2009,30(1)：106-109.
96.完颜素娟,王翊.外部性理论与生态补偿[J].中国水土保持,2007,(12)：17-21.
97.王广成,闫旭骞.矿产资源管理理论与方法[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2002,1.
98.王国华.森林资源生态补偿资金来源及补偿方式[J].林业勘查设计,2008(1)：37.
99.王姣,肖海峰.中国粮食直接补贴政策效果评价[J].中国农村经济,2006,12：4-12.
100.王女杰,刘建,吴大千等.基于生态系统服务价值的区域生态补偿——以山东省为例[J].生态学报,2010,30(23)：6646-6653.
101.王钦敏.建立补偿机制,保护生态环境[J].求是,2004,13：55-56.
102.王仕菊,黄贤金.基于耕地价值的征地补偿标准[J].中国土地科学,2008,22(11)：44-50.
103.王亚楠,王建英.我国农业补贴政策研究综述[J].现代农业,2009,8：67-69
104.吴岚.水土保持生态服务功能及其价值研究[D].北京林业大学博士论文,2007,4-15.
105.奚洁人.科学发展观百科辞典[M].上海市：上海辞书出版社,2007：91-95.
106.萧景楷.农地环境保育效益之评价[J].水土保持研究,1999,6(3)：60-71.
107.谢高地,鲁春霞,冷允法等.青藏高原生态资产的价值评估[J].自然资源学报,2003,18(2)：189-195
108.谢高地,肖玉,甄霖等.我国粮食生产的生态服务价值研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2005,13(3)：10-13.
109.谢静琪,简士豪.环境敏感地区之保育价值[J].台湾土地金融季刊,2003,40(1)：1-21.
110.谢贤政,马中.应用旅行费用法评估黄山风景区游憩价值[J].资源科学,2006,28(3)：128-136.
111.徐大伟,郑海霞,刘民权.基于跨区域水质水量指标的流域生态补偿量测算方法研究[J].中国人资源环境,2008,18(4)：189-194.
112.徐琦.生态补偿尚需平衡多重利益[J].环境科技,2008,3：24-25.
113.徐哲,房婷婷,松青等.组合分析法在新产品概念开发与测试中的应用[J].数量统计与管理,2005,24(6)：25-32.
114.徐中民,任福康,马松尧等.估计环境价值的陈述偏好技术比较分析[J].冰川冻土,2003,25(6)：701-708.
115.徐中民,张志强,龙爱华等.环境选择实验模型在生态系统管理中的应用[J].地理学报2003,58(3)：398-405.
116.许丽忠,吴春山,王菲凤等.条件价值法评估旅游资源非使用价值的可靠性检验[J].生态学报,2007,27(10)：4301-4309.
117.许奕平.论我国的耕地产权制度与耕地保护[D].河海大学,2007.
118.杨光梅,闵庆文,李文华.我国生态补偿研究中的科学问题[J].生态学报,2007,27(10)：4289-4300.
119.杨筠.生态公共产品价格构成及其实现机制[J].经济体制改革,2005,(3)：124-127.
120.杨开忠,白墨,李莹等.关于意愿调查价值评估法在我国环境领域应用的可行性探讨[J].地球科学进展,2002,17(3)：420-425.
121.杨晓东.马克思与欧洲近代政治哲学[M].北京市：社会科学文献出版社,2008,220-230.
122.杨永芳,刘玉振,艾少伟.土地征收中生态补偿缺失对农民权利的影响[J].地理科学进展,2008,27(1)：111-116.
123.杨志新,田志会,郑大玮.农药外部成本问题研究综述[J].生态经济,2004,1：234-237
124.杨志新,郑大玮等.北京郊区农田生态系统服务功能价值的评估研究[J].自然资源学报,2005,20(4)：564-571.
125.姚艺伟.区域协调可持续发展与环境公平[J].经贸北方,2008,4：21-22.
126.尹红.美国与欧盟的农业环保计划[J].中国环保产业,2005,(3)：42-45.
127.雍新琴,张安录.耕地保护经济补偿主体与对象分析[M].安徽农业科学,2010,38(21)：11580-11581.
128.于连生.自然资源价值论及其应用[M].北京：化学工业出版社,2004,66-109.
129.于伟.土地退化的经济学分析及对策研究[D].浙江大学博士论文,2001.
130.于振伟,陈玮.森林生态效益补偿机制研究[J].中国林业企业,2003,(3)：19-20.
131.俞奉庆,蔡运龙.耕地资源价值探讨[J].中国土地科学,2003,17(3)：3-9.
132.俞奉庆,蔡运龙.耕地资源价值重建与农业补贴—一种解决“三农”问题的政策取向[J].中国土地科学,2004,18(1)：18-23.
133.俞海,任勇.中国生态补偿：概念、问题类型与政策路径选择[J].中国软科学,2008,(6)：7-15.
134.俞文华.发达与欠发达地区耕地保护行为的利益机制分析[J].中国人口.资源与环境.1997,7(4)：22-27.
135.喻燕.农地正外部性及其内在化途径[J].国土资源科技管理,2007,(6)：59-63.
136.臧俊梅,王万茂,陈茵茵.农地发展权价值的经济学分析[J].经济体制改革,2008,4：90-95.
137.臧俊梅,张文方,李景刚.耕地总量动态平衡下的耕地保护区域补偿机制研究[J].农业现代化研究,2008,29(3)：318-322.
138.臧俊梅.农地发展权的创设及其在农地保护中的运用研究[D].南京：南京农业大学博士论文,2007.
139.曾珩,陈美球,贺丽华等.不同群体的城镇居民耕地保护意识的实证研究J.江西农业大学学报(社会科学版),2009,8(4)：22-26.
140.翟国梁,张世秋等.选择实验的理论和应用—以中国退耕还林为例[J].北京大学学报(自然科学版),2006,1(3)：1-5.
141.张安录.城乡生态经济交错区农地城市流转机制与制度创新[J].中国农村经济,1999,(7)：43-49.
142.张飞,崔延松,孔伟.耕地资源开发中的价值补偿问题研究[J].农业经济,2009,01：32-35.
143.张凤荣.城乡统筹下的耕地分区保护与补偿政策[J].四川改革,2009,7：45-48.
144.张建肖,安树伟.国内外生态补偿研究综述[J].西安石油大学学报,2008,18(1)：23-27.
145.张巨勇,杨玉文.基于实验经济学的环境资源价值评估[J].大连民族学院,2007,2：21-24
146.张君宇,杜新波,胡杰.建立和完善耕地保护社会监督机制的思路探讨[J].中国国土资源经济,2007,2：28-29.
147.张可盈,吴淑丽,陈钧华.台湾地区水田外部效益评估之研究假想市场价格评估法之应用分析[J].台湾土地金融季刊,2003,40(1)：43-63.
