农业文化遗产非使用价值支付意愿的区域差异——以江西崇义客家梯田系统为例

doi:10.18402/resci.2017.04.14

Abstract

Abstract:

Here,we take the agricultural heritage of Chongyi Hakka terraced system in Jiangxi as a target area and evaluate non-use value by surveying local residents and their willingness to pay based on contingent valuation methods. The sample was divided into core and non-core areas in order to explore regional differences in willingness to pay and influencing factors. Based on 562 questionnaires we found that the non-use value of agricultural heritage of the Chongyi Hakka terrace system in 2015 was worth about 29.142 million CNY. The core area residents’ and non-core area residents’ maximum average willingness to pay is respectively 123.44 （CNY/a）and 140.07 （CNY/a）;non-core area residents’ willingness to pay is 1.14 times higher than core area residents’. Core area residents’ paid rate is 75.90% while non-core area residents’ is 72.39%;core area residents have stronger willingness to pay for protection. Logit regression analysis showed that emotional factors are the main factors influencing willingness to pay. Core area residents’ family burden and living environment consciousness have greater effects on willingness to pay,while non-core area residents’ income level and education have a significant influence on willingness to pay and both are positively correlated. Sharp differences exist between these regions and these data will provide theoretical and scientific bases for government to partition management and perfect compensation rules and relevant policies.

Key words: agricultural heritage, non-use value, willingness to pay, Logit model, influencing factors, regional differences, Chongyi Hakka Terrace System

Xingxing HU, Qingwen MIN, Geying LAI, Qing WU, Taojin CHEN, Siyi PAN. Regional differences in the willingness to pay for non-use value of agriculture heritage：Chongyi Hakka Terrace system in Jiangxi[J].Resources Science, 2017, 39(4): 737-751.

Figures/Tables 8

Figure 1

Table 1

Table 2

Descriptive statistics analysis of main variables"

变量	分类	核心区居民			非核心区居民			核心区与非核心区WTP特征描述对比
变量	分类	占比 /%	支付比 /%		支付意愿均值/元	占比 /%	支付比 /%	支付意愿均值/元
性别	男性	54.68	76.32	105.49	47.39	77.17	117.46	均呈现男性偏高,女性偏低
性别	女性	45.32	75.40	79.44	52.61	68.09	86.93	均呈现男性偏高,女性偏低
年龄	$≤$ 30岁	21.58	76.67	102.93	48.88	76.34	108.51	核心区31~40岁的人最高,非核心区30岁以下的人最高,50~60岁的人均为最低
	31~40岁	17.63	79.59	110.27	25.00	74.63	103.67
	41~50岁	23.02	78.13	109.94	4.10	66.67	84.75
	51~60岁	22.66	69.84	89.37	20.15	45.45	66.91
	$≥$ 61岁	15.11	76.19	42.86	1.87	60.00	65.87
职业	学生	5.04	92.86	78.57	10.82	86.76	101.97	核心区其他职业的人最低,个体户最高; 非核心区工人最低,企事业单位人员最高
	农民	71.58	75.38	90.52	13.43	61.11	110.09
	工人	3.96	81.82	83.64	4.48	83.33	75.42
	其他职业	2.52	57.14	71.43	19.40	61.54	76.37
	企事业单位人员	5.40	73.33	111.73	35.45	76.84	115.17
	个体户	11.51	75.00	119.88	16.42	75.00	109.73
受教育程度	小学以下	25.54	67.61	52.87	1.87	0	0	核心区高中（中专）层次的人最高,非核心区大学及以上层次最高,小学及以下均为最低
	初中	44.96	78.40	94.02	17.91	62.50	70.73
	高中（中专）	15.83	81.82	147.52	32.46	66.67	87.55
	大学及以上	13.67	76.32	106.63	47.76	83.81	126.27
月平均收入/元	$≤$ 1 000	35.25	66.33	47.45	13.43	63.89	79.31	核心区月平均收入2 001~2 500元的人最高,1 000元以下最低;非核心区2 500元以上最高,1 001~1 500元最低
	1 001~1 500	30.58	83.53	99.66	10.45	64.29	61.25
	1 501~2 000	12.59	82.86	133.17	24.63	72.73	98.41
	2 001~2 500	11.87	84.85	145.18	18.66	84.00	109.50
	>2 500	9.71	66.67	128.59	32.84	71.59	120.84
家庭负担情况	负担非常重	12.59	77.14	45.74	2.24	66.67	96.44	支付意愿基本随着家庭负担的减弱而增加
	负担重	37.05	71.85	90.25	17.54	68.09	96.30
	一般	47.48	77.27	107.18	56.34	74.17	92.34
	没负担	2.52	100	114.29	11.94	81.25	155.88
	完全没负担	0.36	100	200	11.94	62.50	105.00

