基于双栏模型的三江平原湿地生态保护价值评估

doi:10.18402/resci.2016.05.12

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

由二分式条件价值评估法得到的样本数据,通常会包含零观察值,以往研究中的支付意愿函数模型和Tobit模型未能妥善处理零观察值,降低了评估结果的准确性。针对零观察值问题,本文通过构建支付意愿的双栏模型,将零观察值纳入CVM数据分析,提出了双栏模型参数估计方法。以三江平原湿地生态保护价值为例,得到黑龙江省居民的平均支付意愿为127.93元/（人·年）,低于支付意愿函数模型的计算结果134.58元/（人・年）,高于Tobit模型的计算结果102.52元/（人・年）,得到2010年三江平原湿地生态保护价值为49.01亿元/年。研究结果验证双栏模型可以避免因删除零观察值而导致估算结果的高估及将所有零值归为真实零观察值所导致估算结果的低估。通过比较两栏的结果发现,收入、了解程度、游玩次数等影响因素在两方程中的作用不同,表明参与和支付是两种不同的机制,需要区分处理。研究结论为CVM研究中零观察值的处理提供新的途径,为生态环境管理提供决策参考依据。

关键词: 条件价值评估法, 零观察值, 双栏模型, 三江平原湿地

Abstract:

The Contingent Valuation Method is a kind of non-market valuation method that combines social investigation and statistical analysis. The Contingent Valuation Method is the most popular and influential valuation method among various non-market valuation methods and has been widely used in the evaluation of non-use value of environment and resources. Data derived from the Contingent Valuation Method usually contains zero observations. The Willingness-To-Pay （WTP）function model and Tobit mode do not deal with zero observations adequately and this reduces the accuracy of estimations. Focusing on the issue of zero observations,we constructed a double-hurdle model of WTP to fit zero observations into CVM data analysis. Using the ecological protection value of the Sanjiang Plain Wetland as an example,we determined that the mean WTP of citizens in Heilongjiang Province is 127.93 CNY a year per person; the result of WTP function model is 134.58 CNY a year per person;and the result of Tobit model is 102.52 CNY a year per person. The estimation result is lower than that of the WTP function model and higher than the Tobit model,the ecological value of the Sanjiang Plain Wetland in 2010 is 4.90 billion CNY per year. The results verify that the Double-Hurdle Model can avoid overestimating WTP lead by deleting zero observations and the underestimate caused by classifying all zero observations as genuine zero observations. By comparing two hurdles,we found that factors such as income,level of acknowledgment and times of visits act differently in the two hurdles. Participation and payment are two kinds of mechanisms that need to be treated accordingly. This study offers a reference for future CVM research dealing with zero observations.

Key words: Contingent Valuation Method（CVM）, zero observations, Double-Hurdle Model, Sanjiang Plain Wetland

敖长林, 董育宁, 焦扬, 张昆, 董利娜. 基于双栏模型的三江平原湿地生态保护价值评估[J]. 资源科学, 2016, 38(5): 929-938.

AO Changlin,DONG Yuning,JIAO Yang,ZHANG Kun,DONG Lina. Ecological value evaluation of the Sanjiang Plain Wetland based on the Double-Hurdle Model[J]. Resources Science, 2016, 38(5): 929-938.

图/表 7

表1

图1

表2

表3

变量定义及描述统计"

变量	选项	定义	人数	比例/%	均值	正支付率/%
性别SEX	男	SEX=1	494	53	0.53	62.0
	女	SEX=0	433	47		69.8
年龄AGE/岁	<20	AGE=1	46	5	2.98	76.7
	21~30	AGE=2	333	36		69.1
	31~40	AGE=3	241	26		63.9
	41~50	AGE=4	234	25		65.4
	51~60	AGE=5	50	5		44.9
	>60	AGE=6	23	2		65.2
教育EDU	小学及以下	EDU=1	29	3	3.60	58.3
	初中	EDU=2	110	12		49.5
	高中	EDU=3	234	25		72.1
	大学	EDU=4	380	41		71.2
	研究生以上	EDU=5	174	19		56.0
收入INC/万元	<0.3	INC=1	278	30	3.69	67.0
	0.3~0.6	INC=2	114	12		61.6
	0.6~1.2	INC=3	106	11		51.9
	1.2~2.4	INC=4	127	13		64.0
	2.4~3.6	INC=5	91	10		71.9
	3.6~4.8	INC=6	58	6		78.2
	4.8~6.0	INC=7	62	7		72.9
	>6.0	INC=8	91	10		65.9
了解程度	非常了解	ACK=5	69	7	2.98	70.3
	比较了解	ACK=4	201	22		73.0
	一般了解	ACK=3	347	37		68.4
	不太了解	ACK=2	259	28		59.1
	完全不了解	ACK=1	51	6		40.2
游玩次数	没去过	TIM=0	471	51	0.82	56.9
	1次	TIM=1	236	25		72.7
	2次	TIM=2	115	12		79.1
	$≥$ 3次	TIM=3	105	11		75.2

