贫困山区农户人力资本对生计策略的影响研究——以四川省凉山彝族自治州为例

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2019.09.002

地理科学进展 ›› 2019, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (9): 1282-1893.doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2019.09.002

贫困山区农户人力资本对生计策略的影响研究——以四川省凉山彝族自治州为例

何仁伟^1,²,方方^3,^*(),刘运伟²

^1. 北京市社会科学院市情调查研究中心,北京 100101
^2. 西昌学院资源与环境学院,四川西昌 615013
^3. 北京市社会科学院经济研究所,北京 100101

收稿日期:2019-04-25 修回日期:2019-06-27 出版日期:2019-09-28 发布日期:2019-09-25
作者简介:何仁伟(1978— ),男,重庆垫江人,博士,副研究员,研究方向为农村贫困与乡村治理。E-mail:herenweiyan@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(No.41461040);国家自然科学基金项目(No.41601176);教育部人文社科基金项目(No.13YJCZH050);教育部人文社科基金项目(No.14YJC790063);教育部人文社科基金项目(No.15YJCZH101)

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

HE Renwei^1,²,FANG Fang^3,^*(),LIU Yunwei²

^1. City Situation Survey Research Center, Beijing Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
^2. School of Resources and Environment, Xichang College, Xichang 615013, Sichuan, China
^3. Institute of Economics, Beijing Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100101, China

Received:2019-04-25 Revised:2019-06-27 Online:2019-09-28 Published:2019-09-25
Supported by:
National Natural Sciences Foundation of China(No.41461040);National Natural Sciences Foundation of China(No.41601176);Project of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education(No.13YJCZH050);Project of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education(No.14YJC790063);Project of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education(No.15YJCZH101)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

人力资本是构建农户生计的关键要素,从人力资本视角探讨农户生计选择对于推动农户生计转型、实现乡村振兴具有重要意义。论文以西南贫困山区四川省凉山彝族自治州为案例区,采用2018年508个农户样本数据,应用回归模型,估算了人力资本对农户生计策略的影响。结果表明：人力资本是山区农户生计选择的重要影响因素,不同类型人力资本对农户生计策略的影响不同,且具有明显的空间差异。教育文化、健康状况对非农生计策略的选择具有正向影响,且高山区>二半山区>河谷区,健康状况对河谷区农户生计选择影响不显著;非农技能培训对非农生计策略选择具有显著的正向影响,且高山区>二半山区>河谷区;农业技能培训对非农生计策略选择具有负向影响,且高山区<二半山区<河谷区,但其对高山区农户生计选择并不显著;青壮年劳动力倾向于选择非农生计,务农人口老龄化问题严峻,高山区表现最为突出,二半山区次之,河谷区较不明显。最后,根据研究结论,探讨了人力资本、劳动力转移与乡村发展之间辩证关系及相关政策建议。

关键词: 农户, 人力资本, 生计策略, 村庄类型, 乡村振兴, 贫困山区

Abstract:

Human capital is the key factor for building farmers' livelihoods and examining farming households' livelihood strategy is important for promoting livelihood transformation and rural revitalization. Taking Liangshan Prefecture of Sichuan Province in the mountainous area of southwest China as the case study area, this study measured the impact of human capital on farming households' livelihood strategy by using the survey data from 508 farmers in 2018 and applying regression models. The results show: human capital is an important factor of farmers' livelihood choices in mountainous areas, and different types of human capital have different impacts on farmers' livelihood strategy, with clear spatial differences. Education level and health condition have positive effects on off-farm livelihood strategy, with most significant impacts in the high mountain villages, followed by the semi-mountain villages, and health condition has no significant effect on farmers' livelihood choices in the river valley villages. Off-farm skill training has a significant positive impact on off-farm livelihood strategy choices, with most significant impact in the high mountain villages, followed by the semi-mountain and river valley villages; agricultural skill training has a negative impact on off-farm livelihood strategy choices, with most significant impact in the river valley villages, followed by the semi-mountain villages, and agricultural skill training has no significant effect on farmers' livelihood choices in the high mountain villages. Young adult labor force tend to choose off-farm livelihood, and the aging problem of farming population is getting worse, with the high mountain villages being the most significant, followed by the semi-mountain villages, and the river valley villages being less obvious. Income gaps between farm and off-farm livelihood types is the fundamental reason affecting farmers' livelihood choices, and poor rural public services and lack of development opportunity are important reasons that affect farmers' livelihood choices. Finally, based on the above conclusions, this article explored the dialectical relationship between human capitals, labor off-farm employment, and rural development and its policy implications.

