贫困地区精准脱贫户生计可持续及其动态风险研究
|
摘要
精准脱贫户的生计可持续性已成为后扶贫时期我国关注的焦点问题之一。本文选择生计资本和代际可持续性两个关键属性构建了生计可持续性框架,将生计资本划分为自然资本、物质资本、人力资本、社会资本和金融资本五类,将后代教育作为代际可持续性评估要素。在此基础上,采用全国社科基金规划重点项目课题组于2016—2017年分三次进行的大规模微观农户入户调查数据,构建BP神经网筛选计算出可持续生计24项评价指标及其权重,对各贫困地区可持续生计指数的预测结果表明:甘肃、山西贫困地区精准脱贫户生计可持续性较强,可持续生计指数分别为4. 288和4. 161;云南、江西、重庆精准脱贫户生计较稳定,可持续生计指数差别较小且均超过3. 6;四川、湖南精准脱贫户可持续生计指数为3. 377和3. 135,生计水平较低;贵州地区可持续生计指数为2. 953,精准脱贫户生计脆弱。基于生计动态转换视角,采用生存分析法探讨了影响精准脱贫户家庭生计可持续风险率的关键因素:因能力、教育、环境致贫的精准脱贫户在脱贫后生计稳定性较好,分别为3. 423、2. 750、2. 642 a,心理因素致贫的可持续生计的生存时间较短,生理因素致贫的生计稳定的生存时间最短,仅为1. 876 a。女性户主生计稳定持续时间(1. 841 a)明显低于男性户主(2. 792 a)。对生计稳定的精准脱贫户生计动荡的比例风险模型估计结果,与可持续生计评价指标及其权重的直观分析结果基本一致:金融资本、人力资本、自然资本对于精准脱贫可持续生计的重要程度最强,物质资本、社会资本对生计稳定有较大影响。综合分析认为:贫困户脱贫退出后的2年应成为脱贫保障的重点"观察期",在这个期间应重点从人力资本和金融资本积累视角对生计尚欠稳定的精准脱贫户实施后帮扶和追踪支持,帮助精准脱贫户稳步实现可持续生计,让脱贫成效经得起时间的检验。
The livelihood sustainability of targeted poverty-alleviation households has become one of the focused issues in China in the post-poverty period. This paper selected two key attributes including livelihood capital and intergenerational sustainability to construct a modified livelihood sustainability framework,which divided livelihood capital into natural capital,physical capital,human capital,social capital and financial capital,and used future generation education as an element of intergenerational sustainability assessment.On the basis of the large-scale micro-farmer household survey data conducted by the research team of the National Social Science Fund Planning Key Project that was implemented in three times from 2016 to 2017,this paper built the BP neural network to calculate the weights of 24 indexes of sustainable livelihoods. The predictions of sustainable livelihood indexes in poverty-stricken areas showed that the pre-poverty households in Gansu,Shanxi had strong sustainability,and the sustainable livelihood indexes were 4. 288 and 4. 161 respectively. The pre-poverty households in Yunnan,Jiangxi and Chongqing were relatively stable,and the difference in sustainable livelihood index was small and exceeded 3. 6. The sustainable livelihood scores of pre-poverty households in Sichuan and Hunan were3. 377 and 3. 135,which meant the livelihood levels were low; the sustainable livelihood index in Guizhou was 2. 953,which showed the livelihood of pre-poverty households was fragile. Based on the perspective of livelihood dynamics conversion,this paper used the survival analysis method to explore the key factors affecting the sustainable risk rate of households lifted out of poverty: those households who fell into poverty because of capacity,education and the environment have better livelihood stability after the precision anti-poverty program and the stable phases were 3. 423,2. 750 and 2. 642 respectively. The survival time of sustainable livelihoods with psychological factors for poverty was short,and the survival time of physiological factors that caused poverty was the shortest,only1. 876 years. Meanwhile,the stable duration of female-headed households( 1. 841) was significantly lower than that of male heads( 2. 792). The estimation of the proportional hazards model for the livelihood turbulence of pre-poverty households was basically consistent with the results of the direct analysis and their weights for sustainable livelihoods: financial capital,human capital and natural capital were the most important for sustainable livelihood of targeted poverty-alleviation households; material capital and social capital have a greater impact on livelihood stability. According to the comprehensive analysis,the two years after anti-poverty program should be the focus of the'observation period'. During this period,relevant departments should focus on providing unstable livelihood households with requisite help and tracking support from the perspective of human capital and financial capital accumulation and help targeted poverty-alleviation households out of poverty to achieve sustainable livelihoods steadily,so that the effectiveness of poverty alleviation can stand the test of time.
