基于居民支付意愿的城市森林生态服务非政府供给方式研究
|
摘要
随着我国城市化进程的加快,城市生态环境的恶化程度也日益明显,而伴着经济的发展和城市居民生活水平的提高,居民对城市生态环境的改善愿望却日益强烈,生态需求已成为居民对环境建设提出的第一需求。虽然城市森林建设是改善城市空气质量和加强城市绿化的有效途径,但是在政府财力有限、城市绿化面积紧张的情况下,亟需探索城市森林生态服务的多主体供给方式。因此,本文的研究涉及森林生态服务、公共服务市场化、经济社会学、行为经济学、制度经济学等基础理论内容,需要综合运用这些理论和实证研究来探索多主体供给方式的相互关系、作用范围和保障体系。
城市森林生态服务是指城市森林提供的净化大气、改善城市小气候、降温增湿、减少“热岛效应”、固碳、降低噪声等生态服务。城市森林生态服务属于公共服务的范畴,在政府供给一定的情况下,居民的积极参与将极大地改善城市生态环境。非政府供给包括市场化供给和自愿供给等两种供给方式。市场化供给方式是指营利组织根据居民对城市森林生态服务市场的需求、以营利为目的、并以收费方式补偿其支出来提供生态服务的一种方式,具体包括市场化补偿和小区绿化市场化供给等两种形式。自愿供给是指公民个人、单位以捐赠或公益彩票等形式无偿和部分无偿地筹集资金,直接或间接地用于城市森林生态服务供给的一种方式。这两种方式得以成功开展的前提是必须符合居民的支付意愿。本文首次应用条件价值评估法(The contingent valuation method,简称CVM)在哈尔滨市和牡丹江市开展居民参与城市森林生态服务供给的支付意愿(willingness topay,简称WTP)调查。调查分析结果表明,居民具有较高的支付意愿,只要提供相应的制度安排和社区有效组织,这种补偿方式是可行的。
我国大中城市的生态环境污染较重,而城市居民又具有较高的物质生活水平和较高的环保意识,为居民参与城市森林生态服务的供给奠定了基础。本文以哈尔滨市和牡丹江市的调查为例进行市场供给和自愿供给的关联性分析、Logistic回归分析、聚类分析,分析结果表明:文化程度越高的居民收入越高,从而越倾向于选择出资支付形式和较多的支付额,在制定有关居民参与城市森林生态服务供给政策时应考虑出资与出力两种支付形式,从而满足不同层次居民的支付意愿。在分析公众参与的影响因素和系统地认识“经济人”及人类经济行为的基础上,对在哈尔滨市进行的两次抽样调查结果进行对比分析,并从生态效用构成、人性观和博弈论等角度分析居民参与城市森林生态服务供给的行为动因,将参与城市森林生态服务供给的居民划分为三种类型,归纳影响居民参与的主要因素,根据参与的Logistic回归模型计算出居民参与供给行为的选择概率,并分析居民拒绝参与的主要影响因素。为了实现城市森林生态服务供给多元化的目标,提出保障城市工程项目绿化和企事业单位绿化的政策、有利于市场化供给和自愿供给实现的政策和制度安排以及相应的技术保障体系。
由于城市森林周边地区居民认为自己获得了更多更好的生态服务,所以具有更强的支付意愿,因此城市森林生态补偿政策可以首先从城市森林周边地区进行,然后再逐步扩大城市森林生态服务的市场供给的范围。自愿供给方式的实行不仅需要媒体的宣传教育和基层的有效组织,而且需要进一步完善居民的个人信用体系,将居民的社会参与信息纳入到个人信用体系中,这将对自愿供给产生较大的激励作用。
虽然目前城市森林生态服务的供给主体是政府,但是随着城市经济的发展和居民环保意识的提高,居民对城市森林生态服务的支付意愿也随之增强,通过政府提供城市森林生态服务多主体供给方面的制度安排,市场化供给和自愿供给的协同作用将得到充分发挥,从而快速推动城市生态环境质量的改善。
The urban ecological environment is worsened with the soaring urbanization of China. Residents are eager to improve the urban ecological environment with the economic boost and the improvement in urban residents' living.Demand on ecology takes first place of all demand from residents on environment.Much effective as the construction of urban forest in improving air quality and urban greening,it is urgent to study multi-entity supply of urban forest ecological service under government budget limit and scarce greening area.The paper applies the theory of forest ecological service,marketization of public service,economic sociology, behavioral economy and institutional economics and empirical method to exploring the interaction,scope of action and guarantee system of the multi-entity supply method.
Urban forest ecological service is that of air purification,improving urban micro-climate, decreasing temperature and increasing humidity,weakening "heat-island" effect,carbon sequestration,and lowering noise by urban forest.Urban forest ecological service is subordinate to public service.Residents' participation will greatly improve the ecological environment when the government does not change its supply.Market supply refers to the profit-purposed,outcome-compensated-by-charging ecological service provided by the profit organization aiming at satisfying the demand on urban forest ecological service from residents. It includes market compensation and market supply of community greening.The voluntary supply refers to the capital sponsored without payment or partly without payment by individual or the organization or donated in the form of lottery ticket,which is directly or indirectly used to supply urban forest ecological service.Success of the two methods depends on their satisfying residents' willingness to pay.The paper first applies the contingent valuation method (CVM) to the survey of willingness to pay by residents in Harbin and Mudanjiang for urban forest ecological service.The result of the survey reveals that residents are willing to pay.The compensation method is feasible under appropriate institutional system and effective organization by the community.
The supply of urban forest ecological service by residents is necessary and possible due to the serious pollution of ecological environment in large and middle-size cities,combined by the high living level and awareness of environmental protection of urban residents.The paper makes correlative analysis,Logistic regression analysis and cluster analysis on market supply and voluntary supply according to the survey in Harbin and Mudanjiang.As is revealed in the analysis,residents will have more income with higher educational level,who are more inclined towards donating money and paying more.Residents to participate in the development of the urban forest ecosystem services supply policy should take into account of the two forms of payment of donating money and contributing effort to meet different levels of residents' willingness-to-pay.
