迁村并居的社区居民满意度研究——基于齐河县南北社区的调查分析

doi:10.18402/resci.2017.05.03

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

居民满意度是衡量迁村并居项目是否成功的重要指标。本文运用实地调查与座谈、二元Logistic回归分析等手段与方法,深入分析了山东省齐河县南北社区居民对迁村并居的满意度及其主要影响因素。研究表明,新社区建设显著提高了农村基础设施和公共服务设施完善程度,改善了居民的生活居住环境。居民的总体满意度水平较高,平均分值达到了8.03;但社区规划功能不足、置换补偿标准不合理等降低了居民的满意程度。受访者文化程度、家庭长期从事非农工作人数、原有房屋价值、家庭农用地面积、合并后家庭生活成本变化、装修及家具购置支出、购买房屋支出、生活居住倾向等因素对居民满意度呈显著影响;总体来看,经济因素仍是影响居民满意度的重要因素。建议政府今后实施类似项目时,应从政策宣传、居民参与、规划设计、补偿方案、迁后发展等方面入手统筹规划,提升居民的参与度及满意度,规避项目实施风险。

关键词: 迁村并居, 居民满意度, Logistic模型, 齐河县

Abstract:

Village relocation and combination can intensify rural residential land use and is one of the important ways to build a new socialist countryside. However,land consolidation involves the vital interests of majority farmers,and residents' satisfaction is an important assessment indicator of the project. We hoped that by analyzing the factors influencing residents' satisfaction,we could determine project problems and put forward countermeasures to provide references for similar projects. We used economic social materials obtained from South-North Community surveys in Qihe County,Shandong,China to analyze satisfaction and influencing factors using a logistic model. We found that the completeness of rural infrastructure,public service facilities and new community construction have significantly improved residents' living environments and raised the average income level of the families. Because of this,the overall satisfaction of residents was higher,and the average score reached 8.03 （out of 10）. Some factors reduced satisfaction,such as the deficiency of new community function,and compensation standards unreasonable. These factors,including residents' cultural level,non-agriculture employment populations,original housing value,amount of family farmland,cost of living,expenditure of decoration and furniture,expenditure of house purchase and living tendency had a significant impact on satisfaction. As the project implementation of the case area required farmers to pay a certain amount of capital,so,economic factors were important factors affecting satisfaction. In the future,when the government implements similar projects it should plan policy promotion,resident participation,planning and design,compensation and new community development to avoid implementation risks and achieve a new socialist countryside.

Key words: villages relocation and combination, residents' satisfaction, Logistic Model, Qihe County

董德坤, 时妍, 沈飞, 谷树忠. 迁村并居的社区居民满意度研究——基于齐河县南北社区的调查分析[J]. 资源科学, 2017, 39(5): 827-835.

Dekun DONG, Yan SHI, Fei SHEN, Shuzhong GU. Satisfaction regarding village relocation and combination in the South-North Community of Qihe County[J]. Resources Science, 2017, 39(5): 827-835.

图/表 5

图1

表1

受访居民个人及家庭基本情况"

基本情况	类别	频率	百分比%	基本情况	类别	频率	百分比%
性别	男	41	38.3	村干部	是	12	11.2
性别	女	66	61.7	村干部	否	95	88.8
年龄/岁	$≤$ 30	13	12.1	文化水平	高中及以上	23	21.5
	31~45	31	29.0		初中	41	38.3
	46~60	44	41.1		小学及以下	43	40.2
	>60	19	17.8
家庭农业人口数/人	0~3	21	19.7	家庭长期在外人数/人	0~1	73	68.2
	4~6	79	73.7		2~3	29	27.1
	$≥$ 7	7	6.6		4	5	4.7