Key words: farming households, human capital, livelihood strategy, village types, rural revitalization, poor mountainous areas

何仁伟,方方,刘运伟. 贫困山区农户人力资本对生计策略的影响研究——以四川省凉山彝族自治州为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2019, 38(9): 1282-1893.

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.

图/表 6

图1

表1

Tab.2

表3

表4

表5

参考文献 33

[1]	郭秀丽, 周立华, 陈勇 , 等. 2017. 典型沙漠化地区农户生计资本对生计策略的影响: 以内蒙古自治区杭锦旗为例[J]. 生态学报, 37(20):6963-6972. doi: 10.5846/stxb201607291549
	[ Guo X L, Zhou L H, Chen Y , et al. 2017. Impact of farmers' livelihood capital on livelihood strategy in a typical desertification area inthe inner mongolia autonomous region. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 37(20):6963-6972. ] doi: 10.5846/stxb201607291549
[2]	何仁伟 . 2013. 典型山区农户生计空间差异与生计选择研究: 以四川省凉山彝族自治州为例[D]. 北京: 中国科学院大学.
	[ He R W . 2013. Research on the spatial difference of farmers' livelihoods and their choice in typical mountainous areas: : A case study of Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province. Beijing, China: University of Chinese Academy of Sciences. ]
[3]	何仁伟 . 2018. 城乡融合与乡村振兴: 理论探讨、机理阐释与实现路径[J]. 地理研究, 37(11):2127-2140.
	[ He R W . 2018. Urban-rural integration and rural revitalization: Theory, mechanism and implementation. Geographical Research, 37(11):2127-2140. ]
[4]	何仁伟, 李光勤, 刘邵权 , 等. 2017. 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, 27(11) : 69-85.
	[ He R W, Li G Q, Liu S Q , et al. 2017. A literature review of China's rural poverty governance from the perspective of sustainable livelihood. China Population,Resources and Environment, 27(11):69-85. ]
[5]	何仁伟, 李光勤, 刘运伟 , 等. 2017. 基于可持续生计的精准扶贫分析方法及应用研究: 以四川凉山彝族自治州为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 36(2):182-192.
	[ He R W, Li G Q, Liu Y W , et al. 2017. Theoretical analysis and case study on targeted poverty alleviation based on sustainable livelihoods framework: A case study of Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province. Progress in Geography, 36(2):182-192. ]
[6]	何仁伟, 刘邵权, 陈国阶 , 等. 2013. 中国农户可持续生计研究进展及趋向[J]. 地理科学进展, 32(4):657-670. doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2013.04.018
	[ He R W, Liu S Q, Chen G J , et al. 2013. Research progress and tendency of sustainable livelihoods for peasant household in China. Progress in Geography, 32(4):657-670. ] doi: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2013.04.018
[7]	何仁伟, 刘邵权, 刘运伟 , 等. 2014. 典型山区农户生计资本评价及其空间格局: 以四川省凉山彝族自治州为例[J]. 山地学报, 32(6):641-651.
	[ He R W, Liu S Q, Liu Y W , et al. 2014. Evaluation and spatial distribution of farmer's livelihood capital in representative mountain areas: A case study of Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture of Sichuan, China. Mountain Research, 32(6):641-651. ]
[8]	李立娜, 何仁伟, 李平 , 等. 2018. 典型山区农户生计脆弱性及其空间差异: 以四川凉山彝族自治州为例[J]. 山地学报, 36(5):134-147.
	[ Li L N, He R W, Li P , et al. 2018. Assessment and spatial difference of peasant household's livelihood vulnerability in representative mountain areas: A case study of Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture of Sichuan, China. Mountain Research, 36(5):134-147. ]
[9]	李实, 杨修娜 . 2015. 我国农民工培训效果分析[J]. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), ( 6):35-47.
	[ Li S, Yang X N . 2015. The effect of the training for rural migrants. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Social Sciences Edition), ( 6):35-47. ]
[10]	李晓楠, 李锐, 罗邦用 . 2016. 农业技术培训和非农职业培训对农村居民收入的影响[J]. 数理统计与管理, 34(5):867-877.
	[ Li X N, Li R, Luo B Y . 2016. Effect of training on the incomeof rural households. Journal of Applied Statistics and Management, 34(5):867-877. ]
[11]	刘彦随 . 2018. 中国新时代城乡融合与乡村振兴[J]. 地理学报, 73(4):637-650.
	[ Liu Y S . 2018. Research on the urban-rural integration and rural revitalization in the new era in China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 73(4):637-650. ]
[12]	马文武, 刘虔 . 2019. 异质性收入视角下人力资本对农民减贫的作用效应研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 29(3):137-147.
	[ Ma W W, Liu Q . 2019. Research on the effect of human capital on farmers' poverty reduction from the perspective of heterogeneous income. China Population, Resources and Environment, 29(3):137-147. ]
[13]	蒙吉军, 艾木入拉, 刘洋 , 等. 2013. 农牧户可持续生计资产与生计策略的关系研究: 以鄂尔多斯市乌审旗为例[J]. 北京大学学报(自然科学版), 49(2):321-328.
	[ Meng J J, Amrulla, Liu Y , et al. 2013. Study on relationship between livelihood capital and livelihood strategy of farming and grazing households: A case of Uxin Banner in Ordos. Acta Scientiarum Naturaliumuniversitatis Pekinensis, 49(2):321-328. ]
[14]	彭小辉, 史清华 . 2018. 中国农村人口结构变化及就业选择[J]. 长安大学学报(社会科学版), 20(2):89-98.