Based on the analysis of the impact of public participation in the understanding of factors and systems,"economic person" and human economic behavior,the paper compares the result of the two sampling surveys in Harbin,analyzes the motive to supplying urban forest ecological service,and describes the three kinds of residents supplying urban forest ecological service from the aspect of ecological utility component,human nature and game theory.The paper summarizes major factors that have effect on residents' participation and calculates the probability of residents' participation with the Logistic regression model and analyzes the major factors making participates refuse to participate.In order to achieve urban forest ecosystem services supply,the paper suggests a wide range of policies by to secure city greening projects and enterprises greening,and institutional arrangements and the corresponding technology security system beneficial to market supply and demand,and supply to achieve voluntary policies.
As residents near urban forest believe that they have gained more and better ecological services and therefore have a greater willingness to pay,urban forest ecological compensation policies can first start from the region around the urban forest,and then gradually expanding the scope of the urban forest ecosystem services of the market supply.Implementation of voluntary supply requires not only the media publicity and education and effective fundamental organizations,but also improvement of the personal credit system,residents' social participation information society recorded into the personal credit system,and this will have a greater incentive to voluntary supply.
Although the urban forest ecosystem services is the main body of supply,resident's willingness to pay for the urban forest ecological service will increase with the urban economy boost and environmental protection awareness of the residents.The effect of both market supply and voluntary supply will be brought into full play through the mechanism designed by government on multi-entity supply of urban forest ecological service,so as to rapidly improve the quality of urban ecological environment.
城市森林生态服务是指城市森林提供的净化大气、改善城市小气候、降温增湿、减少“热岛效应”、固碳、降低噪声等生态服务。城市森林生态服务属于公共服务的范畴,在政府供给一定的情况下,居民的积极参与将极大地改善城市生态环境。非政府供给包括市场化供给和自愿供给等两种供给方式。市场化供给方式是指营利组织根据居民对城市森林生态服务市场的需求、以营利为目的、并以收费方式补偿其支出来提供生态服务的一种方式,具体包括市场化补偿和小区绿化市场化供给等两种形式。自愿供给是指公民个人、单位以捐赠或公益彩票等形式无偿和部分无偿地筹集资金,直接或间接地用于城市森林生态服务供给的一种方式。这两种方式得以成功开展的前提是必须符合居民的支付意愿。本文首次应用条件价值评估法(The contingent valuation method,简称CVM)在哈尔滨市和牡丹江市开展居民参与城市森林生态服务供给的支付意愿(willingness topay,简称WTP)调查。调查分析结果表明,居民具有较高的支付意愿,只要提供相应的制度安排和社区有效组织,这种补偿方式是可行的。
我国大中城市的生态环境污染较重,而城市居民又具有较高的物质生活水平和较高的环保意识,为居民参与城市森林生态服务的供给奠定了基础。本文以哈尔滨市和牡丹江市的调查为例进行市场供给和自愿供给的关联性分析、Logistic回归分析、聚类分析,分析结果表明:文化程度越高的居民收入越高,从而越倾向于选择出资支付形式和较多的支付额,在制定有关居民参与城市森林生态服务供给政策时应考虑出资与出力两种支付形式,从而满足不同层次居民的支付意愿。在分析公众参与的影响因素和系统地认识“经济人”及人类经济行为的基础上,对在哈尔滨市进行的两次抽样调查结果进行对比分析,并从生态效用构成、人性观和博弈论等角度分析居民参与城市森林生态服务供给的行为动因,将参与城市森林生态服务供给的居民划分为三种类型,归纳影响居民参与的主要因素,根据参与的Logistic回归模型计算出居民参与供给行为的选择概率,并分析居民拒绝参与的主要影响因素。为了实现城市森林生态服务供给多元化的目标,提出保障城市工程项目绿化和企事业单位绿化的政策、有利于市场化供给和自愿供给实现的政策和制度安排以及相应的技术保障体系。
由于城市森林周边地区居民认为自己获得了更多更好的生态服务,所以具有更强的支付意愿,因此城市森林生态补偿政策可以首先从城市森林周边地区进行,然后再逐步扩大城市森林生态服务的市场供给的范围。自愿供给方式的实行不仅需要媒体的宣传教育和基层的有效组织,而且需要进一步完善居民的个人信用体系,将居民的社会参与信息纳入到个人信用体系中,这将对自愿供给产生较大的激励作用。
虽然目前城市森林生态服务的供给主体是政府,但是随着城市经济的发展和居民环保意识的提高,居民对城市森林生态服务的支付意愿也随之增强,通过政府提供城市森林生态服务多主体供给方面的制度安排,市场化供给和自愿供给的协同作用将得到充分发挥,从而快速推动城市生态环境质量的改善。
The urban ecological environment is worsened with the soaring urbanization of China. Residents are eager to improve the urban ecological environment with the economic boost and the improvement in urban residents' living.Demand on ecology takes first place of all demand from residents on environment.Much effective as the construction of urban forest in improving air quality and urban greening,it is urgent to study multi-entity supply of urban forest ecological service under government budget limit and scarce greening area.The paper applies the theory of forest ecological service,marketization of public service,economic sociology, behavioral economy and institutional economics and empirical method to exploring the interaction,scope of action and guarantee system of the multi-entity supply method.
Urban forest ecological service is that of air purification,improving urban micro-climate, decreasing temperature and increasing humidity,weakening "heat-island" effect,carbon sequestration,and lowering noise by urban forest.Urban forest ecological service is subordinate to public service.Residents' participation will greatly improve the ecological environment when the government does not change its supply.Market supply refers to the profit-purposed,outcome-compensated-by-charging ecological service provided by the profit organization aiming at satisfying the demand on urban forest ecological service from residents. It includes market compensation and market supply of community greening.The voluntary supply refers to the capital sponsored without payment or partly without payment by individual or the organization or donated in the form of lottery ticket,which is directly or indirectly used to supply urban forest ecological service.Success of the two methods depends on their satisfying residents' willingness to pay.The paper first applies the contingent valuation method (CVM) to the survey of willingness to pay by residents in Harbin and Mudanjiang for urban forest ecological service.The result of the survey reveals that residents are willing to pay.The compensation method is feasible under appropriate institutional system and effective organization by the community.
