草业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (6): 40-53.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2020236
陈强强1,2(), 陈文娟3, 马亚飞1, 杨婕妤1, 杨清1
收稿日期:
2020-05-26
修回日期:
2020-07-29
出版日期:
2021-05-21
发布日期:
2021-05-21
作者简介:
陈强强(1979-),男,甘肃陇西人,教授,硕士。E-mail: jjglxy666@126.com
基金资助:
Qiang-qiang CHEN1,2(), Wen-juan CHEN3, Ya-fei MA1, Jie-yu YANG1, Qing YANG1
Received:
2020-05-26
Revised:
2020-07-29
Online:
2021-05-21
Published:
2021-05-21
摘要:
甘南黄河水源补给区是典型的生态系统脆弱区,其生态安全对黄河流域乃至全国生态安全具有重要的战略意义。牧户的主动参与和有力监督是草原生态保护的基础,基于188户牧户调研数据,运用双栏模型分析了社会资本对牧户参与草原生态治理意愿的影响,结果表明:1)牧户具有较高的草原生态治理参与意愿,但因“搭便车”心理,内在意愿转变为外在行为的动力不足,户均支付意愿金额为233.25~272.36元·年-1。2)干群交往对牧户草原生态治理参与意愿产生抑制作用,牧户信任正向影响草原生态治理参与意愿,平均边际效应为0.039,同时有利于集体治理行为的形成。非正式社会规范对牧户参与意愿具有显著的引导作用,边际效应为0.069,而社会参与对牧户参与意愿和支付意愿均产生抑制作用。另外,受限于资源依赖型生计,年长牧户和家庭决策者参与草原生态治理的意愿更高,其平均边际效应分别为0.036和0.084。牧民交往正向影响牧户支付意愿。3)党员身份对牧户草原生态治理参与意愿和支付意愿均具有显著的正向作用。家庭人口规模和年收入正向影响牧户草原生态治理支付意愿,同时家庭年收入负向影响参与意愿。因此,从草原生态文明价值体系培育,牧户信息网络共享平台建设,牧区党员培养与其模范作用发挥,牧户生计与增收渠道拓宽等方面提出增强牧户意愿的政策建议。
陈强强, 陈文娟, 马亚飞, 杨婕妤, 杨清. 社会资本对牧户参与草原生态治理意愿的影响——以甘南州黄河水源补给区为例[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(6): 40-53.
Qiang-qiang CHEN, Wen-juan CHEN, Ya-fei MA, Jie-yu YANG, Qing YANG. Effect of social capital on herders’ willingness to participate in grassland ecological governance——A case study of the Yellow River catchment area in Gannan autonomous prefecture[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(6): 40-53.
变量 Variable | 项目 Item | 变量含义及赋值 Definition measurement | 最小值 Minimum | 最大值 Maximum | 平均值 Mean | 标准差Standardd eviation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
因变量 Dependent variable | 参与意愿Participation willingness | 1:愿意Willingness;0:不愿意参与Unwillingness | 0 | 1 | 0.883 | 0.322 |
支付意愿 Willingness to pay | 草原生态治理支付意愿(元·户-1·年-1)Payment willingness on rangeland ecological governance(CNY·yr-1·household-1) | 0 | 1200 | 277.710 | 215.870 | |
核心自变量 Core independent variables 社会网络 Social network | 牧民交往 Communication among herdsmen | 1:从不交往Never;2:偶尔交往Occasionally;3:一般General;4:频繁交往Frequently;5:经常交往Constantly | 1 | 5 | 3.436 | 0.937 |
干群交往 Communication between cadres and massed | 1:从不交往Never;2:偶尔交往Occasionally;3:一般General;4:频繁交往Frequently;5:经常交往Constantly | 1 | 5 | 2.718 | 0.992 | |
社会信任 Social trust | 牧民信任 Trust among herdsmen | 1:很不信任Never trust;2:较不信任Occasionally mistrust;3:一般General trust;4:较信任Frequently trust;5:非常信任Constantly trust | 1 | 5 | 3.532 | 1.005 |
干群信任 Trust between cadres and massed | 1:很不信任Never trust;2:较不信任Occasionally mistrust;3:一般General trust;4:较信任Frequently trust;5:非常信任Constantly trust | 1 | 5 | 2.926 | 0.874 | |
社会规范 Social norms | 遵守草原法规制度 Abide by grassland laws and regulations | 1:从不遵守Never;2:偶尔遵守Occasionally;3:一般General;4:比较遵守Frequently;5:经常遵守Constantly | 1 | 5 | 4.170 | 0.776 |
遵守村规民约 Abide by village rules and regulation | 1:从不遵守Never;2:偶尔遵守Occasionally;3:一般General;4:比较遵守Frequently;5:经常遵守Constantly | 1 | 5 | 4.186 | 0.867 | |
社会参与 Social participation | 参与村集体活动 Participate in village collective activities | 1:从不参与Never;2:偶尔参与Occasionally;3:一般General;4:频繁参与Frequently;5:经常参与Constantly | 1 | 5 | 2.830 | 1.106 |
