摘要小型水利設施合作供給是實現準公共物品供給的有效方式,同時農村社區(qū)小型水利設施合作供給也是眾多單個農戶行為選擇的結果。理論研究發(fā)現,極其復雜多變的個體決策行為可以通過突破傳統(tǒng)經濟學的同質性假設——運用個體異質性來表征。本文將農戶異質性概念引入農村社區(qū)小型水利設施合作供給問題研究,探索農戶社會資本異質性與農村社區(qū)小型水利設施合作供給的互動關系及影響機理,試圖解決農村小型水利設施合作供給中集體行動的實現問題。首先,運用探索性因子分析法,將社會資本歸納為社會聲望、社會參與、社會信任和社會網絡四個不同維度。在此基礎上,利用陜西省關中地區(qū)393戶農戶調查數據,采用Probit模型實證分析社會資本多維異質性對農戶參與小型水利設施合作治理的影響。研究結果表明,社會資本多維異質性對農戶參與小型水利設施合作供給具有顯著影響。其中,信任維度、參與維度和網絡維度社會資本是農戶小型水利設施參與行為的重要促進因素,而聲望維度社會資本則降低了農戶的參與行為。反映出社會資本的多維異質性將導致集體行動結果的不確定性。某一維度的社會資本促進合作供給的產生,而另一維度的社會資本則對合作供給起到抑制作用,而且各維度交互作用可能使社會資本對合作供給影響結果產生不同結果。此外,農戶參與小型水利設施合作供給還受其他因素的影響,農戶受教育程度、水利對農業(yè)重要性的認知、水利設施維修情況以及用水糾紛對農戶參與行為具有顯著正向影響,而種植面積對農戶小型水利設施合作供給參與行為具有顯著負向影響。根據以上結果,政府應該通過培育農戶多維度的社會資本,強化社會資本的正向影響,促進小型水利設施的合作供給;此外,通過加強組織服務功能、提高農戶合作認知等,提高農戶小型水利設施合作供給的參與行為。
關鍵詞多維社會資本; 集體行動; 合作供給;小型水利設施
中圖分類號F303.1文獻標識碼A文章編號1002-2104(2014)12-0046-09doi:10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2014.12.007
我國農村水利基礎設施長期存在年久失修、運行效率低下的問題。水利作為農業(yè)生產的命脈,小型水利設施建設的滯后極大制約了農業(yè)生產的發(fā)展。從供給主體視角,農村社區(qū)小型水利設施建設依托村民合作供給是一種有效的方式[1-2]。然而由于中國社會轉型期社會資本的缺失,導致灌溉中農戶合作的困境。社會資本存在與否成為公共物品與服務供給集體行動能否成功的關鍵[3]。合作對于增加農民收入,提高農民在市場經濟條件下的自主地位具有重要作用。社會資本作為集體行動發(fā)起的前提條件,對促進農戶的合作行為具有重要意義。農戶正是通過參與合作經濟組織增加了社區(qū)的社會資本存量,促進了地方經濟發(fā)展與鄉(xiāng)村治理結構的優(yōu)化[4]。
農戶是農業(yè)生產決策的最小單位,由于宗族型社會的特點以及農戶交往的自己人結構,導致農戶的行為邏輯不僅受客觀因素判斷如利潤最大化目標的影響,而且受社會支持與社會關系的影響。農村社會中的差序格局和封閉性特點使得農戶行為不僅是理性的個體決策,而且是從眾的群體決策。大多數情況下,農戶通過學習、模仿、互動和試錯的方式達成合作行為的決策。在小型農村社區(qū)中,農戶的學習、模仿就是通過其所擁有的人際關系及其帶來的網絡效應、長期生活在一起形成的共同價值觀、行為范式和彼此間的信任、不同層次和級別的農戶及組織的互動實現的,其行為受到其他農戶以及所處環(huán)境的影響。因此,農戶社會資本其本質就是農戶個人和組織形成的社會關系通過信任、建立聲望和參與水平獲取資源的能力,實際上可以歸結為社會網絡、社會信任、社會聲望和社會參與四個方面[5]。社會資本就是通過社會中個人和組織的網絡構建及長期的信任規(guī)范約束來實現個人或組織的效益目標。
1文獻綜述
