农户采纳有机农业的影响因素及其空间效应

卢瑜; 向平安; 余亮

doi:10.12357/cjea.20210587

农户采纳有机农业的影响因素及其空间效应基于新疆农户调查数据

doi: 10.12357/cjea.20210587

卢瑜^{1, 2,},
向平安^1, ,,
余亮^{1, 3}

1.
湖南农业大学商学院　长沙　410028
2.
长沙民政职业技术学院　长沙　410004
3.
湖南第一师范学院　长沙　410205

基金项目: 湖南省自然科学基金项目(2021JJ30369)和湖南省哲学社会科学基金项目(19YBA092)资助

详细信息

作者简介:
卢瑜, 主要从事有机农业研究。E-mail: 634279803@qq.com

通讯作者:
向平安, 主要从事生态农业研究。E-mail: xpa830@126.com

中图分类号: S345
计量
- 文章访问数: 226
- HTML全文浏览量: 102
- PDF下载量: 36
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-08-30
- 录用日期: 2021-10-25
- 网络出版日期: 2021-11-01
- 刊出日期: 2022-01-08

Influencing factors and spatial effects of organic agriculture adoption: Based on survey data of farmers in Xinjiang

LU Yu^{1, 2
,},
XIANG Ping’an^{1
, ,},
YU Liang^{1, 3}

1.
Business School, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410028, China
2.
Changsha Social Work College, Changsha 410004, China
3.
Hunan First Normal University, Changsha 410205, China

Funds: This study was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province (2021JJ30369), the Social Science Foundation of Hunan Province (19YBA092).

More Information

Corresponding author: E-mail: xpa830@126.com

摘要

摘要: 洞悉农户采纳有机农业的影响机制是设计有机农业推广政策的前提。本研究通过构建空间杜宾Probit模型, 利用新疆农户调查数据, 探究了农户采纳有机农业的影响因素及空间效应, 并将影响因素的空间效应分解为直接效应和空间溢出效应, 以明确其作用路径。研究发现: 1)示范区、加入合作组织、社会网络、社会规范、合同保障、社会信任、风险偏好、引导政策、激励政策、劳动力、农户认知和年龄均对有机农业采纳行为有显著正向影响, 且总效应依序递减; 其中不同维度社会网络的作用存在较大差异, 产业组织网络对于农户有机农业采纳正向作用大于邻里网络。2)农户有机农业采纳行为存在显著空间依赖性, 采纳行为主要受各因素直接效应的影响, 但邻近农户特征变量的空间溢出效应不容忽视, 尤其是国家有机产品认证示范(创建)区和合作组织的空间溢出效应显著。公共部门的有机农业支持政策可向示范性经营主体倾斜, 通过加大宣传推广、财政、金融与技术支持, 大力培育和发展农业龙头企业和农民合作组织等产业组织, 创建有机产品认证示范区, 提高农户的有机农业认知来促进农户采纳有机农业。
- 采纳有机农业 /
- 空间效应 /
- 空间杜宾Probit模型 /
- 农户 /
- 新疆
Abstract: In recent years, as an important implementation measure to realize agricultural green development and rural revitalization, organic agriculture faces both opportunities and challenges and needs public policy support. Farmers are the direct production decision-maker, clarifying the influencing mechanism of farmers’ organic agriculture adoption is reasonable in allowing the design of effective extension policies to promote the development of organic agriculture for the public sector. On the basis of questionnaire survey and on-the-spot interview data of 516 farmers in seven cities in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, this study constructed a spatial Durbin Probit model to explore the influencing factors and their spatial effects of farmers’ adoption of organic agriculture. Direct effects and spatial spillover effects of characteristic variables on farmers’ organic agriculture adoption were determined using the partial differential method. The main findings revealed that first, 59.3% of the farmers adopted organic agriculture, with income expectation being the key influencing factor. In addition, more organic farmers were located in southern Xinjiang and less in northern Xinjiang, indicating that poor ecological suitability does not constitute an obstacle to the development of organic agriculture. Compared with conventional farmers, organic farmers had a positive understanding of organic agriculture, were more willing to obtain relevant information about organic agriculture through social networks, realized interactive learning and mutually beneficial support, joining cooperative organizations more actively, and had a higher degree of social trust among similar farmers. Second, the demonstration area, cooperative organizations, social networks, social norms, contract guarantees, social trust, risk preference, guiding policy, incentive policy, number of laborers, farmers’ cognition degree of organic agriculture, and age had significant, positive, and independent effects on the adoption of organic agriculture. The total effects of these factors decreased following the above order. It is worth noting that there were differences in the role of social networks in different dimensions, more specifically, the positive effect of the industrial organization network on farmers’ adoption of organic agriculture was greater than that of the neighborhood network. From the perspective of government policies, there were differences in the impact of guidance policies and incentive policies on organic and conventional farmers, but there was no significant difference in restraint policies. Third, the adoption of organic agriculture by neighboring farmers had a positive spatial correlation. Farmers’ organic agriculture adoption was mainly influenced by the direct effects of the influencing factors. However, the neighbors’ spatial spillover effects cannot be ignored, especially regarding their participation in industrial organizations and the organic product certification demonstration area. The public sector can shift organic agriculture support policy toward the demonstration operators and promote farmers’ adoption of organic agriculture by increasing publicity, financial and technical support, cultivating and developing cooperation organizations such as agricultural leading enterprises and farmers’ cooperative organizations, establishing a national organic product certification demonstration (creation) area, and improving farmers’ awareness of organic agriculture. This study made the following contributions: first, it has investigated the influencing factors and spatial effects of farmers’ organic agriculture adoption based on survey data, helping to understand the spatial mechanism of farmers’ organic agriculture adoption and accounting for the lack of empirical evidence at the farmer level; second, it has empirically examined the role of social networks in different dimensions, which is crucial to understanding the role of neighborhood versus industrial organization forces in the diffusion of organic agriculture, which ultimately, can help policymakers to effectively induce behavioral changes by prioritizing programs that target either individual households or neighborhood networks and communities.
- Organic agriculture adoption /
- Spatial effects /
- Spatial Durbin Probit model /
- Farmers /
- Xinjiang

