Download The Comprehensive Evaluation on Regional Agriculture in Ecological

The Comprehensive Evaluation on Regional Agriculture in Ecological
Safety – Case Study from Hebei Province1
WANG Junqin LI Xiansong
College of Trade and Economics Agricultural University of Hebei, Baoding China,071000
[email protected]
Abstract
This paper constructs an indicator system of agricultural ecological safety evaluation by
the mean-variance method assessing the weight of the indicators. Then evaluates the agricultural
ecological safety of eleven regions in Hebei province by the cross section data of 2005.We found the
state of agricultural ecological safety in the regions of Hebei province is unsafe.
Key words Ecological safety; Mean-variance Method; Hebei Province
1 Introduction
To develop ecological agriculture is the important step to achieve the agricultural sustainable
development. Many efforts have been attempted to achieve the agricultural sustainable development in
agricultural field such as developing biodynamic agriculture, organic agriculture, and ecological
agriculture and so on, moreover the development of ecological agriculture is the important model to
achieve the agricultural sustainable development in agricultural field in china. The development of
ecological agriculture has experienced several steps, the experimental unit demonstrating in the 70 age
of 20th century, the demonstrating in the 80 age of 20th century and the extending demonstrating in the
90 age of 20th century. In theory, Hao suqin(2003) put forward the ecological agricultural development
model of Hebei province, Xu xinwang(2005) measured the economic loss of the agricultural ecological
system in Anhui province, Xie renshou(2004) evaluated the ecological environment of Guangdong
province. Different regions have different environment, so the constructing of indicator system must
embody the regional features. This paper structure an indicator system of agricultural ecological safety
evaluation of Hebei province, then evaluate the regional agricultural ecological safety.
2 Research design
2.1 Indicator selection and data collection
2.1.1 The principle of indicator selection
Firstly we use for reference the concept of “ecological agriculture”(W Albreche,1970), which
means it is the mini type agriculture that can be accepted from environment, ethic, and aesthetics aspects,
with features of self maintaining on ecology, low investing, vitality on economy. This concept means
that the ecological agriculture should embody ecological safety, economy, and society secondly; we
should follow the principle of indicator system constructing. The first is integration principle. Relating
to ecological environment, economy, and society etc, the indicator system should be constructing
roundly, and should reflect the development of ecological agriculture in different hierarchy. The second
is concision principle. The most representative indicator, which reflects the basic situation of ecological
agriculture, should be selected from numerous indicators. The third is Comparison principle. The
indicator system should be constructed from the regional actual situation, meeting the practical needs,
，
·
1
This paper is supported by fund of Hebei planning office of philosophy and social science “Research
on the Evaluation Index of System of Hebei county economy”; This paper is supported by the
non-agriculture fund of Agricultural University of Hebei " Research on the Evaluation Index of System
of Constructing New Countryside in Hebei Province" This paper is supported by the non-agriculture
fund of Agricultural University of Hebei
Study on the Development Mode of Circular Economy in
Hebei
”
；
“
791
and compared lengthways in the region. The fourth is maneuver ability principle. The indicators in the
system should be computed simply with direct method and the data used to compute the indicators
should be collected easily.