	[ Peng X H, Shi Q H . 2018. Structure change of rural population and employment choice in China. Journal of Chang'an University (Social Science Edition), 20(2):89-98. ]
[15]	涂丽 . 2018. 生计资本、生计指数与农户的生计策略: 基于CLDS家户数据的实证分析[J]. 农村经济, ( 8):76-83.
	[ Tu L . 2018. Livelihood capital, livelihood index and farmers' livelihood strategy: An empirical analysis based on CLDS household data. Rural Economy, ( 8):76-83. ]
[16]	王美英 . 2017. 凉山连片特困地区精准扶贫实践困境与破解对策: 基于凉山布拖县的调查分析[J]. 贵州民族研究, 38(5):56-61.
	[ Wang M Y . 2017. The practice dilemma and resolution countermeasure of targeted poverty alleviation in Liangshan Contiguous Destitute Areas: Based on the investigation and analysis of Liangshan Butuo County. Guizhou Ethnic Studies, 38(5):56-61. ]
[17]	韦惠兰, 祁应军 . 2016. 农户生计资本与生计策略关系的实证分析: 以河西走廊沙化土地封禁保护区外围为例[J]. 中国沙漠, 36(2):540-548. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2015.00138
	[ Wei H L, Qi Y J . 2016. Empirical analysis of relationship between farmers' livelihood capital and livelihood strategies: A case of Hexi Corridor closing area for protection of desertified land perimeter. Journal of Desert Research, 36(2):540-548. ] doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2015.00138
[18]	俞福丽, 蒋乃华 . 2015. 健康对农民种植业收入的影响研究: 基于中国健康与营养调查数据的实证研究[J]. 农业经济问题, ( 4):66-71.
	[ Yu F L, Jiang N H . 2015. The effect of health on the income of rural residents in planting industry. Issues in Agricultural Economy, ( 4):66-71. ]
[19]	苑会娜 . 2009. 进城农民工的健康与收入: 来自北京市农民工调查的证据[J]. 管理世界, ( 5):56-66.
	[ Yuan H N . 2009. Health and income of peasant workers: Evidence from the investigation of peasant workers in Beijing. Management World, ( 5):56-66. ]
[20]	赵文娟, 杨世龙, 王潇 . 2016. 基于Logistic 回归模型的生计资本与生计策略研究: 以云南新平县干热河谷傣族地区为例[J]. 资源科学, 38(1):136-143. doi: 10.18402/resci.2016.01.15
	[ Zhao W J, Yang S L, Wang X . 2016. The relationship between livelihood capital and livelihood strategy based on logistic regression model in Xinping County of Yunnan dry-hot valley. Resources Science, 38(1):136-143. ] doi: 10.18402/resci.2016.01.15
[21]	郑长德 . 2008. 凉山彝族自治州少数民族人口变化研究[J]. 西北人口, 29(4):49-54.
	[ Zheng C D . 2008. Study in population change of ethnic minority of Yi Autonomous Prefecture of Liangshan. Northwest Population, 29(4):49-54. ]
[22]	Bhandari P B . 2013. Rural livelihood change? Household capital, community resources and livelihood transition[J]. Journal of Rural Studies, 32:126-136.
[23]	Cao M, Xu D, Xie F , et al. 2016. The influence factors analysis of households' poverty vulnerability in southwest ethnic areas of China based on the hierarchical linear model: A case study of Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture[J]. Applied Geography, 66:144-152.
[24]	Chambers R, Conway G R . 1992. Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century (IDS Discussion Paper 296)[M]. Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies.
[25]	DFID. 1999. Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets[M]. London, UK: Department for International Development.
[26]	Fang Y P, Fan J, Shen M Y , et al. 2014. Sensitivity of livelihood strategy to livelihood capital in mountain areas: Empirical analysis based on different settlements in the upper reaches of the Minjiang River, China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 38(3):225-235.
[27]	Fogel R W . 1994. Economic growth, population theory, and physiology: The bearing of long-term processes on the making of economic policy[J]. American Economic Review, 84(3):369-395.
[28]	Jan I, Khattak M K, Khan M A , et al. 2012. Factors affecting rural livelihood choices in northwest Pakistan[J]. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 28(4):681-688.
[29]	Liu Z, Chen Q, Xie H . 2018. Influence of the farmer's livelihood assets on livelihood strategies in the western mountainous area, China[J]. Sustainability, 10(3):875. doi: 10.3390/su10030875.
[30]	López R, Valdés A . 2000. Fighting rural poverty in Latin America: New evidence of the effects of education, demographics, and access to land[J]. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 49(1):197-211.
[31]	Rahut D B, Scharf M M . 2012. Non-farm employment and incomes in rural Cambodia[J]. Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, 26(2):54-71.
[32]	Wang D W, Cai F, Zhang G Q . 2010. Factors influencing migrant workers' employment and earnings: The role of dducation and training[J]. Social Sciences in China, ( 3):123-145. doi: 10.1080/02529203.2010.503078.
[33]	Xu D, Zhang J, Rasul G , et al. 2015. Household livelihood strategies and dependence on agriculture in the mountainous settlements in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China[J]. Sustainability, 7(5):4850-4869.

