农户尺度的耕地撂荒影响因素及空间分异

doi:10.18402/resci.2020.04.09

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

现阶段中国的粮食安全问题严峻,耕地是保障粮食安全的基础,耕地撂荒已成为影响粮食安全的土地利用变化现象。本文采用中国家庭追踪调查数据,分析2010—2016年承包耕地的农户耕地利用行为的变化影响因素,着重从显性撂荒和隐性撂荒两个角度研究其概率变化及区域差异。研究发现：①农户承包的耕地同时存在显性和隐性撂荒现象,隐性撂荒比例较大,但未来撂荒的现象均将逐渐减少;②一致性方面,种子农药化肥投入、农业补贴政策等对撂荒的抑制作用显著,但其边际效应都将减小;土地征用会促使农户选择撂荒,存在负面的长程作用;③显性和隐性撂荒的影响因素有差异,丘陵地貌区显性撂荒显著,耕地规模化和退耕还林还草补贴能减少农户隐性撂荒的概率;自然灾害发生将会导致显性和隐性撂荒,但自然灾害对显性撂荒影响的边际效用减少,对隐性撂荒影响的边际效应却增加;④在空间差异上,经济发达区域的耕地发生显性撂荒的概率仍较大,粮食主产区继续发生隐性撂荒的概率较大。未来应制定和完善相关土地制度和农业政策,继续加大农业投资和大规模开展土地流转等解决耕地撂荒难题。

关键词: 耕地, 撂荒, 农户, 边际效应, 土地利用行为, 空间分异

Abstract:

At present, China’s food security situation is grim because cultivated land is the basis of food security, but abandoned cultivated land has become a common phenomenon of land use change. This study used the panel data of household survey in China to analyze the change of cultivated land use behavior and influencing factors of farming households that contracted cultivated land from 2010 to 2016, and examined the probability change and regional difference from the perspectives of explicit abandonment and implicit abandonment. The results show that: First, cultivated land contracted by farmers experienced both explicit and implicit abandonments. Implicit abandonment is relatively large, but the phenomenon of abandonment in the future will gradually decrease. Second, in terms of consistency, investment in seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers, and the implementation of agricultural subsidy policies have significant inhibitory effects on land abandonment, but their marginal effects will be reduced. Land expropriation will prompt farmers to choose land abandonment, which has a negative long-term effect. Third, the influencing factors of explicit and implicit abandonments are different. Explicit abandonment is significant in hilly areas. The scale of cultivated land and the strategy of returning the grain plots to forestry and grass can reduce the probability of implicit abandonment for farmers. Natural hazards will cause explicit and implicit land abandonment, the marginal effect of natural hazards on explicit abandonment will be reduced, but the marginal effect on implicit abandonment will increase. Last, in terms of spatial differences, it is still possible that the cultivated land in the economically developed areas will experience an explicit abandonment, and the main grain-producing areas may continue to experience an implicit abandonment. In the future, it is necessary to formulate and improve relevant land and agricultural policies, continue to increase agricultural investment, carry out large-scale land transfers, and so on in order to solve the problem of farmland abandonment.

Key words: cultivated land, land abandonment, farming household, marginal effect, land use behavior, spatial differentiation

郭贝贝, 方叶林, 周寅康. 农户尺度的耕地撂荒影响因素及空间分异[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(4): 696-709.

GUO Beibei, FANG Yelin, ZHOU Yinkang. Influencing factors and spatial differentiation of cultivated land abandonment at the household scale[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(4): 696-709.

