
浏览全部资源
扫码关注微信
新疆农业科学院 农业经济与科技信息研究所,新疆 乌鲁木齐 830091
Received:11 June 2022,
Revised:22 July 2022,
Published:31 March 2023
移动端阅览
苏武峥,许士东,张利召.生计禀赋、农户参与对乡村绿色发展的影响——基于新疆和田295个农户调查数据 [J]. 山西农业大学学报(社会科学版),2023,22(2):42⁃50.
SU Wuzheng,XU Shidong,ZHANG Lizhao.Impacts of livelihood endowment and farmer's participation on rural green development——a research based on 295 questionnaires of farmers from Hetian, Xinjiang [J]. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural University(Social Science Edition),2023,22(2):42⁃50.
苏武峥,许士东,张利召.生计禀赋、农户参与对乡村绿色发展的影响——基于新疆和田295个农户调查数据 [J]. 山西农业大学学报(社会科学版),2023,22(2):42⁃50. DOI: 10.13842/j.cnki.issn1671-816X.2023.02.005.
SU Wuzheng,XU Shidong,ZHANG Lizhao.Impacts of livelihood endowment and farmer's participation on rural green development——a research based on 295 questionnaires of farmers from Hetian, Xinjiang [J]. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural University(Social Science Edition),2023,22(2):42⁃50. DOI: 10.13842/j.cnki.issn1671-816X.2023.02.005.
通过构建农户生计资本评估框架和乡村绿色发展参与度测评指标体系,运用熵值法、因子分析法和灰色关联分析法,探讨了农户生计资本及其参与对乡村绿色发展的影响。研究表明:(1)研究区农户生计资本构成不均衡,人力资本测评得分最高,为1.3355,其次为金融资本为0.7638,社会资本为0.7531,物质资本为0.7263,自然资本最低,为0.4238。(2)乡村绿色发展参与度测评中,有59.04%的农户参与度相对较高,40.96%的农户参与积极性不高;且研究区内绿色生活参与度得分最高,为0.6062,其次是绿色理念,为0.5847,绿色生产得分最低,为0.0257。(3)在农户生计资本与乡村绿色发展关联性测评中,人力资本对乡村绿色发展影响关联性较高,其次依次为物质、金融和社会资本,自然资本影响最弱。据此,从农户生计资本、绿色低碳农业、乡村人居环境整治和乡村绿色发展环境等方面提出相应的对策建议。
By constructing an evaluation framework of livelihood capital of rural households and a measurement index system of countryside green development participation rate, and using entropy method, factor analysis, grey relational analysis, this paper aims to discuss the impacts of livelihood capital of rural households and their participation on the rural green development. Here are what the result shows: 1) In the research area, the construction of rural livelihood capitals is not balanced. Among them, the score of human capital is the highest, which is 1.3355; the next one is financial capital, which is 0.7638; social capital scores 0.7531; material capital scores 0.7263; the lowest one is natural capital, which scores 0.4238. 2) In the evaluation of farmer’s participation in rural green development, 59.04% of the farmers have a higher degree of participation, 40.96% of the farmers are not active in their participation. In the research area, the degree of green life participation scores the highest, which is 0.6262; the next one is green concepts, which is 0.5847; the score of green production is the lowest, which is 0.0257. 3) In the evaluation of the correlation between livelihood capital of rural households and rural green development, human capital has a stronger correlation with rural green development, which is followed by material capital, financial capital, social capital. The natural capital has the weakest correlation. Based on the results, the paper tries to propose some constructive suggestions, from the structure of livelihood capital of rural households, green and low-carbon agricultural production, the living environment in rural areas and cultural atmosphere of rural green development.
Koohafkan Parviz , Altieri Miguel , Eric Holt Gimenez . Green agriculture: foundations for biodiverse, resilient and productive agricultural systems [J]. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability , 2012 , 10 ( 1 ): 61 ⁃ 75 .
Bradford L. , Barham , Mercedez Callenes . Fair trade/organic coffee rural livelihoods and the “agrarian ques-tion” : southern mexican coffee families in transition [J]. World Development , 2010 , 39 ( 1 ): 134 ⁃ 145 .
Jacques Trienekens , Peter Zuurbier . Quality and safety standards in the food industry developments and chal-lenges [J]. International Journal of Production Economics , 2007 , 113 ( 1 ): 107 ⁃ 112 .
Godfray H . Charles J, John R .Beddington, Ian R .Crute, et al. Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people[J]. Science , 2010 , 327 ( 5967 ): 812 ⁃ 818 .
于法稳 . 习近平绿色发展新思想与农业的绿色转型发展 [J]. 中国农村观察 , 2016 ,( 5 ): 2 ⁃ 9,94 .
