干旱环境胁迫下农户适应性研究——基于民勤绿洲地区农户调查数据

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2016.05.011

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

适应能力及其评估框架为农户生计研究提供了一个新思路。本文在干旱环境背景下,借鉴农户可持续生计和适应能力相关理论,探讨民勤绿洲地区农户适应能力及适应行为。按照适应能力评估框架,构建农户适应能力评价指标体系,通过问卷和实地调查获取数据,在农户适应行为分类的基础上,测量不同适应类型农户的适应能力,分析影响农户适应类型的因素。结果表明：①从农户的适应行为来看,积极主动的适应行为选择较多,减少消费、参加社会保险等适应行为选择较少;农户适应类型中,综合适应型的比重最大,被动适应型最小。②农户的适应能力方面,各维度整体分布较为均衡,但自然能力和社会能力存在显著分异,而物质能力、金融能力、劳动能力和学习能力较均衡;不同农户适应类型中,综合适应型农户适应能力更稳定,务工主导型和被动适应型的稳定性较差。在适应能力六大维度中,物质能力在六大农户适应类型中所占比重最大,自然能力最小。③家庭物质资产、非农就业比重、社会网络、人均“退还关压”面积、受教育程度等适应能力指标对农户的适应行为选择具有显著影响。

关键词: 干旱胁迫, 适应能力, 适应行为, 农户, 民勤绿洲地区

Abstract:

Adaptive capacity and its evaluation framework provide a new direction for the study of livelihoods of farming households. Considering the arid environment and based on theories about sustainable livelihoods of farming households and adaptive capacity, this article explores adaptive capacity and adaptive actions of farmers in the Minqin Oasis area. An adaptive capacity assessment index system of farming households was constructed. The research data were collected through a questionnaire survey and field investigations. Based on the classification of adaptive actions of farmers, this research measured the adaptive capacity of different adaptive types of farming households and analyzed the influencing factors of farmers’ adaptive types. The results are as follows: (1) With regard to the adaptive actions of farmers, more people chose active adaptive actions, while those who opted for reducing consumption and participating in social insurance were fewer. With regard to the adaptive types of farmers, the proportion of farming households that adopted comprehensive adaptation was the largest, whereas passive adaptation was adopted by the smallest number of households. (2) In terms of the adaptive capacity of farmers, generally speaking in each of the six dimensions a relatively balanced distribution was observed across different types of farming households, but there were significant differences between farming households with regard to natural resource endowments and social resources. On the other hand, material possession, financial resources, labor resources, and education were more balanced. Among different adaptive types, the adaptive capacity of comprehensive adaptation type was more stable, but the stability of migrant worker-dominant adaptation and passive adaptation types was poor. In the six dimensions of adaptive capacity and six adaptive types of farming households, material possession accounted for the largest contribution to adaptive capacity, while natural resource endowments contributed the least. (3) Among the indicators of adaptive capacity, household physical assets, proportion of non-agricultural employment, social network, per capita area of “returning farmland to forest and cutting down wells and field”, level of education, and so on had significant influences on farmers’ choice of adaptive actions.

Key words: drought stress, adaptive capacity, adaptive action, farming household, Minqin Oasis

尹莎, 陈佳, 吴孔森, 杨新军. 干旱环境胁迫下农户适应性研究——基于民勤绿洲地区农户调查数据[J]. 地理科学进展, 2016, 35(5): 644-654.

Sha YIN, Jia CHEN, Kongsen WU, Xinjun YANG. Adaptation of farming households under drought stress:Based on a survey in the Minqin Oasis[J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2016, 35(5): 644-654.

图/表 10

图1

表1

农户适应能力评价指标体系"