社会互惠 Social reciprocity | 牧民互帮互助 Herdsmen mutual aid | 1:非常不同意Resolutely oppose;2:比较不同意Disagree;3:一般Sometimes disagree;4:比较同意Often agree;5:非常同意Agree entirely | 1 | 5 | 4.234 | 0.839 |
控制变量 Control variable | 性别Gender | 1:男Male;2:女Female | 1 | 2 | 1.298 | 0.459 |
年龄Age | 1:18岁以下Under 18;2:18~25;3:26~30;4:31~40;5:41~50;6:51~60;7:60以上Above 60 | 2 | 7 | 3.793 | 1.190 | |
家庭决策者Family decision makers | 1:是Yes;2:否No | 1 | 2 | 1.792 | 0.407 | |
中共党员Party member | 1:是Yes;2:否No | 1 | 2 | 0.080 | 0.272 | |
家庭总人口Family population | 样本牧户家庭总人口数Householder’s real number | 3 | 11 | 5.287 | 1.636 | |
文化程度Education level | 1:小学及以下;2:初中;3:高中、职高;4:大专;5:本科及以上。1:Primary school or below;2:Junior school;3:Senior high school or vocational high school;4:Junior college;5:Bachelor degree or above. | 1 | 5 | 1.569 | 0.866 | |
家庭年收入Family income | 牧户家庭年均总收入(万元) Annual family income(×104 CNY) | 0.1 | 10 | 2.845 | 2.135 | |
兼业化行为Part-time behavior | 1:纯牧户;2:兼业户1:Herdsman;2: Part-time herdsman | 1 | 2 | 1.569 | 0.497 |
表1 变量含义、赋值及描述性统计
Table 1 Variable meaning, assignment and descriptive statistics
变量 Variable | 项目 Item | 变量含义及赋值 Definition measurement | 最小值 Minimum | 最大值 Maximum | 平均值 Mean | 标准差Standardd eviation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
因变量 Dependent variable | 参与意愿Participation willingness | 1:愿意Willingness;0:不愿意参与Unwillingness | 0 | 1 | 0.883 | 0.322 |
支付意愿 Willingness to pay | 草原生态治理支付意愿(元·户-1·年-1)Payment willingness on rangeland ecological governance(CNY·yr-1·household-1) | 0 | 1200 | 277.710 | 215.870 | |
核心自变量 Core independent variables 社会网络 Social network | 牧民交往 Communication among herdsmen | 1:从不交往Never;2:偶尔交往Occasionally;3:一般General;4:频繁交往Frequently;5:经常交往Constantly | 1 | 5 | 3.436 | 0.937 |
干群交往 Communication between cadres and massed | 1:从不交往Never;2:偶尔交往Occasionally;3:一般General;4:频繁交往Frequently;5:经常交往Constantly | 1 | 5 | 2.718 | 0.992 | |
社会信任 Social trust | 牧民信任 Trust among herdsmen | 1:很不信任Never trust;2:较不信任Occasionally mistrust;3:一般General trust;4:较信任Frequently trust;5:非常信任Constantly trust | 1 | 5 | 3.532 | 1.005 |
干群信任 Trust between cadres and massed | 1:很不信任Never trust;2:较不信任Occasionally mistrust;3:一般General trust;4:较信任Frequently trust;5:非常信任Constantly trust | 1 | 5 | 2.926 | 0.874 | |
社会规范 Social norms | 遵守草原法规制度 Abide by grassland laws and regulations | 1:从不遵守Never;2:偶尔遵守Occasionally;3:一般General;4:比较遵守Frequently;5:经常遵守Constantly | 1 | 5 | 4.170 | 0.776 |
遵守村规民约 Abide by village rules and regulation | 1:从不遵守Never;2:偶尔遵守Occasionally;3:一般General;4:比较遵守Frequently;5:经常遵守Constantly | 1 | 5 | 4.186 | 0.867 | |
社会参与 Social participation | 参与村集体活动 Participate in village collective activities | 1:从不参与Never;2:偶尔参与Occasionally;3:一般General;4:频繁参与Frequently;5:经常参与Constantly | 1 | 5 | 2.830 | 1.106 |
社会互惠 Social reciprocity | 牧民互帮互助 Herdsmen mutual aid | 1:非常不同意Resolutely oppose;2:比较不同意Disagree;3:一般Sometimes disagree;4:比较同意Often agree;5:非常同意Agree entirely | 1 | 5 | 4.234 | 0.839 |
控制变量 Control variable | 性别Gender | 1:男Male;2:女Female | 1 | 2 | 1.298 | 0.459 |
年龄Age | 1:18岁以下Under 18;2:18~25;3:26~30;4:31~40;5:41~50;6:51~60;7:60以上Above 60 | 2 | 7 | 3.793 | 1.190 | |
家庭决策者Family decision makers | 1:是Yes;2:否No | 1 | 2 | 1.792 | 0.407 | |