148.张蕾,Jeff Bennett等.中国退耕还林政策成本效益分析[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2008,7.
149.张士功.耕地资源和粮食安全[D].中国农业科学院博士论文,2005,12.
150.张涛.森林生态效益补偿机制研究[D].北京：中国林业科学研究院博士论文,2003：56-57.
151.张效军.耕地保护区域补偿机制研究[D].南京农业大学博士论文,2006：1-12.
152.张效军,欧名豪,高艳梅.耕地保护区域补偿机制研究[J].中国软科学,2007,12：47-55.
153.张翼飞,陈红敏,李瑾.应用意愿价值评估法,科学制订生态补偿标准[J].生态学报,2007,9：27-31.
154.张翼飞.居民对生态环境改善的支付意愿与受偿意愿差异分析[J].西北人口,2008,4(29)：63-67.
155.张云.非再生资源开发中价值补偿的研究[M].北京：中国发展出版社,2007：30-31.
156.章锦河,张捷,梁玥琳等.九寨沟旅游生态足迹与生态补偿分析[J].自然资源学报,2005,20(5)：735-744.
157.章铮.环境与自然资源经济学[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2008,1.36-45
158.章铮.生态环境补偿费的若干基本问题[A]：中国生态环境补偿费的理论与实践.北京：中国环境科学出版社,1995.81-87.
159.赵军,杨凯.生态系统服务价值评估研究进展[J].生态学报,2007,27(1)：347-356.
160.赵敏华,李国平,刘志国.效益转移在陕北煤炭开发环境损失评估的应用[J].生态经济,2006,10：57-60.
161.赵敏华,李国平.效益转移法评估石油开发中跨区域环境价值损失的实证研究[J].系统工程,2006,10：77-81
162.赵敏华,李国平.效益转移在石油开发环境损失评估中的应用[J].生产技术经济,2006,11：96-99.
163.赵荣钦,黄爱民等.农田生态系统服务功能及其评价方法研究[J].农业系统科学与综合研究,2003,19(4)：267-270.
164.郑海霞,张陆彪.流域生态服务补偿定量标准研究[J].环境保护,2006,1A：42-45.
165.郑培,朱道林,张小武.政府耕地保护行为的公共选择理论分析[J].中国国土资源经济,2005,9：10-12.
166.郑新奇.城市土地优化配置与集约利用评价理论、方法、技术、实证[M].北京市：科学出版社,2004：28-33.
167.郑雪梅,韩旭.建立横向生态补偿机制的财政思考[J].地方财政研究,2006,1：25-29.
168.中国21世纪议程管理中心编著.生态补偿原理与应用[M].北京市：社会科学文献出版社,2009.04：16-18.
169.中国生态补偿机制与政策研究课题组.中国生态补偿机制与政策研究：北京：科学出版社,2007：107-109.
170.钟全林,曹建华,王红英.生态公益林价值核算研究[J].自然资源学报,2001,16(6)：537-542.
171.周小萍,谷晓坤,丁娜等.中国发达地区耕地保护观念的转变和机制探讨[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(1)：43-47.
172.周振民,岳小松.农民对水价改革承受能力双边界二分式CVM模型研究[J].中国农村水利水电,2009,8：122-126.
173.朱新华,曲福田.基于粮食安全的耕地保护外部性补偿途径与机制设计[J].南京农业大学学报(社会科学版),2007,7(4)：1-7.
174.诸培新,曲福田.从资源环境经济学角度考察土地征用补偿价格构成[J].中国土地科学,2003,17(3)：10-14.
175.诸培新,曲福田等.农村宅基地使用权流转的公平与效率分析[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(5)：26-29.
176.庄国泰等.生态环境补偿费的理论与实践[A]：中国生态环境补偿费的理论与实践.北京：中国环境科学出版社,1995.88-98.
177. Adamowicz W, Louviere J, Williams M.Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities [J].Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1994,26(3),271-292.
178. Alberini A, Krupnick A.Cost-of-Illness and Willingness-to-Pay Estimates of the Benefits of Improved Air Quality:Evidence from Tai wan[J].Land Economics,2000,76,(1):37-53.
179. Allen O A, Feddema J.J.Wetland loss and substitution by the Section 404 permit program in southern California [J]. Environmental Management,1996,20(2),263-274.
180. Alpizar F,Carlsson F,Martinsson P.Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuati [R].Department of Economics Goteborg University,2001.
181. Anderson P.Ecological restoration and creation:a review[J].Biological Journal of the Linnean Society (Suppl.),1995,(56):187-211.
182. Baylis K, Peplow S, Rausser G et al.Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States:a comparison[J].Ecological Economics,2008,65:753-764.
183. Bergstrom J C,DeCivita. Status of benefits transfer in the United States and Canada:a review[J]. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics,1999,47(1),79-87.
184. Bohm P. Option Demand and Consumer's Surplus:Comment[J]. American Economic Review, 1972,65(3):233-236.
185. Brent L. Mahan; Stephen Polasky, Richard M. Adams. Valuing urban wetlands:a property price approach [J].Land Economics,2000,76,(1):100-113.
186. Locatelli B, Rojas V, Salinas Z. Impacts of payments for environmental services on local development in northern Costa Rica:A fuzzy multi-criteria analysis [J]. Forest Policy and Economics,2008,10:275-285.
187. Buchanan J.M, Stubblebine W.C.Externality[J].Economica,1962,29:371-384.
188. Carl J. Dahlman The problem of externality [J]. Journal of Law and Economics,1979,22(1): 141-162
189. Carlsson F, Frykblomb P, Liljenstolpe C. Valuing wetland attributes:an application of choice experiments[J].Ecological Economics,2003,47:95-103.
190. Carson R T, Louviere J J et al. Experimental analysis of choice [J]. Marketing Letters,1994,5(4): 351-368.
191. Chen Z M,Chen G Q.Net ecosystem services value of wetland:Environmental economic account[J].Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat,2009,14:2837-2843.
192. Claassen R, Cattaneo A et al.Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs:U.S experience in theory and practice[J].Ecological Economics,2008,65:737-752.
193. Coase R H. The problem of social cost[J] The Journal of Law and Economic.1960,8(3):1-44
194. Constanza R d'Arge R,Rudolf de Groot et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital [J].Nature,1997,387:253-260.
195.Costanza R et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital [J]. Nature,1997,387(15):253-260.
196. Cuperus R,Canters K J et al.Guidelines for ecological compensation associated with highways[J].Biological Conservation,1999,(90):41-51.
197. Dale V H, Polasky S.Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services [J]. Ecological Economics,2007,64:286-296.
198. Lewis D J, Bradford L et al.Spatial externalities in agriculture:empirical analysis. Statistical Identification and Policy Implications World Development,2008,36(10):1813-1829.