HTML全文

表 1 新疆调查区域及主要特征

Table 1. Xinjing survey area and its main characteristics

区域 Area	地区(自治州) Region (autonomous prefecture)	县(市、区) County (city, regiment)	主要有机产品 Organic product	属示范创建区 Demonstration area	取样数量 Samples number
南疆 South Xinjiang	巴音郭楞蒙古自治州 Bayingolin Mongolian Autonomous Prefecture	焉耆县 Yanqi County	有机酿酒葡萄 Organic wine grapes	否 No	30
南疆 South Xinjiang	巴音郭楞蒙古自治州 Bayingolin Mongolian Autonomous Prefecture	若羌县 Ruoqiang County	有机红枣 Organic red jujube	是 Yes	66
	阿克苏地区 Aksu Region	阿克苏市 Aksu City	有机苹果、杏、红枣 Organic apple, apricot, red jujube	否 No	30
		温宿县 Wensu County	有机核桃、红枣 Organic walnut, red jujube	是 Yes	75
	吐鲁番地区 Turpan Region	鄯善县 Shanshan County	有机哈密瓜、葡萄 Organic Hami melon, grape	否 No	25
	喀什地区 Kashgar Region	泽普县 Zepu County	有机红枣、苹果、土豆 Organic jujube, apple, potato	是 Yes	45
北疆 North Xinjiang	博尔塔拉蒙古自治州 Bortala Mongolian Autonomous Prefecture	农五师81团 81st Regiment of the Fifth Division of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps	有机棉花 Organic cotton	否 No	25
		博乐市 Bole City	有机牛羊、玉米、鱼类 Organic cattle, sheep, corn, fish	否 No	30
	伊犁地区 Yili Region	农四师76团 76st Regiment of the Fourth Division of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps	有机牛 Organic cattle	否 No	33
		农四师73团场 73st Regiment of the Fourth Division of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps	有机葡萄 Organic grape	否 No	31
		伊宁县 Yining County	有机水稻 Organic rice	否 No	19
	塔城地区 Tacheng Region	裕民县 Yumin County	有机红花、小麦 Organic safflower, wheat	是 Yes	75
		和布克赛尔蒙古自治县 Hebukeser Mongolian Autonomous County	有机棉花、有机牛 Organic cotton, cattle	否 No	32

