生计资本对农地整治项目农户有效参与的影响——以湖北省9县(市、区)为例
|
摘要
测度湖北省9县(市、区)农地整治项目农户有效参与度,分析了影响农户有效参与的生计资本因素。利用TOPSIS法计算农户有效参与及生计资本综合值,采用典型相关模型分析了生计资本对农户有效参与的影响。结果表明:平原工程模式区农户的自然资本、人力资本和物质资本均优于丘陵工程模式区农户,而丘陵工程模式区农户在农地整治项目中的有效参与度更高;从生计资本综合值来看,非农业型农户(0.367 8)>高度兼业型农户(0.352 7)>纯农业型农户(0.351 4)>低度兼业型农户(0.311 3),从农户有效参与度来看,纯农业型农户(0.448 5)>低度兼业型农户(0.425 4)>高度兼业型农户(0.402 9)>非农业型农户(0.402 4);自然资本、社会资本、金融资本依次显著影响着丘陵工程模式区农地整治项目农户参与范围及参与主体,而人力资本、社会资本、金融资本、物质资本依次显著影响着平原工程模式区农地整治项目农户参与范围、参与深度、参与渠道;社会资本、自然资本和人力资本依次显著影响着纯农业型农户参与范围和参与效度,金融资本、社会资本和人力资本依次显著影响着低度兼业型农户参与主体、参与范围和参与效度,金融资本、物质资本和社会资本依次显著影响着高度兼业型农户参与范围、参与效度、参与深度和参与渠道,社会资本和金融资本显著影响着非农业型农户参与范围、参与效度、参与主体和参与深度。生计资本对农户有效参与行为的影响存在显著的区域差异和个体差异。
This study assessed the effective participation of farmers in farmland renovation projects in 9 counties cities and districts of Hubei Province. The factors of livelihood capital that affect farmers′ effective participation were analyzed. The TOPSIS method was used to calculate the comprehensive value of farmers′ effective participation and their livelihood capital. The impact of the livelihood capital on the effective participation of farmers was analyzed with the typical correlation model. The results showed that the natural capital, human capital and physical capital of famers in plain project mode area were better than those in hill project area, while farmers′ effective participation in plain mode area was higher than that in hill mode area; the overall livelihood capital decreased in the sequence: non-farmers(0.367 8)>highly-diversified farmers(0.352 7)>agricultural business farmers(0.351 4)>lowly-diversified farmers(0.311 3), the level of farmers′ effective participation decreased in the order agricultural business farmers(0.448 5)> lowly-diversified farmers(0.425 4)>highly-diversified farmers(0.402 9)>non-farmers(0.402 4); natural capital, social capital and financial capital respectively posed the decreasing significant effect on farmers′ participation in farmland reclamation projects in hill mode area with respect of participation scope and participation subjects, while human capital, social capital, financial capital and physical capital respectively posed the significant effect on farmers′ participation in farmland reclamation projects in plain mode area with respect of participation scope, participation depth, and participation channel; social capital, natural capital and human capital respectively posed the decreasing significant effect on farmers′ participation scope and participation validity of agricultural business farmers; in addition, financial capital, social capital and human capital posed the decreasing significant effect on farmers′ participation subject, participation scope and participation validity of lowly-diversified farmers; furthermore, financial capital, physical capital and social capital posed the decreasing significant effect on highly-diversified farmers; moreover, social capital and financial capital had significant effect on farmers′ participation scope, participation validity, participation subject and participation depth of non-agriculture farmers. There were significant regional differences and individual differences in the impact of livelihood capital on the effective participation of farmers.
This study assessed the effective participation of farmers in farmland renovation projects in 9 counties cities and districts of Hubei Province. The factors of livelihood capital that affect farmers′ effective participation were analyzed. The TOPSIS method was used to calculate the comprehensive value of farmers′ effective participation and their livelihood capital. The impact of the livelihood capital on the effective participation of farmers was analyzed with the typical correlation model. The results showed that the natural capital, human capital and physical capital of famers in plain project mode area were better than those in hill project area, while farmers′ effective participation in plain mode area was higher than that in hill mode area; the overall livelihood capital decreased in the sequence: non-farmers(0.367 8)>highly-diversified farmers(0.352 7)>agricultural business farmers(0.351 4)>lowly-diversified farmers(0.311 3), the level of farmers′ effective participation decreased in the order agricultural business farmers(0.448 5)> lowly-diversified farmers(0.425 4)>highly-diversified farmers(0.402 9)>non-farmers(0.402 4); natural capital, social capital and financial capital respectively posed the decreasing significant effect on farmers′ participation in farmland reclamation projects in hill mode area with respect of participation scope and participation subjects, while human capital, social capital, financial capital and physical capital respectively posed the significant effect on farmers′ participation in farmland reclamation projects in plain mode area with respect of participation scope, participation depth, and participation channel; social capital, natural capital and human capital respectively posed the decreasing significant effect on farmers′ participation scope and participation validity of agricultural business farmers; in addition, financial capital, social capital and human capital posed the decreasing significant effect on farmers′ participation subject, participation scope and participation validity of lowly-diversified farmers; furthermore, financial capital, physical capital and social capital posed the decreasing significant effect on highly-diversified farmers; moreover, social capital and financial capital had significant effect on farmers′ participation scope, participation validity, participation subject and participation depth of non-agriculture farmers. There were significant regional differences and individual differences in the impact of livelihood capital on the effective participation of farmers.