199. Dobbs T L,Pretty J.Case study of agri-environmental payments:the United Kingdom [J]. Ecological Economics,2008,65:765-775.
200. Drake L.The non-market value of Swedish agricultural landscape [J]. European Review of Agricultural Economics,1992,19(3):351-364
201. Duke J.M.,Thomas W.A conjoint analysis of public preferences for agricultural land preservation [J]. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review,2004,33(2):209-219.
202. Engel S, Pagiola S et al.Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues [J].Ecological Economics,2008,65:663-674.
203. Enrique Ibarra Gene. The profitability of forest protection versus logging and the role of payments for environmental services (PES) in the Reserva Forestal GolfoDulce, Costa Rica [J].Forest Policy and Economics,2007,10:7-13.
204. Falconer K, Dupraz P, Whitby M. An investigation of policy administration costs using panel data for the English Environmental Sensitive Areas[J].Journal of Agricultural Economics,2001, 52(1):83-103.
205. Ferraro P, Kiss, A. Direct payments to conserve biodiversity[J].Science,2002.29(8):1718-1719.
206. Gardner B D.The economics of agricultural land preservation [J].American Journal of Agricultural Economics,1977,59(6):1027-1036.
207. Greeley D.A,Walsh R.G,Young R.A.Option value:empirical evidence from a case study of recreation and water quality[J].The Quaterly Journal of Economics,1981,96(4):657-673.
208. Gregory R S.Valuing environmental policy options:a case study comparison of multiattribute and contingent valuation survey methods [J].Land Economics,2000,76(2):151-173.
209. Hackl F, Halla M, Pruckner G J.Local compensation payments for agri-environmental externalities:a panel data analysis of bargaining outcomes[J].European Review of Agricultural Economics,2007,8:1-26.
210. Hackl F.,Pruckner G. J. Towards more efficient compensation programs for tourists benefits from agriculture in Europe[J]. Environment and Resource Economics,1997,10(2):189-205.
211.Hanley N, Whitby M, Simpson I. Assessing the success of agri-environmental policy in the UK[J].Land Use Policy,1999,16:67-80.
212. Hanley N, Wright R E, Adamowicz V. Using choice experiments to value the environment[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics,1998,11(3-4):413-428.
213. Hanley N, Wright R E, Alvarez-Farizo B.Estimating the economic value of improvements in river ecology using choice experiments:an application to the water framework directive[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2006,78:183-193.
214. Hediger W, Lehmann B.Multifunctional agriculture and the preservation of environmental benefits [J].Proceedings of the 25th International Conference of Agricultural Economists,2003, (8):16-22.
215. Heimlich, Ralph E, Claassen, Roger. Agricultural conservation policy at a cross roads[J]. Agricultural and Resource Economics,1998,27 (1):95-107.
216. Heina L, Koppenb K v, Groota R S et al. Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services [J].Ecological Economics,2006,57:209-228.
217. Herzog F, Dreier s,Hofer G, Marfurt C et al.Effect of ecological compensation areas on floristic and breeding bird diversity in Swiss agricultural landscapes[J].Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment,2005,108:189-104.
218. Herzog S F, Dreier G.,Hofer C,Marfurt et al.Effect of ecological compensation areas on floristic and breeding bird diversity in Swiss agricultural landscapes[J].Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment,2005,108:189-104.
219. Joshua M. Duke, Thomas W. Ilvento.A Conjoint Analysis of Public Preferences for Agricultural Land Preservation[J]. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review,2004,33(2):209-219.
220. Ju Y, Bomb P.Externalities and compensation:Primeval games and solutions [J].Journal of Mathematical Economics,2008,44:367-382.
221. Kosoya N, Martinez-Tunaa M.Payments for environmental services in watersheds:Insightsfrom a comparative study of three cases in central America [J].Ecological Economics,2007,61:446-455
222. Kroege T, Casey F. An assessment of market-based approaches to providing ecosystem services on agricultural lands [J].Ecological Economics,2007,64:321-332.
223. Ku S J, Yoo S H.Willingness to pay for renewable energy investment in Korea:a choice experiment study [J].Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,2010,14:2196-2201.
224. Lancaster K.A new approach to consumer theory [J].Journal of Political Eonomy,1966, 77:132-157.
225. Louviere J J, Fox M, Moore W. Cross-task validity comparisons of stated preference choice models [J].Marketing Letters,1993,4,205-213.
226. Lubell M,Schneider M,Scholz J,Mete M.Watershed partnership and the emergence of collective action institutions[J]. American Journal of Political Science,2002,46 (1):148-163.
227. Lynch L, Wesley N. Musser.A relative efficient analysis of farmland preservation programs [J]. Land Economics,2001,7:577-594.
228. Main M B, Roka F M,Noss R F.Evaluating costs of conservation[J].Conservation Biology, 1999,13(6):1262-1272.
229. Merlo M, Briales E R.Public goods and externalities linked to Mediterranean forests:Economic nature and policy[J].Land Use Policy,2000,17:197-208.
230. Mitchell R C, Carson R T.Using Surveys to value public goods:the contingent valuation method. washington D.C [M].Resources for the Future,1989.
231. Murray B C, Abt R C.Estimating price compensation requirements for eco-certified forestry[J]. Ecological Economics,2001,36:149-163.
232. Nakatani J, Aramaki T, Hanaki K.Applying choice experiments to valuing the different types ofenvironmental issues in Japan[J].Journal of Environmental Management,2007,84:362-376.
233. Johnson N,White A et al.Developing markets for water service from forest. forest trend website: http://www.forest-trends.org/index.htm
234. Pagiola S et al. Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America [J].World Development,2005,33(2): 237-253.
235. Pagiola S.Payment for environmental services in Costa Rica [J].Ecological Economics,2008, 65:712-724.
236. Parker D.C.Edge-effect externalities:theoretical and empirical implication of spatical heterogeneity [D].Office of Graduate Studies of the University of California,2000:12-49.
237. Parker D.C.Revealing"space"in spatial externalities:edge-effect externalities and spatial incentives [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2007,54:84-99.
238. Paul E, Green.On the design of choice involving multifactor alternatives[J].Journal of consumer research,1974,1:61-70.
239. Piper S, Martin W E.Evaluating the accuracy of the benefit transfer method:a rural water supply application in the USA [J].Journal of Environmental Management,2001,63:223-235.
240. Rambonilaza M, Dachary-Bernard J.Land-use planning and public preferences:What can we learn from choice experiment method [J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2007,83:318-326.
241. Rollins K.Moral hazard externalities and compensation for crop damages from wildlife[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1996,31:368-386.
242. Rose J M, Scarpa R,Michiel C J, Bliemer.Incorporating model uncertainty into the generation of efficient stated choice experiments:A model averaging approach[R]. The Australian Key Centre in Transport and Logistics Management,2009,4.