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 新疆调查区受访农户的基本情况

Table 2. Basic information of farmers interviewed in Xinjiang survey area

变量 Variable	分类 Classification	频数 Frequency	百分比 Rate (%)	变量 Variable	分类 Classification	频数 Frequency	百分比 Rate (%)
有机农业采纳 Organic agriculture adoption	否 No	210	40.7	家庭年收入 Annual household income (×10⁴¥)	<5	56	32.6
有机农业采纳 Organic agriculture adoption	是 Yes	306	59.3	家庭年收入 Annual household income (×10⁴¥)	5~10	70	40.7
性别 Gender	男 Male	84	48.8		11~15	21	12.2
	女 Female	88	51.2		>15	25	14.5
文化程度 Education	小学 Primary school	10	5.8	农业收入占比 Proportion of agricultural income (%)	<25	26	15.1
	初中 Junior middle school	50	29.1		25~49	30	17.4
	高中或中专 High school or secondary school	68	39.5		50~75	71	41.3
	大专及以上 College or above	44	25.6		>75	45	26.2
合同保障 Contract guarantee	否 No	113	65.7	来自有机认证示范(创建)区 Organic certification demonstration area	否 No	98	57.0
合同保障 Contract guarantee	是 Yes	59	34.3	来自有机认证示范(创建)区 Organic certification demonstration area	是 Yes	74	43.0
加入合作组织 Join cooperative organizations	否 No	79	45.9	地区 Region	南疆 South Xinjiang	93	54.7
加入合作组织 Join cooperative organizations	是 Yes	93	54.1	地区 Region	北疆 North Xinjiang	79	45.3
风险偏好 Risk preference	风险偏好 Preference for high risk	100	58.1	种类 Type	林果 Forestry and fruit	75	43.6
	风险中性 Risk neutral	52	30.2		种植 Planting	58	33.7
	风险厌恶 Risk aversion	20	11.6		养殖 Breeding	39	22.7

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 社会资本变量说明及其赋值

Table 3. Explanation and assignment of social capital

变量及含义 Variable and meaning	变量赋值 Assignment
社会网络 Social network	对信息共享、互动学习、互惠支持3方面题项采用李克特5点量表测量, 取量表打分的平均值。 The items of information sharing, interactive learning and reciprocal support are measured by Likert 5-point scale, and the average scale score is assigned to the variable of social network.
社会信任 Social trust	对邻里街坊、亲朋好友、相关企业、合作组织的信任程度4个题项采用李克特5点量表测量, 取量表打分平均值。 The four items of trust in neighbors, relatives and friends, related enterprises and cooperative organizations are measured with Likert 5-point scale, and the average scale score is assigned to the variable of social trust.
社会规范 Social norms	对价值导向和社会认同两个维度的题项采用李克特5点量表测量, 取量表打分的平均值。 The items of value orientation and social identity were measured with Likert 5-point scale, and the average scale score is assigned to the variable of social norms.

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 公共政策变量说明及其赋值

Table 4. Explanation and assignment of public policy

变量及含义 Variable and Meaning	变量赋值 Assignment
引导政策 Guiding policy	对“政府对有机农业的宣传力度”和“政府对于农业农村环境治理的宣传力度”两个题项, 采用李克特5点量表测量, 取其量表打分平均值。 The items of “the government’s publicity for organic agriculture” and “the government’s publicity for agricultural and rural environmental governance” are measured by Likert 5-point scale, and the average scale score is assigned to the variable of guiding policy.
激励政策 Incentive policy	对“有机农业财政补贴获取难易程度”和“有机农业技术、金融和税收等其他支持获取难易程度”两个题项, 采用李克特5点量表测量, 取其量表打分平均值。 The items “how easy is to obtain financial subsidies for organic agriculture?” and “how easy is to obtain other support such as organic agricultural technology, finance and taxation support?” are measured by Likert 5-point, and the average scale score is assigned to the variable of incentive policy.
约束政策 Compulsory policy	对“政府对农药化肥使用、农膜秸秆禁烧和养殖粪污废弃物处理的监管和惩罚力度”和“政府对违反有机生产及认证标准行为的监管和惩罚力度”两个题项, 采用李克特5点量表测量, 取其量表打分的平均值。 The two items of “the government’s supervision and punishment on the use of pesticides and fertilizers, the prohibition of burning agricultural film straw and the treatment of breeding fecal waste” and “the government’s supervision and punishment on violations of organic production and certification standards” are measured with Likert 5-point scale, and the average scale score is assigned to the variable of compulsory policy.