集體行動作為一種客觀存在的社會現象,是行動個體理性行為的非合作博弈結果。在個體理性選擇下,往往會出現個體理性和集體理性不一致、公共產品提供不足的悲劇性結果,如阿羅提出的“不可能性定理”、博弈論中著名的“囚徒困境”以及薩繆爾森的“搭便車理論”和哈丁的“公共地悲劇”等都詳細的闡述了集體行動失敗的原因。然而,研究也發(fā)現,這種集體行為選擇理論是建立在同質性假設的基礎上,忽視了現實生活中的異質性。從理論上看,極其復雜多變的個體決策行為可以通過突破傳統(tǒng)經濟學的同質性假設——運用個體異質性來表征。社會資本作為表征農戶異質性的重要變量,兩者交互作用共同對合作供給過程中決策的形成和決策方式產生影響。Uphoff認為,社會資本具有不同維度,它們促進信息的分享,有利于采取集體行動,提高個體的合作意愿和合作效率,并且相對客觀并容易觀察[6]。合作是網絡中行動者互動的必然結果,合作越多,行動者之間的互動越多,社會資本的擴展程度越高,網絡中的成員獲益越多[7]。Ostrom利用社會資本理論分析農民如何克服搭便車問題,即通過對尼泊爾150個灌溉系統(tǒng)的經驗性研究考察,認為農民完全有可能通過自己創(chuàng)造的社會資本克服困擾大小集團行動的搭便車問題[8],Isham 和 Kknen采用印度和斯里蘭卡的數據探討村莊社會資本水平與村民社區(qū)水服務項目的參與之間的關系,研究發(fā)現,社會資本水平越高,越有利于村民參與和監(jiān)督水平的提高[9]。因此,社會資本可以為農民帶來社會資本存量的不斷提高,消除集體成員彼此的不信任,達成集體行動主體間的合作,使成員為實現集體的共同利益努力。龐娟對我國農村的研究也發(fā)現,在同質性較強的社區(qū)和具備良好社會資本結構的村莊,公共品的合作供給效果較好,社會資本對走出集體行動的困境,實現成員之間的合作具有一定的說服力[10]。李冰冰和王曙光利用全國10省17村494戶農戶調查數據,分析農村社區(qū)公共品提供中社會資本、村莊特征對農戶參與程度的影響。研究發(fā)現,農戶的社會資本對農戶在鄉(xiāng)村公共品提供中的參與程度具有積極作用,主要體現在農戶的公共意識、政治意識、社團互助、社區(qū)認同、社區(qū)信任等因子[11]。然而也有學者指出,隨著農村人口空心化的加劇,有利于農村公共品供給的鄉(xiāng)村社會資本逐步瓦解,導致農村公共物品供給的困境[12]。此外,學者也討論了社會資本的消極作用,認為社會資本“不僅阻礙了某種行為而且壓制了其他行為”[13]。如毛壽龍指出,農戶合作困境主要是受社會資本、較低的經濟發(fā)展水平以及搭便車行為的制約[14]。
然而,由于學者對社會資本的內涵各抒己見,關注的重點不同導致其度量方法多從社會資本的某一單一維度出發(fā),從而忽視了社會資本的整體性特征及其不同維度在集體行動發(fā)起中所起的作用[8]。其次,在影響農戶小型水利設施合作行為的因素中,不同維度社會資本的作用方向與作用效果如何?在合作行為形成過程中,農戶基本特征、農業(yè)生產特征以及組織服務功能對合作行為的影響機理是什么?對這些問題的回答都是小型水利設施合作供給中亟需解決的問題,本文試圖以小型水利設施合作供給為例,將社會資本歸納為社會信任、社會網絡、社會參與和社會聲望四個維度,考察農戶小型水利設施合作供給參與行為的影響因素,探析不同維度社會資本影響集體行動實現的內在機理。其研究思路是:利用陜西省6 個類型村393戶農戶的調查數據,采用探索性因子分析法歸納農戶社會資本的不同維度;在此基礎上,構建計量經濟模型分析不同維度社會資本對農戶小型水利設施合作供給參與行為的影響,最后提出促進小型水利設施合作供給的對策建議。
苗珊珊:社會資本多維異質性視角下農戶小型水利設施合作參與行為研究中國人口·資源與環(huán)境2014年第12期2模型設定、研究假設與數據來源
2.1研究假設與模型設定
借鑒王昕、陸遷[5]的研究方法,本文主要從信任維度、參與維度、網絡維度和聲望維度測度農戶社會資本擁有量。同時,在4個維度中又分別包含不同的變量,共27個變量(指標及賦值情況如表2 所示)。社會網絡是行為主體內部各種關系的交互結構以及行為主體與外部的互動模式[15]。因此,對社會網絡變量的設計主要從與不同對象的交流程度來確定。預計一個農戶的社會網絡越寬,其合作供給意愿也越強,對網絡維度社會資本變量的設計主要從與不同主體的交互展開。第二,根據Durlauf 等的定義,社會信任就是基于網絡過程所形成的行為規(guī)范和人與人之間的信賴,它們能促成產生好的社會和經濟結果[16]。因此,社會信任體現了社會個體之間的相互信任程度,根據農村人際交往的“自己人”結構,農戶對不同主體由親及疏的不同信任程度,構成了信任維度社會資本的度量指標。第三,社會聲望即社會大眾對于他人的主觀評價。Bourdieu認為社會資本以社會聲望、名譽、權威和頭銜等為符號,以社會契約為制度化形式,社會聲望的形成主要表1農戶社會資本維度及其度量指標