图/表 6

表1

变量的选择和定义"

类型	变量		定义	均值	标准差
因变量		y	退耕=1;显性撂荒=2;隐性撂荒=3;转出耕地=4;正常耕种=5（参照组）;转入耕地=6	4.027	1.316
核心变量	耕地投入产出	x₁	农户承包耕地总面积/亩	6.187	7.635
		x₂	从事自家农业劳动人口总数/人	0.581	0.720
		x₃	耕地种植种子、农药、化肥投入资金/元,取对数	5.949	3.070
		x₄	种植业雇佣劳动力费用/元,取对数	0.946	2.397
		x₅	耕地灌溉费用/元,取对数	1.335	2.571
		x₆	租用机械所需费用/元,取对数	1.093	2.459
		x₇	耕地种植所需其他费用/元,取对数	0.947	2.239
		x₈	农户持有机械的总价值/元,取对数	1.493	2.391
		x₉	家庭出售与自家消耗农副产品总值之和/元,取对数	5.117	4.377
	政策特征	x₁₀	家庭是否领取退耕还林补贴：是=1,否=0	0.061	0.238
		x₁₁	家庭是否领取农业补贴：是=1,否=0	0.625	0.484
		x₁₂	家庭是否经历土地征用：是=1,否=0	0.037	0.189
控制变量	家庭特征	x₁₃	家庭成员打工、工资、经营、转移和财产收入/元,取对数	9.096	2.601
	家庭特征	x₁₄	家庭人口总数/人	4.299	1.848
	户主特征	x₁₅	户主的健康程度打分分为7级,其中0.9为非常健康,0.8为很健康,0.7为比较健康,0.6为一般,0.5为比较不健康,0.4为不健康,0.3为非常不健康	0.706	0.174
		x₁₆		户主是否参加技能培训：是=1,否=0	0.015	0.120
		x₁₇	户主年龄/岁,取对数	3.922	0.231
		x₁₈	户主是否为男性：是=1,否=0	0.812	0.391
		x₁₉	户主的教育年限/年	4.723	4.423
		x₂₀	户主是否为非农户口：是=1,否=0	0.051	0.219
		村庄特征	x₂₁	是否是丘陵：是=1,否=0	0.319	0.466
	x₂₂		是否是除平原或丘陵以外的其他地貌：是=1,否=0	0.345	0.475
	x₂₃		村庄与最近的集镇距离交通（步行、骑行、乘车等）所需时间/h	12.260	49.999
	x₂₄		村庄是否属于矿区：是=1,否=0	0.163	0.369
	x₂₅		是否遭受自然灾害：是=1,否=0	0.496	0.500
	x₂₆		是否是旅游景区：是=1,否=0	0.047	0.211

表1

图1

表2

耕地利用行为多值Logit模型回归系数（对数）"