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 农户自身因素变量说明及其赋值

Table 5. Explanation and assignment of farmers’ individual factors

变量及含义 Variable and meaning		变量赋值 Assignment
农户认知 Farmer’s cognition	效益认知 Benefit cognition	对经济效益认知、生态效益认知、社会效益认知题项采用李克特5点量表进行测量, 取量表打分的平均值。 The items of economic benefit cognition, ecological benefit cognition and social benefit cognition were measured with Likert 5-point scale, and the average value of the scale score is assigned to benefit cognition.
	风险认知 Risk perception	有机农业的生产经营风险: 非常低=1; 低=2; 一般=3; 高=4; 非常高=5 Risks of organic agriculture: very low=1, low=2, general=3, high=4, very high=5
	前景认知 Prospect cognition	有机农业发展前景如何: 非常好=5; 好=4; 一般=3; 不好=2; 非常不好=1 Development prospect of organic agriculture: very good=5; good=4; general=3; bad=2; very bad=1
	能力认知 Ability cognition	对有机农业技术掌握能力和运用能力题项采用李克特5点量表测量, 取量表打分的平均值。 The items of mastering ability and application ability of organic agricultural technology were measured by Likert 5-point scale, and the average value of the scale score is assigned to ability cognition.
人口社会学特征 Sociological characteristics of population	性别 Gender	户主性别: 男=1, 女=0 Household head’s gender: male=1, female=0
	年龄 Age	户主实际年龄(岁) Household head’s actual age
	文化程度 Education	户主受教育水平: 小学=1, 初中=2, 高中或中专=3, 大专及以上=4 Household head’s education level: primary school=1, junior middle school=2, high school or technical secondary school=3, junior college or above=4
	风险偏好 Risk preference	户主风险偏好: 风险偏好=3, 风险中性=2, 风险厌恶=1 Household head’s risk preference: risk preference=3, risk neutrality=2, risk aversion=1
	是否加入合作组织 Cooperative organization	加入=1, 未加入=0 Join=1, not join=0
	是否有合同保障 Contact guarantee	签订了订单销售合同=1, 未签订订单销售合同=0 Signed sales contract=1, unsigned sales contract=0
资源禀赋 Resource endowment	劳动力 Labor force	实际家庭劳动力数量 Number of household labor force
	经营农地面积 Operating farmland area	实际经营农地面积(含流转土地面积) Actual operating agricultural land area (including transferred land area) hm²
	家庭年收入 Annual household income	上一年度家庭总收入(万元): <5=1, 5~10=2, 10~15=3, 15~20=4, >20=5 Total annual household income in the previous year (10⁴¥): <5=1, 5−10=2, 10−15=3, 15−20=4, >20=5

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 区位变量说明及其赋值

Table 6. Explanation and assignment of location variables

变量及含义 Variable and meaning	变量赋值 Assignment
空间位置 Spatial location	农户家庭地址的经纬度坐标 Longitude and latitude coordinates of household address
来源区域 Regions where farmers come from	农户是否来自南疆: 来自南疆=1, 来自北疆=0 Whether the farmers are from southern Xinjiang or not: from southern Xinjiang=1, from northern Xinjiang=0
来自国家有机产品认证示范(创建)区 Organic certification demonstration area	农户是否来自国家有机产品认证示范(创建)区: 示范(创建)区=1, 非示范(创建)区=0 Whether the farmers are from organic certification demonstration area or not: yes=1, no=0

下载: 导出CSV

表 7 新疆农户调查问卷的信度和效度检验

Table 7. Reliability and validity of the farmers’ survey questionnaire in Xinjiang

变量指标 Variables			ɑ系数 ɑ coefficient	组合信度(CR) Composite reliability	平均变异萃取量(AVE) Average variation extraction
农户认知 Farmer’s cognition	前景认知 Prospect cognition		0.773	0.712	0.503
	效益认知 Benefit cognition		0.891	0.831	0.534
	风险认知 Risk cognition		0.849	0.825	0.520
	行为能力认知 Ability cognition		0.833	0.817	0.516
社会资本 Social capital	社会网络 Social network	信息共享 Information sharing	0.797	0.843	0.525
		互动学习 Interactive learning	0.909	0.854	0.527
		互惠支持 Reciprocal support	0.911	0.871	0.548
	社会规范 Social norms	价值导向 Value orientation	0.770	0.751	0.508
		社会认同 Social conformity	0.936	0.882	0.592
	社会信任 Social trust		0.868	0.842	0.524
政府政策 Government policy	引导政策 Guiding policy		0.837	0.826	0.522
	激励政策 Incentive policy		0.887	0.846	0.528
	约束政策 Compulsory policy		0.839	0.820	0.519

