外迁安置、土地流转及水库移民生计转型

doi:10.18402/resci.2018.10.05

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

就近后靠到外迁安置是中国大中型水利水电工程开发性移民政策的重大调整,目的是为了拓展安置区的环境容量并延续移民原有生计。但随着外迁成本升高和经济社会变迁,此政策能否达到预期效果却日渐存疑。为了客观评价其效应,本文首先对外迁农业安置可能产生的异化效应进行机理分析,然后在此基础上采用2008—2014年南水北调中线工程外迁移民的调查数据,利用双重差分倾向得分匹配（PSM-DID）,研究了外迁政策对移民土地处置行为和生计转型的影响。研究结果表明：在易地远迁中的适应压力和社会发展中的制度变革耦合作用下,相对于后靠移民,外迁移民更容易放弃农业生产并转出土地的;移民生计非农转型推动了外迁安置区的土地流转,但仅依靠土地政策革新却无法有效提升移民出让土地后的地租收益;外迁导致移民人力资本恢复滞后,使其就业比例及收入严重受限,进而影响到该群体生计非农化的可持续性。因此,移民安置前期更应注重补偿用地的质量、迁入地区位等因素,同时推广无土少土的安置模式;后扶时则要激活土地市场、开展技能培训、拓展就业渠道、实施低保兜底,以防范安置政策失灵带来的风险。

关键词: 水库移民, 外迁安置, 土地流转, 生计转型, 南水北调工程, 双重差分倾向得分匹配法

Abstract:

To solve the problem of expanding the environmental capacity of resettlement and to continue the original livelihood mode of migrants, the resettlement mode of immigrants changed from the latter-migratory to the out-migratory. It is a major adjustment of the development relocation policy of large and medium-sized water conservancy and hydropower projects. With the rising cost of immigration and the changing economic society, it is increasingly doubtful whether this policy can achieve the prospective. In order to objectively evaluate its impacts, the mechanism of the possible alienation effect of agricultural resettlement was identified in this study. The survey data of emigration in the middle route project of South-to-North Water Diversion Project from 2008 to 2014 were adopted. This study characterized the impact of emigration policy on land disposal behavior and livelihood transformation of migrants by PSM-DID. The result showed that under the coupling of the pressure of adaptation and the institutional changes in social development, migrants waived agricultural production and transferred the land. Non-agricultural transformation promoted land transfer in the relocation area. However, only relying on land policy cannot effectively enhance the landlord income from these lands. The emigration leads to the delayed recovery of the human capital of migrants, which seriously limits the employment rate and income affects the sustainability of the transformation of non-agricultural livelihood of migrants. Therefore, in the early stage of resettlement, more attention should be paid to the quality of compensation land and the location of resettlement area. Meanwhile, the resettlement mode of landlessness should be strengthened. To prevent the risks from non-effective resettlement policy, the land market should be activated, skill training should be carried out, employment channels should be expanded, and the lowest guarantee should be implemented in the latter support period.

Key words: reservoir resettlement, out-migratory, farmland transfer, livelihood transformation, south-to-north water diversion project, PSM-DID

赵旭, 肖佳奇, 段跃芳. 外迁安置、土地流转及水库移民生计转型[J]. 资源科学, 2018, 40(10): 1954-1965.

Xu ZHAO, Jiaqi XIAO, Yuefang DUAN. Relocation, farmland transfer and livelihood transformation of reservoir resettlement[J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(10): 1954-1965.

