农地城市流转外部性测度与外部性内化政策
|
摘要
我国目前处于工业化、城市化快速发展时期,农地城市流转规模大、效率低,地方政府“主导”的违规用地现象突出。单一的数量、指标控制农地城市流转的政策已难以实现农地城市流转数量的优化。为了能从理论上实现农地城市流转过程优化,外部性是需要研究的重要问题,外部性的存在往往导致市场机制效率偏低,而在农地城市流转的过程中,众多过去被忽略的重要问题,例如粮食安全、生态安全以及城市扩张带来的环境污染,都可以从外部性理论中得到体现。在我国经济发展模式转变的新时期,以外部性视角分析农地城市流转问题,能够全面考虑农地所提供的社会、生态效益以及农地转为建设用地所产生的环境损害,提出有效、可持续的农地保护政策。为此,本文针对农地城市流转中涉及的外部性进行了系统的归纳,认为农地城市流转破坏了农地保有的正外部性(外部效益),同时带来了农地城市流转的负外部性(外部成本),将其纳入效益成本衡量的体系当中予以考虑,能够避免大量的农地过度流转。
本文将农地城市流转外部性的测度和配置优化作为研究重点,从农地城市流转外部性分析、外部性测度、外部性内化政策等方面入手,具体分析外部性的数量、差异以及农地城市流转时间、规模,同时,将我国现状纳入到本文理论分析的框架中,通过理论分析和实证研究对理想状况和现实状况进行对比,从而有针对的提出农地城市流转控制政策及建议。具体的研究和讨论从以下几个方面展开：
首先,论文对农地保有的外部效益进行测度。该工作首先对农地保有外部效益进行界定和理论分析,明确农地保有外部效益的内部(发出区)和外部(接受区)；然后对支付意愿测算方法进行归纳比较；之后选择武汉市作为实证区域并利用选择实验法对武汉市外部区域个体的支付意愿进行测算。考虑外部性影响范围,研究将结合实证结果进行讨论,利用三种方法估算外部效益并进行比较分析。结果表明武汉市耕地、园地、林地和农村水面的外部效益分别为30773.2元/hm2,653860.0元/hm2,119267.0元/hm2和82472.7元/hm2。比较不同内、外部划分方法所得的结果,发现用行政区域直接代替外部性影响区域的做法会使耕地外部效益的测算结果偏高,也会造成园地、林地和农村水面测算结果的误差。
随后,论文对农地城市流转外部成本进行测算。这一部分首先对农地城市流转外部成本进行界定,并分析外部成本测算涉及的理论。实证在武汉城市圈优化开发区和重点开发区分别选择武汉市和仙桃市作为研究区域,在城市建成区边缘选择样点进行农地城市流转外部成本测算。对于测算中涉及到的部分-整体误差、外部区域界限识别等问题进行了讨论,最后对两个城市农地城市流转外部成本的差异和变化规律进行比较分析。
在外部性测算之后,研究对农地城市流转外部性内化的方法和基本模型进行了分析。针对外部性问题,研究归纳了庇古解决方法、科斯解决方法以及政府进行外部性内化的方法；在此基础上,对基本的农地城市流转决策模型以及农地城市流转动态决策模型进行了分析。分析认为,相比而言,税费政策能够产生财政收入、具有公平性且更有效率,因此广为采用,但其也存在一些不足需要直接管制政策进行弥补。对于农地城市流转中的土地配置问题,目前已经产生了多个决策模型,基本思路为效益-成本分析,在动态最优化技术的支持下,模型能够对流转数量和流转时间进行分析,从而推算最优化条件。
最后,在外部性测算结果和外部性内化理论的基础上针对国内情况进行了流转规模以及政策优化的研究。这一部分首先对目前国内农地城市流转的现状、管理体系进行了介绍和分析。然后提出了符合国内实际情况的农地城市流转分析模型,通过模型分析了不同外部性内化政策的效果。随后的实证研究以武汉城市圈为研究对象对理论模型进行模拟,以估算城市圈农地城市流转的最优规模,同时,将估算结果与现实政策进行比较,从而提出相应的政策建议。研究发现,尽管我国农地城市流转决策主体为地方政府而非个人,但农地城市流转中的农地保护政策仍然可以视为农地外部性内化的过程,土地用途管制(土地利用规划和年度用地计划)和能够影响地方政府收益的税费政策(耕地开垦费、新增建设用地使用费、耕地占用税)的结合,能够实现农地外部性的内化并且保证地区农地城市流转的适度进行。同时,目前的武汉城市圈的相关政策和流转最优化的目标存在一定的偏差,一方面,相关税费政策的标准偏低,使得农地城市流转控制的任务还依赖于土地用途管制的指标和来自于中央的监督,建议提高税费标准使其与土地用途管制目标相一致,流转优化便可主要通过税费政策得以实现；另一方面,武汉城市圈部分年份的建设用地占用农用地指标较最优规模数量差异偏大,建议指标根据农地外部性的情况进行制定。
China is in the process of rapid industrialization and urbanization, meanwhile, large amount of agricultural lands have been converted to urban lands, then inefficiency or illegal conversion leaded by local government becomes serious problem. To analyze the issue theoretically and achieve optimal rural-urban land allocation, externality of rural-urban land conversion is an essential topic to focus on, since externality is important reason for inefficiency of market mechanism and could cause problems such as food security, ecological security, environmental pollution and urban sprawl. However, these were neglected in land conversion decision-making. Nowadays, it is realized that the pattern of economic development must change to consider resource conservation and environment protection. Therefore study on rural-urban land conversion from the perspective of externality could consider social and ecological benefit of agricultural land and environmental damage, and provide effective and sustainable policies of agricultural land preservation. To achieve the objective, the dissertation regards land conversion eliminating positive externality (external benefit) of agricultural land and bringing extra negative externality (external cost), and considers externality of rural-urban land conversion into benefit-cost analysis to avoid excessive land conversion.
In the dissertation, externality measurement of rural-urban land conversion and externality internalization are main foci. The research contents include connotation of externality, method of externality measurement and policies of externality internalization. Specifically, measurement of externality, difference in externality between areas, optimal timing and magnitude of land conversion are analyzed. Meanwhile, the research considers Chinese context into theoretical framework and compare actual state with ideal state for operational suggestions. The Study is as the following.
At first, the dissertation tries to measure external benefits of agricultural land preservation. In this section, external benefits of agricultural land preservation are defined theoretically as not being rural collective and farmers, but individual utilities from agricultural land preservation. Following this definition, theoretical analysis found that internal part and external part should be divided and the extent of external part need be specified in the measurement process. In the empirical process, choice experiment (CE) model was used to calculate WTP(willingness to pay) of citizens. As a result, that external benefit of farmland, garden land, forest and pond in Wuhan is30773.2yuan/hm2,653860.0yuan/hm2,119267.Oyuan/hm2and82472.7yuan/hm2respectively. The result has significant difference with methods which ignore division of externalities extent.
Secondly, external costs of rural-urban land conversion are estimated in Wuhan metropolitan areas, the research reviews literatures on external costs of rural-urban land conversion and defines external costs in the process of rural-urban land conversion. Basing on the definition, the concept of external cost should be distinguished from non-market value. After that, the study divides external parts and internal parts by homogeneity areas, and separates affected areas and unaffected areas by Loomis'equation which was used in range estimating of public goods. The effects of external cost were generalized from land use types. In empirical study, the model is estimated using survey questionnaire data from urban fringe of Wuhan city and Xiantao city. In farmland and fishery, external costs are guaged by change in productivity method; in rural settlement, willingness to pay for avoiding external costs was estimated with contingent value method and the total value was decomposed by analytic hierarchy process method. The result of Wuhan city suggests that external costs of rural-urban land conversion in Yangdian, Zonghuang, Jinghu, Jinghe, Tianyuan, Sandian, Shekou, Tushan and Liujiazui are4.6×104yuan/hm2/a,7.2×104yuan/hm2/a,32.6×104yuan/hm2/a,1.2×104yuan/hm2/a,5.2×104yuan/hm2/a,1.5×104yuan/hm2/a,4.8×104yuan/hm2/a,4.1×104yuan/hm2/a and3.2x104yuan/hm2/a respectively; In Xiantao city, results are respectively0.6×104yuan/hm2/year,1.45×104yuan/hm2/year,1.17×104yuan/hm2/year,1.16×104yuan/hm2/year in4areas. Theory and methodology about measurement of externalities are discussed then.
Thirdly, the author analyzes solutions to externality internalization of rural-urban land conversion and introduces basic models of land conversion decision making. Pigovian solution, Coasian solution and policies of government to internalize externality are generalized. On the basis of the above solution analysis, decision-making principles of rural-urban land conversion are discussed and the dynamic optimization model relating land conversion is constructed. The result shows that policies of taxation or fee have justification and efficient, besides it could generate fiscal revenue instead of regulation or compensation. However, because of some flaws, combination of taxation/fee and regulation would be more effective. As to land allocation between rural and urban land, benefit-cost decision-making models have been suggested by scholars. Supported by dynamic optimization method, the temporal and magnitude of land conversion condition to achieve optimal target could be found.
At last, externalities of rural-urban land conversion are stdudied theoretically and empirically basing on model of local governments as decision-makers. Theoretical results presented that policy of land planning control and policy of taxation or fee about rural-urban land conversion could have different effects on decision-making of local government, therefore, combination of two kinds of policies should be used and the quantity standards of policies need to be determined by consistant objective. Empirical results presented that the magnitude of rural-urban land conversion surpass optimal amount from2003-2008in Wuhan metropolitan areas. Policies of land planning control reduced amount of rural-urban land conversion by691.88hm2; taxation and fee policies decreased amount by2203.37hm2. According to the analysis, although the decision-makers of rural-urban land conversion in China are local governments instead of individuals, policies of agricultural land preservation are still used for externalities internalization and optimization of land conversion anounts. To improve welfare relating rural-urban land conversion, policies-makers could adjust quantity standards of policies of agricultural land preservation.