村落类型	主要特征	村落名称	农户样本/户	样本比例/%	非农收入比例/%	人均年纯收入/(元/人)
高山区村庄	海拔高度>2200 m,全部为彝族居民,是山区发展最落后的地带。劳动力教育文化水平和劳动技能低,生态环境脆弱,自然灾害频发,基础设施和公共服务设施落后。村庄贫困发生率约为24%。农业以传统农业和牧业为主,山区特色农业资源丰富,但开发程度低	巴久村、且木村、阿洛村、马觉村、啊吼村、则果村(喜德县6个村)	159	31.30	30.16	4301 (农为主型) 7346 (非农为主型)
二半山区村庄	海拔高度1700~2200 m,彝族与汉族杂居,社会经济在山区中处于中游水平。劳动力素质、交通、公共服务等比高山区略好,但仍远远落后于河谷区。村庄贫困发生率约为11.5%。农业以传统农业为主,适宜于种植烤烟、核桃等经济作物	田坝村、店子村、沙坝村、迫夫村、波罗村、三联村(冕宁县6个村)	174	34.25	41.50	6687 (农为主型) 13308 (非农为主型)
河谷区村庄	海拔高度<1700 m,全部为汉族居民,是山区社会经济发展的精华地带。劳动力素质、交通、公共服务、市场意识等在3个村庄类型中最佳。村庄中贫困发生率低于1%。农业资源禀赋佳,现代农业初具雏形,葡萄、洋葱、石榴等经济作物已基本实现专业化生产	凤凰村、柏枝村、新华村、安宁村、鹿马村、大德村(西昌市6个村)	175	34.45	57.26	20107 (农为主型) 19967 (非农为主型)
总体	—	—	508	100	43.38	11963

