文化资本视角下的民族旅游村寨可持续发展研究
|
摘要
人类正在步入崭新的文化经济时代,文化生产力将成为未来世界竞争的重要手段。文化经济是对知识经济内涵的扩展和深化,文化对于当代社会经济产生了巨大影响,文化消费日渐发展,文化经济化与经济文化化逐渐成为社会发展的趋向。
近年来,民族地区旅游发展迅猛。以民族文化为主要吸引物,以民族乡村风光为依托的民族村寨旅游受到越来越多游客的喜爱与认同。民族村寨是少数民族群体聚居的地方,在旅游开发中,原始、古朴、传统的民族村寨,一瞬间开放为跨文化交流的前沿阵地,在推动地方经济发展的同时,对地方文化、环境造成负面影响,包括文化生态失衡,利益相关者冲突、社区内部不和谐、自然环境遭到破坏等问题,旅游村寨可持续发展问题受到严峻挑战。
文化资本理论最早由法国社会学家布迪厄提出,在教育学、社会学领域得到广泛运用,近年来,西方学者越来越倾向于研究文化资本的经济增长功能,探讨文化资本与个人发展的关系,研究文化产品与文化产业,以及文化体制、制度对企业、国家乃至全球经济的影响。由于文化资本理论具有强大的分析功能与较完整的分析框架,对文化资源的资本转化,文化生产与再生产,文化资本的循环、周转、积累、市场运作均有涉及,能够为民族文化的生产、运营、发展、保护提供独特的分析视角和理论构架。目前我国民族村寨旅游可持续开发的研究中,定量化研究较少,没有从文化资本角度对民族旅游村寨进行研究的前例,而现有文化资本方面的研究也少见主要关注小尺度,小范围,非主流文化的少数民族文化资本的研究,这正是本文开展民族旅游村寨文化资本研究的依据。
本论文基于这样的认识：民族文化旅游景区不断上演的利益纷争和群体性事件根本原因是旅游吸引物价值及其归属不明确,导致的旅游收益分配不公,只有从经济上实现旅游吸引物价值认可,并通过法律保障民族村寨社区与村民的财产权利,才能从根本上解决景区各利益相关者无限重复博弈所导致的“共输”问题。
民族旅游村寨不能以牺牲环境效益和社会效益为代价而单纯谋求经济效益,现有民族村寨的开发方式普遍以短期经济利益为主,长此以往,民族村寨旅游发展的文化根基将被掏空,民族文化将会失去原生的土壤,文化的重构赋予文化新的意义,传统的异质性的民族的特色的文化将会逐步消失,外来各利益相关的掘金者在获得自身短期利益满足以后将会撤退,而对于世代生活在民族村寨的村民将面对面目全非的地方文化,四分五裂的价值观体系而无所适从,因此在民族村寨旅游开发之初,就必须以民族村寨的长远可持续发展为前提,充分考虑社区长远的和谐与稳定。
本文研究的目的是希望通过对现有民族旅游村寨不可持续现状的分析,寻找不可持续问题背后的深层次原因,探寻民族旅游村寨可持续发展的根本对策。为此,本文首先分析了民族旅游村寨目前的现实困境和相关理论的局限,提出了民族文化资本化解决问题的思路,其次,通过对民族文化合适价值评估方法的寻找,结合产权理论在民族旅游村寨的运用,为文化资本化提供了方法思路与理论架构,在此基础上,寻找民族旅游村寨文化资本化的实现路径。为了验证方法的可行性,本文选取了贵州典型的民族旅游村寨代表景区--西江千户苗寨作为实证研究,为西江千户苗寨基于文化资本化实现的可持续发展路径进行了探讨。全文共分三个部分共八章对民族旅游村寨的文化资本进行研究。
第一章对研究理论背景与现实背景进行分析,探讨了文化资本化研究的意义,界定了主要研究内容及结构安排,并分析了论文的创新之处。
第二章针对论文的关键词,进行了理论综述。分析了文化资本与文化资本化的缘起、研究方向、研究进展,梳理了民族旅游村寨的研究现状与理论缺陷,并对旅游可持续发展的研究现状与进展进行了述评。在此基础上,对论文的理论基础进行了简要介绍,包括产权理论、价值理论、利益相关者理论、社区参与理论、社区增权理论。
第三章主要探讨民族旅游村寨文化资本实现与可持续发展的关联。论文首先分析了现有民族村寨旅游发展的四种典型性开发模式,分别是政府主导的开发模式,企业主导的开发模式,村民主导的开发模式与NGO主导的开发模式。在以上四种开发模式中,存在着一些普遍问题。文章通过深入分析,发现这些问题的症结解决路径统一指向两个方向,一个是利益分配机制的建立,一个是开发能力的培养。而这两个问题可以在文化资本视角下统一到同一个框架下。现有对这两个问题的理论研究主要集中于利益相关者理论与社区参与理论。利益相关者理论为剖析景区内部存在的问题提供了有力工具,主要提出了利益相关者共同治理模式与多中心治理模式,但不足以解决民族村寨文化发展的问题。而社区参与及其社区增权理论为旅游景区参与式开发与内部增权提供了理想的思路,但是两个理论本身更多的停留在理论层面,同时由于我国旅游景区老百姓普遍被动参与的现状与我国民主制度现有的缺陷,两者不能从根本上解决村民参与能力建设与利益分享的公正机制缺失问题。在此基础上,本文提出了利用文化资本及其转化理论解决民族旅游村寨问题的思路。为了证明笔者的逻辑,本文建立了民族旅游村寨可持续发展目标体系,并通过分析民族村寨旅游开发中各利益相关者利益诉求,将两者建立关联,分析得出只有民族村寨村民的利益诉求与民族旅游村寨的可持续发展目标最为契合,因此,保障村民的利益诉求,即是保障民族旅游村寨的可持续发展。而保障村民的利益诉求,第一步须要实现民族文化的资本化。
第四章主要探讨民族旅游村寨文化资本化实现的前提--村寨旅游资源总体经济价值评估。论文首先根据现有对民族文化分类体系的研究,结合民族旅游村寨资源构成状况,将民族旅游村寨文化分为物质文化与非物质文化两大体系,并将物质文化分为建筑文化、服饰文化、饮食文化、医药文化、农业文化五类,将非物质文化分为节庆文化、歌舞文化,语言文化、宗教文化、生态文化、礼仪文化、工艺文化七类。由于民族村寨本身是自身文化与当地环境互动的结果,周边的自然生境是经文化改造的生境,已成为文化的一部分。同时,游客在对民族村寨旅游目的地进行选择时,常常是基于对民族村寨旅游吸引物的整体认知而形成旅游欲望,在旅游体验中,也是对村寨整个文化生态系统的感知与体验。因此论文将民族村寨文化看成一个文化生态系统,不区分民族旅游村寨的不同资源要素,也不对文化子系统进行细分,统一对民族村寨文化资源的总体价值进行评估。文章认为民族旅游村寨文化价值评估有利于提高利益各方对文化价值的认知,促进民族村寨旅游资源有效配置,为村民分配文化收益提供标准,利于对村寨旅游开发中的成本-收益进行核算。结合现有对文化价值与旅游资源价值评估方法的优劣势分析,本文选用个人旅行费用法(ITCM, Individual Travel Cost Method)评估民族旅游村寨游憩价值,选用意愿价值法(CVM, Contingent Valuation Method)评估其非使用价值,两者加总构成民族旅游村寨文化总经济价值。
第五章,探讨民族旅游村寨文化资本实现的基础--产权界定。本章通过对旅游资源产权功能的分析,认为产权可以从对主客体的激励角度提高村民对旅游开发的支持度与满意度,从根本上解决民族村寨旅游目的地利益分配不公而导致的社区矛盾,减少民族村寨旅游开发的公地悲剧与负外部性问题,实现民族村寨文化资源的有效配置与合理利用,从根本上保障村民利益,实现民族村寨文化良性传承和对自然环境的保护。而民族村寨现有产权缺失,产权界定不清,产权运营“政企不分”,景区利益相关者交易成本高,导致村寨旅游资源浪费与破坏。分析认为民族村寨旅游资源的所有权主体是村寨集体,产权客体应该包括现有自然与人文方面通过劳动付出所构成的自然景观与文化景观以及民族文化本身。集体应该享有民族村寨旅游资源的占有权、使用权、收益权、处置权。集体有权对民族村寨旅游开发方式、发展途径、资本引进、门票价格,景区内食住行游购娱相关服务产品的设立与收益享有决定权,并有权对景区的所有权、经营权实行转让、变更、撤销的权利。现有政府推进的开发模式侵犯了集体的权利,剥夺了集体的主体地位,应严格遵守扶持村寨的职责,还权与民,单独实行管理职能,而集体需要建立村内监督机制,保障村民内部利益的分配,帮助村民真正分享产权带来的收益。
第六章主要探讨民族旅游村寨文化资本实现的具体路径。论文首先分析了民族旅游村寨文化的资本属性,认为民族旅游村寨文化具有价值性、收益性,能够积累和产生增殖,具备实现资本转化的潜能。借鉴现有学者对文化资本的划分,并结合民族旅游村寨的实际,本文将民族文化资本分为实体文化资本与虚体文化资本,并认为实体文化资本的实现需要通过文化资源的产品化,文化产品的市场化,文化市场化运营与管理三个步骤来实现,而虚体文化资本需要通过身体化形态与体制化形态文化资本的提升加以实现。
第七章是对西江干户苗寨文化资本转化的实证研究,文章首先分析了西江千户苗寨的文化旅游资源的构成状况,探查了其旅游发展的历程,并利用6年来的观测对比找出了西江千户苗寨旅游开发中存在的问题,认为西江千户苗寨存在环境破坏、文化变异、过度商业化及景区矛盾冲突的问题。论文紧接着通过对西江千户苗寨旅游开发核心利益相关者利益诉求的描述性统计,分析了各方的利益诉求,在此基础上利用ITCM方法评估了西江千户苗寨的游憩价值,利用CVM方法评估了景区非使用价值,得出西江千户苗寨旅游经济总价值为21.8亿元。通过对西江千户苗寨现有产权现状的分析,论文认为应该将西江千户苗寨旅游资源产权主体界定为村寨集体,将现有无主产权自然景观权、文化景观权及民族文化产权界定为村寨集体的产权客体,保障村寨集体行使旅游资源所有权主对旅游开发决策的权利,实现三权分离。最后本文提出西江千户苗寨文化资本转化路径,包括创新文化产品开发,提升文化产品市场竞争力,培养村民文化生产能力,推动民族地区文化制度建设。
第八章对全文的研究内容进行总结,在分析存在不足的基础上,对今后的研究进行了展望。
Mankind is entering a new era of cultural economy; the competition in the future will be culture competition. Culture economy is the extension and deepening of connotation of the knowledge economy. With the development of culture consumption, culture has the great impact on modern social economic, and culture economics and economic civilization gradually become the trend of social development.
