Sustainable Intensive Level of Cultivated Land Use and Influential Factors in Liaoning Province
-
摘要:
目的 耕地利用可持续集约化是缓解粮食安全问题、减轻环境压力的可行模式,为明晰粮食主产区辽宁省耕地利用的可持续集约化现状和潜力,开展水平测度及影响因素的探究。 方法 创新性地采用超效率SBM模型测度2000 ~ 2019年辽宁省耕地利用可持续集约度,并运用Tobit模型探究影响因子。 结果 ① 2000 ~ 2019年,耕地利用的可持续集约度波动特征明显,整体略有增加,耕地单产和灌溉废水量对可持续集约度的影响较大。② 规模效率相较于纯技术效率对可持续集约度的影响更显著,规模效益也一直处于递增状态,增加人力、物力等要素投入会在较长时间内对可持续集约度有显著地提升作用。③ 农村劳动力高中及以上文化水平、种植结构以及农业收入占农村常住居民人均可支配收入比例对耕地利用的可持续集约度有显著正向影响,耕地受灾率有显著负向影响。 结论 科学提升耕地单位产量、有效管控灌溉用水量对于辽宁省耕地利用可持续集约化水平的提升有明显作用,增加化肥、农药、地膜等物质投入的有效利用率、建立农业应急防护体系是助推可持续集约化的有效途径。 Abstract:Objective Sustainable intensification of cultivated land use is one of the most feasible models to alleviate the problems of food security and environmental pressure. Food security is a problem faced by all mankind. As one of the main grain producing areas in China, Liaoning has great practical significance to clarify the status and promote potential of sustainable intensification of cultivated land use, and to carry out level estimation and explore influencing factors. Methods The super efficiency SBM model was used to measure the sustainable intensification degree of cultivated land use in Liaoning Province from 2000 to 2019, and the Tobit model was used to explore the influencing factors and the relevant optimization suggestions were finally put forward according to the content of the article. Results ① The fluctuation characteristics of sustainable intensification degree of cultivated land were obvious from 2000 to 2019, and the overall increase was slight. The research periods were divided into three stages, and the sustainable intensification degrees of cultivated land were 0.932 (2000 - 2007), 0.696 (2008 - 2011) and 0.944 (2012 - 2019), respectively, with the overall change characteristics of “high-low-high”. From the perspective of input/output, the per unit yield of cultivated land in the expected output and the amount of irrigation wastewater in the unexpected output had a great impact on the sustainable intensification degree of cultivated land use. ② After decomposing the sustainable intensification degree of cultivated land use, there was a correlation between scale effect score, pure technical efficiency score and the sustainable intensification degree of cultivated land use. However, compared with pure technical efficiency score, scale effect score had a more significant impact on sustainable degree, and the returns to scale has been increasing. Increasing the input of manpower, material and other factors would significantly improve the sustainable intensification degree during a long time. ③ The educational level of rural labor force at or above senior high school, planting structure and the proportion of agricultural income in the per capita disposable income of rural permanent residents had a significant positive impact on the sustainable intensification degree of cultivated land use, and the correlation coefficients were 0.077, 0.461 and 0.083, respectively. The disaster rate of cultivated land had a significant negative impact, and the correlation coefficient was -1.203. The impact of the other five influencing factors was not significant, but to a certain extent, it could reflect the current situation that the government's investment in agriculture was increasing and the living standards of rural residents were improving year by year, while the number of rural labor force was decreasing. Conclusion The yield of cultivated land must be increased, the amount of irrigation waste must be reduced and the effective regulatory measures must be taken from the perspective of input/output. From