长江流域生态退捕渔民生计脆弱性评价及生计风险预测

Livelihood vulnerability assessment and risk prediction for fishermen of ecological fish withdrawal in the Yangtze River Basin

渔民作为长江十年禁渔的参与主体,其后续生计发展将直接决定此生态保护政策的实施成效。在重构非自愿生态移民生计脆弱性评价体系的基础上,结合长江流域重点禁渔水域典型退捕渔民的抽样数据,测度渔民生计脆弱性指数(LVI)并找出影响后续生计恢复的主要障碍因子,最后跨领域的引入支持向量回归(SVR)预测模型动态分析了不同区域渔户生计脆弱性的演变趋势。结果表明:(1)渔民弃船上岸后呈现出生计脆弱性的比例较高,但不同类型区域间存在明显差异,其中内湖保护区最高,干流非保护区次之而干流保护区最低;(2)敏感性维度在诱发渔民生计脆弱性上起着主导作用,即个体禀赋比安置区条件更为重要,特别是成员年龄大但无基本社保兜底,受教育程度低且“双转”难的渔民家庭更易陷入生计困境;(3)自然和金融资本是推动渔民生计恢复的主要生计资本,而阻碍渔民生计脆弱性降低的共性因子主要有上岸后的收支失衡,社会支持不足及过分依赖原有生计方式等,同时各区域在脆弱性各维度上还有特殊的障碍因子;(4)推动安置区经济社会发展和家庭转产增收后,并不一定能确保缓解未来五年中的渔户生计脆弱性程度,上岸后完成社会融入并有效降低生产生活成本也至关重要,而干流保护区则还需加强人力资本建设,否则后续将面临极高的返贫风险;(5)长江临近区域的同类渔民生计脆弱性现状、面临的生计风险、后续生计恢复的进程具有一定的相似性和规律性,生计监测和帮扶政策可进行协同统筹。

As the main participants of the ten years fishing ban policy in the Yangtze River,the subsequent livelihood development of fishermen will directly determine the implementation effect of the ecological protection policy.Based on the reconstruction of the livelihood vulnerability assessment system of involuntary ecological migrants and combined with the survey data of fishermen who have quit fishing to the key no⁃fishing waters of the Yangtze River Basin,the Livelihood vulnerability index(LVI)level of fishermen was measured,and the main obstacle factors affecting the subsequent livelihood recovery were identified.Finally,the cross⁃domain support vector regression(SVR)model prediction model was introduced to analyze the dynamic evolution trend of livelihood vulnerability of fishermen households in different regions.The results showed that:(1)the proportion of livelihood vulnerability of fishermen after abandoning their boats was high.Still,there were significant differences among different regions,among which the inner lake protected area was the highest,followed by the main stream non⁃reserve zone.The main stream⁃reserve zone was the lowest.(2)The sensitivity dimension played a leading role in inducing fishermen′s livelihood vulnerability,suggesting that the individual endowment was more important than the conditions of resettlement areas.In particular,fishermen families with older members but no basic social security,low education level and difficult“double transfer”were more likely to fall into livelihood difficulties.(3)The natural and financial capital were the main livelihood capital to promote the recovery of fishermen′s livelihood.The common factors that hindered the reduction of fishermen′s livelihood vulnerability included the imbalance of income and expenditure after landing,insufficient social support and excessive dependence on the original livelihood,etc.At the same time,there were special obstacle factors in each dimension of vulnerability in each region.(4)The promotion of economic and social development and household income transformation in resettlement areas does not necessarily ensure the alleviation of livelihood vulnerability of fishermen households in the next five years.It is also crucial to complete social integration and effectively reduce production and living costs after migration.In addition,the main stream reserve zone need to strengthen the construction of human capital,otherwise they will face a very high risk of returning to poverty.(5)The livelihood vulnerability status,livelihood risks and subsequent livelihood recovery process of similar fishermen in the area near the Yangtze River had certain similarities and regularity,and livelihood monitoring and support policies could be overall planned and coordinated.