由表5可知,社會信任、社會網絡與社會參與維度對農戶小型水利設施合作供給行為具有積極影響,而社會聲望則具有消極影響。總體而言,總量社會資本有助于農戶集體行動的實現。受教育程度、種植面積、小型水利設施對農業(yè)生產重要性的認識、維修情況、用水糾紛是影響農戶參與小型水利設施合作的重要因素。具體分析如下:
(1)社會資本。社會資本總量對合作行為的影響較為顯著,系數檢驗在10%的水平上顯著,且系數為正,即農戶的總量社會資本越大,參與小型水利設施合作供給行為的可能性也越大,這與Coleman的研究結論相一致,并印證了本文的研究假設[27]。社會資本的各個維度中,社會網絡在5%的顯著性水平下通過檢驗,說明在小型水利設施合作供給中,農戶與同村村民之間、與村干部、農業(yè)組織的關系越密切,越有可能參與水利設施的合作供給。這主要是由于農村傳統(tǒng)宗族鄉(xiāng)村主要以地緣、血緣與親緣關系為紐帶,網絡作為資源動員的結構基礎,發(fā)揮著溝通和團結農戶的作用,從而有助于增強農戶水利設施合作供給的參與行為。調研發(fā)現,農戶社會網絡具有同質性和封閉性的特點,有利于增加社會網絡的集中度,較高的網絡強度和較低的網絡使用成本在一定范圍內促進了集體行動的實現。社會信任通過了1%水平下的顯著性檢驗,呈正相關關系,表明村民之間彼此的信任度越高,農戶參與小型水利設施合作供給越容易達成一致,從而有助于農戶小型水利設施合作供給的實現。Ostrom的研究也表明,社會信任是集體行動實現的關鍵因素[28]。社會信任可顯著地增加農戶的合作行為,這與我國的“差序信任”格局密切相關,農戶之間的信任主要建立在血緣親族關系基礎之上,信任范圍在擴展過程中遵循“就近原則(即由近及遠、由親及疏)”,由此,農戶對家人、親戚、朋友及陌生人的信任程度是由高到低進行排序的,農戶對“自己人”的信任程度越高,越有利于集體行動的實現。社會參與對農戶的合作行為影響十分顯著,在5%的顯著性水平下通過檢驗,呈正相關,即農戶的公共事務參與程度越高越有利于集體行動的實現,反映了一定社區(qū)范圍內具有某種成員資格的行動者獲取稀缺資源的能力[29]。聲望維度社會資本對農戶合作行為產生負面影響,在10%的顯著性水平下通過檢驗,表明以互惠為基礎所建立的聲望,弱化了農戶的水利設施合作參與行為,農戶更傾向于通過個體互惠的方式促進準公共物品的供給。這與波茨的研究結論一致,即消極社會資本在為團體成員帶來利益同時,通常也能夠禁止其他人獲得收益,可能會形成封閉的系統(tǒng)而最終難以實現持續(xù)的發(fā)展與進步。此外,也反映出農戶之間、農戶與村干部或農戶與合作組織領導人之間由于利益分配中的委托代理問題,弱化了社會資本促進集體行動實現的功能[30]。
(2)農戶基本特征與農業(yè)生產情況。從模型估計結果看,受教育程度變量對合作行為具有顯著影響,通過5%的顯著性檢驗。表明隨著農戶受教育程度的提高,農戶能夠更加客觀地認識到個人利益與集體利益的關聯性,其參與小型水利設施合作供給的可能性增加。農業(yè)生產情況方面,種植面積對合作行為的影響在1%的水平上顯著,即農戶的種植面積越大,參與小型水利設施合作供給行為的可能性越小,可能的原因是,隨著種植面積的增加,規(guī)模收益促使農戶通過自行購買或租賃小型水利設施滿足灌溉需要,以達到提高土地邊際收入實現收益最大化的目的。
(3)農戶認知程度。水利對農業(yè)重要性的認知是小型水利設施合作供給的重要影響因素,在1%的顯著性水平下通過檢驗,說明水利設施重要性的認知是影響農戶合作行為的主要因素。行為經濟學認為認知決定行為主體的態(tài)度或看法,進而影響其選擇行為。學者的研究也證實了認知的缺失和錯位會對行為主體的支付意愿產生影響[31]。在小型水利設施合作供給的過程中,農戶參與行為的實現是主觀認知與客觀環(huán)境的結合。由于運行資金的限制、監(jiān)督成本等外在因素的影響,導致集體行動意愿與行為的悖離。這也說明合作經濟組織作為農民自主、自治、自我發(fā)展和自我服務的組織,在努力提高農戶的認知程度的基礎上,需要配合相應的制度環(huán)境,以降低組織協調成本,使其內化為農戶自身的理性選擇。