本文将农地城市流转外部性的测度和配置优化作为研究重点,从农地城市流转外部性分析、外部性测度、外部性内化政策等方面入手,具体分析外部性的数量、差异以及农地城市流转时间、规模,同时,将我国现状纳入到本文理论分析的框架中,通过理论分析和实证研究对理想状况和现实状况进行对比,从而有针对的提出农地城市流转控制政策及建议。具体的研究和讨论从以下几个方面展开：
首先,论文对农地保有的外部效益进行测度。该工作首先对农地保有外部效益进行界定和理论分析,明确农地保有外部效益的内部(发出区)和外部(接受区)；然后对支付意愿测算方法进行归纳比较；之后选择武汉市作为实证区域并利用选择实验法对武汉市外部区域个体的支付意愿进行测算。考虑外部性影响范围,研究将结合实证结果进行讨论,利用三种方法估算外部效益并进行比较分析。结果表明武汉市耕地、园地、林地和农村水面的外部效益分别为30773.2元/hm2,653860.0元/hm2,119267.0元/hm2和82472.7元/hm2。比较不同内、外部划分方法所得的结果,发现用行政区域直接代替外部性影响区域的做法会使耕地外部效益的测算结果偏高,也会造成园地、林地和农村水面测算结果的误差。
随后,论文对农地城市流转外部成本进行测算。这一部分首先对农地城市流转外部成本进行界定,并分析外部成本测算涉及的理论。实证在武汉城市圈优化开发区和重点开发区分别选择武汉市和仙桃市作为研究区域,在城市建成区边缘选择样点进行农地城市流转外部成本测算。对于测算中涉及到的部分-整体误差、外部区域界限识别等问题进行了讨论,最后对两个城市农地城市流转外部成本的差异和变化规律进行比较分析。
在外部性测算之后,研究对农地城市流转外部性内化的方法和基本模型进行了分析。针对外部性问题,研究归纳了庇古解决方法、科斯解决方法以及政府进行外部性内化的方法；在此基础上,对基本的农地城市流转决策模型以及农地城市流转动态决策模型进行了分析。分析认为,相比而言,税费政策能够产生财政收入、具有公平性且更有效率,因此广为采用,但其也存在一些不足需要直接管制政策进行弥补。对于农地城市流转中的土地配置问题,目前已经产生了多个决策模型,基本思路为效益-成本分析,在动态最优化技术的支持下,模型能够对流转数量和流转时间进行分析,从而推算最优化条件。
最后,在外部性测算结果和外部性内化理论的基础上针对国内情况进行了流转规模以及政策优化的研究。这一部分首先对目前国内农地城市流转的现状、管理体系进行了介绍和分析。然后提出了符合国内实际情况的农地城市流转分析模型,通过模型分析了不同外部性内化政策的效果。随后的实证研究以武汉城市圈为研究对象对理论模型进行模拟,以估算城市圈农地城市流转的最优规模,同时,将估算结果与现实政策进行比较,从而提出相应的政策建议。研究发现,尽管我国农地城市流转决策主体为地方政府而非个人,但农地城市流转中的农地保护政策仍然可以视为农地外部性内化的过程,土地用途管制(土地利用规划和年度用地计划)和能够影响地方政府收益的税费政策(耕地开垦费、新增建设用地使用费、耕地占用税)的结合,能够实现农地外部性的内化并且保证地区农地城市流转的适度进行。同时,目前的武汉城市圈的相关政策和流转最优化的目标存在一定的偏差,一方面,相关税费政策的标准偏低,使得农地城市流转控制的任务还依赖于土地用途管制的指标和来自于中央的监督,建议提高税费标准使其与土地用途管制目标相一致,流转优化便可主要通过税费政策得以实现；另一方面,武汉城市圈部分年份的建设用地占用农用地指标较最优规模数量差异偏大,建议指标根据农地外部性的情况进行制定。
China is in the process of rapid industrialization and urbanization, meanwhile, large amount of agricultural lands have been converted to urban lands, then inefficiency or illegal conversion leaded by local government becomes serious problem. To analyze the issue theoretically and achieve optimal rural-urban land allocation, externality of rural-urban land conversion is an essential topic to focus on, since externality is important reason for inefficiency of market mechanism and could cause problems such as food security, ecological security, environmental pollution and urban sprawl. However, these were neglected in land conversion decision-making. Nowadays, it is realized that the pattern of economic development must change to consider resource conservation and environment protection. Therefore study on rural-urban land conversion from the perspective of externality could consider social and ecological benefit of agricultural land and environmental damage, and provide effective and sustainable policies of agricultural land preservation. To achieve the objective, the dissertation regards land conversion eliminating positive externality (external benefit) of agricultural land and bringing extra negative externality (external cost), and considers externality of rural-urban land conversion into benefit-cost analysis to avoid excessive land conversion.
In the dissertation, externality measurement of rural-urban land conversion and externality internalization are main foci. The research contents include connotation of externality, method of externality measurement and policies of externality internalization. Specifically, measurement of externality, difference in externality between areas, optimal timing and magnitude of land conversion are analyzed. Meanwhile, the research considers Chinese context into theoretical framework and compare actual state with ideal state for operational suggestions. The Study is as the following.
At first, the dissertation tries to measure external benefits of agricultural land preservation. In this section, external benefits of agricultural land preservation are defined theoretically as not being rural collective and farmers, but individual utilities from agricultural land preservation. Following this definition, theoretical analysis found that internal part and external part should be divided and the extent of external part need be specified in the measurement process. In the empirical process, choice experiment (CE) model was used to calculate WTP(willingness to pay) of citizens. As a result, that external benefit of farmland, garden land, forest and pond in Wuhan is30773.2yuan/hm2,653860.0yuan/hm2,119267.Oyuan/hm2and82472.7yuan/hm2respectively. The result has significant difference with methods which ignore division of externalities extent.
Secondly, external costs of rural-urban land conversion are estimated in Wuhan metropolitan areas, the research reviews literatures on external costs of rural-urban land conversion and defines external costs in the process of rural-urban land conversion. Basing on the definition, the concept of external cost should be distinguished from non-market value. After that, the study divides external parts and internal parts by homogeneity areas, and separates affected areas and unaffected areas by Loomis'equation which was used in range estimating of public goods. The effects of external cost were generalized from land use types. In empirical study, the model is estimated using survey questionnaire data from urban fringe of Wuhan city and Xiantao city. In farmland and fishery, external costs are guaged by change in productivity method; in rural settlement, willingness to pay for avoiding external costs was estimated with contingent value method and the total value was decomposed by analytic hierarchy process method. The result of Wuhan city suggests that external costs of rural-urban land conversion in Yangdian, Zonghuang, Jinghu, Jinghe, Tianyuan, Sandian, Shekou, Tushan and Liujiazui are4.6×104yuan/hm2/a,7.2×104yuan/hm2/a,32.6×104yuan/hm2/a,1.2×104yuan/hm2/a,5.2×104yuan/hm2/a,1.5×104yuan/hm2/a,4.8×104yuan/hm2/a,4.1×104yuan/hm2/a and3.2x104yuan/hm2/a respectively; In Xiantao city, results are respectively0.6×104yuan/hm2/year,1.45×104yuan/hm2/year,1.17×104yuan/hm2/year,1.16×104yuan/hm2/year in4areas. Theory and methodology about measurement of externalities are discussed then.
Thirdly, the author analyzes solutions to externality internalization of rural-urban land conversion and introduces basic models of land conversion decision making. Pigovian solution, Coasian solution and policies of government to internalize externality are generalized. On the basis of the above solution analysis, decision-making principles of rural-urban land conversion are discussed and the dynamic optimization model relating land conversion is constructed. The result shows that policies of taxation or fee have justification and efficient, besides it could generate fiscal revenue instead of regulation or compensation. However, because of some flaws, combination of taxation/fee and regulation would be more effective. As to land allocation between rural and urban land, benefit-cost decision-making models have been suggested by scholars. Supported by dynamic optimization method, the temporal and magnitude of land conversion condition to achieve optimal target could be found.
At last, externalities of rural-urban land conversion are stdudied theoretically and empirically basing on model of local governments as decision-makers. Theoretical results presented that policy of land planning control and policy of taxation or fee about rural-urban land conversion could have different effects on decision-making of local government, therefore, combination of two kinds of policies should be used and the quantity standards of policies need to be determined by consistant objective. Empirical results presented that the magnitude of rural-urban land conversion surpass optimal amount from2003-2008in Wuhan metropolitan areas. Policies of land planning control reduced amount of rural-urban land conversion by691.88hm2; taxation and fee policies decreased amount by2203.37hm2. According to the analysis, although the decision-makers of rural-urban land conversion in China are local governments instead of individuals, policies of agricultural land preservation are still used for externalities internalization and optimization of land conversion anounts. To improve welfare relating rural-urban land conversion, policies-makers could adjust quantity standards of policies of agricultural land preservation.
引文
1.阿玛蒂亚·森.以自由看待发展[M].(任赜等)北京：中国人民大学出版社,2002
2.蔡明华.水稻田之生态性机能及其保护对策[J].政情与农情.1994,30,29-36
3.蔡银莺,宗琪,张安录.江汉平原农地资源价值研究[J].中国人口资源与环境,2007,17(3),85-89
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),122-129
5.蔡银莺,张安录.城郊休闲农业景观地游憩价值估算——以武汉市石榴红农场为例[J].中国土地科学.2007,21(5),28-35.
