欠发达地区旅游脱贫后返贫风险及防控机制

doi:10.18402/resci.2022.09.15

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

有效防控欠发达地区旅游脱贫后的返贫风险是稳固脱贫攻坚成果和实现乡村振兴的关键议题。本文基于脆弱性评价理论和全面风险管理理论，在构建旅游脱贫后的返贫风险理论框架及评价模型基础上，以大别山天柱山旅游片区为例，实证分析欠发达地区旅游脱贫后的返贫风险及内在驱动防控机制。结果发现：①欠发达旅游脱贫地区脱贫稳定性整体较高，旅游参与型农户相对于非旅游参与型农户具有更高脱贫稳定性和更低返贫风险，但随着旅游参与程度由低到高，脱贫家庭的返贫风险呈现U型变化，即高参与度农户亦会因受旅游业自身脆弱性影响而导致返贫风险反向拉升。②脱贫农户返贫风险影响因素包括内生性和突变性两类，对于不同类型旅游参与型脱贫农户而言，两类因素的作用程度也存在差异性。③健康冲击和人力资本对返贫风险起到关键性影响作用，并通过农户生计多样性和体现人格特质的非认知能力影响返贫风险；返贫风险具有空间异质性，旅游地风险防控能力和资源禀赋越高，农户返贫风险越低。④欠发达旅游地应构建以目标管理、组织层级、风险要素为框架，目标设定、综合管控、常态化治理、制度健全、信息沟通和协同监督为一体的返贫风险多维防控机制。本文可为中国欠发达地区返贫风险防控和乡村振兴提供有益的政策启示。

关键词: 欠发达地区, 旅游脱贫, 返贫风险, 防控机制, 天柱山旅游区

Abstract:

In order to stabilize the achievements of poverty alleviation and realize rural revitalization, it is a key issue to effectively prevent and control the risk of returning to poverty after tourism in underdeveloped areas. Based on the vulnerability assessment theory and comprehensive risk management theory, this study took tourism poverty alleviation in underdeveloped areas as the research background to construct the theoretical framework and evaluation model for the risk of returning to poverty, and used the Tianzhu Mountain tourism area in the Dabie Mountains as an example to empirically analyze the risk of returning to poverty and its internal driving and prevention and control mechanisms. The results show that in underdeveloped tourism poverty alleviation areas, the stability of poverty alleviation is generally high. Compared with non-tourism participating farmers, tourism participating farmers have higher stability of getting rid of poverty and lower risk of returning to poverty. But with the participation in tourism from low to high, the risk of returning to poverty shows a U-shaped change, that is, farmers with high participation can be affected by the vulnerability of tourism, which leads to a reverse increase in the risk of returning to poverty. Besides, the influencing factors of the risk of returning to poverty include endogenous and sudden onset factors. For different types of poverty alleviation farmers with tourism participation, the effects of the two factors are also different. For tourism participating farmers, on the one hand, health impact and human capital play a key role in the risk of returning to poverty, and affect it through the diversity of farmers’ livelihood and non-cognitive ability reflecting personality traits. On the other hand, the risk of returning to poverty has spatial heterogeneity. The higher the risk prevention and control ability and resource endowment of tourist destinations, the lower the risk of returning to poverty of farmers. Finally, underdeveloped tourism areas should build a multi-dimensional prevention and control mechanism for the risk of returning to poverty, which takes target management, organizational level and risk factors as the framework, goal setting, comprehensive management and control, normalized governance, system improvement, information communication and collaborative supervision as one. This study can provide beneficial policy enlightenment for the risk of returning to poverty prevention and control and rural revitalization in less developed regions of China.

Key words: underdeveloped areas, tourism poverty alleviation, risk of returning to poverty, prevention and control mechanism, Tianzhu Mountain tourism area

黄泰, 卫嫚, 席建超. 欠发达地区旅游脱贫后返贫风险及防控机制[J]. 资源科学, 2022, 44(9): 1932-1948.

HUANG Tai, WEI Man, XI Jianchao. Risk and prevention mechanism of returning to poverty after poverty alleviation through tourism in underdeveloped areas[J]. Resources Science, 2022, 44(9): 1932-1948.