The livelihood sustainability of targeted poverty-alleviation households has become one of the focused issues in China in the post-poverty period. This paper selected two key attributes including livelihood capital and intergenerational sustainability to construct a modified livelihood sustainability framework,which divided livelihood capital into natural capital,physical capital,human capital,social capital and financial capital,and used future generation education as an element of intergenerational sustainability assessment.On the basis of the large-scale micro-farmer household survey data conducted by the research team of the National Social Science Fund Planning Key Project that was implemented in three times from 2016 to 2017,this paper built the BP neural network to calculate the weights of 24 indexes of sustainable livelihoods. The predictions of sustainable livelihood indexes in poverty-stricken areas showed that the pre-poverty households in Gansu,Shanxi had strong sustainability,and the sustainable livelihood indexes were 4. 288 and 4. 161 respectively. The pre-poverty households in Yunnan,Jiangxi and Chongqing were relatively stable,and the difference in sustainable livelihood index was small and exceeded 3. 6. The sustainable livelihood scores of pre-poverty households in Sichuan and Hunan were3. 377 and 3. 135,which meant the livelihood levels were low; the sustainable livelihood index in Guizhou was 2. 953,which showed the livelihood of pre-poverty households was fragile. Based on the perspective of livelihood dynamics conversion,this paper used the survival analysis method to explore the key factors affecting the sustainable risk rate of households lifted out of poverty: those households who fell into poverty because of capacity,education and the environment have better livelihood stability after the precision anti-poverty program and the stable phases were 3. 423,2. 750 and 2. 642 respectively. The survival time of sustainable livelihoods with psychological factors for poverty was short,and the survival time of physiological factors that caused poverty was the shortest,only1. 876 years. Meanwhile,the stable duration of female-headed households( 1. 841) was significantly lower than that of male heads( 2. 792). The estimation of the proportional hazards model for the livelihood turbulence of pre-poverty households was basically consistent with the results of the direct analysis and their weights for sustainable livelihoods: financial capital,human capital and natural capital were the most important for sustainable livelihood of targeted poverty-alleviation households; material capital and social capital have a greater impact on livelihood stability. According to the comprehensive analysis,the two years after anti-poverty program should be the focus of the'observation period'. During this period,relevant departments should focus on providing unstable livelihood households with requisite help and tracking support from the perspective of human capital and financial capital accumulation and help targeted poverty-alleviation households out of poverty to achieve sustainable livelihoods steadily,so that the effectiveness of poverty alleviation can stand the test of time.
引文
[1]汪三贵,郭子豪.论中国的精准扶贫[J].贵州社会科学,2015(5):147-150.
[2]李君如.人权蓝皮书:中国人权事业发展报告[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2016.
[3]MOURELO E L,ESCUDERO V. Effectiveness of active labor market tools in conditional cash transfers programs:evidence for Argentina[J]. World development,2017,94(6):422-447.
[4]BANE M J,EllWOOD D T. Welfare realities:from rhetoric to reform[M]. Cambridge M A:Harvard University Press,2017.
[5]李裕瑞,曹智,郑小玉,等.我国实施精准扶贫的区域模式与可持续途径[J].中国科学院院刊,2016(3):279-287.
[6]SIMONE C. Conditional cash transfer programmes:the recent experience in Latin America and the Caribbean[M]. New York:United Nations,2011:89-132.