243. Rosenberger R S, Loomi J B.Benefit transfer of outdoor recreation use values [M].A TA Technical Document Supporting the echnical the Forest Service Strategic Plan,2000:4-15.
244. Sonin K.Why the rich may favor poor protection of property rights [J].The Journal of Comparative Economics,2003,31 (4):715-73.
245. Travisi C M,Nijkamp P.Valuing environmental and health risk in agriculture:A choice experiment approach to pesticides in Italy[J]. Ecological Economics,2008,67:598-607
246. Wei Zhang,Taylor H.Ricketts et al. Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture [J]. Ecological Economics,2007,64:253-260.
247. Wiinscher T, Engel S, Wunder S. Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services:a tool for boosting conservation benefits[J]. Ecological Economics,2008,65:822-833.
2. 蔡春光,陈功,乔晓春等.单边界、双边界二分式条件价值评估方法的比较[J].中国环境科学,2007,27(1)：39-43.
3. 蔡剑辉.论森林生态服务的经济补偿[J].林业经济,2003,6：43-45.
4. 蔡银莺,李晓云,张安录.湖北省农地资源价值研究[J].自然资源学报,2007,22(1)：121-130.
5. 蔡银莺,李晓云,张安录.农地城市流转对区域生态系统服务价值的影响[J].农业现代化研究2005,26(3)：186-189.
6. 蔡银莺,张安录.农地生态与农地价值关系[M].北京：科学出版社,2010,4.
7. 蔡银莺,张安录.武汉市农地非市场价值评估[J].生态学报,2007,27(2)：763-773.
8. 蔡银莺,张安录.湖北省农地存在价值的CVM估值研究[A].节能环保和谐发展--2007中国科协年会论文集(二)[C],2007.
9. 蔡运龙,霍雅勤.中国耕地价值重建方法与案例研究.地理学报,2006,61(10)：1084-1092.
10.蔡运龙,俞奉庆.中国耕地问题的症结与治本之策.中国土地科学,2004,18(3)：13-17.
11.蔡运龙等.中国耕地问题的症结与治本之策[J].中国土地科学,2004,(3)：13-17.
12.曹明德,黄东.论土地资源生态补偿[J].法制与社会发展,2007(3)：96-105.
13.陈波,王雅鹏.湖北省粮食补贴方式改革的调查分析[J].经济问题,2006,3：50-52.
14.陈建成,刘进宝等.30年来中国农业经济政策及其效果分析[J].中国人资源环境,2008.18(5)：1-6.
15.陈丽,曲福田,师学义.土地利用规划中的利益均衡问题[J].中国土地科学,2006,20(5)：42-47.
16.陈旻,方斌,葛雄灿.耕地保护区域经济补偿的框架研究[J].中国国土资源经济,2009,4：15-18
17.陈亚恒.占补耕地数量质量折算方法研究[D].河北农业大学硕士论文,2008,16.
18.陈源泉,高旺盛.农业生态补偿的原理与决策模型初探[J].中国农学通报,2007,23(10)：163-166.
19.陈志刚,黄贤金等.耕地保护补偿意愿及其影响机理研究[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(6)：20-25.
20.程明.北京跨界水源功能区生态补偿标准初探*以官厅水库流域怀来县为例[J].湖北经济学院学报,2010,7(5)：11-12.
21.程淑兰,石敏俊,王新艳.应用两阶段二分式虚拟市场评价法消除环境价值货币评估的偏差[J].资源科学,2006,28(2)：191-198.
22.戴星翼,俞厚末,董梅.生态服务的价值实现[M].北京：科学出版社,2005,78-91.
23.邓坤枚,石培礼,谢高地.长江上游森林生态系统水源涵养量与价值的研究[J].资源科学,2002,24(6)：68-73.
24.丁成日.美国土地开发权转让制度及其对中国耕地保护的启示[J].中国土地科学,2008,22(3)：75-80.
25.丁四保,王昱.区域生态补偿的基础理论与实践问题研究[M].北京：科学出版社,2010：130-133
26.董长瑞.西方经济学[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2003,190.
27.董运来,赵慧娥,王大超.国外农业补贴的经验及借鉴[J].沈阳工业大学学报,2008,1(4)：335-340.
28.董祚继.18亿亩耕地红线不容动摇[J].党政干部文摘,2009,8：32-33.
29.杜娟.云南经济开发与环境管理指南[M].昆明市：云南大学出版社,2003：84-90.
30.冯艳芬,王芳,杨木壮.生态补偿标准研究.地理与地理信息科学,2009,25(4)：84-88.
31.弗·冯·维塞尔.自然价值[M].北京：商务印书馆,1987：110-115.
32.高鸿业.西方经济学(微观部分)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2007：378-396.
33.高旺盛.农业宏观分析方法与应用[M].北京：中国农业大学出版社,2009.07.
34.顾岗,陆根法,蔡邦成.南水北调东线水源地保护区建设的区际生态补偿研究[J].生态经济,2006(2)：43-45.
35.哈尔·R·范里安,费方域等译.微观经济学：现代观点[M].上海：上海人民出版社,2006,491-495.
36.洪尚群,马丕京,郭慧光.生态补偿制度的探索[J].环境科学与技术,2001,5：40-43.
37.侯小凤,陈伟琪等.沿海农业区施用农药的环境费用分析及管理对策[J1.厦门大学学报(自然科学版),2004,8(43)：236-241.
38.侯元兆.菲律宾林地利用与配置决策：总经济价值评价和效益转移法的应用.(森林资源核算下)[A].北京市：中国科学技术出版社,2004,07：118.
39.胡耀岭,杨广.我国保护耕地资源的政府间博弈分析[J].未来与发展,2009,2：9-13.
40.黄富祥,康慕谊,张新时.退耕还林还草过程中的经济补偿问题探讨[J].生态学报,2002,22(4)：471-478
41.黄烈佳,张安录.农地价值与农地城市流转决策若干问题探讨[J].地理与地理信息科学,2006,22(2)：88-91.
42.姜广辉,孔祥斌,张凤荣.耕地保护经济补偿机制分析[A].主体功能区规划与耕地保护,2008年中国土地学会学术年会论文集：316-322
43.姜广辉,孔祥斌.耕地保护经济补偿机制分析[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(7)：24-27.
44.杰弗瑞.A.杰里,菲利普.J.瑞尼,王根蓓译.高级微观经济理论[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社,2001.11：251-300.
45.金建君,王志石.澳门固体废物管理的经济价值评估[J].中国环境科学,2005,25(6)：751-755.
46.金建君,王志石.选择试验模型法在澳门固体废弃物管理中的应用[J].环境科学,2006,27(4)：820-825.