中共党员Party member | 1:是Yes;2:否No | 1 | 2 | 0.080 | 0.272 | |
家庭总人口Family population | 样本牧户家庭总人口数Householder’s real number | 3 | 11 | 5.287 | 1.636 | |
文化程度Education level | 1:小学及以下;2:初中;3:高中、职高;4:大专;5:本科及以上。1:Primary school or below;2:Junior school;3:Senior high school or vocational high school;4:Junior college;5:Bachelor degree or above. | 1 | 5 | 1.569 | 0.866 | |
家庭年收入Family income | 牧户家庭年均总收入(万元) Annual family income(×104 CNY) | 0.1 | 10 | 2.845 | 2.135 | |
兼业化行为Part-time behavior | 1:纯牧户;2:兼业户1:Herdsman;2: Part-time herdsman | 1 | 2 | 1.569 | 0.497 |
愿意支付金额 Willing to pay (CNY·yr-1·household-1) | 绝对频次 Absolute frequency (persons) | 相对频度 Relative frequency (%) | 调整频度 Adjustment frequency (%) | 累计频度 Cumulative frequency (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
100以下Below 100 | 31 | 16.489 | 19.255 | 19.255 |
100~200 | 37 | 19.681 | 22.981 | 42.236 |
200~300 | 38 | 20.213 | 23.602 | 65.839 |
300~400 | 20 | 10.638 | 12.422 | 78.261 |
400~500 | 16 | 8.511 | 9.938 | 88.199 |
500~600 | 6 | 3.191 | 3.727 | 91.925 |
600~700 | 5 | 2.660 | 3.106 | 95.031 |
700~800 | 3 | 1.596 | 1.863 | 96.894 |
>800 | 5 | 2.660 | 3.106 | 100.000 |
愿意支付Willingness to pay | 161 | 85.638 | - | - |
不愿意支付Unwillingness to pay | 27 | 14.362 | - | - |
总计Total | 188 | 100.000 | - | - |
表2 牧户草原生态治理支付意愿累计频率分布
Table 2 Cumulative frequency distribution of willingness to pay for grassland ecological governance of farmers
愿意支付金额 Willing to pay (CNY·yr-1·household-1) | 绝对频次 Absolute frequency (persons) | 相对频度 Relative frequency (%) | 调整频度 Adjustment frequency (%) | 累计频度 Cumulative frequency (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
100以下Below 100 | 31 | 16.489 | 19.255 | 19.255 |
100~200 | 37 | 19.681 | 22.981 | 42.236 |
200~300 | 38 | 20.213 | 23.602 | 65.839 |
300~400 | 20 | 10.638 | 12.422 | 78.261 |
400~500 | 16 | 8.511 | 9.938 | 88.199 |
500~600 | 6 | 3.191 | 3.727 | 91.925 |
600~700 | 5 | 2.660 | 3.106 | 95.031 |
700~800 | 3 | 1.596 | 1.863 | 96.894 |
>800 | 5 | 2.660 | 3.106 | 100.000 |
愿意支付Willingness to pay | 161 | 85.638 | - | - |
不愿意支付Unwillingness to pay | 27 | 14.362 | - | - |
总计Total | 188 | 100.000 | - | - |
变量类型 Variable type | 变量 Variable | 参与意愿 Participation willingness | 支付意愿 Payment willingness | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
系数Coefficient | z值z value | 系数Coefficient | z值z value | ||
社会网络 Social network | 牧民交往Communication among herdsmen | 0.080 | 0.56 | -53.031** | -1.93 |
干群交往Communication between cadres and massed | -0.274* | -1.91 | 20.738 | 0.79 | |
社会信任 Social trust | 牧民信任Trust among herdsmen | 0.261* | 1.67 | 70.686*** | 2.79 |
干群信任Trust between cadres and massed | -0.228 | -1.58 | -11.747 | -0.42 | |
社会规范 Social norms | 遵守草原法规制度Abide by grassland laws and regulations | 0.335 | 1.47 | -48.022 | -1.34 |
遵守村规民约Abide by village rules and regulation | 0.452** | 2.35 | 34.405 | 0.96 | |
社会参与 Social participation | 参与村集体活动Participate in village collective activities | -0.304** | -2.39 | -45.003** | -2.14 |
社会互惠 Social reciprocity | 牧民互帮互助Herdsmen mutual aid | 0.006 | 0.04 | 19.185 | 0.62 |
控制变量 Control variables | 性别Gender | 0.299 | 0.92 | 25.719 | 0.52 |
