Human-environment relationship is a focus of academic researches and an understanding of the rela- tionship is important for making effective policies and decisions. In this study, based on rural household survey data...Human-environment relationship is a focus of academic researches and an understanding of the rela- tionship is important for making effective policies and decisions. In this study, based on rural household survey data of Taibus Banner, Duolun county and Zhengxiangbai Banner in the Inner Mongolia autonomous region of China, we identified the impact of livelihood diversification on ecosystems in these agro-pastoral areas by using the ecological footprint theory and methodology together with the one-way analysis of variance （ANOVA） and correlation analysis methods. In 2011, the total ecological footprint of consumption （EFC） was 0.665 g hm2, and the total ecological footprint of production （EFP） was 2.045 g hm2, which was more than three times the EFC. The ecological footprint of arable land consumption （EFAC） accounted for a large proportion of the EFC, and the ecological footprint of grassland production （EFGP） occupied a large proportion of the EFP. Both the ecological footprint of grassland consumption （EFGC） and EFGP had a significant positive correlation with the income, indicating that income was mainly depended on livestock production and the households with higher incomes consumed more livestock prod- ucts. The full-time farming households （FTFHs） had the highest EFP, ecological footprint of arable land production （EFAP）, EFGP and EFGC, followed by the part-time farming households （PTFHs） and non-farming households （NFHs）, which indicated that part-time farming and non-farming employment reduced the occupancy and con- sumption of rural households on local ecosystems and natural resources to some extent. When farming households engaged in livestock rearing, both the EFAP and EFAC became smaller, while the EFP, EFC, EFGC and EFGP increased significantly. The differences in ecological footprints among different household groups should be taken into account when making ecosystem conservation policies. Encouraging the laborers who have the advantages of participating in non-farming employment to move out of the rural areas and increasing the diversification of liveli- hoods of rural households are important in reducing the environmental pressures and improving the welfare of households in the study area. Moreover, grassland should be utilized more effectively in the future.展开更多
From subject,object and target subsystems,we analyze the rural human resource development system.The subject system includes government,education and training organizations,society,and rural human resource itself.Diff...From subject,object and target subsystems,we analyze the rural human resource development system.The subject system includes government,education and training organizations,society,and rural human resource itself.Different development subject bears different responsibility.Object system includes farmers engaged in farming,farmer workers,rural unemployed people,rural students,rural left-behind people,and other people in rural areas.Different development object has different features.Development target system includes raising quality of rural human resource,keeping reasonable population size,optimizing structure of rural human resource,and improving vitality of rural human resource,etc.展开更多
基金supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41161140352, 41471092)
文摘Human-environment relationship is a focus of academic researches and an understanding of the rela- tionship is important for making effective policies and decisions. In this study, based on rural household survey data of Taibus Banner, Duolun county and Zhengxiangbai Banner in the Inner Mongolia autonomous region of China, we identified the impact of livelihood diversification on ecosystems in these agro-pastoral areas by using the ecological footprint theory and methodology together with the one-way analysis of variance （ANOVA） and correlation analysis methods. In 2011, the total ecological footprint of consumption （EFC） was 0.665 g hm2, and the total ecological footprint of production （EFP） was 2.045 g hm2, which was more than three times the EFC. The ecological footprint of arable land consumption （EFAC） accounted for a large proportion of the EFC, and the ecological footprint of grassland production （EFGP） occupied a large proportion of the EFP. Both the ecological footprint of grassland consumption （EFGC） and EFGP had a significant positive correlation with the income, indicating that income was mainly depended on livestock production and the households with higher incomes consumed more livestock prod- ucts. The full-time farming households （FTFHs） had the highest EFP, ecological footprint of arable land production （EFAP）, EFGP and EFGC, followed by the part-time farming households （PTFHs） and non-farming households （NFHs）, which indicated that part-time farming and non-farming employment reduced the occupancy and con- sumption of rural households on local ecosystems and natural resources to some extent. When farming households engaged in livestock rearing, both the EFAP and EFAC became smaller, while the EFP, EFC, EFGC and EFGP increased significantly. The differences in ecological footprints among different household groups should be taken into account when making ecosystem conservation policies. Encouraging the laborers who have the advantages of participating in non-farming employment to move out of the rural areas and increasing the diversification of liveli- hoods of rural households are important in reducing the environmental pressures and improving the welfare of households in the study area. Moreover, grassland should be utilized more effectively in the future.
基金Supported by Project of National Social Science Foundation(09XMZ055)General Program of Scientific Research Project of Guangxi Provincial Department of Education (200911MS104)
文摘From subject,object and target subsystems,we analyze the rural human resource development system.The subject system includes government,education and training organizations,society,and rural human resource itself.Different development subject bears different responsibility.Object system includes farmers engaged in farming,farmer workers,rural unemployed people,rural students,rural left-behind people,and other people in rural areas.Different development object has different features.Development target system includes raising quality of rural human resource,keeping reasonable population size,optimizing structure of rural human resource,and improving vitality of rural human resource,etc.
