帮扶措施对山区脱贫农户生计策略选择的影响——以陇南山区为例

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2022.11.002

Abstract

Abstract:

Support measures are not only a key means to build a long-term mechanism for stable poverty eradication, but also an objective requirement to promote the effective connection between poverty eradication and rural revitalization. This study established an analytical framework for the impact of support measures on farmers' choice of livelihood strategies. Based on the household survey data, we examined the key factors that influence the choice of livelihood strategies of the rural households. The results show that: 1) Of the rural households in the Longnan mountainous area, 59.84% have enjoyed multiple support measures, among which the most common are industrial development + ecological compensation, while the most popular individual support measure is poverty alleviation by ecological compensation. 2) The livelihood strategy of the rural out-of-poverty households in the Longnan mountainous area is mainly off-farm employment, which is characterized by characteristic agricultural, non-agricultural, and diversification types. 3) The path dependence of the livelihood strategy choice of the out-of-poverty farmers is at a medium level. Farming households living in gully and valley areas, elderly farmers, and farmers with low livelihood capital endowments have a strong dependence on the path of livelihood strategy choice, and support measures have a moderating effect on them. 4) Social capital, human capital, financial capital, and location conditions have a significant impact on farmers' choice of livelihood strategies. Industrial development and e-commerce poverty alleviation interventions have a positive impact on farmers' choice of characteristic agriculture-oriented livelihood strategy, while ecological compensation and employment measures have a positive impact on farmers' choice of non-agricultural livelihood strategy. Finally, we recommended measures to optimize the livelihood strategies of farmers.

Key words: support measures, livelihood strategy, out-of-poverty farming households, path dependence, Longnan mountainous area

WANG Helin, ZHAO Xueyan. Influence of support measures on the livelihood strategy choice of out-of-poverty farming households in mountainous regions: A case study of the Longnan mountainous area[J].PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2022, 41(11): 2004-2017.

Figures/Tables 12

Fig.1

Tab.1

Fig.2

Tab.2

Description of the explanatory variables

变量		测量指标	指标说明及赋值	均值	标准差
生计资本	自然资本	耕地面积	耕地面积(hm²)	0.31	0.24
	自然资本	林地面积	林地面积(hm²)	0.30	0.87
	人力资本	劳动力数量	18~60岁家庭成年劳动力数量	3.65	1.29
	人力资本	劳动力受教育水平	大专及以上=5；高中/中专=4；初中=3；小学=2；文盲=1	3.18	1.32
	物质资本	人均住房面积	住房面积/家庭规模(m²/人)	32.21	31.54
	物质资本	耐用消费品数量	家庭拥有家用电器、交通工具、农机具的数量	8.79	3.73
	金融资本	家庭人均年收入	家庭年收入/总人数(元/人)	8976.50	5699.25
	金融资本	家庭欠债	是否有贷款或欠债? 有=1，没有=0	0.32	0.47
	社会资本	亲友关系	与亲戚朋友的关系：非常好=5；比较好=4；一般=3；比较差=2；非常差=1	3.94	0.66
	社会资本	帮助网规模	遇到困难主动帮忙的人数：非常多=5；比较多=4；一般=3；比较少=2；非常少=1	3.85	1.05
	心理资本	对未来生活的期望指数	一定会变好=5；有可能会变好=4；说不上=3；可能会变差=2；肯定会变差=1	4.08	0.82
	心理资本	面对困难或逆境的表现	非常坚强=5；比较坚强=4；一般=3；有点沮丧=2；非常沮丧=1	4.04	0.79
生计环境	自然环境	地貌	川坝河谷区=3；半山区=2；高山区=1	1.88	0.66
	自然环境	气象灾害	是否遭遇冰雹/干旱/暴雨/病虫害：否=2；是=1	1.22	0.42
	经济环境	农牧产品销售难易程度	非常容易=5；比较容易=4；一般=3；比较困难=2；非常困难=1	3.06	0.87
	经济环境	农牧产品价格波动	非常小=5；比较小=4；一般=3；比较大=2；非常大=1	2.34	0.75
	区位条件	与村主干道距离	距离主干道路距离(km)	4.20	0.79
	区位条件	距离最近集市距离	距离最近集市距离(km)	2.57	1.34
帮扶措施	产业扶贫	产业扶贫强度	对脱贫作用的大小：非常大=5；比较大=4；一般=3；比较小=2；非常小=1；未享受=0	1.73	1.89
	电商扶贫	电商扶贫强度		0.46	1.27
	旅游扶贫	旅游扶贫强度		0.36	1.14
	金融扶贫	扶贫小额贷款强度		1.14	1.14
	易地扶贫搬迁	易地扶贫搬迁强度		0.21	0.92
	就业扶贫	劳务技能培训强度		0.77	1.46
	生态补偿扶贫	生态补偿扶贫强度		2.13	1.85