指数	维度	指标	指标描述与定义	均值	标准差	指标向性
适应能力指数	自然能力	人均实际耕种面积	家庭实际耕种面积与总人数之比	3.77	6.86	+
		人均“退还关压”面积	家庭退耕还林及关井压田面积与总人数之比	1.78	2.55	-
		水资源情况	距离水源距离与实际有效灌溉度;有效灌溉度：0.25=一小部分,0.5=一半左右,0.75=绝大部分,1=全部	453.35	1890.85	+
	物质能力	人均大棚面积	家庭日光温室及暖棚面积与总人数之比	38.71	76.03	+
		住房情况	住房类型和人均住房面积;住房类型：0=草房,0.25=土木房,0.5=土砖房,0.75=砖瓦房,1=混凝土结构;人均住房面积：家庭住房总面积与总人数之比	89.35	52.09	+
		家庭物质资产	家庭物质资产种类数	6.62	1.60	+
		养殖及种植	牲畜数量及种植作物种类数;牲畜数量=牛×1+驴×0.8+羊×0.6+猪×0.4+鸡×0.2;种植作物种类数包括特色林果业与日光温室种植作物	17.93	53.52	+
	金融能力	人均收入	家庭现金总收入(包括政府补贴)与总人数之比	1.18	0.79	+
		人均水资源支出	家庭灌溉及生活用水总支出与总人数之比	782.61	722.23	+
		家庭资助机会	信贷机会和可借款人数;信贷机会：0=没有,1=有	6.16	4.67	+
	劳动能力	非农就业比重	家庭非农就业人数占总人数比例	0.18	0.21	+
		弱势群体人口比重	家庭女性、大于65岁老人和小于5岁小孩人数占总人数比例	0.59	0.22	-
		男性劳动人口比重	家庭男性劳动(16~65岁)人数占总人数比例	0.41	0.18	+
	学习能力	受教育程度	家庭男性劳动力受教育程度;受教育程度：0=文盲,0.25=小学,0.5=初中或中专,0.75=高中或大专,1=大学本科及以上	1.19	0.62	+
		政策知晓度	对退耕还林还草、日光温室、“三禁”、水资源、“关井压田”、压沙造林、生态移民等政策的了解程度：0=完全不了解,0.25=不太了解,0.5=一般,0.75=比较了解,1=非常了解	4.07	1.15	+
		农业技术	农业科学技术培训机会和运用情况;培训机会：以培训次数表示;运用情况：0=未运用,1=运用	1.47	1.76	+
	社会能力	领导潜力	以家庭中村委成员数来表示	0.17	0.52	+
		社会网络	获得帮助的人数和关系网络支持度;关系网络支持度：以获得支持类型种数表示,0.25=1种,0.5=2种,0.75=3种,1=4种	0.74	0.12	+
		对周围人的信任	0.25=几乎没有,0.5=一小部分,0.75=绝大部分,1=全部	11.98	11.17	+