47.柯水发.农户参与退耕还林行为理论与实证研究[M].北京：中国农业出版社,2007：184-190.
48.赖力,黄贤金,刘伟良.生态补偿理论、方法研究进展[J].生态学报2008,28(6)：870-2876.
49.李长健,伍文辉.土地资源可持续利用中的利益均衡：土地发展权配置[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,14(2)：60-64.
50.李翠珍,孔祥斌,孙宪海.北京市耕地资源价值体系及价值估算方法[J].地理学报,2008,63(3)：321-329.
51.李明阳,郑阿宝.我国公益林生态效益补偿政策与法规问题探讨[J].南京林业大学学报(人文社会科学版),2003,3(2)：57-61.
52.李文华,李芬,李世东等.森林生态效益补偿的研究现状与展望[J].自然资源学报,2006,,21(5)：677-687.
53.李晓光,苗鸿等.生态补偿标准确定的主要方法及其应用[J].生态学报,2009,29(8)：4431-4438.
54.李效顺,曲福田等.中国耕地资源变化与保护研究------基于土地督察视角的考察[J].自然资源学报,2009,24(3)：337-401.
55.李新文,王健.微观经济学[M].北京：中国农业出版社,2005,08：237-241.
56.李秀霞,刘金国.农用地转用生态补偿价格评估实证研究[J].吉林大学学报,2007,37(5)：998-1001.
57.李仲广.旅游经济学模型与方法[M].北京：中国旅游出版社,2006.06
58.林勃.耕地保护政策博弈分析[J].现代商贸工业,2009,20：50-52.
59.刘克田.经济论谈[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2001,380-384.
60.刘青.江河源区生态系统服务价值与生态补偿机制研究[D].南京大学博士论文,2007.
61.刘然,朱丽霞.中央与地方利益均衡分析[J].云南行政学院学报,2005,3：25-28.
62.刘书楷.土地经济学[M].北京：中国农业出版社,1996.
63.刘文卿.实验设计[M].北京市：清华大学出版社,2004.
64.刘亚萍.生态旅游区游憩资源经济价值评价研究[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2008,9：43-61.
65.刘治国,李国平.陕北地区非再生能源资源开发的环境破坏损失价值评估[J].统计研究,2006,3：61-66.
66.卢升高,吕军.环境生态学[M].杭州市：浙江大学出版社,2004：193-195.
67.陆红生.土地管理学总论[M].北京：中国农业出版社,2002,156-160.
68.陆小华.信息财产权--民法视角中的新财富保护模式[M].北京市：法律出版社,2009.04.
69.马爱慧,蔡银莺,张安录.基于土地优化配置模型的耕地生态补偿及核算框架构建[J].中国人口资源环境,2010,10：97-101.
70.马爱慧,蔡银莺,张安录等.两型社会建设跨区域土地生态补偿[J].中国土地科学,2010,7：66-70
71.毛锋,曾香.生态补偿的机理与准则[J].生态学报,2006,26(11)：3841-3846.
72.毛显强,钟瑜,张胜.生态补偿的理论探讨[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2002,12(4)：38-41
73.毛显强,钟瑜.生态补偿的经济博弈分析[A].生态补偿机制与政策设计国际研讨会论文集,2008.147-155.
74.美国估价学会著：不动产估价[M]北京：地质出版社,2001,3
75.孟召宜,朱传耿,渠爱雪等.我国主体功能区生态补偿思路研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,18(2)：139-144.
76.苗翠翠.基于效益转移方法的旅游资源价值评价研究[D].大连理工大学硕士论文,2009.
77.阂庆文,甄霖,杨光梅.自然保护区生态补偿研究与实践进展[J].生态与农村环境学报,2007,23(1)：81-84.
78.牛海鹏,张安录.耕地保护的外部性及其测算—以河南省焦作市为例[J].资源科学,2009,31(8)：1400-1408.
79.欧阳志云,王如松,赵景柱.生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价[J].应用生态学报,1999,10(5)：635-640.
80.潘少兵.生态补偿机制建立的经济学原理及补偿模式[J].安庆师范学院学报,2008,1.27(10)：6-9.
81.彭丽娟.生态效益涵义初探[J].湖南林业科技,2005,32(4)：76-79.
82.钱忠好.中国农地保护：理论与政策分析[J].管理世界,2003,10：60-70.
83.钱忠好.中国农地保护政策的理性反思[J].中国土地科学,2003,17(5)：14-18.
84.曲福田,冯淑怡,俞红.土地价格及分配关系与农地非农化经济机制研究—以经济发达地区为例[J].中国农村经济,2001,12：54-60.
85.任勇,冯东方,俞海.中国生态补偿理论与政策框架设计[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2008,7：1-7.
86.沈满洪.资源与环境经济学[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2007,49-61.
87.师学义,王万茂.土地利用规划的利益均衡理念[N].中国国土资源报(理论周刊),2005,09.
88.宋蕾,李峰.矿产资源生态补偿现状及对策研究[J].兰州商学院学报,2006,22(4)：24-27.
89.宋敏,张安录.湖北省农地资源正外部性价值量估算[J].长江流域资源与环境,2009,18(4)：314-320.
90.苏明达,吴佩瑛.愿意支付价值最佳效率指标之建构与验证[J].台湾农业经济丛刊.2004,9(2)：27-60.
91.孙发平,曾贤刚.中国三江源区生态价值及补偿机制研究[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2009.04.
92.孙新章,谢高地等.中国生态补偿的实践及其政策取向[J].资源科学,2006,28(4)：25-30。
93.谭术魁,涂姗.征地冲突中利益相关者的博弈分析—以地方政府与失地农民为例[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(11)：27-37.
94.唐健,卢艳霞.我国耕地保护制度研究理论与实证[M].北京：中国大地出版社,2006.06：12-14.
95.田春,李世平.论耕地资源的生态效益补偿[J].农业现代化研究,2009,30(1)：106-109.
96.完颜素娟,王翊.外部性理论与生态补偿[J].中国水土保持,2007,(12)：17-21.
97.王广成,闫旭骞.矿产资源管理理论与方法[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2002,1.
98.王国华.森林资源生态补偿资金来源及补偿方式[J].林业勘查设计,2008(1)：37.
99.王姣,肖海峰.中国粮食直接补贴政策效果评价[J].中国农村经济,2006,12：4-12.
100.王女杰,刘建,吴大千等.基于生态系统服务价值的区域生态补偿——以山东省为例[J].生态学报,2010,30(23)：6646-6653.
101.王钦敏.建立补偿机制,保护生态环境[J].求是,2004,13：55-56.
102.王仕菊,黄贤金.基于耕地价值的征地补偿标准[J].中国土地科学,2008,22(11)：44-50.