Tab.2

Tab.3

Fig.3

Tab.4

Fig.4

Fig.5

Tab.5

Tab.6

Fig.6

References 35

[1]	Sun Z, Zhao L, Wang S Y, et al. Targeted poverty alleviation and households' livelihood strategy in a relation-based society: Evidence from Northeast China[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021, 18: 1747. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18041747. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18041747
[2]	李芳华, 张阳阳, 郑新业. 精准扶贫政策效果评估: 基于贫困人口微观追踪数据[J]. 经济研究, 2020, 55(8): 171-187.
	[ Li Fanghua, Zhang Yangyang, Zheng Xinye. Impact of targeted poverty alleviation: Micro tracking data of poor populations. Economic Research Journal, 2020, 55(8): 171-187. ]
[3]	李玉山, 卢敏, 朱冰洁. 多元精准扶贫政策实施与脱贫农户生计脆弱性: 基于湘鄂渝黔毗邻民族地区的经验分析[J]. 中国农村经济, 2021(5): 60-82.
	[ Li Yushan, Lu Min, Zhu Bingjie. Implementation of diversified targeted poverty alleviation policies and livelihood vulnerability of out-of-poverty farming households: An empirical analysis based on the adjacent ethnic areas of Hunan, Hubei, Chongqing and Guizhou provinces. Chinese Rural Economy, 2021(5): 60-82. ]
[4]	李晗, 陆迁. 精准扶贫与贫困家庭复原力: 基于CHFS微观数据的分析[J]. 中国农村观察, 2021(2): 28-41.
	[ Li Han, Lu Qian. Targeted poverty alleviation and poor households' resilience: An analysis based on micro data of CHFS. China Rural Survey, 2021(2): 28-41. ]
[5]	何仁伟, 李光勤, 刘邵权, 等. 可持续生计视角下中国农村贫困治理研究综述[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2017, 27(11): 69-85.
	[ He Renwei, Li Guangqin, Liu Shaoquan, et al. A literature review of China's rural poverty governance from the perspective of sustainable livelihood. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2017, 27(11): 69-85. ]
[6]	Hua X B, Yan J Z, Zhang Y L. Evaluating the role of livelihood assets in suitable livelihood strategies: Protocol for anti-poverty policy in the eastern Tibetan Plateau, China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2017, 78(7): 62-74. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.03.009
[7]	赵雪雁, 李巍, 杨培涛, 等. 生计资本对甘南高原农牧民生计活动的影响[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2011, 21(4): 111-118.
	[ Zhao Xueyan, Li Wei, Yang Peitao, et al. Impact of livelihood capital on the livelihood activities of farmers and herdsmen on Gannan Plateau. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2011, 21(4): 111-118. ]
[8]	Wang P, Yan J Z, Hua X B, et al. Determinants of livelihood choice and implications for targeted poverty reduction policies: A case study in the YNL River region, Tibetan Plateau[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2019, 101: 1055-1063. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.02.007
[9]	Yin S, Yang X J, Chen J. Adaptive behavior of farmers' livelihoods in the context of human-environment system changes[J]. Habitat International, 2020, 100: 102185. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102185. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102185
[10]	Novotny I P, Fuentes-Ponce M H, Lopez-Ridaura S, et al. Longitudinal analysis of household types and livelihood trajectories in Oaxaca, Mexico[J]. Journal of Rural Studies, 2021, 81(1): 170-181. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.10.022
[11]	马彩虹, 袁倩颖, 文琦, 等. 乡村产业发展对农户生计的影响研究: 以宁夏红寺堡区为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2021, 40(5): 784-797. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.05.006
	[ Ma Caihong, Yuan Qianying, Wen Qi, et al. Impact of agriculture industrial development on farmers' livelihood: Based on the research of four migrant villages in Hongsibu District, Ningxia. Progress in Geography, 2021, 40(5): 784-797. ]
[12]	周丽, 黎红梅, 李培. 易地扶贫搬迁农户生计资本对生计策略选择的影响: 基于湖南搬迁农户的调查[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(11): 167-175.
