长江流域资源与环境 >> 2019, Vol. 28 >> Issue (07): 1747-1756.doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201907024

• 农业发展 • 上一篇    

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

唐林1,2 ,罗小锋1,2*,黄炎忠1,2,余威震1,2,张俊飚1,2   

  1. (1.华中农业大学经济管理学院,湖北 武汉 430070;2.湖北农村发展研究中心,湖北 武汉 430070)
  • 出版日期:2019-07-20 发布日期:2019-07-25

Active Participation or Passive Choice: Analysis of the Participation Behaviors and Effects of Villege Domain Environmental Governance

TANG Lin1,2,LUO Xiao-feng1,2,HUANG Yan-zhong1,2,YU Wei-zhen1,2,ZHANG Jun-biao1,2   

  1. (1.College of Economics & Management,Huazhong Agricultural University,Wuhan 430070, China;2.Hubei Rural Development Research Center,Wuhan 430073,China)
  • Online:2019-07-20 Published:2019-07-25

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。

Abstract: 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.

No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 万荣荣, 杨桂山. 太湖流域土地利用变化及其空间分异特征研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2005, 14(3): 298 -302 .
[2] 沈德福,史学正,吕成文,于东升. 江苏沿江地区土壤肥力空间分布及其区域对比研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2005, 14(3): 316 -321 .
[3] 聂钠, 于坤香. 我国世界自然遗产地旅游业环境经济核算思路[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(2): 121 .
[4] 宋玉芝,秦伯强, 高光. 附着生物对富营养化水体氮磷的去除效果[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(2): 180 .
[5] 张榆霞,刘嘉麒,王立前. 漫湾电站建成后澜沧江下游水质变化[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2005, 14(4): 501 -506 .
[6] 解晓南,许朋柱,秦伯强. 太湖流域苏锡常地区地面沉降若干问题探析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2005, 14(1): 125 -131 .
[7] 刘 健,陈 星,彭恩志,周学东. 气候变化对江苏省城市系统用电量变化趋势的影响[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2005, 14(5): 546 -550 .
[8] 刘爱霞,刘正军,王 静. 基于PCA变换和神经元网络分类方法的中国森林制图研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(1): 19 -24 .
[9] 郑明媚,李满春,毛 亮,黎韶光. GIS支持的县域人口迁移空间模型研究——以浙江省临安市为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(3): 281 -286 .
[10] 张晓平,樊 杰. 长江上游生态脆弱区生态屏障建设与产业发展战略研究——以昭通市为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(3): 310 -314 .