年龄Age | 0.237* | 1.78 | -5.256 | -0.27 | |
家庭决策者Family decision makers | 0.551* | 1.73 | -57.764 | -1.08 | |
中共党员Party member | 1.054 | 2.04 | 119.590* | 1.69 | |
家庭总人口Family population | -0.050 | -0.50 | 45.283*** | 3.30 | |
文化程度Education level | -0.159 | -0.87 | -1.434 | -0.05 | |
家庭年收入Family income | -0.123* | -67.00 | 74.456*** | 5.98 | |
兼业化行为Part-time behavior | -0.261 | -0.85 | 46.172 | 1.00 | |
常量Constant term | -1.772 | -1.19 | -278.969 | -1.09 | |
沃尔德卡方值Wald chi2(16) =29.48 | Wald chi2(15) =78.03 | ||||
显著性Prob>chi2=0.0210 | Prob>chi2=0.0000 | ||||
对数伪然值Logarithmic pseudo-values=-51.568 | 对数似然值 Log likelihood=-1006.819 |
表3 模型估计结果
Table 3 Model estimation results
变量类型 Variable type | 变量 Variable | 参与意愿 Participation willingness | 支付意愿 Payment willingness | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
系数Coefficient | z值z value | 系数Coefficient | z值z value | ||
社会网络 Social network | 牧民交往Communication among herdsmen | 0.080 | 0.56 | -53.031** | -1.93 |
干群交往Communication between cadres and massed | -0.274* | -1.91 | 20.738 | 0.79 | |
社会信任 Social trust | 牧民信任Trust among herdsmen | 0.261* | 1.67 | 70.686*** | 2.79 |
干群信任Trust between cadres and massed | -0.228 | -1.58 | -11.747 | -0.42 | |
社会规范 Social norms | 遵守草原法规制度Abide by grassland laws and regulations | 0.335 | 1.47 | -48.022 | -1.34 |
遵守村规民约Abide by village rules and regulation | 0.452** | 2.35 | 34.405 | 0.96 | |
社会参与 Social participation | 参与村集体活动Participate in village collective activities | -0.304** | -2.39 | -45.003** | -2.14 |
社会互惠 Social reciprocity | 牧民互帮互助Herdsmen mutual aid | 0.006 | 0.04 | 19.185 | 0.62 |
控制变量 Control variables | 性别Gender | 0.299 | 0.92 | 25.719 | 0.52 |
年龄Age | 0.237* | 1.78 | -5.256 | -0.27 | |
家庭决策者Family decision makers | 0.551* | 1.73 | -57.764 | -1.08 | |
中共党员Party member | 1.054 | 2.04 | 119.590* | 1.69 | |
家庭总人口Family population | -0.050 | -0.50 | 45.283*** | 3.30 | |
文化程度Education level | -0.159 | -0.87 | -1.434 | -0.05 | |
家庭年收入Family income | -0.123* | -67.00 | 74.456*** | 5.98 | |
兼业化行为Part-time behavior | -0.261 | -0.85 | 46.172 | 1.00 | |
常量Constant term | -1.772 | -1.19 | -278.969 | -1.09 | |
沃尔德卡方值Wald chi2(16) =29.48 | Wald chi2(15) =78.03 | ||||
显著性Prob>chi2=0.0210 | Prob>chi2=0.0000 | ||||
对数伪然值Logarithmic pseudo-values=-51.568 | 对数似然值 Log likelihood=-1006.819 |
变量Variable | 平均边际效应Average marginal effects | 标准误Standard error | z值z value |
---|---|---|---|
牧民交往Communication among herdsmen | 0.012 | 0.021 | 0.57 |
干群交往Communication between cadres and massed | -0.042** | 0.021 | -2.00 |
牧民信任Trust among herdsmen | 0.040* | 0.023 | 1.74 |
干群信任Trust between cadres and massed | -0.035 | 0.021 | -1.64 |
遵守草原法规制度Abide by grassland laws and regulations | 0.051 | 0.034 | 1.49 |
遵守村规民约Abide by village rules and regulation | 0.069** | 0.029 | 2.36 |
参与村集体活动Participate in village collective activities | -0.046** | 0.019 | -2.39 |
牧民互帮互助Herdsmen mutual aid | 0.001 | 0.022 | 0.04 |
性别Gender | 0.046 | 0.050 | 0.92 |
年龄Age | 0.036* | 0.021 | 1.76 |
家庭决策者Family decision makers | 0.084* | 0.047 | 1.78 |
中共党员Party member | 0.161** | 0.080 | 2.01 |
家庭总人口Family population | -0.008 | 0.015 | -0.51 |
