生态补偿政策差异如何影响生态保护红线区农户生计策略

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (0)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract A reasonable eco-compensation policy is the key to improving the livelihood strategy of farmers in the ecological protection red line area. Based on the DFID sustainable livelihood framework, a theoretical mechanism is constructed to explore the differences in eco-compensation policies and the livelihood strategies of farmers in ecological protection red line areas. Using micro survey data from pilot areas designated by the national ecological protection red line, a binary discrete choice model is employed to empirically analyze the impact of differences in eco-compensation policies on the livelihood strategies of farmers in ecological protection red line areas. The results show that compared to farmers in agricultural dominated ecological protection red line areas, non-agricultural dominated ecological protection red line area farmers have more diversified livelihood activities, stronger risk resistance ability, and smaller resource and environmental dependence. Further analysis reveals that farmers in ecological protection red line areas who accept the compensation method of “blood typing” are more likely to choose non-agricultural livelihood strategies, and this result still holds true after passing the robustness test. At the same time, the household head’s work experience, non-agricultural labor skills and labor force quantity in human capital, the number of mobile phone contacts and frequent contacts in social capital, the opportunity to obtain loans in financial capital, and the type of housing structure in material capital can all promote farmers in ecological protection red line areas to adopt non-agricultural livelihood strategies. Therefore, it is necessary to explore diversified “blood type” compensation methods, broaden the social network of farmers, and leverage the role of green finance in helping farmers overcome difficulties.

Key words： eco-compensation compensation methods livelihood capital livelihood strategies ecological protection red line area

Received: 20 December 2024

PACS:	X321
	F327

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	QIU Shui-lin
	CAI Xue-xiong

Cite this article:

QIU Shui-lin,CAI Xue-xiong. The Impact of Eco-compensation Policies Differences on the Farmers’ Livelihood Strategies in Ecological Protection Red Line Areas[J]. , 2025, 42(3): 68-76.

URL:

https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/ OR https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/Y2025/V42/I3/68

[1] 丘水林,靳乐山.资本禀赋对生态保护红线区农户人为活动限制受偿意愿的影响[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2022, 32(1):146-154.
[2] Ola O, Menapace L, Benjamin E, et al.Determinants of the environmental conservation and poverty alleviation objectives of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) pro-grams[J].Ecosystem Services,2019,35(1):52-66.
[3] Kumar R, Horwitz P, Milton R G, et al.Assessing wetland ecosystem services and poverty interlinkages:A general framework and case study[J].Hydrological Sciences Journ-al,2011,56(8):1602-1621.
[4] Aldashev G, Vallino E.The dilemma of NGOs and parti-cipatory conservation[J].World Development,2019,123(1):1-14.
[5] 易盛媛,王一婷,李纯等.干热河谷地区农户生计策略价值对生计资本的响应[J].生态与农村环境学报,2025,41(3):349-357.
[6] Pour M D, Barati A A, Azadi H, et al.Revealing the role of livelihood assets in livelihood strategies: Towards enh-ancing conservation and livelihood development in the Hara Biosphere Reserve,Iran[J].Ecological Indicators,2018, 94(1):336-347.
[7] 何仁伟,方方,刘运伟.贫困山区农户人力资本对生计策略的影响研究——以四川省凉山彝族自治州为例[J].地理科学进展,2019,38(9):1282-1293.
[8] 刘建国,苏文杰.数字技术对农户生计策略选择的影响 ——基于农户心理状态的调节效应[J].世界农业,2022,(11):98-112.
[9] 宋文豪,黄祖辉,叶春辉.数字金融使用对农村家庭生计策略选择的影响——来自中国农村家庭追踪调查的证据[J].中国农村经济,2023,(6):92-113.
[10] 高原,赵凯.以地为生的转型:宅基地退出对老年农户生计策略的影响[J].农村经济,2024,(7):47-57.
[11] Asante F, Guodaar L, Arimiyaw S.Climate change and variability awareness and livelihood adaptive strategies among smallholder farmers in semi-arid northern Ghana[J].Environmental Development,2021,39(1):1-15.
[12] 庞洁,徐珂,靳乐山.湿地生态补偿对农户生计策略和收入的影响研究——以鄱阳湖区调研数据为例[J].中国土地科学,2021,35(4):72-80+108.
[13] 李坦,张晓慧,靳财等.生态补偿政策差异对农户就业和收入的影响研究[J].中国土地科学,2024,38(3):38-47.
[14] 刘格格,周玉玺,葛颜祥.多样化生态补偿对农村家庭生计策略选择的影响——以生态保护红线区农村家庭为例[J].农村经济,2024,(8):120-131.
[15] (印度)阿马蒂亚·森.贫穷和饥荒[M].王宇,王文玉译. 北京:商务印书馆,2004.112-126.
[16] Sene-Harrper A, Matarrita-Cascanat D, Larson L R.Leveraging local livelihood strategies to support conser-vation and development in West Africa[J].Environmental Development,2019,29(1):16-28.
[17] DFID.Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets[M].London:Department for International Development,1999.75-83.
[18] 尹奇,马璐璐,王庆日.基于森的功能和能力福利理论的失地农民福利水平评价[J].中国土地科学,2010,24(7):41-46.
[19] Chambers R, Conway G R.Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century(IDS Discussion Paper 296)[M].Brighton,UK:Institute of Development St-udies,1992.62-159.