石羊河下游农户的生计风险及应对策略——以民勤绿洲区为例

doi:10.11821/dlyj201505011

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

石羊河下游农户面临着严峻的风险冲击,使其生计脆弱性加剧。当前急需辨明农户面临的主要风险,探索阻碍农户抵御风险冲击的潜在因素,并依此找寻提高农户风险应对能力的对策措施。基于入户调查数据,分析了石羊河下游民勤绿洲区农户面临的主要生计风险及应对策略,并采用多元logistic模型分析了影响风险应对策略选择的因素。结果发现：① 市场、教育及自然风险已成为农户面临的最主要生计风险,其中纯农户（全部劳动力均从事农业生产）与一兼户（非农收入比重<50%）主要面临市场、教育及自然风险,二兼户（50%≤非农收入比重<90%）为市场、健康及教育风险,非农户（非农收入比重≥90%）为教育、健康及养老风险;② 减少消费、外出打工、动用储蓄、向亲友寻求帮助、向银行借贷是农户应对风险的主要策略,其中非农户的首选策略中居首位的是外出打工,其他三类农户均为减少消费;③ 人力资本、金融资本、社会资本是影响农户风险应对策略选择的最重要因素,物质资本次之,自然资本的影响最弱。最后,提出了提高农户风险应对能力的对策建议。

关键词: 农户, 生计风险, 应对策略, 生计资本, 石羊河下游

Abstract:

There have always been kinds of livelihood risks in the environment, which will lower the level of the person or the family welfare, and restrict the region sustainable development. Shiyang River basin is located in the arid area of northwest China, and belongs to the typical arid inland basin. As the major economic activity unit in the downstream of the Shiyang River, the farmers are faced with the serious livelihood risk, which has aggravated the farmers’ livelihood vulnerability. It is extremely urgent now to distinguish the key livelihood risk which the farmers are facing, explore the potential factors which has hindered the farmers to resist the risk and seek the effective risk coping strategy. Through stratified random sampling survey, participatory rural appraisal and investigation of plot, 484 households are investigated and sampled. Farmers are divided into four types: pure agriculture households, agriculture-dependent households, off-farm dependent households and off-farm households. Based on the investigation data, we identify the main livelihood risk which the farmers are faced with and their risk coping strategies, and analyze the factors which influence the farmers′ risk strategy choice using the multi-logistic model. The results show: (1) The market risk, education risk and nature risk have been the main livelihood risks which the farmers are facing in the downstream of Shiyang River, but there are differences among different types of farmers. The top three livelihood risks facing the pure agriculture households and agriculture-dependent households are from market, education and nature; the risks facing the off-farm dependent households are from market, health and education; the risks facing the off-farm households are education, health and pension risk in sequence. (2) The main risk coping strategies include reducing consumption, going out to work, dissaving, asking relatives and friends for help and getting bank loans. However, there are some differences in the risk coping strategy choices among the different types of farmers. The first choice of off-farm households is going out to work, but the other three types of farmers would choose reducing consumption; (3) The most important factors which influence the choices of risk coping strategies are human capital, financial capital and social capital; material capital comes second; nature capital has the weakest influence. Finally, we present the risk control measures to reduce the livelihood risk possibility and give the suggestions to promote the farmers’ risk coping ability.

Key words: farmers, livelihood risk, coping strategy, livelihood capital, the downstream of Shiyang River

赵雪雁, 赵海莉, 刘春芳. 石羊河下游农户的生计风险及应对策略——以民勤绿洲区为例[J]. 地理研究, 2015, 34(5): 922-932.

Xueyan ZHAO, Haili ZHAO, Chunfang LIU. The farmers′ livelihood risk and their coping strategy in the downstream of Shiyang River: A case of Minqin Oasis[J]. GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH, 2015, 34(5): 922-932.