	[ Zhou Li, Li Hongmei, Li Pei. Impact of livelihood capital on the choice of livelihood strategy for resettled farmers: Based on the survey of resettled farmers in Hunan Province. Economic Geography, 2020, 40(11): 167-175. ]
[13]	Liu Z X, Liu L M. Characteristics and driving factors of rural livelihood transition in the east coastal region of China: A case study of suburban Shanghai[J]. Journal of Rural Studies, 2016, 43: 145-158. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.12.008
[14]	Belton B, Filipski M. Rural transformation in central Myanmar: By how much, and for whom?[J]. Journal of Rural Studies, 2019, 67: 166-176. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.02.012
[15]	Walelign S Z, Jiao X. Dynamics of rural livelihoods and environmental reliance: Empirical evidence from Nepal[J]. Forest Policy and Economics, 2017, 83: 199-209. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2017.04.008
[16]	杨伦, 刘某承, 闵庆文, 等. 农户生计策略转型及对环境的影响研究综述[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(21): 8172-8182.
	[ Yang Lun, Liu Moucheng, Min Qingwen, et al. Review of eco-environmental effect of farmers' livelihood strategy transformation. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(21): 8172-8182. ]
[17]	Gerlitz J Y, Macchi M, Brooks N, et al. The multidimensional livelihood vulnerability index: An instrument to measure livelihood vulnerability to change in the Hindu Kush Himalayas[J]. Climate and Development, 2017, 9(2): 124-140. doi: 10.1080/17565529.2016.1145099
[18]	丁建军, 冷志明. 区域贫困的地理学分析[J]. 地理学报, 2018, 73(2): 232-247. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201802003
	[ Ding Jianjun, Leng Zhiming. Regional poverty analysis in a view of geography science. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2018, 73(2): 232-247. ] doi: 10.11821/dlxb201802003
[19]	DFID. Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets[M]. London, UK: Department for International Development, 1999.
[20]	张军以, 王腊春. 乡村振兴视域下的小农户振兴解析[J]. 人文地理, 2020, 35(6): 66-75.
	[ Zhang Junyi, Wang Lachun. Analysis on small peasant household revitalization from the perspective of the rural revitalization strategy. Human Geography, 2020, 35(6): 66-75. ]
[21]	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. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2013.04.018
	[ He Renwei, Liu Shaoquan, Chen Guojie, et al. Research progress and tendency of sustainable livelihoods for peasant household in China. Progress in Geography, 2013, 32(4): 657-670. ] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2013.04.018
[22]	Deng Q Q, Li E L, Zhang P Y. Livelihood sustainability and dynamic mechanisms of rural households out of poverty: An empirical analysis of Hua County, Henan Province, China[J]. Habitat International, 2020, 99: 102160. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102160. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102160
[23]	罗翔, 李崇明, 万庆, 等. 贫困的“物以类聚”: 中国的农村空间贫困陷阱及其识别[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(10): 2460-2472.
	[ Luo Xiang, Li Chongming, Wan Qing, et al. "Birds of a feather flock together": China's rural spatial poverty trap and its identification. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020, 35(10): 2460-2472. ] doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20201012
[24]	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[J]. 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. Geographical Research, 2011, 30(4): 687-698. ] doi: 10.11821/yj2011040011
[25]	李广东, 邱道持, 王利平, 等. 生计资产差异对农户耕地保护补偿模式选择的影响: 渝西方山丘陵不同地带样点村的实证分析[J]. 地理学报, 2012, 67(4): 504-515. doi: 10.11821/xb201204007