图/表 10

图1

表1

变量选取及赋值

维度	指标	变量	变量赋值	性质
内生性返贫风险影响因素	自然资本	人均园地面积	<5亩=1；5~10亩（不含）=2；10~15亩（不含）=3；15~20亩（不含）=4；≥20亩=5	+
		人均发展旅游园地面积	<5亩=1；5~10亩（不含）=2；10~15亩（不含）=3；15~20亩（不含）=4；≥20亩=5	+
		家庭区位	距离主要公路的远近：非常远=1；较远=2；一般=3；较近=4；非常近=5	+
	物质资本	房屋情况	房屋类型：土木房=1；砖木房=2；砖混房=3；混凝土房=4	+
		房屋情况	房屋面积：<100 m²=1；100~200 m²（不含）=2；200~400 m²（不含）= 3；≥400 m²=4	+
		经营性物质资产	经营面积：<10 m²=1；10~50 m²（不含）=2；50~100 m²（不含）=3；≥100 m²=4	+
		家庭固定资产/种	家庭拥有电饭煲、电视机、冰箱、组合家具、手机、空调、太阳能热水器、电脑、天然气灶、洗衣机、汽车、农用三轮车、摩托车、电动车、自行车和拖拉机种类	+
	社会资本	参加社会组织	是否参加社区组织（合作社、乡村旅游相关协会等）：无=0；有=1	+
		社会连接度	家庭成员是否有国家公职人员、村干部等：无=0；有=1	+
		专业技能培训机会	是否参加过专业技能培训：无=0；有=1	+
	人力资本	专业技能	家庭成员最高技能：无任何技能=1；具备简单技能=2；具备中等技能=3；具备高等技能=4	+
		家庭旅游从业情况	家庭旅游业就业人数/家庭总人口数	+
		家庭健康状况	家庭未患大病或慢性病人口数/家庭总人口数	+
		家庭平均受教育程度	成年人口受教育年限之和/成年人口数	+
突变性返贫风险影响因素	健康冲击	大病冲击	大病对家庭收入和消费的影响程度，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
	教育冲击	教育支出	教育支出对家庭消费的影响程度，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
	消费冲击	婚丧嫁娶支出	婚丧嫁娶支出对家庭消费的影响程度，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
	就业冲击	外出务工收入损失	外出务工性失业对家庭收入和消费的影响程度，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
	政策冲击	旅游扶贫政策变动	旅游扶贫政策变动对家庭收入和消费的影响程度，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
	市场需求冲击	游客需求转移	游客量不稳定性对家庭收入和消费的影响程度，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
	公共卫生冲击	新冠疫情冲击	新冠疫情对家庭收入和消费的影响程度，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
中介变量	生计多样性	收入来源种类/种	收入来源种类	+
	非认知能力	情绪稳定	一周内精神紧张的次数一周内做任何事情都感到费力的次数	-
		情绪稳定	一周内感到生活没有意义的次数	-
		外向性	调查者对被调查者待人接物的评价，五点量表：差=1；好=5	+
		思维开通性	对调查的兴趣，五点量表：不感兴趣=1；感兴趣=5	+
		宜人性	其他居民对被调查者乐于助人的评价，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
		宜人性	其他居民对被调查者人缘的评价，五点量表：差=1；好=5	+
		尽责性	对问卷题目的疑问，五点量表：少=1，多=5	+
		尽责性	调查者对被调查者衣物整洁程度的评价，五点量表：不整洁=1；整洁=5	+
调节变量	风险防控能力	旅游政策支持度	对旅游扶贫政策的帮扶程度感知，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
	风险防控能力	社区领导力	对乡村管理机构应对突发事件的能力和效率感知，五点量表：低=1；高=5	+
	旅游地资源禀赋	旅游地与主景区距离	调查者对旅游地与主景区距离实地调研判断：远=0；近=1	+
		当地旅游资源吸引力	调查者对旅游地旅游资源吸引力实地调研判断以及旅游者、专家学者的评价，低=0；高=1	+
		旅游基础设施	调查者对旅游地旅游基础设施实地调研判断以及旅游者、专家学者的评价，差=0；好=1	+