图/表 6

图1

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

参考文献 26

[27]	Dillon J L, Scandizzo P L.Risk attitudes of subsistence farmers in Northeast Brazil: A sampling approach. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1978, 60(3): 425-435.
[28]	章元, 陆铭. 社会网络是否有助于提高农民工的工资水平?. 管理世界. 2009(3): 45-54.
[1]	Sherbinin A D, Vanwey L K, Mcsweeney K, et al.Rural household demographics, livelihoods and the environment. Global Environmental Change, 2008, (18): 38-53.
[2]	Tsegaye D, Vedeld P, Moe S R.Pastoralists and livelihoods: A case study from northern Afar, Ethiopia. Journal of Arid Environments, 2013, (91): 138-146.
[3]	Van den Berg M. Household income strategies and natural disasters: Dynamic livelihoods in rural Nicaragua. Ecological Economics, 2010, (69): 592-602.
[4]	Soltani A, Angelsen A, Eid T, et al.Poverty, sustainability, and household livelihood strategies in Zagros, Iran. Ecological Economics, 2012, (79): 60-70.
[5]	Umoh G S.Programming risks in wetlands farming: Evidence from Nigerian Floodplains. Journal of Human Ecology, 2008, 24(2): 85-92.
[6]	Islam A, Maitra P.Health shocks and consumption smoothing in rural households: Does microcredit have a role to play?. Journal of Development Economics, 2012, (97): 232-243.
[7]	杨文, 孙蚌珠, 王学龙. 中国农村家庭脆弱性的测量与分解. 经济研究, 2012, (4): 40-51.
	[Yang Wen, Sun Bangzhu, Wang Xuelong.Measurement and decomposition of household′s vulnerability in rural China. Economic Research Journal, 2012, (4): 40-51.]
[8]	马定国, 刘影, 陈洁, 等. 鄱阳湖区洪灾风险与农户脆弱性分析. 地理学报, 2007, 62(3): 321-332.
	[Ma Dingguo, Liu Ying, Chen Jie, et al.Farmers′ vulnerability to flooding in the Poyang Lake Region. Acta Geograpahica Sinica, 2007, 62(3): 321-332.]
[9]	谭灵芝, 王国友. 气候变化对干旱区家庭生计脆弱性影响的空间分析: 以新疆于田绿洲为例. 中国人口科学, 2012, (2): 67-77.
	[Tan Lingzhi, Wang Guoyou.Spatial analysis on family-livelihood vulnerability affected by climate change in arid area: An example of Yu-tian in XinJiang. Chinese Population Science, 2012, (2): 67-77.]
[10]	苏芳, 尚海洋. 农户生计资本对其风险应对策略的影响: 以黑河流域张掖市为例. 中国农村经济, 2012, (8): 79-87.
	[Su Fang, Shang Haiyang.The impact of the farmers′ livelihood capital on their risk coping strategy: A case of Zhangye in Heihe river. Chinese Rural Economy, 2012, (8): 79-87.]
[11]	马小勇. 中国农户的风险规避行为分析: 以陕西为例. 中国软科学, 2006, (2): 22-30.
	[Ma Xiaoyong.Risk avoiding behavior of Chinese farmers: An empirical study in Shaanxi. Chinese Soft Science, 2006, (2): 22-30.]
[12]	许汉石, 乐章. 生计资本、生计风险与农户的生计策略. 农业经济问题, 2012, (10): 100-105.
	[Xu Hanshi, Le Zhang.Livelihood capital, livelihood risk and the farmer′s livelihood strategy. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2012, (10): 100-105.]
[13]	杨俊, 杨钢桥. 风险状态下不同类型农户农业生产组合优化: 基于target-MOTAD 模型的分析. 中国农村观察, 2011(1): 49-59.
	[Yang Jun, Yang Gangqiao.The agriculture production combination optimization of the different type of farmers in the risk condition: Based on target-MOTAD model. Chinese Rural Survey, 2011, (1): 49-59.]