下载: 导出CSV

表 8 有机农户和常规农户的描述性统计和差异显著性检验结果

Table 8. Descriptive statistics and significance test results of organic farmers and conventional farmers

变量 Variable	有机农户 Organic farmers	常规农户 Conventional farmers	组间差异统计检验 Difference significance test
变量 Variable	有机农户 Organic farmers	常规农户 Conventional farmers	T值/卡方值 T value / Chi square value	P
社会网络(邻里) Neighborhood network	3.72±0.92	3.40±0.90	3.21	0.07
社会网络(组织) Industrial organization network	4.11±0.77	3.96±077	4.13	0.00
社会规范 Social norms	3.96±0.83	3.70±0.82	3.67	0.05
社会信任 Social trust	4.09±1.13	3.99±1.17	3.56	0.00
引导政策 Guiding policy	4.23±1.02	3.98±1.15	3.21	0.07
激励政策 Incentive policy	4.21±1.00	3.77±1.27	4.13	0.00
约束政策 Compulsory policy	4.14±1.15	4.01±1.18	1.67	0.45
农户对有机农业的认知 Farmers’ cognition of organic agriculture	4.48±0.86	3.33±0.93	3.56	0.00
家庭年收入 Annual household income	2.08±0.98	2.10±1.07	0.24	0.83
经营农地面积 Operating farmland area	6.96±8.98	5.25±7.15	−1.39	0.19
劳动力 Labor force	2.55±0.97	2.66±1.27	−1.13	0.23
性别 Gender	0.51±0.50	0.51±0.50	0.06	0.96
年龄 Age	42.01±9.31	41.36±8.75	−0.46	0.64
文化程度 Education	2.95±0.97	2.04±0.95	0.61	0.54
风险偏好 Risk preference	2.49±0.67	2.43±0.73	−1.74	0.08
加入合作组织 Join cooperative organizations	0.84±0.37	0.10±0.30	7.88	0.00
合同保障 Contract guarantee	0.53±0.50	0.07±0.26	1.53	0.31
来自有机认证示范区 Organic certification demonstration area	0.69±0.43	0.31±0.52	8.23	0.00
来自南疆 From southern Xinjiang	0.63±0.52	0.37±0.43	5.83	0.00

下载: 导出CSV

表 9 空间依赖性检验和模型比较

Table 9. Spatial dependence test and model comparison

基于不同阈值距离空间权重矩阵的模型 Model specification	后验模型概率 Model probabilities	空间自回归系数(ρ) Spatial auto-regressive coefficient
W1: d1=1.5 km	0.531	0.39^***
W2: d2=2.0 km	0.273	0.36^***
W3: d3=2.5 km	0.281	0.28^***
W4: d4=3.0 km	0.152	0.23^***
W5: d5=3.5 km	0.093	0.18
W6: d6=4.0 km	0.061	0.13
W1−W6为基于6种不同地理阈值距离的空间权重矩阵, d1−d6为6种不同的地理距离阈值。、和*分别表示在P<10%、P<5%和P<1%水平显著。W1−W6 are spatial weight matrices based on six geographical threshold distances, and d1−d6 are six geographical distance thresholds. , and * represent the significance at the levels of P<10%, P<5% and P<1%, respectively.