[7]房连泉.国际扶贫中的退出机制——有条件现金转移支付计划在发展中国家的实践[J].国际经济评论,2016(11):86-104.
[8]MICHELLE M D S S. Poverty reduction,education,and the global diffusion of conditional cash transfers[M]. London:Palgrave Macmillan,2017:184.
[9]RITA A,EMANUELA G. Jump-starting self-employment? evidence for welfare participants in Argentina[J]. World development,2010,38(5):742-755.
[10]ELLWOOD D T,ADAMS E K. Medicaid mysteries:transitional benefits,medicaid coverage,and welfare exits[J]. Health care financing review,1990(11):119-131.
[11]SEN A. Capability and well-being[M]. Oxford:Clarendon Press,1993:30-53.
[12]CHAMBERS R,CONWAY G R. Sustainable rural livelihoods:practical concepts for the 21st century[R]. UK:Institute of Development Studies,1991:296.
[13]Department for International Development. Sustainable livelihood guidance sheets[R]. London:DFID,1999.
[14]FARRINGTON J. Sustainable livelihoods, rights and the new architecture of aid[R]. London:Overseas Development Institute,2001:123-145.
[15]PANTHI J,ARYAL S,DAHAL P,et al. Livelihood vulnerability approach to assessing climate change impacts on mixed agrolivestock smallholders around the Gandaki River Basin in Nepal[J].Regional environmental change,2016,16(4):1121-1132.
[16]STEPHEN M,NORA M N. Sustainable livelihood approach:a critique of theory and practice[M]. Dordrecht:Science&Business Media,2013:34-56.
[17]何仁伟.山区聚落农户可持续生计发展水平及空间差异分析:以四川省凉山州为例[J].中国科学院大学学报,2014,31(2):221-230.
[18]HUANG T,XI J C,GE Q S. Livelihood differentiation between two villages in Yesanpo tourism district in China[J]. Journal of mountain science,2017,14(11):2359-2372.
[19]GENTLE P, MARASENI T N. Climate change, poverty and livelihoods:adaptation practices by rural mountain communities in Nepal[J]. Environmental science&policy,2012,21(12):24-34.
[20]WANG C,YANG Y,ZHANG Y. Economic development,rural livelihoods,and ecological restoration,evidence from China[J].AMBIO,2011,40(1):78-87.
[21]YAN J,ZHANG Y. Livelihood vulnerability assessment of farmers and nomads in eastern ecotone of Tibetan Plateau[J]. American Geophysical Union,2011(7):858-867.
[22]FANG Y P,FAN J,SHEN M Y,et al. Sensitivity of livelihood strategy to livelihood capital in mountain areas:empirical analysis based on different settlements in the upper reaches of the Minjiang River,China[J]. Ecological indicators,2014,38:225-235.
[23]HUANG X J,HUANG X,HE Y B,et al. Assessment of livelihood vulnerability of land-lost farmers in urban fringes:a case study of Xi'an,China[J]. Habitat international,2017,59:1-9.
[24]LIU Y G,HUANG C M. WANQ,et al. Assessment of sustainable livelihood and geographic detection of settlement sites in ethnically contiguous poverty-stricken areas in the Aba Prefecture,China[J].International journal of geo-information,2018,7(1):1-18.
[25]BRAUW A D,ROZELLE S. Reconciling the the returns to education in off-Farm wage employment in rural China[J]. Review of development economics,2008(12):57-71.
[26]ASADULLAH M N,RAHMAN S. Farm productivity and efficiency in rural Bangladesh:the role of education revisited[J]. Applied economic,2009,41(1):17-33.
[27]REIMERS M,KLASEN S. Revisiting the role of education for agricultural productivity[J]. American journal of agricultural economics,2013,95(1):131-152.
[28]王彦星,潘石玉,卢涛,等.生计资本对青藏高原东缘牧民生计活动的影响及区域差异[J].资源科学,2014,36(10):2157-2165.