层次	变量	退耕		显性撂荒		隐性撂荒			耕地转出		耕地转入
层次	变量	退耕		回归系数	边际效应	回归系数		边际效应	耕地转出		耕地转入
耕地投入产出	x₁	-0.808***		0.006	0.009***	-0.014***		0.001	0.009		-0.024***
	x₁	(0.160)		(0.011)	(0.001)	(0.004)		(0.001)	(0.008)		(0.007)
	x₂	-0.767***		0.243	0.017***	-0.019		0.005	-0.466***		0.137***
	x₂	(0.284)		(0.186)	(0.004)	(0.036)		(0.005)	(0.087)		(0.040)
	x₃	-1.005***		-2.211***	-0.033***	-0.521***		-0.048***	-0.833***		0.369***
	x₃	(0.068)		(0.093)	(0.002)	(0.019)		(0.002)	(0.028)		(0.040)
	x₄	0.352**		-2.615***	-0.064***	-0.074***		-0.001	-0.006		0.044***
	x₄	(0.150)		(0.207)	(0.005)	(0.009)		(0.002)	(0.019)		(0.009)
	x₅	0.162		-2.415***	-0.057***	-0.032***		0.007***	-0.054**		-0.009
	x₅	(0.176)		(0.191)	(0.005)	(0.009)		(0.002)	(0.023)		(0.012)
	x₆	0.456***		-2.685***	-0.068***	0.039***		0.014***	0.087***		-0.001
	x₆	(0.151)		(0.240)	(0.006)	(0.008)		(0.002)	(0.018)		(0.010)
耕地投入产出	x₇	0.322**		-2.794***	-0.068***	-0.054***	0.003**		0.006	0.0165*
	x₇	(0.164)		(0.158)	(0.004)	(0.009)	(0.002)		(0.021)	(0.010)
	x₈	-0.541***		-1.312***	-0.024***	0.046***	0.015***		-0.148***	0.080***
	x₈	(0.055)		(0.062)	(0.001)	(0.009)	(0.001)		(0.022)	(0.011)
	x₉	-0.407***		-3.337***	-0.074***	0.086***	0.026***		0.068***	-0.034***
	x₉	(0.039)		(1.008)	(0.023)	(0.012)	(0.004)		(0.014)	(0.009)
政策特征	x₁₀	-2.810***		0.042	0.028***	-0.199**	-0.007		-0.588***	-0.267**
	x₁₀	(0.561)		(0.221)	(0.004)	(0.077)	(0.009)		(0.160)	(0.126)
	x₁₁	-0.198		-0.367***	-0.007***	-0.093*	-0.015***		0.221***	0.025
	x₁₁	(0.124)		(0.108)	(0.002)	(0.048)	(0.006)		(0.083)	(0.052)
	x₁₂	0.669***		0.917***	0.010***	0.356***	0.046***		0.316*	-0.452***
	x₁₂	(0.243)		(0.240)	(0.004)	(0.098)	(0.013)		(0.174)	(0.162)
家庭特征	x₁₃	0.017		-0.043*	-0.001***	-0.018***	-0.003		0.0460***	0.008
	x₁₃	(0.033)		(0.023)	(0.000)	(0.007)	(0.001)		(0.016)	(0.009)
	x₁₄	0.039		0.007	0.000	-0.009	0.000		-0.091***	0.006
	x₁₄	(0.031)		(0.027)	(0.001)	(0.011)	(0.001)		(0.025)	(0.016)
户主特征	x₁₅	1.561***		-0.196	-0.020***	-0.107	-0.011		-0.332*	-0.041
	x₁₅	(0.304)		(0.248)	(0.005)	(0.106)	(0.013)		(0.186)	(0.167)
	x₁₆	0.500		0.534	0.002	0.097	-0.007		0.697***	0.037
	x₁₆	(0.368)		(0.401)	(0.007)	(0.179)	(0.022)		(0.266)	(0.164)
	x₁₇	0.349		0.077	-0.005	0.061	0.008		0.476***	-0.531***
	x₁₇	(0.267)		(0.213)	(0.004)	(0.083)	(0.010)		(0.183)	(0.114)
	x₁₈	-0.672***		-0.143	0.006**	-0.031	-0.002		-0.208**	0.228**
	x₁₈	(0.138)		(0.121)	(0.002)	(0.046)	(0.006)		(0.087)	(0.099)
	x₁₉	-0.003		-0.005	0.000	0.005	0.001		0.017*	-0.007
	x₁₉	(0.014)		(0.013)	(0.000)	(0.004)	(0.001)		(0.009)	(0.006)
	x₂₀	0.251		0.145	-0.001	0.074	0.010		0.157	-0.246*
	x₂₀	(0.278)		(0.178)	(0.005)	(0.103)	(0.013)		(0.149)	(0.137)
村庄特征	x₂₁		-0.335*	0.206*	0.010***	-0.014	-0.003		-0.174		0.236**
	x₂₁		(0.174)	(0.123)	(0.003)	(0.060)	(0.007)		(0.121)		(0.109)
	x₂₂		-0.202	0.218	0.010***	-0.065	-0.003		-0.327**		0.055
	x₂₂		(0.174)	(0.136)	(0.003)	(0.065)	(0.008)		(0.129)		(0.094)
	x₂₃		-0.001	0.001	0.000	0.001	0.000		0.002		0
	x₂₃		(0.001)	(0.001)	(0.000)	0.000	(0.000)		(0.001)		(0.001)
	x₂₄		-0.528**	-0.119	0.002	-0.082	-0.010		0.187		-0.137
	x₂₄		(0.208)	(0.164)	(0.003)	(0.073)	(0.009)		(0.125)		(0.090)
	x₂₅		1.074***	0.396***	-0.008***	0.383***	0.036***		0.610***		-0.061
	x₂₅		(0.139)	(0.107)	(0.002)	(0.054)	(0.006)		(0.099)		(0.070)
	x₂₆		-0.383	-0.382	-0.004	-0.119	-0.007		-0.12		-0.236*
	x₂₆		(0.402)	(0.294)	(0.007)	(0.131)	(0.016)		(0.234)		(0.132)
Constant			0.691	2.938***		0.231			-1.826**		-2.320***
Constant			(1.207)	(0.927)		(0.372)			(0.766)		(0.554)
Pseudo R²=0.360 伪似然对数=-21997.965