下载: 导出CSV

表 10 空间杜宾Probit模型估计结果

Table 10. Results of the spatial Durbin Probit model

变量 Variable	系数 Coefficient	标准差 Standard deviation	变量的空间滞后项 Spatial lag term of variables	系数 Coefficient	标准差 Standard deviation
社会网络(邻里) Neighborhood network	0.0593^**	0.0285	W×社会网络(邻里) W × neighborhood network	0.0361^*	0.1376
社会网络(组织) Industrial organization network	0.1117^***	0.0279	W×社会网络(组织) W × industrial organization network	0.0266^*	0.1185
社会规范 Social norms	0.0823^***	0.0184	W×社会规范 W × social norms	0.0168^*	0.1032
社会信任 Social trust	0.0824^**	0.0373	W×社会信任 W × social trust	0.0291^*	0.1366
引导政策 Guiding policy	0.0766^**	−0.0346	W×引导政策 W × guiding policy	0.0076^*	0.1602
激励政策 Incentive policy	0.0370^**	−0.0274	W×激励政策 W × incentive policy	−0.0211^*	0.1261
约束政策 Compulsory policy	0.0062	−0.0209	W×约束政策 W × compulsory policy	0.1465	0.0984
农户认知 Farmer’s cognition	0.0580^**	−0.0242	W×农户认知 W × farmer’s cognition	0.0507^*	−0.0961
家庭年收入 Annual household income	−0.0078	−0.0195	W×家庭年收入 W × annual household income	0.2016	−0.0918
农地面积 Actual arable land area	−0.0141	−0.0150	W×农地面积 W × actual arable land area	−0.0141	−0.0678
劳动力 Labor force	0.0290^**	0.0146	W×劳动力 W × labor force	0.1901^*	−0.0831
性别 Gender	−0.0015	0.0331	W×性别 W × gender	−0.1300	−0.1900
年龄 Age	0.0337^**	0.0735	W×年龄 W × age	−0.0538	−0.0377
文化程度 Education	−0.0750	0.0199	W×文化程度 W × education	0.0647	−0.0844
风险偏好 Risk preference	0.0298^**	0.0212	W×风险偏好 W × risk preference	0.0113	−0.0841
是否加入合作组织 Join cooperative organization	0.1116^**	0.0403	W×是否加入合作组织 W × join cooperative organization	0.1132^*	−0.1591
是否有合同保障 Contract guarantee	0.0545^**	0.0422	W×是否有合同保障 W × contract guarantee	0.0768^*	−0.1405
是否来自示范(创建)区 Organic certification demonstration area	0.2063^***	−0.0577	W×是否示范区农户 W × organic certification demonstration area	0.1148^*	0.1559
是否来自南疆 From southern Xinjiang	0.1171^**	−0.0450	W×是否是南疆农户 W × from southern Xinjiang	0.0428	−0.1911
常数项 Constant term	0.9032	−1.3859	R²	0.8988
空间自回归系数 Spatial auto-regressive coefficient	0.3911^***	0.0230	Wald chi²	73.02^***
、、*分别表示在P<10%、P<5%和P<1%水平显著。, and * represent the significance at the levels of P<10%, P<5% and P<1%, respectively.

下载: 导出CSV

表 11 空间效应分解结果

Table 11. Decomposition results of spatial effect

变量 Variable	直接效应 Direct effect	空间溢出效应 Spatial spillover effect	总效应 Total effect
社会网络(邻里) Neighborhood network	0.04^***	0.02^**	0.06^***
社会网络(组织) Industrial organization network	0.17^***	0.02^**	0.19^***
社会规范 Social norms	0.10^***	0.05^**	0.15^***
社会信任 Social trust	0.10^***	0.02^**	0.12^**
引导政策 Guiding policy	0.05^**	0.03^**	0.08^**
激励政策 Incentive policy	0.04^**	0.03^**	0.07^**
约束政策 Compulsory policy	0.02	0.04	0.06
农户认知 Farmer’s cognition of organic agriculture	0.04^**	0.01^**	0.05^**
家庭年收入 Annual household income	−0.03	−0.06	−0.06
农地面积 Operating farmland area	0.01	0.05	0.05
劳动力 Labor force	0.08^**	0.01^**	0.09^**
性别 Gender	−0.02	0.02	0.00
年龄 Age	0.04^**	0.01	0.05^*
文化程度 Education	−0.01	−0.03	−0.04
风险偏好 Risk preference	0.08^***	0.04	0.12^*
加入合作组织 Join cooperative organization	0.13^**	0.08^**	0.21^**
合同保障 Contract guarantee	0.10^**	0.05^**	0.15^**
来自示范(创建)区 Organic certification demonstration area	0.23^***	0.14^**	0.37^**
来自南疆 From southern Xinjiang	0.05^**	0.02	0.07^*
、、*分别表示在P<10%、P<5%和P<1%水平显著。, and * represent the significance in the levels of P<10%, P<5% and P<1%, respectively.

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(32)