Table 2

Figure 2

Figure 3

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

References 23

[1]	闵庆文. 哈尼梯田农业类遗产的持久保护和持续发展[J]. 世界遗产,2014,(9):60-63.
	[Min Q W.Hani terraces sustainable conservation and development of agricultural heritages[J]. World Heritage,2014,(9):60-63.]
[2]	唐珂. 关于农业与文化的关系[J]. 古今农业,2011,(1):1-9.
	[Tang K.The relationship between agriculture and culture[J]. Ancient and Modern Agriculture,2011,(1):1-9.]
[3]	闵庆文,张丹,何露,等. 中国农业文化遗产研究与保护实践的主要进展[J]. 资源科学,2011,33(6):1018-1024.
	[Min Q W,Zhang D,He L,et al. Agri-cultural heritage research and con-servation practices in China:Progresses and perspectives[J]. Resources Science,2011,33(6):1018-1024.]
[4]	李文华. 农业文化遗产的保护与发展[J]. 农业环境科学学报,2015,34(1):1-6.
	[Li W H.Agri-cultural heritage research and conservation practices:Progress and perspectives[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science,2015,34(1):1-6.]
[5]	孙业红,闵庆文,成升魁. “稻鱼共生系统”全球重要农业文化遗产价值研究[J]. 中国生态农业学报,2008,16(4):991-994.
	[Sun Y H,Min Q W,Cheng S K.Value of the GIAHS-China traditional rice-fishsystem[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agricul-ture,2008,16(4):991-994.]
[6]	崔峰,王思明,赵英. 新疆坎儿井的农业文化遗产价值及其保护利用[J]. 干旱区资源与环境,2012,(2):47-55.
	[Cui F,Wang S M,Zhao Y.The values of agro-cultural heritage of Xinjiang Karezes and its protection and utilization[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment,2012,(2):47-55.]
[7]	郭盛晖,司徒尚纪. 农业文化遗产视角下珠三角桑基鱼塘的价值及保护利用[J]. 热带地理,2010,30(4):452-458.
	[Guo S H,Situ S J.The value and utilization of mulberry-dike-fish-pond in the pearl river delta in perspective of the agricultural heritage[J]. Tropical Geography,2010,30(4):452-458.]
[8]	何露,闵庆文,袁正. 澜沧江中下游古茶树资源、价值及农业文化遗产特征[J]. 资源科学,2011,33(6):1060-1065.
	[He L,Min Q W,Yuan Z.Resources,value and agricultural heritage charac-teristics of the ancient tea plant in the middle and lower reaches of the Lancang River[J]. Resources Science,2011,33(6):1060-1065.]
[9]	林贤彪,颜燕燕,闵庆文,等. 农业文化遗产非使用价值评估及其影响因素分析-以福州茉莉花种植与茶文化遗产为例[J]. 资源科学,2014,36(5):1089-1097.
	[Lin X B,Yan Y Y,Min Q W,et al. Evaluating the non-use value of agricultural heritage across jasmine planted and tea cultural systems in Fuzhou[J]. Resources Science,2014,36(5):1089-1097.]
[10]	Torras M.The total economic value of Amazonian deforestation[J]. Ecological Economics,2000,33(2):283-297.
[11]	董雪旺,张捷,刘传华,等. 条件价值法中的偏差分析及信度和效度检验-以九寨沟游憩价值评估为例[J]. 地理学报,2011,66(2):267-278.
	[Dong X W,Zhang J,Liu C H,et al.Bias analysis and reliability and validity test in contingent valuation method:A case study of assessment of Jiuzhaigou's recreational value[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica,2011,66(2):267-278.]
[12]	郭剑英,王乃昂. 敦煌旅游资源非使用价值评估[J]. 资源科学,2005,27(5):187-192.
	[Guo J Y,Wang N A.Evaluation of the non-use values of tourist resources of Dunhuang[J]. Resources Science,2005,27(5):187-192.]
[13]	姚建云,黄安民,兰晓原. 基于CVM方法的文化遗产价值评估研究-以云冈石窟为例[J]. 经济研究导刊,2011,(5):257-258.
	[Yao J Y,Huang A M,Lan X Y.Case of evaluate cultural heritage values of the Yungang Grottoes based on contigent valu-ation method[J]. Economic Research Guide,2011,(5):257-258.]
[14]	胡喜生,洪伟,吴承祯. 基于CVM的闽江河口湿地生态系统非使用价值评价[J]. 中国水土保持科学,2012,10(6):64-70.
	[Hu X S,Hong W,Wu C Z.Evaluating the non-use value of Minjiang estuary wetlandecosystem based on contigent valu-ation method[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation,2012,10(6):64-70.]
[15]	崇义县农业和粮食局. 加强遗产保护,传承梯田文化[C]. 赣州:全省农业文化遗产挖掘和保护会议,2014.
	[Chongyi Bureau of Griculture.Strengthen the Protection of Heritage and Inherit the Terrace Cultural[C].Ganzhou:The Conference about Excavation and Protection of Agricultural Heritage in Jiangxi Province,2014.]
[16]	黄萌,黄流香,朱建华,等. 崇义年鉴,2015[M]. 北京:方志出版社,2015
	[Huang M,Huang L X,Zhu J H,et al.Chongyi Year-book[M].Beijing:Local Records Publinshing,2015.]
[17]	刘亚萍,李罡,陈训,等. 运用WTP值与WAP值对游憩资源非使用价值的货币估价[J]. 资源科学,2008,30(3):431-439.
	[Liu Y P,Li G,Chen X,et al.Monetary Valuation of the Non-Use Value of Recreational Resources in Huangguoshu Scenical Resort based on WTP and WTA Methods[J]. Resources Science,2008,30(3):431-439.]
[18]	庄大昌. 基于CVM的洞庭湖湿地资源非使用价值评估[J]. 地域研究与开发,2006,25(2):105-110.
	[Zhuang D C.Evaluation of the non-use values of the wetland resources in Dongting Lake based on CVM[J]. Areal Researchand Development,2006,25(2):105-110.]
[19]	Noonan D S.Contingent valuation and cultural resources:A meta-analytic review of the literature[J]. Journal of Cultural Eco-nomics,2003,27(3):159-176.
[20]	Scheaffer R L,Mendenhall W,Ott R L.Elementary Survey Sampling[M]. Boston:Duxbury Press,2006.
[21]	Mitchell R C,Carson R T.Using Surveys to Value Public Goods:The Contingent Valuation Method[M]. Washington DC:Re-sources for the Future,1989.
[22]	李莹. 意愿调查价值评估法的问卷设计技术[J]. 环境保护科学,2001,27(6):25-27.
	[Li Y.The technology of questionnaire design in the Contingent Valuation Method[J]. Environmental Protection Science,2001,27(6):25-27.]
[23]	焦扬. 基于CVM的三江平原湿地非使用价值评价[D]. 哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2008.
	[Jiao Y.The Non-use Value Evaluation of Sanjing Wetland base on CVM[D]. Harbin:Northeast Agricul-tural University,2008.]

