新一轮退耕还林工程农户风险感知的影响因素分析——基于新疆阿克苏地区的调研数据

doi:10.18402/resci.2018.07.07

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

退耕风险感知是影响农户退耕参与意愿和决策行为的关键要素。基于新疆阿克苏地区1451户农户的调查,应用广义有序Logit模型,从预置性因素、政策性因素、过程性因素与外部性因素出发,探索新一轮退耕还林工程农户风险感知的影响因素,为降低农户退耕参与风险感知、激发农户退耕参与意愿、优化退耕还林政策设计提供信息支持。研究结果表明：① 农业经营收入比重等预置性因素、退耕还林配套政策等政策性因素、退耕还林直接成本等过程性因素、非农就业能力等外部性因素具有统计显著性;② 家庭收入水平、社会保障情况、退耕还林政策认知水平、退耕配套政策、非农就业能力等变量对显著降低农户参与退耕的高风险感知或提升低风险感知的概率相对较大,农业经营收入比重、退耕还林直接成本、林业自然生产弱质性、林产品市场销售损失等变量对显著提高农户参与退耕高风险感知的概率相对较大;③ 退耕政策认知水平、退耕还林直接成本、林产品市场销售损失等是影响农户参与退耕风险感知水平的关键变量,也是降低农户退耕风险感知水平的关注重点。

关键词: 新一轮退耕还林, 风险感知, 广义有序Logit模型, 影响因素, 风险管理

Abstract:

Risk perception of the Returning Farmland to Forest Project (RFFP) is a key factor influencing farmer willingness and decision behavior to participate in the RFFP. Based on a survey of 1451 farmers in the Aksu region of Xinjiang, China, a General Ordered Logit Model was used to analyzes factors affecting farmer risk perception of the new round RFFP according to preset factors, policy factors, process factors and externality factors. The aim was to provide information support to reduce farmer risk perception, stimulate willingness to participate in the RFFP and optimize RFFP policy. Preset factors such as the proportion of agricultural income, policy factors such as supporting policy of RFFP, process factors such as the direct cost of RFFP, and external factors such as off-farm employment ability were found to be significant. Variables such as family income, social security, awareness of RFFP, supporting policy of RFFP and off-farm employment ability were found to have a high probability of reducing higher risk reception or enhancing lower risk reception of famers. Variables such as the proportion of agricultural income, direct costs of the RFFP, weakness of forestry natural production and marketing loss of forest products were found to have a high probability of enhancing higher risk reception. Variables such as awareness of RFFP, direct costs of the RFFP and marketing loss of forest products are key variables to influencing farmer risk reception in the new round RFFP. These factors will reduce farmers risk reception and enhance farmers participation enthusiasm in the RFFP.

Key words: new round RFFP, risk perception, Gologit model, influencing factor, risk management

张朝辉. 新一轮退耕还林工程农户风险感知的影响因素分析——基于新疆阿克苏地区的调研数据[J]. 资源科学, 2018, 40(7): 1387-1396.

Zhaohui ZHANG. Factors affecting risk perception of farmers in the new round Returning Farmland to Forest Project in the Aksu Region[J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(7): 1387-1396.

图/表 4

表1

表2

模型回归结果"