表1

图2

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

图3

参考文献 48

[1]	周国华, 张汝娇, 贺艳华, 等. 论乡村聚落优化与乡村相对贫困治理[J]. 地理科学进展, 2020, 39(6): 902-912. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.06.002
	[ Zhou G H, Zhang R J, He Y H, et al. Optimization of rural settlements and the governance of rural relative poverty[J]. Progress in Geography, 2020, 39(6): 902-912.] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.06.002
[2]	仲超, 林闽钢. 中国相对贫困家庭的多维剥夺及其影响因素研究[J]. 南京农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2020, 20(4): 112-120.
	[ Zhong C, Lin M G. A study of multidimensional deprivation and influencing factors of relatively poor families in China[J]. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition), 2020, 20(4): 112-120.]
[3]	习近平. 在决战决胜脱贫攻坚座谈会上的讲话[N]. 人民日报, 2020-03-07( 02).
	[ Xi J P. Speech at the Symposium on Poverty Alleviation[N]. People’s Daily, 2020-03-07( 02).]
[4]	韩磊, 乔花芳, 谢双玉, 等. 恩施州旅游扶贫村居民的旅游影响感知差异[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(2): 381-393. doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.02.16
	[ Han L, Qiao H F, Xie S Y, et al. The difference and classification of residents’ perception on tourism impact in Enshi tourism poverty-alleviation villages based on PCI[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(2): 381-393.]
[5]	Mottiar Z. The importance of local area as a motivation for cooperation among rural tourism entrepreneurs[J]. Tourism Planning & Development, 2016, 13(2): 203-218.
[6]	Folarin O, Adeniyi O. Does tourism reduce poverty in Sub-Saharan African Countries?[J]. Journal of Travel Research, 2020, 59(1): 140-155. doi: 10.1177/0047287518821736
[7]	余利红. 基于匹配倍差法的乡村旅游扶贫农户增收效应[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(5): 955-966. doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.05.12
	[ Yu L H. Effects of rural pro-poor tourism on farming households’ income: A study based on the PSM-DID method[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(5): 955-966.]
[8]	李益敏, 蒋睿. 怒江大峡谷旅游扶贫研究[J]. 人文地理, 2010, 25(6): 131-134.
	[ Li Y M, Jiang R. A research on poverty reduction through the development of tourism in Nujiang grand canyon[J]. Human Geography, 2010, 25(6): 131-134.]
[9]	孙九霞, 徐新建, 王宁, 等. 旅游对全面脱贫与乡村振兴作用的途径与模式: “旅游扶贫与乡村振兴”专家笔谈[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(10): 2604-2614.
	[ Sun J X, Xu X J, Wang N, et al. Ways and patterns of tourism’s role in poverty alleviation and rural revitalization: Expert discussion on “Tourism for Poverty Alleviation and Rural Revitalization”[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2021, 36(10): 2604-2614.] doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20211011
[10]	陈超凡, 王赟. 连片特困区旅游扶贫效率评价及影响因素: 来自罗霄山片区的经验证据[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(1): 226-233.
	[ Chen C F, Wang Y. Tourism-oriented poverty alleviation efficiency and its determinants of Chinese contiguous destitute area-empirical evidence from Luoxiao Mountain area[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(1): 226-233.]
[11]	徐少癸, 方世巧, 甘永萍, 等. 广西边境民族地区旅游扶贫效率测度与时空演化分析[J]. 世界地理研究, 2021, 30(2): 367-377. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2021.02.2019525
	[ Xu S K, Fang S Q, Gan Y P, et al. Measurement and spatio-temporal evolution of tourism poverty alleviation efficiency in Guangxi border ethnic areas[J]. World Regional Studies, 2021, 30(2): 367-377.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2021.02.2019525
[12]	何静, 汪侠, 刘丹丽, 等. 国家级贫困县旅游发展与多维贫困的脱钩关系研究: 以西南地区为例[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(5): 1189-1207. doi: 10.11821/dlyj020171246
	[ He J, Wang X, Liu D L, et al. The decoupling relationship between tourism development and multidimensional poverty in national-level poor counties: A case study of Southwest China[J]. Geographical Research, 2019, 38(5): 1189-1207.] doi: 10.11821/dlyj020171246
[13]	穆学青, 郭向阳, 明庆忠. 多维贫困视角下县域旅游扶贫效率时空演化及影响机理: 以云南25个边境县(市)为例[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(12): 199-210.
	[ Mu X Q, Guo X Y, Ming Q Z. The spatio-temporal evolution and impact mechanism of county tourism poverty alleviation efficiency from the perspective of multidimensional poverty: A case study of 25 border counties (cities) in Yunnan Province[J]. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(12): 199-210.]
[14]	谢双玉, 李琳, 冯娟, 等. 贫困与非贫困户旅游扶贫政策绩效感知差异研究: 以恩施为例[J]. 旅游学刊, 2020, 35(2): 80-92.
	[ Xie S Y, Li L, Feng J, et al. A study on the differences between poor and non-poor households’ perception on tourism poverty alleviation policy performance in Enshi[J]. Tourism Tribune, 2020, 35(2): 80-92.]