(4)組織服務功能。在影響農戶小型水利設施合作供給行為的影響因素中,小型水利設施維修情況具有顯著影響,在1%的顯著性水平下通過檢驗,說明小型水利設施運轉出現問題時維修的效率越高,將越有利于提高農戶的參與積極性。因此,組織服務功能的完善有利于農戶集體行動的實現,從而降低組織的運行成本。此外,農村農業(yè)灌溉用水以及相應而生的灌溉水費和用水糾紛往往是農民最為關注的問題和農村社會焦點。農戶間的用水糾紛在1%的水平下通過顯著性檢驗,反映出水權的不確定性是農戶日常灌溉用水的主要矛盾,通過參與小型水利設施合作供給,使用水權的安排有序化,從而降低交易成本。
4結論與討論
本文基于社會資本視角,利用2011 年陜西省關中地區(qū)393戶農戶的實地調查數據,運用因子分析法將社會資本分為社會信任、社會參與、社會網絡、社會聲望四個維度,在此基礎上采用Probit模型,分析社會資本各維度對農民合作行為的影響。研究結果顯示:社會資本不同維度對農戶小型水利設施合作供給行為的影響各不相同?;谛袨橹黧w之間的社交網絡與交往程度的網絡維度社會資本、基于普遍信任與交往基礎的信任維度社會資本以及基于組織內各成員之間公共事務的參與維度社會資本對農戶水利設施合作行為有積極影響,而聲望維度的社會資本卻降低了農戶的參與積極性,反映出某一維度的社會資本促進合作供給的實現,而另一維度的社會資本對合作供給起抑制作用,各維度社會資本的交互作用導致集體行動結果的隨機性。
第一,社會資本的多維異質性導致集體行動結果的不確定性。某一維度的社會資本會促進合作供給的產生,而另一維度的社會資本對合作供給起到抑制作用,而且各維度交互作用可能使社會資本對合作供給影響結果產生不同結果。正是這種復雜性導致了目前理論界對社會資本與農戶自組織合作行為之間的關系存在不一致的結論。因此,在社會資本對合作行為的影響研究中,應加強社會資本不同維度的研究,重視對社會資本各維度作用機制的考察。
第二,農村公共物品自發(fā)供給中社會資本的消極影響不容忽視,可能使農村公共物品自發(fā)供給面臨失敗的威脅。由于社區(qū)或是小集團的局限性,如當社區(qū)內外基于個體異質特征或收入差距而產生分歧時,社區(qū)治理可能會更多的鼓勵轄區(qū)內的種族歧視和狹隘意識,而不是彌補政府和市場失靈。本研究僅考慮了社會資本異質性對小型水利設施合作供給的影響,下一步的研究方向應考慮個體異質性與社會資本異質性共同作用如何導致集體行動實現的機理。
第三,社會資本是導致農戶小型水利設施支付意愿與支付行為悖離的重要因素。據調查,實際支出的農戶僅占具有支付意愿農戶數的三分之二,社會資本在準公共物品的供給中,發(fā)揮了一定的社會保險功能,導致農戶實際支付行為的降低,然而這種功能發(fā)揮背后的作用機理是什么,社會資本及不同維度對農戶小型水利設施合作供給的意愿與行為的悖離到底有什么影響,其作用機制和影響效果有待進一步研究。
因此,應著力培育不同維度社會資本,促進小型水利設施合作供給。社會資本是集體行動開展的前提和基礎,應從提高村民的參與意識入手,加強對農戶的宣傳教育,彼此之間因參與而互相信賴,從而建立起成員之間普遍信任的人際網絡關系。這不僅是農戶之間的學習與互動,更是小型水利設施合作組織社會資本培育的最好機會。其次要加強社會網絡的構建,由于我國獨特的鄉(xiāng)土民情,農戶在傳統(tǒng)的鄉(xiāng)間地頭彼此間更容易形成一種連接,這種連接是血緣關系和地緣關系的結合體,農戶對不同關系的偏好及占用情況對農戶的自身發(fā)展和小型水利設施合作組織的成長起著重要作用。
(編輯:劉呈慶)
參考文獻(References)
[1]Baker J. The Effect of Community Structure on Social Forestry Outcomes: Insights from Chota Nagpur, India[J]. Mountain Research and Development, 1998, 18(1):51-62.
[2]Lam W. Governing Irrigation Systems in Nepal: Institutions, Infrastructure and Collective Action[R]. San Francisco, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies, 1998.