	[ Li Guangdong, Qiu Daochi, Wang Liping, et al. Impacts of difference among livelihood assets on the choice of economic compensation pattern for farmer households farmland protection in Chongqing City. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2012, 67(4): 504-515. ] doi: 10.11821/xb201204007
[26]	刘俊, 张恒锦, 金朦朦, 等. 旅游地农户生计资本评估与生计策略选择: 以海螺沟景区为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(8): 1735-1747.
	[ Liu Jun, Zhang Hengjin, Jin Mengmeng, et al. The evaluation of households' livelihood capital and their livelihood strategies in the tourist area: A case study in Hailuogou Scenic Area. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019, 34(8): 1735-1747. ] doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20190813
[27]	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[J]. 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. ] doi: 10.11821/xb200902009
[28]	宓泽锋, 周灿, 朱菲菲, 等. 生态文明建设的路径依赖与互动关系变化: 基于2003—2015年长江经济带地级市面板数据[J]. 地理研究, 2018, 37(10): 1915-1926. doi: 10.11821/dlyj201810003
	[ Mi Zefeng, Zhou Can, Zhu Feifei, et al. The path dependence and relationship change of ecological civilization construction: Based on the panel data analysis of prefecture-level cities in the Yangtze River Economic Belt from 2003 to 2015. Geographical Research, 2018, 37(10): 1915-1926. ] doi: 10.11821/dlyj201810003
[29]	刘倩, 陈佳, 吴孔森, 等. 秦巴山集中连片特困区农户多维贫困测度与影响机理分析: 以商洛市为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2020, 39(6): 996-1012. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.06.010
	[ Liu Qian, Chen Jia, Wu Kongsen, et al. Multidimensional poverty measurement and its impact mechanism on households in the Qinling-Daba Mountains poverty area: A case of Shangluo City. Progress in Geography, 2020, 39(6): 996-1012. ] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.06.010
[30]	刘艳华, 徐勇. 扶贫模式可持续减贫效应的分析框架及机理探析[J]. 地理科学进展, 2018, 37(4): 567-578. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2018.04.012
	[ Liu Yanhua, Xu Yong. Analytical framework of sustainable poverty-reduction effect and mechanisms of anti-poverty models. Progress in Geography, 2018, 37(4): 567-578. ] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2018.04.012
[31]	苏灿, 曾刚. 演化经济地理学视角下区域新路径发展的研究评述与展望[J]. 经济地理, 2021, 41(2): 23-34.
	[ Su Can, Zeng Gang. Review on study of regional new path development from the perspective of evolutionary economic geography. Economic Geography, 2021, 41(2): 23-34. ]
[32]	Boschma R A, Frenken K. Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography[J]. Journal of Economic Geography, 2006, 6(3): 273-302. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbi022
[33]	赵雪雁, 刘江华, 王伟军, 等. 贫困山区脱贫农户的生计可持续性及生计干预: 以陇南山区为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2020, 39(6): 982-995. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.06.009
	[ Zhao Xueyan, Liu Jianghua, Wang Weijun, et al. Livelihood sustainability and livelihood intervention of out-of-poverty farming households in poor mountainous areas: A case of Longnan mountainous area. Progress in Geography, 2020, 39(6): 982-995. ] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2020.06.009
[34]	Wu Z L, Dai X H, Li B, et al. Livelihood consequences of the Grain for Green Programme across regional and household scales: A case study in the Loess Plateau[J]. Land Use Policy, 2021, 111(12): 105746. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105746. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105746
[35]	丁建军, 王璋, 余方薇, 等. 精准扶贫驱动贫困乡村重构的过程与机制: 以十八洞村为例[J]. 地理学报, 2021, 76(10): 2568-2584. doi: 10.11821/dlxb202110016
	[ Ding Jianjun, Wang Zhang, Yu Fangwei, et al. Targeted poverty alleviation drives the process and mechanism of rural reconstruction: A case study of Shibadong Village. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2021, 76(10): 2568-2584. ] doi: 10.11821/dlxb202110016

