生态治理政策工具对农户行为的影响差异研究——以宁夏盐池县为例

政策工具被认为是政府为解决某个公共问题采取的具体手段或措施，一项政策可以视作目标和多种政策工具的组合。在生态治理过程中，不同政策工具对农户行为的刺激程度不同，进而导致不同的政策效果。分离不同政策工具的影响，可为工具选择和政策优化提供科学参考。以盐池县为例，利用基于该县1983-2017年内出台的316份生态政策文本构建的政策工具数据集和VAR模型中的脉冲响应和方差分解方法定量研究了强制型、混合型和自愿型三大类政策工具及十种子工具对农户耕作、放牧、造林3种行为的影响。结果表明：（1）政策工具对农户行为的影响具有时效性，一般在政策出台后2-3年内影响最大，随后逐渐减小并消失，影响持续时间为7-10年。（2）总体来看，政策工具对农户行为的冲击力度较小，冲击范围在0-0.30之间，说明农户行为还受到其他诸多因素的影响。（3）10年累计影响从大到小依次为强制型、混合型、自愿型，其中直接提供和规制两种子工具的影响最大。放牧行为受到政策工具的刺激最大，耕作行为次之，造林行为最小。（4）直接提供工具对耕作行为具有最大正向影响，最大冲击为0.30；规制工具在短期内抑制牲畜数量增长，而直接提供和补贴工具促进牲畜数量增长，且由于冲击曲线存在正负波动，说明政府与农户在牲畜养殖上存在长期博弈；只有规制工具对造林行为具有积极影响，说明造林更多是在政府的主导下进行。建议充分利用政策工具的短期效应，凸显政府角色，及时做好政策效果评估工作，调整工具组合，助力生态目标的实现。

Different effects of policy instruments of ecological governance on farmers' behaviors: A case study of Yanchi County, Ningxia

Policy instruments are considered to be specific means or measures taken by the government to solve public problems, and one policy can be regarded as the combination of objectives and various policy instruments. In the process of ecological governance, the degrees of policy instruments'' stimulation to the behavior of local farmers are different, which further leads to different policy effects. The understanding of the influence of different policy instruments can provide a scientific reference for instrument selection and policy optimization. Taking Yanchi County as an example, using the data set of policy instruments constructed from 316 ecological policies issued by Yanchi County from 1983 to 2017 and based on the impulse response and variance decomposition method of VAR model, this paper quantitatively studies the impacts of various policy instruments that include mandatory instrument, hybrid instrument, voluntary instrument and ten sub-instruments on farmers'' behaviors of farming, grazing, and afforestation. The results show that:(1) the impact of policy instruments on farmers'' behaviors is time-sensitive, which would reach the maximum within 2 to 3 years after the instrument was implemented, and then gradually dwindle and disappear within 7 to 10 years. (2) Generally speaking, the impact of policy instruments on farmers'' behaviors is relatively small, with an impulse response ranging from 0 to 0.30, indicating that the farmers'' behaviors are also affected by many other factors. (3) The 10 years cumulative impact is in descending order of the mandatory instrument, hybrid instrument and voluntary instrument; The two instruments, direct provision and regulation, have the greatest effects. Farmers'' behavior of grazing is most stimulated by policy instruments, followed by farming and afforestation. (4) The instrument of direct provision has the greatest positive impact on farming behavior, with a maximum impact of 0.30; the instrument of regulatory may inhibit the growth of livestock numbers in the short term, while the instruments of direct provision and subsidy may promote the growth of livestock numbers. There are fluctuations between positive and negative in the impulse response curves, indicating that there has been a long-term game between the government and farmers in livestock breeding. Only the instrument of regulatory has a positive impact on the behavior of afforestation, which indicates that afforestation is more under the leadership of the government. To realize the goal of ecological protection, it is recommended to make full use of the short-term effects of policy instruments, highlight the role of the government, and optimize the combination of instruments.