表2

表3

图2

图3

参考文献 26

[1]	戈大专, 龙花楼, 杨忍 . 中国耕地利用转型格局及驱动因素研究: 基于人均耕地面积视角[J]. 资源科学, 2018,40(2):273-283. doi: 10.18402/resci.2018.02.05
	[ Ge D Z, Long H L, Yang R . The pattern and mechanism of farmland transition in China from the perspective of per capita farmland area[J]. Resources Science, 2018,40(2):273-283.] doi: 10.18402/resci.2018.02.05
[2]	范业婷, 金晓斌, 项晓敏 , 等. 苏南地区耕地多功能评价与空间特征分析[J]. 资源科学, 2018,40(5):980-992. doi: 10.18402/resci.2018.05.11
	[ Fan Y T, Jin X B, Xiang X M , et al. Evaluation and spatial characteristics of arable land multifunction in southern Jiangsu[J]. Resources Science, 2018,40(5):980-992.] doi: 10.18402/resci.2018.05.11
[3]	王亚辉, 李秀彬, 辛良杰 . 山区土地流转过程中的零租金现象及其解释: 基于交易费用的视角[J]. 资源科学, 2019,41(7):1339-1349. doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.07.14
	[ Wang Y H, Li X B, Xin L J . Rent-free land transfer in mountainous areas and its explanation[J]. Resources Science, 2019,41(7):1339-1349.] doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.07.14
[4]	陈秧分, 孙炜琳, 薛桂霞 . 粮食适度经营规模的文献评述与理论思考[J]. 中国土地科学, 2015,29(5):8-15.
	[ Chen Y F, Sun W L, Xue G X . Literature comment and theoretical study on the optimum management scale of farmland[J]. China Land Science, 2015,29(5):8-15.]
[5]	田玉军, 李秀彬, 马国霞 , 等. 劳动力析出对生态脆弱区耕地撂荒的影响[J]. 中国土地科学, 2010,24(7):4-9.
	[ Tian Y J, Li X B, Ma G X , et al. Influences of labor emigration from agriculture on the production abandonment of cultivated land in ecological sensitive areas[J]. China Land Science, 2010,24(7):4-9.]
[6]	谭术魁 . 耕地撂荒程度描述、可持续性评判指标体系及其模式[J]. 中国土地科学, 2003,17(6):3-8.
	[ Tan S K . Extent description and index system of sustainability judgment and its pattern of cultivated land abandoning[J]. China Land Science, 2003,17(6):3-8.]
[7]	陈诗波, 谭鑫, 余志刚 , 等. 粮食主产区耕地隐性撂荒的形式、成因及应对策略[J]. 农业经济与管理, 2016,38(4):43-51.
	[ Chen S B, Tan X, Yu Z G , et al. Forms, causes and coping strategies of recessive abandoned in major grain-producing areas[J]. Agricultural Economics and Management, 2016,38(4):43-51.]
[8]	Lasanta T, Arnáez J, Pascual N , et al. Space-time process and drivers of land abandonment in Europe[J]. Catena, 2017,149:810-823.
[9]	Levers C, Schneider M, Prishchepov A V , et al. Spatial variation in determinants of agricultural land abandonment in Europe[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2018,644:95-111.
[10]	Yin H, Prishchepov A V, Kuemmerle T , et al. Mapping agricultural land abandonment from spatial and temporal segmentation of Landsat time series[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2018,210:12-24.
[11]	Price B, Kienast F, Seidl I , et al. Future landscapes of Switzerland: Risk areas for urbanisation and land abandonment[J]. Applied Geography, 2015,57:32-41. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.12.009
[12]	Prishchepov A V, Müller D, Dubinin M , et al. Determinants of agricultural land abandonment in post-Soviet European Russia[J]. Land Use Policy, 2013,30(1):873-884. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.06.011
[13]	Qi Z, Song C H, Chen X D . Effects of China’s payment for ecosystem services programs on cropland abandonment: A case study in Tiantangzhai Township, Anhui, China[J]. Land Use Policy, 2018,73:239-248.
[14]	周丽娟, 冉瑞平, 林武阳 , 等. 农户耕地撂荒影响因素研究: 基于宜宾市南溪区158户农户的调查[J]. 农村经济, 2014, ( 4):46-50.