[1]	黄季焜. 四十年中国农业发展改革和未来政策选择[J]. 农业技术经济, 2018(3): 4–15 HUANG J K. Forty years of China’s agricultural development and reform and the way forward in the future[J]. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, 2018(3): 4–15
[2]	于法稳. 新时代农业绿色发展动因、核心及对策研究[J]. 中国农村经济, 2018(5): 19–34 YU F W. An analysis of the reasons, core and countermeasures of agricultural green development in the new era[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2018(5): 19–34
[3]	国家认证认可监督管理委员会, 中国农业大学. 中国有机产品认证与产业发展[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2020 Certification and Accreditation Administration of the People’s Republic of China, China Agricultural University. Organic Product Certification and Development of Organic Industry in China[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2020
[4]	WILLER H, TRáVNIčEK J, MEIER C, et al. The World of Organic Agriculture— Statistics and Emerging Trends[M]. FiBLI and FOAM, Nürnberg, 2021
[5]	KARKI L, SCHLEENBECKER R, HAMM U. Factors influencing a conversion to organic farming in Nepalese tea farms[J]. Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development in the Tropics and Subtropics, 2011, 112(2): 113−123
[6]	王奇, 陈海丹, 王会. 农户有机农业技术采用意愿的影响因素分析——基于北京市和山东省250户农户的调查[J]. 农村经济, 2012(2): 99–103 WANG Q, CHEN H D, WANG H. Analysis on influencing factors of farmers’ willingness to adopt organic agricultural technology: Based on a survey of 250 farmers in Beijing and Shandong Province[J]. Rural Economy, 2012(2): 99–103
[7]	LÄPPLE D, KELLEY H. Understanding the uptake of organic farming: Accounting for heterogeneities among Irish farmers[J]. Ecological Economics, 2013, 88: 11−19 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.12.025
[8]	高杨, 张笑, 陆姣, 等. 家庭农场绿色防控技术采纳行为研究[J]. 资源科学, 2017, 39(5): 934−944 GAO Y, ZHANG X, LU J, et al. Research on adoption behavior of green control techniques by family farms[J]. Resources Science, 2017, 39(5): 934−944
[9]	SHAMS A, FARD Z H M. Factors affecting wheat farmers’ attitudes toward organic farming[J]. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 2017, 26(5): 2207−2214 doi: 10.15244/pjoes/69435
[10]	张万兰, 卢敏. 农民采纳有机水稻生产技术的影响因素[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2018, 46(9): 146−150 ZHANG W L, LU M. Study on factors influencing farmers to adopt production technology of organic rice[J]. Guizhou Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 46(9): 146−150
[11]	熊鹰, 何鹏. 绿色防控技术采纳行为的影响因素和生产绩效研究−基于四川省水稻种植户调查数据的实证分析[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2020, 28(1): 136−146 XIONG Y, HE P. Impact factors and production performance of adoption of green control technology: an empirical analysis based on the survey data of rice farmers in Sichuan Province[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2020, 28(1): 136−146
[12]	SCHMIDTNER E, LIPPERT C, ENGLER B, et al. Spatial distribution of organic farming in Germany: does neighbourhood matter?[J]. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 2012, 39(4): 661−683 doi: 10.1093/erae/jbr047
[13]	DE BJØRKHAUG H, BLEKESAUNE A. Development of organic farming in Norway: a statistical analysis of neighbourhood effects[J]. Geoforum, 2013, 45: 201−210 doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.11.005
[14]	WOLLNI M, ANDERSSON C. Spatial patterns of organic agriculture adoption: Evidence from Honduras[J]. Ecological Economics, 2014, 97: 120−128 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.11.010
[15]	LÄPPLE D, KELLEY H. Spatial dependence in the adoption of organic drystock farming in Ireland[J]. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 2015, 42(2): 315−337 doi: 10.1093/erae/jbu024
[16]	BONCINELLI F, BARTOLINI F, BRUNORI G, et al. Spatial analysis of the participation in agri-environment measures for organic farming[J]. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 2016, 31(4): 375−386 doi: 10.1017/S1742170515000307
[17]	王小楠, 朱晶, 薄慧敏. 家庭农场有机农业采纳行为的空间依赖性[J]. 资源科学, 2018, 40(11): 2270−2279 WANG X N, ZHU J, BO H M. Spatial dependence of family farms’ adoption behaviors of organic agriculture[J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(11): 2270−2279
[18]	YANG W, SHARP B. Spatial dependence and determinants of dairy farmers’ adoption of best management practices for water protection in New Zealand[J]. Environmental Management, 2017, 59(4): 594−603 doi: 10.1007/s00267-017-0823-6
[19]	卢瑜, 向平安, 余亮. 中国有机农业的集聚与空间依赖性[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2021, 29(3): 440−452 LU Y, XIANG P A, YU L. Agglomeration and spatial dependence of organic agriculture in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2021, 29(3): 440−452
