沙封区农户生计资本对生计策略选择敏感性影响——以临泽县为例

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2023.07.16

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

沙化土地封禁保护区（沙封区）是我国对暂不具备治理条件和不宜开发的连片沙化土地，通过封禁等方法预防土地沙化，恢复区域植被，维护生态安全，促进经济和社会可持续发展的重要手段。农户作为沙封区活动的主体，沙封区的建设对当地农户生计产生影响，为探究该区域生计资本对生计策略选择的影响。本文采用参与式农村评估法（PRA）以沙化土地封禁保护区张掖市临泽县为例，在SLA（Sustainable Livelihoods Approach）可持续分析框架基础上结合二元Logistic回归模型，分析农户生计资本对生计策略的敏感性影响。结果表明：（1）自然和人力资本显著影响纯农型生计策略的选择，物质和社会资本对农户选择兼农型生计策略的影响显著，而金融资本是农户选择非农型生计策略最主要的影响因素。（2）农户生计资本的储量影响农户对不同类型生计策略的选择，储量越多，选择的敏感性越强。（3）不同类型农户对调整现有生计策略的意愿存在较大差异，68%的纯农型和56%的兼农型农户希望调整现有的生计策略；但63%的非农户无调整现有生计策略的意愿。该结果对提高沙封区农户生计和生态安全，促进社会经济可持续发展提供重要理论依据。

关键词: 沙化保护区, 生计资本, 生计策略, 敏感性, Logistic模型

Abstract:

Sand bound land protection area (sand bound area) is an important means to prevent desertification, restore vegetation, maintain ecological security, and promote sustainable economic and social development of contiguous sand bound land that does not have control and development. As primary body of the operations in sand bound area, farmers’ construction has an impact on their livelihood. To explore the impact of livelihood capital on livelihood strategy selection in this region. This paper adopts the participatory rural assessment method (PRA) and takes Linze County of Zhangye City as an example. Based the sustainable livelihoods approach (SLA) sustainable analysis framework paired with binary logistic regression model. The results show that (1) Natural and human capital significantly affect the choice of pure agricultural livelihood strategy. Material and social capital have significant influence on the choice and agriculture livelihood strategy. Financial capital is the main factor of non-agricultural livelihood strategy selection (2) The reserves livelihood capital affect farmers’ choice of different types of livelihood strategies, and the more reserves, the stronger the sensitivity of choice. (3) The willingness of different types of farmers to adjust the existing livelihood strategy is very different, 68% of pure farmers and 56% of part-time farmers hope to adjust the existing livelihood strategy; 63% of non-farmers are unwilling to adjust their existing livelihood strategies. The conclusion provides a theoretical basis for improving the livelihood and ecological security of local farmers and promoting the sustainable development of social economy.

Key words: desertification protection area, livelihood capital, livelihood strategy, sensitivity, Logistic model

乐芳军, 罗永忠, 郭艳俊, 罗昕, 桂杰. 沙封区农户生计资本对生计策略选择敏感性影响——以临泽县为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(7): 1194-1202.

LE Fangjun, LUO Yongzhong, GUO Yanjun, LUO Xin, GUI Jie. The impact of farmers’ livelihood capital on the sensitivity of livelihood strategy choice in the Shafeng District: Taking Linze County as an example[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(7): 1194-1202.