6.蔡银莺,张安录.江汉平原农地保护的外部效益研究[J].长江流域资源与环境,2008,17(1),98-104
7.蔡银莺.农地生态与农地价值关系.[博士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学图书馆,2007
8.曹辉,陈平留.森林景观资产评估CVM法研究[J].福建林学院学报,2003,(1),48-52
9.陈明灿.选择价值与外部成本应用于农地转用管理之研究——以云林县大碑乡为例[J].台湾土地金融季刊.1996,33(3),1-27
10.陈明健、阙雅文.农业的环境保育及粮食安全效益评估[J].台湾土地金融季刊,2000,37(02),209-236
11.陈瑞主.台湾农地农用管制制度对土地财产权界定原则与保障方式之探讨——以私有农地滥采沙石为例.[博士学位论文].台北：国立中山大学经济学研究所,2002
12.陈竹,张安录,张雄等.农地城市流转的外部成本测算[J].资源科学.2010,36(06),1141-1147
13.董得坤,朱道林,王霞.农地非农化的外部性分析[J].经济问题,2004,(4),55-57
14.董黎明.城市土地问题与土地集约利用[J].中国土地,2005(8),6-8
15.高云峰.背景山区森林资源价值评估.[博士学位论文].中国农业大学,2005
16.高智晟.野生动物价值评估与定价研究.[博士学位论文].东北林业大学,2005
17.郭剑英,王乃昂.敦煌旅游资源非使用价值评估[J].资源科学,2005,27(5),187-192
18.哈尔.R.范里安.微观经济学：现代观点[M].(费方域等).上海：上海人民出版社,2003
19.胡瑞丰.农地使用变更外部性处理的制度分析[J].农业与经济,2005,34,121-152
20.黄贤金,王静,濮励杰等.区域土地用途管制的不同方式[J].南京大学学报(自然科学),2003,39(3)：411-422
21.黄雅玲,陈明健.厨馀回收及其经济效益之评估—以台中市社区为例[J].台湾土地金融季刊,2004,41(3)：99-119
22.黄有光.福利经济学[M].(周建明等).北京：中国友谊出版公司,1991
23.黄宗煌.现阶段农业保育之经济分析[J].农业金融论坛,1991,25：271-298
24.黄宗煌.农业生产之环境外部性的因应措施.[R].1996
25.黄宗煌.台湾地区国家公园之游憩效益的评估[J].台湾银行季刊,1990,41(3),282-304
26.黄宗煌.现阶段农地保育的经济效益分析[J],农业金融论坛[J].1991,25,271-297
27.霍雅勤,蔡运龙.耕地资源价值的评估与重建——以甘肃省会宁县为例[J].干早区资源与环境,2003,17(5),81-85
28.蒋中一.动态最优化基础[M].北京：商务印书馆,1999
29.金健君,王志石.澳门固体废弃物管理的经济价值评估—选择实验模型法和条件价值法的比较[J].中国环境科学,2005,25(6),751-755
30.李猛,沈坤荣.地方政府行为对中国经济波动的影响.经济研究，2010,(12),35-47
31.李项峰.地方政府行为外部性研究.[博士学位论文].广州：暨南大学图书馆,2007
32.李志辉.基于Hedonic模型的武汉住宅特征价格研究.[硕士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学,2008
33.林国庆、陈明健、黄宗煌.农业外部效果与农地地租之研究[R],行政院农委会补助研究计画报告,1994
34.刘坤,杨东.旅游资源的经济价值评价[J].曲阜师范大学学报(自然科学版),2001,27(3),103-107
35.刘敏,陈田,刘爱利.旅游地游憩价值评估研究进展[J].人文地理,2008,23(1),14-19
36.刘祥熹,庄淑芳.农地转用之选择价值与外部性效果-从农地释出宜从长计议说起[J].农业经济半年刊,1995,(12),1-29
37.龙开胜,陈利根.中国土地违法现象的影响因素分析——基于1999年-2008年省际面板数据[J].资源科学,33(6),1171-1177
38.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
39.乔荣峰,高进云,张安录.山地丘陵地区农地资源价值评估—以湖北省宜昌市为例[J].资源科学,2006,28(6),97-103
40.乔荣锋,高进云,周智等.武汉市洪山区流转概率预测[J].资源科学,2008,30(4),585-590
41.曲福田,高艳梅,姜海.我国土地管理政策：理论命题与机制转变[J].管理世界,2005,(4),40-47
42.宋敏,张安录.湖北省农地资源正外部性价值量估算——基于对农地社会与生态之功能和价值分类的视角[J].长江流域资源与环境,2009,18(3),242-247
43.宋敏.农地城市流转的外部性与社会理性决策研究.[博士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学,2009
44.谭荣,曲福田.中国农地非农化与农地资源保护：从两难到双赢.管理世界[J].2006,(12),50-59,66
45.谭仲春,曲福田等.耕地资源可赤血利用的经济分析与政策启示[J].农业环境与发展,1998(4),4-6
46.汤玉刚,赵大平.论政府供给偏好的短期决定：政治均衡与经济效率[J].经济研究,2007,(1),29-40
47.陶然,苏福兵,陆曦等.经济增长能够带来晋升吗?——对晋升锦标赛理论的逻辑挑战与省级实证重估.管理世界,2010,(12),13-26
48.汪峰.农地价值评估及其社会保障功能研究.[硕士学位论文].杭州：浙江大学,2001
49.王瑞雪.耕地非市场价值评估理论方法与实践.[博士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学,2005
50.吴次芳,杨志荣.经济发达地区农地非农化的驱动因素比较研究：理论与实证[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2008,38(2),29-37
51.武燕丽.农用土地资源价值测度方法研究[硕士学位论文].太谷：山西农业大学图书馆,2005
52.谢高地,甄霖,鲁春霞等.生态系统服务的供给、消费和价值化.资源科学,2008,30(1),93-99
53.薛达元,包浩生,李文华.长白山自然保护区森林生态系统简接经济价值评估[J].中国环境科学,1999,19(3),247-252
54.张安录,毛泓.农地城市流转与土地一级市场均衡[J].华中师范大学学报(自然科学版),2000,34(2),233-236
55.张安录.美国农地保护的政策措施[J].世界农业.2000,249,8-10
56.张芳.黑龙江省耕地资源价值核算[J].农场经济管理,2003,(6),26-27
57.张蕾, Jeff Bennett,戴广翠等.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
58.张志强,徐中明.黑河流域张掖地区生态系统服务恢复的条件价值评估[J].生态学报,2002,22(6),885-893
59.赵学涛.城市边缘区农地城市流转决策.[硕士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学,2003
60.周黎安.中国地方官员的晋升锦标赛模式研究[J].经济研究,2007,(7),36-50
61.诸培新,任艳利,曲福田：经济发达地区耕地非市场价值及居民支付意愿研究——以南京市为例[J].中国土地科学,2010,24(6),50-55
62.诸培新.农地非农化配置：公平、效率与公共福利——基于江苏省南京市的实证分析.[博士学位论文].南京：南京农业大学,2005
63.竺凯,郑惠燕.台湾东部赏鲸旅游之登船港口游憩效益评估[J].农业经济,2005,(77),45-67
64.庄淑芳.农地转用有关选择价值及外部成本只研究——特征价格法之应用.[博士学位论文].台中：中兴大学,1999
65. Albers, H J, A C Fisher and W M Hanemann. (1996), "Valuation of tropical forests:implications of uncertainty and irreversibility", Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol.8No.3, pp.39-61
66. Amir, S. (1995), "The Environmental Cost of Sustainable Welfare", Ecological Economics, No.13, pp.27-41
67. Andrea, B., D'A Giovanni. (1998), Measuring Well-Being in the Functioning Space",http://www.uia.mx/humanismocristiano/seminario_capability/pdf/3.pdf
68. Arrow, K J, A C Fisher. (1974), "Environmental preservation, uncertainty, and irreversibility". Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol.88 No.2,pp312-319
69. Barnes, J I. (1996), "Changes in the economic use value of elephant in Botswana:The effect of international trade prohibition". Ecological Economics, Vol.18No.3, pp.215-230
70. Bateman,1 and I H Langford. (1997), "Non-users' willingness to pay for a National Park:an application and critique of the contingent valuation method". Regional Studies, Vol.31No.6,pp.571-582
71. Bateman, I, A Munro and B Rhodes et al.(1997),"Does part-whole bias exist? An experimental investigation". Economic Journal, Vol.107,pp.322—332
72. Bateman, I, B H Day, S Georgiou et al. (2006), "The aggregation of environmental benefit values: welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP ". Ecological Economics,Vol.60No.2,450-460
73. Bateman, I, I H Langford and N Nishikawa et al. (2000),"The Ax ford debate revisited:A case study illustrating different approaches to the aggregation of benefits data". Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol.43No.2,291-302
74. Bateman, I, S Georgiou, and I Lake. "The Aggregation of Environmental Benefit Values:A Spatially Sensitive Valuation Function Approach ".CSERGE Working Paper series, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, University of East Anglia,2005
75. Beasley, Steven D, W G Workman, and N A Williams. (1986),"Estimating Amenity Values of Urban Fringe Farmland:A Contingent Valuation Approach Note." Growth and Change. Vol.17No.4,pp.70-78
76. Ben-Akiva, M. (1974), "Multi-Dimensional Choice Models:Alternative Structures of Travel Demand Models", Transportation Research Board Special Report, Vol.149,129-142
77. Bennett, RY and D Larson.(1996), "contingent valuation of the perceived benefits of farm anunal welfare legislation:an exploratory survey", Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 47No.2,pp.224-235
78. Bergstrom, J C, K Boyle and G Poe.(2000), The economic valuation of water quality. Edward Elgar Publishers, Cheltenham, U.K
79. Bergstrom, J. C., Dillman, B. L., et al..(1985), "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land:The Case of Prime Agricultural Land". Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics Vol.17,pp.139-149
80. Bergstrom, John C, B L Dillman, and John R. Stoll. (1985), "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land:The Case of Prime Agricultural Land". Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.17No.6, pp.139-149
81. Bishop, R. C., A. H Thomas. (1979), "Measuring Values of Extra-Market Goods:Are Indirect Measures Biased?" American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.61No.5, pp.926-930
82. Bockstael, N E, W M Hanemann and C L Kling. (1987),"Estimating the value of water quality improvements in a recreational demand framework". Water Resources Research, Vol.23No.5,pp.951-960
83. Bockstael, N.E. (1996),"Economics and Ecological Modeling:The Importance of a Spatial Perspective". American Journal of Agricultural Economics,, Vol.78 No.5, pp.1168-1180
84. Bowker, J M, and D Didychuk. (1994), "Estimation of nonmarket benefits of agricultural land retention in eastern canada". Agricultural And Resource Economics Review, Vol.23No.2, pp. 218-225
85. Bowker, J M, H K Cordell, C Y Johnson. (1999) "User fees for recreation services on public lands: anational assessment". Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, Vol.17No.3,pp.1-14
86. Bowker,J M and J R Stoll.(1988), "Use of dichotomous choice non-market methods to value the whooping crane resource". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.70No.2, pp.371-381
87. Bowker,J M, H K Cordell, C Y Johnson. (1999),User fees for recreation services on public lands:a national assessment[J].Jowrnal of Park and Recreation Administration, Vol.17No.3,pp.1-14
88. Boyd Blaekwell.(2007), "The value of a recreational beach visit:An application to Mooloolaba beach and comparisons with other outdoor recreation sites". Economic Analysis and Policy, Vol.37,pp.77-95
89. Boyle, K J and R C Bishop.(1987), "Valuing wildlife in benefit-cost analysis:a casestudy involving endangered species". Water Resources Research, Vol.23No.5, pp.943-950
90. Bromley, D W., and I. Hodge. (1990), "Private Property Rights and Presumptive Policy Entitlements:Reconsidering the Premises of Rural Policy". European Review of Agricultural Economics,Vol.17No.2, pp.197-214
91. Bromley, D W, and I Hodge.(1990), "Private Property Rights and Presumptive Policy Entitlements:Reconsidering the Premises of Rural Policy." European Review of Agricultural Economics, Vol.17No.2, pp.197-214
92. Bruns, D F W, J A Schmidt. (1997), " City Edges In Germany:Quality Growth And Urban Design". Landscape and Urban Planning 36,347-356
93. Buchanan, J. and W C Stubblebine.(1962), " Externality". Economica Vol.29,pp.371-384
94. Burton, P S. (1996), "Land use externalities:mechanism design for the allocation of environmental resources". Journal of environmental Economics and Management, Vol.30, pp.174-185
95. Campbell,D, W G Hutchinson.(2009),"Using choice experiments to explore the spatial distribution of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements". Evironment and Planning,Vol.41,pp.97-111
96. Cao, G Z, C C Feng, et al.. (2008), " Local "Land finance" in China's urban expansion: Challenges and solutions". China & World Economy Vol.16No.2, pp.19-30
97. Carson,R T. (1998), " Valuation of tropical rainforest:philosophical and practical issues in the use of contingent valuation". Ecological Economics, Vol.24No.1, pp.15-29
98. Chen, M. (1996), " Study on farmland conversion management by option value and external cost theory-A case study of Dabei County, Yunlin Town". Journal of the Land Bank of Taiwan, No.9, 129-155
99. Clark, D E. (2006), "Externality effects on residential property values:the example of noise disamenities". Growth and Change Vol.37No.3,pp.460-488
100. Clawson, M and J L Knetsch. Economics of outdoor recreation. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore,1966.
