地理科学进展 ›› 2016, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (5): 644-654.doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2016.05.011

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

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

尹莎(), 陈佳, 吴孔森, 杨新军*()   

  1. 西北大学城市与环境学院,西安 710127
  • 接受日期:2016-01-01 出版日期:2016-05-27 发布日期:2016-05-27
  • 通讯作者: 杨新军 E-mail:jennifer_yinsha@126.com;yangxj@nwu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:

    作者简介:尹莎(1992-),女,湖南衡阳人,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为人地系统适应性和农村可持续发展,E-mail: jennifer_yinsha@126.com

  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(41571163);

Adaptation of farming households under drought stress:Based on a survey in the Minqin Oasis

Sha YIN, Jia CHEN, Kongsen WU, Xinjun YANG*()   

  1. College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, China
  • Accepted:2016-01-01 Online:2016-05-27 Published:2016-05-27
  • Contact: Xinjun YANG E-mail:jennifer_yinsha@126.com;yangxj@nwu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.41571163

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