In recent years, tourism is flourishing in ethnic areas. The tourism based on ethnic rural scenery, and of which main attraction is ethnic culture, is well recognized and loved by more and more tourists. Ethnic village is a place where ethnic minority groups live. With the development of tourism, the original, primitive, traditional villages become forefront of intercultural communication instantly, which will promote economic development. However, at the same time, it may cause a negative impact on local culture, environment, cultural and ecological imbalances, which include culture ecological imbalance, Stakeholder conflict, the disharmony of internal community and destruction of natural environment. The sustainable development of ethnic
Cultural Capital Theory, which was first proposed by The French sociologist Bourdieu, has been widely used in Pedagogy and Sociology. In recent years, western scholars increasing study on cultural economic function of cultural capital, relationship between cultural capital and personal development, cultural products and cultural industries and the impact on enterprise, area and nation of which cultural system cause. Cultural Capital Theory, because of its powerful analysis function and the complete analysis framework, and its relation to circulation, turnaround, accumulation of cultural capital, is able to provide unique analytical insight and theoretical framework for ethnic culture.
At present, study on sustainable tourism of ethnic village contains less quantitative research, and there is no precedent of research on ethnic villages with the "Culture capital theory" perspective. The paper based on this understanding, conflicts of interest and the ethnic cultural tourism scenic spot has been played out mass incidents root cause is the value and tourist attractions are not clear, lead to the tourism income inequality, only realize the tourist attractions from the economic value, and through the legal safeguard ethnic village community and the villagers' rights to property, in order to fundamentally solve the scenic area as a result of various stakeholders infinite repeated game "lose-lose" problem.
Villages of ethnic tourism cannot be at the expense of environmental benefits for the economic benefits and social benefits at the expense of simple, existing ways of the development of the ethnic villages of common short-term economic interest is given priority to, in the long term, the culture of the ethnic village tourism development foundations will be hollowed, ethnic culture will lose its native soil, reconstructing culture new meaning of culture, traditional heterogeneity of the national characteristics of culture will gradually disappear, foreign various stakeholders of the nuggets will retreat after get to meet their own short-term interests, but for generations live in ethnic village villagers will face recognition of local culture, the value of the fragmented system and uncertain, so at the beginning of the ethnic villages of tourism development, it must be on the premise of ethnic villages of long-term sustainable development, give full consideration to the harmony and stability of the community in the long run.
The purpose of this study is to find the profound reasons behind the unsustainable problem, which analyzing unsustainable status quo of the tourism in ethnic Village, and to explore the fundamental countermeasures for the sustainable development of the tourism in ethnic villages. For this reason, this article analyzes the realistic predicament of the national tourist villages and the limitations of existing theories at first, and then puts forward the idea to solve the national culture capitalization. Secondly, through finding suitable assessment methods of national culture, the article provides the methods and the theoretical framework for the cultural capitalization combining with the using of theory of property rights in the national tour of the village. Based on this, the article also looks for the realization of culture capitalization path of the tourism in ethnic village. In order to verify the feasibility, this article selects the typical representative of the villages of ethnic tourism scenic area called Xi jiang miao village in Guizhou city as empirical study to discuss the implementation of sustainable development path of the culture capitalization of the Xijiang miao village. The Paper is divided into three parts consisted of nine chapters to study the cultural capital of tourism in ethnic village.
Chapter Ⅰ analyzes the theoretical and practical background of the research, discusses the significance of cultural capitalization, defines the main research content and structural arrangements, and analyzes the difficulties and innovation of the paper.
Chapter Ⅱ carries on the theoretical review according to the keywords in the thesis, and respectively analyzes the cultural capital theory and the origin of cultural capital theory, research direction and research progress of capitalization, research status and theoretical defects of ethnic village tourism, the sustainable development of tourism research progress both at home and abroad. On this basis, the present situations of the study on three aspects have carried on the brief review. Lastly, all the above, carries on the brief introduction for the four most relevant theories which mainly used for this article, including property rights theory, value theory, stakeholder theory, theory of community participation.
Chapter Ⅲ mainly discusses the necessity of research on the cultural capitalization of the tourism in ethnic village.The article first analyzes four typical development patterns for the development of current ethnic village tourism, namely government-led development model, community-led development model, the villagers-led development model and NGO-led development model, in the above four kinds of development mode, generally there are some problems. In this paper, based on the thoroughly analysis, we have found out that the development problem of ethnic village tourism unified point to two directions, one is the establishment of the interest distribution mechanism, the other one is the development ability, and this two problems, can be unified to the same framework under the perspective of cultural capital. Existing theoretical research on these two issues focused on stakeholder theory and community participation theory. Stakeholder theory provides a powerful tool for the analysis of the problems that exist within the area, and mainly puts forward the stakeholders co-governance mode and polycentric governance mode, which is not enough to solve the problem of cultural development of ethnics village. Community participation theory and community empowerment theory provide an ideal thought for the scenic spots participatory development and the internal empowerment. However, the two theories themselves are more at the theoretical level, and due to current situation that common people generally passive participation in traveling scenic area and deficiencies of the existing democratic system in our country, so they cannot fundamentally solve the issues that the villagers who participated in capacity building and benefit sharing mechanism are lack of justice. On this basis, this paper puts forward cultural capital theory which is possible to solve the problem of tourism in ethnic village. In order to prove the author's logic, this paper establishes the sustainable development target system of tourism in ethnic village, and by analyzing the interested demands of stakeholders in the development of ethnics village tourism, associates them and concludes that only the interested demands of the villagers in ethnics village fits most with the sustainable development goals of tourism in ethnic village, therefore, protecting the interest demands of villagers is equal to the protection of sustainable development of ethnics village tourism.
Chapter IV focuses on the overall value assessment of cultural resources in tourism in ethnic villages. Firstly, based on the existing classification of national culture, the culture of these ethnic villages is divided into two systems, which is material culture and non-material culture, combining with the constitution of resources in ethnic tourism villages. The material culture is divided into architectural culture, clothing culture, food culture, medicine culture, and agricultural culture. The non-material culture is divided into festival culture, dance culture, language culture, religion cultural, ecological culture, etiquette culture, and craft culture. Since the ethnic village itself is the outcome of interaction between its own culture and the local environment, the surroundings which is modified by the culture have become part of the culture. Meanwhile, when selecting destinations, tourists are often attracted by the overall cognitive of ethnic villages. This visit will be not only a travel for tourists, but also perception and experience on the whole culture village ecosystem. Therefore, this thesis takes ethnic villages culture as a cultural and ecological system, which does not distinguish between different ethnic tourism village resource elements, nor subdivide cultural subsystems. It unifies the overall value assessment of cultural resources in tourism in ethnic villages. This article thinks that this assessment will improve the awareness of all parties on the value of the culture and promote the effective allocation of tourism in ethnic villages, providing standards for the villagers on allocation of cultural benefits. It will do the accounting on cost and revenue in the development of tourism. Combining with the existing analysis on cultural values and assessment methods of tourism resources value, this paper chooses Individual Travel Cost Method(ITCM) to assess the recreational value of ethnic tourism villages, selecting Contingent Valuation Method(CVM) to assess its non-use values. Both of them constitute the sum total of economic value of culture in ethnic villages.