The supply of urban forest ecological service by residents is necessary and possible due to the serious pollution of ecological environment in large and middle-size cities,combined by the high living level and awareness of environmental protection of urban residents.The paper makes correlative analysis,Logistic regression analysis and cluster analysis on market supply and voluntary supply according to the survey in Harbin and Mudanjiang.As is revealed in the analysis,residents will have more income with higher educational level,who are more inclined towards donating money and paying more.Residents to participate in the development of the urban forest ecosystem services supply policy should take into account of the two forms of payment of donating money and contributing effort to meet different levels of residents' willingness-to-pay.
Based on the analysis of the impact of public participation in the understanding of factors and systems,"economic person" and human economic behavior,the paper compares the result of the two sampling surveys in Harbin,analyzes the motive to supplying urban forest ecological service,and describes the three kinds of residents supplying urban forest ecological service from the aspect of ecological utility component,human nature and game theory.The paper summarizes major factors that have effect on residents' participation and calculates the probability of residents' participation with the Logistic regression model and analyzes the major factors making participates refuse to participate.In order to achieve urban forest ecosystem services supply,the paper suggests a wide range of policies by to secure city greening projects and enterprises greening,and institutional arrangements and the corresponding technology security system beneficial to market supply and demand,and supply to achieve voluntary policies.
As residents near urban forest believe that they have gained more and better ecological services and therefore have a greater willingness to pay,urban forest ecological compensation policies can first start from the region around the urban forest,and then gradually expanding the scope of the urban forest ecosystem services of the market supply.Implementation of voluntary supply requires not only the media publicity and education and effective fundamental organizations,but also improvement of the personal credit system,residents' social participation information society recorded into the personal credit system,and this will have a greater incentive to voluntary supply.
Although the urban forest ecosystem services is the main body of supply,resident's willingness to pay for the urban forest ecological service will increase with the urban economy boost and environmental protection awareness of the residents.The effect of both market supply and voluntary supply will be brought into full play through the mechanism designed by government on multi-entity supply of urban forest ecological service,so as to rapidly improve the quality of urban ecological environment.
引文
[1]卢卫.居住城市化:人居科学的视角.北京:高等教育出版社.2005:255,268.
[2]彭镇华.城市森林.北京:中国林业出版社,2003:8-9,67.
[3]郎奎建,等.林业生态工程10种森林生态效益计量理论和方法的研究.东北林业大学学报,2000,28(1):1-7.
[4]万志芳,蒋敏元.林业生态工程生态效益经济计量的理论和方法研究.林业经济,2001,(11):24-27.
[5]刘际建,王德善,李圣春.生态公益林补偿机制的初探[J].水土保持学报,2002,16(6):145-147.
[6]刘璨.森林资源与环境价值分析及补偿问题研究.世界林业研究.2003,16(2):7-11.
[7]费世民,彭镇华,周金星,杨冬生.关于森林生态效益补偿问题的探讨.林业科学,2004,40(4):171-179.
[8]李文华,李芬,李世东,刘某承.森林生态效益补偿的研究现状与展望.自然资源学报,2006,21(5):677-688.
[9]黄选瑞,张玉珍等.环境再生产与森林生态效益补偿.林业科学,2002,38(6):164-168.
[10]李艳波.关于公共服务市场化的思考.中国行政管理,2004,(7):24-27.
[11]刘静波.公共服务的多主体供给分析.西北工业大学硕士学位论文,2006:22,24-25.
[12]夏振洲,孙彦泉,张一梁.关于运用市场机制发展生态生产的设想.中国农学通报,2006,22(7):612-615.
[13]刘燕华,等.中国资源环境形势与可持续发展[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2001:26-27.
[14]蔡志坚.我国发展森林水文服务市场的相关问题探讨.林业经济问题,2006,26(4):297-301.
[15]刘璨.我国森林环境服务市场构建与私人参与的选择[J].自然资源学报,2002,17(2):247-252.
[16]徐中民,任福康,马松尧.估计环境价值的陈述偏好技术比较分析[J].冰川冻土,2003,25(6):701-707.
[17]杨开忠,白墨,李莹.关于意愿调查价值评估法在我国环境领域应用的可行性探讨-以北京市居民支付意愿研究为例[J].地球科学进展,2002,17(3):420-425.
[18]张志强,徐中民,程国栋.条件价值评估法的发展与应用[J].地球科学进展,2003,18(3):454-463.
[19]李莹.意愿调查价值评估法的问卷设计技术[J].环境保护科学,2001,27(6):25-28.
[20]钟全林,彭世揆.生态公益林价值补偿意愿调查分析.林业经济,2002,(6):43-46.
[21]陈东景,徐中民,程国栋.恢复额济纳旗生态环境的支付意愿研究[J].兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2003,39(3):69-72.
[22]张志强,徐中民,程国栋.条件价值评估法的发展与应用[J].地球科学进展,2003,18(3):454-463.
[23]李莹,白墨,杨开忠.居民为改善北京市大气环境质量的支付意愿研究[J].城市环境与城市生态,2001,14(5):6-8.
[24]刘光栋,吴文良.华北高产农区公众对农业面源污染的环境保护意识及支付意愿调查[J].农村生态环境,2004,20(2):41-45.
[25]陈伟东,余坤明.“转代理”:转型期低收入社区居委会自我“减负”的行为模式---武汉市X社区“门栋自治”的背后.社会主义研究,2005,(4):86-90,101.
[26]陈惠雄.经济人假说的理论机理与利己一致性行为模式.社会科学战线,2006,(4):51-58.
[27]刘耀彬,李仁东,宋学锋.城市化与城市生态环境关系研究综述与评价.中国人口.资源与环境,2005,15(3):55-60.
[28]鲁敏,李英杰,李萍.城市生态学研究进展[J].山东建筑工程学院学报,2002,17(4):42-48.
[29]杨旭涛.滁城城市林业建设现状与发展对策探讨.安徽林业科技,2006,(1):80-81.
[30]陆贵巧.大连城市森林生态效益评价及动态仿真研究.北京林业大学博士论文,2006.
[31]蔡剑辉.森林生态服务供给的政策手段研究.福建农林大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,7(1):44-47.
[32]李涛.社会互动、信任与股市参与 经济研究,2006,(1):34-45.
[33]张伟.论转轨时期中国环境污染治理设施的投融资方式与创新.中国海洋大学博士学位论文,2005.
[34]卢小丽.生态旅游社区居民旅游影响感知与参与行为研究.大连理工大学博士学位论文,2005.