[29]杨云彦,赵峰.可持续生计分析框架下农户生计资本的调查与分析:以南水北调(中线)工程库区为例[J].农业经济问题,2009(3):58-65.
[30]DENG Z,TREIMAN D J. The impact of the cultural revolution on trends in educational attainment in the People’s Republic of China[J]. The American journal of sociology,1997,103(2):391-428.
[31]AIZER A,CUNHA F. The Production of child human capital:endowments,investments,and fertility[D]. Cambridge:Brown University,2012.
[32]CUNHA F,HECKMAN J J. Formulating,identifying and estimating the technology of cognitive and noncognitive skill formation[J]. The journal of human resources,2008,43(4):738-782.
[33]VINCENT K. Uncertainty in adaptive capacity and the importance of scale[J]. Global environmental change,2007,17(1):12-24.
[34]WANG C C,ZHANG Y Q,YANG Y S,et al. Assessment of sustainable livelihoods of different farmers in hilly red soil erosion areas of Southern China[J]. Ecological indicators,2016,64:123-131.
[35]刘恩来,徐定德,谢芳婷,等.基于农户生计策略选择影响因素的生计资本度量:以四川省402户农户为例[J].西南大学学报(自然科学版),2015(12):59-65.
[36]BARRETT C B,MARENYA P P,MCPEAK J,et al. Welfare dynamics in rural Kenya and Madagascar[J]. The journal of development studies,2006,42(2):248-277.
[37]PANDEY R, JHA S K, ALATALO J M, et al. Sustainable livelihood framework-based indicators for assessing climate change vulnerability and adaptation for Himalayan communities[J].Ecological indicators,2017,79:338-346.
[2]李君如.人权蓝皮书:中国人权事业发展报告[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2016.
[3]MOURELO E L,ESCUDERO V. Effectiveness of active labor market tools in conditional cash transfers programs:evidence for Argentina[J]. World development,2017,94(6):422-447.
[4]BANE M J,EllWOOD D T. Welfare realities:from rhetoric to reform[M]. Cambridge M A:Harvard University Press,2017.
[5]李裕瑞,曹智,郑小玉,等.我国实施精准扶贫的区域模式与可持续途径[J].中国科学院院刊,2016(3):279-287.
[6]SIMONE C. Conditional cash transfer programmes:the recent experience in Latin America and the Caribbean[M]. New York:United Nations,2011:89-132.
[7]房连泉.国际扶贫中的退出机制——有条件现金转移支付计划在发展中国家的实践[J].国际经济评论,2016(11):86-104.
[8]MICHELLE M D S S. Poverty reduction,education,and the global diffusion of conditional cash transfers[M]. London:Palgrave Macmillan,2017:184.
[9]RITA A,EMANUELA G. Jump-starting self-employment? evidence for welfare participants in Argentina[J]. World development,2010,38(5):742-755.
[10]ELLWOOD D T,ADAMS E K. Medicaid mysteries:transitional benefits,medicaid coverage,and welfare exits[J]. Health care financing review,1990(11):119-131.
[11]SEN A. Capability and well-being[M]. Oxford:Clarendon Press,1993:30-53.
[12]CHAMBERS R,CONWAY G R. Sustainable rural livelihoods:practical concepts for the 21st century[R]. UK:Institute of Development Studies,1991:296.
[13]Department for International Development. Sustainable livelihood guidance sheets[R]. London:DFID,1999.
[14]FARRINGTON J. Sustainable livelihoods, rights and the new architecture of aid[R]. London:Overseas Development Institute,2001:123-145.
[15]PANTHI J,ARYAL S,DAHAL P,et al. Livelihood vulnerability approach to assessing climate change impacts on mixed agrolivestock smallholders around the Gandaki River Basin in Nepal[J].Regional environmental change,2016,16(4):1121-1132.
[16]STEPHEN M,NORA M N. Sustainable livelihood approach:a critique of theory and practice[M]. Dordrecht:Science&Business Media,2013:34-56.