变量		单位	变量说明	最小值	最大值	平均值	标准误
生计策略	LS_Type	-	农户生计类型	0	1	0.48	0.50
	Income_Rto	%	非农收入占生产性总收入的比例	0	99.00	43.38	27.91
人力资本	education	a	劳动力(16~60岁)平均受教育年限	0.50	11.50	5.70	2.83
	health	-	劳动力平均健康状况	1	5	4.19	0.74
	training1	%	参加过非农培训的技能劳动力比例	0	100	22.89	25.57
	training2	%	参加农业技能培训的劳动力比例	0	100	15.05	27.64
	laborage	-	家庭劳动力平均年龄	25	65	41.98	8.93
	laborage²	-	家庭劳动力平均年龄的平方	625	4225	1841.73	811.80
社会资本	spending	元	亲戚、朋友人情往来支出	50	6800	1479	994
	FPC	-	参加农民专业合作社情况	0	1	0.31	0.47
金融资本	cashincome	万元	家庭年人均现金收入	0.14	6.35	1.36	1.03
自然资本	arableland	hm²	人均耕地面积	0.03	0.44	0.11	0.07
	forestland	hm²	人均林地面积	0	0.68	0.26	0.22
物质资本	fixassets	万元	家庭固定资产市场价值	1.58	33.50	7.76	5.68
村庄特征/村庄可达性	dis	km	村庄到县城的交通距离	11.80	56.60	32.67	13.66
	time_dis	h	村庄到县城的时间距离	0.32	4.01	1.23	0.88
	altitude	m	村庄平均海拔高度	1470	3102	2022.87	479.83

解释变量	被解释变量： LS_type (生计类型)
解释变量	Logit(1)	Logit(2)	Logit(3)	Logit(4)	Logit(5)	Probit(6)
education	0.364^***	-	-	-	0.287^**	0.198^**
	(0.083)	-	-	-	(0.132)	(0.087)
health	-	0.752^*	-	-	0.685^*	0.634^*
	-	(0.427)	-	-	(0.363)	(0.341)
training1	-	-	1.012^***	-	0.968^***	0.865^***
	-	-	(0.34)	-	(0.316)	(0.273)
training2	-	-	-0.305^*	-	0.446^*	0.415^*
	-	-	(0.157)	-	(0.276)	(0.228)
laborage	-	-	-	0.973^**	0.897^**	0.848^**
	-	-	-	(0.412)	(0.435)	(0.359)
laborage²	-	-	-	-0.003^*	-0.005^*	-0.004^*
	-	-	-	(0.001)	(0.002)	(0.002)
spending	0.008^**	0.007^**	0.009^**	0.008^**	0.011^**	0.009^**
	(0.004)	(0.003)	(0.004)	(0.004)	(0.005)	(0.004)
FPC	-0.825	-0.725	-0.783	-0.764	-0.664	-0.565
	(0.521)	(0.558)	(0.524)	(0.589)	(0.456)	(0.395)
cashincome	0.198^**	0.154^**	0.165^**	0.162^**	0.158^**	0.107^**
	(0.071)	(0.069)	(0.067)	(0.068)	(0.076)	(0.045)
arableland	-0.799^**	-0.837^**	-0.632^**	-0.735^**	-0.838^**	-0.468^**
	(0.331)	(0.352)	(0.264)	(0.332)	(0.399)	(0.202)
forestland	-0.048	-0.125	-0.010	-0.074	-0.138	-0.062
	(0.119)	(0.127)	(0.119)	(0.131)	(0.142)	(0.078)
fixassets	-0.105	-0.102	-0.111	-0.175	-0.238	-0.120
	(0.24)	(0.153)	(0.149)	(0.203)	(0.256)	(0.129)
dis	-0.003^*	-0.004^*	-0.003^*	-0.003^*	-0.002^*	-0.002^*
	(0.002)	(0.002)	(0.002)	(0.002)	(0.001)	(0.001)
time_dis	-0.093^*	-0.017^*	-0.075^*	-0.131^*	-0.186^*	-0.065^*
	(0.051)	(0.010)	(0.039)	(0.002)	(0.010)	-0.037)
altitude	-0.001^**	-0.001^**	-0.001^**	-0.001^**	-0.001^**	-0.001^**
	(<0.001)	(<0.001)	(<0.001)	(<0.001)	(<0.001)	(<0.001)
常数项	-12.725^***	-11.768^***	-10.889^***	-9.879^**	-11.124^***	-10.075^***
	(1.625)	(1.305)	(1.449)	(1.291)	(1.521)	(1.720)
N	508	508	508	508	508	508
Pseudo R²	0.421	0.415	0.413	0.431	0.534	0.542
chi2	132.348	136.742	154.717	146.118	131.008	172.613