[35]米锋,李吉跃,等.森林生态效益评价的研究进展.北京林业大学学报,2003,25(6):77-83.
[36]Costanza R.,R.d'Arge,R.de Groot,S.Farber,M.Grasso,B.Hannon,K.Limburg,S.Naeem,R.V.O'Neil,J.Paruelo,R.G.Raskin,P.Sutton and M.van den Belt.The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital.Nature,1997,(387):253-260.
[37]Pearce D.Auditing the Earth.Environment,1998,40(2):23-28.
[38]Thomas P.Holmes,John C.Bergstrom,Eric Huszar,Susan B.Kask,Fritz Orr Ⅲ.Analysis Contingent Valuation,net marginal benefits,and the scale of riparian ecosystem restoration.Ecological Economics,2004,(49):9-30.
[39]Hamid Amirnejad,Sadegh Khalilian,Mohammad H.Assareh and Majid Ahmadian.Estimating the existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method.Ecological Economics,2006,58(4):665-675.
[40]E.J.Sattout,S.N.Talhouk and P.D.S.Caligari.Economic value of cedar relics in Lebanon:An application of contingent valuation method for conservation [J].Ecological Economics,2007,61(2-3):315-322.
[41]Berta Martin-Lopez,Carlos Montes and Javier Benayas.The non-economic motives behind the willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation[J].Biological Conservation,2007,139(1-2):67-82.
[42]Serkan G(?)rl(?)k.The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project:Results from a contingent valuation survey.Forest Policy and Economics,2006,9(3):209-218.
[43]C.Y.Jim and Wendy Y.Chen.Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of urban greenspaces in Guangzhou,China.Landscape and Urban Planning,2006,75(1-2):81-96.
[44]Bradley S.Jorgensen,Mathew A.Wilson and Thomas A.Heberlein.Fairness in the contingent valuation of environmental public goods:attitude toward paying for environmental improvements at two levels of scope.Ecological Economics,2001,36(1):133-148.
[45]Hamid Amirnejad,Sadegh Khalilian,Mohammad H.Assareh and Majid Ahmadian.Estimating the existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method.Ecological Economics,2006,58(4):665-675.
[46]Ryan H.Wiser.Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy:A comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles.Ecological Economics,2007,62(3-4):419-432.
[47]Felix Schlapfer.Survey protocol and income effects in the contingent valuation of public goods:A meta-analysis.Ecological Economics,2006,57(3):415-429.
[48]Felix Schlapfer,Anna Roschewitz and Nick Hanley.Validation of stated preferences for public goods:a comparison of contingent valuation survey response and voting behavior.Ecological Economics,2004,51(1-2):1-16.
[49]Dominic Moran,Alistair McVittie,David J.Allcroft and David A.Elston.Quantifying public preferences for agri-environmental policy in Scotland:A comparison of methods.Ecological Economics,2007,63(1):42-53.
[50]Jayanath Ananda and Gamini Herath.Multi-attribute preference modelling and regional land-use planning.Ecological Economics,Available online 10 August 2007.
[51]Vrishali Deosthali.Assessment of impact of urbanization on climate:An application of bio-climatic index,Atmospherics Environment,1999,(33):4125-4133.
[52]G Grossman,A Krueger.Economic growth and the environment,Quarterly Journal of Economics,1995,(110):353-377.
[53]Peter Deplazes,Daniel Hegglinl,Sandra Gloor,et al.Wilderness in the city:The urbanization of echinococcus multilocularis[J].Trends in parasitology,2004,20(2):77-84.
[54]Nilsson Kjell,(?)kerlund Ulrika,Alekseev Alexander,etc.Implementing urban greening aid projects-The case of St.Petersburg,Russia[J].Urban forestry & Urban Greening,2007,6(2):93-101.
[55]Franz W.Gatzweiler.Organizing a public ecosystem service economy for sustaining biodiversity.Ecological Economics,2006,59(3):296-304.
[56]Matthew J.Kotchen and Michael R.Moore.Private provision of environmental public goods:Household participation in green-electricity programs.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2007,53(1):1-16.
[57]樊丽明,石绍宾.公共品供给机制:作用边界变迁及影响因素.当代经济科学,2006,28(1):63-68.
[58]Delali B.K.Dovie,Charlie M.ShackletonandE.T.F.Witkowski.Valuation of communal area livestock benefits,rural livelihoods and related policy issues.Land Use Policy,2006,23(3):260-271.
[59]Frederick Cubbage,Patrice Harou and Erin Sills.Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management.Forest Policy and Economics,2007,9(7):833-851.
[60]Matthew J.Kotchen and Stephen D.Reiling.Environmental attitudes,motivations,and contingent valuation of nonuse values:a case study involving endangered species.Ecological Economics,2000,32(1):93-107.
[61]Philip Cooper,Gregory L.Poe and Ian J.Bateman.The structure of motivation for contingent values:a case study of lake water quality improvement.Ecological Economics,Volume50,Issues 1-2,1 September2004,50(1-2):69-82.
[62]Estelle Bienabe,Robert R.Hearne.Public preferences for biodiversity conservation and scenic beauty within a framework of environmental services payments.Forest Policy and Economics,2006,(9):335-348.
[63]Greig Andrew Mill,Tom M.van Rensburg,Stephen Hynes and Conor Dooley.Preferences for multiple use forest management in Ireland:Citizen and consumer perspectives.Ecological Economics,2007,60(3):642-653.
[64]Knut Veisten.Willingness to pay for eco-labelled wood furniture:Choice-based conjoint analysis versus open-ended contingent valuation[J].Forest Economics,2007,13(1):29-48.
[65]Slobodan P.Simonovic and Taslima Akter.Participatory floodplain management in the Red River Basin,Canada.Annual Reviews in Control,2006,30(2):183-192.
[66]章锦河,等.九寨沟旅游生态足迹及生态补偿分析.自然资源学报,2005,20(5):735-744.
[67]唐建荣.生态经济学.北京:化学工业出版社,2005:29,185.
[68]彭建,王仰麟,陈燕飞,李卫锋,蒋依依.城市生态系统服务功能价值评估初探-以深圳市为例.北京大学学报(自然科学版),2005,41(4):594-604.
[69]王寿兵,吴峰,刘晶茹.产业生态学.北京:化学工业出版社,2006:94.