变量		y=1	y=2	y=3	y=4
income家庭收入水平	系数	-0.056(-0.10)	0.001(0.01)	-0.270**(-2.47)	-0.417**(-2.02)
income家庭收入水平	OR值	0.946(0.54)	1.001(0.13)	0.763**(0.08)	0.659**(0.14)
agricul农业经营收入比重	系数	-0.033(-0.10)	0.253*(1.90)	0.356***(3.27)	0.568***(3.58)
agricul农业经营收入比重	OR值	0.968(0.31)	1.288*(0.17)	1.428***(0.16)	1.764***(0.28)
security社会保障情况	系数	-0.179(-0.29)	-0.044(-0.32)	-0.250**(-2.16)	-0.413**(-2.25)
security社会保障情况	OR值	0.836(0.51)	0.957(0.13)	0.779**(0.090)	0.662**(0.12)
recog退耕政策认知水平	系数	0.055(0.14)	-0.439***(-3.73)	-0.663***(-6.68)	-0.690***(-3.60)
recog退耕政策认知水平	OR值	1.057(0.43)	0.645***(0.08)	0.515***(0.05)	0.502***(0.10)
compen退耕补偿标准	系数	0.229(0.78)	-0.075(-0.93)	-0.150**(-2.24)	-0.166(-1.31)
compen退耕补偿标准	OR值	1.257(0.37)	0.927(0.075)	0.861**(0.06)	0.847(0.11)
supolicy退耕还林的配套政策	系数 OR值	-0.505(-0.67) 0.604(0.45)	-0.087(-0.55) 0.916(0.15)	-0.275(-2.05) 0.760(0.10)	-0.233(-0.93) 0.792(0.20)
dcost退耕还林直接成本	系数	0.959(1.30)	0.887***(8.62)	0.913***(9.94)	0.969***(4.72)
dcost退耕还林直接成本	OR值	2.609(1.93)	2.428***(0.25)	2.493***(0.23)	2.636***(0.54)
fprodu林业自然生产弱质性	系数	1.249(1.34)	0.462***(3.59)	0.243***(2.85)	-0.018(-0.11)
fprodu林业自然生产弱质性	OR值	3.486(3.26)	1.587***(0.20)	1.275***(0.11)	0.983(0.15)
fmarket林产品市场销售损失	系数	1.803(1.25)	1.210***(7.01)	0.751***(7.73)	1.061***(4.63)
fmarket林产品市场销售损失	OR值	6.070(8.76)	3.353***(0.58)	2.119***(0.21)	2.888***(0.66)
offfarm非农就业能力	系数 OR值	-0.045(-0.11) 0.956(0.38)	-0.431*(-4.04) 0.650*(0.07)	-0.074(-0.91) 0.928(0.08)	-0.131(-0.93) 0.877(0.12)
techno政府技术支持	系数	-0.033(-0.08)	-0.023(-0.20)	-0.138(-1.36)	-0.209(-1.22)
techno政府技术支持	OR值	0.968(0.40)	0.977(0.11)	0.871(0.09)	0.811(0.14)
example新一轮工程运行效果	系数	0.243(0.56)	-0.146(-1.01)	-0.159(-1.40)	-0.490***(-3.07)
example新一轮工程运行效果	OR值	1.275(0.55)	0.865(0.12)	0.853(0.10)	0.613***(0.10)
log pseudo likelihood	-1 370.36		prob>χ²	0.000 0
wald χ²(48)	665.54		pseudo R²	0.264 9

