Subsidy, training or material supply? The impact path of eco-compensation method on farmers & rsquo; livelihood assets

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112339

	Subsidy, training or material supply? The impact path of eco-compensation method on farmers & rsquo; livelihood assets
	Liu, Moucheng 2; Rao, Didi 1,2; Yang, Lun 2; Min, Qingwen 1,2
刊名	JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
	2021-06-01
卷号	287 页码:9
关键词	Ecological compensation Compensation methods Sustainable livelihoods Livelihood assets Three-River-Source National Park System Pilot Area
ISSN号	0301-4797
DOI	10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112339
通讯作者	Liu, Moucheng(liumc@igsnrr.ac.cn) ; Min, Qingwen(minqw@igsnrr.ac.cn)
英文摘要	The impact of ecological compensation policies on farmers? livelihoods is related to the sustainability of policies and social equity. How do different compensation methods affect farmers? livelihood assets? This paper uses China?s Three-River-Source National Park System Pilot Area (TNP) as the research area, and designs three compensation scenarios: cash subsidy, material supply, and technical training. We evaluated the impact of different compensation methods on the livelihood assets of farmers, and reveals the impact path of ecological compensation on different livelihood assets. The results show that cash subsidies can effectively improve the livelihood assets of farmers (17.04%), the five types of livelihood capital distribution are most reasonable under technical training method (0.306); Three compensation methods have improved the human assets of rural households (40.48%, 18.57%, and 0.48% respectively) and physical assets (30.15%, 26.84%, and 9.56% respectively). It also show different effects on farmers? financial assets (44.00%,-11.43%, and 1.14%) and social assets (19.15%,-17.02%, and 10.64%, respectively). Ecological compensation reduced farmers? natural assets (32.89%), but all three compensation methods stimulated farmers to improve their education levels (59.06%, 0.79%, and 7.87%, respectively), which affected farmers? human assets; The improvement of means of production (41.54%, 50.00% and 7.69% respectively) and the family living conditions (75.00%, 25.00% and 75.00% respectively) affect the physical assets of farmers; Changes in natural assets, human assets, and physical assets affect the financial assets of farmers, while social assets is affected by financial assets and human assets.
资助项目	China National key RD plan[2017YFC0506402] ; Mobility Programme DFG-NSFC[M0342]
WOS研究方向	Environmental Sciences & Ecology
语种	英语
出版者	ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
WOS记录号	WOS:000639200600008
资助机构	China National key RD plan ; Mobility Programme DFG-NSFC
内容类型	期刊论文
源URL	[http://ir.igsnrr.ac.cn/handle/311030/161716]
专题	中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所
通讯作者	Liu, Moucheng; Min, Qingwen
作者单位	1.Univ Chinese Acad Sci, Beijing 100049, Peoples R China 2.Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Geog Sci & Nat Resources Res, Beijing 100101, Peoples R China
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Liu, Moucheng,Rao, Didi,Yang, Lun,et al. Subsidy, training or material supply? The impact path of eco-compensation method on farmers & rsquo; livelihood assets[J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT,2021,287:9.
APA	Liu, Moucheng,Rao, Didi,Yang, Lun,&Min, Qingwen.(2021).Subsidy, training or material supply? The impact path of eco-compensation method on farmers & rsquo; livelihood assets.JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT,287,9.
MLA	Liu, Moucheng,et al."Subsidy, training or material supply? The impact path of eco-compensation method on farmers & rsquo; livelihood assets".JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 287(2021):9.