图/表 7

图1

表1

表2

表3

图2

表4

表5

参考文献 34

[1]	Alobaidi J R, Yahya A M, Salim A B. The environmental, economic, and social development impact of desertification in Iraq: A review on desertification control measures and mitigation strategies[J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2022, 194(6): 440. doi: 10.1007/s10661-022-10102-y pmid: 35595871
[2]	池虹, 罗永忠. 封禁对沙化土地居民生计及活动影响研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(6): 1657-1666.
	[Chi Hong, Luo Yongzhong. Impact of land closure on livelihood and activities of people living in the desertified land[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(6): 1657-1666. ]
[3]	罗万云, 钟方雷, 王光耀. 沙化土地封禁保护政策的农户满意度及影响因素分析——以甘肃省为例[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(8): 2636-2646.
	[Luo Wanyun, Zhong Fanglei, Wang Guangyao. Satisfaction level and its influencing factors of peasant for desertification land sealed protection policy: A case study of Gansu Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(8): 2636-2646. ]
[4]	崔秀娟, 杨婕妤, 杜月红, 等. 农牧交错区农牧民生计策略选择及影响因素——以天祝藏族自治县为例[J]. 草业科学, 2022, 39(4): 829-840.
	[Cui Xiujuan, Yang Jieyu, Du Yuehong, et al. An empirical study on livelihood strategy choice and influencing factors of farmers and herdsmen in the agro-pastoral ecotone: Tianzhu Tibetan Autonomous County[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2022, 39(4): 829-840. ]
[5]	涂丽. 生计资本、生计指数与农户的生计策略——基于CLDS家户数据的实证分析[J]. 农村经济, 2018, 36(8): 76-83.
	[Tu Li. Livelihood capital, livelihood index and farmers’ livelihood strategies: An empirical analysis based on CLDS household data[J]. Rural Economy, 2018, 36(8): 76-83. ]
[6]	李治, 孙悦, 李国平, 等. 陕北黄土高原贫困农户生计策略对生计资本的敏感性——以佳县为例[J]. 生态学报, 2022, 42(19): 7818-7829.
	[Li Zhi, Sun Yue, Li Guoping, et al. Sensitivity of poor farmer’s livelihood strategy to livelihood capital in the Loess Plateau of northern Shaanxi Province: Evidence from Jia County[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2022, 42(19): 7818-7829. ]
[7]	Ubiali B, Alexiades M. Forests, fields, and pastures: Unequal access to brazil nuts and livelihood strategies in an extractive reserve, Brazilian Amazon[J]. Land, 2022, 11(7): 967. doi: 10.3390/land11070967
[8]	Xu D D, Deng X, Guo S L, et al. Sensitivity of livelihood strategy to livelihood capital: An empirical investigation using nationally representative survey data from rural China[J]. Social Indicators Research, 2019, 144(1): 113-131. doi: 10.1007/s11205-018-2037-6
[9]	杨悦, 员学锋. 黄土高原区农户生计资本差异及其生计策略选择——以绥德县为例[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2021, 49(6): 220-225.
	[Yang Yue, Yuan Xuefeng. Differences in livelihood capital of farmers in the Loess Plateau and their live: A case study of suide county[J]. Jounal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 49(6): 220-225. ]
[10]	Che X, Li J, Fang F. Association between livelihood capital and catastrophic health expenditure among patients with critical illness: A cross-sectional study in rural Shandong, China[J]. BMJ Open, 2021, 11: 1234-1246.
[11]	Zou S, Jilili A, Ding J L, et al. Description and attribution analysis of the 2017 spring anomalous high temperature causing floods in Kazakhstan[J]. Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan, 2020, 98(6): 1353-1368.
[12]	张志君, 陈伏龙, 龙爱华, 等. 基于可拓云模型的干旱区水资源安全评价——以石河子垦区为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(4): 847-856.
	[Zhang Zhijun, Chen Fulong, Long Aihua, et al. Assessment of water resources security in arid area based on extension cloud model: A case study of Shihezi District[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2020, 37(4): 847-856. ]