[14]	马小勇, 白永秀. 中国农户的收入风险应对机制与消费波动: 来自陕西的经验证据. 经济学, 2009, 8(4): 1221-1238.
	[Ma Xiaoyong, Bai Yongxiu.Chinese farmers′ income risk coping mechanisms and consumption fluctuations: An empirical study from Shaanxi Province. China Economic Quarterly, 2009, 8(4): 1221-1238.]
[15]	Motsholapheko M R, Kgathi D L, Vanderpost C.Rural livelihoods and household adaptation to extreme flooding in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Physics and Chemistry of The Earth, 2011, 36(8): 984-995.
[16]	陈传波. 农户风险与脆弱性: 一个分析框架及贫困地区的经验. 农业经济问题, 2005, (8): 47-50.
	[Chen Chuanbo.The Farmers′ risk and vulnerability: A analysis framework and the lessons in the poverty-stricken area. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2005, (8): 47-50.]
[17]	Eakin H, Luers A L.Assessing the vulnerability of social-environment systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 2006, 31(1): 365-394.
[18]	张凯, 冯起, 吕永清, 等. 民勤绿洲荒漠带土壤水分的空间分异研究. 中国沙漠, 2011, 31(5): 1149-1155.
	[Zhang Kai, Feng Qi, Lv Yongqing, et al.Study on spatial heterogeneity of soil water contents in oasis-desert belt of Minqin. Journal of Desert Research, 2011, 31(5): 1149-1155.]
[19]	宋冬梅, 肖笃宁, 张志城, 等. 石羊河下游民勤绿洲生态安全时空变化分析. 中国沙漠, 2004, 24(3): 335-342.
	[Song Dongmei, Xiao Duning, Zhang Zhicheng, et al.Change of ecological security of Minqin oasis in Shiyang River Basin. Journal of Desert Rresearch, 2004, 24(3): 335-342.]
[20]	Shapiro B I, Brorsen B W.Factors affecting farmers′ hedging decisions. North Central Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1988, 10(2): 145-153.
[21]	Bebbington A.Capital and capabilities: A framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Development, 1999, 27(12): 2021-2044.
[22]	赵雪雁. 生计资本对农牧民生活满意度的影响: 以甘南高原为例. 地理研究, 2011, 30(4): 687-698.
	[Zhao Xueyan.The impact of livelihood capital on the life satisfaction of peasants and herdsmen: A case of Gannan Plateau. Geography Research, 2011, 30(4): 687-698.]
[23]	Sharp K.Measuring destitution: Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches the analysis of survey data. IDS Working Paper, 2003, 217.
[24]	李小云, 董强, 饶小龙, 等. 农户脆弱性分析方法及其本土化应用. 中国农村经济, 2007, (4): 32-39.
	[Li Xiaoyun, Dong Qiang, Rao Xiaolong, et al.The farmers′ vulnerability analysis and its localization utilization. Chinese Rural Economy, 2007, (4): 32-39.]
[25]	阎建忠, 吴莹莹, 张镱锂, 等. 青藏高原东部样带农牧民生计的多样化. 地理学报, 2009, 64(2): 221-233.
	[Yan Jianzhong, Wu Yingying, Zhang Yili, et al.Livelihood diversification of peasants and nomads of eastern transect in Tibetan Plateau. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2009, 64(2): 221-233.]
[28]	[Zhang Yuan, Lu Ming.Have the social net contributed to promote the peasant-worker′s wage?. Management World, 2009(3): 45-54.]
[26]	Wiens T B.Peasant risk aversion and allocative behavior: Quadratic programming experiment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1976, 58(4): 629-635.