[70]张陆彪,郑海霞.流域生态服务市场的研究进展与形成机制.环境保护,2004,(12):38-43.
[71]张耀辉.实验经济学.北京:经济科学出版社,2006:142-145.
[72]王利伟,刘东升.市场经济概论.北京:中国商务出版社,2003.
[73]吴强.政府行为与区域经济协调发展.北京:经济科学出版社,2005:228-229.
[74]温作民.森林生态资源配置中的市场失灵及其对策.林业科学,1999,35(6):110-114.
[75]戴星翼,俞厚未,董梅.生态服务的价值实现.北京:科学出版社,2005:110,142.
[76]Putnam R.D.Bowling Alone:America's Decline Social Capital.Journal of Democracy,1995,6(1):65-78.
[77]Putnam R.D.,R,Leonardi,R.Y.Nanetti.Make Democracy Work:Civic Tradition in Modern Italy.Princeton University Press,1992:167.
[78]张其仔.社会资本论--社会资本与经济增长.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[79]Astier M.Almedom.Social capital and mental health:An interdisciplinary review of primary evidence.Social Science & Medicine,2005,61(5):943-964.
[80]朱国宏,桂勇.经济社会学导论.上海:复旦大学出版社,2005:189.
[81]Manski,Charles F.Economic analysis of social interaction.Journal of Economic Perspectives,2000,(14):115-136.
[82]Juan-Camilo Cardenas.Norms from outside and from inside:an experimental analysis on the governance of local ecosystems.Forest Policy and Economics,2004,6(3-4):229-241.
[83]柯武刚,史漫飞.制度经济学社会秩序与公共政策.北京:商务印书馆,2000.
[84]洪银兴.可持续发展经济学.北京:商务印书馆,2000.
[85]任保平,安立仁.现代经济学理论与方法创新论坛.北京:中国经济出版社,2006:64.
[86]罗利丽.外部环境设定与消费者行为的变异:制度视角的阐释.贵州社会科学2006,(3):31-34.
[87]张俊清,吕杰.集体林产权制度改革效应分析.林业经济问题,2007,27(3):276-279.
[88]王跃生.制度、文化与经济发展.北京:北京大学出版社,2005:150-154.
[89]Matthew Rabin.Risk aversion and expected-utility theory:a calibration theorem.Econometrica,2000,68(5):1281-1292.
[90]Kahneman D.and Tversky A.Prospect Theory:An analysis of decision under Risk,Econometrica,1979,47(2):263-291.
[91]Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky.Advances in prospect theory:Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty.Journey of risk and uncertainty[J].Journal of risk and uncertainty,1992,(5):297-323.
[92]Kahneman D.and Tversky A.Choices,values and frames.American Psychologist,1984,39(4):341-350.
[93]董志勇.行为经济学.北京:北京大学出版社,2005:191-193.
[94]中国城市森林论坛组委会.中国城市森林正在崛起.中国城市林业,2005,3(1):8-13.
[95]武立磊.生态系统服务功能经济价值评价研究综述[J].林业经济,2007,29(3):42-46.
[96]http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2006-03/11/content_4290446.htm.
[97]Renaud B.National Urbanization Policy in Developing Countries.Oxford University press,1981:17-18.
[98]Braaden R.Allenby著,翁端译.工业生态学政策框架与实施.北京:清华大学出版社,2005:180,186.
[99]肖寒,欧阳志云,等.森林生态服务功能及其生态经济价值评估初探.应用生态学报,2000,11(47):481-484.
[100]鲁敏,李英杰.部分园林植物对大气污染物吸收净化能力的研究.山东建筑工程学院学报,2002,17(2):45-49.
[101]曲庆云,赵小梅,阮桂海.统计分析方法-SAS实例精选。北京:清华大学出版社,2005:155.
[102]黄燕,吴平.SAS统计分析及应用.北京:机械工业出版社,2006.
[103]聂冲,贾生华.离散选择模型的基本原理及其发展演进评价.数量经济技术经济研究,2005,(11):151-159.
[104]赵秀勇.生产力发展与城市生态系统稳定性研究.南京气象学院,2003硕士论文.
[105]国家统计局城市社会经济调查总队,中国统计学会城市统计委员会.2004中国城市发展报告.北京:中国统计出版社,2005:11,117.
[106]刘永辉,鲁力进.谈消费者环境意识与行为的差异[J].商业时代,2007,26(19):29-30.
[107]王运生.美、日国家开发后进地区中的环境保护实践及启示[J].植物保护,2007,44(1):101-103.
[108]饶传坤.英国国民信托在环境保护中的作用及其对我国的借鉴意义[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2006,36(6):81-89.
[109]曾玉林.我国林业经济体制转型的现实制度分析[J].林业经济问题,2007,27(2):166-172.
[110]朱四海.论北京生态涵养区环境服务的价值实现[J].北京社会科学,2006,22(6):46-51.
[111]胡艳琳.城市森林生态系统生态服务功能的评价[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版).2005,29(3):111-114.
[112]Joachim Sell,Thomas Koellner,Olaf Weber,Lucio Pedroni and Roland W.Scholz.Analysis Decision criteria of European and Latin American market actors for tropical forestry projects providing environmental services.Ecological Economics,2006,58(1):17-36.
[113]陈惠雄.生命成本:关于消费函数理论的一个新假说[J].中国工业经济,2005,(8):5-13.
[114]杨春学.经济人的“再生”:对一种新综合的探讨与辩护[J].经济研究,2005,(11):22-33.
[115]叶航,汪丁丁,罗卫东.作为内生偏好的利他行为及其经济学意义[J].经济研究,2005,(8):84-94.
[116]倪秋菊,倪星.政府官员的“经济人”角色及其行为模式分析[J].武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,57(2):260-267.
[117]Samuelson W.and Zeckhauser R.Status quo bias in decision making,Journal of Risk and Uncertainly,1988,(1):7-59.
[118]Elizabeth H.,Mccabe K.and Smith V.L.The impact of exchange context on the activation of equity in ultimatum games[J].Experimental Economics,2000,(3):5-9.
[119]Camerer C.行为博弈--对策略互动的实验研究[M].//贺京同,那艺等.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006:6.