表1

图2

表2

表3

图3

图4

图5

图6

表4

参考文献 36

[1]	陈佳, 杨新军, 王子侨, 等. 2015. 乡村旅游社会—生态系统脆弱性及影响机理: 基于秦岭景区农户调查数据的分析[J]. 旅游学刊, 30(3): 64-75. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-5006.2015.03.007
	[Chen J, Yang X J, Wang Z Q, et al.2015. Vulnerability and influence mechanisms of rural tourism socio-ecological systems: A household survey in China’s Qinling Mountain area[J]. Tourism Tribune, 30(3): 64-75.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-5006.2015.03.007
[2]	崔胜辉, 李旋旗, 李扬, 等. 2011. 全球变化背景下的适应性研究综述[J]. 地理科学进展, 30(9): 1088-1098.
	[Cui S H, Li X Q, Li Y, et al.2011. Review on adaptation in the perspective of global change[J]. Progress in Geography, 30(9): 1088-1098.]
[3]	戴晟懋, 邱国玉, 赵明. 2008. 甘肃民勤绿洲荒漠化防治研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 25(3): 319-324.
	[Dai S M, Qiu G Y, Zhao M.2008. Study on land desertification and its prevention and control measures in the Minqin Oasis in Gansu Province[J]. Arid Zone Research, 25(3): 319-324.]
[4]	方一平, 秦大河, 丁永建. 2009. 气候变化适应性研究综述: 现状与趋向[J]. 干旱区研究, 26(3): 299-305.
	[Fang Y P, Qin D H, Ding Y J.2009. A review about the research on adaptability in climate change: Present situation and tendency[J]. Arid Zone Research, 26(3): 299-305.]
[5]	高志海, 李增元, 魏怀东, 等. 2006. 基于遥感的民勤绿洲植被覆盖变化定量监测[J]. 地理研究, 25(4): 587-595.
	[Gao Z H, Li Z Y, Wei H D, et al.2006. Quantitative monitoring of vegetation cover change by using remotely sensed data over Minqin Oasis, Gansu[J]. Geographical Research, 25(4): 587-595.]
[6]	林海明, 杜子芳. 2013. 主成分分析综合评价应该注意的问题[J]. 统计研究, 30(8): 25-31. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-4565.2013.08.004
	[Lin H M, Du Z F.2013. Some problems in comprehensive evaluation in the principal component analysis[J]. Statistical Research, 30(8): 25-31.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-4565.2013.08.004
[7]	唐嘉琪, 石培基. 2013. 民勤土地利用格局时空变化研究[J]. 中国沙漠, 33(3): 928-936. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2013.00130
	[Tang J Q, Shi P J.2013. The change of land-use pattern during 1987-2010 in Minqin, Gansu, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 33(3): 928-936.] doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2013.00130
[8]	喻忠磊, 杨新军, 杨涛. 2013. 乡村农户适应旅游发展的模式及影响机制: 以秦岭金丝峡景区为例[J]. 地理学报, 68(8): 1143-1156.
	[Yu Z L, Yang X J, Yang T.2013. Exploring conditions, determinants and mechanisms of rural households’ adaptability to tourism development: A case study of Jinsixia in Qinling Mountains[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 68(8): 1143-1156.]
[9]	张强, 姚玉璧, 李耀辉, 等. 2015. 中国西北地区干旱气象灾害监测预警与减灾技术研究进展及其展望[J]. 地球科学进展, 30(2): 196-213. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2015.02.0196
	[Zhang Q, Yao Y B, Li Y H, et al.2015. Research progress and prospect on the monitoring and early warning and mitigation technology of meteorological drought disaster in Northwest China[J]. Advances in Earth Science, 30(2): 196-213.] doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2015.02.0196
[10]	张瑞君, 段争虎, 陈小红, 等. 2012. 民勤县2000-2009年来水资源生态环境压力分析[J]. 中国沙漠, 32(2): 558-563.
	[Zhang R J, Duan Z H, Chen X H, et al.2012. Analysis of water resource ecological environment stress during 2000-2009 in Minqin County, Gansu Province, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 32(2): 558-563.]
[11]	赵雪雁, 赵海莉, 刘春芳. 2015. 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, 34(5): 922-932. doi: 10.11821/dlyj201505011
	[Zhao X Y, Zhao H L, Liu C F.2015. The farmers’ livelihood risk and their coping strategy in the downstream of Shiyang River: A case of Minqin Oasis[J]. Geographical Research, 34(5): 922-932.] doi: 10.11821/dlyj201505011
[12]	周松秀, 田亚平, 刘兰芳. 2015. 南方丘陵区农业生态系统适应能力及其驱动因子: 以衡阳盆地为例[J]. 生态学报, 35(6): 1991-2002. doi: 10.5846/stxb201305241168
	[Zhou S X, Tian Y P, Liu L F.2015. Adaptability of agricultural ecosystems in the hilly areas in southern China: A case study in Hengyang Basin[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(6): 1991-2002.] doi: 10.5846/stxb201305241168
[13]	Acosta L, Klein R J T, Reidsma P, et al.2013. A spatially explicit scenario-driven model of adaptive capacity to global change in Europe[J]. Global Environmental Change, 23(5): 1211-1224. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.03.008
[14]	Alam K.2015. Farmers’ adaptation to water scarcity in drought-prone environments: A case study of Rajshahi District, Bangladesh[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 148: 196-206. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2014.10.011
[15]	Alberini A, Chiabai A, Muehlenbachs L.2006. Using expert judgment to assess adaptive capacity to climate change: Evidence from a conjoint choice survey[J]. Global Environmental Change, 16(2): 123-144. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.001
[16]	Below T B, Mutabazi K D, Kirschke D, et al.2012. Can farmers’ adaptation to climate change be explained by socio-economic household-level variables[J]. Global Environmental Change, 22(1): 223-235.
[17]	Brooks N, Adger W N, Kelly P M.2005. The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications for adaptation[J]. Global Environmental Change, 15(2): 151-163. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.12.006
[18]	Chen H, Wang J X, Huang J K.2014. Policy support, social capital, and farmers’ adaptation to drought in China[J]. Global Environmental Change, 24: 193-202. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.11.010
[19]	Dutra L X C, Bustamante R H, Sporne I, et al.2015. Organizational drivers that strengthen adaptive capacity in the coastal zone of Australia[J]. Ocean & Coastal Management, 109: 64-76.
[20]	Engle N L.2011. Adaptive capacity and its assessment[J]. Global Environmental Change, 21(2): 647-656. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.019
[21]	Etemadi M, Karami E.2016. Organic fig growers’ adaptation and vulnerability to drought[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 124: 142-149.
[22]	Gallopín G C.2006. Linkages between vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity[J]. Global Environmental Change, 16(3): 293-303. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.004
[23]	Hinkel J.2011. “Indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity”: Towards a clarification of the science-policy interface[J]. Global Environmental Change, 21(1): 198-208.
[24]	IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2001. Climate change 2001: The science of climate change[M]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[25]	Kumar V, Vasto-Terrientes L D, Valls A, et al.2016. Adaptation strategies for water supply management in a drought prone Mediterranean river basin: Application of outranking method[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 540: 344-357. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.06.062 pmid: 26277442
[26]	Lei Y D, Zhang H L, Chen F, et al.2016. How rural land use management facilitates drought risk adaptation in a changing climate: A case study in arid Northern China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 550: 192-199.
[27]	Li Y C, Huang H P, Ju H, et al.2015. Assessing vulnerability and adaptive capacity to potential drought for winter-wheat under the RCP 8.5 scenario in the Huang-Huai-Hai Plain[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 209: 125-131. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2015.03.033
[28]	Pahl-Wostl C.2009. A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes[J]. Global Environmental Change, 19(3): 354-365. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.06.001
[29]	Panda A, Sharma U, Ninan K N, et al.2013. Adaptive capacity contributing to improved agricultural productivity at the household level: Empirical findings highlighting the importance of crop insurance[J]. Global Environmental Change, 23(4): 782-790. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.03.002
[30]	Pandey V P, Babel M S, Shrestha S, et al.2011. A framework to assess adaptive capacity of the water resources system in Nepalese River Basins[J]. Ecological Indicators, 11(2): 480-488. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.07.003
[31]	Posey J.2009. The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the municipal level: Evidence from floodplain management programs in the United States[J]. Global Environmental Change, 19(4): 482-493. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.06.003
[32]	Quiroga S, Suárez C, Solís J D.2015. Exploring coffee farmers’ awareness about climate change and water needs: Smallholders’ perceptions of adaptive capacity[J]. Environmental Science & Policy, 45: 53-66. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2014.09.007
[33]	Smit B, Wandel J.2006. Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability[J]. Global Environmental Change, 16(3): 282-292. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.008
[34]	Thulstrup A W.2015. Livelihood resilience and adaptive capacity: Tracing changes in household access to capital in central Vietnam[J]. World Development, 74: 352-362. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.019
[35]	Villagra P, Rojas C, Ohno R, et al.2014. A GIS-base exploration of the relationships between open space systems and urban form for the adaptive capacity of cities after an earthquake: The cases of two Chilean cities[J]. Applied Geography, 48: 64-78. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.01.010
[36]	Vincent K.2007. Uncertainty in adaptive capacity and the importance of scale[J]. Global Environmental Change, 17(1): 12-24. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.11.009