文化程度Education level | -0.024 | 0.028 | -0.86 |
家庭年收入Family income | -0.019* | 0.011 | -1.70 |
兼业化行为Part-time behavior | -0.039 | 0.047 | -0.85 |
表4 平边际效应分析
Table 4 Average marginal effects
变量Variable | 平均边际效应Average marginal effects | 标准误Standard error | z值z value |
---|---|---|---|
牧民交往Communication among herdsmen | 0.012 | 0.021 | 0.57 |
干群交往Communication between cadres and massed | -0.042** | 0.021 | -2.00 |
牧民信任Trust among herdsmen | 0.040* | 0.023 | 1.74 |
干群信任Trust between cadres and massed | -0.035 | 0.021 | -1.64 |
遵守草原法规制度Abide by grassland laws and regulations | 0.051 | 0.034 | 1.49 |
遵守村规民约Abide by village rules and regulation | 0.069** | 0.029 | 2.36 |
参与村集体活动Participate in village collective activities | -0.046** | 0.019 | -2.39 |
牧民互帮互助Herdsmen mutual aid | 0.001 | 0.022 | 0.04 |
性别Gender | 0.046 | 0.050 | 0.92 |
年龄Age | 0.036* | 0.021 | 1.76 |
家庭决策者Family decision makers | 0.084* | 0.047 | 1.78 |
中共党员Party member | 0.161** | 0.080 | 2.01 |
家庭总人口Family population | -0.008 | 0.015 | -0.51 |
文化程度Education level | -0.024 | 0.028 | -0.86 |
家庭年收入Family income | -0.019* | 0.011 | -1.70 |
兼业化行为Part-time behavior | -0.039 | 0.047 | -0.85 |
1 | Han C B. Report of the State Council on the protection of grassland ecological environment. www.npc.gov.cn, 2017. |
韩长赋. 国务院关于草原生态环境保护工作情况的报告. 中国人大网, 2017. | |
2 | Qin Y Z. Fei Xiao Tong and the Northwest National Corridor. Nationalities Research in Qinghai, 2011, 22(3): 1-6. |
秦永章. 费孝通与西北民族走廊. 青海民族研究, 2011, 22(3): 1-6. | |
3 | Ren J Z. Grazing, the basic form of grassland ecosystem and its transformation. Journal of Natural Resources, 2012, 27(8): 1259-1275. |
任继周. 放牧, 草原生态系统存在的基本方式—兼论放牧的转型. 自然资源学报, 2012, 27(8): 1259-1275. | |
4 | Wang X Y. From “rangeland leasing” to “recentralization in rangeland conservation” —Policies of rangeland conservation in North China. China Rural Survey, 2009(3): 36-46. |
王晓毅. 从承包到“再集中”—中国北方草原环境保护政策分析. 中国农村观察, 2009(3): 36-46. | |
5 | Hu Z T, Kong D S, Jin L S. Grassland eco-compensation: Game analysis under weak supervision. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2016, 37(1): 95-102. |
胡振通, 孔德帅, 靳乐山. 草原生态补偿: 弱监管下的博弈分析. 农业经济问题, 2016, 37(1): 95-102. | |
6 | Chen Q Q, Sun X H. Analysis of impact of human activities on grassland environment based on ImPACT identity—A case study of pastoral area of Gannan. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2010, 28(1): 168-174. |
陈强强, 孙小花. 基于ImPACT等式的人类活动对草原环境的影响—以甘南州草原牧区为例. 干旱地区农业研究, 2010, 28(1): 168-174. | |
7 | Bourdieu P. The forms of capital. Richardson J. Handbook of theory & research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press, 1986: 241-258. |
8 | Putnam R D, Leonardi R, Nanetti R Y. Making democracy work: Civic tradition in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993: 163-167. |
9 | Wan J Y, Qin J. Social capital: Its connotation, measurement, function and application. Commercial Research, 2011(4): 8-13. |
万俊毅, 秦佳. 社会资本的内涵、测量、功能及应用. 商业研究, 2011(4): 8-13. | |
10 | Zhu Q H, Lei Y. Influence of social capital on the pro-environmental behavior of straw disposal by farmers in L County of Hubei Province. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2018, 32(11): 15-21. |