表2

表3

表4

参考文献 25

[25]	[Zhu C N, Wang S J.The conversion of cropland to forest, cropland constraint and farmer household economic behaviors[J]. On Economic Problems, 2015, (8): 86-90. ]
[26]	杨婷怡, 罗剑朝. 农户参与农村产权抵押融资意愿及其影响因素实证分析-以陕西高陵县和宁夏同心县 919 个样本农户为例[J]. 中国农村经济, 2014, (4): 42-57.
	[Yang T Y, Luo J Z.An empirical analysis of farmers' willingness to participate in rural property rights mortgage financing and its influencing factors-based on 919 farmers in Gaoling county of Shaanxi and Tongxin county of Ningxia[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2014, (4): 42-57. ]
[27]	Williams R.Generalized ordered logit/partial proportional odds models for ordinal dependent variables[J]. Stata Journal, 2006, 6(1): 58-82.
[28]	陆文聪, 西爱琴. 农户农业生产的风险反应: 以浙江为例的 MOTAD 模型分析[J]. 中国农村经济, 2005, (12): 68-75.
	[Lu W C, Xi A Q.Farmers' risk response in agricultural production: an analysis of MOTAD model in Zhejiang Province[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2005, (12): 68-75. ]
[29]	刘燕, 周庆行. 退耕还林政策的激励机制缺陷[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2005, 15(5): 108-111.
	[Liu Y, Zhou Q X.The institutional defects of de-farming and reforestation policy[J]. China Population Resources and Environment, 2005, 15(5): 108-111. ]
[30]	曾玉林, 周素芳. 信息不对称条件下林产品营销风险及防范[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2011, 5(4): 62-64.
	[Zeng Y L, Zhou S F.Marketing risk and precaution of forest products in the case of information a asymmetry[J]. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology(Social Science), 2011, 5(4): 62-64. ]
[1]	杜建宾, 张志强, 姜志德. 退耕还林:公共生态产品的私人提供[J]. 林业经济问题, 2012, 32(1): 36-41.
	[Du J B, Zhang Z Q, Jiang Z D.The sloping-land conversion program: private provision of public ecological product[J]. Problems of Forestry Economics, 2012, 32(1): 36-41. ]
[2]	易福金, 徐晋涛, 徐志刚. 退耕还林经济影响再分析[J]. 中国农村经济, 2006, (10): 28-36.
	[Yi F J, Xu J T, Xu Z G.Reanalysis of economic influence of sloping-land conversion program[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2006, (10): 28-36. ]
[3]	孔凡斌, 何尤刚, 江灶发. 退耕还林工程风险管理机制研究[J]. 林业经济问题, 2007, 27(1): 12-15.
	[Kong F B, He Y G, Jiang Z F.A research on risk management mechanism for Converting Cropland into Forestland Project(CCFP)[J]. Problems of Forestry Economics, 2007, 27(1): 12-15. ]
[4]	张郁, 齐振宏, 孟祥海. 规模养猪户的环境风险感知及其影响因素[J]. 华南农业大学学报: 社会科学版, 2015, 14(2): 27-36.
	[Zhang Y, Qi Z H, Meng X H.Study on the environmental risk perception and the influencing factors of pig raising household[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University(Social Science Edition), 2015, 14(2): 27-36. ]
[5]	赵宝春. 非伦理消费情景下感知风险对行为意愿的影响: 直接经验的调节作用[J]. 管理评论, 2016, 28(2): 116-126.
	[Zhao B C.The influence of perceived risk on consumer's unethical behavior intention and the moderate effect of direct experience[J]. Management Review, 2016, 28(2): 116-126. ]
[6]	Quiggin J.Risk perception and risk aversion among Australian farmers[J]. Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1981, 25(2): 160-169.
[7]	Caveness F A, Kurtz W B.Agroforestry adoption and risk perception by farmers in Senegal[J]. Agroforestry Systems, 1993, 21(1): 11-25.
[8]	Sarkar S, Padaria R N.Farmers’ awareness and risk perception about climate change in coastal ecosystem of West Bengal[J]. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 2016, 10(2): 32-38.
[9]	江激宇, 张士云, 李博伟, 等. 种粮大户经营风险感知机理与实证检验[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2016, 16(4): 123-130.
	[Jiang J Y, Zhang S Y, Li B W, et al. Risk perception mechanism and empirical of large grain-growers[J]. Journal of Northwest Sci-Tech University of Agriculture and Forestry(Social Science), 2016, 16(4): 123-130. ]
[10]	肖娥芳. 农户家庭农场经营风险认知状况及其影响因素研究[J]. 商业研究, 2017, 59(3): 175-182.
	[Xiao E F.Research on farmers’ operation risk perception of family farm and its influence factors[J]. Commercial Research, 2017, 59(3): 175-182. ]
[11]	邬兰娅, 齐振宏, 李欣蕊, 等. 养猪农户环境风险感知与生态行为响应[J]. 农村经济, 2014, (7): 98-102.
	[Wu L Y, Qi Z H, Li X R, et al. Research on farmers environmental risk perception and ecological behavior of pig raising household[J]. Rural Economy, 2017, (7): 98-102. ]
[12]	王兆林, 杨庆媛, 李斌. 农户农村土地退出风险认知及其影响因素分析: 重庆的实证[J]. 中国土地科学, 2015, 29(7): 81-88.
	[Wang Z L, Yang Q Y, Li B.Farmers' risk perception and the impact factors on returning rural collective-owned Land: a case of Chongqing[J]. China Land Science, 2015, 29(7): 81-88. ]
[13]	李景刚, 高艳梅, 臧俊梅. 农户风险意识对土地流转决策行为的影响[J]. 农业技术经济, 2014, (11): 21-30.
	[Li J G, Gao Y M, Zang J M.The influence of farmers' risk awareness of land circulation decision[J]. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, 2014, (11): 21-30. ]
[14]	巩前文, 穆向丽, 田志宏. 农户过量施肥风险认知及规避能力的影响因素分析-基于江汉平原284个农户的问卷调查[J]. 中国农村经济, 2010, (10): 66-76.
	[Gong Q W, Mu X L, Tian Z H.Influencing factors of farmers' risk cognition and avoid ability of excessive fertilization-based on a questionnaire survey of 284 farmers in Jianghan Plain[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2010, (10): 66-76. ]
[15]	Roselius T.Consumer rankings of risk reduction methods[J]. Journal of Marketing, 1971, 35(1): 56-61.
[16]	谢晨, 赵金成, 姜喜麟, 等. 加大西部地区退耕还林力度推动“两增任务”完成-甘肃省退耕还林调研报告[J]. 林业经济, 2010, (7): 55-58.
	[Xie C, Zhao J C, Jiang X L, et al. Intensifying efforts to return cultivated land to forests in the West of China to fulfill the west task[J]. Forestry Economics, 2010, (7): 55-58. ]
[17]	张奇林, 张兴文. 风险与社会保障: 一个解释性框架[J]. 社会保障研究, 2011, (3): 71-77.
	[Zhang Q L, Zhang X W.Risk and social security: an explanatory framework[J]. Social Security Studies, 2011, (3): 71-77. ]
[18]	Wang L L, Watanabe T.Factors affecting farmers' risk perceptions regarding biomass supply: a case study of the national bioenergy industry in northeast China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 139: 517-526.
[19]	赵成根. 论公共政策的稳定性和政策秩序[J]. 中国行政管理, 1998, (1): 41-42.
	[Zhao C G.Research on the stability and policy order of public policy[J]. Chinese Public Administration, 1998, (1): 41-42. ]
[20]	韩洪云, 喻永红. 退耕还林生态补偿研究-成本基础、接受意愿抑或生态价值标准[J]. 农业经济问题, 2014, 35(4): 64-72.
	[Han H Y, Yu Y H.Research on the payment for environmental services of the Grain for Green Program: cost basis, willingness to accept or environmental values[J]. Problems of Agricultural Economy, 2014, 35(4): 64-72. ]
[21]	李国平, 石涵予. 退耕还林生态补偿标准、农户行为选择及损益[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2015, 25(5): 152-161.
	[Li G P, Shi H Y.The payment of grain to green project, the behavior choice of peasants and their grains and losses[J]. China Population Resources and Environment, 2015, 25(5): 152-161. ]
[22]	蔡志坚, 蒋瞻, 杜丽永, 等. 退耕还林政策的有效性与有效政策搭配的存在性[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2015, 25(9): 60-69.
	[Cai Z J, Jiang Z, Du L Y, et al. Grain for green program: policy effectiveness and the existence of effective policy mix[J]. China Population Resources and Environment, 2015, 25(9): 60-69. ]
[23]	危丽, 杨先斌, 刘燕. 农户参与意愿与退耕还林政策的可持续性[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2006, 12(6): 29-35.
	[Wei L, Yang X B, Liu Y.Farmer's participation willingness and the sustainability of the Grain for Green Project policy[J]. Journal of Chongqin University(Social Science Edition), 2006, 12(6): 29-35. ]
[24]	王小龙. 退耕还林:私人承包与政府规制[J]. 经济研究, 2004, 17(4): 107-116.
	[Wang X L.The cropland conversion: contracting out and public regulation[J]. Economics Research, 2004, 17(4): 107-116. ]
[25]	朱长宁, 王树进. 退耕还林, 耕地约束与农户经济行为[J]. 经济问题, 2015, (8): 86-90.