偏差类型	偏差处理
投标起点偏差	通过预调查、借鉴已有研究成果来控制
假想偏差	强调该遗产保护的重要性,同时提醒受访者收入、家庭负担等方面的约束
信息偏差	提前向受访者展示并介绍该遗产的相关图表,以便获得直观认识
策略性偏差	强调匿名调查以使受访者提供真实价值;分析数据时,剔除异常值
抗议投标偏差	设计辨明0支付原因的问题
调查方式偏差	采用回收率较高的面访式调查
调查者及停留时长偏差	调查前对调查者进行统一培训,要求其按照统一标准进行调查

自变量	变量及赋值
性别	男=1,女=2
年龄/岁	[-,30]=1;（30,40]=2;（40,50]=3;（50,60]=4;（60,-）=5
职业	学生=1;农民=2;工人=3;其他职业=4;企事业单位人员=5;个体户=6
受教育程度	小学以下=1;初中=2;高中（中专）=3;大学及以上=4
月平均收入/元	（-,1 000]=1;（1 000,1 500]=2;（1 500,2 000]=3;（2 000,2 500]=4;（2 500,-）=5
家庭负担情况	完全没负担=1;没负担=2;一般=3;负担重=4;负担非常重=5
受该遗产影响程度	影响非常小=1;影响小=2;影响一般=3;影响大=4;影响非常大=5
对该遗产情感态度	非常不珍贵=1;不珍贵=2;一般=3;珍贵=4;非常珍贵=5