朱清海, 雷云. 社会资本对农户秸秆处置亲环境行为的影响研究—基于湖北省L县农户的调查数据. 干旱区资源与环境, 2018, 32(11): 15-21. | |
11 | Shi H T, Sui D C, Wu H X, et al. The influence of social capital on farmers’ participation in watershed ecological management behavior: Evidence from Heihe Basin. Chinese Rural Economy, 2018(1): 34-45. |
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. 中国农村经济, 2018(1): 34-45. | |
12 | Liu Q, Zhu Y C. Research on the influence of social capital on farmers’ participation in small-scale farmland water supply. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, 2015(12): 32-41. |
刘庆, 朱玉春. 社会资本对农户参与小型农田水利供给行为的影响研究. 农业技术经济, 2015(12): 32-41. | |
13 | Zheng Z, Zhu Y C. Research on farmers’ willingness to invest in irrigation and water conservancy based on the perspective of social capital. China Rural Water and Hydropower, 2014(11): 1-5. |
郑重, 朱玉春. 基于社会资本视角的农户参与农田水利投资意愿研究. 中国农村水利水电, 2014(11): 1-5. | |
14 | Yang L, Zhu Y C, Ren Y. Influence of social trust and organizational support on the performance of farmers’ participation in the management and maintenance of small-scale farmland water conservancy. Resources Science, 2018, 40(6): 1230-1245. |
杨柳, 朱玉春, 任洋. 社会信任、组织支持对农户参与小农水管护绩效的影响. 资源科学, 2018, 40(6): 1230-1245. | |
15 | Yan T W, He K, Zhang J B. Analysis of social capital influencing farmers’ willingness of environment protection investment: Evidence from empirical study on reusing agricultural wastes in Hubei rural areas. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2016, 26(1): 158-164. |
颜廷武, 何可, 张俊飚. 社会资本对农民环保投资意愿的影响分析—来自湖北农村农业废弃物资源化的实证研究. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016, 26(1): 158-164. | |
16 | Guo W X, Fu Y C, Zhang L F. Social capital simulation of watershed eco-compensation. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2014, 24(7): 18-22. |
郭文献, 付意成, 张龙飞. 流域生态补偿社会资本模拟. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2014, 24(7): 18-22. | |
17 | Gong D X, Jin W J, Dou X C, et al. Response of herdsmen’s behavior to the policy of grazing grassland fencing: A case in alpine pasture area of Maqu County. Journal of Desert Research, 2012, 32(4): 1169-1173. |
龚大鑫, 金文杰, 窦学诚, 等. 牧户对退牧还草工程的行为响应及其影响因素研究—以高寒牧区玛曲县为例. 中国沙漠, 2012, 32(4): 1169-1173. | |
18 | Hou C C, Zhao X Y, Zhao M L, et al. Impact of ecological compensation on herdsman’s social senses: A case of Yellow River water supply area of Gannan. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2012, 20(5): 650-655. |
侯成成, 赵雪雁, 赵敏丽, 等. 生态补偿对牧民社会观念的影响—以甘南黄河水源补给区为例. 中国生态农业学报, 2012, 20(5): 650-655. | |
19 | Zhao X Y, Li W, Yang P T, et al. Impact of livelihood capital on the livelihood activities of farmers and herdsmen on Gannan Plateau. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2011, 21(4): 111-118. |
赵雪雁, 李巍, 杨培涛, 等. 生计资本对甘南高原农牧民生计活动的影响. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2011, 21(4): 111-118. | |
20 | Zhao X Y, Lu H L, Liu S, et al. Analysis on farmers’ willingness to participate in ecological compensation—A case of the Yellow River water supply area of Gannan. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2012, 22(4): 96-101. |