Chapter V discusses the definition of property rights which is the foundation/basis to implement the cultural capital theory of tourism in ethnic village. Analyzing the function of tourism resources ownership, this chapter maintains that property rights can improve the support degree and satisfaction towards tourism development of villagers from the perspective of incentives for subjects and objects, it can also give the fundamental solution to community conflicts caused by unfair distribution of benefits of the ethnic villages tourist destination, reduce the tragedy of the commons and the negative externalities during the development of ethnic village tourism, achieve the efficient allocation and rational utilization of cultural resources in ethnic villages, fulfill the benign heritage of ethnic villages cultural and the protection of natural environment. There is a waste of resources and destruction of village tourism, resulting from the lack of ethnic villages existing property rights, the ill-definition of property rights, a mixture of government administration and enterprise management in property rights operation, the high transaction costs between stakeholders of the scenic spot. By analyzing, it is believed that village collective is the main ownership of ethnic village tourism resources, and the property right object include the natural and-cultural landscape value attached on existing natural objects, as well as the he existing tourism resources. Collective should enjoy the rights of possession, use, usufruct, disposition of ethnic village tourism resources. Collective should enjoy decision-making power both on development methods, development approach, capital introduction, ticket prices of ethnic village tourism, and on the establishment and benefits of products and services of food, housing, travel and entertainment in scenic spots. Meanwhile, they can transfer, change, and withdraw the ownership and management right of the scenic spot. Existing development model promoted by government violates collective rights, deprives dominant position of collective. The government should strictly observe responsibilities to support village, delegate rights back to people, and implement management functions alone. At the same time, the village collective needs to build internal oversight mechanism to protect the allocation of the villagers internal interests and to help the villagers realize the benefits produced by property rights.
Chapter VI mainly discusses the specific path how to achieve cultural capital in ethnic tourism villages. First of all, it is believed that ethnic tourism village culture has value and profitability, would accumulate and produce appreciation, is potential for capital conversion, by analyzing the capital property of tourism culture in ethnic village. Based on existing division of cultural capital drawn by others scholars, combined with the actual conditions of tourism in ethnic village, this article divided national cultural capital into tangible cultural capital and incorporeal cultural capital. Tangible cultural capital can be achieved by three steps, productization of cultural resources, marketization of cultural products and market-oriented operations and management of cultural market, while incorporeal cultural capital needs to be realized by improving the embodied forms and institutionalized forms of cultural capital.
Chapter VII is an empirical research into cultural capital transformation of the Xijiang Miao Village. Firstly, the article analyzes the constitution of cultural tourism resources in Xijiang Miao Village, explores its tourism development course, identifies the problems during its tourism development course using six years of observation data. Results show that there exist several problems, such as environmental damage, cultural variation, excessive commercialization and scenic spot contradictions and conflicts. In addition, by using the descriptive statistics method, the article describes and analyzes the interests demand of four core stakeholders. Based on600questionnaires of visitors in Xijiang Miao Village, the article uses ITCM methods to assess recreational value of Xijiang Miao Village, and uses CVM methods to assess non-use values of the area, result shows that the total value of its tourism economy is21.8billion yuan. According to the status analysis of existing property rights, the article holds that property right subject of tourism resources in Xijiang Miao Village should be the ethnic village collective. Moreover, the existing ownerless property, such as the natural landscape right, cultural landscape right and ethnic cultural right should be defined as the object property right of the ethnic village collective, in this way, the main decision-making rights for tourism development of the ethnic village collective can be protected, and the three property rights can be divided. At last, the article put forwards cultural capital conversion path of Xijiang Miao Village, including how to develop innovative cultural products, lift market competitiveness of cultural products, provide some trains for villagers to improve its cultural production ability and promote national regional cultural system construction.
In Chapter Ⅷ, deficiencies of the research are summarized and the future research directions are discussed.
近年来,民族地区旅游发展迅猛。以民族文化为主要吸引物,以民族乡村风光为依托的民族村寨旅游受到越来越多游客的喜爱与认同。民族村寨是少数民族群体聚居的地方,在旅游开发中,原始、古朴、传统的民族村寨,一瞬间开放为跨文化交流的前沿阵地,在推动地方经济发展的同时,对地方文化、环境造成负面影响,包括文化生态失衡,利益相关者冲突、社区内部不和谐、自然环境遭到破坏等问题,旅游村寨可持续发展问题受到严峻挑战。
文化资本理论最早由法国社会学家布迪厄提出,在教育学、社会学领域得到广泛运用,近年来,西方学者越来越倾向于研究文化资本的经济增长功能,探讨文化资本与个人发展的关系,研究文化产品与文化产业,以及文化体制、制度对企业、国家乃至全球经济的影响。由于文化资本理论具有强大的分析功能与较完整的分析框架,对文化资源的资本转化,文化生产与再生产,文化资本的循环、周转、积累、市场运作均有涉及,能够为民族文化的生产、运营、发展、保护提供独特的分析视角和理论构架。目前我国民族村寨旅游可持续开发的研究中,定量化研究较少,没有从文化资本角度对民族旅游村寨进行研究的前例,而现有文化资本方面的研究也少见主要关注小尺度,小范围,非主流文化的少数民族文化资本的研究,这正是本文开展民族旅游村寨文化资本研究的依据。
本论文基于这样的认识：民族文化旅游景区不断上演的利益纷争和群体性事件根本原因是旅游吸引物价值及其归属不明确,导致的旅游收益分配不公,只有从经济上实现旅游吸引物价值认可,并通过法律保障民族村寨社区与村民的财产权利,才能从根本上解决景区各利益相关者无限重复博弈所导致的“共输”问题。
民族旅游村寨不能以牺牲环境效益和社会效益为代价而单纯谋求经济效益,现有民族村寨的开发方式普遍以短期经济利益为主,长此以往,民族村寨旅游发展的文化根基将被掏空,民族文化将会失去原生的土壤,文化的重构赋予文化新的意义,传统的异质性的民族的特色的文化将会逐步消失,外来各利益相关的掘金者在获得自身短期利益满足以后将会撤退,而对于世代生活在民族村寨的村民将面对面目全非的地方文化,四分五裂的价值观体系而无所适从,因此在民族村寨旅游开发之初,就必须以民族村寨的长远可持续发展为前提,充分考虑社区长远的和谐与稳定。
本文研究的目的是希望通过对现有民族旅游村寨不可持续现状的分析,寻找不可持续问题背后的深层次原因,探寻民族旅游村寨可持续发展的根本对策。为此,本文首先分析了民族旅游村寨目前的现实困境和相关理论的局限,提出了民族文化资本化解决问题的思路,其次,通过对民族文化合适价值评估方法的寻找,结合产权理论在民族旅游村寨的运用,为文化资本化提供了方法思路与理论架构,在此基础上,寻找民族旅游村寨文化资本化的实现路径。为了验证方法的可行性,本文选取了贵州典型的民族旅游村寨代表景区--西江千户苗寨作为实证研究,为西江千户苗寨基于文化资本化实现的可持续发展路径进行了探讨。全文共分三个部分共八章对民族旅游村寨的文化资本进行研究。
第一章对研究理论背景与现实背景进行分析,探讨了文化资本化研究的意义,界定了主要研究内容及结构安排,并分析了论文的创新之处。
第二章针对论文的关键词,进行了理论综述。分析了文化资本与文化资本化的缘起、研究方向、研究进展,梳理了民族旅游村寨的研究现状与理论缺陷,并对旅游可持续发展的研究现状与进展进行了述评。在此基础上,对论文的理论基础进行了简要介绍,包括产权理论、价值理论、利益相关者理论、社区参与理论、社区增权理论。
第三章主要探讨民族旅游村寨文化资本实现与可持续发展的关联。论文首先分析了现有民族村寨旅游发展的四种典型性开发模式,分别是政府主导的开发模式,企业主导的开发模式,村民主导的开发模式与NGO主导的开发模式。在以上四种开发模式中,存在着一些普遍问题。文章通过深入分析,发现这些问题的症结解决路径统一指向两个方向,一个是利益分配机制的建立,一个是开发能力的培养。而这两个问题可以在文化资本视角下统一到同一个框架下。现有对这两个问题的理论研究主要集中于利益相关者理论与社区参与理论。利益相关者理论为剖析景区内部存在的问题提供了有力工具,主要提出了利益相关者共同治理模式与多中心治理模式,但不足以解决民族村寨文化发展的问题。而社区参与及其社区增权理论为旅游景区参与式开发与内部增权提供了理想的思路,但是两个理论本身更多的停留在理论层面,同时由于我国旅游景区老百姓普遍被动参与的现状与我国民主制度现有的缺陷,两者不能从根本上解决村民参与能力建设与利益分享的公正机制缺失问题。在此基础上,本文提出了利用文化资本及其转化理论解决民族旅游村寨问题的思路。为了证明笔者的逻辑,本文建立了民族旅游村寨可持续发展目标体系,并通过分析民族村寨旅游开发中各利益相关者利益诉求,将两者建立关联,分析得出只有民族村寨村民的利益诉求与民族旅游村寨的可持续发展目标最为契合,因此,保障村民的利益诉求,即是保障民族旅游村寨的可持续发展。而保障村民的利益诉求,第一步须要实现民族文化的资本化。
