休耕政策实施的偏离风险、形成路径与防范体系研究
|
摘要
研究目的:探索休耕政策实施偏离风险新命题,客观认识休耕政策实施的偏离风险源与形成路径,以期为保障中国休耕政策推行的稳定性和连续性提供参考。研究方法:生命周期法、归纳总结法和逻辑推理法。研究结果:(1)基于生命周期发现休耕政策实施存在耕地权益、社会保障、实施组织和后续利用等偏离风险;(2)偏离风险源与产权界定模糊、目标定位差异、组织管理不足和激励约束缺失等密切相关;(3)休耕产权公共域、休耕主体行为空间和休耕负外部性形成了偏离风险的内在路径;(4)休耕偏离风险实现负外部性内部化还需借助权益认知体系、政策保障体系、组织管理体系和利用预警体系等外部规制与激励。研究结论:在休耕政策实施后续完善与推广应用时,应当考虑休耕周期内休耕政策实施过程存在的偏离风险,构建合理的风险防范体系。
The purpose of this study is to explore a new deviation risk proposition for the implementation of the fallow policy, and to analyze the deviation risk and formation path of the fallow policy implementation in order to provide theoretical basis for the stability and sustainability of fallow system based on life cycle theory. The methods of literature research, life cycle, inductive abstraction and logical reasoning were employed. The results show that: 1)the fallow preparation faces the risks of farmland rights and interests, implementation organization, social security and management based on the life cycle; 2)the path of risk formation is closely related to the ambiguous definition of farmland property rights, the difference in target orientation, the lack of organizational management and the lack of incentive constraints;3)the internal path of deviation risk comes from the public domain of fallow property right, behavior space of fallow subject and negative externality of fallow; 4)the internalization of negative externality regarding deviation risk of fallow requires external regulation and incentives such as equity cognition system, policy guarantee system, organization management system and early warning system. In conclusion, the deviation risk in the fallow policy implementation should be considered and a reasonable risk prevention system should be established in the future.
The purpose of this study is to explore a new deviation risk proposition for the implementation of the fallow policy, and to analyze the deviation risk and formation path of the fallow policy implementation in order to provide theoretical basis for the stability and sustainability of fallow system based on life cycle theory. The methods of literature research, life cycle, inductive abstraction and logical reasoning were employed. The results show that: 1)the fallow preparation faces the risks of farmland rights and interests, implementation organization, social security and management based on the life cycle; 2)the path of risk formation is closely related to the ambiguous definition of farmland property rights, the difference in target orientation, the lack of organizational management and the lack of incentive constraints;3)the internal path of deviation risk comes from the public domain of fallow property right, behavior space of fallow subject and negative externality of fallow; 4)the internalization of negative externality regarding deviation risk of fallow requires external regulation and incentives such as equity cognition system, policy guarantee system, organization management system and early warning system. In conclusion, the deviation risk in the fallow policy implementation should be considered and a reasonable risk prevention system should be established in the future.
引文
[1]李平,李秀彬,刘学军.我国现阶段土地利用变化驱动力的宏观分析[J].地理研究,2001,20(2):129-138.
[2]陈展图,杨庆媛.中国耕地休耕制度基本框架构建[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(12):126-136.
[3]中国人民共和国农业部.探索实行耕地轮作休耕制度试点方案[EB/OL].(2016-07-01)[2018-10-25]. http://mt.sohu.com/20160701/n457282989.shtml.
[4]张慧芳.我国轮作休耕制度试点述评及对地方的启示[J].浙江农业科学,2018,59(6):881-883,885.
[5]赵其国,滕应,黄国勤.中国探索实行耕地轮作休耕制度试点问题的战略思考[J].生态环境学报,2017,26(1):1-5.
[6]赵雲泰,黄贤金,钟太洋,等.区域虚拟休耕规模与空间布局研究[J].水土保持通报,2011,31(5):103-107.
[7]朱国锋,李秀成,石耀荣,等.国内外耕地轮作休耕的实践比较及政策启示[J].中国农业资源与区划,2018,39(6):35-41,92.
[8]饶静.发达国家“耕地休养”综述及对中国的启示[J].农业技术经济,2016(9):118-128.