[17]何仁伟.山区聚落农户可持续生计发展水平及空间差异分析:以四川省凉山州为例[J].中国科学院大学学报,2014,31(2):221-230.
[18]HUANG T,XI J C,GE Q S. Livelihood differentiation between two villages in Yesanpo tourism district in China[J]. Journal of mountain science,2017,14(11):2359-2372.
[19]GENTLE P, MARASENI T N. Climate change, poverty and livelihoods:adaptation practices by rural mountain communities in Nepal[J]. Environmental science&policy,2012,21(12):24-34.
[20]WANG C,YANG Y,ZHANG Y. Economic development,rural livelihoods,and ecological restoration,evidence from China[J].AMBIO,2011,40(1):78-87.
[21]YAN J,ZHANG Y. Livelihood vulnerability assessment of farmers and nomads in eastern ecotone of Tibetan Plateau[J]. American Geophysical Union,2011(7):858-867.
[22]FANG Y P,FAN J,SHEN M Y,et al. Sensitivity of livelihood strategy to livelihood capital in mountain areas:empirical analysis based on different settlements in the upper reaches of the Minjiang River,China[J]. Ecological indicators,2014,38:225-235.
[23]HUANG X J,HUANG X,HE Y B,et al. Assessment of livelihood vulnerability of land-lost farmers in urban fringes:a case study of Xi'an,China[J]. Habitat international,2017,59:1-9.
[24]LIU Y G,HUANG C M. WANQ,et al. Assessment of sustainable livelihood and geographic detection of settlement sites in ethnically contiguous poverty-stricken areas in the Aba Prefecture,China[J].International journal of geo-information,2018,7(1):1-18.
[25]BRAUW A D,ROZELLE S. Reconciling the the returns to education in off-Farm wage employment in rural China[J]. Review of development economics,2008(12):57-71.
[26]ASADULLAH M N,RAHMAN S. Farm productivity and efficiency in rural Bangladesh:the role of education revisited[J]. Applied economic,2009,41(1):17-33.
[27]REIMERS M,KLASEN S. Revisiting the role of education for agricultural productivity[J]. American journal of agricultural economics,2013,95(1):131-152.
[28]王彦星,潘石玉,卢涛,等.生计资本对青藏高原东缘牧民生计活动的影响及区域差异[J].资源科学,2014,36(10):2157-2165.
[29]杨云彦,赵峰.可持续生计分析框架下农户生计资本的调查与分析:以南水北调(中线)工程库区为例[J].农业经济问题,2009(3):58-65.
[30]DENG Z,TREIMAN D J. The impact of the cultural revolution on trends in educational attainment in the People’s Republic of China[J]. The American journal of sociology,1997,103(2):391-428.
[31]AIZER A,CUNHA F. The Production of child human capital:endowments,investments,and fertility[D]. Cambridge:Brown University,2012.
[32]CUNHA F,HECKMAN J J. Formulating,identifying and estimating the technology of cognitive and noncognitive skill formation[J]. The journal of human resources,2008,43(4):738-782.
[33]VINCENT K. Uncertainty in adaptive capacity and the importance of scale[J]. Global environmental change,2007,17(1):12-24.
[34]WANG C C,ZHANG Y Q,YANG Y S,et al. Assessment of sustainable livelihoods of different farmers in hilly red soil erosion areas of Southern China[J]. Ecological indicators,2016,64:123-131.
[35]刘恩来,徐定德,谢芳婷,等.基于农户生计策略选择影响因素的生计资本度量:以四川省402户农户为例[J].西南大学学报(自然科学版),2015(12):59-65.
[36]BARRETT C B,MARENYA P P,MCPEAK J,et al. Welfare dynamics in rural Kenya and Madagascar[J]. The journal of development studies,2006,42(2):248-277.
[37]PANDEY R, JHA S K, ALATALO J M, et al. Sustainable livelihood framework-based indicators for assessing climate change vulnerability and adaptation for Himalayan communities[J].Ecological indicators,2017,79:338-346.