101. Correll, M. R., Lillydahl, J. H., et al.. (1978), "The effects of greenbelts on residential property values:some findings on the political economy of open space". Land Economics Vol.54No.2, pp. 207-217
102. Coughlin, R. E.. (1980), "Farming on the urban fringe". Environment Vol.22No.3, pp.33-39
103. Daniel, J P, L K Catherine, A H Joseph. (2000), "Estimation and welfare calculations in a generalized corner solution model with an application to recreation demand", The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol.82 No.1, pp.83-92
104. Davis,R K.(1963), "Recreation planning as an economic problem". Natural Resource Journal, No.3,pp.239-249
105. Deng, F F, (2005), "Public Land Leasing and the Changing Roles of Local Government in Urban China". Annals of Regional Science, Vol.39,pp.353-373
106. Deng, X., J. Huang, et al..(2006), "Cultivated land conversion and potential agricultural productivity in China". Land Use Policy Vol.23,pp.372-384
107. Ding, C R.(2003), "Land policy reform in China:assessment and prospects". Land Use Policy Vol.20No.2,pp.109-120
108. Ding, C. R..(2004), "Urban spatial development in the land policy reform era: Evidence from Beijing". Urban Studies, Vol.41 No.10, pp.1889-1907
109. Duke, Joshua M, and Rhonda Aull-Hyde.(2002), "Identifying Public Preferences for Land Preservation Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process". Ecological Economics, Vol,42, pp.131-145
110. Eisen-Hecht, J.I. and R.A. Kramer. (2002), "A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Water Quality Protection in the Catawba Basin". Journal of the Water Resources Association,Vol.38, pp.453-465
111. Ekin, B, K Katia,K Phoebe.(2006),Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes:the case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greence. Ecological Economics, Vol.6O No.1,pp.145-156
112. Irwin, Elena G., Nancy E.Bockstael.(2002),"The effects of space on residential property values". Land economics,Vol.78No.4,pp.465-480
113. Irwin, Elena G.,,Nancy E.Bockstael.(2001), "The problem of identifying land use spillovers: measuring the effects of open space on residential property values". American Journal of Agricultural.Economics, Vol.83No.3,pp.698-704
114. Fishburn, Peter C. The Foundations of Expected Utility. Theory and Decision Library, Vol.31. Dordrecht: D. Reidel,1982
115. Fleisscher, A and Y Tsur. (2009), "The amenity value of agricultural landscape and rural-urban land allocation". Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.60No.1,pp.132-153
116. Gardner, B D. (1977), "The Economics of Agricultural Land Preservation". American Journal of Agricultural Economics.Vol.59No.5, pp.1027-1036
117. Geoffrey, K. Turnbull. (2004), "Urban growth controls:transitional dynamics of development fees and growth boundaries". Journal of Urban Economics, Vol.55No.02), pp.215-237
118. Geoghegan, J.,L Lynch, et al.. (2006), "Are Agricultural Land Preservation Programs Self-Financing?" Editors:Robert J. Johnston and Stephen K. Swallow, Economics and Contemporary Land Use Policy:Development and Conservation at the Rural-Urban Fringe,. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
119. Goetz, R U. (1997), "Land development and pigouvian taxes:the case of pealand". American Journal of Agricultural Economics. Vol.79No.4,pp.227-234
120. Green, P E,J C Frank and P W David.(1977), "On the analysis of qualitative data in marketing research". Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.18No.2, pp.52-59
121. Griliches,Z. Hedonic price indices for automobiles:an econometric analysis of quality change. Griliches Ed:Price Indexes and Quality Change, Harvard, Cambridge,Massachusetts,1971
122. Hagenaars, A.J.M., B.M.S van Praag. (1985), "A synthesis of poverty line definitions", Review of Income and Wealth, Vol.31 No.2, pp.139-153
123.Hanley, N, F Schlapfer and J Spurgeon. (2003), "Aggregating the benefits of environmental improvements:Distance-decay functions for use and non-use values". Journal of Environmental Management, Vol.68,pp.297-304
124. Hanley, N, R Wright and V Adamowicz. (1998), "Using choice experiments to value the environment:Design issues, current experience and future prospects". Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol.11,pp.413—428
125. Hardie, I W and P J Parks. (1997), "Land use with heterogeneous land quality:An application of an area base model". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.79No.2,pp.299-310
126. Harless, D W and F R Allen.(1999), "Using the contingent valuation method to measure patron benefits of reference desk service in an academic library". College and research Libraries, Vol.60No.l,pp.56-69
127. Harrison, Glenn W., Ronald M.Harstad, and Rutstrom, E. Elisabet, "Experimental Methods and Elicitation of Values," Unpublished Manuscript, Department of Economics, University of South Carolina,2002; available at http://dmsweb.moore.sc.edu/glenn/wp/.