解释变量	被解释变量： LS_type (生计类型)
	高山区村庄		二半山区村庄		河谷区村庄
	Logit(1)	Probit(2)	Logit(3)	Probit(4)	Logit(5)	Probit(6)
education	0.423^***	0.378^***	0.295^**	0.234^**	0.237^*	0.165^*
	(0.136)	(0.121)	(0.143)	(0.107)	(0.132)	(0.097)
health	0.965^**	0.874^**	0.725^*	0.654^*	0.563	0.494
	(0.459)	(0.431)	(0.414)	(0.361)	(0.515)	(0.457)
training1	1.328^***	1.205^***	0.978^***	0.875^***	0.768^***	0.665^***
	(0.316)	(0.273)	(0.316)	(0.273)	(0.276)	(0.223)
training2	-0.256	-0.227	-0.454^*	-0.437^*	-0.576^**	-0.549^**
	(0.272)	(0.243)	(0.246)	(0.238)	(0.267)	(0.258)
laborage	1.084^***	0.961^***	0.927^**	0.873^**	0.759^*	0.718^*
	(0.345)	(0.339)	(0.415)	(0.398)	(0.435)	(0.379)
laborage²	-0.008^**	-0.007^**	-0.006^**	-0.005^**	-0.005^*	-0.004^*
	(0.004)	(0.003)	(0.003)	(0.002)	(0.003)	(0.002)
FPC	-0.543	-0.472	-0.679	-0.587	-0.728^**	-0.634^**
	(0.836)	(0.787)	(0.462)	(0.434)	(0.336)	(0.317)
常数项、其他控制变量	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
N	159	159	174	174	175	175
Pseudo R²	0.445	0.459	0.274	0.265	0.646	0.637
chi2	64.21	78.523	23.59	30.693	28.569	33.353