[20]	费孝通. 戴可景译. 江村经济[M]. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社, 2018 FEI X T. Peasant Life in China[M]. Shanghai: East China Normal University Press, 2018
[21]	LESAGE J P, PARENT O. Bayesian model averaging for spatial econometric models[J]. Geographical Analysis, 2007, 39(3): 241−267 doi: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.2007.00703.x
[22]	尉建文, 赵延东. 权力还是声望?−社会资本测量的争论与验证[J]. 社会学研究, 2011, 26(3): 64−83, 244 WEI J W, ZHAO Y D. Power or prestige? the debates and verifications in measurement of social capital[J]. Sociological Studies, 2011, 26(3): 64−83, 244
[23]	卫龙宝, 李静. 农业产业集群内社会资本和人力资本对农民收入的影响−基于安徽省茶叶产业集群的微观数据[J]. 农业经济问题, 2014, 35(12): 41−47, 110 WEI L B, LI J. Analysis for effects of social capital and human capital of agricultural industry cluster on farmers’ income: based on the micro-data of tea industry cluster in Anhui Province[J]. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2014, 35(12): 41−47, 110
[24]	杨志海. 老龄化、社会网络与农户绿色生产技术采纳行为——来自长江流域六省农户数据的验证[J]. 中国农村观察, 2018(4): 44–58 YANG Z H. Ageing, social network and the adoption of green production technology: evidence from farm households in six provinces in the Yangtze River Basin[J]. China Rural Survey, 2018(4): 44–58
[25]	李芬妮, 张俊飚, 何可. 替代与互补: 农民绿色生产中的非正式制度与正式制度[J]. 华中科技大学学报: 社会科学版, 2019, 33(6): 51−60, 94 LI F N, ZHANG J B, HE K. Alternative and complementary: informal institutions and formal institutions in farmers’ green production[J]. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology: Social Science Edition, 2019, 33(6): 51−60, 94
[26]	旷浩源. 农村社会网络与农业技术扩散的关系研究−以G乡养猪技术扩散为例[J]. 科学学研究, 2014, 32(10): 1518−1524 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2053.2014.10.010 KUANG H Y. Study on the relation of rural social network and agricultural technology diffusion— taking the technology diffusion of pig raising on the country G as an example[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2014, 32(10): 1518−1524 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-2053.2014.10.010
[27]	许佳彬, 王洋, 李翠霞. 环境规制政策情境下农户认知对农业绿色生产意愿的影响−来自黑龙江省698个种植户数据的验证[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2021, 26(2): 164−176 doi: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2021.02.18 XU J B, WANG Y, LI C X. Impact of farmers’ cognition on the willingness of green production in the context of environmental regulation policy: Data verificaition from 698 growers in Heilongjiang Province[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2021, 26(2): 164−176 doi: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2021.02.18
[28]	黄祖辉, 钟颖琦, 王晓莉. 不同政策对农户农药施用行为的影响[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016, 26(8): 148−155 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2016.08.020 HUANG Z H, ZHONG Y Q, WANG X L. Study on the impacts of government policy on farmers’ pesticide application behavior[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2016, 26(8): 148−155 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2016.08.020
[29]	黄炎忠, 罗小锋, 李容容, 等. 农户认知、外部环境与绿色农业生产意愿−基于湖北省632个农户调研数据[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(3): 680−687 doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201803024 HUANG Y Z, LUO X F, LI R R, et al. Farmer cognition, external environment and willingness of green agriculture production — based on the survey data of 632 farmers in Hubei Province[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2018, 27(3): 680−687 doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201803024
[30]	姚瑞卿, 姜太碧. 农户行为与“邻里效应”的影响机制[J]. 农村经济, 2015(4): 40–44 YAO R Q, JIANG T B. Farmers’ behavior and the influencing mechanism of “neighborhood effect”[J]. Rural Economy, 2015(4): 40–44
[31]	耿宇宁, 郑少锋, 王建华. 政府推广与供应链组织对农户生物防治技术采纳行为的影响[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报: 社会科学版, 2017, 17(1): 116−122 GENG Y N, ZHENG S F, WANG J H. Impact of the government technology promotion and supply chain organization on farmers’ biological technology adoption behavior[J]. Journal of Northwest A& F University: Social Science Edition, 2017, 17(1): 116−122
[32]	杜运周, 李佳馨, 刘秋辰, 等. 复杂动态视角下的组态理论与QCA方法: 研究进展与未来方向[J]. 管理世界, 2021, 37(3): 180−197, 12 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2021.03.012 DU Y Z, LI J X, LIU Q C, et al. Configurational theory and QCA method from a complex dynamic perspective: research progress and future directions[J]. Journal of Management World, 2021, 37(3): 180−197, 12 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-5502.2021.03.012