103.王亚楠,王建英.我国农业补贴政策研究综述[J].现代农业,2009,8：67-69
104.吴岚.水土保持生态服务功能及其价值研究[D].北京林业大学博士论文,2007,4-15.
105.奚洁人.科学发展观百科辞典[M].上海市：上海辞书出版社,2007：91-95.
106.萧景楷.农地环境保育效益之评价[J].水土保持研究,1999,6(3)：60-71.
107.谢高地,鲁春霞,冷允法等.青藏高原生态资产的价值评估[J].自然资源学报,2003,18(2)：189-195
108.谢高地,肖玉,甄霖等.我国粮食生产的生态服务价值研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2005,13(3)：10-13.
109.谢静琪,简士豪.环境敏感地区之保育价值[J].台湾土地金融季刊,2003,40(1)：1-21.
110.谢贤政,马中.应用旅行费用法评估黄山风景区游憩价值[J].资源科学,2006,28(3)：128-136.
111.徐大伟,郑海霞,刘民权.基于跨区域水质水量指标的流域生态补偿量测算方法研究[J].中国人资源环境,2008,18(4)：189-194.
112.徐琦.生态补偿尚需平衡多重利益[J].环境科技,2008,3：24-25.
113.徐哲,房婷婷,松青等.组合分析法在新产品概念开发与测试中的应用[J].数量统计与管理,2005,24(6)：25-32.
114.徐中民,任福康,马松尧等.估计环境价值的陈述偏好技术比较分析[J].冰川冻土,2003,25(6)：701-708.
115.徐中民,张志强,龙爱华等.环境选择实验模型在生态系统管理中的应用[J].地理学报2003,58(3)：398-405.
116.许丽忠,吴春山,王菲凤等.条件价值法评估旅游资源非使用价值的可靠性检验[J].生态学报,2007,27(10)：4301-4309.
117.许奕平.论我国的耕地产权制度与耕地保护[D].河海大学,2007.
118.杨光梅,闵庆文,李文华.我国生态补偿研究中的科学问题[J].生态学报,2007,27(10)：4289-4300.
119.杨筠.生态公共产品价格构成及其实现机制[J].经济体制改革,2005,(3)：124-127.
120.杨开忠,白墨,李莹等.关于意愿调查价值评估法在我国环境领域应用的可行性探讨[J].地球科学进展,2002,17(3)：420-425.
121.杨晓东.马克思与欧洲近代政治哲学[M].北京市：社会科学文献出版社,2008,220-230.
122.杨永芳,刘玉振,艾少伟.土地征收中生态补偿缺失对农民权利的影响[J].地理科学进展,2008,27(1)：111-116.
123.杨志新,田志会,郑大玮.农药外部成本问题研究综述[J].生态经济,2004,1：234-237
124.杨志新,郑大玮等.北京郊区农田生态系统服务功能价值的评估研究[J].自然资源学报,2005,20(4)：564-571.
125.姚艺伟.区域协调可持续发展与环境公平[J].经贸北方,2008,4：21-22.
126.尹红.美国与欧盟的农业环保计划[J].中国环保产业,2005,(3)：42-45.
127.雍新琴,张安录.耕地保护经济补偿主体与对象分析[M].安徽农业科学,2010,38(21)：11580-11581.
128.于连生.自然资源价值论及其应用[M].北京：化学工业出版社,2004,66-109.
129.于伟.土地退化的经济学分析及对策研究[D].浙江大学博士论文,2001.
130.于振伟,陈玮.森林生态效益补偿机制研究[J].中国林业企业,2003,(3)：19-20.
131.俞奉庆,蔡运龙.耕地资源价值探讨[J].中国土地科学,2003,17(3)：3-9.
132.俞奉庆,蔡运龙.耕地资源价值重建与农业补贴—一种解决“三农”问题的政策取向[J].中国土地科学,2004,18(1)：18-23.
133.俞海,任勇.中国生态补偿：概念、问题类型与政策路径选择[J].中国软科学,2008,(6)：7-15.
134.俞文华.发达与欠发达地区耕地保护行为的利益机制分析[J].中国人口.资源与环境.1997,7(4)：22-27.
135.喻燕.农地正外部性及其内在化途径[J].国土资源科技管理,2007,(6)：59-63.
136.臧俊梅,王万茂,陈茵茵.农地发展权价值的经济学分析[J].经济体制改革,2008,4：90-95.
137.臧俊梅,张文方,李景刚.耕地总量动态平衡下的耕地保护区域补偿机制研究[J].农业现代化研究,2008,29(3)：318-322.
138.臧俊梅.农地发展权的创设及其在农地保护中的运用研究[D].南京：南京农业大学博士论文,2007.
139.曾珩,陈美球,贺丽华等.不同群体的城镇居民耕地保护意识的实证研究J.江西农业大学学报(社会科学版),2009,8(4)：22-26.
140.翟国梁,张世秋等.选择实验的理论和应用—以中国退耕还林为例[J].北京大学学报(自然科学版),2006,1(3)：1-5.
141.张安录.城乡生态经济交错区农地城市流转机制与制度创新[J].中国农村经济,1999,(7)：43-49.
142.张飞,崔延松,孔伟.耕地资源开发中的价值补偿问题研究[J].农业经济,2009,01：32-35.
143.张凤荣.城乡统筹下的耕地分区保护与补偿政策[J].四川改革,2009,7：45-48.
144.张建肖,安树伟.国内外生态补偿研究综述[J].西安石油大学学报,2008,18(1)：23-27.
145.张巨勇,杨玉文.基于实验经济学的环境资源价值评估[J].大连民族学院,2007,2：21-24
146.张君宇,杜新波,胡杰.建立和完善耕地保护社会监督机制的思路探讨[J].中国国土资源经济,2007,2：28-29.
147.张可盈,吴淑丽,陈钧华.台湾地区水田外部效益评估之研究假想市场价格评估法之应用分析[J].台湾土地金融季刊,2003,40(1)：43-63.
148.张蕾,Jeff Bennett等.中国退耕还林政策成本效益分析[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2008,7.
149.张士功.耕地资源和粮食安全[D].中国农业科学院博士论文,2005,12.
150.张涛.森林生态效益补偿机制研究[D].北京：中国林业科学研究院博士论文,2003：56-57.
151.张效军.耕地保护区域补偿机制研究[D].南京农业大学博士论文,2006：1-12.
152.张效军,欧名豪,高艳梅.耕地保护区域补偿机制研究[J].中国软科学,2007,12：47-55.
153.张翼飞,陈红敏,李瑾.应用意愿价值评估法,科学制订生态补偿标准[J].生态学报,2007,9：27-31.
154.张翼飞.居民对生态环境改善的支付意愿与受偿意愿差异分析[J].西北人口,2008,4(29)：63-67.