农户类型	家庭规模（人/户）	劳动力数量（人/户）	劳动力受教育程度（%）						劳动力配置（%）
农户类型	家庭规模（人/户）	劳动力数量（人/户）	文盲		小学	初中	高中	大专及以上	务农	打工	经商或运输	工资性工作	其他
纯农户	4.64	2.55	4.55	21.62	39.96	26.10	7.77		98.82	-	-	-	1.18
一兼户	4.94	3.01	5.36	20.15	30.52	30.13	13.84		65.78	27.24	2.33	1.66	2.99
二兼户	4.80	3.4	3.15	22.64	31.27	30.44	12.50		52.35	40.00	5.59	1.47	0.59
非农户	4.89	3.03	2.62	21.61	41.56	23.02	11.19		0.37	70.59	16.17	3.63	9.24

变量	测量指标及权重	指标赋值	均值	标准差
人力资本	家庭整体劳动能力I₁₁(0.44)	非劳动力为0,半劳动力为0.5,全劳动力为1.0	3.89	1.02
	成年劳动力受教育程度I₁₂(0.56)	文盲为0,小学为0.25,初中为0.5,高中为0.75,大专及以上为1.0	1.94	0.98
自然资本	人均耕地面积I₂(1.0)	人均实际耕种面积（亩）	2.99	1.75
物质资本	家庭固定资产拥有量I₃₁(0.65)	所拥有的固定资产项数占所列选项的比例	0.53	0.15
	住房类型及面积I₃₂(0.35)	混凝土房为1.0,砖瓦/砖木房为0.75,土木房为0.5,棚圈0.25;5间房及以上为1.0,4间房为0.75,3间房为0.5,2间为0.25,1间为0	0.57	0.19
牲畜数量	住房类型及面积I₃₂(0.35)		0.57	0.19	马/骡为1.0,牛为0.8,羊为0.3,猪为0.2	17.19	10.94
金融资本	人均现金收入I₄₁(0.75)	人均现金收入（元）	6628.34	4359.56
	获得信贷的机会I₄₂(0.25)	有为1,无为0	0.82	0.39
社会资本	领导潜力I₅₁(0.20)	家庭有村委成员为1,无为0	0.14	0.35
	对周围人的信任I₅₂(0.25)	非常信任为1,比较信任为0.75,一般为0.5,不太信任为0.25,极不信任为0	0.41	0.29
	遇到风险能帮助自己的人数I₅₃(0.55)	10个以上为1,6~10个为0.75,4~6个为0.5,1~3个为0.25,0个为0	0.41	0.25

风险类型	纯农户			一兼户		二兼户			非农户
风险类型	担心该风险		最担心该风险		担心该风险	最担心该风险	担心该风险	最担心该风险	担心该风险	最担心该风险
自然风险	86.09	14.01		94.38	16.88	80.56	12.20		82.38	11.43
市场风险	81.16	28.02		76.88	25.63	82.93	29.27		68.57	8.57
健康风险	71.5	9.67		63.13	8.75	76.83	24.39		77.14	22.86
教育风险	73.43	23.67		75.00	29.38	65.85	23.17		65.71	28.57
就业风险	72.73	13.04		70.83	13.12	59.76	3.65		74.29	8.57
养老风险	60.39	8.21		55.00	3.75	59.76	6.10		71.43	20.00
耕地风险	48.86	2.90		42.5	2.49	37.81	1.22		33.33	0.00
政策风险	9.24	0.48		7.95	0.00	13.43	0.00		17.39	0.00

应对策略	纯农户			一兼户		二兼户			非农户
应对策略	选择该策略		首选该策略		选择该策略	首选该策略	选择该策略	首选该策略	选择该策略	首选该策略
减少消费	46.38	29.55		56.88	25.63	56.1	30.49		71.43	22.86
动用储蓄	38.64	12.50		36.11	11.11	40.00	18.29		66.67	14.29
向亲友寻求帮助	44.32	7.95		47.22	12.45	53.33	12.20		50.00	11.43
向银行借贷	44.93	9.09		59.38	15.28	62.20	4.88		57.14	8.57
出售资产	27.54	4.55		48.13	2.78	48.13	2.44		54.88	5.71
孩子辍学	11.36	0.00		1.39	0.00	0.00	0.00		0.00	0.00
外出打工	61.84	20.45		60.63	13.89	57.32	7.32		74.29	28.57
改变生产技术	38.64	14.77		38.89	17.47	46.67	13.41		25.00	5.71
参加社会保险	40.1	1.14		50.00	1.39	54.88	10.98		65.71	2.86

应对策略	变量	回归系数	标准误	Wald值		应对策略	变量	回归系数	标准误	Wald值
外出打工	常数	-6.640^***	1.798	13.642		向亲友寻求帮助	常数	-2.157^*	1.590	1.840
	人力资本	24.925^**	5.661	19.389			人力资本		2.879	4.933	0.341
	自然资本	-1.231	2.591	0.226	自然资本			-4.953^*	2.977	2.768
	物质资本	-0.346	1.970	0.031	物质资本			0.400	2.204	0.033
	金融资本	0.132	2.553	0.003	金融资本			-3.946	3.048	1.676
	社会资本	2.392^*	1.516	2.490	社会资本			7.528^***	1.688	19.897
银行借贷	常数	-2.872^**	1.496	3.683	动用储蓄	常数	-0.613^*	1.762	0.121
	人力资本	1.396^*	4.528	1.009		人力资本		-9.082^*	4.780	3.610
	自然资本	-2.119	2.502	0.717		自然资本		-5.074	3.422	2.198
	物质资本	1.943^**	1.864	1.089		物质资本		-4.628^*	2.430	3.627
	金融资本	3.376^*	2.694	1.571		金融资本		11.658^***	4.450	6.864
	社会资本	-0.141	1.568	0.008		社会资本		3.708^*	1.847	4.045