第四章主要探讨民族旅游村寨文化资本化实现的前提--村寨旅游资源总体经济价值评估。论文首先根据现有对民族文化分类体系的研究,结合民族旅游村寨资源构成状况,将民族旅游村寨文化分为物质文化与非物质文化两大体系,并将物质文化分为建筑文化、服饰文化、饮食文化、医药文化、农业文化五类,将非物质文化分为节庆文化、歌舞文化,语言文化、宗教文化、生态文化、礼仪文化、工艺文化七类。由于民族村寨本身是自身文化与当地环境互动的结果,周边的自然生境是经文化改造的生境,已成为文化的一部分。同时,游客在对民族村寨旅游目的地进行选择时,常常是基于对民族村寨旅游吸引物的整体认知而形成旅游欲望,在旅游体验中,也是对村寨整个文化生态系统的感知与体验。因此论文将民族村寨文化看成一个文化生态系统,不区分民族旅游村寨的不同资源要素,也不对文化子系统进行细分,统一对民族村寨文化资源的总体价值进行评估。文章认为民族旅游村寨文化价值评估有利于提高利益各方对文化价值的认知,促进民族村寨旅游资源有效配置,为村民分配文化收益提供标准,利于对村寨旅游开发中的成本-收益进行核算。结合现有对文化价值与旅游资源价值评估方法的优劣势分析,本文选用个人旅行费用法(ITCM, Individual Travel Cost Method)评估民族旅游村寨游憩价值,选用意愿价值法(CVM, Contingent Valuation Method)评估其非使用价值,两者加总构成民族旅游村寨文化总经济价值。
第五章,探讨民族旅游村寨文化资本实现的基础--产权界定。本章通过对旅游资源产权功能的分析,认为产权可以从对主客体的激励角度提高村民对旅游开发的支持度与满意度,从根本上解决民族村寨旅游目的地利益分配不公而导致的社区矛盾,减少民族村寨旅游开发的公地悲剧与负外部性问题,实现民族村寨文化资源的有效配置与合理利用,从根本上保障村民利益,实现民族村寨文化良性传承和对自然环境的保护。而民族村寨现有产权缺失,产权界定不清,产权运营“政企不分”,景区利益相关者交易成本高,导致村寨旅游资源浪费与破坏。分析认为民族村寨旅游资源的所有权主体是村寨集体,产权客体应该包括现有自然与人文方面通过劳动付出所构成的自然景观与文化景观以及民族文化本身。集体应该享有民族村寨旅游资源的占有权、使用权、收益权、处置权。集体有权对民族村寨旅游开发方式、发展途径、资本引进、门票价格,景区内食住行游购娱相关服务产品的设立与收益享有决定权,并有权对景区的所有权、经营权实行转让、变更、撤销的权利。现有政府推进的开发模式侵犯了集体的权利,剥夺了集体的主体地位,应严格遵守扶持村寨的职责,还权与民,单独实行管理职能,而集体需要建立村内监督机制,保障村民内部利益的分配,帮助村民真正分享产权带来的收益。
第六章主要探讨民族旅游村寨文化资本实现的具体路径。论文首先分析了民族旅游村寨文化的资本属性,认为民族旅游村寨文化具有价值性、收益性,能够积累和产生增殖,具备实现资本转化的潜能。借鉴现有学者对文化资本的划分,并结合民族旅游村寨的实际,本文将民族文化资本分为实体文化资本与虚体文化资本,并认为实体文化资本的实现需要通过文化资源的产品化,文化产品的市场化,文化市场化运营与管理三个步骤来实现,而虚体文化资本需要通过身体化形态与体制化形态文化资本的提升加以实现。
第七章是对西江干户苗寨文化资本转化的实证研究,文章首先分析了西江千户苗寨的文化旅游资源的构成状况,探查了其旅游发展的历程,并利用6年来的观测对比找出了西江千户苗寨旅游开发中存在的问题,认为西江千户苗寨存在环境破坏、文化变异、过度商业化及景区矛盾冲突的问题。论文紧接着通过对西江千户苗寨旅游开发核心利益相关者利益诉求的描述性统计,分析了各方的利益诉求,在此基础上利用ITCM方法评估了西江千户苗寨的游憩价值,利用CVM方法评估了景区非使用价值,得出西江千户苗寨旅游经济总价值为21.8亿元。通过对西江千户苗寨现有产权现状的分析,论文认为应该将西江千户苗寨旅游资源产权主体界定为村寨集体,将现有无主产权自然景观权、文化景观权及民族文化产权界定为村寨集体的产权客体,保障村寨集体行使旅游资源所有权主对旅游开发决策的权利,实现三权分离。最后本文提出西江千户苗寨文化资本转化路径,包括创新文化产品开发,提升文化产品市场竞争力,培养村民文化生产能力,推动民族地区文化制度建设。
第八章对全文的研究内容进行总结,在分析存在不足的基础上,对今后的研究进行了展望。
Mankind is entering a new era of cultural economy; the competition in the future will be culture competition. Culture economy is the extension and deepening of connotation of the knowledge economy. With the development of culture consumption, culture has the great impact on modern social economic, and culture economics and economic civilization gradually become the trend of social development.
In recent years, tourism is flourishing in ethnic areas. The tourism based on ethnic rural scenery, and of which main attraction is ethnic culture, is well recognized and loved by more and more tourists. Ethnic village is a place where ethnic minority groups live. With the development of tourism, the original, primitive, traditional villages become forefront of intercultural communication instantly, which will promote economic development. However, at the same time, it may cause a negative impact on local culture, environment, cultural and ecological imbalances, which include culture ecological imbalance, Stakeholder conflict, the disharmony of internal community and destruction of natural environment. The sustainable development of ethnic
Cultural Capital Theory, which was first proposed by The French sociologist Bourdieu, has been widely used in Pedagogy and Sociology. In recent years, western scholars increasing study on cultural economic function of cultural capital, relationship between cultural capital and personal development, cultural products and cultural industries and the impact on enterprise, area and nation of which cultural system cause. Cultural Capital Theory, because of its powerful analysis function and the complete analysis framework, and its relation to circulation, turnaround, accumulation of cultural capital, is able to provide unique analytical insight and theoretical framework for ethnic culture.
At present, study on sustainable tourism of ethnic village contains less quantitative research, and there is no precedent of research on ethnic villages with the "Culture capital theory" perspective. The paper based on this understanding, conflicts of interest and the ethnic cultural tourism scenic spot has been played out mass incidents root cause is the value and tourist attractions are not clear, lead to the tourism income inequality, only realize the tourist attractions from the economic value, and through the legal safeguard ethnic village community and the villagers' rights to property, in order to fundamentally solve the scenic area as a result of various stakeholders infinite repeated game "lose-lose" problem.
Villages of ethnic tourism cannot be at the expense of environmental benefits for the economic benefits and social benefits at the expense of simple, existing ways of the development of the ethnic villages of common short-term economic interest is given priority to, in the long term, the culture of the ethnic village tourism development foundations will be hollowed, ethnic culture will lose its native soil, reconstructing culture new meaning of culture, traditional heterogeneity of the national characteristics of culture will gradually disappear, foreign various stakeholders of the nuggets will retreat after get to meet their own short-term interests, but for generations live in ethnic village villagers will face recognition of local culture, the value of the fragmented system and uncertain, so at the beginning of the ethnic villages of tourism development, it must be on the premise of ethnic villages of long-term sustainable development, give full consideration to the harmony and stability of the community in the long run.
The purpose of this study is to find the profound reasons behind the unsustainable problem, which analyzing unsustainable status quo of the tourism in ethnic Village, and to explore the fundamental countermeasures for the sustainable development of the tourism in ethnic villages. For this reason, this article analyzes the realistic predicament of the national tourist villages and the limitations of existing theories at first, and then puts forward the idea to solve the national culture capitalization. Secondly, through finding suitable assessment methods of national culture, the article provides the methods and the theoretical framework for the cultural capitalization combining with the using of theory of property rights in the national tour of the village. Based on this, the article also looks for the realization of culture capitalization path of the tourism in ethnic village. In order to verify the feasibility, this article selects the typical representative of the villages of ethnic tourism scenic area called Xi jiang miao village in Guizhou city as empirical study to discuss the implementation of sustainable development path of the culture capitalization of the Xijiang miao village. The Paper is divided into three parts consisted of nine chapters to study the cultural capital of tourism in ethnic village.
Chapter Ⅰ analyzes the theoretical and practical background of the research, discusses the significance of cultural capitalization, defines the main research content and structural arrangements, and analyzes the difficulties and innovation of the paper.
Chapter Ⅱ carries on the theoretical review according to the keywords in the thesis, and respectively analyzes the cultural capital theory and the origin of cultural capital theory, research direction and research progress of capitalization, research status and theoretical defects of ethnic village tourism, the sustainable development of tourism research progress both at home and abroad. On this basis, the present situations of the study on three aspects have carried on the brief review. Lastly, all the above, carries on the brief introduction for the four most relevant theories which mainly used for this article, including property rights theory, value theory, stakeholder theory, theory of community participation.