[15]	段伟, 欧阳波. 自然保护区对周边农户多维贫困的影响: 基于社会资本的中介效应分析[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(6): 1074-1086. doi: 10.18402/resci.2020.06.06
	[ Duan W, Ouyang B. Impacts of protected areas on multidimensional poverty of surrounding rural households: Analysis of the intermediary effect based on social capital[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(6): 1074-1086.]
[16]	Kuypers S, Marx I. The truly vulnerable: Integrating wealth into the measurement of poverty and social policy effectiveness[J]. Social Indicators Research, 2019, 142(1): 131-147. doi: 10.1007/s11205-018-1911-6
[17]	Atake E H. Health shocks in sub-Saharan Africa: Are the poor and uninsured households more vulnerable?[J]. Health Economics Review, 2018, 8(1): 1-13. doi: 10.1186/s13561-018-0185-7
[18]	罗玉杰, 李会琴, 侯林春, 等. 可持续生计视角下乡村旅游地返贫风险识别及预警机制构建: 以湖北省恩施州W村为例[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2022, 36(2): 186-193.
	[ Luo Y J, Li H Q, Hou L C, et al. Risk identification and early-warning mechanism construction of poverty-returning in rural tourism destinations from the perspective of sustainable livelihood[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2022, 36(2): 186-193.]
[19]	黄金梓, 李燕凌. 突发环境事件与生态脆弱性地区返贫风险防控[J]. 江西社会科学, 2021, 41(4): 245-253.
	[ Huang J Z, Li Y L. Prevention and control of environmental emergencies and the risk of returning to poverty in ecologically fragile areas[J]. Jiangxi Social Sciences, 2021, 41(4): 245-253.]
[20]	田里, 刘亮. 旅游驱动型区域返贫: 内涵、路径与阻断[J]. 湖湘论坛, 2021, 34(1): 86-92.
	[ Tian L, Liu L. Tourism-driven regional poverty reduction: Connotation, path and interruption[J]. Huxiang Forum, 2021, 34(1): 86-92.]
[21]	李壮壮, 龙莹. 新发展阶段农村多维贫困的识别与测度[J]. 华南农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2022, 21(2): 15-27.
	[ Li Z Z, Long Y. Identification and measurement of rural poverty in the new development stage[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), 2022, 21(2): 15-27.]
[22]	吕华鲜. 壮族贫困户旅游脱贫参与障碍与对策: 基于广西河池市祥贝乡的调查分析[J]. 社会科学家, 2021, (1): 54-60.
	[ Lv H X. Barriers and countermeasures for Zhuang’s poverty-stricken households’ participation in tourism poverty alleviation: Based on the investigation and analysis of Xiangbei Township, Hechi City, Guangxi Province[J]. Social Scientist, 2021, (1): 54-60.]
[23]	Chaudhuri S, Jalan J, Suryahadi A. Assessing Household Vulnerability to Poverty from Cross-sectional Data: A Methodology and Estimates from Indonesia[R]. Columbia University Department of Economics Discussion Paper No. 0102-52, 2002.
[24]	严小燕, 祁新华, 潘颖, 等. 贫困退出背景下返贫脆弱性评价: 融合区域与个体的新视角[J]. 自然资源学报, 2022, 37(2): 440-458.
	[ Yan X Y, Qi X H, Pan Y, et al. Vulnerability assessment of return-to-poverty under poverty elimination in China: A new integrated regional and individual perspective[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2022, 37(2): 440-458.] doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20220212
[25]	葛永波, 陈虹宇. 贫困脆弱性及其应对策略: 国外研究的新进展[J]. 国外理论动态, 2021, (2): 170-176.
	[ Ge Y B, Chen H Y. Vulnerability to poverty and its countermeasures: New advances in foreign research[J]. Foreign Theoretical Trends, 2021, (2): 170-176.]
[26]	周迪, 陈明成, 邱铭坚. 脱贫群体的内生动力与返贫风险: 来自广东省相对贫困村的微观证据[J]. 财经研究, 2022, 48(8): 48-62.
	[ Zhou D, Chen M C, Qiu M J. Internal driving force of groups emerging from poverty and risk of return-to-poverty: Micro evidence from relatively poor villages in Guangdong Province[J]. Journal of Finance and Economics, 2022, 48(8): 48-62.]
[27]	耿新. 民族地区返贫风险与返贫人口的影响因素分析[J]. 云南民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2020, 37(5): 68-75.
	[ Geng X. An analysis of risks and factors influencing the people returning to poverty in ethnic minority areas[J]. Journal of Yunnan Minzu University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2020, 37(5): 68-75.]
[28]	Novignon J, Nonvignon J, Mussa R, et al. Health and vulnerability to poverty in Ghana: Evidence from the Ghana living standards survey round 5[J]. Health Economics Review, 2012, DOI: 10.1186/2191-1991-2-11. doi: 10.1186/2191-1991-2-11
[29]	Pritchett L, Suryahadi A, Sumarto S. Quantifying vulnerability to poverty: A proposed measure, applied to Indonesia[M]. World Bank Publications, 2000.
[30]	Levente B, Dumitru D D. Decentralized enterprise risk management issues under rapidly changing environments[J]. Risks, 2021, 9(9): 1-18. doi: 10.3390/risks9010001
[31]	黎洁, 高岚. 乡村旅游对农户农林业生产和外出务工影响研究: 基于陕西22个旅游扶贫村农户调查数据[J]. 人文地理, 2019, 34(4): 143-151.
	[ Li J, Gao L. Impact of rural tourism rural households plantation and migration in the poor mountainous areas: Evidence from survey in 22 villages in Shaanxi Province[J]. Human Geography, 2019, 34(4): 143-151.]
[32]	DFID. Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets[R]. London: Department for International Development, 1999.