	变量	变量取值及定义	均值	标准差	预期方向
因变量	农户风险感知水平	1=非常低,2=比较低,3=一般,4=比较高,5=非常高	3.308	0.916
预置性因素	家庭收入水平	1=中等以下水平,2=中等水平,3=中等以上水平	2.546	0.638	-
	农业经营收入比重	1=30%以下,2=30%~50%,3=50%~70%,4=70%~90%,5=90%以上	3.431	0.820	+
	社会保障情况	1=不好;2=一般;3=很好	2.564	0.638	-
政策性因素	退耕政策认知水平	1=非常不了解,2=不太了解,3=一般,4=比较了解,5=非常了解	2.638	0.834	-
	退耕补偿标准	1=非常低,2=比较低,3=一般,4=比较高,5=非常高	3.925	1.026	-
	退耕还林的配套政策	0=没有,1=有	0.669	0.471	-
过程性因素	退耕还林直接成本	1=非常低,2=比较低,3=一般,4=比较高,5=非常高	3.349	0.932	+
	林业自然生产弱质性	1=非常低,2=比较低,3=一般,4=比较高,5=非常高	2.726	0.918	+
	林产品市场销售损失	1=非常低,2=比较低,3=一般,4=比较高,5=非常高	2.911	0.893	+
外部性因素	非农就业能力	1=非常少,2=比较少,3=一般,4=比较多,5=非常多	2.917	0.947	-
	政府政策支持	1=没有,2=比较少,3=一般,4=比较好,5=非常好	2.997	0.819	-
	新一轮工程运行效果	1=很不好;2=不太好;3=一般;4=比较好;5=非常好	3.270	0.800	-