128. Harsanyi, J C. (1997), "Utilities, Preferences, and Substantive Goods", Soc. Choice Welfare. No. 14, pp.129-145
129. Hartwick, J. M.(2001), Deforestation and development in a small open economy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Vol.41, pp.235-251
130. Head, K and Ries, J. (1996), "Inter-city competition for foreign investment:Static and dynamic effects of China's incentive areas". Journal of Urban Economics Vol.40No.1,pp.38-60
131. Ho, S P S and G C S Lin. (2004), "Converting land to nonagricultural use in China's coastal provinces-Evidence from Jiangsu". Modern China Vol.30No.l,pp.81-112
132. Hodge,I.(1984), "Uncertainty, irreversibility and the loss of agricultural land". Journal of Agricultural Economics Vol.35No.2, pp.191-202
133. Hoehn, J. P. and Randall, A.(1987), "A satisfactory benefit cost indicator from contingent valuation". Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Vol.14No.3, pp.226-247
134. Hoehn, J P and Randall, A. (1989), "Too many proposals pass the benefit cost test". American Economic Review Vol.79No.3,pp.554-551
135. Hoehn, J P. (1991), "Valuing the multimensional impact of environmental policy:Theory and methods". American Journal of Agricultural Economics Vol.73No.2,pp.289-299
136. Hotelling, H L.In an economic study of the monetary evaluation of recreation in the national pareks, Washington D C. National Park Service,1949
137. Hotelling, H. The Economics of Public Recreation. The Prewitt Repor. National Parks Service, Washington,1947
138. Ian J Bateman, Brett H Day and Stavros Georgiou et al. (2006), "The aggregation of environmental benefit values:Welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP". Ecological Economics,Vol.60No.2,pp.450-460
139. Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, University of Edinburgh. Estimating the Value of Environmental Features.06,2001
140. Irwin, E G, and N E Bockstael. (2001), "The problem of identifying land use spillovers:Measuring the effects of open space on residential property values". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.83No.3,698-704
141. Irwin, E. G., N. E. Bockstael. (1998), "Interacting agents, spatial externalities, and the evolution of land use pattern". Journal of Economic Geography, Vol.2 No.1,pp.31-54
142. Johnston, R J, Duke J M.(2007), "Willingness to pay for agricultural land preservation and policy process attributes:does the method matter?". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.89No.4, pp.1098-1115
143. Kallas, Z, J A Gomez-Limon and J B Hurle.(2007), "Decomposing the Value of Agricultural Multifunctionality:Combining Contingent Valuation and the Analytical Hierarchy Process" Journal of Agricultural Economics. VoI.58No.2, pp.218-241
144. Keeney, R L and H Raiffa. Decisions with Multiple Objectives:Preferences and Value Trade-offs. Cambridge,Cambridge University Press,1993
145. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa. (2010), "Heterogeneous Preferences for Water Quality Attributes:the case of Eutrophication of the Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea". Ecological Economics Vol.69No.3,pp. 528-538
146. Krutilla, J V. (1967), "Conservation Reconsider". American Economic Review, Vol.57No.4, pp.777-786
147. Kuhn, W. S. Theoretical Definition and Empirical Measurement of Welfare and Poverty:a Microeconomic Approach. Paper Prepared for the 26th General Conference of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth. Cracow, Poland,27 August to 2 September 2000. www.stat.gov.pl
148. Lancaster, K J.(1966),"A new approach to consumer theory". Journal of Political Economy,Vol.74,pp.132-157
149. Lewis, D J, B L Barham.(2007), "Spatial externalities in agriculture:Empirical analysis, Statistical identification, and policy implications". Word Development,No.12, pp.1-17
150. Li M., H.J.Brown.(1980),"Micro-Neighborhood Externalities and Hedonic Housing Pricesp". Land Economocs,Vol.56No.2,pp.125-140
151. Li, H, L Zhou.(2005), "Political turnover and economic performance:The incentive role of personnel control in China". Journal of Public Economics Vol.89,pp.1743-1762
152. Lichtenberg E, Chengri Ding(2009), "Local officials as land developers:urban spatial expansion in China". Journal of Urban Economics, Vol.66No.I, pp.57-64
153. Lin, J Y and Z Liu. (2000), "Fiscal decentralization and economic growth". Economic Development and Cultural Change Vol.49, pp.1-21
154. Long, H. L., G P Tang, et al.. (2007), "Socio-economic driving forces of land-use change in Kunshan, the Yangtze River Delta economic area of China". Journal of Environmental Management Vol.83No.3,pp.351-364
155. Loomis, J B. (2000), "Vertically summing public good demand curves:An empirical comparison of economic versus political jurisdictions". Land Economics Vol.76No.2,pp.312-321
156. Lori Lynch, Joshua M Duke. "Economic Benefits of Farmland Preservation:Evidence from the United States". http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/7342/2/wp070004.pdf
157. Lv, Y., S Z Gu, et al.. (2010), "Valuing environmental externalities from rice-wheat farming in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River". Ecological Economics Vol.69No.7, pp.1436-1442
158. Lynch, Lori, Wesley N Musser. (2001), "A Relative Efficiency Analysis of Farmland Preservation Programs". Land Economics, Vol.77No.11,pp.577-594
159. Lynch, Lori, and Xiangping Liu. (2007), "Impact of Designated Preservation Areas on Rate of Preservation and Rate of Conversion". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.89No.5, pp.1205-1210
160. Madden, P.(1991), "A generzalition of Hicksian Q substitutes and complements with application to demand rationing". Econometrica Vol.59No.5,pp.1497-1508
161. Marshall, E.(2004), "Open-space amenities, interacting agents, and equilibrium landscape structure". Land Economics, Vol.80No.2,pp.272-293
162. McConnell, K E. (1989), "The optimal quantity of land in agriculture". Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol.18No.10),pp.63-72
163. McConnell, Kenneth E. (1983), Existence and bequest value. In Robert P. Rowe and Lauraine G. Chestnut, eds., Managing air quality and scenic resources at national parks and wildness areas. Boulder, Colo., Westview Press
164. Mette, T, Z Marianne and J M Colin.(2008), "Spatial substitution patterns in forest recreation". Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol.38No.1, pp.81-97
165. Michell,R G and R T Carson. Using surveys to value public goods:the contingent valuation method". Washington DC:Resource for the Future,1989
166. Mogas, J, P Riera, and J Bennett. (2006),"A comparison of contingent valuation and choice modeling with second-order interactions". Journal of Forest Economics, No.12,pp.5-30
167. Noonsn, D S. (2003), "Contingent valuation and cultural resources:A meta-analytic review of the literature". Journal of Cultural Economics, Vol.27No.3-4,pp.159-176
168. Palmquist.R.B.(1992), "Valuing Localized Externalities". Journal of Urban Economics. No.31,pp.59-68
169. Parker, D C. Agent-based modeling to explore linkages between preferences for open space, fragmentation at the urban-rural fringe, and economic welfare, in:Proceedings of the Role of Open Space and Green Amenities in the Residential Move from Cities, INRA, Dijon, France,2005
170. Parker, D C. Edge-effect externalities:theoretical and empirical implications of spatial heterogeneity. PHD thesis, Davis, University of California,2000
171. Parker, D C. Landscape outcomes in a model of edge-effect externalities:a computational economics approach, Santa Fe Institute Working Paper,1999
172. Parker, D C.(2007), "Revealing "Space" in spatial externalities:Edge-effect externalities and spatial incentives". Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.54,pp.84-99
173. Parsons, G R.(1991), "A note on choice of residential location in travel cost demand models". Land Economics, Vol.67, pp.360-364
174. Pearce, D W and D Moran. The economic value of biodiversity. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd,1995
175. Poe,G.L.(1999),"Maximizing the Environmental Benefits per Dollar Expended:An Economic Interpretation and Review of Agricultural Environmental Benefits and Costs". Society&Natural Resources Vol.12,pp.571-598
176. Randall, A, and J Hoehn.(1996), "Embedding in market demand systems". Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.30No.3, pp.369-380
177. Randall, A., B Ives. and C Eastman. (1974), "Bidding Games for Valuation of Aesthetic Environmental Improvements". Journal Of Environmental Economics And Management, Vol.1 No.2, pp.132-49
178. Ridker, R G and J A Henning (1967), "The determinants of residential property values with special reference to air pollution", Review of Economics and Statistics Vol.49,pp.246-257
179. Robert Costanza, Ralph d'Arge, Rudolf de Groot, et al..(1997), "The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital", Nature, Vol.387, pp.253-260
180. Robert J Johnston and Joshua M Duke. (2009), "Willingness to Pay for Land Preservation across States and Jurisdictional Scale:Implications for Benefit Transfer". Land economics, Vol.85No,5,pp.217-237
181. Rosen, S. (1974), "Hedonic prices and implicit markets:Product differentiation in pure competition". Journal of Political Economy, Vol.82No.l,pp.35-55
182. Rosenberger, Randall S, and Richard G. Walsh.(1997), "Nonmarket Value of Western Valley Ranchland Using Contingent Valuation". Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics Vol.22No.2,pp.296-309
183. Sara, L. Factor Analysis vs. Fuzzy Sets Theory:Assessing the Influence of Different Techniques on Sen's Functioning Approach, CES Discussion Paper Series,21, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 2001
184. Seto, K C Kaufmann, R K. (2003), "Modeling the drivers of urban land use change in the Pearl River Delta, China:Integrating remote sensing with socioeconomic data". Land Economics Vol.79No.1,pp.106-121
185. Song, M, Zhang, A. (2008), "Multi-objective Programming and Social Welfare Analysis of Rural-urban Land Conversion Decision-making". Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment Vol.6No.4,pp.65-71
186. Stavins, R N and A B Jaffe.(1990), "Unintended impact of public investments on private decisions: The depletion of forested wetlands". The American Economic Review, Vol.80No.3,pp.337-352
187. Swallow, S K. Critical lands conservation with development: Using contingent choice to establish impact fees for open space. Working Paper. Department of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, University of Rhode Island November,2002
188. Tan, M., Li, X., et al., (2005), "Urban land expansion and arable land loss in China-a case study of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region". Land Use Policy Vol.22,pp.187-196
189. Tan, R, F Qu. (2011), The impact of China's current land market structure on farmland conversion and social welfare change. http://www.asia-link-recreate.com/chapter_42.pdf.
190. Tan, R., Beckmann, V., et al.. (2009), "Governing farmland conversion:Comparing China with the Netherlands and Geny". Land Use Policy Vol.26,pp.961-974
191. Thorsnes, P.(2002), " The Value of a Suburban Forest Preserve:Estimates from Sales of Vacant Residential Building Lots". Land Economics, Vol.78No.3,pp.426-441
192. Turnbull, G K. (2004), " Urban growth controls:transitional dynamics of development fees and growth boundaries". Journal of Urban Economics, Vol.55No.2,pp.215-237
193. Valk, A V D. (2002), " The Dutch Planning Experience". Landscape and Urban Planning Vol.58, pp.201-210
194. William A.Fischel. (1982),"The urbanization of agricultural land:areview of the national agricultural land study". Land Economics, Vol.58No.2,pp.236-259
195. Williams, B. The Standard of Living:Interests and Capabilities. Geoffrey Hawthorn ed:The Standard of Living. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,1987
196. Willis, K G, G D Garrod. (1999), "An individual travel cost method of evaluation forest recreation". Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.42No.1, pp.33-42
197. Woodward,R T and Y S Wui.(2001), "The economic value of wetland services:a meta-analysis". Econogical Economics, Vol.37No.2,pp.257-270
198. Wu, J P.(2008), "The peri-urbanization of Shanghai:Planning, growth pattern and sustainable development". Asia Pacific Viewpoint,Vol.49No.2,pp.244-253
199. Wu, Junjie, E G Irwin.(2008), "Optimal land development with endogenous environmental amenities". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.90No.l,pp.232-248
200. Zein Kallas, Jose'A. Go'mez-Limo'n el..(2007),"Decomposing the Value of Agricultural Multifunctionality:Combining Contingent Valuation and the Analytical Hierarchy Process". Journal of Agricultural Economics. Vol.58No.2, pp.218-241
2.蔡明华.水稻田之生态性机能及其保护对策[J].政情与农情.1994,30,29-36
3.蔡银莺,宗琪,张安录.江汉平原农地资源价值研究[J].中国人口资源与环境,2007,17(3),85-89
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),122-129
5.蔡银莺,张安录.城郊休闲农业景观地游憩价值估算——以武汉市石榴红农场为例[J].中国土地科学.2007,21(5),28-35.