赵雪雁, 路慧玲, 刘霜, 等. 甘南黄河水源补给区生态补偿农户参与意愿分析. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2012, 22(4): 96-101. | |
21 | Han H Y, Zhang Z J, Peng W H. An analysis of the influence mechanism of social capital of households waste separation. Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 2016, 46(3): 164-179. |
韩洪云, 张志坚, 朋文欢. 社会资本对居民生活垃圾分类行为的影响机理分析. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2016, 46(3): 164-179. | |
22 | Wang X T, Zhang J B, He K, et al. The impacts of social trust and group norms on farmers’ ecological consciousness. Research of Agricultural Modernization, 2019, 40(2): 215-225. |
王学婷, 张俊飚, 何可, 等. 社会信任、群体规范对农户生态自觉性的影响. 农业现代化研究, 2019, 40(2): 215-225. | |
23 | Qiao D, Lu Q, Xu T. Social network, extension service and farmers water-saving irrigation technology adoption in Minqin County. Resources Science, 2017, 39(3): 441-450. |
乔丹, 陆迁, 徐涛. 社会网络、推广服务与农户节水灌溉技术采用—以甘肃省民勤县为例. 资源科学, 2017, 39(3): 441-450. | |
24 | He K, Zhang J B, Zhang L, et al. The interpersonal trust, the system trust, and farmers’ willingness to participate in environmental control: A study that takes as an example the resources of agricultural wastes. Management World, 2015(5): 75-88. |
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. 管理世界, 2015(5): 75-88. | |
25 | Zhang C E, Li Y M. Research on peasants’ recognition, situational constraint and the peasants’ willingness to participate in social governance-based on the survey data from five Provinces. China Rural Survey, 2015(2): 69-80. |
张翠娥, 李跃梅. 主体认知、情境约束与农民参与社会治理的意愿—基于山东等5省调查数据的分析. 中国农村观察, 2015(2): 69-80. | |
26 | Li X D, Li L T. Social security, social trust and ecological protection of pastoral grassland. Journal of Northwest A&F University (Social Science Edition), 2019, 19(3): 132-141. |
李先东, 李录堂. 社会保障、社会信任与牧民草场生态保护. 西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2019, 19(3): 132-141. | |
27 | Chen Q. Advanced econometrics and Stata applications (Second Edition). Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2014: 169-177. |
陈强. 高级计量经济学及Stata应用(第二版). 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2014: 169-177. | |
28 | Zhao X Y. Relationship between social capital and economic growth, environment impact. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2010, 20(2): 68-73. |
赵雪雁. 社会资本与经济增长及环境影响的关系研究. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2010, 20(2): 68-73. | |
29 | Cai Q H, Zhu Y C. Social trust, relationship network and farmers’ participation in the supply of rural public goods. Chinese Rural Economy, 2015(7): 57-69. |
蔡起华, 朱玉春. 社会信任、关系网络与农户参与农村公共产品供给. 中国农村经济, 2015(7): 57-69. | |
30 | Zhang F D. On the social norm approach of environmental governance. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2016, 26(11): 10-18. |
张福德. 环境治理的社会规范路径. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016, 26(11): 10-18. | |
31 | Jiang T B. Analysis on the factors influencing the fertilization behavior of farmers in the construction of rural ecological environment. Journal of Southwest Minzu University (Humanities and Social Science), 2015(12): 157-161. |
姜太碧. 农村生态环境建设中农户施肥行为影响因素分析. 西南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2015(12): 157-161. | |
