主动参与还是被动选择:农户村域环境治理参与行为及效果差异分析
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Active Participation or Passive Choice: Analysis of the Participation Behaviors and Effects of Villege Domain Environmental Governance
  • 作者:唐林 ; 罗小锋 ; 黄炎忠 ; 余威震 ; 张俊飚
  • 英文作者:TANG Lin;LUO Xiao-feng;HUANG Yan-zhong;YU Wei-zhen;ZHANG Jun-biao;College of Economics & Management,Huazhong Agricultural University;Hubei Rural Development Research Center;
  • 关键词:主动参与 ; 被动选择 ; 村域环境治理 ; Heckman模型 ; Oaxaca-Blinder反事实分解
  • 英文关键词:active participation;;passive choice;;village domain environmental governance;;Heckman model;;Oaxaca-Blinder counterfactual decomposition
  • 中文刊名:CJLY
  • 英文刊名:Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin
  • 机构:华中农业大学经济管理学院;湖北农村发展研究中心;
  • 出版日期:2019-07-15
  • 出版单位:长江流域资源与环境
  • 年:2019
  • 期:v.28
  • 基金:国家社科基金重点项目(15AZD071);; 农业农村部软科学项目(2018032);; 中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目(2662018YJ001)
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:CJLY201907024
  • 页数:10
  • CN:07
  • ISSN:42-1320/X
  • 分类号:239-248
摘要
基于湖北省的调研数据,分析农户参与村域环境治理的行为及行为效果,并运用Heckman两阶段模型加以实证检验。结果发现:是否为村干部、家庭总人口、家庭年收入、家庭耕地面积、行为认知、环境状况评价、气候变化感知以及政府激励是农户参与村域环境治理的关键因素。受教育年限、环境容忍度、行为认知、环境状况评价以及气候变化感知则对农户环境治理参与行为效果有显著影响。在此基础上,从农户参与环境治理的行为动机出发,并借助Oaxaca-Blinder反事实分解方法,探讨主动参与和被动参与两种行为的效果差异及产生差异的原因。结果显示,禀赋差异和禀赋回报率差异均致使主动参与者的行为效果均值(3.729)显著高于被动参与者的行为效果均值(3.027)。其中,受教育年限、行为认知和气候变化感知的差异是主动参与者和被动参与者行为效果存在差异的主要因素。
        Based on survey data from Hubei Province, this paper focused on the behavior and behavioral effects of farmers participating in village domain environmental governance, and the Heckman two-stage model was used for empirical test. The results show that whether it is the village cadres, the total family population, family annual income, family arable land area, behavioral cognition, environmental status assessment, climate change perception and government incentives are the key factors for farmers to participate in village domain environmental governance.Besides, the years of education, environmental tolerance, behavioral cognition, environmental status assessment and climate change perception have a significant impact on the effects of farmers' environmental governance participation behavior. On these basis, so having considered about the behavioral motives of farmers who participate in environmental governance, this paper discusses the differences between the effects of active participation and passive participation with the help of Oaxaca-Blinder counterfactual decomposition method. And then trying to find the cause of the differences. Finally, the findings reveal that both the difference in endowment and the rate of return on endowment resulted in the mean behavioral effect of active participants(3.729) being significantly higher than the mean of behavioral effects of passive participants(3.027). Among them, the differences in years of education, behavioral cognition and climate change perception are the main factors that influence the behavioral effects of active participants and passive participants.
引文
[1] 梁流涛,翟彬.农户行为层面生态环境问题研究进展与述评[J].中国农业资源与区划,2016(1):72-80.LIANG L T,ZAI B.Research progress and review of ecological environment problems in farmers' behavioral levels[J].Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning,2016(1):72-80.
    [2] 杜焱强,刘平养,包存宽,等.社会资本视阈下的农村环境治理研究——以欠发达地区J村养殖污染为个案[J].公共管理学报,2016(4):101-112.DU Y Q,LIU P Y,BAO C K,et al.Research on rural environmental governance from the perspective of social capital:A case study of aquaculture pollution in J villages in underdeveloped areas[J].Journal of Public Management,2016(4):101-112.
    [3] 于法稳.新型城镇化背景下农村生态治理的对策研究[J].城市与环境研究,2017(2):34-49.YU F W.Research on the countermeasures of rural ecological management under the background of new urbanization[J].Urban and Environmental Studies,2017(2):34-49.
