期刊文献+

农地城市流转的外部成本测算——以仙桃市为例 被引量:10

Measurement of External Costs in Rural-urban Land Conversion Processes
原文传递
导出
摘要 本文总结了前人对农地城市流转外部成本的研究,在分析了已有文献存在问题的基础上提出农地流转外部性的内部化应在内、外部边界划分的基础上进行。结合过去的研究,将外部成本效应归并为治安状况变差、空气质量下降、噪音污染、自然景观的破坏、公共设施不足、垃圾堆积、农地产量下降7个方面。实证研究选取仙桃市近郊区4个代表性的农地流转地块作为研究样本,通过问卷调查,应用CVM、AHP等方法测算和分解了其农地流转外部成本,得到结果分别为0.6×104元(/hm2·a)、1.45×104元(/hm2·a)、1.17×104元/(hm2·a)和1.15×104元/(hm2·a);研究表明个体受农地流转外部性影响的大小主要和性别、年龄、受教育程度、政治面貌、家庭成员数量、家庭月收入等因素相关;而农地流转的外部成本大小受到区域繁华程度、土地利用类型、个体偏好等因素的影响。 The contradiction between occupying farmland for non-agricultural construction and farmland preservation receive increasing attentions in recent years.Measurement of benefits-cost in rural-urban land conversion processes would benefit policy-making.This paper aims to examine the measurement of external costs in rural-urban land.First,an extensive and comprehensive review on this topic was performed,indicating that previous studies generally fall short of: 1) without considering the externality systematically;2) confusions between the externality and non-market value;and 3) a vague definition on the boundary of external and internal parts.To address such problems,the paper defines the external costs in rural-urban land conversion,in which the land conversion external costs should be considered together with land conversion external benefits,external costs and benefits of farmland preservation,as separate 4 parts of total land conversion externality.Meanwhile,the concept of external costs should be distinguished from the non-market value.After that,the authors divided the external parts and internal parts by homogeneity areas,and separated affected areas and unaffected areas by the Loomis’ equation which is used in range estimation of public goods.The effects of external costs were generalized as 7 parts: worsening crime,deterioration of air quality,noise pollution,landscape broken,inadequacy of public facilities,accumulation of refuse and decline of farmland production.As an empirical study,data were from questionnaire surveys conducted in the urban fringe of Xiantao City,where land conversion was accelerated obviously because of being at a preliminary development phase.The willingness to pay avoiding external costs was measured with the contingent value method and oral presentation method.Then,based on the additivity assumption underlying utility functions,the total value was decomposed by the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method.Results showed that the land conversion external costs were 0.6×10^4 yuan/hm^2/year,1.45×10^4 yuan/hm^2/year,1.17×10^4 yuan/hm^2/year,and 1.16×10^4 yuan/hm^2/year,respectively,in 4 areas of the urban fringe of Xiantao City.As for effect,the most significant effect in the area which has lots of farmland decreased the farmland production,showing an aggregated weight of 91%.In the area which has almost comparable quantity of farmland and urban land,most effects are significant.In two areas which have no farmland,worsening crime (15%,14%),deterioration of air quality (23%,22%),noise pollution (17%,26%) and landscape broken (37%,26%) were major effects of externality.Invidious’ willingness to pay was impacted by gender,age,education degree,political affiliation,the number of family members and incomes.The external costs of land conversion were found to be impacted by the flourishing extent of areas,land utilization type and individual preference.
出处 《资源科学》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2010年第6期1141-1147,共7页 Resources Science
基金 国家自然科学基金项目:"农地城市流转中不同利益集团福利变化测度与福利均衡研究"(编号:70773047) 国家社会科学基金项目:"土地使用权征用制度安排与农民损失及补偿政策研究"(批准号:08BZZ026) 教育部高等学校博士点基金项目:"农地城市流转的选择价值和外部性研究"(编号:2007504020) 国土资源部基金项目:"武汉 长株潭"两型社会"实验区土地政策研究"
关键词 农地城市流转 外部成本 福利测算 仙桃市 Rural-urban land conversion External cost Welfare measurement
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1张安录,杨钢桥.美国城市化过程中农地城市流转与农地保护[J].中国农村经济,1998(11):74-80. 被引量:48
  • 2刘祥熹 庄淑芳.农地转用之选择价值与外部性效果--从农地释出宜从长计议说起[J].农业经济半年刊,1995,(58).
  • 3陈明灿.选择价值与外部成本应用于农地转用管理之研究-以云林县大碑乡为例.台湾土地金融季刊,1996,(9):129-155.
  • 4Bergstrom, John C., B.L. Dillman, John R. Stoll. Public environmental amenity benefits of private land: The case of prime agricultural land[J]. Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1985, 17( 1):139-149.
  • 5Swallow, S.K. Critical Lands Conservation with Development: Using Contingent Choice to Establish Impact Fees for Open Space [R]. Rhode Island: Department of Environmental and Natural Resource Economies, 2002.
  • 6Geoghegan, Jacqueline, Lynch, Lori, Bucholtz, Shawn J. Are Agricultural Land Preservation Programs Self-Financing? [A]. Robert J. Johnston, Stephen K. Swallow. Economics and Contemporary Land Use Policy: Development and Conservation at the Rural-Urban Fringe[R]. Washington, DC.: Resources for the Future, 2006.
  • 7宋敏.农地城市流转的外部性与社会理性决策研究[D].武汉:华中农业大学,2008.
  • 8Buchanan,James, W.C.Stubblebine. Externality[J].Economica, 1962, 29:371-384.
  • 9黄宗煌.农业生产之环境外部性的因应措施[R].农业委员会委托研究计划报告(84科技-2.27-企-24(2)),1996.
  • 10Clark,D.E. Externality effects on residential property values: The example of noise disamenities[J].Growth and Change,2006, 37 (3): 460-488.

二级参考文献24

  • 1周慧滨,左旦平.旅行成本法在我国应用中存在的几个问题[J].自然资源学报,2006,21(3):489-499. 被引量:20
  • 2谢贤政,马中.应用旅行费用法评估黄山风景区游憩价值[J].资源科学,2006,28(3):128-136. 被引量:74
  • 3蔡银莺,张安录.武汉市农地非市场价值评估[J].生态学报,2007,27(2):763-773. 被引量:50
  • 4尼科.巴克,等.增长的城市,增长的食物-都市农业之政策议题[M].北京:商务印书馆,2005.
  • 5长江日报.因地制宜尊重民意,乡村休闲游将评“星”,2006-11-23.http://zx.cjn.cn/whyw/zxdt/200611/t240763.htm.
  • 6Venkatachalam L. The contingent valuation method: a review[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2004, 24( 1 ): 89- 124.
  • 7Hotelling H. letter. In an economic study of the monetary evaluation of recreation in the national parks[M]. Washington DC: National Park Service, 1949.
  • 8Trice AH, Wood SE. Measurement of recreation benefits[J]. Land Economics, 1958, 34(2): 195- 207.
  • 9Clawson M, Knetsch JL. Economics of Outdoor Recreation[ M ]. Washington DC: Resource for Future, 1966.
  • 10黄宗煌.台湾地区国家公园之游憩效益的评估.台湾银行季刊(台湾),1990,41(3):282-304.

共引文献85

同被引文献304

引证文献10

二级引证文献46

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部