|其他摘要||Microcosmic mechanism research on household's livelihood is an urgent for sustainable development in rural region in China, as well as is an key issue for the coordinated development among farmers’ income, farming and animal husbandry development and rural ecological environment protection. Aiming to restore the ecological service functions of ecosystem, China launched pastureland rehabilitation and cultivated land reforestation projects in agro-pastoral transitional zone. It is a matter of urgency to assess the effectiveness of this project, especially in the rural mountain communities with limited livelihood choices and low adaptive capacity. Thus we established comprehensive evaluation index system to clarify household livelihood status of local communities before and after ecological compensation project. Then a quantitative analysis were adopted to explore how livelihood capitals affect the adaptation activities as well as how different beneficiaries were affected. The results would provide references for building up sustainable livelihoods ways, revising follow-up detailed mechanisms, making the limited funds get more reasonable optimal allocation.
The main conclusions are as follows:
First, we summarize the characteristics of household livelihood status. Natural capital stock is low in the study area, which makes the rich human capital and more adequate financial capital fails to give full play to form the best livelihood strategy, while future development needs to focus on protecting natural capital and improve the ability to convert other livelihood capital. The livelihood capital index of sample households is 2.3603, and there is an obvious difference in livelihood capital index among heterogeneous households in the study area, with the group of agro-pastoralists has the highest livelihood asset values, then followed by herdsmen and farmers. Depending upon grassland, cultivated land, woodland resource and human input, animal husbandry, planting, part-time job, wage job , business, etc. are the main livelihood activity ways of households in study region, with not high proportion of non-farm strategy by and large. Generally, herdsmen and agro-pastoralists’ dependence on natural resources exceeds farmers’. Seeing from the perspective of households’ livelihood activities diversity, farmers have the highest livelihood types, followed by agro-pastoralists and herdsmen.
Second, the impact of ecological compensation on households' livelihood capital. The livelihood capital index of sample households increased after ecological compensation, along with physical, social, psychological and financial capital index increased while natural and human capital index decreased. The impact of ecological compensation on households' livelihood capital structure exist differences among heterogeneous households. The change of livelihood sustainable capacity before and after ecological compensation is 0.88, 1.07, 1.00 and 0.63 times respectively for the sample household, farmers, herdsmen and agro-pastoralists. Ecological compensation change the relationships between various livelihood capitals among heterogeneous households, which means it has not yet reached the stage of a relatively stable interaction or conversion between the various types of livelihood capital.
Third, the impact of ecological compensation on households' livelihood strategy. It is ecological compensation that do a great favor for households’ livelihood types transforming from traditional agricultural to non-agricultural industries. The impact of ecological compensation on households' livelihood activity structure also exert dinstinct differences among different beneficiaries group from ecological compensation project. Ecological compensation, an external power injection, promotes households' livelihood strategies towards the direction of diversification, but various constraints limited their driving ability, the current degree of diversification of livelihood activities are still not high in Qinghe County.
Fourth, the impact of ecological compensation on the relationship between livelihood capital and livelihood type. On the basis of the sensitivity analysis of on-farm or off-farm livelihood strategies to livelihood capitals at present, the results showed that there is a significant positive relationship between human, natural, financial capital and non-farm livelihood activities, while it is physical capital that drives rural households choosing farm strategies. The probabilities of off-farm livelihood strategy increases by 106.999, 6.215 and 3.700 times if the human, natural or financial capital increase by one unit; the chances of off-farm strategy decrease by 0.034 times when the physical capital increase by one unit.
On the basis of the sensitivity analysis of livelihood diversity to livelihood capitals, at present, compared with those sample households who only select one type of livelihood strategy, nature capital have the largest effect on choosing two types of livelihood strategy, followed by the human, physical and financial capital. The probabilities increase by 11.917 times in the event of physical capital increase by one unit, yet those of two types of livelihood activities are bound to multiply by 124.711, 40.650 and 2.790 times severally along with one unit increasing of natural, human and finanical capitals. The chances and probabilities of three types of livelihood activities dramatically go up by 334.287,145.620 and 13.184 times respectively along with the increments per unit of natural, human and financial capitals.
At the end, thesis proposed the following policy recommendations. Qinghe County need to optimize the allocation of resources, to achieve a virtuous coupling between livelihood systems and ecological environment systems. According to the different relationships types of different households between livelihood capital and livelihood strategy, also the evaluation the effects of the existing ecological compensation policy on households livelihood, we determined the top priority measures to heterogeneity households in the follow-up of ecological compensation policy. Additionally, we make effective recommendations and optimal path to help farmers and herdsmen participate in ecological compensation project more actively from the following aspects: enhance households’ self-development capacity, implement participatory management operation mode of ecological compensation project and innovation corresponding support measures of the government.|