表1

图2

表2

表 3

参考文献 22

[1]	齐婧. 蜕变中的乡村-国外新型农村建设的经验及启示[J]. 中国房地产,2016,(10):26-29.
	[Qi J.Transformation in the coun-tryside-experience and enlightenment of new rural construction abroad[J]. China Real Estate,2016,(10):26-29.]
[2]	乔海彬,罗家祥. 当代日本市町村合并及其对新农村建设的影响[J]. 中国农村研究,2014,(2):259-267.
	[Qiao H B,Luo J X.The city-town-village mergence and the effects on the develop-ment of Japanese Rural Area[J]. China Rural Studies,2014,(2):259-267.]
[3]	Rogers A,Blunden J,Curry N.The Countryside Handbook[M].London:Groom Helm,1985.
[4]	于立. 英国乡村发展政策的演变及对中国新型城镇化的启示[J]. 武汉大学学报(人文科学版),2016,(2):30-34.
	[ Yu L.The evolvement of rural development policy in UK and its inspiration to China's new urbanization[J]. Wuhan University Journal(Humanity Sciences),2016,(2):30-34.]
[5]	易鑫. 德国的乡村规划及其法规建设[J]. 国际城市规划,2010,25(2):11-16.
	[Yi X.Rural renewal planning and related planning laws and regulations in Germany[J]. Urban Planning International,2010,25(2):11-16.]
[6]	本·西格斯. 德国村庄经济发展和村落保护[J]. 今日国土,2016,(Z4):45-48.
	[Bernd S.Economic development and village protection in German[J]. China Territory Today,2016,(Z4):45-48.]
[7]	Kiss E.Rural restructuring in Hungary in the period of socio-economic transition[J]. Geo Journal,2000,51(3):221-233.
[8]	Lewis C A,Mrara A Z.Rural settlements,mission settlements and rehabilitation in Transkei[J]. GeoJouroal,1986,12(4):375-386.
[9]	刘元胜,崔长彬,唐浩. 城乡建设用地增减挂钩背景下的撤村并居研究[J]. 经济问题探索,2011,(11):149-152.
	[Liu Y S,Cui C B,Tang H.On the village merging under the background of urban and rural construction sites linked[J]. Inquiry into Economic Issues,2011,(11):149-152.]
[10]	殷灵芳. 城镇化与新农村建设背景下合村并居发展研究-以德州市为例[D].保定:河北大学,2015.
	[Yin L F.Development of Village Merging in the Background of Urbanization and New Rural Construction-A Case of Dezhou City[D]. Baoding:Hebei University,2015.]
[11]	杨亚楠,陈利根,郁晓非. 新型城镇化过程中农民集中居住研究进展[J]. 人文地理,2015,(2):83-88.
	[Yang Y N,Chen L G,Yu X F.Research advances in concentrated inhabitation of peasants in the progress of new urbanization[J]. Human Geography,2015,(2):83-88.]
[12]	李春风. 基于村庄合并的新农村建设研究-以依安县丰林村为例[J]. 农村经济与科技,2012,23(4):74-75.
	[Li C F.Study on the construction of new rural villages merged-Take Linfeng village Yian county as an example[J]. Rural Economy and Science-Technology,2012,23(4):74-75.]
[13]	张旭,廖和平,杨伟,等. 浅析城乡建设用地增减挂钩对新农村建设的作用[J]. 西南师范大学学报(自然科学版),2015,37(5):135-139.
	[Zhang X,Liao H P,Yang W,et al.On roles of increase and decrease of construction land played in neo-village construction[J]. Journal of Southwest China Normal University(Natural Science Edition),2015,37(5):135-139.]
[14]	田土城,郭少飞. 城乡建设用地增减挂钩制度的问题与出路-以农民权益保护为视角[J]. 河南社会科学,2014,22(1):21-27.
	[Tian T C,Guo S F.Urban and rural construction sites linked to system problems and outlet-a perspective to protect the interests of farmers[J]. Henan Social Sciences,2014,22(1):21-27.]
[15]	邓雪霜,林晓莉,骆东奇. 农民集中居住研究综述及展望[J]. 重庆工商大学学报,(社会科学版),2016,6(1):52-60.
	[Deng X S,Lin X L,Luo D Q.Review and prospect of farmer concentrated inhabitation[J]. Journal of Chongqing Technology and Business University(Social Science Edition),2016,6(1):52-60.]
[16]	彭东海. 基于增减挂钩模式“迁村并点”效益研究-以邙山镇六村为例[J]. 安徽农业大学学报(社会科学版),2014,23(5):12-15.
	[Peng D H.On the benefits of village relocation and combination scheme based on balancing between the increase and decrease of urban and rural construction land:A case study of six residential points in Mangshan Town[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural University(Social Sciences Edition),2014,23(5):12-15.]
[17]	赵效萍. 迁村并居与社会稳定风险关系的分析[J]. 湖北行政学院学报,2016,(1):49-53.
	[Zhao X P.Analysis of the relationship between village combination and social stability risk[J]. Journal of Hubei Administration Institute,2016,(1):49-53.]
[18]	张春兰,贾舞阳,李敏丽,等. 迁村并居村民的社区适应性研究-基于河南省中部地区的调查[J]. 郑州轻工业学院学报(社会科学版),2014,(5):65-70.
	[Zhang C L,Jia W Y,Li M L,et al.The villager community adaptability after village relocation and combination:Based on the survey of central Henan Province[J]. Journal of Zhengzhou University of Light Industry(Social Science Edition),2014,(5):65-70.]
[19]	胡月,牛雪莹,魏杰,等. 村庄合并中文化整合的研究[J]. 山西农业大学学报(社会科学版),2013,12(11):1169-1172.
	[Hu Y,Niu X Y,Wei J,et al.Research of cultural integration in villages merging[J]. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural University(Social Science Edition),2013,12(11):1169-1172.]
[20]	刘艳敏,李政,姚兆余. 村庄合并后农村居民社区意识的重构-以江苏省D村为例[J]. 法制与社会,2012,(2):202-203.
	[Liu Y M,Li Z,Yao Z Y.Reconstruction of rural residents a sense of community after villages merged-take village D Jiangsu province as a case[J]. Legal System and Society,2012,(2):202-203.]
[21]	唐雪凤,冷笑飞. 村庄合并的政治、社会后果分析:以湖南省AH县为研究个案[J]. 社会主义研究,2010,(6):91-96.
	[Tang X F,Leng X F.Political and social consequences of the village combination[J]. Socialism Studies,2010,(6):91-96.]
[22]	王济川,郭志刚. Logistic回归模型-方法与应用[M]. 北京:高等教育出版社,2001.
	[Wang J C,Guo Z G.Logistic Regression Model:Method and Application[M]. Beijing:Higher Education Press,2001.]