[3]Alberto A, La Ferrara E. Participation in Heterogeneous Communities[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,2000,115 (3):847-904.
[4]Warner M. State Policy under Devolution: Redistribution and Centralization[J]. National Tax Journal, 2001,54(3):213-224.
[5]王昕,陸遷. 社會資本綜述及研究框架[J].商業(yè)研究, 2012,(2):26-30.[Wang Xin, Lu Qian. Social Capital and Its Research Frame[J]. Business Research, 2012, (2):26-30.]
[6]Krishna A, Uphoff N. Mapping and Measuring Social Capital through Assessment of Collective Action to Conserve and Develop Watersheds in Rajasthan[M]. India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003:85-124.
[7]Durlauf S N, Fafchamps M. Social Capital[R]. NBER Working Paper, 2004:10485.
[8]Ostrom E. Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms[J]. Journal of Economic Perspective, 2000,14(3):137-158.
[9]Isham J, Khknen S. Institutional Determinants of the Impact of Communitybased Water Services: Evidence from Sri Lanka and India[R]. Middlebury College Working Paper Series, 2002.
[10]龐娟,舒銀燕.農村公共品合作供給的因素分析[J].商業(yè)時代, 2010, (27):12-13.[Pang Juan, Shu Yinyan. Rural Public Goods Cooperation Supply Factor Analysis[J]. Journal of Commercial Age, 2010, (27): 12-13.]
[11]李冰冰,王曙光.社會資本、鄉(xiāng)村公共品供給與鄉(xiāng)村治理: 基于 10 省 17 村農戶調查[J].經濟科學,2013, (3):61-71.[Li Bingbing, Wang Shuguang. Social Capital, Rural Public Goods Supply and Rural Governance: Based on 10 provinces 17 villages Farmer Survey[J]. Journal of Economic Science, 2013, (3): 61-71.]
[12]Coleman J S. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1988, 94:52-59.
[13]毛壽龍.公共事物的治理之道[J].江蘇行政學院學報,2010,(1):100-105.[Mao Shoulong. The Way of Public Affairs Management[J]. Journal of Jiangsu Administration Institute, 2010,(1): 100-105.]
[14]汪龍.人口“空心化”、鄉(xiāng)村社會資本與農村公共品供給: 一個文獻綜述[J]. 特區(qū)經濟,2013,(11):132-133.[Wang Long. ‘Hollowing out, Population, Rural Social Capital and Rural Public Goods Supply: A Literature Review[J]. Journal of Special Zone Economy, 2013 (11): 132-133.]
[15]Ingram P, Lifschitz A.Kinship in the Shadow of the Corporation: the Interbuilder Network in Clyde River Shipbuilding[J]. American Sociological Review,2006,71(2):334-352.
[16]Durlauf D. Neighbourhood Effects[M]. Henderson J V, Tjisse J F. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Amsterdam: North Holland, 2004.
[17]Bourdieu P. The forms of Capital[M]. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1986.
[18]Das Gupta H, Grandvoinnet M. SateCommunity Synergies in Communitydriven Development[J]. Journal of Development Studies, 2004,40 (3):55-62.
[19]吳軍,夏建.中國外社會資本理論:歷史脈絡與前沿動態(tài)[J]. 學術界,2012,(8):67-76.[Wu Jun, Xia Jian. International Social Capital Theory: History and Frontier[J]. Academisim, 2012,(8):67-76.]
[20]艾伯特·赫希曼. 轉變參與:私人利益與公共行動[M]. 上海:上海人民出版社,2008.[Herman A. Transfer Participation: Individual Interests and Collective Action[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai People Press, 2008.]
[21]Gorton M,Sauer J, Peshevski M. The Dimensions of Social Capital and Rural Development: Evidence from Water Communities in the Republic of Macedonia[C]. European Association of Agricultural Economists, 2010.
[22]趙立娟. 農民用水者協會形成及有效運行的經濟分析[D]. 呼和浩特:內蒙古農業(yè)大學, 2009.[Zhao Lijuan. Rural Water User Association Formation and Efficient Carrying out Analysis[D].Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2009.]
[23]張兵,孟德鋒. 農戶參與灌溉管理意愿的影響因素分析[J].農業(yè)經濟問題,2009, (2):66-72.[Zhaing Bing, Meng Defeng. The Willingness of Farmers Participative Behaviour and Its Influencing Factors[J]. Rural Problems, 2009, (2):66-72.]
[24]黃祖輝. 農民專業(yè)合作組織發(fā)展的影響因素分析[J]. 中國農村經濟,2002,(3):54-58.[Huang Zuhui. Agricultural Professional Cooperatives Development Influencing Factors[J]. China Rural Economy, 2002, (3):54-58.]