引文
[1]汪文雄.农地整治项目农民有效参与的实证研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2015,25(7):128-137.
[2]吴九兴.农地整理项目农民参与现状及其原因分析:基于湖北省部分县区的问卷调查[J].华中农业大学学报:社会科学版,2013(1):65-71.
[3]赵微,周惠,杨钢桥,等.农民参与农地整理项目建后管护的意愿与行为转化研究:以河南邓州的调查为例[J].中国土地科学,2016,30(3):55-62.
[4]吴九兴,杨钢桥.农地整理项目农民参与行为的机理研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(2):102-110.
[5]杨昭熙,杨钢桥,汪文雄,等.社会资本视域下农民参与农地整治项目的行为机理[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(3):288-294,300.
[6]李祎琛,吴诗嫚.农地整治项目规划设计阶段农户参与度影响因素研究:基于博弈论视角[J].中国农业资源与区划,2017,38(4):69-74.
[7]汪文雄,李敏,余利红,等.农地整治项目农民有效参与的测度及其诊断:以湖北省为例[J].资源科学,2015,37(4):671-679.
[8]DFID.Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets[J].Dfid,2007.
[9]王沛沛,许佳君.生计资本对水库移民创业的影响分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2013,23(2):150-156.
[10]张洪,张燕.基于加权TOPSIS法的旅游资源区际竞争力比较研究:以长江三角洲为例[J].长江流域资源与环境,2010,19(5):500-505.
[11]谢晋,蔡银莺.创新实践地区农户参与农田保护补偿政策成效的生计禀赋影响:苏州及成都的实证比较[J].资源科学,2016,38(11):2082-2094.
[12]李伯华,刘艳,张安录,等.城市边缘区不同类型农户对宅基地流转的认知与响应:以衡阳市酃湖乡两个典型村为例[J].资源科学,2015,37(4):654-662.
[2]吴九兴.农地整理项目农民参与现状及其原因分析:基于湖北省部分县区的问卷调查[J].华中农业大学学报:社会科学版,2013(1):65-71.
[3]赵微,周惠,杨钢桥,等.农民参与农地整理项目建后管护的意愿与行为转化研究:以河南邓州的调查为例[J].中国土地科学,2016,30(3):55-62.
[4]吴九兴,杨钢桥.农地整理项目农民参与行为的机理研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(2):102-110.
[5]杨昭熙,杨钢桥,汪文雄,等.社会资本视域下农民参与农地整治项目的行为机理[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(3):288-294,300.
[6]李祎琛,吴诗嫚.农地整治项目规划设计阶段农户参与度影响因素研究:基于博弈论视角[J].中国农业资源与区划,2017,38(4):69-74.
[7]汪文雄,李敏,余利红,等.农地整治项目农民有效参与的测度及其诊断:以湖北省为例[J].资源科学,2015,37(4):671-679.
[8]DFID.Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets[J].Dfid,2007.
[9]王沛沛,许佳君.生计资本对水库移民创业的影响分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2013,23(2):150-156.
[10]张洪,张燕.基于加权TOPSIS法的旅游资源区际竞争力比较研究:以长江三角洲为例[J].长江流域资源与环境,2010,19(5):500-505.
[11]谢晋,蔡银莺.创新实践地区农户参与农田保护补偿政策成效的生计禀赋影响:苏州及成都的实证比较[J].资源科学,2016,38(11):2082-2094.
[12]李伯华,刘艳,张安录,等.城市边缘区不同类型农户对宅基地流转的认知与响应:以衡阳市酃湖乡两个典型村为例[J].资源科学,2015,37(4):654-662.