2.1.2 Indicator system constructing
Using for reference the Pressure-State-Response (PSR) frame model (constructed by OECD) and
other relative literatures on ecology evaluation, meanwhile following the principle of indicator system
constructing, we construct a 19indicators system, which structure the indicator system of evaluating the
agricultural ecological safety, involving three sorts: ecological environment safety, economy safety, and
society harmonious development. The system is shown as table 1:
Table 1 the evaluation indicator system of ecological agricultural sustainable development
evaluation indicator
Farmland area
（A1）
（A2）
（ ）
（ ）
（ ）
（ ）
The disaster area（A7）
The sown area（A8）
Total yield of grain（A9）
The output of agriculture（A10）
Land productivity（A11）
The income of each farmer（A12）
The valid irrigation area/ farmland area
agricultural ecological
Environment indicator
economy indicator
Irrigated area A3
The despite area of drought and flooding/
A4
The fertilizes of Each hectare Farmland area
A5
The quantity Of Pesticide A6
The Industrial output value of the agricultural
product processing
（A13）
（ ）
The accruing ratio of rural population（A15）
rural population（A16）
Rural non-farm labor/Rural labor （A17）
Engle’s coefficient of the rural family（A18）
The mean education years of rural labor force
（A19）
rural urbanization ratio A14
social sustainable
development indicator
unit
hectare
%
hectare
%
kilogram
ton/ hectare
hectare
hectare
ton
million
yuan/ hectare
yuan
million
%
‰
%
%
2.1.3 Data collection
The above indicators data are collected mainly from Hebei Province Statistical Yearbook 2006 and
Hebei Province Economic Yearbook 2006,moreover the mean education years of rural labor force, rural
urbanization ratio, Engle s coefficient of the rural family indicators etc are computed and coordinated
using a sample survey method from the survey of 2006 team on new rural constructing of Hebei
province.
’
2.2 Data processing and computing
2.2.1 Ascertaining of indicators weight
Indicators weight is the important factor which impact the scientific and preciseness of the
Comprehensive evaluation. We use the Mean variance Weighted method to ascertain the indicator s
weight , which is impersonal, for the weight is formed by the actual data of evaluation unit in this
’
792
method.
2.2.2 Method and result
First, standard processing method of data used on the evaluation indicators. Because different
indicators have different contents, different characters, and different dimensions, in order to eliminate
the impact of dimensions to evaluation, we must process the raw data to eliminate the dimensions before
evaluation, and here we select the unitary method from the numerous processing methods. The
computing formulas are shown as follows:
xi − xmin
xmax − xi
1
or
(2)
Bi =
（）
Bi =
xmax− xmin
（）
（）
xmax − xmin
In formula 1 , the computing result B is bigger ,the ecological agricultural is more safe; for
the indicators whose numerical value are negative correlation with ecological agricultural
safety ,the formula 2 is used, Bij denoting the assessing indicators unitary value on the ith row
and jth list, The results are shown at table 2.
Table 2 Standard processing of assessing indicators data.
’
Bij
A1
Shi
Jia
zhuang
0.680
Qin
Huang
dao
0.000
Tang
shan
Lang
fang
Bao
ding
Cang
zhou
Heng
shui
Xing
tai
Han
dan
0.167
Zhang
Jia
kou
0.880
0.633
0.331
1.000
0.972
0.667
0.807
0.812
A2
A3
0.991
0.247
0.000
0.658
1.000
0.735
0.921
0.744
0.923
0.779
0.859
0.747
0.000
0.239
0.000
0.611
0.311
1.000
0.848
0.697
0.733
0.782
A4
1.000
0.110
0.000
0.535
0.838
0.748
0.922
0.757
0.934
0.790
0.856
A5
0.000
0.713
1.000
0.214
0.190
0.565
0.416
0.641
0.587
0.505
0.237
A6
0.530
1.000
0.966
0.879
0.539
0.943
0.409
0.646
0.758
0.610
0.000
A7
1.000
0.692
0.000
0.937
0.622
0.858
0.822
0.466
0.952
0.696
0.621
A8
0.791
0.088
0.606
0.000
0.625
0.295
1.000
0.833
0.582
0.801
0.851
indictor
Cheng
de
A9
1.000
0.068
0.055
0.000
0.470
0.211
0.972
0.700
0.569
0.701
0.826
A10
1.000
0.053
0.071