变量	pr(y=1)	pr(y=2)	pr(y=3)	pr(y=4)	pr(y=5)
income	0.002(0.000)	-0.017(0.013)	6.695***(0.024)	-5.977**(0.027)	-0.703*(0.004)
agricul	0.001(0.000)	-2.557*(0.014)	-6.207**(0.025)	7.786***(0.026)	0.978***(0.004)
security	0.008(0.000)	0.431(0.014)	5.745**(0.026)	-5.489*(0.028)	-0.695**(0.004)
recog	-0.002(0.000)	4.465***(0.012)	11.446***(0.022)	-14.695***(0.022)	-1.214***(0.004)
compen	-0.010(0.000)	0.767(0.008)	2.963*(0.015)	-3.447**(0.016)	-0.273(0.002)
supolicy	0.021(0.001)	0.846(0.016)	5.970*(0.032)	-6.438*(0.033)	-0.398(0.005)
dcost	-0.049(0.001)	-9.292***(0.012)	-11.932***(0.019)	19.451***(0.019)	1.822***(0.005)
fprodu	-0.070(0.001)	-4.635***(0.014)	-1.312(0.021)	6.046***(0.021)	-0.029(0.003)
fmarket	-0.130(0.001)	-13.032***(0.017)	-4.688**(0.022)	15.805***(0.021)	2.045***(0.005)
offfarm	0.002(0.000)	4.381***(0.012)	-2.537(0.019)	-1.630(0.020)	-0.216(0.002)
techno	0.001(0.000)	0.231(0.012)	3.186(0.023)	-3.073(0.025)	-0.345(0.003)
example	-0.011(0.000)	1.475(0.015)	2.488(0.026)	-3.120(0.028)	-0.833** (0.003)

变量	pr(y=1)	pr(y=2)	pr(y=3)	pr(y=4)	pr(y=5)
income	0.033(0.003)	-0.049(0.015)	4.356*** (0.017)	-2.413** (0.019)	-1.927* (0.010)
agricul	0.020(0.002)	-2.856* (0.015)	-2.873** (0.018)	3.076*** (0.018)	2.633*** (0.008)
security	0.108(0.004)	0.382(0.016)	3.526** (0.019)	-2.111* (0.019)	-1.905** (0.009)
recog	-0.033(0.002)	4.940***(0.013)	5.627*** (0.016)	-7.322*** (0.016)	-3.211*** (0.009)
compen	-0.138(0.002)	0.982(0.009)	1.567* (0.011)	-1.648* (0.012)	-0.762(0.006)
supolicy	0.279(0.005)	0.694(0.018)	3.460* (0.023)	-3.339* (0.023)	-1.094(0.011)
dcost	-0.626(0.006)	-9.230*** (0.011)	-4.503*** (0.012)	9.787*** (0.014)	4.572*** (0.010)
fprodu	-0.863(0.008)	-4.302*** (0.016)	1.259(0.016)	3.987*** (0.014)	-0.081(0.007)
fmarket	-1.437(0.015)	-11.900*** (0.020)	1.444** (0.016)	6.864*** (0.016)	5.028*** (0.011)
offfarm	0.027(0.002)	4.794*** (0.012)	-3.626 (0.014)	-0.591(0.014)	-0.604(0.007)
techno	0.020(0.003)	0.239(0.013)	1.956(0.016)	-1.253(0.017)	-0.962(0.008)
example	-0.146(0.003)	1.777(0.016)	0.930(0.019)	-0.297(0.019)	-2.265** (0.008)