[9]李娅.美国、欧盟和日本耕地休耕政策的比较研究[J].世界农业,2018(6):71-76,215.
[10]谭永忠,练款,俞振宁.重金属污染耕地治理式休耕农户满意度及其影响因素研究[J].中国土地科学,2018,32(10):43-50.
[11]江娟丽,杨庆媛,童小蓉,等.我国实行休耕制度的制约因素与对策研究[J].西南大学学报(社会科学版),2018,44(3):52-57.
[12]LU H, XIE H, LV T, et al. Determinants of cultivated land recuperation in ecologically damaged areas in China[J].Land Use Policy, 2019, 81:160-166.
[13]陈展图,杨庆媛,童小容.轮作休耕推进农业供给侧结构性改革路径研究[J].农村经济,2017(7):20-25.
[14]沈孝强,吴次芳.自主参与式农地休养政策:模式和启示[J].中国土地科学,2016,30(1):68-74
[15]钟媛,张晓宁.休耕政策存在的问题及对策[J].农业经济问题,2018(9):76-84.
[16]孙华,赵晶.基于生命周期理论的无锡市锡山区棕(褐)地再利用环境风险综合评价[J].中国土地科学,2012,26(7):84-90.
[17]张慧芳,吴宇哲,何良将.我国推行休耕制度的探讨[J].浙江农业学报,2013,25(1):166-170.
[18]XIE H, CHENG L, LU H. Farmers’ responses to the winter wheat fallow policy in the groundwater funnel area of China[J]. Land Use Policy, 2018, 73:195-204.
[19]中华人民共和国中央人民政府.农业部就耕地轮作休耕制度试点有关情况举行新闻发布会[EB/OL].(2018-02-23)[2018-10-25]. http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-02/23/content_5268221.htm.
[20]王行风,汪云甲,李永峰.基于生命周期理论的煤矿区土地利用演化模拟[J].地理研究,2009,28(2):379-390.
[21]常伶丽.从生命周期理论透视中国农村养老保障制度[J].特区经济,2007(7):111-112.
[22]吴一恒,徐砾,马贤磊.农地“三权分置”制度实施潜在风险与完善措施——基于产权配置与产权公共域视角[J].中国农村经济,2018(8):46-63.
[23]匡兵,卢新海,陈丹玲.基于内容分析法的中国耕地轮作休耕政策工具选择研究[J].中国土地科学,2018,32(11):30-36.
[24]杨文杰,巩前文.国内耕地休耕试点主要做法、问题与对策研究[J].农业现代化研究,2018,39(1):9-18.
[25]陈振,郭杰,欧名豪,等.资本下乡过程中农地流转风险识别、形成机理与管控策略[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(5):988-995.
[26]宋文飞,李国平,韩先锋,等.“产权公共域”与失地农民利益失衡的理论机理剖析:基于租金视角[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2016,26(6):84-93.
[27]罗婷婷,邹学荣.撂荒、弃耕、退耕还林与休耕转换机制谋划[J].西部论坛,2015(2):40-46.
[28]俞振宁,谭永忠,练款,等.基于计划行为理论分析农户参与重金属污染耕地休耕治理行为[J].农业工程学报,2018,34(24):266-273.
[29]俞振宁,谭永忠,茅铭芝,等.重金属污染耕地治理式休耕补偿政策:农户选择实验及影响因素分析[J].中国农村经济,2018(2):109-125.
[30]谢花林,翟群力,卢华.我国耕地轮作休耕制度运行中的监督机制探讨[J].农林经济管理学报,2018,17(4):455-462.
[2]陈展图,杨庆媛.中国耕地休耕制度基本框架构建[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(12):126-136.
[3]中国人民共和国农业部.探索实行耕地轮作休耕制度试点方案[EB/OL].(2016-07-01)[2018-10-25]. http://mt.sohu.com/20160701/n457282989.shtml.
[4]张慧芳.我国轮作休耕制度试点述评及对地方的启示[J].浙江农业科学,2018,59(6):881-883,885.