变量设定		变量	变量说明及赋值	平均值	标准偏差
居民满意度		Y	0=不满意;1=比较满意	0.92	0.279
个体特征	年龄	X₁	1=30岁以下;2=30~50岁;3=50岁以上	2.25	0.660
	性别	X₂	1=男;2=女	1.62	0.488
	文化程度	X₃	1=文盲;2=小学;3=初中;4=中专,高中;5=大专及以上	2.82	1.235
家庭特征	家庭农业户口人数	X₄	实际数据	4.70	1.235
	家庭长期从事非农工作人数	X₅	实际数据	1.15	1.253
	原有房屋价值	X₆	实际数据	13.87	6.828
	家庭农用地面积	X₇	实际数据	10.52	7.611
政策评价	对迁村并居政策的了解	X₈	1=不了解;2=略有耳闻;3=基本了解;4=非常了解	1.60	0.763
	项目实施前是否征求意见	X₉	1=否;2=是	1.77	0.425
经济收支	合并后家庭收入变化	X₁₀	1=减少;2=不变;3=增加	2.54	0.691
	合并后家庭月生活成本变化	X₁₁	实际数据	712.24	550.301
	装修及家具购置支出	X₁₂	实际数据	10.43	5.264
	购买房屋支出	X₁₃	实际数据	7.18	2.830
其他	生活居住倾向	X₁₄	1=集中式的独院式住宅;2=集中式的多层住宅	1.93	0.440
	安置补偿方式倾向	X₁₅	1=宅基地换安置房;2=货币补偿;3=前两者结合	1.48	0.769

	变量设定	变量	B（回归系数）	S.E.标准误差	Wald（统计量）	Sig（显著性）	Exp（B）
个体特征	年龄	X₁	-0.467	0.952	0.241	0.524	0.627
	性别	X₂	1.093	1.514	0.522	0.470	2.985
	文化程度	X₃	1.356	0.547	6.138	0.010***	3.880
家庭特征	家庭农业户口人数	X₄	0.338	0.493	0.469	0.393	1.402
	家庭长期从事非农工作人数	X₅	0.800	0.577	1.927	0.100*	1.576
	原有房屋价值	X₆	-0.552	0.184	8.957	0.003***	0.576
	家庭农用地面积	X₇	-0.415	0.206	4.081	0.043**	1.226
政策评价	对迁村并居政策的了解	X₈	1.067	1.007	1.123	0.289	2.908
	项目实施前是否征求意见	X₉	1.240	1.140	1.184	0.277	3.457
经济收支	合并后家庭收入变化	X₁₀	-0.467	0.809	0.333	0.346	0.627
	合并后家庭月生活成本变化	X₁₁	-5.630	2.579	4.767	0.008***	0.004
	装修及家具购置支出	X₁₂	-0.261	0.112	2.068	0.098*	0.851
	购买房屋支出	X₁₃	-0.526	0.298	3.129	0.077*	0.591
其他	生活居住倾向	X₁₄	-5.131	2.038	6.337	0.009***	0.006
	安置补偿方式倾向	X₁₅	-0.177	0.613	0.084	0.573	0.838
		常数	3.469	5.919	0.244	0.558	32.11