[25]孫亞范. 現階段我國農民合作需求與意愿的實證研究[J].江蘇社會科學, 2003, (1):204-208.[Sun Yafan. Empirical Analysis on Farmer Cooperating Demand[J]. Jiangsu Social Science, 2003, (1):204-208.]
[26]黃瑞芹,楊云彥. 中國農村居民社會資本的經濟回報[J].世界經濟文匯,2008, (6):53-63. [Huang Ruiqin, Yang Yunyan. The Return of Chinese Rural Households Social Capital[J]. World Economic Papers, 2008, (6):53-63.]
[27]Coleman J S. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1998, 94:95-120.
[28]Ostrom E, Ahn T. The Meaning of Social Capital and Its Link to Collective Action[M]. Svendsen G T, Svendsen G L H. Handbook of Social Capital: The Troika of Sociology, Political Science and Economics. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009.
[29]DiPasquale D, Edward L. Incentives and Social Capital: Are Homeowners Better Citizens?[J]. Journal of Urban Economic,1999,45 (2):354-384.
[30]萬生新,李世平,寧澤逵. 社會資本視角下農民用水戶滿意度研究: 基于陜西省寶雞峽灌區(qū)農民用水戶的調查[J].經濟問題,2012,(2):78-82.[Wan Shengxin, Li Shiping, Ning Zekui. Farmers Water Using Satisfaction Based on Social Capital Perspective[J]. Economic Problems, 2012, (2):78-82.]
[31]王鋒,張小栓,穆維松,等. 消費者對可追溯農產品的認知和支付意愿分析[J].中國農村經濟,2009,(3):68-74.[Wang Feng, Zhang Xiaoshuan, Mu Weisong, et al. The Consumers Recognition and Willingness to Pay for Traceable Farm Produce[J]. China Rural Economy, 2009,(3):68-74.]
Farmers Smallscale Irrigation Facilities Participative Behavior under
Multidimensional Social Capital Perspective
MIAO Shanshan1,2
(1.Research Center of Safety and Emergency Management, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo Henan 454003, China;
2. Emergency Management School, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo Henan 454003, China)
AbstractSmallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply is a useful way to realize effective supply of quasipublic goods, while it is the result of rural households individual choice. Theoretical study finds that individual decisionmaking behavior is extremely complex, it could be characterized by individual heterogeneity which changed the traditional assumption: homogeneity. This paper explores the smallscale irrigation facilities collective action issues by introducing the concept of rural households individual heterogeneity, the objective is to examine the interaction mechanism between smallscale irrigation facilities collective action and rural households social capital, trying to resolve the collective action dilemma for smallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply. Firstly, this paper empirically analyses the influence of four components of social capital on farmers behavior in participating in collective actions; it is for constructing and operating smallscale irrigation systems in Guanzhong Plain, Shaanxi Province, China. The four components consist of social networking; social trust, social prestige and social participation were derived by employing factor analysis. We use a Probit model to estimate the influence of these components on farmers participative behavior. The findings indicate that social capital multidimensional heterogeneity has a significant impact on the smallscale irrigation facilities collective action. It is revealed that considering different components of social capital allows for a better understanding of farmers participative behavior. We find that higher levels of social trust, social networking and social participation lead to a higher propensity for collective action; however, social prestige reduces the possibility of farmers participative behavior. It is reflected that multidimensional social capital will lead to the uncertainty results of collective action. A dimension of social capital promotes farmers smallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply participative behavior; however, other dimensions of social capital will play an inhibitory effect on the farmers participative behavior. Therefore, the interaction between the different dimensions of social capital may affect the results of the collective action. Other socioeconomic factors and farming characteristics such as farmers education level, farmers recognition, as well as smallscale irrigation facilities maintenance condition and water disputes have positive significant effects on farmers participative behavior, while the cultivated area has negative effects on farmers participative behavior. Finally, it is suggested that the government should encourage farmers participative behavior by cultivating farmers multidimensional social capital and modifying the positive dimensions of social capital. Moreover, the government should strengthen organization service function and improve farmers cooperative consciousness.
Key wordsmultidimensional social capital; collective action; cooperative supply; smallscale irrigation facilities
[22]趙立娟. 農民用水者協會形成及有效運行的經濟分析[D]. 呼和浩特:內蒙古農業(yè)大學, 2009.[Zhao Lijuan. Rural Water User Association Formation and Efficient Carrying out Analysis[D].Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2009.]
[23]張兵,孟德鋒. 農戶參與灌溉管理意愿的影響因素分析[J].農業(yè)經濟問題,2009, (2):66-72.[Zhaing Bing, Meng Defeng. The Willingness of Farmers Participative Behaviour and Its Influencing Factors[J]. Rural Problems, 2009, (2):66-72.]