罗必良 . 推进我国农业绿色转型发展的战略选择 [J]. 农业经济与管理 , 2017 ( 6 ): 8 ⁃ 11 .
魏胜文 , 乔德华 , 张东伟 . 甘肃农业绿色发展研究报告 [M]. 兰州 : 中国社会科学出版社 , 2018 : 87 ⁃ 88 .
金赛美 . 供给侧改革背景下农业绿色发展评价指数研究 [M]. 北京 : 经济管理出版社 , 2018 : 95 - 96 .
孙小燕 , 付文秀 . 消费者安全农产品购买行为品种间差异:事实与解释 [J]. 农村经济 , 2018 ( 4 ): 58 ⁃ 64 .
杨灿 , 朱玉林 . 论供给侧结构性改革背景下的湖南农业绿色发展对策 [J]. 中南林业科技大学学报(社会科学版) , 2016 , 10 ( 5 ): 1 ⁃ 5 .
严立冬 , 何伟 , 乔长涛 . 绿色农业产业化的政策性金融支持研究 [J]. 中南财经政法大学学报 , 2012 ( 2 ): 88 ⁃ 92 .
胡雪萍 , 董红涛 . 构建绿色农业投融资机制须破解的难题及路径选择 [J]. 中国人口·资源与环境 , 2015 , 25 ( 6 ): 152 ⁃ 158 .
陈叶兰 . 论新农村生态文明建设中的政府责任 [J]. 湖南社会科学 , 2013 ( 5 ): 29 ⁃ 31 .
赵美玲 , 马明冲 . 基于战略视角的农村生态文明建设探析 [J]. 理论学刊 , 2013 ( 7 ): 72 ⁃ 75 .
李亚青 , 王栓军 . 浅析低碳生活方式与农村生态文明建设 [J]. 生态经济 , 2012 ( 6 ): 188 ⁃ 190 .
宋洪远 , 金书秦 , 张灿强 . 强化农业资源环境保护 推进农村生态文明建设 [J]. 湖南农业大学学报(社会科学版) , 2016 ( 5 ): 33 ⁃ 41 .
杨斯玲 , 刘应宗 , 潘珍妮 . 基于循环经济的农村生态文明科学发展研究 [J]. 北京工业大学学报(社会科学版) , 2011 , 11 ( 5 ): 25 ⁃ 29 .
周航 , 李君 . 农村生态文明建设中的金融支持措施研究 [J]. 农村经济 , 2016 ( 1 ): 126 ⁃ 129 .
杨世伟 . 绿色发展引领乡村振兴:内在意蕴、逻辑机理与实现路径 [J]. 华东理工大学学报(社会科学版) , 2020 , 35 ( 4 ): 125 ⁃ 135 .
张宇 , 朱立志 . 关于“乡村振兴”战略中绿色发展问题的思考 [J]. 新疆师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版) , 2019 , 40 ( 1 ): 65 ⁃ 71
张远新 . 推进乡村生态振兴的必然逻辑、现实难题和实践路径 [J]. 甘肃社会科学 , 2022 ( 2 ): 116 ⁃ 124 .
邓玲 , 顾金土 . 后扶贫时代乡村生态振兴的价值逻辑、实践路向及治理机制 [J]. 理论导刊 , 2021 ( 5 ): 77 ⁃ 84 .
何仁伟 , 刘邵权 , 陈国阶 , 等 . 中国农户可持续生计研究进展及趋向 [J]. 地理科学进展 , 2013 , 32 ( 4 ): 657 ⁃ 670 .
苏芳 , 蒲欣冬 , 徐中民 , 等 . 生计资本与生计策略关系研究——以张掖市甘州区为例 [J]. 中国人口·资源与环境 , 2009 , 19 ( 6 ): 119 ⁃ 125 .
黎洁 , 李亚莉 , 邰秀军 , 等 . 可持续生计分析框架下西部贫困退耕山区农户生计状况分析 [J]. 中国农村观察 , 2009 ( 5 ): 29 ⁃ 38,96 .
黄炎忠 , 罗小锋 , 李容容 , 等 . 农户认知、外部环境与绿色农业生产意愿——基于湖北省632个农户调研数据 [J]. 长江流域资源与环境 , 2018 , 27 ( 3 ): 680 ⁃ 687 .
崔元锋 , 严立冬 , 陆金铸 , 等 . 我国绿色农业发展水平综合评价体系研究 [J]. 农业经济问题 , 2009 , 30 ( 6 ): 29 ⁃ 33
0
Views
2
下载量
0
CSCD
Publicity Resources
Related Articles
Related Author
Related Institution
京公网安备11010802024621