表3

表4

表5

表6

参考文献 44

[1]	张志强,徐中民,程国栋. 条件价值评估法的发展与应用[J]. 地球科学进展,2003,18(3):454-463.
	[Zhang Z Q,Xu Z M,Cheng G D.Development and application of contingent valuation method[J]. Advance in Earth Sciences,2003,18(3):454-463.]
[2]	欧阳志云,王如松,赵景柱. 生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价[J]. 应用生态学报,1999,10(5):635-640.
	[Ouyang Z Y,Wang R S,Zhao J Z.Ecosystem services and their economic valuation[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,1999,10(5):635-640.]
[3]	Bishop R C,Heberlein T A.Measuring values of extramarket goods:Are indirect measures biased?[J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,1979,61(5):926-930.
[4]	Arrow K,Solow R,Portney P,et al.Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation[J]. Federal Register,1993,58(3):48-56.
[5]	Cameron T A.A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data:Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1988,15(3):355-379.
[6]	Cameron T A,James M D.Estimating willingness to pay from survey data:An alternative pre-test-market evaluation procedure[J]. Journal of Marketing Research,1987,24(4):389-395.
[7]	Tobin J.Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables[J]. Econometrica:Journal of the Econometric Society,1958,26(1):24-36.
[8]	Halstead J M,Lindsay B E,Brown C M.Use of the Tobit model in contingent valuation:Experimental evidence from the Pemige-wasset Wilderness Area[J]. Journal of Environmental Manage-ment,1991,33(1):79-89.
[9]	Bowker J M,Newman D H,Warren R J,et al.Estimating the economic value of lethal versus nonlethal deer control in suburban communities[J]. Society & Natural Resources,2003,16(2):143-158.
[10]	Cho S H,Newman D H,Bowker J M.Measuring rural homeowners' willingness to pay for land conservation easements[J]. Forest Policy and Economics,2005,7(5):757-770.
[11]	Yang J,Zou L,Lin T,et al.Public willingness to pay for CO2 mitigation and the determinants under climate change:A case study of Suzhou,China[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2014,146:1-8.
[12]	Dalmau Matarrodona E.Alternative approaches to obtain optimal bid values in contingent valuation studies and to model protest zeros. Estimating the determinants of individuals' willingness to pay for home care services in day case surgery[J]. Health Economics,2001,10(2):101-118.
[13]	Kotchen M J,Reiling S D.Environmental attitudes,motivations,and contingent valuation of nonuse values:A case study involving endangered species[J]. Ecological Economics,2000,32(1):93-107.
[14]	Cragg J.Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with application to the demand for durable goods[J]. Econometrica,1971,39(5):829-844.
[15]	Demoussis M,Mihalopoulos V.Adult equivalent scales revisited[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics,2001,33(1):135-146.
[16]	Nichola T.The decision to adopt and the intensity of adoption of technology:A double hurdle model application in the adoption of a sorghum hybrid[J]. Journal for Studies in Economic and Eco-nometrics,1996,20:49-57.
[17]	Goodwin B K,Offenbach L,Cable T T,et al.Discrete/continuous contingent valuation of private hunting access in Kansas[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,1993,39(1):1-12.
[18]	Alvarez-Farizo B,Hanley N,Wright R E,et al.Estimating the benefits of agri-environmental policy:Econometric issues in open-ended contingent valuation studies[J]. Journal of Environ-mental Planning and Management,1999,42(1):23-43.
[19]	Hammitt J K,Zhou Y.The economic value of air-pollution-related health risks in China:A contingent valuation study[J]. Environmental & Resource Economics,2006,33(3):399-423.
[20]	Martinez-Espineira R.A box-cox double-hurdle model of wildlife valuation:The citizen’s perspective[J]. Ecological Eco-nomics,2006,58(1):192-208.
[21]	Saz-Salazar S D,Rausell-Köster P. A double-hurdle model of urban green areas valuation:Dealing with zero responses[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2008,84(3):241-251.
[22]	Lucchetti R,Pigini C.A simple and effective misspecification test for the double-hurdle model[J]. Economics Letters,2014,123(1):75-78.
[23]	Oseni M.Assessing the consumers’ willingness to adopt a prepay-ment metering system in Nigeria[J]. Energy Policy,2015,86:154-165.
[24]	Akcura E.Mandatory versus voluntary payment for green electri-city[J]. Ecological Economics,2015,116:84-94.