[120]Renato A.M.Silvano,Shana Udvardy,Marta Ceroni and Joshua Farley.An ecological integrity assessment of a Brazilian Atlantic Forest watershed based on surveys of stream health and local farmers' perceptions:implications for management.Ecological Economics,2005,53(3):369-385.
[121]孙成志.管理学.大连:东北财经大学出版社,2006:292.
[122]樊丽明.中国公共品市场与自愿供给分析.上海:上海人民出版社,2005.
[123]Ledyard.John,Public Goods:A Survey of Experimental Research.Chap.2 in:Alvin Roth and John Kagel(eds.).Handbook of Experimental Economics,Princeton University Press,1995.
[124]唐钧,陈淑伟.全面提升政府危机管理能力,构建城市安全和应急体系.探索,2005,(4):74-77
[125]黎昌珍.城市社会危机管理:变量研究与危机预警.广西民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,29(1):149-152.
[126]A.Benander,B.Benander,A.Fadlalla,G.James.Data Warehouse Administration and Management.Information System Management.2000,17(1):71-73.
[2]彭镇华.城市森林.北京:中国林业出版社,2003:8-9,67.
[3]郎奎建,等.林业生态工程10种森林生态效益计量理论和方法的研究.东北林业大学学报,2000,28(1):1-7.
[4]万志芳,蒋敏元.林业生态工程生态效益经济计量的理论和方法研究.林业经济,2001,(11):24-27.
[5]刘际建,王德善,李圣春.生态公益林补偿机制的初探[J].水土保持学报,2002,16(6):145-147.
[6]刘璨.森林资源与环境价值分析及补偿问题研究.世界林业研究.2003,16(2):7-11.
[7]费世民,彭镇华,周金星,杨冬生.关于森林生态效益补偿问题的探讨.林业科学,2004,40(4):171-179.
[8]李文华,李芬,李世东,刘某承.森林生态效益补偿的研究现状与展望.自然资源学报,2006,21(5):677-688.
[9]黄选瑞,张玉珍等.环境再生产与森林生态效益补偿.林业科学,2002,38(6):164-168.
[10]李艳波.关于公共服务市场化的思考.中国行政管理,2004,(7):24-27.
[11]刘静波.公共服务的多主体供给分析.西北工业大学硕士学位论文,2006:22,24-25.
[12]夏振洲,孙彦泉,张一梁.关于运用市场机制发展生态生产的设想.中国农学通报,2006,22(7):612-615.
[13]刘燕华,等.中国资源环境形势与可持续发展[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2001:26-27.
[14]蔡志坚.我国发展森林水文服务市场的相关问题探讨.林业经济问题,2006,26(4):297-301.
[15]刘璨.我国森林环境服务市场构建与私人参与的选择[J].自然资源学报,2002,17(2):247-252.
[16]徐中民,任福康,马松尧.估计环境价值的陈述偏好技术比较分析[J].冰川冻土,2003,25(6):701-707.
[17]杨开忠,白墨,李莹.关于意愿调查价值评估法在我国环境领域应用的可行性探讨-以北京市居民支付意愿研究为例[J].地球科学进展,2002,17(3):420-425.
[18]张志强,徐中民,程国栋.条件价值评估法的发展与应用[J].地球科学进展,2003,18(3):454-463.
[19]李莹.意愿调查价值评估法的问卷设计技术[J].环境保护科学,2001,27(6):25-28.
[20]钟全林,彭世揆.生态公益林价值补偿意愿调查分析.林业经济,2002,(6):43-46.
[21]陈东景,徐中民,程国栋.恢复额济纳旗生态环境的支付意愿研究[J].兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2003,39(3):69-72.
[22]张志强,徐中民,程国栋.条件价值评估法的发展与应用[J].地球科学进展,2003,18(3):454-463.
[23]李莹,白墨,杨开忠.居民为改善北京市大气环境质量的支付意愿研究[J].城市环境与城市生态,2001,14(5):6-8.
[24]刘光栋,吴文良.华北高产农区公众对农业面源污染的环境保护意识及支付意愿调查[J].农村生态环境,2004,20(2):41-45.
[25]陈伟东,余坤明.“转代理”:转型期低收入社区居委会自我“减负”的行为模式---武汉市X社区“门栋自治”的背后.社会主义研究,2005,(4):86-90,101.
[26]陈惠雄.经济人假说的理论机理与利己一致性行为模式.社会科学战线,2006,(4):51-58.
[27]刘耀彬,李仁东,宋学锋.城市化与城市生态环境关系研究综述与评价.中国人口.资源与环境,2005,15(3):55-60.
[28]鲁敏,李英杰,李萍.城市生态学研究进展[J].山东建筑工程学院学报,2002,17(4):42-48.
[29]杨旭涛.滁城城市林业建设现状与发展对策探讨.安徽林业科技,2006,(1):80-81.
[30]陆贵巧.大连城市森林生态效益评价及动态仿真研究.北京林业大学博士论文,2006.
[31]蔡剑辉.森林生态服务供给的政策手段研究.福建农林大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,7(1):44-47.
[32]李涛.社会互动、信任与股市参与 经济研究,2006,(1):34-45.
[33]张伟.论转轨时期中国环境污染治理设施的投融资方式与创新.中国海洋大学博士学位论文,2005.
[34]卢小丽.生态旅游社区居民旅游影响感知与参与行为研究.大连理工大学博士学位论文,2005.
[35]米锋,李吉跃,等.森林生态效益评价的研究进展.北京林业大学学报,2003,25(6):77-83.
[36]Costanza R.,R.d'Arge,R.de Groot,S.Farber,M.Grasso,B.Hannon,K.Limburg,S.Naeem,R.V.O'Neil,J.Paruelo,R.G.Raskin,P.Sutton and M.van den Belt.The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital.Nature,1997,(387):253-260.
[37]Pearce D.Auditing the Earth.Environment,1998,40(2):23-28.
[38]Thomas P.Holmes,John C.Bergstrom,Eric Huszar,Susan B.Kask,Fritz Orr Ⅲ.Analysis Contingent Valuation,net marginal benefits,and the scale of riparian ecosystem restoration.Ecological Economics,2004,(49):9-30.
[39]Hamid Amirnejad,Sadegh Khalilian,Mohammad H.Assareh and Majid Ahmadian.Estimating the existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method.Ecological Economics,2006,58(4):665-675.