农户类型	家庭规模 /(人/户)	劳动力数量 /(人/户)	耕地面积 /hm²	劳动力受教育程度/%					人均年收入 /(元/人)
农户类型	家庭规模 /(人/户)	劳动力数量 /(人/户)	耕地面积 /hm²	文盲	小学	初中	高中/中专	大专及以上	人均年收入 /(元/人)
高山区农户	4.77	3.81	0.28	22.09	26.58	22.90	16.87	11.56	8833.31
半山区农户	4.71	3.61	0.35	15.25	31.79	26.19	16.47	10.30	8942.16
川坝河谷区农户	4.78	3.51	0.34	17.56	30.26	27.17	13.91	11.11	9154.03
全体受访户	4.74	3.65	0.31	18.30	29.54	25.42	15.75	10.99	8976.50

农户类型	划分依据		主要生计活动及收入来源	占比/%
农户类型	收入比重	劳动力主要投入方向	主要生计活动及收入来源	占比/%
传统务农型	粮食作物+牲畜养殖收入 ≥50%	农业	种植粮食作物(土豆、小麦、玉米、荞麦等)及养殖活动(牛、羊、猪、蜜蜂等)	6.04
特色务农型	经济作物收入≥50%	农业	种植经济作物(花椒、油橄榄、核桃、蔬菜等)	15.09
补贴依赖型	补贴性收入≥50%	农业	养老金/退耕还林/低保金等补贴	2.10
务工主导型	务工收入≥50%	非农业	本地及外地打工	63.52
经商主导型	经商收入≥50%	非农业	电商/个体经营等活动	2.36
均衡型	上述比重以外	农业、非农业	种植业、务工、电商、个体经营等	10.89

类型	传统务农型	特色务农型	务工主导型	非农经商主导型	补贴依赖型	均衡型
高山区	5.00	19.09	65.46	1.36	0.91	8.18
半山区	7.69	13.95	63.22	2.40	2.40	10.34
川坝河谷区	2.38	11.91	61.11	3.97	3.17	17.46
年轻家庭	8.00	18.54	55.64	1.82	1.82	14.18
中年家庭	4.65	11.75	69.67	2.46	1.91	9.56
老年家庭	3.70	17.59	64.82	2.78	2.78	8.33
全体受访户	6.04	15.09	63.52	2.36	2.10	10.89

变量	模型1	模型2
		特色务农型		务工主导型		经商主导型		补贴依赖型		均衡型
			系数		系数	exp(β)		系数	exp(β)		系数	exp(β)	系数	exp(β)	系数	exp(β)
自然资本	0.589	0.535	1.707	-4.848^***	0.008	-3.023^**	2.067E-19	1.254	3.503	0.813	2.255
人力资本	0.796^***	2.165	8.711	2.118	8.312	-0.247	0.781	-8.589^***	0.006	1.852	6.202
物质资本	0.033	2.537	12.636	-1.309	0.270	5.164	174.874	1.382	3.982	3.372	29.124
金融资本	0.333^***	-0.777	0.460	-0.342	0.710	3.672^**	0.025	-1.176	0.309	1.077^*	2.937
社会资本	0.179	-0.577	0.561	-0.992	0.371	3.923^**	0.020	-0.441	0.644	0.097	1.102
心理资本	-0.367	-2.102	0.122	1.099	3.001	3.173	23.884	3.042	20.954	-0.783	0.457
自然环境	-0.118	-0.624	0.536	-0.029	0.971	0.224	1.251	0.602	1.827	0.156	1.168
经济环境	-0.637^**	-1.469	0.230	-1.011	0.364	-3.778	0.023	-0.029	0.972	-2.409	1.129
区位条件	0.176^*	-1.378^**	0.252	0.260	1.298	3.921^***	50.439	-1.123	0.325	0.145	1.156
产业扶贫	0.067	1.134^**	3.108	-2.407^***	0.090	1.570	4.804	-0.560	0.571	-0.938	0.391
电商扶贫	0.934^***	1.624^**	0.197	-1.067^**	0.344	1.608^**	4.993	-0.418	0.658	-0.821	0.440
就业扶贫	0.551^***	0.575	1.777	1.694^**	5.442	0.694	0.462	-2.000	0.819	2.447^***	11.551
生态补偿扶贫	0.252^***	0.060	1.062	2.634^***	13.936	2.245^**	9.437	7.531^***	1.865	2.230^***	9.300
旅游扶贫	0.309^**	-3.424^***	0.033	0.193	1.213	0.089	1.093	-33.850	3.540E-15	-1.066	0.344
金融扶贫	0.280^***	-0.774	0.461	0.366	1.442	-0.778	0.462	-0.250	0.779	0.231	1.260
易地扶贫搬迁	0.448^**	-1.613	0.199	-0.324	0.723	-21.028	7.373E-10	-34.850	7.372E-16	-0.730	0.482
模型检验	调整R²=0.183	-2倍最大似然值=1362.032
模型检验	F统计值=11.661	Cox-Snell R²=0.406