[25]	刘振乾,刘红玉,吕宪国. 三江平原湿地生态脆弱性研究[J]. 应用生态学报,2001,12(2):241-244.
	[Liu Z Q,Liu H Y,Lv X G.Ecological fragility of wetlands in Sanjiang Plain[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,2001,12(2):241-244.]
[26]	刘兴土,马学慧. 三江平原大面积开荒对自然环境影响及区域生态环境保护[J]. 地理科学,2002,20(1):14-19.
	[Liu X T,Ma X H.Influence of large-scale reclamation on natural environment and regional environmental protection in the Sanjiang Plain[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica,2002,20(1):14-19. ]
[27]	敖长林,陈瑾婷,焦扬,等. 生态保护价值的距离衰减性-以三江平原湿地为例[J]. 生态学报,2013,33(16):5109-5117.
	[Ao C L,Chen J T,Jiao Y,et al.The effect of distance on the ecological conservation value:A case study of Sanjiang Plain Wetland[J]. Acta Ecologica,2013,33(16):5109-5117.]
[28]	敖长林,王静,高琴,等. CVM数据分析中的半参数模型及实证研究[J]. 系统工程理论与实践,2014,34(9):2332-2338.
	[Ao C L,Wang J,Gao Q,et al.The semi-parametric model and empirical research in CVM[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice,2014,34(9):2332-2338.]
[29]	敖长林,李一军,冯磊. 基于CVM的三江平原湿地非使用价值评估[J]. 生态学报,2010,30(23):6470-6477.
	[Ao C L,Li Y J,Feng L.Evaluating the non- use value of Sanjiang wetland based on contigent valuation method[J]. Acta Ecologica,2010,30(23):6470-6477.]
[30]	Amigues J P,Boulatoff C,Desaigues B,et al.The benefits and costs of riparian analysis habitat preservation:A willingness to accept/willingness to pay contingent valuation approach[J]. Ecological Economics,2002,43(1):17-31.
[31]	Mitchell R C,Carson R T.Using surveys to value public goods:The continent valuation method[J]. Land Economics,1990,66(1):107-109.
[32]	张志强,徐中民,龙爱华,等. 黑河流域张掖市生态系统服务恢复价值评估研究-连续型和离散型条件价值评估方法的比较应用[J]. 自然资源学报,2004,19(2):230-239.
	[Zhang Z Q,Xu Z M,Long A H,et al.Measuring the economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Zhangye city of Heihe river basin-Comparison and application of continuous and discrete contingent valuation survey[J]. Journal of Natural Resources,2004,19(2):230-239.]
[33]	杨凯,赵军. 城市河流生态系统服务的CVM估值及其偏差分析[J]. 生态学报,2005,25(6):1391-1396.
	[Yang K,Zhao J.Study on the ecosystem services value of urban river using contingent valuation method and bias analysis of the results[J]. Acta Ecologica,2005,25(6):1391-1396.]
[34]	杨开忠,白墨,李莹,等. 关于意愿调查价值评估法在我国环境领域应用的可行性探讨-以北京市居民支付意愿研究为例[J]. 地球科学进展,2002,17(3):420-425.
	[Yang K Z,Bai M,Li Y,et al.The feasibility of contingent valuation method in economic valuation of environment in China:A case study of the residents’ willingness to pay in Beijing[J]. Advance In Earth Sciences,2002,17(3):420-425.]
[35]	江冲,金建君,李论. 基于CVM的耕地资源保护非市场价值研究-以浙江省温岭市为例[J]. 资源科学,2011,33(10):1955-1961.
	[Jiang C,Jin J J,Li L.Non-market valuation of cultivated land protection using CVM:A case study of Wenling City[J]. Resources Science,2011,33(10):1955-1961.]
[36]	Strazzera E,Genius M,Scarpa R,et al.The effect of protest votes on the estimates of WTP for use values of recreational sites[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics,2003,25(4):461-476.
[37]	Cho S,Yen S T,Bowker J M,et al.Modeling willingness to pay for land conservation easements:Treatment of zero and protest bids and application and policy implications[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics,2008,40(1):267-285.
[38]	Ready R C,Buzby J C,Hu D.Differences between continuous and discrete contingent value estimates[J]. Land Economics,1996,72(3):397-411.
[39]	吴珮瑛,郑琬方,苏明达. 复槛式决策过程模型之建构-条件评估法中抗议性答覆之处理[J]. 农业与经济,2004,(33):1-29.
	[Wu P Y,Zheng W F,Su M D.The construction of multi-hurdle model of decision process-handling of the protest response in the contingent valuation method[J]. Agriculture and Economy,2004,(33):1-29.]
[40]	Reiser B,Shechter M.Incorporating zero values in the economic valuation of environmental program benefits[J]. Environmetrics,1999,10(1):87-101.
[41]	Blackwell R,Miniard P,Engel J. Consumer Behavior (9th edition)[M]. Melbourne:Harcourt Education,2001.
[42]	Gao X,Wailes E,Cramer G.Double-hurdle model with bivariate normal errors:An application to U.S. rice demand[J]. Rice Demand Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics,1995,27(2):363-376.
[43]	Jones A.A double-hurdle model of cigarette consumption[J]. Journal of Applied Econometrics,1989,4(1):23-39.
[44]	国家统计局. 2010年第六次全国人口普查主要数据公报(第2号)[EB/OL]. (2011-04-29)[2015-12-21]. .
	[State Statistical Bureau. Bulletin of the Sixth National Population Census Major Data in2010 (Second)[EB/OL]. (2011-04-29)[2015-12-21]. .]