the perspective of management measures, the cultivated land protection measures must be implemented, the pest control and green agricultural techniques must be applied, and the policy support and continuous follow-up of corresponding agricultural supporting investment must be given. From the perspective of the implementation subject, the ways for farmers must increase to obtain knowledge, farming mode and crop management technology, to ensure farmers' economic income, to improve the level of sustainable intensification of cultivated land use, and finally realize a virtuous cycle. -
表 1 耕地利用可持续集约度评估指标
Table 1. Evaluation index of the degree of sustainable intensification of cultivated land use
指标类型
Index type指标
Index释义及单位
Interpretation and unit物质投入 土地投入 耕地面积(hm2) 能源投入 农业机械总动力(kw) 劳动力投入 农业从业人员(万人) 水资源投入 耕地有效灌溉面积(hm2) 化肥投入 化肥施用量(104 t) 农药投入 农药使用量(104 t) 薄膜投入 塑料薄膜使用量(t) 柴油投入 农用柴油使用量(104 t) 期望产出 农业产值 农业产值(亿元) 耕地单产 耕地作物单位面积产量(t hm−2) 非期望产出 气体废物 碳排放量(t) 固体废物 农业污染物排放量(t) 废水 灌溉废水量(t) 表 2 各产出要素的碳排放系数
Table 2. Carbon emission coefficient of each output factor
要素
Factor碳排放系数
Carbon emission coefficient单位
Unit煤炭 0.539 kg kg−1 焦炭 0.830 kg kg−1 原油 0.836 kg kg−1 汽油 0.814 kg kg−1 煤油 0.844 kg kg−1 柴油 0.862 kg kg−1 燃料油 0.828 kg kg−1 天然气 0.596 kg (m3)−1 电力 0.097 kg kwh−1 化肥 0.896 kg kg−1 农药 4.934 kg kg−1 农膜 5.180 kg kg−1 表 3 耕地可持续集约度分解情况
Table 3. Decomposition of the degree of sustainable intensification of cultivated land use
年份
Year综合效率
Technical
efficiency score纯技术效率
Pure technical
efficiency score规模效率
Scale
effect score规模收益
Returns
to scale2000 0.576 1.092 0.528 增加 2001 1.005 1.024 0.981 增加 2002 1.000 1.025 0.976 增加 2003 0.839 1.029 0.815 增加 2004 1.021 1.032 0.989 增加 2005 1.002 1.003 0.999 增加 2006 1.001 1.005 0.996 增加 2007 1.014 1.018 0.996 增加 2008 0.718 1.006 0.714 增加 2009 0.591 0.789 0.749 增加 2010 0.727 0.835 0.870 增加 2011 0.746 0.862 0.866 增加 2012 1.004 1.012 0.993 增加 2013 1.011 1.011 1.000 增加 2014 0.671 1.001 0.671 增加 2015 1.018 1.034 0.984 增加 2016 1.008 1.022 0.986 增加 2017 0.919 1.000 0.919 增加 2018 0.863 1.006 0.858 增加 2019 1.059 1.068 0.992 增加 表 4 耕地利用可持续集约度影响因素Tobit回归结果
Table 4. Tobit regression results of influencing factors of the degree of sustainable intensification of cultivated land use
影响因素
Indicator相关系数
Correlation coefficient标准误
Standard error显著性
Significance耕地受灾率 −1.203 0.265 0.000 农村劳动力高中及以上文化水平比例 0.077 0.021 0.000 机械化程度 −0.006 0.008 0.486 政府农林水支出 0.001 0.001 0.278 年均降雨量 0.000 0.000 0.673 种植结构 0.461 0.118 0.000 农村劳动力转移量 −0.002 0.003 0.473 农村居民消费价格指数 −0.007 0.009 0.445 农业收入占农村常住居民人均可支配收入比例 0.083 0.030 0.006 -
[1] Singh R K, Joshi P K, Sinhai V S P, et al. Indicator based assessment of food security in SAARC nations under the influence of climate change scenarios[J]. Future Foods, 2022, 5: 100122. doi: 10.1016/j.fufo.2022.100122 [2] Patel S K, Sharma A, Singh G S. Traditional agricultural practices in India: an approach for environmental sustainability and food security[J]. Energy, Ecology and Environment, 2020, 5(3): 253 − 271. [3] Fortmann L. Sustainable intensification: Increasing productivity in African food and agricultural systems[J]. Experimental Agriculture, 2011, 48(1): 153. [4] Godfray H, Garnett T. Food security and sustainable intensification[J]. Philosophical Transactions - Royal Society. Biological Sciences, 2014, 369(1639): 20120273. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0273 [5] Melissa F R, Curan A B, Jan D, et al. An integrated approach to monitoring ecosystem services and agriculture: implications for sustainable agricultural intensification in Rwanda[J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment:An International Journal, 2017, 189(1): 15. doi: 10.1007/s10661-016-5607-6 [6] Piao S L, Ciais P, Huang Y, et al. The impacts of climate change on water resources and agriculture in China[J]. Nature, 2010, 467(7311): 43 − 51. doi: 10.1038/nature09364 [7] IPCC Third Assessment Report: climate change 2006[R]. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 2006: 21. [8] Jourdain D, Lairez J, Striffler B, et al. Farmers’ preference for cropping systems and the development of sustainable intensification: a choice experiment approach[J]. Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, 2020, 101: 417 − 437. doi: 10.1007/s41130-020-00100-4 [9] Cassman K G, Grassini P. A global perspective on sustainable intensification research[J]. Nature Sustainability, 2020, 3(4): 262 − 268. doi: 10.1038/s41893-020-0507-8 [10] Joffre O M, Laurens K, Khoa T. Aquaculture innovation system analysis of transition to sustainable intensification in shrimp farming[J]. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2018, 38(3): 34. doi: 10.1007/s13593-018-0511-9 [11] Nath T K, Jashimuddin M, Hasan M K, et al. The sustainable intensification of agroforestry in shifting cultivation areas of Bangladesh[J]. Agroforestry Systems, 2016, 90(3): 405 − 416. doi: 10.1007/s10457-015-9863-1 [12] Matsuda M. Intensification level of rice farming in Myanmar: implication for its sustainable development[J]. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2011, 13: 51 − 64. doi: 10.1007/s10668-010-9247-7 [13] Kotua B H, Oyinbo O, Irmgard H Z, et al. Smallholder farmers’ preferences for sustainable intensification attributes in maize production: Evidence from Ghana[J]. World Development, 2022, 152: 105789. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105789 [14] Heidenreich A, Grovermann C, Kadzerea I, et al. Sustainable intensification pathways in Sub-Saharan Africa: Assessing eco-efficiency of smallholder perennial cash crop production[J]. Agricultural Systems, 2022, 195: 103304. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103304 [15] Silva J V, Reidsma P, Baudron F, et al. How sustainable is sustainable intensification? Assessing yield gaps at field and farm level across the globe[J]. Global Food Security, 2021, 30: 100552. doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2021.100552 [16] Rudel T K, Paul B, White D, et al. LivestockPlus: Forages, sustainable intensification, and food security in the tropics[J]. Ambio, 2015, 44(7): 685. doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0676-2 [17] Xie H L, Huang Y Q, Choi Y, et al. Evaluating the sustainable intensification of cultivated land use based on emergy analysis[J]. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2021, 165: 120449. [18] Mouratiadou I, Latka C, Hilst F, et al. Quantifying sustainable intensification of agriculture: The contribution of metrics and modelling[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2021, 129: 107870. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107870 [19] 牛善栋, 吕 晓, 史洋洋. 山东省农地利用可持续集约化的时空格局[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(2): 607 − 616. [20] Chikowo R, Zingore S, Nyamangara J, et al. Approaches to reinforce crop productivity under rain-fed conditions in sub-humid environments in sub-Saharan Africa[M]. Sustainable Intensification to Advance Food Security and Enhance Climate Resilience in Africa, 2015, 235 − 253. [21] Owenya M, Mariki W, Stewart A, et al. Conservation agriculture and sustainable crop intensification in Karatu District, Tanzania[J]. Integrated Crop Management, 2012, 3(17): 116 − 127. [22] Willy D K, Muyang M, Jayne T. Can economic and environmental benefits associated with agricultural intensification be sustained at high population densities? A farm level empirical analysis[J]. Land Use Policy, 2019, 81: 100 − 110. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.046 [23] Prasad P, Damani O M, Sohoni M. How can resource-level thresholds guide sustainable intensification of agriculture at farm level? A system dynamics study of farm-pond based intensification[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2022, 264: 107385. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107385 [24] Kamanga B C G, Waddington S R, Whitbread A M, et al. Improving the efficiency of use of small amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer on smallholder maize in Central Malawi[J]. Experimental Agriculture, 2014, 58(2): 229 − 249. [25] Lovell R J, Shennan C, Thuy N N. Sustainable and conventional intensification: How gendered livelihoods influence farming practice adoption in the Vietnamese Mekong River Delta[J]. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2021, 23(1): 7089 − 7116. [26] Balaine L, Dillon E J, Läoolea D, et al. Can technology help achieve sustainable intensification? Evidence from milk recording on Irish dairy farms[J]. Land Use Policy, 2020, 92: 104437. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104437 [27] 吕 晓, 牛善栋, 谷国政, 等. “新三农”视域下中国耕地利用的可持续集约化: 概念认知与研究框架[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(9): 2029 − 2043. [28] 彭文龙, 吕 晓, 牛善栋. 论耕地利用可持续集约化与农户生计转型[J]. 农业工程学报, 2022, 38(4): 270 − 277. [29] Anantha K H, Kaushal K G, Jennie B, et al. Impact of best management practices on sustainable crop production and climate resilience in smallholder farming systems of South Asia[J]. Agricultural Systems, 2021, 194: 103276. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103276 [30] Vine M. Prospects of sustainable intensification of smallholder farming systems: A farmer typology approach[J]. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 2020, 12(6): 727 − 734. doi: 10.1080/20421338.2019.1711319 [31] Ruben R, Kruseman G, Kuyvenhoven A. Strategies for sustainable intensification in East African highlands: labor use and input efficiency[J]. Agricultural Economics, 2006, 34(2): 167 − 181. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-0864.2006.00116.x [32] Lyu X, Peng W L, Yu W, et al. Sustainable intensification to coordinate agricultural efficiency and environmental protection: a systematic review based on metrological visualization[J]. Journal of Land Use Science, 2021, 16(3): 313 − 338. doi: 10.1080/1747423X.2021.1922524 [33] Chanes A, Cooper W W, Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 1978, (6): 429 − 444. [34] Tone K. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2001, 130(3): 498 − 509. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00407-5 [35] Tone K. A slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2002, 143(1): 32 − 41. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00324-1 [36] 赵娟霞, 赵佳悦, 王明浩. 我国环保产业融资效率评价的实证分析[J]. 生态经济, 2021, 37(11): 71 − 77,85. [37] 赵荣钦. 城市系统碳循环及土地调控研究[M]. 南京: 南京大学出版社, 2012: 145. [38] 赵倩雯. 辽宁省农用地膜残留污染现状分析及建议[J]. 园艺与种苗, 2019, 39(4): 51 − 53, 56. [39] 侯孟阳, 邓元杰, 姚顺波. 农村劳动力转移、化肥施用强度与农业生态效率: 交互影响与空间溢出[J]. 农业技术经济, 2021, (10): 79 − 94. [40] 崔宁波, 王欣媛, 于 尊. 东北粮食主产区耕地生态效率评价及影响因素分析[J]. 生态经济, 2021, 37(7): 104 − 110. [41] 孙 雪. 辽宁地区农业气象灾害的趋势变化及其对粮食产量的影响[J]. 农民致富之友, 2015, (18): 288 − 289,104. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-1650.2015.18.278 [42] 王平达, 王泽宇. 农村劳动力转移对地区产业结构优化的影响及治理对策[J]. 学术交流, 2021, (12): 94 − 105. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-8284.2021.12.008