城中村拆迁还建居民家庭生计资本的流动特征——以武汉市两个拆迁安置小区为例
|
摘要
以武汉市两个城中村拆迁还建小区的317户居民家庭实地调查数据为基础,运用可持续生计理论和流动性测度方法分析了居民家庭的生计资本流动特征。结果显示:拆迁还建后被拆迁居民家庭的总体生计水平得到了提升,其中物质、金融、社会、心理等资本得到显著提升,人力资本变化不显著;不同生计资本组的家庭生计资本的流动状态不一,原中等偏下分组向上流动居多,原中等偏上和高等分组向下流动居多,原低等分组相对缺乏流动性;采用社会集资模式的西苑小区的相对和绝对流动性均大于采取政府和开发商联合共建模式的青年城小区; 300平方米补偿面积基线的设置导致原高等分组居民生计资本下降;中等偏下、中等及中等偏上分组居民家庭的社会福利得到改善。
Based on the field investigation data of 317 households of two demolited and reconstructive communities in Wuhan,this essay uses Sustainable Livelihood Theory and Mobility Measurement Method to analyze the mobility characteristics of livelihood capital. The results show that: Firstly,after demolition and reconstruction,the overall livelihood level of the demolished households has been improved, increasing by4. 83%-13. 66%. Among them,material,financial,social and psychological capitals have been significantly improved,human capital has not changed significantly. Secondly,the flow status of family livelihood capital in different livelihood capital groups is different. The former middle-lower livelihood capital group mostly flows upward. The former middle-upper and higher livelihood capital group mostly flows downward. And the former low-level livelihood capital group is relatively lack of liquidity. The relative and absolute liquidity of Xiyuan District,which adopts the mode of social fund-raising,is greater than that of Qingniancheng Community,which adopts the mode of joint venture of government and developers. The establishment of the baseline of 300 m2 compensation area has led to a decline in the livelihood capital of the former high-level group households. Thirdly,the social welfare of the households in the middle-lower,middle-upper and middle-upper groups has been improved.
Based on the field investigation data of 317 households of two demolited and reconstructive communities in Wuhan,this essay uses Sustainable Livelihood Theory and Mobility Measurement Method to analyze the mobility characteristics of livelihood capital. The results show that: Firstly,after demolition and reconstruction,the overall livelihood level of the demolished households has been improved, increasing by4. 83%-13. 66%. Among them,material,financial,social and psychological capitals have been significantly improved,human capital has not changed significantly. Secondly,the flow status of family livelihood capital in different livelihood capital groups is different. The former middle-lower livelihood capital group mostly flows upward. The former middle-upper and higher livelihood capital group mostly flows downward. And the former low-level livelihood capital group is relatively lack of liquidity. The relative and absolute liquidity of Xiyuan District,which adopts the mode of social fund-raising,is greater than that of Qingniancheng Community,which adopts the mode of joint venture of government and developers. The establishment of the baseline of 300 m2 compensation area has led to a decline in the livelihood capital of the former high-level group households. Thirdly,the social welfare of the households in the middle-lower,middle-upper and middle-upper groups has been improved.
引文
[1]何力武,刘骥.城中村改造:历史起源及行为者分析[J].中国行政管理,2017(3):78-82
[2]李润国,赵青,王伟伟.新型城镇化背景下城中村改造的问题与对策研究[J].宏观经济研究,2015(8):41-47
[3]许经勇.城中村:城市化进程中的一道坎[J].调研世界,2006(8):33-34
[4]Cao Y.,Dallimer M.,Stringer L.C.Land expropriation compensation among multiple stakeholders in a mining area:Explaining“skeleton house”compensation[J].Land Use Policy,2018(5):97-110
[5]陈凯仁,龙茂乾,李贵才.城中村利益相关者改造意愿影响因素——以深圳市上步村为例[J].城市问题,2017(8):96-103
[6]郭瑞.城中村改造居民满意度的影响因素——以开封市为例[J].城市问题,2017(7):37-43
[7]刘于琪,刘晔,李志刚.居民归属感、邻里交往和社区参与的机制分析——以广州市城中村改造为例[J].城市规划,2017(9):38-47
[8]朱竑,李如铁,苏斌原.微观视角下的移民地方感及其影响因素——以广州市城中村移民为例[J].地理学报,2016(4):637-648
[9]敖文文,徐彬.“城中村”改造中多主体博弈与冲突演进机制研究——以武汉市为例[J].湖北工业大学学报,2015(6):5-9
[10]谢东梅.农户生计资产量化分析方法的应用与验证——基于福建省农村最低生活保障目标家庭瞄准效率的调研数据[J].技术经济,2009(9):43-49
[11]李广东.生计资产差异对农户耕地保护补偿模式选择的影响——渝西方山丘陵不同地带样点村的实证分析[J].地理学报,2012(4):504-515
[12]谢晋,蔡银莺.农户生计资产与耕地保护补偿政策效应的动态响应——以成都市耕地保护基金为例[J].中国土地科学,2017(8):15-23
[13]何仁伟.中国农户可持续生计研究进展及趋向[J].地理科学进展,2013(4):657-670
[14]蔡银莺,朱兰兰.生计资产差异对农民生活满意度的影响分析——以成都市双流县和崇州市为例[J].华中农业大学学报(社会科学版),2015(1):30-38
[2]李润国,赵青,王伟伟.新型城镇化背景下城中村改造的问题与对策研究[J].宏观经济研究,2015(8):41-47
[3]许经勇.城中村:城市化进程中的一道坎[J].调研世界,2006(8):33-34
[4]Cao Y.,Dallimer M.,Stringer L.C.Land expropriation compensation among multiple stakeholders in a mining area:Explaining“skeleton house”compensation[J].Land Use Policy,2018(5):97-110
[5]陈凯仁,龙茂乾,李贵才.城中村利益相关者改造意愿影响因素——以深圳市上步村为例[J].城市问题,2017(8):96-103
[6]郭瑞.城中村改造居民满意度的影响因素——以开封市为例[J].城市问题,2017(7):37-43
[7]刘于琪,刘晔,李志刚.居民归属感、邻里交往和社区参与的机制分析——以广州市城中村改造为例[J].城市规划,2017(9):38-47
[8]朱竑,李如铁,苏斌原.微观视角下的移民地方感及其影响因素——以广州市城中村移民为例[J].地理学报,2016(4):637-648
[9]敖文文,徐彬.“城中村”改造中多主体博弈与冲突演进机制研究——以武汉市为例[J].湖北工业大学学报,2015(6):5-9
[10]谢东梅.农户生计资产量化分析方法的应用与验证——基于福建省农村最低生活保障目标家庭瞄准效率的调研数据[J].技术经济,2009(9):43-49
[11]李广东.生计资产差异对农户耕地保护补偿模式选择的影响——渝西方山丘陵不同地带样点村的实证分析[J].地理学报,2012(4):504-515
[12]谢晋,蔡银莺.农户生计资产与耕地保护补偿政策效应的动态响应——以成都市耕地保护基金为例[J].中国土地科学,2017(8):15-23
[13]何仁伟.中国农户可持续生计研究进展及趋向[J].地理科学进展,2013(4):657-670
[14]蔡银莺,朱兰兰.生计资产差异对农民生活满意度的影响分析——以成都市双流县和崇州市为例[J].华中农业大学学报(社会科学版),2015(1):30-38