图/表 14

图1

表1

表 2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

表8

图2

图3

图4

图5

表9

参考文献 26

[1]	Heming L, Waley P, Rees P.Reservoir resettlement in China: past experience and the Three Gorges Dam[J]. The Geographical Journal, 2001, 167(3): 195-212.
[2]	陶景良. 论三峡工程开发性移民政策的“两个调整”[J]. 水力发电, 2002, 49(2): 14-17.
	[Tao J L.Discussions on the “two-adjustment” of the development resettlement policies for the Three Gorges Project[J]. Water Power, 2002, 49(2): 14-17. ]
[3]	中华人民共和国国务院. 大中型水利水电工程建设征地补偿和移民安置条例 [Z].2006-09-01.
	[ State Council of the People's Republic of China. Land requisition compensation and resettlement regulations of large and medium-sized water conservancy and hydropower projects[Z].2006-09-01. ]
[4]	Magsi H, Torre A, Magsi H, et al. Social network legitimacy and property right loopholes: evidences from an infrastructural water project in Pakistan[J]. Journal of Infrastructure Development, 2014, 4(2): 59-76.
[5]	陈昱, 陈银蓉, 马文博. 基于Logistic模型的水库移民安置区居民土地流转意愿分析-四川、湖南、湖北移民安置区的调查[J]. 资源科学, 2011, 33(6): 1178-1185.
	[Chen Y, Chen Y R, Ma W B.Intention of land circulation in reservoirs resettlements based on the logistic model: an investigation into Sichuan, Hunan and Hubei Provinces[J]. Resources Science, 2011, 33(6): 1178-1185. ]
[6]	Nordensvard J, Urban F, Mang G.Social innovation and Chinese overseas hydropower dams: the nexus of national social policy and corporate social responsibility[J]. Sustainable Development, 2015, 23(4): 245-256.
[7]	Mccormick S.The governance of hydroelectric dams in Brazil[J]. Journal of Latin American Studies, 2007, 39(2): 227-261.
[8]	许佳君, 王理平, 张丽. 水库移民土地调配的政府协调探究[J]. 河海大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2015, 17(5): 41-45.
	[Xu J J, Wang L P, Zhang L.Governmental coordination of land allocation of reservoir resettlement[J]. Journal of Hohai University(Philosophy and Social Sciences), 2015, 17(5): 41-45. ]
[9]	杜华. 基于土地流转的水库移民补偿安置模式研究[J]. 人民长江, 2012, 43(9): 104-107.
	[Du H.Research on compensation and settlement patterns for reservoir relocates based on land circulation[J]. Yangtze River, 2012, 43(9): 104-107. ]
[10]	孙海兵, 赵旭. 水库移民征地补偿标准量化研究[J]. 水力发电, 2017, 43(10): 5-8.
	[Sun H B, Zhao X.Quantifying land expropriation compensation standard of reservoir resettlement[J]. Water Power, 2017, 43(10): 5-8. ]
[11]	杨婷, 靳小怡. 资源禀赋、社会保障对农民工土地处置意愿的影响-基于理性选择视角的分析[J]. 中国农村观察, 2015, 36(4): 16-25.
	[Yang T, Jin X Y.The influence of resource endowment and social security on the willingness of peasant workers to dispose of their land-analysis based on rational perspective[J]. China Rural Survey, 2015, 36(4): 16-25. ]
[12]	张务伟, 张福明, 杨学成. 农业富余劳动力转移程度与其土地处置方式的关系-基于山东省2421位农业转移劳动力调查资料的分析[J]. 中国农村经济, 2009, 25(3): 85-90.
	[Zhang W W, Zhang F M, Yang X C.The relationship between the degree of agricultural surplus labor transfer and the land disposal mode-analysis based on the investigation data of 2421 agricultural transfer labors in Shandong Province[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2009, 25(3): 85-90. ]
[13]	Zhou H, Christopher T, Steve A, et al. Difference-in-differences method in comparative effectiveness research: utility with unbalanced groups[J]. Applied Health Economics & Health Policy, 2016, 14(4): 419-429.
[14]	Heggelund G.Resettlement programmes and environmental capacity in the three gorges dam project[J]. Development & Change, 2006, 37(1): 179-199.
[15]	赵锋, 杨云彦. 外力冲击下水库移民生计脆弱性及其解决机制-以南水北调中线工程库区为例[J]. 人口与经济, 2009, 37(4): 1-7.
	[Zhao F, Yang Y Y.Vulnerability of immigrants' livelihood in reservoir resettlement caused by external force and its solution: a case study of the reservoir zone of the south-to-north water diversion (middle line) project[J]. Population & Economics, 2009, 37(4): 1-7. ]
[16]	孙元明. 三峡库区“后移民时期”若干重大社会问题分析-区域性社会问题凸显的原因及对策建议[J]. 中国软科学, 2011, 26(6): 24-33.
	[Sun Y M.Analysis on major social problems in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area in post -migration period: their causes and the suggestions for their solution[J]. China Soft Science, 2011, 26(6): 24-33. ]
[17]	周宜君, 周银珍, 胡红青, 等. 三峡工程农村外迁移民安置效果区域差异及其启示[J]. 经济地理, 2011, 31(8): 1351-1357.
	[Zhou Y J, Zhou Y Z, Hu H Q, et al. The regional differentiation of the three gorges rural emigrants adaptability and the revelation[J]. Economic Geography, 2011, 31(8): 1351-1357. ]
[18]	Pek C K, Jamal O.A choice experiment analysis for solid waste disposal option: a case study in Malaysia[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2011, 92(11): 2993-3001.
[19]	刘远新, 张华忠, 周维, 等. 三峡库区农村移民安置模式对移民家庭收入的影响分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2011, 20(3): 352-356.
	[Liu Y X, Zhang H Z, Zhou W, et al. Effect of rural households resettlement mode on the households income in the Three Gorges Reservoir Areas[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2011, 20(3): 352-356. ]
[20]	钟士宇, 游达明, 李中, 等. 农村土地流转与社会保障、就业水平: 理论与实证[J]. 系统工程, 2014, 32(7): 108-114.
	[Zhong S Y, You D M, Li Z, et al. Theoretic and empirical study of rural land transfer and social security, employment status[J]. Systems Engineering, 2014, 32(7): 108-114. ]
[21]	Wilmsen B, Webber M, Duan Y F.Development for whom? Rural to urban resettlement at the Three Gorges Dam, China[J]. Asian Studies Review, 2011, 35(1): 21-42.
[22]	陈中伟, 陈浩. 农村劳动力转移与土地流转统筹发展分析[J]. 中国人口科学, 2013, 27(3): 46-53.
	[Chen Z W, Chen H.Analysis of the overall development between labor migration and labor transferring[J]. Chinese Journal of Population Science, 2013, 27(3): 46-53. ]
[23]	张忠明, 钱文荣. 不同兼业程度下的农户土地流转意愿研究-基于浙江的调查与实证[J]. 农业经济问题, 2014, 35(3): 19-24.
	[Zhang Z M, Qian W R.Study on farmers’ willingness of land transfer under different levels of concurrent business: based on the investigation and evidence in Zhejiang Province[J]. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2014, 35(3): 19-24. ]
[24]	Rosenbaum P, Rubin D.Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score[J]. American Statistician, 1985, 39(1): 33-38.
[25]	陈朝兵. 农村土地“三权分置”: 功能作用、权能划分与制度构建[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016, 26(4): 135-141.
	[Chen C B."Division of three rights" of rural land: the function, right content and system construction[J]. China Population Resources and Environment, 2016, 26(4): 135-141. ]
[26]	国家统计局农村社会经济调查司. 2015年农民工监测调查报告[R]. 北京: 国家统计局, 2016.
	[Department of rural social and economic investigation of the National Bureau of Statistics. report on the monitoring and investigation of migrant workers in 2015 [R]. Beijing: National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2016. ]