155.张云.非再生资源开发中价值补偿的研究[M].北京：中国发展出版社,2007：30-31.
156.章锦河,张捷,梁玥琳等.九寨沟旅游生态足迹与生态补偿分析[J].自然资源学报,2005,20(5)：735-744.
157.章铮.环境与自然资源经济学[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2008,1.36-45
158.章铮.生态环境补偿费的若干基本问题[A]：中国生态环境补偿费的理论与实践.北京：中国环境科学出版社,1995.81-87.
159.赵军,杨凯.生态系统服务价值评估研究进展[J].生态学报,2007,27(1)：347-356.
160.赵敏华,李国平,刘志国.效益转移在陕北煤炭开发环境损失评估的应用[J].生态经济,2006,10：57-60.
161.赵敏华,李国平.效益转移法评估石油开发中跨区域环境价值损失的实证研究[J].系统工程,2006,10：77-81
162.赵敏华,李国平.效益转移在石油开发环境损失评估中的应用[J].生产技术经济,2006,11：96-99.
163.赵荣钦,黄爱民等.农田生态系统服务功能及其评价方法研究[J].农业系统科学与综合研究,2003,19(4)：267-270.
164.郑海霞,张陆彪.流域生态服务补偿定量标准研究[J].环境保护,2006,1A：42-45.
165.郑培,朱道林,张小武.政府耕地保护行为的公共选择理论分析[J].中国国土资源经济,2005,9：10-12.
166.郑新奇.城市土地优化配置与集约利用评价理论、方法、技术、实证[M].北京市：科学出版社,2004：28-33.
167.郑雪梅,韩旭.建立横向生态补偿机制的财政思考[J].地方财政研究,2006,1：25-29.
168.中国21世纪议程管理中心编著.生态补偿原理与应用[M].北京市：社会科学文献出版社,2009.04：16-18.
169.中国生态补偿机制与政策研究课题组.中国生态补偿机制与政策研究：北京：科学出版社,2007：107-109.
170.钟全林,曹建华,王红英.生态公益林价值核算研究[J].自然资源学报,2001,16(6)：537-542.
171.周小萍,谷晓坤,丁娜等.中国发达地区耕地保护观念的转变和机制探讨[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(1)：43-47.
172.周振民,岳小松.农民对水价改革承受能力双边界二分式CVM模型研究[J].中国农村水利水电,2009,8：122-126.
173.朱新华,曲福田.基于粮食安全的耕地保护外部性补偿途径与机制设计[J].南京农业大学学报(社会科学版),2007,7(4)：1-7.
174.诸培新,曲福田.从资源环境经济学角度考察土地征用补偿价格构成[J].中国土地科学,2003,17(3)：10-14.
175.诸培新,曲福田等.农村宅基地使用权流转的公平与效率分析[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(5)：26-29.
176.庄国泰等.生态环境补偿费的理论与实践[A]：中国生态环境补偿费的理论与实践.北京：中国环境科学出版社,1995.88-98.
177. Adamowicz W, Louviere J, Williams M.Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities [J].Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1994,26(3),271-292.
178. Alberini A, Krupnick A.Cost-of-Illness and Willingness-to-Pay Estimates of the Benefits of Improved Air Quality:Evidence from Tai wan[J].Land Economics,2000,76,(1):37-53.
179. Allen O A, Feddema J.J.Wetland loss and substitution by the Section 404 permit program in southern California [J]. Environmental Management,1996,20(2),263-274.
180. Alpizar F,Carlsson F,Martinsson P.Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuati [R].Department of Economics Goteborg University,2001.
181. Anderson P.Ecological restoration and creation:a review[J].Biological Journal of the Linnean Society (Suppl.),1995,(56):187-211.
182. Baylis K, Peplow S, Rausser G et al.Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States:a comparison[J].Ecological Economics,2008,65:753-764.
183. Bergstrom J C,DeCivita. Status of benefits transfer in the United States and Canada:a review[J]. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics,1999,47(1),79-87.
184. Bohm P. Option Demand and Consumer's Surplus:Comment[J]. American Economic Review, 1972,65(3):233-236.
185. Brent L. Mahan; Stephen Polasky, Richard M. Adams. Valuing urban wetlands:a property price approach [J].Land Economics,2000,76,(1):100-113.
186. Locatelli B, Rojas V, Salinas Z. Impacts of payments for environmental services on local development in northern Costa Rica:A fuzzy multi-criteria analysis [J]. Forest Policy and Economics,2008,10:275-285.
187. Buchanan J.M, Stubblebine W.C.Externality[J].Economica,1962,29:371-384.
188. Carl J. Dahlman The problem of externality [J]. Journal of Law and Economics,1979,22(1): 141-162
189. Carlsson F, Frykblomb P, Liljenstolpe C. Valuing wetland attributes:an application of choice experiments[J].Ecological Economics,2003,47:95-103.
190. Carson R T, Louviere J J et al. Experimental analysis of choice [J]. Marketing Letters,1994,5(4): 351-368.
191. Chen Z M,Chen G Q.Net ecosystem services value of wetland:Environmental economic account[J].Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulat,2009,14:2837-2843.
192. Claassen R, Cattaneo A et al.Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs:U.S experience in theory and practice[J].Ecological Economics,2008,65:737-752.
193. Coase R H. The problem of social cost[J] The Journal of Law and Economic.1960,8(3):1-44
194. Constanza R d'Arge R,Rudolf de Groot et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital [J].Nature,1997,387:253-260.
195.Costanza R et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital [J]. Nature,1997,387(15):253-260.
196. Cuperus R,Canters K J et al.Guidelines for ecological compensation associated with highways[J].Biological Conservation,1999,(90):41-51.
197. Dale V H, Polasky S.Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services [J]. Ecological Economics,2007,64:286-296.
198. Lewis D J, Bradford L et al.Spatial externalities in agriculture:empirical analysis. Statistical Identification and Policy Implications World Development,2008,36(10):1813-1829.
199. Dobbs T L,Pretty J.Case study of agri-environmental payments:the United Kingdom [J]. Ecological Economics,2008,65:765-775.
200. Drake L.The non-market value of Swedish agricultural landscape [J]. European Review of Agricultural Economics,1992,19(3):351-364
201. Duke J.M.,Thomas W.A conjoint analysis of public preferences for agricultural land preservation [J]. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review,2004,33(2):209-219.
202. Engel S, Pagiola S et al.Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues [J].Ecological Economics,2008,65:663-674.
203. Enrique Ibarra Gene. The profitability of forest protection versus logging and the role of payments for environmental services (PES) in the Reserva Forestal GolfoDulce, Costa Rica [J].Forest Policy and Economics,2007,10:7-13.