6.蔡银莺,张安录.江汉平原农地保护的外部效益研究[J].长江流域资源与环境,2008,17(1),98-104
7.蔡银莺.农地生态与农地价值关系.[博士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学图书馆,2007
8.曹辉,陈平留.森林景观资产评估CVM法研究[J].福建林学院学报,2003,(1),48-52
9.陈明灿.选择价值与外部成本应用于农地转用管理之研究——以云林县大碑乡为例[J].台湾土地金融季刊.1996,33(3),1-27
10.陈明健、阙雅文.农业的环境保育及粮食安全效益评估[J].台湾土地金融季刊,2000,37(02),209-236
11.陈瑞主.台湾农地农用管制制度对土地财产权界定原则与保障方式之探讨——以私有农地滥采沙石为例.[博士学位论文].台北：国立中山大学经济学研究所,2002
12.陈竹,张安录,张雄等.农地城市流转的外部成本测算[J].资源科学.2010,36(06),1141-1147
13.董得坤,朱道林,王霞.农地非农化的外部性分析[J].经济问题,2004,(4),55-57
14.董黎明.城市土地问题与土地集约利用[J].中国土地,2005(8),6-8
15.高云峰.背景山区森林资源价值评估.[博士学位论文].中国农业大学,2005
16.高智晟.野生动物价值评估与定价研究.[博士学位论文].东北林业大学,2005
17.郭剑英,王乃昂.敦煌旅游资源非使用价值评估[J].资源科学,2005,27(5),187-192
18.哈尔.R.范里安.微观经济学：现代观点[M].(费方域等).上海：上海人民出版社,2003
19.胡瑞丰.农地使用变更外部性处理的制度分析[J].农业与经济,2005,34,121-152
20.黄贤金,王静,濮励杰等.区域土地用途管制的不同方式[J].南京大学学报(自然科学),2003,39(3)：411-422
21.黄雅玲,陈明健.厨馀回收及其经济效益之评估—以台中市社区为例[J].台湾土地金融季刊,2004,41(3)：99-119
22.黄有光.福利经济学[M].(周建明等).北京：中国友谊出版公司,1991
23.黄宗煌.现阶段农业保育之经济分析[J].农业金融论坛,1991,25：271-298
24.黄宗煌.农业生产之环境外部性的因应措施.[R].1996
25.黄宗煌.台湾地区国家公园之游憩效益的评估[J].台湾银行季刊,1990,41(3),282-304
26.黄宗煌.现阶段农地保育的经济效益分析[J],农业金融论坛[J].1991,25,271-297
27.霍雅勤,蔡运龙.耕地资源价值的评估与重建——以甘肃省会宁县为例[J].干早区资源与环境,2003,17(5),81-85
28.蒋中一.动态最优化基础[M].北京：商务印书馆,1999
29.金健君,王志石.澳门固体废弃物管理的经济价值评估—选择实验模型法和条件价值法的比较[J].中国环境科学,2005,25(6),751-755
30.李猛,沈坤荣.地方政府行为对中国经济波动的影响.经济研究，2010,(12),35-47
31.李项峰.地方政府行为外部性研究.[博士学位论文].广州：暨南大学图书馆,2007
32.李志辉.基于Hedonic模型的武汉住宅特征价格研究.[硕士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学,2008
33.林国庆、陈明健、黄宗煌.农业外部效果与农地地租之研究[R],行政院农委会补助研究计画报告,1994
34.刘坤,杨东.旅游资源的经济价值评价[J].曲阜师范大学学报(自然科学版),2001,27(3),103-107
35.刘敏,陈田,刘爱利.旅游地游憩价值评估研究进展[J].人文地理,2008,23(1),14-19
36.刘祥熹,庄淑芳.农地转用之选择价值与外部性效果-从农地释出宜从长计议说起[J].农业经济半年刊,1995,(12),1-29
37.龙开胜,陈利根.中国土地违法现象的影响因素分析——基于1999年-2008年省际面板数据[J].资源科学,33(6),1171-1177
38.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
39.乔荣峰,高进云,张安录.山地丘陵地区农地资源价值评估—以湖北省宜昌市为例[J].资源科学,2006,28(6),97-103
40.乔荣锋,高进云,周智等.武汉市洪山区流转概率预测[J].资源科学,2008,30(4),585-590
41.曲福田,高艳梅,姜海.我国土地管理政策：理论命题与机制转变[J].管理世界,2005,(4),40-47
42.宋敏,张安录.湖北省农地资源正外部性价值量估算——基于对农地社会与生态之功能和价值分类的视角[J].长江流域资源与环境,2009,18(3),242-247
43.宋敏.农地城市流转的外部性与社会理性决策研究.[博士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学,2009
44.谭荣,曲福田.中国农地非农化与农地资源保护：从两难到双赢.管理世界[J].2006,(12),50-59,66
45.谭仲春,曲福田等.耕地资源可赤血利用的经济分析与政策启示[J].农业环境与发展,1998(4),4-6
46.汤玉刚,赵大平.论政府供给偏好的短期决定：政治均衡与经济效率[J].经济研究,2007,(1),29-40
47.陶然,苏福兵,陆曦等.经济增长能够带来晋升吗?——对晋升锦标赛理论的逻辑挑战与省级实证重估.管理世界,2010,(12),13-26
48.汪峰.农地价值评估及其社会保障功能研究.[硕士学位论文].杭州：浙江大学,2001
49.王瑞雪.耕地非市场价值评估理论方法与实践.[博士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学,2005
50.吴次芳,杨志荣.经济发达地区农地非农化的驱动因素比较研究：理论与实证[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2008,38(2),29-37
51.武燕丽.农用土地资源价值测度方法研究[硕士学位论文].太谷：山西农业大学图书馆,2005
52.谢高地,甄霖,鲁春霞等.生态系统服务的供给、消费和价值化.资源科学,2008,30(1),93-99
53.薛达元,包浩生,李文华.长白山自然保护区森林生态系统简接经济价值评估[J].中国环境科学,1999,19(3),247-252
54.张安录,毛泓.农地城市流转与土地一级市场均衡[J].华中师范大学学报(自然科学版),2000,34(2),233-236
55.张安录.美国农地保护的政策措施[J].世界农业.2000,249,8-10
56.张芳.黑龙江省耕地资源价值核算[J].农场经济管理,2003,(6),26-27
57.张蕾, Jeff Bennett,戴广翠等.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
58.张志强,徐中明.黑河流域张掖地区生态系统服务恢复的条件价值评估[J].生态学报,2002,22(6),885-893
59.赵学涛.城市边缘区农地城市流转决策.[硕士学位论文].武汉：华中农业大学,2003
60.周黎安.中国地方官员的晋升锦标赛模式研究[J].经济研究,2007,(7),36-50
61.诸培新,任艳利,曲福田：经济发达地区耕地非市场价值及居民支付意愿研究——以南京市为例[J].中国土地科学,2010,24(6),50-55
62.诸培新.农地非农化配置：公平、效率与公共福利——基于江苏省南京市的实证分析.[博士学位论文].南京：南京农业大学,2005
63.竺凯,郑惠燕.台湾东部赏鲸旅游之登船港口游憩效益评估[J].农业经济,2005,(77),45-67
64.庄淑芳.农地转用有关选择价值及外部成本只研究——特征价格法之应用.[博士学位论文].台中：中兴大学,1999
65. Albers, H J, A C Fisher and W M Hanemann. (1996), "Valuation of tropical forests:implications of uncertainty and irreversibility", Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol.8No.3, pp.39-61
66. Amir, S. (1995), "The Environmental Cost of Sustainable Welfare", Ecological Economics, No.13, pp.27-41
67. Andrea, B., D'A Giovanni. (1998), Measuring Well-Being in the Functioning Space",http://www.uia.mx/humanismocristiano/seminario_capability/pdf/3.pdf
68. Arrow, K J, A C Fisher. (1974), "Environmental preservation, uncertainty, and irreversibility". Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol.88 No.2,pp312-319
69. Barnes, J I. (1996), "Changes in the economic use value of elephant in Botswana:The effect of international trade prohibition". Ecological Economics, Vol.18No.3, pp.215-230
70. Bateman,1 and I H Langford. (1997), "Non-users' willingness to pay for a National Park:an application and critique of the contingent valuation method". Regional Studies, Vol.31No.6,pp.571-582
71. Bateman, I, A Munro and B Rhodes et al.(1997),"Does part-whole bias exist? An experimental investigation". Economic Journal, Vol.107,pp.322—332
72. Bateman, I, B H Day, S Georgiou et al. (2006), "The aggregation of environmental benefit values: welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP ". Ecological Economics,Vol.60No.2,450-460
73. Bateman, I, I H Langford and N Nishikawa et al. (2000),"The Ax ford debate revisited:A case study illustrating different approaches to the aggregation of benefits data". Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol.43No.2,291-302
74. Bateman, I, S Georgiou, and I Lake. "The Aggregation of Environmental Benefit Values:A Spatially Sensitive Valuation Function Approach ".CSERGE Working Paper series, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, University of East Anglia,2005
75. Beasley, Steven D, W G Workman, and N A Williams. (1986),"Estimating Amenity Values of Urban Fringe Farmland:A Contingent Valuation Approach Note." Growth and Change. Vol.17No.4,pp.70-78
76. Ben-Akiva, M. (1974), "Multi-Dimensional Choice Models:Alternative Structures of Travel Demand Models", Transportation Research Board Special Report, Vol.149,129-142
77. Bennett, RY and D Larson.(1996), "contingent valuation of the perceived benefits of farm anunal welfare legislation:an exploratory survey", Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 47No.2,pp.224-235
78. Bergstrom, J C, K Boyle and G Poe.(2000), The economic valuation of water quality. Edward Elgar Publishers, Cheltenham, U.K
79. Bergstrom, J. C., Dillman, B. L., et al..(1985), "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land:The Case of Prime Agricultural Land". Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics Vol.17,pp.139-149
80. Bergstrom, John C, B L Dillman, and John R. Stoll. (1985), "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land:The Case of Prime Agricultural Land". Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.17No.6, pp.139-149
81. Bishop, R. C., A. H Thomas. (1979), "Measuring Values of Extra-Market Goods:Are Indirect Measures Biased?" American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.61No.5, pp.926-930
82. Bockstael, N E, W M Hanemann and C L Kling. (1987),"Estimating the value of water quality improvements in a recreational demand framework". Water Resources Research, Vol.23No.5,pp.951-960
83. Bockstael, N.E. (1996),"Economics and Ecological Modeling:The Importance of a Spatial Perspective". American Journal of Agricultural Economics,, Vol.78 No.5, pp.1168-1180
84. Bowker, J M, and D Didychuk. (1994), "Estimation of nonmarket benefits of agricultural land retention in eastern canada". Agricultural And Resource Economics Review, Vol.23No.2, pp. 218-225
85. Bowker, J M, H K Cordell, C Y Johnson. (1999) "User fees for recreation services on public lands: anational assessment". Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, Vol.17No.3,pp.1-14