分类结果	支付状态	参与状态	观察值
YY	Y_i≥T ^U*	D_i>0	Y_i=Y_i*
YN	T ^U> Y_i*≥T	D_i>0	Y_i=Y_i*
NY	T> Y_i≥T ^L*	D_i>0	Y_i=Y_i*
NN	T ^L> Y_i>*0	D_i>0	Y_i=Y_i*
真实零	Y_i*≤0	D_i>0	Y_i=0
抗议性零	-	D_i≤0	Y_i=0

问卷类型	T^L	T	T^U	YY/ %（样本数）	YN/ %（样本数）	NY/ %（样本数）	NN/ %（样本数）	真实零支付/ %（样本数）	抗议性零支付/ %（样本数）	样本总计
A	-	1	3	89（73）	3（2）	1（1）	0（0）	15（12）	15（12）	123
B	3	5	10	86（61）	5（4）	4（3）	2（1）	16（11）	28（20）	141
C	5	10	20	72（58）	8（6）	5（4）	2（2）	19（15）	18（15）	124
D	10	20	30	64（52）	9（7）	7（6）	2（1）	21（17）	21（17）	124
E	30	50	100	55（42）	11（8）	11（8）	8（6）	26（20）	21（16）	132
F	50	100	200	39（29）	21（15）	14（10）	5（4）	26（19）	31（23）	136
G	100	200	500	31（21）	34（23）	13（9）	14（10）	27（18）	28（19）	147
样本合计				436（47）	91（10）	55（6）	33（4）	150（16）	162（17）	927

	平均值		F值	T值
变量	非抗议性样本（样本数=765）	抗议性样本（样本数=162）	F值	T值
性别（SEX）	0.511	0.635	56.787**	2.903**
年龄（AGE）	2.905	3.226	1.182	3.424**
教育（EDU）	3.593	3.795	7.093**	2.330*
收入（INC）	3.426	3.996	2.791*	2.807**
了解程度（ACK）	2.982	2.871	1.370	-1.291
游玩次数（TIM）	0.882	0.594	2.904*	-3.274**

变量	系数	标准差	Z统计量	P值
SEX	0.203	0.104	1.956	0.050
AGE	-0.038	0.043	-0.881	0.378
EDU	-0.117	0.037	-3.176	0.002**
INC	0.059	0.024	2.479	0.013*
ACK	-0.187	0.049	-3.846	0.001**
TIM	-0.151	0.051	-2.952	0.003**

变量	系数	标准差	Z统计量	P值
SEX	-32.860	23.611	-1.392	0.164
AGE	-22.616	9.246	-2.446	0.014*
EDU	26.805	7.855	3.413	0.001**
INC	17.340	5.442	3.186	0.001**
ACK	26.422	10.393	2.542	0.011*
TIM	45.265	11.963	3.784	0.000**