0.000
0.816
0.243
0.686
0.418
0.219
0.363
0.620
A11
0.868
0.302
0.000
0.691
1.000
0.534
0.507
0.214
0.251
0.288
0.448
A12
0.724
0.011
0.000
0.511
0.887
0.992
0.539
0.430
0.489
0.448
0.519
A13
0.453
0.000
0.029
0.028
0.010
0.434
0.424
0.004
0.074
1.000
0.012
A14
0.889
0.271
0.256
1.000
0.965
0.777
0.636
0.332
0.292
0.000
0.657
A15
0.980
0.160
0.530
0.650
1.000
0.990
0.490
0.630
0.450
0.120
0.000
A16
0.321
0.872
0.803
1.000
0.536
0.835
0.000
0.497
0.774
0.477
0.304
A17
1.000
0.767
0.450
0.600
0.333
0.617
0.533
0.667
0.767
0.950
0.000
A18
0.100
0.875
1.000
0.175
0.000
0.250
0.550
0.600
0.675
0.450
0.500
A19
0.586
0.214
0.000
0.643
1.000
0.786
0.571
0.500
0.464
0.643
0.500
（ ，，…，
（ ， ，…，
，
’
σ
Second, compute the mean, variance, and weight. Supposing the evaluation indicator is Ai i=1 2
19 and Shijiazhuang, Chengde
Handan etc. Different regions are expressed by Hj j=1 2
11 ;We define project set , the mean of assessing indicators unitary value being E(Ai) project set
mean variance being (Ai);then the weight of indicators are computed according to the (Ai). The
material computing formulae are formula 3 , formula 4 ,and formula 5 .The results are shown at
table 3.
），
）
σ
…，
’
（）
（）
793
（）
11
E ( Ai ) =
19
∑
B ij / 11 ( 3 )
W i = σ ( Ai ) / ∑ σ ( Ai ) ( 4 )
j =1
i =1
11
σ ( Ai ) =
∑ [( B
ij
− E ( Ai )] 2 / 11(5)
j =1
Table 3 the assessing indicators weight of ecological agricultural sustainable development
indictor
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
E（Ai）
0.632
0.714
0.543
0.681
0.461
0.662
0.697
0.588
0.507
0.408
0.464
0.505
0.224
0.552
0.545
0.584
0.608
0.470
0.537
σ（Ai）
0.329
0.317
0.347
0.334
0.285
0.297
0.284
0.327
0.372
0.333
0.298
0.307
0.321
0.338
0.354
0.302
0.283
0.317
0.265
weight
0.055
0.053
0.058
0.056
0.047
0.049
0.047
0.054
0.062
0.055
0.050
0.051
0.053
0.056
0.059
0.050
0.047
0.053
0.044
Lastly, compute the evaluation result of ecological agricultural sustainable development. The
computing formula is shown as follows.
19
P = ∑ Bij × Wi
i =1
Where P is the safety degree of ecological agricultural sustainable development; Wi is the weight of
each indicator; Bij ditto mark. Table 3 presents the Comprehensive evaluation results.
794
Table 3 the agricultural ecological safety Comprehensive evaluation results and rank
On regions of Hebei province
Shi
Qin
Zhang
Cheng
Lang
Bao
Cang
Heng
Xing
Tang
jia
Jia
Huang
ding
shui
de
shan
fang
zhou
tai
zhuang
kou
dao
region
Coefficient
of
agricultural
ecological
safety
Rank of
safety
degree
Han
dan
0.728
0.332
0.359
0.435
0.638
0.594
0.663
0.578
0.582
0.584
0.505
1
11
10
9
3
4
2
7
6
5
8
3 Empirical results analysis
According to the theories and rank standards on ecological agricultural safety (see
Wuguoqing,2001;Zhaofengqin,2005;Tangjie,2007),we grade the ecological agricultural safe degree into
five ranks , namely safe state(standard value 0.9 , junior safe state(standard value0.8~<0.9 , sensitive
state(standard value0.6~<0.8 , risk safe state(standard value0.4~<0.6 ,deterioration state(standard
value<0.4 . Using the ecological safety model, we evaluate the ecological agricultural safety situation of
11 regions in Hebei province, and the results show that the ecological agricultural safe standards of
Shijiazhuang, Tangshan, and Baoding are between 0.6 and 0.8,so they are in sensitive state, namely the
agricultural ecological environment has been disturbed ,but it can maintain its basic functions ; the
ecological agricultural safe standards of Cangzhou Hengshui Xingtai Handan and Qinhuangdao are
between 0.5 and 0.6,so they are in risk state, namely the agricultural ecological environment has been
destroyed in some measure, furthermore there are severe ecological problem and many ecological
disasters; the ecological agricultural safe standards of Chengde, Zhangjiakou are between0.3 and 0.4, so
they are in deterioration state, namely the agricultural ecological environment has been destroyed greatly,
with low functions and land productivity ,moreover the ecological disasters being severe.