86. Bowker,J M and J R Stoll.(1988), "Use of dichotomous choice non-market methods to value the whooping crane resource". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.70No.2, pp.371-381
87. Bowker,J M, H K Cordell, C Y Johnson. (1999),User fees for recreation services on public lands:a national assessment[J].Jowrnal of Park and Recreation Administration, Vol.17No.3,pp.1-14
88. Boyd Blaekwell.(2007), "The value of a recreational beach visit:An application to Mooloolaba beach and comparisons with other outdoor recreation sites". Economic Analysis and Policy, Vol.37,pp.77-95
89. Boyle, K J and R C Bishop.(1987), "Valuing wildlife in benefit-cost analysis:a casestudy involving endangered species". Water Resources Research, Vol.23No.5, pp.943-950
90. Bromley, D W., and I. Hodge. (1990), "Private Property Rights and Presumptive Policy Entitlements:Reconsidering the Premises of Rural Policy". European Review of Agricultural Economics,Vol.17No.2, pp.197-214
91. Bromley, D W, and I Hodge.(1990), "Private Property Rights and Presumptive Policy Entitlements:Reconsidering the Premises of Rural Policy." European Review of Agricultural Economics, Vol.17No.2, pp.197-214
92. Bruns, D F W, J A Schmidt. (1997), " City Edges In Germany:Quality Growth And Urban Design". Landscape and Urban Planning 36,347-356
93. Buchanan, J. and W C Stubblebine.(1962), " Externality". Economica Vol.29,pp.371-384
94. Burton, P S. (1996), "Land use externalities:mechanism design for the allocation of environmental resources". Journal of environmental Economics and Management, Vol.30, pp.174-185
95. Campbell,D, W G Hutchinson.(2009),"Using choice experiments to explore the spatial distribution of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements". Evironment and Planning,Vol.41,pp.97-111
96. Cao, G Z, C C Feng, et al.. (2008), " Local "Land finance" in China's urban expansion: Challenges and solutions". China & World Economy Vol.16No.2, pp.19-30
97. Carson,R T. (1998), " Valuation of tropical rainforest:philosophical and practical issues in the use of contingent valuation". Ecological Economics, Vol.24No.1, pp.15-29
98. Chen, M. (1996), " Study on farmland conversion management by option value and external cost theory-A case study of Dabei County, Yunlin Town". Journal of the Land Bank of Taiwan, No.9, 129-155
99. Clark, D E. (2006), "Externality effects on residential property values:the example of noise disamenities". Growth and Change Vol.37No.3,pp.460-488
100. Clawson, M and J L Knetsch. Economics of outdoor recreation. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore,1966.
101. Correll, M. R., Lillydahl, J. H., et al.. (1978), "The effects of greenbelts on residential property values:some findings on the political economy of open space". Land Economics Vol.54No.2, pp. 207-217
102. Coughlin, R. E.. (1980), "Farming on the urban fringe". Environment Vol.22No.3, pp.33-39
103. Daniel, J P, L K Catherine, A H Joseph. (2000), "Estimation and welfare calculations in a generalized corner solution model with an application to recreation demand", The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol.82 No.1, pp.83-92
104. Davis,R K.(1963), "Recreation planning as an economic problem". Natural Resource Journal, No.3,pp.239-249
105. Deng, F F, (2005), "Public Land Leasing and the Changing Roles of Local Government in Urban China". Annals of Regional Science, Vol.39,pp.353-373
106. Deng, X., J. Huang, et al..(2006), "Cultivated land conversion and potential agricultural productivity in China". Land Use Policy Vol.23,pp.372-384
107. Ding, C R.(2003), "Land policy reform in China:assessment and prospects". Land Use Policy Vol.20No.2,pp.109-120
108. Ding, C. R..(2004), "Urban spatial development in the land policy reform era: Evidence from Beijing". Urban Studies, Vol.41 No.10, pp.1889-1907
109. Duke, Joshua M, and Rhonda Aull-Hyde.(2002), "Identifying Public Preferences for Land Preservation Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process". Ecological Economics, Vol,42, pp.131-145
110. Eisen-Hecht, J.I. and R.A. Kramer. (2002), "A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Water Quality Protection in the Catawba Basin". Journal of the Water Resources Association,Vol.38, pp.453-465
111. Ekin, B, K Katia,K Phoebe.(2006),Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes:the case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greence. Ecological Economics, Vol.6O No.1,pp.145-156
112. Irwin, Elena G., Nancy E.Bockstael.(2002),"The effects of space on residential property values". Land economics,Vol.78No.4,pp.465-480
113. Irwin, Elena G.,,Nancy E.Bockstael.(2001), "The problem of identifying land use spillovers: measuring the effects of open space on residential property values". American Journal of Agricultural.Economics, Vol.83No.3,pp.698-704
114. Fishburn, Peter C. The Foundations of Expected Utility. Theory and Decision Library, Vol.31. Dordrecht: D. Reidel,1982
115. Fleisscher, A and Y Tsur. (2009), "The amenity value of agricultural landscape and rural-urban land allocation". Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.60No.1,pp.132-153
116. Gardner, B D. (1977), "The Economics of Agricultural Land Preservation". American Journal of Agricultural Economics.Vol.59No.5, pp.1027-1036
117. Geoffrey, K. Turnbull. (2004), "Urban growth controls:transitional dynamics of development fees and growth boundaries". Journal of Urban Economics, Vol.55No.02), pp.215-237
118. Geoghegan, J.,L Lynch, et al.. (2006), "Are Agricultural Land Preservation Programs Self-Financing?" Editors:Robert J. Johnston and Stephen K. Swallow, Economics and Contemporary Land Use Policy:Development and Conservation at the Rural-Urban Fringe,. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
119. Goetz, R U. (1997), "Land development and pigouvian taxes:the case of pealand". American Journal of Agricultural Economics. Vol.79No.4,pp.227-234
120. Green, P E,J C Frank and P W David.(1977), "On the analysis of qualitative data in marketing research". Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.18No.2, pp.52-59
121. Griliches,Z. Hedonic price indices for automobiles:an econometric analysis of quality change. Griliches Ed:Price Indexes and Quality Change, Harvard, Cambridge,Massachusetts,1971
122. Hagenaars, A.J.M., B.M.S van Praag. (1985), "A synthesis of poverty line definitions", Review of Income and Wealth, Vol.31 No.2, pp.139-153
123.Hanley, N, F Schlapfer and J Spurgeon. (2003), "Aggregating the benefits of environmental improvements:Distance-decay functions for use and non-use values". Journal of Environmental Management, Vol.68,pp.297-304
124. Hanley, N, R Wright and V Adamowicz. (1998), "Using choice experiments to value the environment:Design issues, current experience and future prospects". Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol.11,pp.413—428
125. Hardie, I W and P J Parks. (1997), "Land use with heterogeneous land quality:An application of an area base model". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.79No.2,pp.299-310
126. Harless, D W and F R Allen.(1999), "Using the contingent valuation method to measure patron benefits of reference desk service in an academic library". College and research Libraries, Vol.60No.l,pp.56-69
127. Harrison, Glenn W., Ronald M.Harstad, and Rutstrom, E. Elisabet, "Experimental Methods and Elicitation of Values," Unpublished Manuscript, Department of Economics, University of South Carolina,2002; available at http://dmsweb.moore.sc.edu/glenn/wp/.