    [4] 彭小霞.我国农村生态环境治理的社区参与机制探析[J].理论月刊,2016(11):170-176.PENG X X.Analysis of the community participation mechanism of rural ecological environment governance in China[J].Theory Mont4hly,2016(11):170-176.
    [5] 汪永涛.作为乡村社会控制手段的“面子”:涵义、特征、运行机制[J].天津行政学院学报,2009(4):56-60.WANG Y T.“Face” as a means of rural social control:Implications,characteristics,and operational mechanisms[J].Journal of Tianjin Administration Institute,2009(4):56-60.
    [6] 方菲,张鸿鹏.乡村社会中的“面子”探究[J].晋阳学刊,2012(5):33-37.FANG F,ZHANG H P.Research on “Face” in rural society[J].Academic Journal of Jinyang,2012(5):33-37.
    [7] 刘兆征.当前农村环境问题分析[J].农业经济问题,2009(3):70-74.LIU Z Z.Analysis of current rural environmental problems[J].Issues in Agricultural Economy,2009(3):70-74.
    [8] 李建琴.农村环境治理中的体制创新——以浙江省长兴县为例[J].中国农村经济,2006(9):63-71.LI J Q.Institutional innovation in rural environmental governance:Taking Changxing county of Zhejiang province as an example[J].Chinese Rural Economy,2006(9):63-71.
    [9] 苏杨,马宙宙.我国农村现代化进程中的环境污染问题及对策研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2006(2):12-18.SU Y,MA Z Z.Environmental pollution problems and countermeasures in the process of rural modernization in China[J].China Population,Resources and Environment,2006(2):12-18.
    [10] 张国磊,张新文.基层政府购买农村环境治理服务的对策[J].现代经济探讨,2017(4):43-47.ZHANG G L,ZHANG X W.Countermeasures for grassroots governments to purchase rural environmental management services[J].Modern Economic Research,2017(4):43-47.
    [11] 沈费伟,刘祖云.农村环境善治的逻辑重塑—基于利益相关者理论的分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2016(5):32-38.SHEN F W,LIU Z Y.The reconstruction of rural environmental good governance:Based on the analysis of stakeholder theory[J].China Population,Resources and Environment,2016(5):32-38.
    [12] 史恒通,睢党臣,吴海霞,等.社会资本对农户参与流域生态治理行为的影响:以黑河流域为例[J].中国农村经济,2018(1):34-45.SHI H T,RUAN D C,WU H X,et al.The impact of social capital on farmers’ participation in river basin ecological governance:A case study of the Heihe River basin[J].Chinese Rural Economy,2018(1):34-45.
    [13] 史恒通,睢党臣,徐涛,等.生态价值认知对农民流域生态治理参与意愿的影响——以陕西省渭河流域为例[J].中国农村观察,2017(2):68-80.SHI H T,RUAN D C,XU T,et al.The influence of ecological value cognition on the willingness to participate in farmers’ watershed ecological management:Taking the Weihe River Basin in Shaanxi Province as an example[J].China Rural Survey,2017(2):68-80.
    [14] 李君,吕火明,梁康康,等.基于乡镇管理者视角的农村环境综合整治政策实践分析—来自全国部分省(区、市)195个乡镇的调查数据[J].中国农村经济,2011(2):74-82.LI J,LU H M,LIANG K K,et al.Practice analysis of rural environmental comprehensive remediation policy based on the perspective of township managers:Investigation data from 195 townships in some provinces (districts,cities)[J].China Rural Economy,2011(2):74-82.
    [15] 宋言奇.发达地区农民环境意识调查分析—以苏州714个样本为例[J].中国农村经济,2010(1):53-62.SONG Y Q.Investigation and analysis of farmers’ environmental awareness in developed areas:Taking 714 samples in Suzhou as an example[J].China Rural Economy,2010(1):53-62.
    [16] 王常伟,顾海英.农户环境认知、行为决策及其一致性检验——基于江苏农户调查的实证分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2012(10):1204-1208.WANG C W,GU H Y.Farmers’ environmental cognition,behavioral decision-making and consistency test:An empirical analysis based on Jiangsu farmers’ survey[J].Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin,2012(10):1204-1208.