变量	模型3
	特色务农型		务工主导型		经商主导型		补贴依赖型		均衡型
		系数	exp(β)		系数	exp(β)		系数	exp(β)		系数	exp(β)	系数	exp(β)
电商扶贫×路径依赖系数	-0.596	0.551	-0.988	0.372	2.408^**	11.108	-1.268	0.281	-1.274	0.280
产业扶贫×路径依赖系数	0.890	2.435	-3.256^***	0.039	0.650	1.915	-1.013	0.363	-1.148	0.371
就业扶贫×路径依赖系数	0.551	1.735	2.377^**	10.777	-0.310	0.734	0.022	1.023	2.779^***	16.097
易地扶贫搬迁×路径依赖系数	-2.207	0.110	0.801	0.449	-1.122	1.495E-48	-1.536	1.857E-60	-1.866	0.155
金融扶贫×路径依赖系数	-0.455	0.634	0.825	2.282	-1.739	0.176	0.373	1.452	0.840	0.522
生态补偿扶贫×路径依赖系数	0.557	1.745	3.964^***	52.659	1.810^*	6.113	4.255^***	68.400	2.737^***	15.439
旅游扶贫×路径依赖系数	-4.256^**	0.014	-0.097	0.907	1.209	3.352	-1536	2.077E-60	-0.838	0.433
-2倍最大似然值	1528.066
Cox-Snell R²	0.262

Influence of support measures on the livelihood strategy choice of out-of-poverty farming households in mountainous regions: A case study of the Longnan mountainous area

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 12

References 35

Related Articles 14

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	WANG Rong, ZHAO Xueyan, LAN Haixia. Evaluation of the foundation of rural revitalization in out-of-poverty mountainous areas and its influencing factors： A case study of the Longnan mountainous areas [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2022, 41(8): 1389-1402.
[2]	MA Caihong, YUAN Qianying, WEN Qi, LI Xuemei. Impact of agriculture industrial development on farmers’ livelihood:Based on the research of four migrant villages in Hongsibu District, Ningxia [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2021, 40(5): 784-797.
[3]	LI Wei, HE Canfei. Regional industrial diversification of China: Based on technological relatedness and complexity [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2021, 40(4): 620-634.
[4]	ZHAO Xueyan, LIU Jianghua, WANG Weijun, LAN Haixia, MA Pingyi, DU Yuxuan. Livelihood sustainability and livelihood intervention of out-of-poverty farming households in poor mountainous areas: A case of Longnan mountainous area [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(6): 982-995.
[5]	HE Renwei,FANG Fang,LIU Yunwei. Influence of human capital on the livelihood strategy of farming households in poor mountainous areas: A case study of Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture of Sichuan, China [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2019, 38(9): 1282-1893.
[6]	Zhengyuan ZHAO, Zhigao LIU. Review of tourist destination research in the perspective of evolutionary economic geography [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2019, 38(1): 101-110.
[7]	Qi GUO, Canfei HE. Progress of research on technological relatedness in the perspective of evolutionary economic geography [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2018, 37(2): 229-238.
[8]	Lulu JIN, Canfei HE, Yi ZHOU, Xuqian HU. Path creation in China's industrial evolution [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2017, 36(8): 974-985.
[9]	Renwei HE, Guangqin LI, Yunwei LIU, Lina LI, Fang FANG. Theoretical analysis and case study on targeted poverty alleviation based on sustainable livelihoods framework:A case study of Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2017, 36(2): 182-192.
[10]	LV Chen, SUN Wei. Impacting factors of population agglomeration areas on migration：a case study in Dongguan City [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2014, 33(5): 593-604.
[11]	Jiawei WU, Feng YUAN, Weiguo LV, Guiling WANG. Spatiotemporal change of foreign direct investment and mechanism in the Pan-Yangtze River Delta area under the global financial crisis [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2014, 33(12): 1601-1613.
[12]	TANG Qing, XU Yong, LI Yang. Assessment of farmers’sustainable livelihoods and future strategies on the Loess Plateau: Based on a survey of 1076 farmers in Yan’an City in Shaanxi Province and Guyuan City in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2013, 32(2): 161-169.
[13]	ZHANG Bailin, YANG Qingyuan, SU Kangchuan, WANG Zhaolin, FENG Yingbin. Heterogeneous households’decision on household registration transfer and farmland relinquishment: From livelihood perspective [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2013, 32(2): 170-180.
[14]	WANG Chengchao, YANG Yusheng. An Overview of Farmers’Livelihood Strategy Change and Its Effect on Land Use/Cover Change in Developing Countries [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2012, 31(6): 792-798.