[33]	徐爽, 胡业翠. 农户生计资本与生计稳定性耦合协调分析: 以广西金桥村移民安置区为例[J]. 经济地理, 2018, 38(3): 142-148.
	[ Xu S, Hu Y C. Coupling coordination analysis of capital and livelihood stability of farmers: A case study of the resettlement area of Jinqiao Village in Guangxi[J]. Economic Geography, 2018, 38(3): 142-148.]
[34]	杨琨, 刘鹏飞. 欠发达地区失地农民可持续生计影响因素分析: 以兰州安宁区为例[J]. 水土保持研究, 2020, 27(4): 342-348.
	[ Yang K, Liu P F. Analysis on influencing factors on land-lost farmers’ livelihood sustainability in underdeveloped region: A case study of Anning District in Lanzhou[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 27(4): 342-348.]
[35]	张晶, 孙鹏举, 刘学录, 等. 生计资本对黄土丘陵区贫困人口生计活动的影响及评价: 以甘肃省榆中县为例[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2020, 41(11): 243-251.
	[ Zhang J, Sun P J, Liu X L, et al. Impact of livelihood capital on livelihood activities of poor people in loess hilly region and its evaluation: A case study of Yuzhong County, Gansu Province[J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2020, 41(11): 243-251.]
[36]	Staub C G, Clarkson G. Farmer-led participatory extension leads Haitian farmers to anticipate climate-related risks and adjust livelihood strategies[J]. Journal of Rural Studies, 2021, 81(1): 235-245. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.10.029
[37]	杨新军, 石育中, 王子侨. 道路建设对秦岭山区社会-生态系统的影响: 一个社区恢复力的视角[J]. 地理学报, 2015, 70(8): 1313-1326. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201508010
	[ Yang X J, Shi Y Z, Wang Z Q. Exploring the impacts of road construction on a local social-ecological system in Qinling mountainous area: A resilience perspective[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2015, 70(8): 1313-1326.] doi: 10.11821/dlxb201508010
[38]	Bühler D, Sharma R, Stein W. Occupational attainment and earnings in Southeast Asia: The role of non-cognitive skills[J]. Labour Economics, 2020, 67(4): 1-23.
[39]	张莎莎, 郑循刚. 农户相对贫困缓解的内生动力[J]. 华南农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 20(4): 44-53.
	[ Zhang S S, Zheng X G. Endogenetic impetus on relative poverty of rural households[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), 2021, 20(4): 44-53.]
[40]	李佳丽, 何瑞珠. 家庭教育时间投入、经济投入和青少年发展: 社会资本、文化资本和影子教育阐释[J]. 中国青年研究, 2019, (8): 97-105.
	[ Li J L, He R Z. Family education time investment, economic investment and adolescent development: Social capital, cultural capital, and shadow education[J]. China Youth Study, 2019, (8): 97-105.]
[41]	Schurer S. Bouncing back from health shocks: Locus of control and labor supply[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2017, 133(3): 1-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2016.10.019
[42]	Musavengane R, Siakwah P, Leonard L. The nexus between tourism and urban risk: Towards inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable outdoor tourism in African cities[J]. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.jort.2019.100254. doi: 10.1016/j.jort.2019.100254
[43]	韩增林, 潘佳玉, 郭建科, 等. 基于地理本性的滨海城市旅游系统适应性分析[J]. 资源科学, 2022, 44(3): 634-645. doi: 10.18402/resci.2022.03.16
	[ Han Z L, Pan J Y, Guo J K, et al. Tourism system adaptability analysis of coastal cities based on geographical natures[J]. Resources Science, 2022, 44(3): 634-645.]
[44]	任瑞, 李雪梅, 李兰海, 等. 中国天山山区降水形态转变的驱动因子辨析[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2020, 34(3): 112-117.
	[ Ren R, Li X M, Li L H, et al. Discrimination of driving factors of precipitation forms in Tianshan mountains area of China[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2020, 34(3): 112-117.]
[45]	杨定, 杨振山. 高寒地区生态贫困评价及影响因素分析: 以色林错地区为例[J]. 资源科学, 2021, 43(2): 293-303. doi: 10.18402/resci.2021.02.08
	[ Yang D, Yang Z S. Ecological poverty and its influencing factors in an alpine area: Case study of the Selinco area[J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(2): 293-303.] doi: 10.18402/resci.2021.02.08
[46]	郭之天, 陆汉文. 相对贫困的界定: 国际经验与启示[J]. 南京农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2020, 20(4): 100-111.
	[ Guo Z T, Lu H W. Defining relative poverty: International experience and inspirations[J]. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition), 2020, 20(4): 100-111.]
[47]	刘郑伟, 付梅臣, 丁茜. 边境贸易地区土地利用变化驱动力演变研究[J]. 资源科学, 2018, 40(4): 729-736. doi: 10.18402/resci.2018.04.07
	[ Liu Z W, Fu M C, Ding Q. Driving force evolution of land use change in a border trade area of China[J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(4): 729-736.] doi: 10.18402/resci.2018.04.07
[48]	李根丽, 尤亮. 非认知能力对非正规就业者工资收入的影响[J]. 财经研究, 2022, 48(3): 124-138.
	[ Li G L, You L. The impact of non-cognitive skills on wages of informal workers[J]. Journal of Finance and Economics, 2022, 48(3): 124-138.]