    [17] AJZEN I.The theory of planned behavior[J].Organization Behavior And Human Decision Processes,1991,50:179-211.
    [18] ROGERS E M.Diffusion of Innovation[M].New York:Free Press,2003.
    [19] 江鑫,颜廷武,尚燕,等.主动选择还是被动适应——农户秸秆还田驱动力探究[J].中国农业资源与区划,2018(1):48-56.JIANG X,YAN T W,SHANG Y,et al.Active selection or passive adaptation:The driving force of farmers returning straw to the field[J].Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning,2018 (1):48-56.
    [20] 黄炎忠,罗小锋,李容容,等.农户认知、外部环境与农业绿色生产意愿——基于湖北省632个农户调研数据[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018(3):680-687.HUANG Y Z,LUO X F,LI R R,et al.Farmers' cognition,external environment and agricultural green production willingness:Based on survey data of 632 farmers in Hubei province[J].Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin,2018(3):680-687.
    [21] GRANOVETTER M.Economic action and social structure:The problem of embeddedness[J].American Journal of Sociology,1985,91(3):481-510.
    [22] BIAN Y.Bringing strong ties back in:Indirect ties,network bridges and job searches in China[J].American Sociological Review,1997,62(3):366-385.
    [23] UZZI B.Social structure and competition in interfirm networks:the paradox of embeddedness[J].Administrative Science Quarterly,1997,42(1):35-67.
    [24] 林丽梅,刘振滨,黄森慰,等.农村生活垃圾集中处理的农户认知与行为响应:以治理情境为调节变量[J].生态与农村环境学报,2017,33(2):127-134.LIN L M,LIU Z B,HUANG S W,et al.Cognitive and behavioral responses of rural households with centralized treatment of domestic garbage:Using governance context as a regulatory variable[J].Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment,2017,33(2):127-134.
    [25] 马健芳,张培富.被动选择还是主动选择——反思人与自然的关系[J].中国社会科学院研究生院学报,2007(4):25-30.MA J F,ZHANG P F.Passive choice or active choice:Rethinking the relationship between man and nature[J].Journal of Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,2007(4):25-30.
    [26] 丁志国,徐德财,覃朝晖.被动选择还是主观偏好:农户融资为何更加倾向民间渠道[J].农业技术经济,2014(11):52-64.DING Z G,XU D C,QIN Z H.Passive choice or subjective preference:Why farmer financing is more inclined to private channels[J].Journal of Agrotechnical Economics,2014(11):52-64.
    [27] 朱启荣.城郊农户处理农作物秸秆方式的意愿研究——基于济南市调查数据的实证分析[J].农业经济问题,2008(5):103-109.ZHU Q R.Study on the willingness of farmers in suburbs to deal with crop straws:An empirical analysis based on survey data of Jinan City[J].Issues in Agricultural Economy,2008(5):103-109.
    [28] 蒋琳莉,张俊飚,何可.农业生产性废弃物资源处理方式及其影响因素分析——来自湖北省的调查数据[J].资源科学,2014(9):1925-1932.JIANG L L,ZHANG J B,HE K.Analysis on the treatment methods of agricultural productive waste resources and its influencing factors:The survey data from Hubei province[J].Resources Science,2014(9):1925-1932.
    [29] 何可,张俊飚,张露,等.人际信任、制度信任与农民环境治理参与意愿——以农业废弃物资源化为例[J].管理世界,2015(5):75-88.HE K,ZHANG J B,ZHANG L,et al.Interpersonal trust,institutional trust and farmers’ willingness to participate in environmental governance:Taking agricultural waste recycling as an example[J].Management World,2015(5):75-88.
    (1)数据、资料来源于湖北环保厅发布的《2014年湖北省环境质量状况》《2017年湖北省环境治理状况》.
    (2)数据来源:湖北统计局、国家统计局湖北调查总队(编):《湖北省统计年鉴2017》,中国统计出版社,2017年.
    (3)因篇幅原因,本文并未将多重共线性检验结果列出.如有需要,可向作者索取.
    (4)表中没有放入政府激励这一变量,其原因在于政府激励对所以参与者而言是一样,理论上不存在差异.

© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号

地址:北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编:100083

电话:办公室:(+86 10)66554848;文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新:66554700