[24]黃祖輝. 農民專業(yè)合作組織發(fā)展的影響因素分析[J]. 中國農村經濟,2002,(3):54-58.[Huang Zuhui. Agricultural Professional Cooperatives Development Influencing Factors[J]. China Rural Economy, 2002, (3):54-58.]
[25]孫亞范. 現階段我國農民合作需求與意愿的實證研究[J].江蘇社會科學, 2003, (1):204-208.[Sun Yafan. Empirical Analysis on Farmer Cooperating Demand[J]. Jiangsu Social Science, 2003, (1):204-208.]
[26]黃瑞芹,楊云彥. 中國農村居民社會資本的經濟回報[J].世界經濟文匯,2008, (6):53-63. [Huang Ruiqin, Yang Yunyan. The Return of Chinese Rural Households Social Capital[J]. World Economic Papers, 2008, (6):53-63.]
[27]Coleman J S. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1998, 94:95-120.
[28]Ostrom E, Ahn T. The Meaning of Social Capital and Its Link to Collective Action[M]. Svendsen G T, Svendsen G L H. Handbook of Social Capital: The Troika of Sociology, Political Science and Economics. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009.
[29]DiPasquale D, Edward L. Incentives and Social Capital: Are Homeowners Better Citizens?[J]. Journal of Urban Economic,1999,45 (2):354-384.
[30]萬生新,李世平,寧澤逵. 社會資本視角下農民用水戶滿意度研究: 基于陜西省寶雞峽灌區(qū)農民用水戶的調查[J].經濟問題,2012,(2):78-82.[Wan Shengxin, Li Shiping, Ning Zekui. Farmers Water Using Satisfaction Based on Social Capital Perspective[J]. Economic Problems, 2012, (2):78-82.]
[31]王鋒,張小栓,穆維松,等. 消費者對可追溯農產品的認知和支付意愿分析[J].中國農村經濟,2009,(3):68-74.[Wang Feng, Zhang Xiaoshuan, Mu Weisong, et al. The Consumers Recognition and Willingness to Pay for Traceable Farm Produce[J]. China Rural Economy, 2009,(3):68-74.]
Farmers Smallscale Irrigation Facilities Participative Behavior under
Multidimensional Social Capital Perspective
MIAO Shanshan1,2
(1.Research Center of Safety and Emergency Management, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo Henan 454003, China;
2. Emergency Management School, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo Henan 454003, China)
AbstractSmallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply is a useful way to realize effective supply of quasipublic goods, while it is the result of rural households individual choice. Theoretical study finds that individual decisionmaking behavior is extremely complex, it could be characterized by individual heterogeneity which changed the traditional assumption: homogeneity. This paper explores the smallscale irrigation facilities collective action issues by introducing the concept of rural households individual heterogeneity, the objective is to examine the interaction mechanism between smallscale irrigation facilities collective action and rural households social capital, trying to resolve the collective action dilemma for smallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply. Firstly, this paper empirically analyses the influence of four components of social capital on farmers behavior in participating in collective actions; it is for constructing and operating smallscale irrigation systems in Guanzhong Plain, Shaanxi Province, China. The four components consist of social networking; social trust, social prestige and social participation were derived by employing factor analysis. We use a Probit model to estimate the influence of these components on farmers participative behavior. The findings indicate that social capital multidimensional heterogeneity has a significant impact on the smallscale irrigation facilities collective action. It is revealed that considering different components of social capital allows for a better understanding of farmers participative behavior. We find that higher levels of social trust, social networking and social participation lead to a higher propensity for collective action; however, social prestige reduces the possibility of farmers participative behavior. It is reflected that multidimensional social capital will lead to the uncertainty results of collective action. A dimension of social capital promotes farmers smallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply participative behavior; however, other dimensions of social capital will play an inhibitory effect on the farmers participative behavior. Therefore, the interaction between the different dimensions of social capital may affect the results of the collective action. Other socioeconomic factors and farming characteristics such as farmers education level, farmers recognition, as well as smallscale irrigation facilities maintenance condition and water disputes have positive significant effects on farmers participative behavior, while the cultivated area has negative effects on farmers participative behavior. Finally, it is suggested that the government should encourage farmers participative behavior by cultivating farmers multidimensional social capital and modifying the positive dimensions of social capital. Moreover, the government should strengthen organization service function and improve farmers cooperative consciousness.
Key wordsmultidimensional social capital; collective action; cooperative supply; smallscale irrigation facilities
[22]趙立娟. 農民用水者協會形成及有效運行的經濟分析[D]. 呼和浩特:內蒙古農業(yè)大學, 2009.[Zhao Lijuan. Rural Water User Association Formation and Efficient Carrying out Analysis[D].Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2009.]