204. Falconer K, Dupraz P, Whitby M. An investigation of policy administration costs using panel data for the English Environmental Sensitive Areas[J].Journal of Agricultural Economics,2001, 52(1):83-103.
205. Ferraro P, Kiss, A. Direct payments to conserve biodiversity[J].Science,2002.29(8):1718-1719.
206. Gardner B D.The economics of agricultural land preservation [J].American Journal of Agricultural Economics,1977,59(6):1027-1036.
207. Greeley D.A,Walsh R.G,Young R.A.Option value:empirical evidence from a case study of recreation and water quality[J].The Quaterly Journal of Economics,1981,96(4):657-673.
208. Gregory R S.Valuing environmental policy options:a case study comparison of multiattribute and contingent valuation survey methods [J].Land Economics,2000,76(2):151-173.
209. Hackl F, Halla M, Pruckner G J.Local compensation payments for agri-environmental externalities:a panel data analysis of bargaining outcomes[J].European Review of Agricultural Economics,2007,8:1-26.
210. Hackl F.,Pruckner G. J. Towards more efficient compensation programs for tourists benefits from agriculture in Europe[J]. Environment and Resource Economics,1997,10(2):189-205.
211.Hanley N, Whitby M, Simpson I. Assessing the success of agri-environmental policy in the UK[J].Land Use Policy,1999,16:67-80.
212. Hanley N, Wright R E, Adamowicz V. Using choice experiments to value the environment[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics,1998,11(3-4):413-428.
213. Hanley N, Wright R E, Alvarez-Farizo B.Estimating the economic value of improvements in river ecology using choice experiments:an application to the water framework directive[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2006,78:183-193.
214. Hediger W, Lehmann B.Multifunctional agriculture and the preservation of environmental benefits [J].Proceedings of the 25th International Conference of Agricultural Economists,2003, (8):16-22.
215. Heimlich, Ralph E, Claassen, Roger. Agricultural conservation policy at a cross roads[J]. Agricultural and Resource Economics,1998,27 (1):95-107.
216. Heina L, Koppenb K v, Groota R S et al. Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services [J].Ecological Economics,2006,57:209-228.
217. Herzog F, Dreier s,Hofer G, Marfurt C et al.Effect of ecological compensation areas on floristic and breeding bird diversity in Swiss agricultural landscapes[J].Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment,2005,108:189-104.
218. Herzog S F, Dreier G.,Hofer C,Marfurt et al.Effect of ecological compensation areas on floristic and breeding bird diversity in Swiss agricultural landscapes[J].Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment,2005,108:189-104.
219. Joshua M. Duke, Thomas W. Ilvento.A Conjoint Analysis of Public Preferences for Agricultural Land Preservation[J]. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review,2004,33(2):209-219.
220. Ju Y, Bomb P.Externalities and compensation:Primeval games and solutions [J].Journal of Mathematical Economics,2008,44:367-382.
221. Kosoya N, Martinez-Tunaa M.Payments for environmental services in watersheds:Insightsfrom a comparative study of three cases in central America [J].Ecological Economics,2007,61:446-455
222. Kroege T, Casey F. An assessment of market-based approaches to providing ecosystem services on agricultural lands [J].Ecological Economics,2007,64:321-332.
223. Ku S J, Yoo S H.Willingness to pay for renewable energy investment in Korea:a choice experiment study [J].Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,2010,14:2196-2201.
224. Lancaster K.A new approach to consumer theory [J].Journal of Political Eonomy,1966, 77:132-157.
225. Louviere J J, Fox M, Moore W. Cross-task validity comparisons of stated preference choice models [J].Marketing Letters,1993,4,205-213.
226. Lubell M,Schneider M,Scholz J,Mete M.Watershed partnership and the emergence of collective action institutions[J]. American Journal of Political Science,2002,46 (1):148-163.
227. Lynch L, Wesley N. Musser.A relative efficient analysis of farmland preservation programs [J]. Land Economics,2001,7:577-594.
228. Main M B, Roka F M,Noss R F.Evaluating costs of conservation[J].Conservation Biology, 1999,13(6):1262-1272.
229. Merlo M, Briales E R.Public goods and externalities linked to Mediterranean forests:Economic nature and policy[J].Land Use Policy,2000,17:197-208.
230. Mitchell R C, Carson R T.Using Surveys to value public goods:the contingent valuation method. washington D.C [M].Resources for the Future,1989.
231. Murray B C, Abt R C.Estimating price compensation requirements for eco-certified forestry[J]. Ecological Economics,2001,36:149-163.
232. Nakatani J, Aramaki T, Hanaki K.Applying choice experiments to valuing the different types ofenvironmental issues in Japan[J].Journal of Environmental Management,2007,84:362-376.
233. Johnson N,White A et al.Developing markets for water service from forest. forest trend website: http://www.forest-trends.org/index.htm
234. Pagiola S et al. Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America [J].World Development,2005,33(2): 237-253.
235. Pagiola S.Payment for environmental services in Costa Rica [J].Ecological Economics,2008, 65:712-724.
236. Parker D.C.Edge-effect externalities:theoretical and empirical implication of spatical heterogeneity [D].Office of Graduate Studies of the University of California,2000:12-49.
237. Parker D.C.Revealing"space"in spatial externalities:edge-effect externalities and spatial incentives [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2007,54:84-99.
238. Paul E, Green.On the design of choice involving multifactor alternatives[J].Journal of consumer research,1974,1:61-70.
239. Piper S, Martin W E.Evaluating the accuracy of the benefit transfer method:a rural water supply application in the USA [J].Journal of Environmental Management,2001,63:223-235.
240. Rambonilaza M, Dachary-Bernard J.Land-use planning and public preferences:What can we learn from choice experiment method [J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2007,83:318-326.
241. Rollins K.Moral hazard externalities and compensation for crop damages from wildlife[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1996,31:368-386.
242. Rose J M, Scarpa R,Michiel C J, Bliemer.Incorporating model uncertainty into the generation of efficient stated choice experiments:A model averaging approach[R]. The Australian Key Centre in Transport and Logistics Management,2009,4.
243. Rosenberger R S, Loomi J B.Benefit transfer of outdoor recreation use values [M].A TA Technical Document Supporting the echnical the Forest Service Strategic Plan,2000:4-15.
244. Sonin K.Why the rich may favor poor protection of property rights [J].The Journal of Comparative Economics,2003,31 (4):715-73.
245. Travisi C M,Nijkamp P.Valuing environmental and health risk in agriculture:A choice experiment approach to pesticides in Italy[J]. Ecological Economics,2008,67:598-607
246. Wei Zhang,Taylor H.Ricketts et al. Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture [J]. Ecological Economics,2007,64:253-260.
247. Wiinscher T, Engel S, Wunder S. Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services:a tool for boosting conservation benefits[J]. Ecological Economics,2008,65:822-833.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |