多情景下耕地生态效益支付和受偿意愿特征分析

牛海鹏; 高汉琦

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.02.040

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

多情景下耕地生态效益支付和受偿意愿特征分析

试验研究

- 多情景下耕地生态效益支付和受偿意愿特征分析
- Characteristics of Cultivated Land Ecological Benefits Willingness to Pay and to Accept Based on Multiple Scenarios
- 水土保持通报 2015年35卷第2期页码：205-212
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 河南理工大学测绘与国土信息工程学院,河南,焦作,454000
  2. 河南理工大学土地经济与区域可持续发展研究中心,河南,焦作,454000
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目"基于外部性多层次边界视角的粮食主产区耕地保护经济补偿及效应"(41371524);教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目(11YJC790139);中国博士后科学基金(2013M530337);河南省高等学校哲学社会科学研究优秀学者资助项目(2014-YXXZ-34)
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.02.040
  中图分类号：
- 纸质出版：2015
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
牛海鹏, 高汉琦. 多情景下耕地生态效益支付和受偿意愿特征分析[J]. 水土保持通报, 2015,35(2):205-212.

NIU Haipeng, GAO Hanqi. Characteristics of Cultivated Land Ecological Benefits Willingness to Pay and to Accept Based on Multiple Scenarios[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2015, 35(2): 205-212.
牛海鹏, 高汉琦. 多情景下耕地生态效益支付和受偿意愿特征分析[J]. 水土保持通报, 2015,35(2):205-212. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.02.040.

NIU Haipeng, GAO Hanqi. Characteristics of Cultivated Land Ecological Benefits Willingness to Pay and to Accept Based on Multiple Scenarios[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2015, 35(2): 205-212. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.02.040.

摘要

[目的] 分析耕地生态效益支付意愿(WTP)和受偿意愿(WTA)的不对称性与差异性

为耕地生态效益表征指标的选取提供依据。[方法] 以焦作市耕地生态效益测算为例

在多情景下

基于条件价值评估法(contingent valuation method

CVM)开展研究。[结果] (1)WTP和WTA具有选择的差异性。在不同情景下

农户和城镇居民的受偿意愿均高于其支付意愿;(2)WTP和WTA具有分布的差异性。在不同情景下

WTP累积概率分布曲线明显位于WTA累积概率分布曲线上方;(3)WTP和WTA具有离散程度的不对称

WTA的离散程度明显高于WTP的离散程度

受访者对WTP的支付区间小于WTA的受偿区间;(4)WTP和WTA比值具有不对称性。受访城镇居民在不同情景下的WTA与WTP比值一般小于农户在不同情景下的WTA与WTP比值。[结论] 结合不同情景下WTP和WTA不对称性与差异性

依据持有效应、耕地生态效益的非唯一性、WTA/WTP波动的差异性

可选取WTP作为CVM多情景下耕地生态效益测算的表征指标。

Abstract

[Objective] This paper presented the asymmetry and dissimilarity of willingness to pay(WTP) and willingness to accept(WTA) in order to provide selective advices for measuring indicators of cultivated land ecological benefits.[Methods] Taking the ecological benefits measurement of cultivated lands in Jiaozuo City as an example

multiple scenarios CVM was adopted.[Results] (1) WTP and WTA have selection dissimilarity. In different scenarios

WTA of farmer households and town residents is higher than WTP; (2) WTP and WTA have distribution dissimilarity. In different scenarios

the cumulative probability distribution curves of WTP are significantly above WTA; (3) WTP and WTA have asymmetry on the degree of dispersion. The dispersion degree of WTA is significantly higher than WTP

and the pay-interval of WTA is larger than the repay-interval of WTP; (4) The ratio of WTP and WTA has asymmetry. In different scenarios

the farmer households' ratio of WTP and WTA is larger than the town residents'

which shows town residents are more reasonable than farmer households when consumed.[Conclusion] According to holding effect

non-uniqueness of the cultivated land ecological benefits and fluctuating dissimilarity of the ratio of WTP and WTA

this research chooses WTP as the cultivated land ecological benefits measurement indicator based on the asymmetry and dissimilarity of WTP and WTA under three scenarios.

关键词

Keywords

references

张翼飞.城市内河生态系统服务的意愿价值评估:CVM有效性可靠性研究的视角[D].上海:复旦大学,2008.

赵军,杨凯,刘兰岚,等.环境与生态系统服务价值的WTA/WTP不对称[J].环境科学学报,2007,27(5):854-860.

赵军.生态系统服务的条件价值评估:理论、方法与应用[D].上海:华东师范大学,2005.

韩智霞.初探WTA/WTP不对称的动力机制[D].福建福州:福建师范大学,2010.

刘亚萍.生态旅游区游憩资源经济价值评价研究[D].湖南长沙:中南林业科技大学,2007.

王瑞雪.耕地非市场价值评估理论方法与实践[D].湖北武汉:华中农业大学,2005.

李金平,王志石.空气污染损害价值的WTP、WTA对比研究[J].地球科学进展,2006,21(3):250-255.

徐大伟,刘春燕,常亮. 流域生态补偿意愿的WTP 与WTA 差异性研究:基于辽河中游地区居民的CVM 调查[J]. 自然资源学报,2013,28(3):402-409.

Willig R D. Consumer's surplus without apology[J].The American Economic Review, 1976,66(4):589-597.

Hanemann W M. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept:How much can they differ?[J]. American Economic Review, 1991,81(3):635-647.

Coursey D L, Hovis J L, Schulze W D. The disparity between willingness to accept and willingness to pay measures of value[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1987, 102(3):679-690.

Horowitz J K, McConnell K E. A review of WTA/WTP studies[J]. Journal of Environmental Economic and Management, 2002,44(3):426-447.

牛海鹏,张安录.耕地保护的外部性及其测算:以河南省焦作市为例[J].资源科学,2009,31(8):1400-1408.

陈琳,欧阳志云,王效科,等.条件价值评估法在非市场价值评估中的应用[J].生态学报,2006,26(2):610-619.

Loomis J B, Walsh R G. Recreation Economic Decisions, Comparing Benefits and Costs[M]. Pennsylvania:Venture Publishing, Inc,1997.

Freeman A M. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values:Theory and Method[M]. Beijing:China Renmin University Press,1993.

Horowitz J K, McConnell K E. Willingness to accept, willingness to pay and the income effect[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2003,51(4):537-545.

Arrow K, Solow R, Portney P R, et al. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation[M]. Washington D C:Resources for the Future, 1993.

崔相宝,苗建军.条件价值评估:一种非市场的价值评估技术[J].武汉理工大学学报:社会科学版,2005,18(6):802-807.

徐赫.基于CVM与TCM的城市滨水空间游憩价值评估研究[D].浙江杭州:浙江大学,2010.

阮氏春香.森林生态旅游非使用价值的CVM有效性研究[D].江苏南京:南京林业大学,2011.

浏览量

1326

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

赤水市水土保持生态修复工程生态效益评价研究

小流域坡耕地治理措施及生态效益研究

中国退耕还林生态效益监测网络构建方法

黔中喀斯特城市新区森林生态系统水土保持及其生态效益

河北省山地森林保土生态效益计量研究