Chapter Ⅲ mainly discusses the necessity of research on the cultural capitalization of the tourism in ethnic village.The article first analyzes four typical development patterns for the development of current ethnic village tourism, namely government-led development model, community-led development model, the villagers-led development model and NGO-led development model, in the above four kinds of development mode, generally there are some problems. In this paper, based on the thoroughly analysis, we have found out that the development problem of ethnic village tourism unified point to two directions, one is the establishment of the interest distribution mechanism, the other one is the development ability, and this two problems, can be unified to the same framework under the perspective of cultural capital. Existing theoretical research on these two issues focused on stakeholder theory and community participation theory. Stakeholder theory provides a powerful tool for the analysis of the problems that exist within the area, and mainly puts forward the stakeholders co-governance mode and polycentric governance mode, which is not enough to solve the problem of cultural development of ethnics village. Community participation theory and community empowerment theory provide an ideal thought for the scenic spots participatory development and the internal empowerment. However, the two theories themselves are more at the theoretical level, and due to current situation that common people generally passive participation in traveling scenic area and deficiencies of the existing democratic system in our country, so they cannot fundamentally solve the issues that the villagers who participated in capacity building and benefit sharing mechanism are lack of justice. On this basis, this paper puts forward cultural capital theory which is possible to solve the problem of tourism in ethnic village. In order to prove the author's logic, this paper establishes the sustainable development target system of tourism in ethnic village, and by analyzing the interested demands of stakeholders in the development of ethnics village tourism, associates them and concludes that only the interested demands of the villagers in ethnics village fits most with the sustainable development goals of tourism in ethnic village, therefore, protecting the interest demands of villagers is equal to the protection of sustainable development of ethnics village tourism.
Chapter IV focuses on the overall value assessment of cultural resources in tourism in ethnic villages. Firstly, based on the existing classification of national culture, the culture of these ethnic villages is divided into two systems, which is material culture and non-material culture, combining with the constitution of resources in ethnic tourism villages. The material culture is divided into architectural culture, clothing culture, food culture, medicine culture, and agricultural culture. The non-material culture is divided into festival culture, dance culture, language culture, religion cultural, ecological culture, etiquette culture, and craft culture. Since the ethnic village itself is the outcome of interaction between its own culture and the local environment, the surroundings which is modified by the culture have become part of the culture. Meanwhile, when selecting destinations, tourists are often attracted by the overall cognitive of ethnic villages. This visit will be not only a travel for tourists, but also perception and experience on the whole culture village ecosystem. Therefore, this thesis takes ethnic villages culture as a cultural and ecological system, which does not distinguish between different ethnic tourism village resource elements, nor subdivide cultural subsystems. It unifies the overall value assessment of cultural resources in tourism in ethnic villages. This article thinks that this assessment will improve the awareness of all parties on the value of the culture and promote the effective allocation of tourism in ethnic villages, providing standards for the villagers on allocation of cultural benefits. It will do the accounting on cost and revenue in the development of tourism. Combining with the existing analysis on cultural values and assessment methods of tourism resources value, this paper chooses Individual Travel Cost Method(ITCM) to assess the recreational value of ethnic tourism villages, selecting Contingent Valuation Method(CVM) to assess its non-use values. Both of them constitute the sum total of economic value of culture in ethnic villages.
Chapter V discusses the definition of property rights which is the foundation/basis to implement the cultural capital theory of tourism in ethnic village. Analyzing the function of tourism resources ownership, this chapter maintains that property rights can improve the support degree and satisfaction towards tourism development of villagers from the perspective of incentives for subjects and objects, it can also give the fundamental solution to community conflicts caused by unfair distribution of benefits of the ethnic villages tourist destination, reduce the tragedy of the commons and the negative externalities during the development of ethnic village tourism, achieve the efficient allocation and rational utilization of cultural resources in ethnic villages, fulfill the benign heritage of ethnic villages cultural and the protection of natural environment. There is a waste of resources and destruction of village tourism, resulting from the lack of ethnic villages existing property rights, the ill-definition of property rights, a mixture of government administration and enterprise management in property rights operation, the high transaction costs between stakeholders of the scenic spot. By analyzing, it is believed that village collective is the main ownership of ethnic village tourism resources, and the property right object include the natural and-cultural landscape value attached on existing natural objects, as well as the he existing tourism resources. Collective should enjoy the rights of possession, use, usufruct, disposition of ethnic village tourism resources. Collective should enjoy decision-making power both on development methods, development approach, capital introduction, ticket prices of ethnic village tourism, and on the establishment and benefits of products and services of food, housing, travel and entertainment in scenic spots. Meanwhile, they can transfer, change, and withdraw the ownership and management right of the scenic spot. Existing development model promoted by government violates collective rights, deprives dominant position of collective. The government should strictly observe responsibilities to support village, delegate rights back to people, and implement management functions alone. At the same time, the village collective needs to build internal oversight mechanism to protect the allocation of the villagers internal interests and to help the villagers realize the benefits produced by property rights.
Chapter VI mainly discusses the specific path how to achieve cultural capital in ethnic tourism villages. First of all, it is believed that ethnic tourism village culture has value and profitability, would accumulate and produce appreciation, is potential for capital conversion, by analyzing the capital property of tourism culture in ethnic village. Based on existing division of cultural capital drawn by others scholars, combined with the actual conditions of tourism in ethnic village, this article divided national cultural capital into tangible cultural capital and incorporeal cultural capital. Tangible cultural capital can be achieved by three steps, productization of cultural resources, marketization of cultural products and market-oriented operations and management of cultural market, while incorporeal cultural capital needs to be realized by improving the embodied forms and institutionalized forms of cultural capital.
Chapter VII is an empirical research into cultural capital transformation of the Xijiang Miao Village. Firstly, the article analyzes the constitution of cultural tourism resources in Xijiang Miao Village, explores its tourism development course, identifies the problems during its tourism development course using six years of observation data. Results show that there exist several problems, such as environmental damage, cultural variation, excessive commercialization and scenic spot contradictions and conflicts. In addition, by using the descriptive statistics method, the article describes and analyzes the interests demand of four core stakeholders. Based on600questionnaires of visitors in Xijiang Miao Village, the article uses ITCM methods to assess recreational value of Xijiang Miao Village, and uses CVM methods to assess non-use values of the area, result shows that the total value of its tourism economy is21.8billion yuan. According to the status analysis of existing property rights, the article holds that property right subject of tourism resources in Xijiang Miao Village should be the ethnic village collective. Moreover, the existing ownerless property, such as the natural landscape right, cultural landscape right and ethnic cultural right should be defined as the object property right of the ethnic village collective, in this way, the main decision-making rights for tourism development of the ethnic village collective can be protected, and the three property rights can be divided. At last, the article put forwards cultural capital conversion path of Xijiang Miao Village, including how to develop innovative cultural products, lift market competitiveness of cultural products, provide some trains for villagers to improve its cultural production ability and promote national regional cultural system construction.
In Chapter Ⅷ, deficiencies of the research are summarized and the future research directions are discussed.
引文
[1]薛晓源,曹荣湘.全球化与文化资本[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2005.
[2]王磊.“文化资本全要素生产率”的实证研究[D].北京邮电大学,2009.
[3]杜芳娟,陈晓亮,朱竑.民族文化重构实践中的身份与地方认同——仡佬族祭祖活动案例[J].地理科学,2011,31(12)：1512-1517.
[4]保继刚,左冰.为旅游吸引物权立法[J].旅游学刊,2012,27(07)：11-18.
[5]中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局.《马克思恩格斯全集》第二卷[M].北京：人民出版社,1995.
[6]斯密亚当.,郭大力,王亚南.《国民财富的性质和原因的研究》(上卷)[M].北京：商务印书馆,1972.
[7]大卫·李嘉图.政治经济学及赋税原理[M].北京：人民出版社,1972.
[8]中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局.《马克思恩格斯全集》第四卷[M].北京：人民出版社,1958.
[9]布尔迪厄.文化资本与社会炼金术[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1997.
[10]孙维.文化资本的界定与测度[J].统计与决策,2010(6)：166-167.
[11]布尔迪厄,华康德.实践与反思——反思社会学导引[M].北京：中央文献出版社,1998.
[12]王海岳.文化资本理论研究述评[J].南通职业大学学报,2012,26(1)：16-20.
[13]何振科.布丢文化资本理论与文化创业实践研究[D].山东大学,2012.
[14]朱伟珏.文化资本与人力资本——布迪厄文化资本理论的经济学意义[J].天津社会科学,2007(3)：84-89.
[15]徐明生.我国文化资本与经济发展的协调性研究[J].厦门大学学报：哲学社会科学版,2011(1)：30-37.
[16]姚俭建,岑文忠.文化资本的积累机制探微[J].上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,33(2)：35-40.
[17]陈青生.厘清文化资本的内涵[J].探索与争鸣,2007(1)：19-21.
[18]陈锋.文化资本导论[D].中共中央党校,2005.
[19]李丽.文化资本与企业发展研究[D].华中农业大学,2004.