[13]	Soergel B, Kriegler E, Bodirsky B L, et al. Combining ambitious climate policies with efforts to eradicate poverty[J]. Nature Communications, 2021, 12 (1): 2342. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-22315-9 pmid: 33907192
[14]	临泽县统计局. 2020年临泽县国民经济和社会发展统计公报[R]. 临泽县统计局, 2021.
	[ Linze County Statistics Bureau. Statistical Bulletin of National Economic and Social Development of Linze County in 2020[R]. Linze County Statistics Bureau, 2021. ]
[15]	刘璐璐, 李锋瑞. 黄土高原退耕农户生计资本对生计策略的影响——以甘肃会宁县为例[J]. 中国沙漠, 2020, 40(1): 233-244. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2019.00123
	[Liu Lulu, Li Fengrui. Impact of rural housseholds’ livelihood capital on livelihood strategy in the Loess Plateau: A case study of Huining County, Gansu Province, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2020, 40(1): 233-244. ] doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2019.00123
[16]	Hai H G, Zhang J P, Li X B, et al. Impact of livelihood diversification of rural households on their ecological footprint in agropastoral areas of northern China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2015, 7(5): 653-664. doi: 10.1007/s40333-015-0049-5
[17]	袁东波, 陈美球, 廖彩荣, 等. 土地转出农户的生计资本分化及其生计策略变化[J]. 水土保持研究, 2019, 26(4): 349-354, 362.
	[Yuan Dongbo, Chen Meiqiu, Liao Cairong, et al. Differentiation of Livelihood capital of farmers and changes of livelihood strategy[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 26(4): 349-354, 362. ]
[18]	苏芳, 蒲欣冬, 徐中民, 等. 生计资本与生计策略关系研究——以张掖市甘州区为例[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2009, 19(6): 119-125.
	[Su Fang, Pu Xindong, Xu Zhongmin, et al. Research on the relationship between livelihood capital and livelihood strategy[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2009, 19(6): 119-125. ]
[19]	Yang X, Sang Y, Zhang A. How livelihood capital affects farmers’ willingness to pay for farmland non-market value? Evidence from Jianghan Plain, China[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2022, 29: 51456-51468. doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-19327-3
[20]	马国璇, 周忠发, 朱昌丽, 等. 石漠化地区农户生计资本与生计策略的关系——以贵州省关岭贞丰花江石漠化综合示范区为例[J]. 水土保持通报, 2020, 40(2): 299-307.
	[Ma Guoxuan, Zhou Zhongfa, Zhu Changli, et al. Relationship between livelihood capital and livelihood strategy of farmers in rocky desertification area: A case of Guanling-Zhenfeng Huajiang rocky desertification demonstration zone in Guizhou Province[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 40(2): 299-307. ]
[21]	伍艳. 农户生计资本与生计策略的选择[J]. 华南农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2015, 14(2): 57-66.
	[Wu Yan. Study on farmers livelihood capital impact upon the livelihood strategies[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), 2015, 14(2): 57-66. ]
[22]	郭秀丽, 周立华, 陈勇, 等. 典型沙漠化地区农户生计资本对生计策略的影响——以内蒙古自治区杭锦旗为例[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(20): 6963-6972.
	[Guo Xiuli, Zhou Lihua, Chen Yong, et al. Impact of farmers’ livelihood capital on livelihood strategy in a typical desertification areas in the Inner Mongolia autonomous region[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(20): 6963-6972. ]
[23]	蒙吉军, 艾木入拉, 刘洋, 等. 农牧户可持续生计资产与生计策略的关系研究——以鄂尔多斯市乌审旗为例[J]. 北京大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 49(2): 321-328.
	[Meng Jijun, Aimurula, Liu Yang, et al. Study on relationship between livelihood capital and livelihood strategy of farming and grazing households: A case of Uxin Banner in Ordos[J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2013, 49(2): 321-328. ]
[24]	王娅, 周立华, 魏轩. 基于社会-生态系统的沙漠化逆转过程脆弱性评价指标体系[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(3): 829-840.