变量	特征分类	非旅游参与型	旅游参与型
变量	特征分类	非旅游参与型	旅游兼营型	旅游主导型	旅游专营型
家庭成年人平均年龄/岁	<40	0.2034	0.4888	0.4634	0.4955
	[40, 50)	0.0461	0.0570	0.1359	0.0489
	[50, 60)	0.2044	0.1773	0.2276	0.2281
	≥ 60	0.9313	0.6362	0.5543	0.7379
家庭疾病率/%	<25	0.1962	0.1894	0.1582	0.1358
	[25, 50)	0.1463	0.3021	0.2524	0.3743
	[50, 75)	0.4117	0.3872	0.3838	0.3873
	≥ 75	0.8524	0.6697	0.4310	0.5944
家庭劳动力水平/%	<25	0.9326	0.7429	0.6625	0.8478
	[25, 50)	0.1121	0.3299	0.3740	0.4838
	[50, 75)	0.0022	0.1681	0.1404	0.2321
	≥ 75	0.0884	0.0605	0.0866	0.0671
总体	—	0.3408	0.3229	0.2820	0.3374

变量	旅游兼营型	旅游主导型	旅游专营型
健康冲击	3.622	4.122	4.235
教育冲击	3.373	3.502	4.002
消费冲击	3.493	3.420	3.951
就业冲击	3.653	3.531	3.842
政策冲击	3.435	3.607	3.899
市场需求冲击	3.345	4.031	4.396
公共卫生冲击	3.456	3.815	4.362