子样本	搬迁前（dt = 0）	搬迁前（dt = 1）	Difference
外迁户（控制组,du = 0）	β₀	β₀+β₂	ΔY₀+β₂
后靠户（处理组,du = 1）	β₀+β₁	β₀+β₁+β₂+β₃	ΔY₁=β₂+β₃
DID			ΔΔY=β₃

安置方式	外迁安置		后靠安置		总体
安置方式	搬迁前	搬迁后	搬迁前	搬迁后	搬迁前	搬迁后
样本数/户	403	403	114	114	517	517
自种户占比/%	92.31	29.78	96.49	78.05	94.40	40.50
土地转出户占比/%	3.97	64.02	2.63	21.05	3.68	54.55
土地转入户占比/%	3.72	6.20	0.88	0.90	3.09	5.03
户均土地承包面积/亩	7.91	6.36	4.34	2.18	7.13	5.44
户均转出土地面积/亩	0.30	3.72	0.08	0.43	0.25	2.99
户均转入土地面积/亩	3.18	2.53	0.88	2.19	2.68	2.46
户均本地非农劳动时间/天	58.90	81.53	74.09	103.23	62.00	86.18
户均外出务工劳动时间/天	56.73	79.05	61.38	74.71	57.66	78.12

变量分类	变量名	定义	均值	标准差
因变量	土地流转的比例	参与土地流转的面积占比	0.870	0.970
自变量	安置模式	外迁=0;后靠=1	0.221	0.172
控制变量
家庭禀赋	劳动力数量/人	移民户中18~60岁人口数量	3.180	1.390
家庭禀赋	人均受教育年限/年	家庭成员平均受教育的年限	7.737	2.332
生计情况	人均年收入	家庭人均纯收入取自然对数	9.469	0.479
	家庭现金支出	家庭现金支出取自然对数	9.296	1.221
	非农收入占比	非农收入占总收入的比重	0.718	0.158
	外出务工时间/月	—	2.190	3.470
	本地非农劳动时间/月	—	2.390	3.780
土地特征	土地补偿面积/亩	安置中获得的土地补偿面积	5.442	2.809
	土地年租金	流转土地的租金取自然对数	6.505	0.522
	土地流转政策认知	见注释	2.647	0.664

解释变量	土地流转的比例（model 1）			土地流转的比例（model 2）
解释变量	系数	标准差	t值	系数	标准差	t值
dt	-0.013	0.018	-0.680	-0.125***	0.030	-4.170
du	0.493***	0.025	19.550	0.343***	0.035	9.760
du×dt	0.387***	0.042	-9.150	-0.275***	0.052	-5.320
劳动力数量				-0.005	0.007	-0.630
人均受教育年限				-0.006	0.008	-0.560
人均年收入				0.018	0.051	0.360
家庭现金支出				-0.100***	0.037	-0.270
非农收入占比				0.046	0.041	1.110
外出务工时间				0.008**	0.003	2.450
本地非农劳动时间				0.020***	0.003	5.690
土地补偿面积				0.076***	0.080	-8.940
土地年租金				-0.012**	0.032	-3.750
土地流转政策认知				0.094***	0.016	-5.730
常数项	0.043***	0.010	4.370	0.608**	0.248	2.450
	R²=0.29,F-test=191.60			R²=0.38,F-test=51.96

控制变量	系数	标准差	z值	P>\|z\|
劳动力数量	-0.153**	0.069	-2.220	0.026
家庭现金支出	-3.990***	0.324	-12.350	0.000
外出务工时间	0.046*	0.026	1.740	0.083
本地非农劳动时间	0.079***	0.025	3.170	0.002
土地补偿面积	-13.725***	2.200	-6.240	0.000