32 | Yang Q, Nan Z B, Chen Q Q. Ecological compensation for grassland in China: A review. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(7): 1-8. |
杨清, 南志标, 陈强强. 国内草原生态补偿研究进展. 生态学报, 2020, 40(7): 1-8. | |
33 | Liu Q J, Li Z N, Li Y T. Farmers’ understanding and coping strategies on climate poverty in ecological vulnerable ethnic region: An empirical typical evidence from Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture and Linxia Hui Autonomous Prefecture of Gansu Province. Ecological Economy, 2017, 33(11): 139-145. |
刘七军, 李昭楠, 李雨婷. 生态脆弱民族地区农户对气候贫困的认知及应对策略—来自甘南州和临夏州的典型调查. 生态经济, 2017, 33(11): 139-145. | |
34 | Ma B, Zhou L H, Lu H L, et al. Quantitative analysis of ecological compensation for prohibiting grazing policy based on contingent valuation method-A case study in Yanchi, Ningxia, China. Journal of Desert Research, 2015, 35(3): 800-807. |
马兵, 周立华, 路慧玲, 等. 基于意愿价值评估法的禁牧政策生态补偿定量分析—以宁夏盐池县为例. 中国沙漠, 2015, 35(3): 800-807. | |
35 | Gong F, Wang F, Chang Q, et al. Empirically study on compensation will of grassland ecology in Inner Mongolia. Economic Geography, 2011, 31(1): 144-148. |
巩芳, 王芳, 长青, 等. 内蒙古草原生态补偿意愿的实证研究. 经济地理, 2011, 31(1): 144-148. | |
36 | Zhang X H. Willingness to pay for grassland eco-compensation for the town residents in Xinjiang. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2019, 33(3): 51-56. |
张新华. 新疆城镇居民对草原生态保护补偿支付意愿分析. 干旱区资源与环境, 2019, 33(3): 51-56. | |
37 | Shi Y X, Yao L Y, Zhao M J. The effect of social capital on herdsmen’s participation willingness in grassland community governance: Analysis based on Triple-Hurdle model. China Rural Survey, 2018(3): 35-50. |
史雨星, 姚柳杨, 赵敏娟. 社会资本对牧户参与草场社区治理意愿的影响—基于Triple-Hurdle模型的分析. 中国农村观察, 2018(3): 35-50. | |
38 | Xie X X, Li X P, Zhao M J, et al. How does capital endowment affect herdsman to reduce livestock—An empirical analysis based on 372 herdsmen in Inner Mongolia. Resources Science, 2018, 40(9): 1730-1741. |
谢先雄, 李晓平, 赵敏娟, 等. 资本禀赋如何影响牧民减畜—基于内蒙古372 户牧民的实证考察. 资源科学, 2018, 40(9): 1730-1741. | |
39 | Chen Q H. Community led grassland co-management model: Effectiveness and mechanism—Based on the perspective of social capital. Chinese Rural Economy, 2011(5): 61-71. |
陈秋红. 社区主导型草地共管模式: 成效与机制—基于社会资本视角的分析. 中国农村经济, 2011(5): 61-71. | |
40 | Xie X X, Zhao M J, Cai Y. Influence of livelihood capital on herdsmen’s willingness to reduce the livestock in Inner Mongolia. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2019, 33(6): 55-62. |
谢先雄, 赵敏娟, 蔡瑜. 生计资本对牧民减畜意愿的影响分析—基于内蒙古372户牧民的微观实证. 干旱区资源与环境, 2019, 33(6): 55-62. | |
41 | Liu D F, Wang M J, Wulan A D, et al. Write a large composition on grassland culture. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2012, 34(1): 1-4. |
刘德福, 王明玖, 乌兰敖登, 等. 做好草原文化大文章. 中国草地学报, 2012, 34(1): 1-4. | |
42 | Feng X L, Liu M Y, Qiu H G. Impact of grassland eco-compensation policy on herders’ overgrazing behavior. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2019, 29(7): 157-165. |
冯晓龙, 刘明月, 仇焕广. 草原生态补奖政策能抑制牧户超载过牧行为吗? 中国人口·资源与环境, 2019, 29(7): 157-165. |
No related articles found! |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||