	系数估计	标准误	Wald	df	显著性	95% 置信区间
	系数估计	标准误	Wald	df	显著性	下限	上限
[Y=0]	22.063	1.287	293.663	1	0.000***	19.540	24.586
[Y=1]	24.024	1.307	337.608	1	0.000***	21.461	26.587
[Y=2]	26.251	1.335	386.830	1	0.000***	23.635	28.867
性别	0.121	0.295	0.169	1	0.681	-0.457	0.699
年龄	-0.312	0.615	0.258	1	0.061*	-1.518	0.893
职业	0.718	0.857	0.703	1	0.402	-0.960	2.397
受教育程度	1.244	0.733	2.882	1	0.090*	-0.192	2.680
月平均收入	0.818	0.547	2.237	1	0.135	-0.254	1.889
家庭负担情况	-4.295	2.304	3.477	1	0.042**	-5.220	8.810
受该遗产影响程度	1.052	0.556	3.581	1	0.048**	-0.038	2.142
对该遗产情感态度	20.717	0.663	96.890	1	0.000***	19.418	22.016

	估计	标准误	Wald	df	显著性	95% 置信区间
	估计	标准误	Wald	df	显著性	下限	上限
[Y=0]	17.222	1.579	118.950	1	0.000***	14.127	20.316
[Y=1]	18.628	1.578	139.285	1	0.000***	15.535	21.722
[Y=2]	20.497	1.583	167.634	1	0.000***	17.394	23.600
性别	0.591	0.270	4.797	1	0.292	0.062	1.120
年龄	-0.836	1.051	0.633	1	0.426	-2.897	1.224
职业	-0.711	0.419	2.883	1	0.090*	-1.531	0.110
受教育程度	-0.996	0.320	9.700	1	0.002**	-1.622	-0.369
月平均收入	0.387	0.376	1.060	1	0.033**	-0.350	1.124
家庭负担情况	-0.694	0.857	0.657	1	0.418	-2.374	0.985
受该遗产影响程度	0.620	0.502	1.528	1	0.216	-0.363	1.603
对该遗产情感态度	19.006	0.610	97.348	1	0.000***	17.810	20.202

Regional differences in the willingness to pay for non-use value of agriculture heritage：Chongyi Hakka Terrace system in Jiangxi

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 8

References 23

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	YANG Ding, YANG Zhenshan. Ecological poverty and its influencing factors in an alpine area: Case study of the Selinco area [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(2): 293-303.
[2]	CHEN Caixia, HUANG Guangqing, YE Yuyao, ZHAO Lingling, JIN Lixia, LIU Xulong. Change and ecological restoration of the dike-pond system in the Pearl River Delta: A case study of four villages in Foshan City [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(2): 328-340.
[3]	HAN Jing, CHEN Zexiu, LU Xinhai. Spatiotemporal change of China’s overseas investment in farmlands and influencing factors [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1715-1727.
[4]	ZHANG Lixin, BI Xu, HUANG Zhiji. Urban industrial land use efficiency under the background of economic transformation in the Yangtze River Economic Belt [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1728-1738.
[5]	WANG Pingping, HAN Yijun, ZHANG Yi. Characteristics of change and influencing factors of the technical efficiency of chemical fertilizer use for agricultural production in China [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(9): 1764-1776.
[6]	HUANG Jing, XUE Dongqian, DAI Lanhai. Spatial differentiation and influencing factors of resource and environmental carrying capacity in main agricultural production areas: Taking Linze County of Gansu Province as an example [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(7): 1262-1274.
[7]	YANG Kaiyue, SONG Yongyong, XUE Dongqian. Spatiotemporal change of rural settlement land in the Loess Plateau and influencing factors [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(7): 1311-1324.
[8]	LI Jingmei, SHAN Jingzhu, DENG Yuncheng, XU Handuo. Uncertainty bias and its correction in contingent valuation method: A case study of marine biodiversity valuation in Pingtan County [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(7): 1338-1347.
[9]	TANG Jianxiong, MA Mengyao. Spatial pattern and influencing factors of industrial tourism demonstration sites in China [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(6): 1188-1198.
[10]	HE Siyuan, LI Heyao, MIN Qingwen. Value and conservation actors of Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS) from the perspective of rural households [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(5): 870-880.
[11]	LI Jingmei, DING Zhongxian, XU Wanting, XU Zhihua, SHAN Jingzhu. National park ticket pricing based on double-bounded dichotomous contingent valuation method for the Jiaozhou Bay National Marine Park [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(2): 232-241.
[12]	YUE Li, XUE Dan. Spatiotemporal change of urban green development efficiency in the Yellow River Basin and influencing factors [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(12): 2274-2284.
[13]	LI Jiangsu, SUN Wei, YU Jianhui. Change and regional differences of production-living-ecological space in the Yellow River Basin: Based on comparative analysis of resource-based and non-resource-based cities [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(12): 2285-2299.
[14]	LIU Chenguang. Spatial evolution of specialized villages and influencing factors in the Yellow River Basin [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(12): 2300-2313.
[15]	LIU Xiao, XU Jianhua. Public willingness to pay for cleaner power sources [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(12): 2328-2340.