[5]赵其国,滕应,黄国勤.中国探索实行耕地轮作休耕制度试点问题的战略思考[J].生态环境学报,2017,26(1):1-5.
[6]赵雲泰,黄贤金,钟太洋,等.区域虚拟休耕规模与空间布局研究[J].水土保持通报,2011,31(5):103-107.
[7]朱国锋,李秀成,石耀荣,等.国内外耕地轮作休耕的实践比较及政策启示[J].中国农业资源与区划,2018,39(6):35-41,92.
[8]饶静.发达国家“耕地休养”综述及对中国的启示[J].农业技术经济,2016(9):118-128.
[9]李娅.美国、欧盟和日本耕地休耕政策的比较研究[J].世界农业,2018(6):71-76,215.
[10]谭永忠,练款,俞振宁.重金属污染耕地治理式休耕农户满意度及其影响因素研究[J].中国土地科学,2018,32(10):43-50.
[11]江娟丽,杨庆媛,童小蓉,等.我国实行休耕制度的制约因素与对策研究[J].西南大学学报(社会科学版),2018,44(3):52-57.
[12]LU H, XIE H, LV T, et al. Determinants of cultivated land recuperation in ecologically damaged areas in China[J].Land Use Policy, 2019, 81:160-166.
[13]陈展图,杨庆媛,童小容.轮作休耕推进农业供给侧结构性改革路径研究[J].农村经济,2017(7):20-25.
[14]沈孝强,吴次芳.自主参与式农地休养政策:模式和启示[J].中国土地科学,2016,30(1):68-74
[15]钟媛,张晓宁.休耕政策存在的问题及对策[J].农业经济问题,2018(9):76-84.
[16]孙华,赵晶.基于生命周期理论的无锡市锡山区棕(褐)地再利用环境风险综合评价[J].中国土地科学,2012,26(7):84-90.
[17]张慧芳,吴宇哲,何良将.我国推行休耕制度的探讨[J].浙江农业学报,2013,25(1):166-170.
[18]XIE H, CHENG L, LU H. Farmers’ responses to the winter wheat fallow policy in the groundwater funnel area of China[J]. Land Use Policy, 2018, 73:195-204.
[19]中华人民共和国中央人民政府.农业部就耕地轮作休耕制度试点有关情况举行新闻发布会[EB/OL].(2018-02-23)[2018-10-25]. http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-02/23/content_5268221.htm.
[20]王行风,汪云甲,李永峰.基于生命周期理论的煤矿区土地利用演化模拟[J].地理研究,2009,28(2):379-390.
[21]常伶丽.从生命周期理论透视中国农村养老保障制度[J].特区经济,2007(7):111-112.
[22]吴一恒,徐砾,马贤磊.农地“三权分置”制度实施潜在风险与完善措施——基于产权配置与产权公共域视角[J].中国农村经济,2018(8):46-63.
[23]匡兵,卢新海,陈丹玲.基于内容分析法的中国耕地轮作休耕政策工具选择研究[J].中国土地科学,2018,32(11):30-36.
[24]杨文杰,巩前文.国内耕地休耕试点主要做法、问题与对策研究[J].农业现代化研究,2018,39(1):9-18.
[25]陈振,郭杰,欧名豪,等.资本下乡过程中农地流转风险识别、形成机理与管控策略[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(5):988-995.
[26]宋文飞,李国平,韩先锋,等.“产权公共域”与失地农民利益失衡的理论机理剖析:基于租金视角[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2016,26(6):84-93.
[27]罗婷婷,邹学荣.撂荒、弃耕、退耕还林与休耕转换机制谋划[J].西部论坛,2015(2):40-46.
[28]俞振宁,谭永忠,练款,等.基于计划行为理论分析农户参与重金属污染耕地休耕治理行为[J].农业工程学报,2018,34(24):266-273.
[29]俞振宁,谭永忠,茅铭芝,等.重金属污染耕地治理式休耕补偿政策:农户选择实验及影响因素分析[J].中国农村经济,2018(2):109-125.
[30]谢花林,翟群力,卢华.我国耕地轮作休耕制度运行中的监督机制探讨[J].农林经济管理学报,2018,17(4):455-462.