[20]高波,张志鹏.文化资本：经济增长源泉的一种解释[J].南京大学学报(哲学.人文科学.社会科学版),2004(05)：102-112.
[21]许艳艳.景德镇陶瓷文化资源的资本化研究[D].景德镇陶瓷学院,2008.
[22]李旭.一个文化资本的生成与运作[D].中央民族大学,2011.
[23]从_木兰_到_花木兰_文化转换与文化资本的博弈的个例分析[J].
[24]周叮波.民族文化资本化的社会经济效应分析——广西百色民族文化资本化典型研究[J].百色学院学报,2011,24(5)：100-103.
[25]周叮波.民族文化资本化的困境与发展模式研究——以广西百色为例[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(11)：6756-6758,6761.
[26]覃雪梅.民族文化资本化与民族村寨社会转型——以云南为例[J].思想战线,2010(3)：141-142.
[27]胡优玄.广西民族文化资本化中的政府政策研究[D].广西师范学院,2010.
[28]李富强.让文化成为资本—中国西部民族文化资本化运营研究[M].北京：民族出版社,2004.
[29]马頨炜,陈庆德.民族文化资本化[M].北京：人民出版社,2004.
[30]马克思. 《资本论》第三卷[M].北京：人民出版社,2004.
[31]李增来.对资源转化为资本问题的研究[J].铜陵学院学报,2007,6(5)：30-31.
[32]余红燕.地方经济增长与资源资本化初探[J].山东行政学院山东省经济管理干部学院学报,2003(4)：19-20.
[33]温铁军.欠发达地区经济起飞的关键是“资源资本化”——中国扶贫体制改革试验区的实证经验[J].管理世界,1997(06)：136-144.
[34]范林娟.资源资本化：欠发达地区摆脱贫困的根本出路[J].发展,1998(05)：30-31.
[35]聂华林,高新才.欠发达地区区域经济发展的战略创新[J].中国人民大学学报,1999(02)：19-22,
[36]孙京海,朱学义.煤炭开采塌陷区土地资本化运作研究[J].煤炭经济研究,2009(02)：29-30.
[37]刘永湘,杨继瑞.论城市土地的资本化运营[J].经济问题探索,2003(3)：46-50.
[38]何晓星,王守军.论中国土地资本化中的利益分配问题[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,12(4)：11-16.
[39]李双海.国有土地资本化经营研究[D].西南财经大学,2007.
[40]李沛新.文化资本论[D].中央民族大学,2006.
[41]于嘉.浅析文化资源到文化资本的转化[J].消费导刊,2009(13)：216-217.
[42]杜明义.城乡统筹发展中农地资本化与农民土地权益保护[J].湖北社会科学,2012(3)：100-103.
[43]冯学荣,李小兵,冯梦雨.农村土地使用权资本化的可行性分析及政策建议[J].生产力研究,2012(7)：59-60.
[44]邹富良.土地资源商品化与土地资源资本化——对失地农民社会保障效果的比较[J].调研世界,2009(05)：10-13.
[45]杨帅,温铁军.经济波动、财税体制变迁与土地资源资本化——对中国改革开放以来”三次圈地”相关问题的实证分析[J].管理世界,2010(4)：32-41.
[46]朱强.资本化：农地经营权流转的基本趋势[J].农业经济,2010(9)：65-67.
[47]王云玺,张期陈,胡志平.中国农地资本化平衡发展机制探析——基于“三维联动”的观点[J].现代经济探讨,2012(11)：42-46.
[48]权小虎.试论新农村建设中的土地使用权资本化[J].生产力研究,2010(8)：44-45,47.
[49]刘守英.土地资本化与农村城市化道路——北京三模式调查[J].开放导报,2011(2)：17-22.
[50]王媛.土地资本化、城市化与城市经济增长——深圳土地制度改革的意义[J].中国房地产,2012(10)：50-52.
[5 1]廖丹.农地资本化的法律制度分析[J].学理论,2012(21)：78-80.
[52]黄国良,许之前,朱学义.矿产资源资本化问题的研究[J].煤炭学报,2002,27(6)：561-565.
[53]朱学义,张亚杰.论中国矿产资源的资本化改革[J].资源科学,2008,30(1)：134-139.
[54]朱学义,戴新颖.论我国矿产资源资本化改革的新思路[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2010,10(6)：41-44.
[55]刘滨谊,张琳.旅游资源资本化的机制和方法[J].长江流域资源与环境,2009,18(9)：825-830.
[56]孙京海.旅游资源资本化研究[D].中国矿业大学,2010.
[57]吴伟东.旅游资源资本化管理若干问题探讨[J].浙江统计,2005(12)：24-25.
[58]向书坚,孟祥兰.旅游资本形成核算的基本问题研究[J].统计与信息论坛,2004,19(2)：14-17.
[59]刘晓丽.意大利旅游资源向旅游资本转变的途径[D].对外经济贸易大学,2006.
[60]范定祥,傅丽华.旅游资源资本化的市场运行探析[J].湖南工业大学学报(社会科学版),2009,14(1)：129-131.
[61]伍新木,李雪松.流域开发的外部性及其内部化[J].长江流域资源与环境,2002,1 1(1)：21-26.
[62]严立冬,屈志光,方时姣.水资源生态资本化运营探讨[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2011,21(12)：81-84.
[63]吴必虎,余青.中国民族文化旅游开发研究综述[J].民族研究,2000(04)：85-94.
[64]黄海珠.民族旅游村寨建设研究[D].中央民族大学,2007.
[65]罗永常.民族村寨旅游发展问题与对策研究[J].贵州民族研究,2003,23(2)：102-107.
[66]覃德清.中国文化概论[M].南宁：广西师范大学出版社,2002.
[67]潘顺安.民族文化与旅游关系探讨[J].广西教育学院学报,2004(2)：97-100.
[68]金毅.民族文化旅游开发模式与评介[J].广东技术师范学院学报,2004(1)：41-44.
[69]杨慧,陈志明,张展鸿.旅游、人类学与中国社会[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,2001.
[70]King B. What is ethnic tourism? An Australian perspective[J]. Tourism Management, 1994,15(3):173-176.
[71]Yiping L. Ethnic tourism a Canadian experience[J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2000(1):115-131.
[72]Susan P. Ethnic tourism and nationalism in Wales[J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 1995(1):35-52.
[73]Robey C. Ethnic politics and tourism a British case study[J]. Annals of Tourism Research,1998(4):818-836.
[74]田敏,邓小艳.近十年国内民族村寨旅游开发与民族文化保护和传承研究述评[J].中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版),2012,32(6)：36-40.
[75]李天翼.镇山村”家庭主导型”民族村寨旅游开发模式成因分析[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(17)：10539-10541.
[76]马晓京.西部地区民族旅游开发与民族文化保护[J].旅游学刊,2000,15(5)：50-54.
[77]金颖若.试论贵州民族文化村寨旅游[J].贵州民族研究,2002,22(1)：61-65.
[78]罗永常.黔东南民族文化旅游资源开发现状分析与对策研究[J].贵州民族研究,2004,24(3)：118-121.
[79]田敏.民族社区社会文化变迁的旅游效应再认识[J].中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版),2003,23(5)：40-44.
[80]杨慧.民族旅游与族群认同、传统文化复兴及重建--云南民族旅游开发中的”族群”及其应用泛化的检讨[J].思想战线,2003,29(1)：41-44,79.
[81]王国祥.民族旅游地区保护与开发互动机制探索——云南省邱北县仙人洞彝族文化生态村个案研究[J].云南社会科学,2003(2)：75-78.
[82]杨桂华.民族生态旅游接待村多维价值的研究--以香格里拉霞给村为例[J].旅游学刊,2003,18(4)：76-79.
[83]林锦屏,周鸿,何云红.纳西东巴民族文化传统传承与乡村旅游发展研究--以云南丽江三元村乡村旅游开发为例[J].人文地理,2005,20(5)：78-80.
[84]岳坤.旅游与传统文化的现代生存--以泸沽湖畔落水下村为例[J].民俗研究,2003(4)：114-128.
[85]路幸福,陆林.少数民族社区旅游的舞台化特征研究——以云南若干村镇为例[J].旅游学刊,2007,22(2)：38-42.
[86]谭丽林,吴笛霜.原生态侗族文化旅游开发研究——以三江县高友侗寨为例[J].广西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,44(3)：53-56.
[87]高婕.民族旅游发展背景下的民族文化变迁与保护研究[D].华中农业大学,2009.
[88]蒋焕洲.贵州民族村寨旅游发展与新农村建设互动关系及实现路径研究[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(22)：12096-12098.
[89]何景明.边远贫困地区民族村寨旅游发展的省思——以贵州西江千户苗寨为中心的考察[J].旅游学刊,2010(02)：59-65.
[90]杨昌儒,潘梦澜.贵州民族文化村寨旅游发展问题与对策研究[J].贵州民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2004(5)：5-9.
[91]徐赣丽.民俗旅游的表演化倾向及其影响[J].民俗研究,2006(3)：57-66.
[92]艾菊红.文化生态旅游的社区参与和传统文化保护与发展——云南三个傣族文化生态旅游村的比较研究[J].民族研究,2007(4)：49-58.