种类	适应行为
农业转变	采用节水技术减少用水;改变种类作物类型;改变养殖品种
社会援助	向亲友寻求帮助;银行借贷;参加社会保险
生计多样化	增加收入方式;外出打工
被动选择	减少消费;移民搬迁

类型	说明	农户数量	比例/%
单一农业转变型	只选择农业转变	35	9.67
农业主导型	选择以农业转变为主	40	11.05
工农复合型	选择兼顾农业转变和外出打工	83	22.93
务工主导型	选择以打工为主	14	3.87
被动适应型	选择社会援助和被动选择,或两者中1种适应行为	5	1.38
综合适应型	选择3种适应行为及以上	185	51.10

变量	单一农业转变型			农业主导型		工农复合型			务工主导型			被动适应型
变量	B		Exp(B)		B	Exp(B)		B	Exp(B)	B	Exp(B)	B	Exp(B)
人均“退还关压”面积	-2.163	0.115		-1.797	0.166	-2.721^*	0.066		-1.288	0.276		-4.375	0.013
家庭物质资产	-3.042^**	0.048		-0.752	0.472	-1.933^**	0.145		1.436	4.206		-5.544^*	0.004
对周围人的信任	-1.456^*	0.233		-0.800	0.449	-1.710^***	0.181		-0.732	0.481		-0.577	0.562
非农就业比重	-1.823^*	0.162		-2.950^***	0.052	1.367^*	3.924		-1.277	0.279		-1.415	0.243
社会网络	-3.691^**	0.025		-1.288	0.276	-1.390	0.249		-8.943^*	0.000		1.214	3.366
受教育程度	-0.201	0.818		-0.508	0.602	-1.815^**	0.163		-2.464	0.085		-0.539	0.583
政策知晓度	0.321	1.378		0.567	1.764	-0.519	0.595		-3.294^*	0.037		-2.317	0.099