	[Wang Ya, Zhou Lihua, Wei Xuan. An evaluation index system of vulnerability of the desertification reversal process based on socio-ecological systems theory[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(3): 829-840. ]
[25]	路慧玲, 赵雪雁, 周海, 等. 社会资本对农户收入的影响——以甘肃省张掖市、甘南藏族自治州与临夏回族自治州为例[J]. 中国沙漠, 2014, 34(2): 610-616. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2013.00355
	[Lu Huiling, Zhao Xueyan, Zhou Hai, et al. Impact of social capital on farmers’ income: A case study in Zhangye City, Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture and Linxia Hui Autonomous Prefecture of Gansu Province, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2014, 34(2): 610-616. ] doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2013.00355
[26]	Fang Y P, Fan J, Shen M Y, et al. Sensitivity of livelihood strategy to livelihood capital in mountain areas: Empirical analysis based on different settlements in the upper reaches of the Minjiang River, China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2014, 38: 225-235. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.11.007
[27]	Detlef G, Hans-Christoph S, Carsten L. Population dynamics, social resilience strategies, and Adaptive Cycles in early farming societies of SW Central Europe[J]. Quaternary International, 2017, 446: 54-65. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2017.01.018
[28]	张云霞, 张金茜, 巩杰. 半干旱区湖盆景观格局脆弱性及其影响因素——以凉城县为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(4): 1259-1269.
	[Zhang Yunxia, Zhang Jinxi, Gong Jie. Landscape pattern vulnerability and its influencing factors on a semi-arid lake basin: A case study of Liangcheng County[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(4): 1259-1269. ]
[29]	赵文娟, 杨世龙, 王潇. 基于Logistic回归模型的生计资本与生计策略研究——以云南新平县干热河谷傣族地区为例[J]. 资源科学, 2016, 38(1): 136-143. doi: 10.18402/resci.2016.01.15
	[Zhao Wenjuan, Yang Shilong, Wang Xiao. The relationship between Livelihood capital and livelihood strategy based on logistic regression model in Xinping County of Yuanjiang dry-hot valley[J]. Resource Science, 2016, 38(1): 136-143. ] doi: 10.18402/resci.2016.01.15
[30]	韦惠兰, 韩雪, 魏鹏. 生计资本对农户生活满意度的影响——基于甘肃省沙化土地封禁保护区的村域调查[J]. 开发研究, 2018, 196(3): 124-130.
	[Wei Huilan, Han Xue, Wei Peng. Analysis of the impact of farmers’ livelihood capital on life satisfaction in enclosed and forbidden reserves of desertified land: Based on the village survey date in Gansu Province[J]. Research on Development, 2018, 196(3): 124-130. ]
[31]	张萍, 杨振, 郭红娇, 等. 林区农户生计策略的资本敏感性研究[J]. 资源开发与市场, 2014, 30(7): 788-792.
	[Zhang Ping, Yang Zhen, Guo Hongjiao, et al. Study on capital sensitivity of farmers’livelihood strategy in forest Area[J]. Resource Development & Market, 2014, 30(7): 788-792. ]
[32]	全磊, 陈玉萍. 农地转出户的生计资本流动及其影响因素分析[J]. 华中农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2018, 134(2): 127-135, 161.
	[Quan Lei, Chen Yuping. Analysis on livelihood assets mobility and its influencing factors of rural households[J]. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), 2018, 134(2): 127-135, 161. ]
[33]	道日娜. 农牧交错区域农户生计资本与生计策略关系研究——以内蒙古东部四个旗为例[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2014, 24(S2): 274-278.
	[Dao Rina. Relationship between livelihood strategy of rural households of farming-pastoral area: A case study on four counties in the eastern Inner Mongolia[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2014, 24(S2): 274-278. ]
[34]	伍艳. 贫困山区农户生计资本对生计策略的影响研究——基于四川省平武县和南江县的调查数据[J]. 农业经济问题, 2016, 37(3): 88-94.
	[Wu Yan. Poor mountain farmers livelihood capital impact on livelihoods strategy research: Based on the survey data Pingwu and Nanjiang County of Sichuan Province[J]. Issues in Agricultural Economic, 2016, 37(3): 88-94. ]