[40]E.J.Sattout,S.N.Talhouk and P.D.S.Caligari.Economic value of cedar relics in Lebanon:An application of contingent valuation method for conservation [J].Ecological Economics,2007,61(2-3):315-322.
[41]Berta Martin-Lopez,Carlos Montes and Javier Benayas.The non-economic motives behind the willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation[J].Biological Conservation,2007,139(1-2):67-82.
[42]Serkan G(?)rl(?)k.The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project:Results from a contingent valuation survey.Forest Policy and Economics,2006,9(3):209-218.
[43]C.Y.Jim and Wendy Y.Chen.Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of urban greenspaces in Guangzhou,China.Landscape and Urban Planning,2006,75(1-2):81-96.
[44]Bradley S.Jorgensen,Mathew A.Wilson and Thomas A.Heberlein.Fairness in the contingent valuation of environmental public goods:attitude toward paying for environmental improvements at two levels of scope.Ecological Economics,2001,36(1):133-148.
[45]Hamid Amirnejad,Sadegh Khalilian,Mohammad H.Assareh and Majid Ahmadian.Estimating the existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method.Ecological Economics,2006,58(4):665-675.
[46]Ryan H.Wiser.Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy:A comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles.Ecological Economics,2007,62(3-4):419-432.
[47]Felix Schlapfer.Survey protocol and income effects in the contingent valuation of public goods:A meta-analysis.Ecological Economics,2006,57(3):415-429.
[48]Felix Schlapfer,Anna Roschewitz and Nick Hanley.Validation of stated preferences for public goods:a comparison of contingent valuation survey response and voting behavior.Ecological Economics,2004,51(1-2):1-16.
[49]Dominic Moran,Alistair McVittie,David J.Allcroft and David A.Elston.Quantifying public preferences for agri-environmental policy in Scotland:A comparison of methods.Ecological Economics,2007,63(1):42-53.
[50]Jayanath Ananda and Gamini Herath.Multi-attribute preference modelling and regional land-use planning.Ecological Economics,Available online 10 August 2007.
[51]Vrishali Deosthali.Assessment of impact of urbanization on climate:An application of bio-climatic index,Atmospherics Environment,1999,(33):4125-4133.
[52]G Grossman,A Krueger.Economic growth and the environment,Quarterly Journal of Economics,1995,(110):353-377.
[53]Peter Deplazes,Daniel Hegglinl,Sandra Gloor,et al.Wilderness in the city:The urbanization of echinococcus multilocularis[J].Trends in parasitology,2004,20(2):77-84.
[54]Nilsson Kjell,(?)kerlund Ulrika,Alekseev Alexander,etc.Implementing urban greening aid projects-The case of St.Petersburg,Russia[J].Urban forestry & Urban Greening,2007,6(2):93-101.
[55]Franz W.Gatzweiler.Organizing a public ecosystem service economy for sustaining biodiversity.Ecological Economics,2006,59(3):296-304.
[56]Matthew J.Kotchen and Michael R.Moore.Private provision of environmental public goods:Household participation in green-electricity programs.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2007,53(1):1-16.
[57]樊丽明,石绍宾.公共品供给机制:作用边界变迁及影响因素.当代经济科学,2006,28(1):63-68.
[58]Delali B.K.Dovie,Charlie M.ShackletonandE.T.F.Witkowski.Valuation of communal area livestock benefits,rural livelihoods and related policy issues.Land Use Policy,2006,23(3):260-271.
[59]Frederick Cubbage,Patrice Harou and Erin Sills.Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management.Forest Policy and Economics,2007,9(7):833-851.
[60]Matthew J.Kotchen and Stephen D.Reiling.Environmental attitudes,motivations,and contingent valuation of nonuse values:a case study involving endangered species.Ecological Economics,2000,32(1):93-107.
[61]Philip Cooper,Gregory L.Poe and Ian J.Bateman.The structure of motivation for contingent values:a case study of lake water quality improvement.Ecological Economics,Volume50,Issues 1-2,1 September2004,50(1-2):69-82.
[62]Estelle Bienabe,Robert R.Hearne.Public preferences for biodiversity conservation and scenic beauty within a framework of environmental services payments.Forest Policy and Economics,2006,(9):335-348.
[63]Greig Andrew Mill,Tom M.van Rensburg,Stephen Hynes and Conor Dooley.Preferences for multiple use forest management in Ireland:Citizen and consumer perspectives.Ecological Economics,2007,60(3):642-653.
[64]Knut Veisten.Willingness to pay for eco-labelled wood furniture:Choice-based conjoint analysis versus open-ended contingent valuation[J].Forest Economics,2007,13(1):29-48.
[65]Slobodan P.Simonovic and Taslima Akter.Participatory floodplain management in the Red River Basin,Canada.Annual Reviews in Control,2006,30(2):183-192.
[66]章锦河,等.九寨沟旅游生态足迹及生态补偿分析.自然资源学报,2005,20(5):735-744.
[67]唐建荣.生态经济学.北京:化学工业出版社,2005:29,185.
[68]彭建,王仰麟,陈燕飞,李卫锋,蒋依依.城市生态系统服务功能价值评估初探-以深圳市为例.北京大学学报(自然科学版),2005,41(4):594-604.
[69]王寿兵,吴峰,刘晶茹.产业生态学.北京:化学工业出版社,2006:94.
[70]张陆彪,郑海霞.流域生态服务市场的研究进展与形成机制.环境保护,2004,(12):38-43.
[71]张耀辉.实验经济学.北京:经济科学出版社,2006:142-145.
[72]王利伟,刘东升.市场经济概论.北京:中国商务出版社,2003.
[73]吴强.政府行为与区域经济协调发展.北京:经济科学出版社,2005:228-229.
[74]温作民.森林生态资源配置中的市场失灵及其对策.林业科学,1999,35(6):110-114.
[75]戴星翼,俞厚未,董梅.生态服务的价值实现.北京:科学出版社,2005:110,142.
[76]Putnam R.D.Bowling Alone:America's Decline Social Capital.Journal of Democracy,1995,6(1):65-78.
[77]Putnam R.D.,R,Leonardi,R.Y.Nanetti.Make Democracy Work:Civic Tradition in Modern Italy.Princeton University Press,1992:167.