[93]贺能坤.旅游开发中民族文化变迁的三个层次及其反思——基于贵州省黎平县肇兴侗寨的田野调查[J].广西民族研究,2009(3)：172-177.
[94]吴其付.旅游发展与公共空间的变迁——以阿坝州理县桃坪羌族为例[J].旅游论坛,2011,04(4)：13-17.
[95]麻三山.民族文化村旅游开发热：威胁与保护[J].湖南工程学院学报(社会科学版),2009,19(1)：1-5.
[96]黄泽虎,戴贤君.民族地区旅游产业利益相关者的产权关系研究[J].旅游管理研究,2012(12)：18-21.
[97]李强.少数民族村寨旅游的社区自主和民族文化保护与发展——以云南泸沽湖与青海小庄村为例[J].贵州民族研究,2010(02)：106-112.
[98]杨娜,赵耀.民族旅游开发中的村寨文化景观恢复探析——以贵州剑河小广侗寨为例[J].沿海企业与科技,2007(7)：116-118.
[99]黄华.社区参与民族村寨旅游开发的初步研究[D].云南师范大学,2004.
[100]李菁.少数民族民族社区农户参与旅游发展问题的研究[D].云南师范大学,2006.
[101]刘韫.困境与选择：民族村寨旅游的社区参与研究[J].青海社会科学,2008(2)：133-135.
[102]保继刚,孙九霞.雨崩村社区旅游：社区参与方式及其增权意义[J].旅游论坛,2008,1(1)：58-65.
[103]孙九霞.赋权理论与旅游发展中的社区能力建设[J].旅游学刊,2008,23(9)：22-27.
[104]王汝辉,刘旺.民族村寨旅游开发的内生困境及治理路径——基于资源系统特殊性的深层次考察[J].旅游科学,2009,23(3)：1-5.
[105]文红,唐德彪.民族文化多样性保护与文化旅游资源适度开发——从文化生态建设的角度探讨[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(9)：2700-2702,2715.
[106]高婕,田敏.民族旅游的困惑与选择——中国民族旅游与少数民族传统文化保护能否双赢的思考[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社科版),2009,30(6)：204-208.
[107]罗永常.民族村寨社区参与旅游开发的利益保障机制[J].旅游学刊,2006,21(10)：45-48.
[108]徐新建.开发中国：“民族旅游”与“旅游民族”的形成与影响——以“穿青人”、“银水寨”和“藏羌村”为案例的评述[J].西南民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000(07)：1-9.
[109]马晓京.民族旅游文化商品化与民族传统文化的发展[J].中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版),2002,22(6)：104-107.
[110]杨慧.民族旅游与族群认同、传统文化复兴及重建--云南民族旅游开发中的“族群”及其应用泛化的检讨[J].思想战线,2003,29(1)：41-44,79.
[111]罗永常.文化经济背景下的民族村寨旅游开发[J].思想战线,2006,32(4)：96-101.
[112]罗永常.关于贵州民族村寨旅游开发的几个问题[J].贵州社会科学,2006(3)：47-49.
[113]王生鹏.民族旅游开发的羁绊及突破探析[J].甘肃科技,2004,20(12)：209-210.
[114]蒋丽芹.少数民族村寨旅游资源开发与可持续发展战略研究--以贵州省凯里市麻塘革家村寨为例[J].江南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2005,4(4)：66-69.
[115]谢彦君.永续旅游_新观念_新课题_新挑战_谢彦君[J].旅游学刊,1994,9(1).
[116]李天元.中国旅游可持续发展研究[M].天津：南开大学出版社,2004.
[117]陶表红.生态旅游产业可持续发展研究[D].武汉理工大学,2012.
[118]邓超颖.生态旅游可持续发展动力系统研究[D].北京交通大学,2012.
[119]魏敏.基于生态经济模型的泰安旅游可持续发展评析与预测[D].山东农业大学,2012.
[120]王忠成.基于旅游生态足迹模型的海岛旅游可持续发展研究[D].青岛大学,2010.
[121]安颖.试论民族文化保护与民族文化旅游可持续发展[J].黑龙江民族丛刊,2006(3)：94-97.
[122]姜爱,李永诚.少数民族非物质文化遗产旅游可持续发展的思考——以云南、贵 州、海南为例[J].贵州民族研究,2012(04)：110-114.
[123]陈刚.我国多民族地区文化生态旅游可持续发展路径探讨[J].旅游学刊,2012,27(11)：21-23.
[124]徐永志.传统节日小长假与民族地区旅游可持续发展[J].旅游学刊,2009,24(10)：10-11.
[125]马剑平,黄先禄.贵州乡村旅游可持续发展对策研究[J].贵州社会科学,2011(5)：53-56.
[126]朱万春.基于民族特色视角的贵州少数民族非物质文化遗产旅游可持续发展研究[J].贵州民族研究,2012(5)：104-107.
[127]李承来.村寨生态旅游可持续发展研究——以黔东南苗侗村寨建筑为例[J].黑龙江民族丛刊,2010(1)：75-78.
[128]龚娜.贵州民族地区乡村旅游可持续发展探析[J].贵州民族研究,2010,31(2)：96-100.
[129]叶春,李渊妮,陈志永.社区参与视角下民族村寨旅游可持续发展评估[J].生态经济,2009(9)：98-101.
[130]萨缪尔森保罗,诺德豪斯威廉.经济学(第15版)[M].北京：华夏出版社,1999.
[131]赵玲,王尔大,苗翠翠ITCM在我国游憩价值评估中的应用及改进[J].旅游学刊,2009,24(3)：63-69.
[132]Choi S, Ritchie W. Economic valuation of cultural heritage sites:A choice modeling approach[J]. Tourism Management,2010,31(2):213-220.
[133]郭剑英,王乃昂.敦煌旅游资源非使用价值评估[J].资源科学,2005,27(5)：187-192.
[134]穆贤清,黄祖辉,张小蒂.国外环境经济理论研究综述[J].国外社会科学,2004(2)：29-37.
[135]喻燕,卢新海.九华山景区旅游价值货币化估算研究[J].国土资源科技管理,2009(02)：83-88.
[136]许抄军,刘沛林,王良健,等.历史文化古城的非利用价值评估研究--以凤凰古城为例[J].经济地理,2005,25(2)：240-243.
[137]杨干忠.社会主义市场经济理论(第二版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,1999.
[138]杨晓霞.我国旅游资源产权问题探析[J].经济地理,2004(03)：419-422.
[139]王鹤云.保护民族民间文化的立法模式思索[M].北京：中国方正出版社,2002.
[140]郭蓓薇.民间文学艺术作品法律保护初探[J].新疆社会经济,1996(04)：75-79.
[141]张革新.民间文学艺术作品权属问题探析[J].知识产权,2003,13(2)：48-50.
[142]凯尔森.法与国家的一般理论[M].北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1996.
[143]刘晖.”摩梭人文化保护区”质疑--论少数民族文化旅游资源的保护与开发[J].旅游学刊,2001,16(5)：27-30.
[144]严永和.论传统知识的知识产权保护[M].北京：法律出版社,2006.
[145]袁金平.文化产权下的传统文化保护问题研究[D].湖南师范大学,2012.
[146]焦斌龙.文化资源的产权属性演变与文化体制改革[J].开发研究,2004(5)：28-30.
[147]Ryan C. Equity, management, power sharing and sustain ability:issue of "new tourism"[J]. Tourism Management,2002,23(1):17-26.
[148]Stonich C. Political Ecology of Tourism[J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 1998,25(1):2554.
[149]Holden A. In Need of New Environmental Ethics for Tourism[J]. Annals of Tourism Research,2003,30(1):94-108.
[150]Aas C, Ladkin A, Fletcher J. Stakeholder collaboration and heritage managemen[J]. Annals of Tourism research,2005,32(1):28-48.
[151]孙九霞,保继刚.社区参与的旅游人类学研究-以西双版纳傣族园为例[J].广西民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,26(6)：128-136,171.
[152]林璧属,张希,赵韶芬,等.武夷山封闭式管理对利益相关者的影响研究[J].旅游学刊,2006,21(7)：33-37.
[153]郑媛媛.旅游社区的利益平衡机制研究[D].厦门大学,2006.
[154]李凡,蔡桢燕.古村落旅游开发中的利益主体研究——以大旗头古村为例[J].旅游学刊,2007,22(1)：42-48.
[155]Robson J, Robson I. From Shareholders to Stakeholders:Critical Issues for Tourism Marketers[J]. Tourism Management,1996(17):533-540.
[156]胡海燕.世界文化遗产利益相关者管理的理想模式研究--以布达拉宫为例[J].西藏大学学报,2006,21(1)：23-28.
[157]唐晓云,赵黎明.农村社区生态旅游发展分析--基于利益相关者理论[J].西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版),2006,6(2)：93-97.
[158]张维,郭鲁芳.旅游景区门票价格调整的经济学分析--利益相关者理论视角[J].桂林旅游高等专科学校学报,2006,17(1)：44-47,60.
