长江流域资源与环境 >> 2022, Vol. 31 >> Issue (9): 2086-2095.doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj202209019

• 农业发展 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于经济-社会-生态价值的耕地价值量核算研究——以Y市为例

朱文娟1,李建兵2,高阳2,邹妮1,李发志1,于博1,孙华1*   

  1. (1.南京农业大学公共管理学院,江苏 南京 210095;2.农业农村部耕地质量监测保护中心, 北京 100000)
  • 出版日期:2022-09-20 发布日期:2022-09-29

Cultivated Land Value Accounting Based on Economic-Social-Ecological Value:A Case Study of Y City

ZHU Wen-juan1, LI Jian-bing2, GAO Yang2, ZOU Ni1, LI Fa-zhi1, YU Bo1,  SUN Hua1   

  1. (1. College of Public Administration, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095,China;2. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People's Republic of China, Beijing 100000,China)
  • Online:2022-09-20 Published:2022-09-29

摘要:  为建立无量纲的耕地质量等级与可货币量化的耕地价值量的连接,以Y市耕地质量等级评价结果为基础,探究不同质量等级耕地价值。研究方法:收益还原法,影子价格法,当量因子法。结果表明:(1)Y市不同等级耕地,地均综合价值介于35.37 ~ 158.53万元/hm2区间;其中地均经济价值介于4.60 ~ 21.59万元/hm2区间;地均社会价值介于30.35 ~134.67万元/hm2区间;地均生态价值介于0.43~2.27万元/hm2区间;耕地价值量随耕地等级的降低而减少。(2)耕地综合价值中,社会价值占比超过经济价值,成为耕地价值核算中不可忽视的重要部分,社会、经济、生态价值占比依次减少。(3)不同等级耕地的地均综合价值量存在显著级差,耕地质量等级差额愈大,价值量差距愈大。5~10相邻等级耕地价值量差值远高于1~5等级耕地即相邻低等级耕地间价值量差异较高等级更大。该研究尝试打破原有耕地价值核算研究中区域耕地同质化的固有假设,显化了耕地的质量等级价值。未来应根据耕地不同质量等级探索制定兼顾社会、经济、生态等综合价值量维度差别化的补偿机制,建立科学合理的耕地补偿标准。同时重点着眼于5~10等级耕地质量提升,可最大限度挖掘区域耕地价值潜力。补齐低质量耕地短板,切实提升区域耕地质量水平,落实耕地数量、质量常态化保护。


Abstract: In order to establish the connection between the dimensionless cultivated land quality grade and the monetary quantifiable cultivated land value, we explored the value of cultivated land of different quality grades based on the evaluation result of the cultivated land quality grade in Y city.Research methods: The present value of earnings method, shadow price method,and equivalent factor method. Research results:(1)The average comprehensive value range of cultivated land of different grades in Y city was 35.37-158.53 ten thousand yuan/hm2, of which the average land economic value range was 4.60-21.59 ten thousand yuan/hm2, and the average social value range was 30.35-134.67 ten thousand yuan/hm2, the average ecological value of land ranges from 0.43-2.27 ten thousand yuan/hm2. The value of cultivated land decreased with the decrease of land grade.(2)In the comprehensive value of cultivated land, social value accounts for more than economic value and becomes an important part that cannot be ignored in the calculation of cultivated land value. The proportion of social, economic, and ecological values decreases in turn.(3)There is a significant difference in the average comprehensive value of cultivated land of different grades. The greater the difference in the quality of cultivated land, the greater the difference in value.The difference in value of cultivated land between six to ten adjacent grades is much higher than that of cultivated land at grades one to five, that is, the difference in value of cultivated land between adjacent low grades is greater than that of high grades.Research conclusion: This article attempts to break the inherent assumption of the homogeneity of regional cultivated land in the original cultivated land value accounting research, and manifests the quality grade value of cultivated land.In the future, it is necessary to explore and formulate compensation mechanisms that consider the differentiation of comprehensive value dimensions such as society, economy, and ecology according to different quality levels of cultivated land, and establish scientific and reasonable cultivated land compensation standards.At the same time, the focus is on improving the quality of cultivated land of grades five to ten, which can maximize the potential of regional cultivated land value.In addition, it is very important to make up for the shortcomings of low-quality cultivated land, to effectively improve the quality of regional cultivated land, and to implement normalized protection of the quantity and quality of cultivated land.


No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 王锐, 余涛, 杨忠芳, 侯青叶, 曾庆良, 马宏宏. 富硒土壤硒生物有效性及影响因素研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(07): 1460 .
[2] 付书科, 李小帆, 彭甲超, 张子悦, 陈 思. 基于动态因子分析法的长江三角洲城市群城镇化质量测度研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(09): 1909 -1918 .
[3] 吴浪, 周廷刚, 温莉, 刘晓璐, 朱晓波. 基于遥感数据的PM2.5与城市化的时空关系研究——以成渝城市群为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(09): 2142 -2152 .
[4] 李 述, 葛 刚, 刘琪璟.  

基于主体功能区规划的江西省城镇化协调发展研究 [J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(10): 2250 -2259 .

[5] 马小亮, 刘桂民, 吴晓东, 徐海燕, 叶琳琳, 张晓兰. 三江源高寒草甸下溪流溶解性有机碳的季节性输移特征[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(10): 2387 -2394 .
[6] 苏 芳, 郑亚萍, 阚立娜, 蔡 莎. 基于CVM调查法评估城市公共绿地服务价值 ——以西部省会城市为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(11): 2434 -2442 .
[7] 孔锋, 杨萍, 王品, 吕丽莉, 孙劭. 中国灾害性对流天气日数的时空变化特征[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(11): 2518 -2528 .
[8] 朱立一, 何伟, 朱璧然, . 纳米二氧化硅和铅复合暴露对 斑马鱼幼鱼甲状腺内分泌系统的毒性影响[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(11): 2588 -2596 .
[9] 查凯丽, 刘艳芳, 孔雪松, 田雅丝, 刘耀林, . 村镇路网通达性与空间出行研究——以武汉市李集镇为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(12): 2663 -2672 .
[10] 起永东, 何明琼, 郑永宏, 高 洁, 王 丹, 孔繁希. 汉江流域降水结构时空特征及影响因素分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(12): 2830 -2838 .