| 摘要: |
| 秸秆还田作为目前秸秆资源化利用的主要方式之一，它有增加土壤有机质、改善土壤质量、提升作物产量等作用，同时还有保护生态环境、减少农业面源污染等功效。但秸秆还田所带来的成本增加，在某种程度上影响了农户秸秆还田的积极性，因此，给予农户一定补贴等激励措施势在必行。文章以玉米秸秆还田为例，基于河北、山东两省的农户调查数据，分析两个地区农户玉米秸秆的利用状况，在此基础上研究农户秸秆直接还田受偿意愿的影响因素。结果表明，农户受访者年龄、秸秆还田是否增加成本、秸秆还田增加的费用是否由政府承担、秸秆焚烧查处力度是否强、与秸秆不还田相比秸秆还田增加的费用这5个因素对农户秸秆还田受偿意愿有着显著的正向影响，而受访者是否是村干部和秸秆还田是否改善土壤质量这两个因素对农户秸秆还田受偿意愿有着显著的负向影响。 |
| 关键词: 秸秆还田 条件价值评估法 受偿意愿 排序选择模型 |
| DOI：10.7621/cjarrp.1005-9121.20160713 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目: |
|
| ANALYSIS OF THE WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT FOR MAIZE STRAW RETURNEDTO FIELD——BASED ON FARMER′S SURVEY IN HEBEI AND SHANDONG PROVINC |
|
Yin Changbin1, Huang Xianlei1, Zhao Junwei1, Cheng Leilei2, Chang Zhizhou3, Chien Hsiaoping4
|
|
1.Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning，Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences，Beijing 100081, China;2.Institute of Desertification Studies，Chinese Academy of Forestry，Beijing 100091, China;3.Institute of agricultural resources and environment, Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanjing 210014, China;4.Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences, Tsukuba 305-8686, Japan
|
| Abstract: |
| Agricultural straw returned to field as one of the main ways of straw resource utilization is useful for adding organic carbon of soil, improving the quality of the soil and increasing grain productivity, and is also beneficial to protect environment and solve agricultural non-point source pollution.But the increase of the cost affects the enthusiasm of the farmers for agricultural straw returned to field. Therefore, it is necessary to make the stimulation system for the farmers. Based on the farmer′s survey in Hebei and Shandong province, this paper analyzed the utilization status of the maize straw, and then explored correlative factors that affected farmers′ willingness to accept the concept of maize straw returned to field. The result showed that there were obvious positive and negative factors influencing the farmers′ willingness to accept the maize straw returned to field. The positive factors included the age of farmers, the possible extra-cost, whether the extra-cost being covered by the government, the punishment′s intensity of burning straw and the increased cost of straw recycling contrasted with not recycling straw. The negative factors included whether the farmers were village cadres and whether straw returning to field can improve the soil quality. |
| Key words: agricultural straw returned to field contingent valuation method(CVM) willingness To accept(WTA) orderedchoice mode |
