【作者】 马林靖；

【导师】 孟令杰； 张林秀；

【作者基本信息】 南京农业大学 ， 农业经济管理， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 随着社会主义新农村建设事业的全面推进,真正实现“生产发展、生活宽裕、乡风文明、村容整洁、管理民主”已经成为各级政府和组织面临的一个重要问题。其中,“生产发展”更是成为其核心内容.作为提高农业生产率重要环节之一—农村水利灌溉设施的改善也日益受到政府和有关部门的重视。与此同时,中国今后的农业生产潜力开发在很大程度上也依赖于灌溉设施的完善和灌溉条件的提高。因此,本研究的目标就是通过全国代表性的抽样调查,在描述我国农村灌溉服务现状的基础上,对投资的效果、质量以及农民的满意情况进行评估.通过对以上问题的实证分析,为改善农村水利灌溉设施的投资质量、增加农民收入、提高农民满意度提供一些决策参考.本文的核心内容是使用中国科学院农业政策研究中心于2005年4月在全国5个省、25个县、50多个乡、101个村、808个农户的调查数据,从以下三个主要方面对农田水利投资进行研究:第一,从村级角度实证分析了1998—2004年灌溉投资的发生与特点,包括投资的基本情况、投资目的、资金来源主体、投资区域分布、投资强度等。宏观统计表明,建国后农田水利取得了长足发展,然而我国的水利投资大多集中在上世纪的80年代之前,之后经历了倒退、缓慢发展、平稳发展几个阶段,目前虽然总体的投资强度有所上扬,但是真正落入农村基层的投资资金并不乐观。研究发现,作为与农民农业生产密切关联的公共投资项目,灌溉排水已经成为继修路和修桥之后的第二人类项目.由于不同省份在社会经济、自然条件等方面存在的差别,在灌溉的基础条件、投资数目、投资资金和劳动力方面多少具有一定的差异,特别是作为沿海经济发达地区代表的江苏省和西部欠发达地区代表的陕西省更为明显.另外研究还证明了富裕地区农村灌排项目投资更多的靠自己解决,而贫困省份则更多靠上级投资,这表明村级以上政府的公共物品投资策略具有向贫困地区倾斜的特征。本章最后还对产生区域差异的多方面原因进行了简单剖析.第二,使用效益排序倍差分析(Difference-in-Difference)方法对灌溉投资的绩效进行评估,评估指标是灌溉设施投资项目对农民亩均收入的影响.研究发现:虽然项目的平均覆盖率和农户受益率都比六年前有了明显的改善,但是和道路、饮用水相比,灌溉的社会效益却排在第三位。描述统计和计量模型都显示灌溉项目对亩均农业收入有显著的促进作用,这证明投资村级灌溉设施是有利于促进农业增收的。但是,我们的调查资料也显示,有灌溉项目的村所占比例仍然是偏小的:灌溉项目村占全部村的比例只有不到三分之一.因此农村水利灌溉设施的投资的强度仍然不足.第三,从农户角度出发,使用ORM(Ordered Regression Model)的方法分析了农民对其所在社区灌溉投资满意状况,以及影响他们对灌溉进行评价的因素.通过总体的投资意向分析,满意度的描述统计表明,全国水平上对灌溉的满意度虽然比六年前有所增加,但总体水平是差强人意的.总体的投资意向显示,农民对道路和灌溉的投资满意情况最差,而总体投资意愿最强烈的是道路、饮用水和灌溉.此外农民虽有意向表示愿意对灌溉进行投资,但受到资金的限制,总投资意愿显示他们最愿意投资的是道路,其次才是灌溉。另外,农户的教育程度、项目实施前是否公开预算、征求意见以及农户家庭是否参加了项目维护等因素都对满意情况有积极的正向影响.相反,教育程度低、项目实施前没有公开预算、没有征求农户意见以及农户家庭并没有参加了项目维护的话,满意情况趋向更低.最后,我们提出了完善相应投资的政策建议.希望今后有关部门所关注的不仅是大江大河的水利治理,也要多关注农田水利基础设施的改善,并且在投资的时候不仅要关注投资的数量,还要保证投资的质量和满意度等问题,对保证投资的持续性和效果做出更科学更合理的政策规划.同时,让农田水利灌溉投资进入更多的村,让更多的农户从中受益,提高农作物产量,增加收入.总之,要加大对农村的投资力度、实现城乡统筹发展还有很漫长的路要走.更多还原

【Abstract】 Irrigation infrastructure in rural areas is of great significance to poverty reduction and agricultural production in light of "Building New Socialistic Rural Communities". Furthermore, the future development of agricultural production depends mostly on the improvement of irrigation conditions. The overall goals of the study are to use two new, nationally representative data sets to create a profile of China’s irrigation and drainage facilities’ investment situation at the village and even the rural household level. In doing so, we can evaluate the implementation of the investment and satisfactory of rural households. On this base, we can give some suggestions to perfect the system of public investment, to increase peasants’ income and enhance their satisfactory.The core content of the research is about the public investment of irrigation and drainage facilities from three aspects through nationally survey which is organized by CCAP (Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy) on April, 2005. This large survey is conducted in 25 counties of 5 provinces (Jiangsu, Sichuan, Shanxxi, Jilin, Hebei) and includes the information about 808 rural household samples, 101 village samples and 50 township samples.First of all, the empirical analysis primarily deals with the current situation of irrigation facilities investment, including the total situation, investing goals, intensity and distribution of investment, source of money and so forth. As a whole, rural irrigation made a headway progress since 1950s. However, it experienced backup, slow developing and steady developing. For the time being, total investment has some ascend , but only a small part comes to the village level. Our result shows that irrigation investment has become the second large program after road and bridge. Because of social and natural differences in different provinces, for example, some are rich and some are poor, some are inland and some are coastal, the conditions of irrigation are changeable. It demonstrates higher levelgovernment has some policies for lag behind provinces. At last, we give some simple reasons for the differences investment situation of areas.In the second aspect, we evaluate the implementation of the irrigation investment from the village level with the method of DID (Difference-in-Difference). Although the conditions of irrigation and drainage facilities have changed a lot, they still rank the third place behind road and drinking water facilities.This evaluation is representative by the peasant’s income every mu (0.0667 hectares). The result manifests public investment of irrigation and drainage has accelerates the peasant’s income positively. However, the percent of villages which have the investment is very low. Because this ratio is lower than thirty percent. Therefore, the intensity of investment is not sufficient.Thirdly, the study uses household level data to analyze peasants’ satisfactory with ORM (Ordered Regression Model) . The statistics indicates that although the level of satisfactory is heightened than six years before, but the total level is still very low. The most unsatisfacfied programs are road and irrigation. Meanwhile, farmers have most strong willing to invest road, drinking water and irrigation. In addition, with the limitation of money restraint, peasants’ investment willingness of priority is road but not irrigation.At last, some relevant policy implications are suggested. It is hoped that the government should pay more attention on the improvement of agricultural irrigation but not only management of rivers and lakes. Meanwhile, irrigation and drainage facilities investment should enter more villages and rural households so as to realize the rapid development of rural economy.更多还原