	[ Zhou L J, Ran R P, Lin W Y , et al. Research on the affecting factors of farmland arableness in farming households: Based on the investigation of 158 farmers in Nanxi district of Yibin[J]. Rural Economy, 2014, ( 4):46-50.]
[15]	李赞红, 阎建忠, 花晓波 , 等. 不同类型农户撂荒及其影响因素研究: 以重庆市12个典型村为例[J]. 地理研究, 2014,33(4):721-734.
	[ Li Z H, Yan J Z, Hua X B , et al. Factors influencing the cultivated land abandonment of households of different types: A case study of 12 typical villages in Chongqing Municipality[J]. Geographical Research, 2014,33(4):721-734.]
[16]	张冰琦, 郭静, 于溪 , 等. 中国2000-2010年耕地低效转化的空间特征[J]. 自然资源学报, 2018,33(7):1230-1243.
	[ Zhang B Q, Guo J, Yu X , et al. Spatial pattern of low-benefit conversion of cultivated land in China from 2000 to 2010[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2018,33(7):1230-1243.]
[17]	汪芳甜 . 北方农牧交错带退耕还林生态效应评价: 以乌兰察布市为例[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2018.
	[ Wang F T . Evaluation of Ecological Effects for the Grain for Green Project in the Farming-Pastoral Ecotone of North China: A Case Study in the Ulanqab City[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2018.]
[18]	邹秀清, 王英, 武婷燕 , 等. 江西省农业人口转移对耕地利用效率影响的门槛效应[J]. 资源科学, 2019,41(8):1576-1588.
	[ Zou X Q, Wang Y, Wu T Y , et al. Threshold effect of agricultural population transfer on cultivated land use efficiency in Jiangxi Province[J]. Resources Science, 2019,41(8):1576-1588.]
[19]	曹飞 . 辩证看待农村耕地抛荒: 以桂阳县为例[J]. 江西财经大学学报, 2003, ( 2):40-43.
	[ Cao F . To observe dialectically the phenomenon of the disuse of rural land: Take Guiyang County as an example[J]. Journal of Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, 2003, ( 2):40-43.]
[20]	郭家栋 . 中国家庭农场发展研究[D]. 上海: 上海社会科学院, 2017.
	[ Guo J D . Research on the Development of Chinese Family Farms[D]. Shanghai: Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, 2017.]
[21]	肖国峰, 朱秀芳, 侯陈瑶 , 等. 撂荒耕地的提取与分析: 以山东省庆云县和无棣县为例[J]. 地理学报, 2019,29(4):581-597.
	[ Xiao G F, Zhu X F, Hou C Y , et al. Extraction and analysis of abandoned farmland: A case study of Qingyun and Wudi counties in Shandong Province[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019,29(4):581-597.]
[22]	张学珍, 赵彩杉, 董金玮 , 等. 1992-2017年基于荟萃分析的中国耕地撂荒时空特征[J]. 地理学报, 2019,74(3):411-420.
	[ Zhang X Z, Zhao C S, Dong J W , et al. Spatio-temporal pattern of cropland abandonment in China from 1992 to 2017: A meta-analysis[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019,74(3):411-420.]
[23]	王向东, 沈孝强, 王振波 , 等. 中国耕地集约化利用评价2010-2016[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2019,29(4):58-67.
	[ Wang X D, Shen X Q, Wang Z B , et al. Dynamic evaluation of farmland intensive use in 2010-2016 in China[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2019,29(4):58-67.]
[24]	葛玉娟, 赵宇鸾 . 基于道路网络分析技术的耕地细碎化测度模型改进[J]. 资源科学, 2019,41(4):766-774.
	[ Ge Y J, Zhao Y L . Improvement of farmland fragmentation measurement model based on road network analysis[J]. Resources Science, 2019,41(4):766-774.]
[25]	李俊高, 李萍 . 我国农地撂荒及其分类治理: 基于马克思地租理论的拓展分析[J]. 财经科学, 2016, ( 12):47-54.
	[ Li J G, Li P . Land waste and classification management of China: Based on Landtax theory and its development[J]. Finance and Economics, 2016, ( 12):47-54.]
[26]	吴宇哲, 许智钇 . 休养生息制度背景下的耕地保护转型研究[J]. 资源科学, 2019,41(1):9-22.
	[ Wu Y Z, Xu Z Y . Study on the transformation of cropland protection under the background of rehabilitation system[J]. Resources Science, 2019,41(1):922.]