）
）
≥ ）
，
）
）
，
，
，
4 Conclusion
We, using the cross section date of 2005, evaluate the ecological agricultural safety state of the
regions in Hebei province, and the results show that the regional ecological agricultural development of
Hebei province does not achieve safe state in 2005. Safe state means that the agricultural ecological
environment does not be disturbed or destroyed basically; moreover vegetation coverage ratio is high
with no desertification, no saline-alkalized and no apparent ecological problem. The ecological
agricultural safety degree is very low in the regions of Hebei province, which matched with the actual
situation of Hebei province. The plantation quality of Hebei province is poor as a whole, with third of
the plantation being in mountainous areas and Bashang areas, and the food stuff yield being low,
furthermore the land in Cangzhou and Hengshui belonging to salina mostly ,with soil encrusted with salt,
droughty climate,and frequent disaster. In the latest two years, the ecological agricultural safety degree
has improved greatly in Hebei province ,but the ecological environment basis of Hebei province is poor
as a whole ,with high salinization land ,severe degradation of grassland in Chengde and
Zhangjiakou,water resource lack in Cangzhou and Hengshui ,which are the severe ecological
environment problems restricting the agricultural economic development. Protecting plantation strictly,
improving ecological environment, and realizing the agricultural sustainable development are the
important measures to improve the ecological agricultural safety.
795
References
[1] Wu Guoqing, Study on Ecological Safety and its Evaluation of Regional Agricultural
Sustainable Development. Journal of China Agricultrural Resources and Regional
Planning,2001 22(4) 26 30. in Chinese
[2] The Workshop Organized by the Land and Water Development Division FAO. Land quality
indicator sand their use in sustainable agriculture and rural development [J]. Agriculture
Development 1997 2 5.
[3] Rainer WALZ. Development of environmental indicator systems, experiences from Germany
[J]. Environmental Management 2000 25(6) 613 623.
[4] Zhou fengqin, Research on Security of Land Ecological Environment in the West of Jilin
Province, Jilin university .2005. in Chinese 23 27.
[5] Lijin, lishude . The Comprehensive Evaluation Study on Ecological Agricultural sustainable
development of city Mode in Tianjin, Journal of Agrotechnical Economics,2003 5 57 60
in Chinese
[6] Xuxinwang. the evaluation and analysis of economic loss on agricultural ecological system
Chinese Rural Economy,2005.7.30 37 in Chinese
[7] Haosuqin.The Discussion of the Mode to Develop Ecological Agriculture in Heibei Province,
Journal of Environmental Management College of China.2003 13 2 20 23. in chinese
[8] Xie renshou.The analysis of evaluation and constructing keystone on agricultural ecological
environment in Guangdong province. Problem of Agricultural Economy,2004,7.72 74
in chinese
Auther in brief:
Wang junqin, Female , Born in 1970 , Associate Professor, Doctoral Postgraduates,Work units in the
college of trade and economics of Agricultural University of Hebei. Postcode: 071001
Email:[email protected]
，
： ～ （
，：
（
（
（
）
）
，
： ～
） ～
～ （
）
796
）
（） ～
， ：（ ） ～ （
～
）