农户类型	调研区域	农户划分	问卷数量/份	占比/%
纯农户	汪家墩村，倪家营村	农业收入占家庭总收入的80%以上	129	49.8
兼农户	五里墩村，雷台村	农业、牧业或其他占家庭总收入的50%左右	90	34.74
非农户	平川镇，倪家营镇	农业收入占家庭的总收入不能超过20%	40	15.46

资本类型	测量指标	变量	变量赋值计算
自然资本（N）	耕地面积	N₁	水浇地/旱地面积：0~5 hm²为0.25，6~10 hm²为0.5，11~15 hm²为0.75，16 hm²及以上为1
自然资本（N）	草地面积	N₂	草地面积：0~5 hm²为0.25，6~10 hm²为0.5，11~15 hm²为0.75，16 hm²及以上为1
人力资本（H）	受教育水平	H₁	未上学0，小学0.25，初中0.5，高中0.75，大专及以上1
	健康状况	H₂	小疾为0.25，一般为0.5，健康为0.75，残疾为1
	技能培训	H₃	农户是否接受技能培训（养殖/种植）；否为0，是为1
	家庭劳动力	H₄	无人为0；1人为0.25，2人为0.5，3人为0.75，4人及以上为1
物质资本（P）	家电数量	P₁	0~2件为0.25，3~5件为0.5，6~8件为0.75，9件及以上为1
	生产工具	P₂	农用机械数，1辆为0.25，2辆为0.5，3辆为0.75，4辆及以上为1
	牲畜数量	P₃	禽类为0，羊为0.25，猪为0.5，牛为0.75，马为1
	住房质量	P₄	土木构造为0.25，砖木构造为0.5，砖混构造为1
金融资本（F）	存款金额	F₁	每户存款（万元），1~3为0.25，4~6为0.5，7~9为0.75，10万及以上为1
	贷款金额	F₂	每户贷款（万元），无为0，1~3为0.25，4~6为0.5，7~9为0.75，10万及以上为1
	家庭总收入	F₃	每户收入（万元），1万以下为0，1~3为0.25，4~6为0.5，7~9为0.75，10万及以上为1
社会资本（S）	获得帮助人数	S₁	无为0，1次为0.25，2次为0.5，3为0.75，4次及以上为1
	家庭礼金支出	S₂	礼金支出（万元），无为0，0~0.1为0.25，0.1~0.15为0.5，0.15~0.2为0.75，0.2以上为1
	社会关系	S₃	家庭成员或亲戚有无村委会或县（乡）政府工作人员，无为0，有为1

资本类型	变量	纯农型			兼农型		非农型
资本类型	变量	权重	资本值		权重	资本值	权重	资本值
自然资本（N）	耕地面积（N₁）	0.651	0.372		0.623	0.311	0.598	0.103
自然资本（N）	草地面积（N₂）	0.349	0.372		0.377	0.311	0.402	0.103
人力资本（H）	受教育水平（H₁）	0.353	0.267		0.366	0.276	0.372	0.131
	健康状况（H₂）	0.303			0.311		0.313
	技能培训（H₃）	0.319			0.121		0.132
	家庭劳动力（H₄）	0.225			0.202		0.183
物质资本（P）	家电数量（P₁）	0.270	0.156	0.201	0.243	0.223	0.116
	生产工具（P₂）	0.262		0.271		0.287
	牲畜数量（P₃）	0.321		0.305		0.248
	住房质量（P₄）	0.147		0.223		0.242
金融资本（F）	存款金额（F₁）	0.219	0.107	0.361	0.098	0.286	0.289
	贷款金额（F₂）	0.271		0.274		0.317
	家庭总收入（F₃）	0.260		0.365		0.397
社会资本（S）	获得帮助人数（S₁）	0.392	0.098	0.317	0.072	0.250	0.361
	家庭礼金支出（S₂）	0.286		0.344		0.407
	社会关系（S₃）	0.222		0.339		0.343

生计资本	纯农型			兼农型			非农型
生计资本	B	Wald	exp（B）	B	Wald	exp（B）	B	Wald	exp（B）
自然资本（N）	1.462	0.613	4.315	1.503	0.510	4.493	-5.403	4.011	0.005
人力资本（H）	1.031	0.337	2.805	-1.234	1.607	0.291	0.043	0.001	1.044
物质资本（P）	0.965	0.287	2.625	-4.033	2.301	0.018	1.089	1.159	2.972
金融资本（F）	-2.995	1.502	0.050	0.454	0.058	1.575	2.162	2.130	13.624
社会资本（S）	-0.595	0.505	0.552	0.601	0.102	1.824	-0.556	0.462	0.573
	H-L Chi-square=15.068 （df=8，sig=0.588）			H-L Chi-square=6.302 （df=8，sig=0.869）			H-L Chi-square=5.639 （df=8，sig=0.688）

农户类型	调整生计策略	愿意调整占比/%	不调整生计策略	不愿意调整占比/%
纯农型	增加外出务工、半工半农	68	文化水平低、缺乏技术	32
兼农型	专业农业经营、规模化畜牧养殖	56	缺乏养殖经验、缺乏技术、销路不畅	44
非农型	经商、附近设厂	37	资金短缺、风险较高、交通不便	63