解释变量	被解释变量： Income_Rto(非农收入比例)
解释变量	总样本(1)	高山区村庄(2)	二半山区村庄(3)	河谷区村庄(4)
education	0.023^**	0.061^***	0.019^**	0.017^*
	(0.011)	(0.018)	(0.008)	(0.009)
health	0.074^*	0.134^**	0.084^*	0.046
	(0.040)	(0.066)	(0.049)	(0.082)
training1	0.243^***	0.287^***	0.253^***	0.198^***
	(0.057)	(0.065)	(0.078)	(0.064)
training2	0.132^*	0.092	0.128^*	0.181^***
	(0.073)	(0.108)	(0.071)	(0.032)
laborage	0.044^**	0.020^***	0.029^***	0.103^*
	(0.028)	(0.006)	(0.010)	(0.057)
laborage²	-0.002^**	-0.003^***	-0.002^**	-0.002^*
	(0.001)	(0.001)	(0.001)	(0.001)
spending	0.064^**	0.052^**	0.034^**	0.081^*
	(0.029)	(0.024)	(0.014)	(0.044)
FPC	-0.055	-0.007	0.038	-0.072^***
	(0.057)	(0.038)	(0.031)	(-0.033)
cashincome	0.003^*	0.004^*	0.006^**	0.003
	(0.001)	(0.002)	(0.003)	(0.018)
forestland	0.007	0.016	0.009	0.004
	(0.008)	(0.013)	(0.012)	(0.067)
arableland	-0.047^**	-0.038^**	-0.052^**	-0.058^**
	(0.022)	(0.015)	(0.024)	(0.028)
fixassets	-0.025	-0.048	-0.037	-0.009
	(-0.026)	(-0.078)	(-0.40)	(-0.031)
dis	-0.0005^*	-0.002^*	-0.003^*	-0.058^*
	(0.003)	(0.001)	(0.002)	(0.032)
time_dis	-0.011^*	0.014^*	0.086^*	0.246^*
	(0.006)	(0.008)	(0.052)	(0.015)
altitude	-0.001^**	-0.001^**	-0.001^**	0.001^**
	(<0.001)	(<0.001)	(<0.001)	(<0.001)
常数项	-0.816^***	-0.352^*	-0.694^*	-1.967^***
	(0.216)	(0.183)	(0.402)	(0.614)
N	496	147	174	175
R²	0.633	0.746	0.752	0.768
F	49.356	68.582	44.790	46.437

贫困山区农户人力资本对生计策略的影响研究——以四川省凉山彝族自治州为例

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

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 33

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	汤礼莎, 龙花楼, 周贵鹏, 戈大专, 杨嘉艺. 中国农业地理学研究进程与展望[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(9): 1853-1868.
[2]	唐承财, 秦珊, 戴湘毅, 吕君. 文化和旅游视域下中国乡村振兴研究评述与展望[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(8): 1437-1452.
[3]	赵秋皓, 金平斌, 王冰冰, 徐鹏飞. 基于多源数据与机器学习的乡村旅游竞争力评价研究——以杭州市临安区为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(8): 1541-1555.
[4]	刘美新, 蔡晓梅, 黄凯洁. 乡村文化治理视角下当代祠堂空间的再生产——广东案例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(8): 1597-1608.
[5]	洪惠坤, 蔡智聪, 廖和平, 王刚, 刘亭. 共轭视角下重庆市县域乡村“居住—就业”协同发展格局及振兴路径[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(6): 1098-1111.
[6]	项慧燕, 何峰, 周国华, 邹明霞. 传统村落旅游地农户可持续生计评价及实证研究——以湖南省郴州市4个典型传统村落为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(5): 884-897.
[7]	罗婉璐, 王武林, 林珍, 周伟健. 中国城乡融合时空演化及驱动因素[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(4): 629-643.
[8]	潘卓, 李玉恒, 刘愿理, 廖和平, 朱琳. 深度贫困地区农户脱贫稳定性测度及影响机理研究[J]. 地理科学进展, 2022, 41(8): 1378-1388.
[9]	王蓉, 赵雪雁, 兰海霞. 脱贫山区乡村振兴基础水平评价及其影响因素——以陇南山区为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2022, 41(8): 1389-1402.
[10]	张春燕, 资明贵, 周梦, 罗静. 乡村旅游融合性测度及其影响因素研究——以大别山区潜山市为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2022, 41(4): 595-608.
[11]	朱乾坤, 乔家君, 韩冬, 辛向阳. 河南省专业村空间格局与集聚测度[J]. 地理科学进展, 2022, 41(3): 396-408.
[12]	肖亮, 苏黎馨, 冯长春, 郑树杰. 国外乡村地理关系研究范式进展与启示[J]. 地理科学进展, 2022, 41(2): 330-340.
[13]	王鹤霖, 赵雪雁. 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[J]. 地理科学进展, 2022, 41(11): 2004-2017.
[14]	郭芬, 金建君, 张晨阳, 何睿, 邱欣. 农户保护性耕作技术采纳行为及其影响因素研究综述[J]. 地理科学进展, 2022, 41(11): 2165-2177.
[15]	罗庆, 陈思旖, 王艺霏, 李孟林. 贫困山区乡村发展类型识别及振兴路径研究——以河南省栾川县为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2022, 41(10): 1783-1794.