人口（x₂）	样本量	退耕		显性撂荒		隐性撂荒		耕地转出		耕地转入
人口（x₂）	样本量	系数	边际效应	系数	边际效应	系数	边际效应	系数	边际效应	系数	边际效应
1	9459	-0.480	-0.011*	0.211	0.004*	0.148***	0.011***	-0.382***	0.027***	0.064	0.004***
1	9459	(0.373)	(0.006)	(0.309)	(0.005)	(0.043)	(0.006)	(0.094)	(0.006)	(0.055)	(0.005)
2	1728	-21.850***	-0.038***	-0.332	0.080***	-2.572***	0.037***	-1.516**	-0.167	0.412***	0.080
2	1728	(0.413)	(0.001)	(0.531)	(0.014)	(0.454)	(0.006)	(0.599)	(0.013)	(0.101)	(0.014)
3	275	-19.810***	-0.038***	2.273***	0.045***	-22.070***	0.058***	-21.02***	-0.196***	0.107	0.045***
3	275	(0.438)	(0.001)	(0.411)	(0.023)	(0.151)	(0.002)	(0.208)	(0.004)	(0.190)	(0.023)
4	102	-20.360***	-0.038***	1.824***	0.180***	-22.120***	0.056***	-21.15***	-0.196***	0.993***	0.180***
4	102	(0.650)	(0.001)	(0.564)	(0.044)	(0.222)	(0.003)	(0.364)	(0.004)	(0.251)	(0.044)
5	16	-20.470***	-0.038***	-15.170***	0.032***	-22.360***	-0.068***	-20.910***	-0.196***	-0.0189	0.032***
5	16	(1.038)	(0.001)	(0.777)	(0.071)	(0.413)	(0.001)	(0.458)	(0.004)	(0.608)	(0.071)
6	1	-18.550***	-0.038***	-16.770***	-0.116***	-23.420***	-0.068***	-22.130***	-0.196***	-25.010***	-0.116***
6	1	(1.475)	(0.001)	(1.170)	(0.005)	(1.016)	(0.001)	(1.013)	(0.004)	(0.970)	(0.005)
8	1	-15.240***	-0.038***	-2.200	-0.116	-23.290***	0.016***	-21.620***	-0.196***	-24.620***	-0.116***
8	1	(1.800)	(0.001)	(4.231)	(0.005)	(1.020)	(0.092)	(1.022)	(0.004)	(0.997)	(0.005)