指标	旅游兼营型	旅游主导型	旅游专营型
自然资本	1.62**	2.13***	2.55***
物质资本	4.03***	2.12***	4.13***
社会资本	7.90***	2.48**	3.82***
人力资本	5.09***	4.23***	2.87*
健康冲击	34.72***	20.07***	27.02***
就业冲击	33.70***	—	—
公共卫生冲击	—	7.15***	2.93*
市场需求冲击	—	15.70***	6.55***

指标	旅游兼营型	旅游主导型	旅游专营型
自然资本	-0.7194* （0.3703）	-0.7890* （0.4148）	-0.9227** （0.3936）
物质资本	-0.5799** （0.2911）	-0.6491* （0.3600）	-0.6188* （0.3296）
社会资本	-0.5671** （0.2623）	-0.4945** （0.2332）	-0.4010** （0.1816）
人力资本	-1.0761** （0.4157）	-1.2304*** （0.3584）	-0.6489* （0.3605）
健康冲击	1.1980*** （0.3843）	0.9492** （0.4104）	1.0933** （0.4746）
就业冲击	0.7421* （0.4008）	—	—
公共卫生冲击	—	0.8535* （0.5135）	0.9148* （0.4720）
市场需求冲击	—	0.3665	-0.0893

中介作用	旅游兼营型		旅游主导型		旅游专营型
中介作用	中介效应	中介效应占比/%	中介效应	中介效应占比/%	中介效应	中介效应占比/%
自然资本→ 生计多样性	-0.0215	—	-0.0339**（0.0158）	22.14	-0.0325**（0.0146）	17.49
物质资本→ 生计多样性	-0.0301***（0.0112）	20.53	-0.0227（0.0154）	17.15	-0.0249	—
社会资本→ 生计多样性	-0.0341***（0.0121）	19.46	-0.0268**（0.0125）	39.30	-0.0306***（0.0118）	25.48
人力资本→ 生计多样性	-0.0515***（0.0189）	20.74	-0.0309**（0.0143）	13.38	-0.0168	—
健康冲击→ 生计多样性	0.0515***（0.0175）	18.07	0.0383**（0.0178）	16.18	0.0603***（0.0216）	18.62
就业冲击→ 生计多样性	0.0539***（0.0175）	18.66	—	—	—	—
公共卫生冲击→ 生计多样性	—	—	0.0430**（0.0201）	17.88	0.0111847	5.96
自然资本→ 非认知能力	-0.0913***（0.0264）	55.64	-0.0595***（0.0214）	38.86	-0.0650***（0.0214）	34.98
物质资本→ 非认知能力	-0.0553***（0.0156）	37.72	-0.0224	—	-0.0799***（0.0234）	60.03
社会资本→ 非认知能力	-0.0744***（0.0172）	42.47	-0.0228	—	-0.0665***（0.0171）	55.37
人力资本→ 非认知能力	-0.1073***（0.0266）	43.21	-0.0813***（0.0195）	35.21	-0.1248***（0.0306）	51.27
健康冲击→ 非认知能力	0.1017***（0.0243）	35.69	0.0714***（0.0242）	30.16	0.1865***（0.0358）	57.58
就业冲击→ 非认知能力	0.0899***（0.0236）	31.13	—	—	—	—
公共卫生冲击→ 非认知能力	—	—	0.0704**（0.0274）	29.27	0.1046***（0.0355）	55.73