[78]张其仔.社会资本论--社会资本与经济增长.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[79]Astier M.Almedom.Social capital and mental health:An interdisciplinary review of primary evidence.Social Science & Medicine,2005,61(5):943-964.
[80]朱国宏,桂勇.经济社会学导论.上海:复旦大学出版社,2005:189.
[81]Manski,Charles F.Economic analysis of social interaction.Journal of Economic Perspectives,2000,(14):115-136.
[82]Juan-Camilo Cardenas.Norms from outside and from inside:an experimental analysis on the governance of local ecosystems.Forest Policy and Economics,2004,6(3-4):229-241.
[83]柯武刚,史漫飞.制度经济学社会秩序与公共政策.北京:商务印书馆,2000.
[84]洪银兴.可持续发展经济学.北京:商务印书馆,2000.
[85]任保平,安立仁.现代经济学理论与方法创新论坛.北京:中国经济出版社,2006:64.
[86]罗利丽.外部环境设定与消费者行为的变异:制度视角的阐释.贵州社会科学2006,(3):31-34.
[87]张俊清,吕杰.集体林产权制度改革效应分析.林业经济问题,2007,27(3):276-279.
[88]王跃生.制度、文化与经济发展.北京:北京大学出版社,2005:150-154.
[89]Matthew Rabin.Risk aversion and expected-utility theory:a calibration theorem.Econometrica,2000,68(5):1281-1292.
[90]Kahneman D.and Tversky A.Prospect Theory:An analysis of decision under Risk,Econometrica,1979,47(2):263-291.
[91]Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky.Advances in prospect theory:Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty.Journey of risk and uncertainty[J].Journal of risk and uncertainty,1992,(5):297-323.
[92]Kahneman D.and Tversky A.Choices,values and frames.American Psychologist,1984,39(4):341-350.
[93]董志勇.行为经济学.北京:北京大学出版社,2005:191-193.
[94]中国城市森林论坛组委会.中国城市森林正在崛起.中国城市林业,2005,3(1):8-13.
[95]武立磊.生态系统服务功能经济价值评价研究综述[J].林业经济,2007,29(3):42-46.
[96]http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2006-03/11/content_4290446.htm.
[97]Renaud B.National Urbanization Policy in Developing Countries.Oxford University press,1981:17-18.
[98]Braaden R.Allenby著,翁端译.工业生态学政策框架与实施.北京:清华大学出版社,2005:180,186.
[99]肖寒,欧阳志云,等.森林生态服务功能及其生态经济价值评估初探.应用生态学报,2000,11(47):481-484.
[100]鲁敏,李英杰.部分园林植物对大气污染物吸收净化能力的研究.山东建筑工程学院学报,2002,17(2):45-49.
[101]曲庆云,赵小梅,阮桂海.统计分析方法-SAS实例精选。北京:清华大学出版社,2005:155.
[102]黄燕,吴平.SAS统计分析及应用.北京:机械工业出版社,2006.
[103]聂冲,贾生华.离散选择模型的基本原理及其发展演进评价.数量经济技术经济研究,2005,(11):151-159.
[104]赵秀勇.生产力发展与城市生态系统稳定性研究.南京气象学院,2003硕士论文.
[105]国家统计局城市社会经济调查总队,中国统计学会城市统计委员会.2004中国城市发展报告.北京:中国统计出版社,2005:11,117.
[106]刘永辉,鲁力进.谈消费者环境意识与行为的差异[J].商业时代,2007,26(19):29-30.
[107]王运生.美、日国家开发后进地区中的环境保护实践及启示[J].植物保护,2007,44(1):101-103.
[108]饶传坤.英国国民信托在环境保护中的作用及其对我国的借鉴意义[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2006,36(6):81-89.
[109]曾玉林.我国林业经济体制转型的现实制度分析[J].林业经济问题,2007,27(2):166-172.
[110]朱四海.论北京生态涵养区环境服务的价值实现[J].北京社会科学,2006,22(6):46-51.
[111]胡艳琳.城市森林生态系统生态服务功能的评价[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版).2005,29(3):111-114.
[112]Joachim Sell,Thomas Koellner,Olaf Weber,Lucio Pedroni and Roland W.Scholz.Analysis Decision criteria of European and Latin American market actors for tropical forestry projects providing environmental services.Ecological Economics,2006,58(1):17-36.
[113]陈惠雄.生命成本:关于消费函数理论的一个新假说[J].中国工业经济,2005,(8):5-13.
[114]杨春学.经济人的“再生”:对一种新综合的探讨与辩护[J].经济研究,2005,(11):22-33.
[115]叶航,汪丁丁,罗卫东.作为内生偏好的利他行为及其经济学意义[J].经济研究,2005,(8):84-94.
[116]倪秋菊,倪星.政府官员的“经济人”角色及其行为模式分析[J].武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,57(2):260-267.
[117]Samuelson W.and Zeckhauser R.Status quo bias in decision making,Journal of Risk and Uncertainly,1988,(1):7-59.
[118]Elizabeth H.,Mccabe K.and Smith V.L.The impact of exchange context on the activation of equity in ultimatum games[J].Experimental Economics,2000,(3):5-9.
[119]Camerer C.行为博弈--对策略互动的实验研究[M].//贺京同,那艺等.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006:6.
[120]Renato A.M.Silvano,Shana Udvardy,Marta Ceroni and Joshua Farley.An ecological integrity assessment of a Brazilian Atlantic Forest watershed based on surveys of stream health and local farmers' perceptions:implications for management.Ecological Economics,2005,53(3):369-385.
[121]孙成志.管理学.大连:东北财经大学出版社,2006:292.
[122]樊丽明.中国公共品市场与自愿供给分析.上海:上海人民出版社,2005.
[123]Ledyard.John,Public Goods:A Survey of Experimental Research.Chap.2 in:Alvin Roth and John Kagel(eds.).Handbook of Experimental Economics,Princeton University Press,1995.
[124]唐钧,陈淑伟.全面提升政府危机管理能力,构建城市安全和应急体系.探索,2005,(4):74-77
[125]黎昌珍.城市社会危机管理:变量研究与危机预警.广西民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,29(1):149-152.
[126]A.Benander,B.Benander,A.Fadlalla,G.James.Data Warehouse Administration and Management.Information System Management.2000,17(1):71-73.