[23]張兵,孟德鋒. 農戶參與灌溉管理意愿的影響因素分析[J].農業(yè)經濟問題,2009, (2):66-72.[Zhaing Bing, Meng Defeng. The Willingness of Farmers Participative Behaviour and Its Influencing Factors[J]. Rural Problems, 2009, (2):66-72.]
[24]黃祖輝. 農民專業(yè)合作組織發(fā)展的影響因素分析[J]. 中國農村經濟,2002,(3):54-58.[Huang Zuhui. Agricultural Professional Cooperatives Development Influencing Factors[J]. China Rural Economy, 2002, (3):54-58.]
[25]孫亞范. 現階段我國農民合作需求與意愿的實證研究[J].江蘇社會科學, 2003, (1):204-208.[Sun Yafan. Empirical Analysis on Farmer Cooperating Demand[J]. Jiangsu Social Science, 2003, (1):204-208.]
[26]黃瑞芹,楊云彥. 中國農村居民社會資本的經濟回報[J].世界經濟文匯,2008, (6):53-63. [Huang Ruiqin, Yang Yunyan. The Return of Chinese Rural Households Social Capital[J]. World Economic Papers, 2008, (6):53-63.]
[27]Coleman J S. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1998, 94:95-120.
[28]Ostrom E, Ahn T. The Meaning of Social Capital and Its Link to Collective Action[M]. Svendsen G T, Svendsen G L H. Handbook of Social Capital: The Troika of Sociology, Political Science and Economics. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009.
[29]DiPasquale D, Edward L. Incentives and Social Capital: Are Homeowners Better Citizens?[J]. Journal of Urban Economic,1999,45 (2):354-384.
[30]萬生新,李世平,寧澤逵. 社會資本視角下農民用水戶滿意度研究: 基于陜西省寶雞峽灌區(qū)農民用水戶的調查[J].經濟問題,2012,(2):78-82.[Wan Shengxin, Li Shiping, Ning Zekui. Farmers Water Using Satisfaction Based on Social Capital Perspective[J]. Economic Problems, 2012, (2):78-82.]
[31]王鋒,張小栓,穆維松,等. 消費者對可追溯農產品的認知和支付意愿分析[J].中國農村經濟,2009,(3):68-74.[Wang Feng, Zhang Xiaoshuan, Mu Weisong, et al. The Consumers Recognition and Willingness to Pay for Traceable Farm Produce[J]. China Rural Economy, 2009,(3):68-74.]
Farmers Smallscale Irrigation Facilities Participative Behavior under
Multidimensional Social Capital Perspective
MIAO Shanshan1,2
(1.Research Center of Safety and Emergency Management, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo Henan 454003, China;
2. Emergency Management School, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo Henan 454003, China)
AbstractSmallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply is a useful way to realize effective supply of quasipublic goods, while it is the result of rural households individual choice. Theoretical study finds that individual decisionmaking behavior is extremely complex, it could be characterized by individual heterogeneity which changed the traditional assumption: homogeneity. This paper explores the smallscale irrigation facilities collective action issues by introducing the concept of rural households individual heterogeneity, the objective is to examine the interaction mechanism between smallscale irrigation facilities collective action and rural households social capital, trying to resolve the collective action dilemma for smallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply. Firstly, this paper empirically analyses the influence of four components of social capital on farmers behavior in participating in collective actions; it is for constructing and operating smallscale irrigation systems in Guanzhong Plain, Shaanxi Province, China. The four components consist of social networking; social trust, social prestige and social participation were derived by employing factor analysis. We use a Probit model to estimate the influence of these components on farmers participative behavior. The findings indicate that social capital multidimensional heterogeneity has a significant impact on the smallscale irrigation facilities collective action. It is revealed that considering different components of social capital allows for a better understanding of farmers participative behavior. We find that higher levels of social trust, social networking and social participation lead to a higher propensity for collective action; however, social prestige reduces the possibility of farmers participative behavior. It is reflected that multidimensional social capital will lead to the uncertainty results of collective action. A dimension of social capital promotes farmers smallscale irrigation facilities cooperative supply participative behavior; however, other dimensions of social capital will play an inhibitory effect on the farmers participative behavior. Therefore, the interaction between the different dimensions of social capital may affect the results of the collective action. Other socioeconomic factors and farming characteristics such as farmers education level, farmers recognition, as well as smallscale irrigation facilities maintenance condition and water disputes have positive significant effects on farmers participative behavior, while the cultivated area has negative effects on farmers participative behavior. Finally, it is suggested that the government should encourage farmers participative behavior by cultivating farmers multidimensional social capital and modifying the positive dimensions of social capital. Moreover, the government should strengthen organization service function and improve farmers cooperative consciousness.
Key wordsmultidimensional social capital; collective action; cooperative supply; smallscale irrigation facilities