128. Harsanyi, J C. (1997), "Utilities, Preferences, and Substantive Goods", Soc. Choice Welfare. No. 14, pp.129-145
129. Hartwick, J. M.(2001), Deforestation and development in a small open economy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Vol.41, pp.235-251
130. Head, K and Ries, J. (1996), "Inter-city competition for foreign investment:Static and dynamic effects of China's incentive areas". Journal of Urban Economics Vol.40No.1,pp.38-60
131. Ho, S P S and G C S Lin. (2004), "Converting land to nonagricultural use in China's coastal provinces-Evidence from Jiangsu". Modern China Vol.30No.l,pp.81-112
132. Hodge,I.(1984), "Uncertainty, irreversibility and the loss of agricultural land". Journal of Agricultural Economics Vol.35No.2, pp.191-202
133. Hoehn, J. P. and Randall, A.(1987), "A satisfactory benefit cost indicator from contingent valuation". Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Vol.14No.3, pp.226-247
134. Hoehn, J P and Randall, A. (1989), "Too many proposals pass the benefit cost test". American Economic Review Vol.79No.3,pp.554-551
135. Hoehn, J P. (1991), "Valuing the multimensional impact of environmental policy:Theory and methods". American Journal of Agricultural Economics Vol.73No.2,pp.289-299
136. Hotelling, H L.In an economic study of the monetary evaluation of recreation in the national pareks, Washington D C. National Park Service,1949
137. Hotelling, H. The Economics of Public Recreation. The Prewitt Repor. National Parks Service, Washington,1947
138. Ian J Bateman, Brett H Day and Stavros Georgiou et al. (2006), "The aggregation of environmental benefit values:Welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP". Ecological Economics,Vol.60No.2,pp.450-460
139. Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, University of Edinburgh. Estimating the Value of Environmental Features.06,2001
140. Irwin, E G, and N E Bockstael. (2001), "The problem of identifying land use spillovers:Measuring the effects of open space on residential property values". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.83No.3,698-704
141. Irwin, E. G., N. E. Bockstael. (1998), "Interacting agents, spatial externalities, and the evolution of land use pattern". Journal of Economic Geography, Vol.2 No.1,pp.31-54
142. Johnston, R J, Duke J M.(2007), "Willingness to pay for agricultural land preservation and policy process attributes:does the method matter?". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.89No.4, pp.1098-1115
143. Kallas, Z, J A Gomez-Limon and J B Hurle.(2007), "Decomposing the Value of Agricultural Multifunctionality:Combining Contingent Valuation and the Analytical Hierarchy Process" Journal of Agricultural Economics. VoI.58No.2, pp.218-241
144. Keeney, R L and H Raiffa. Decisions with Multiple Objectives:Preferences and Value Trade-offs. Cambridge,Cambridge University Press,1993
145. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa. (2010), "Heterogeneous Preferences for Water Quality Attributes:the case of Eutrophication of the Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea". Ecological Economics Vol.69No.3,pp. 528-538
146. Krutilla, J V. (1967), "Conservation Reconsider". American Economic Review, Vol.57No.4, pp.777-786
147. Kuhn, W. S. Theoretical Definition and Empirical Measurement of Welfare and Poverty:a Microeconomic Approach. Paper Prepared for the 26th General Conference of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth. Cracow, Poland,27 August to 2 September 2000. www.stat.gov.pl
148. Lancaster, K J.(1966),"A new approach to consumer theory". Journal of Political Economy,Vol.74,pp.132-157
149. Lewis, D J, B L Barham.(2007), "Spatial externalities in agriculture:Empirical analysis, Statistical identification, and policy implications". Word Development,No.12, pp.1-17
150. Li M., H.J.Brown.(1980),"Micro-Neighborhood Externalities and Hedonic Housing Pricesp". Land Economocs,Vol.56No.2,pp.125-140
151. Li, H, L Zhou.(2005), "Political turnover and economic performance:The incentive role of personnel control in China". Journal of Public Economics Vol.89,pp.1743-1762
152. Lichtenberg E, Chengri Ding(2009), "Local officials as land developers:urban spatial expansion in China". Journal of Urban Economics, Vol.66No.I, pp.57-64
153. Lin, J Y and Z Liu. (2000), "Fiscal decentralization and economic growth". Economic Development and Cultural Change Vol.49, pp.1-21
154. Long, H. L., G P Tang, et al.. (2007), "Socio-economic driving forces of land-use change in Kunshan, the Yangtze River Delta economic area of China". Journal of Environmental Management Vol.83No.3,pp.351-364
155. Loomis, J B. (2000), "Vertically summing public good demand curves:An empirical comparison of economic versus political jurisdictions". Land Economics Vol.76No.2,pp.312-321
156. Lori Lynch, Joshua M Duke. "Economic Benefits of Farmland Preservation:Evidence from the United States". http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/7342/2/wp070004.pdf
157. Lv, Y., S Z Gu, et al.. (2010), "Valuing environmental externalities from rice-wheat farming in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River". Ecological Economics Vol.69No.7, pp.1436-1442
158. Lynch, Lori, Wesley N Musser. (2001), "A Relative Efficiency Analysis of Farmland Preservation Programs". Land Economics, Vol.77No.11,pp.577-594
159. Lynch, Lori, and Xiangping Liu. (2007), "Impact of Designated Preservation Areas on Rate of Preservation and Rate of Conversion". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.89No.5, pp.1205-1210
160. Madden, P.(1991), "A generzalition of Hicksian Q substitutes and complements with application to demand rationing". Econometrica Vol.59No.5,pp.1497-1508
161. Marshall, E.(2004), "Open-space amenities, interacting agents, and equilibrium landscape structure". Land Economics, Vol.80No.2,pp.272-293
162. McConnell, K E. (1989), "The optimal quantity of land in agriculture". Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol.18No.10),pp.63-72
163. McConnell, Kenneth E. (1983), Existence and bequest value. In Robert P. Rowe and Lauraine G. Chestnut, eds., Managing air quality and scenic resources at national parks and wildness areas. Boulder, Colo., Westview Press
164. Mette, T, Z Marianne and J M Colin.(2008), "Spatial substitution patterns in forest recreation". Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol.38No.1, pp.81-97
165. Michell,R G and R T Carson. Using surveys to value public goods:the contingent valuation method". Washington DC:Resource for the Future,1989
166. Mogas, J, P Riera, and J Bennett. (2006),"A comparison of contingent valuation and choice modeling with second-order interactions". Journal of Forest Economics, No.12,pp.5-30
167. Noonsn, D S. (2003), "Contingent valuation and cultural resources:A meta-analytic review of the literature". Journal of Cultural Economics, Vol.27No.3-4,pp.159-176
168. Palmquist.R.B.(1992), "Valuing Localized Externalities". Journal of Urban Economics. No.31,pp.59-68
169. Parker, D C. Agent-based modeling to explore linkages between preferences for open space, fragmentation at the urban-rural fringe, and economic welfare, in:Proceedings of the Role of Open Space and Green Amenities in the Residential Move from Cities, INRA, Dijon, France,2005
170. Parker, D C. Edge-effect externalities:theoretical and empirical implications of spatial heterogeneity. PHD thesis, Davis, University of California,2000
171. Parker, D C. Landscape outcomes in a model of edge-effect externalities:a computational economics approach, Santa Fe Institute Working Paper,1999
172. Parker, D C.(2007), "Revealing "Space" in spatial externalities:Edge-effect externalities and spatial incentives". Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.54,pp.84-99
173. Parsons, G R.(1991), "A note on choice of residential location in travel cost demand models". Land Economics, Vol.67, pp.360-364
174. Pearce, D W and D Moran. The economic value of biodiversity. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd,1995
175. Poe,G.L.(1999),"Maximizing the Environmental Benefits per Dollar Expended:An Economic Interpretation and Review of Agricultural Environmental Benefits and Costs". Society&Natural Resources Vol.12,pp.571-598
176. Randall, A, and J Hoehn.(1996), "Embedding in market demand systems". Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.30No.3, pp.369-380
177. Randall, A., B Ives. and C Eastman. (1974), "Bidding Games for Valuation of Aesthetic Environmental Improvements". Journal Of Environmental Economics And Management, Vol.1 No.2, pp.132-49
178. Ridker, R G and J A Henning (1967), "The determinants of residential property values with special reference to air pollution", Review of Economics and Statistics Vol.49,pp.246-257
179. Robert Costanza, Ralph d'Arge, Rudolf de Groot, et al..(1997), "The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital", Nature, Vol.387, pp.253-260
180. Robert J Johnston and Joshua M Duke. (2009), "Willingness to Pay for Land Preservation across States and Jurisdictional Scale:Implications for Benefit Transfer". Land economics, Vol.85No,5,pp.217-237
181. Rosen, S. (1974), "Hedonic prices and implicit markets:Product differentiation in pure competition". Journal of Political Economy, Vol.82No.l,pp.35-55
182. Rosenberger, Randall S, and Richard G. Walsh.(1997), "Nonmarket Value of Western Valley Ranchland Using Contingent Valuation". Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics Vol.22No.2,pp.296-309
183. Sara, L. Factor Analysis vs. Fuzzy Sets Theory:Assessing the Influence of Different Techniques on Sen's Functioning Approach, CES Discussion Paper Series,21, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 2001
184. Seto, K C Kaufmann, R K. (2003), "Modeling the drivers of urban land use change in the Pearl River Delta, China:Integrating remote sensing with socioeconomic data". Land Economics Vol.79No.1,pp.106-121
185. Song, M, Zhang, A. (2008), "Multi-objective Programming and Social Welfare Analysis of Rural-urban Land Conversion Decision-making". Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment Vol.6No.4,pp.65-71
186. Stavins, R N and A B Jaffe.(1990), "Unintended impact of public investments on private decisions: The depletion of forested wetlands". The American Economic Review, Vol.80No.3,pp.337-352
187. Swallow, S K. Critical lands conservation with development: Using contingent choice to establish impact fees for open space. Working Paper. Department of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, University of Rhode Island November,2002
188. Tan, M., Li, X., et al., (2005), "Urban land expansion and arable land loss in China-a case study of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region". Land Use Policy Vol.22,pp.187-196
189. Tan, R, F Qu. (2011), The impact of China's current land market structure on farmland conversion and social welfare change. http://www.asia-link-recreate.com/chapter_42.pdf.
190. Tan, R., Beckmann, V., et al.. (2009), "Governing farmland conversion:Comparing China with the Netherlands and Geny". Land Use Policy Vol.26,pp.961-974
191. Thorsnes, P.(2002), " The Value of a Suburban Forest Preserve:Estimates from Sales of Vacant Residential Building Lots". Land Economics, Vol.78No.3,pp.426-441
192. Turnbull, G K. (2004), " Urban growth controls:transitional dynamics of development fees and growth boundaries". Journal of Urban Economics, Vol.55No.2,pp.215-237
193. Valk, A V D. (2002), " The Dutch Planning Experience". Landscape and Urban Planning Vol.58, pp.201-210
194. William A.Fischel. (1982),"The urbanization of agricultural land:areview of the national agricultural land study". Land Economics, Vol.58No.2,pp.236-259
195. Williams, B. The Standard of Living:Interests and Capabilities. Geoffrey Hawthorn ed:The Standard of Living. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,1987
196. Willis, K G, G D Garrod. (1999), "An individual travel cost method of evaluation forest recreation". Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.42No.1, pp.33-42
197. Woodward,R T and Y S Wui.(2001), "The economic value of wetland services:a meta-analysis". Econogical Economics, Vol.37No.2,pp.257-270
198. Wu, J P.(2008), "The peri-urbanization of Shanghai:Planning, growth pattern and sustainable development". Asia Pacific Viewpoint,Vol.49No.2,pp.244-253
199. Wu, Junjie, E G Irwin.(2008), "Optimal land development with endogenous environmental amenities". American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.90No.l,pp.232-248
200. Zein Kallas, Jose'A. Go'mez-Limo'n el..(2007),"Decomposing the Value of Agricultural Multifunctionality:Combining Contingent Valuation and the Analytical Hierarchy Process". Journal of Agricultural Economics. Vol.58No.2, pp.218-241