[159]姚国荣,陆林.旅游风景区核心利益相关者界定——以安徽九华山旅游集团有限公司为例[J].安徽师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2007,35(1)：102-105.
[160]郭华.制度变迁视角的乡村旅游社区利益相关者管理研究[D].暨南大学,2007.
[161]保继刚,孙九霞.社区参与旅游发展的中西差异[J].地理学报,2006,61(4)：401-413.
[162]Maureen G R. Power Relations and Community-based Tourism Planning[J]. Annals of Tourism Research,1997(3).
[163]Sofield T. Empowerment for Sustainable Tourism Development[M]. London: Pergamon Press,2003.
[164]左冰,保继刚.从”社区参与”走向”社区增权”——西方”旅游增权”理论研究述评[J].旅游学刊,2008,23(4)：58-63.
[165]朱玉熹.民族地区旅游开发中的社区增权问题研究[D].西南财经大学,2011.
[166]李乐京,陈志永,吴亚平.贵州参与式乡村旅游发展研究——以郎德、天龙屯堡、镇山村参与式乡村旅游发展模式为例[J].贵州教育学院学报,2007,18(2)：97-101.
[167]陈爱宣.古村落旅游公司利益相关者共同治理模式研究——以浙江为例[D].厦门大学,2008.
[168]陈英.古村镇旅游资源的产权问题研究[D].江西财经大学,2006.
[169]董俊杰.基于产权理论的古村镇可持续开发研究[D].上海社会科学院,2012.
[170]保继刚,左冰.为旅游吸引物权立法[J].旅游学刊,2012,27(7)：11-18.
[171]王亚娟.社区参与旅游的制度性增权研究[J].旅游科学,2012,26(3)：18-26,94.
[172]武魏巍.民族旅游发展与民族文化保护的研究[D].广西大学,2004.
[173]徐万邦.中国少数民族文化通论[M].北京：中央民族学院出版社,1993.
[174]唐晓云,吴忠军.论西部民族文化资源的旅游开发--一个文化经济学的视角[J].广西经济管理干部学院学报,2006,18(1)：55-59,68.
[175]陈彦均.文化产权下的民族民间传统文化保护问题[D].重庆师范大学,2008.
[176]张文勋,施惟达,张胜冰.民族文化学[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1998.
[177]马波.现代旅游文化学[M].青岛：青岛出版社,1998.
[178]邓涛涛.民族文化旅游主题公园式开发研究——以西双版纳傣族园景区为例[D].华东师范大学,2007.
[179]黄明玉.文化遗产的价值评估及记录建档[D].复旦大学,2009.
[180]金剑,王贺敏,王建祥.关于非物质文化遗产价值核算的相关理论问题探讨[J].河北企业,2012(5)：93-94.
[181]刘敏,陈田,刘爱利.旅游地游憩价值评估研究进展[J].人文地理,2008,23(1)：13-19.
[182]周军,何小芊,张涛,龚胜生.屈原故里景区旅游总经济价值评估研究[J].旅游学刊,2011,26(12)：64-71.
[183]郭剑英,王乃昂.旅游资源价值评估的意义与评估系统的构建[J].乐山师范学院学报,2004,19(7)：121-126.
[184]陈浮,张捷.旅游价值货币化核算研究--九寨沟案例分析[J].南京大学学报(自然科学版),2001,37(3)：298-303.
[185]李向明.旅游资源资产评估及其指标体系的构建[J].资源科学,2006,28(3)：143-150.
[186]苏卉.非物质文化遗产旅游价值的多层次灰色评价[J].北京第二外国语学院学报,2010(9)：72-77.
[187]詹丽,杨昌明,李江风.用改进的旅行费用法评估文化旅游资源的经济价值--以湖北省博物馆为例[J].软科学,2005,19(5)：94-96.
[188]周军,何小芊,张涛,等.文物景区游憩价值评估的旅行费用法与收益法应用比较——以凤凰山景区为例[J].旅游论坛,2012,05(1)：23-28.
[189]白榆军.武汉黄鹤楼公园游憩价值研究[D].湖北大学,2012.
[190]谢贤政,马中.应用旅行费用法评估环境资源价值的研究进展[J].合肥工业大学学报(自然科学版),2005,28(7)：730-737.
[191]Lansdell N, Gangadharan L. Comparing Travel Cost Models and The Precision Of Their Consumer Surplus Estimates Albert Park and Maroondah Reservoir[J]. Australian Economic Papers,2001,42(4):41-46.
[192]李巍,李文军.用改进的旅行费用法评估九寨沟的游憩价值[J].北京大学学报(自然科学版),2003,39(4)：548-555.
[193]张茵,蔡运龙.基于分区的多目的地TCM模型及其在游憩资源价值评估中的应用--以九寨沟自然保护区为例[J].自然资源学报,2004,19(5)：651-661.
[194]屈小娥,李国平.意愿价值评估法：理论基础及研究进展[J].统计与决策,2011(7)：156-160.
[195]Wantrup C. Capical Returns from Soil Conservation Practices[J]. ournal of Farm Economics,1947,29.
[196]董雪旺,张捷,刘传华,等.条件价值法中的偏差分析及信度和效度检验——以九寨沟游憩价值评估为例[J].地理学报,2011,66(2)：267-278.
[197]Loomis B, Bateman I. Some empirical evidence on embedding effect in contingent valuation of forest protection[J]. Journa of Environmental Economics and Management, 1993,24(1):45-55.
[198]池静,崔凤军.乡村旅游地发展过程中的“公地悲剧”研究——以杭州梅家坞、龙坞茶村、山沟沟景区为例[J].旅游学刊,2006,21(07)：17-23.
[199]斯蒂格利茨.经济学[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2000.
[200]保罗.萨缪尔森,威廉.诺德豪斯,萧琛译.微观经济学[M].北京：华夏出版社,1999.
[201]敖荣军,龚胜生.旅游业的外部不经济性及其内化研究[J].旅游学刊,2002,17(3)：14-17.
[202]吴昌南.外部经济、市场失败与旅游业的发展[J].韶关学院学报,2002,23(1)：89-93.
[203]刘旺,张文忠.对构建旅游资源产权制度的探讨[J].旅游学刊,2002(04)：27-29.
[204]饶品样,李树民.产权边界、层次差异与旅游用地资源配置效率[J].旅游学刊,2008(11)：42-47.
[205]刘旺,孙璐,吴明星.少数民族村寨旅游开发中的“公地悲剧”及其对策研究——以丹巴县甲居藏寨为例[J].开发研究,2008(1)：125-129.
[206]马鑫.民族文化旅游资源的产权界定及利益分配问题研究[J].云南民族大学学报：哲学社会科学版,2011,28(4)：35-39.
[207]姜文来.关于自然资源资产化管理的几个问题[J].资源科学,2000,22(1)：5-8.
[208]左冰,保继刚.制度增权：社区参与旅游发展之土地权利变革[J].旅游学刊,2012,27(2)：23-31.
[209]郑均,黄高钰.少数民族文化产权关系的现状及其重构[J].市场论坛,2007(6)：90-92.
[210]汪侠,甄峰,吴小根,等.旅游开发的居民满意度驱动因素——以广西阳朔县为例[J].地理研究,2010,29(5)：841-851.
[211]淳秋红.公共景区产权管理模式研究[D].华东师范大学,2011.
[212]贺红权,刘伟.我国旅游资源产权制度的演进趋势及启示——基于一个文化古镇背景模型的分析[J].中国软科学,2007(12)：66-72.
[213]贺善侃.资本文明的伦理评价[J].上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,36(3)：21-28.
[214]姚俭建.论西方社会的中产阶级--文化资本理论框架内的一种解读[J].上海大学学报(社会科学版),2005,12(3)：107-112.
[215]焦世泰.边远少数民族贫困地区民族村寨旅游开发研究——以贵州黔东南西江苗寨为例[J].资源开发与市场,2012,28(10)：941-944.
[216]张遵东,章立峰.贵州民族地区乡村旅游扶贫对农民收入的影响研究——以雷山县西江苗寨为例[J].贵州民族研究,2011(06)：66-71.
[2]王磊.“文化资本全要素生产率”的实证研究[D].北京邮电大学,2009.
[3]杜芳娟,陈晓亮,朱竑.民族文化重构实践中的身份与地方认同——仡佬族祭祖活动案例[J].地理科学,2011,31(12)：1512-1517.
[4]保继刚,左冰.为旅游吸引物权立法[J].旅游学刊,2012,27(07)：11-18.
[5]中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局.《马克思恩格斯全集》第二卷[M].北京：人民出版社,1995.
[6]斯密亚当.,郭大力,王亚南.《国民财富的性质和原因的研究》(上卷)[M].北京：商务印书馆,1972.
[7]大卫·李嘉图.政治经济学及赋税原理[M].北京：人民出版社,1972.
[8]中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局.《马克思恩格斯全集》第四卷[M].北京：人民出版社,1958.
[9]布尔迪厄.文化资本与社会炼金术[M].上海：上海人民出版社,1997.
[10]孙维.文化资本的界定与测度[J].统计与决策,2010(6)：166-167.
[11]布尔迪厄,华康德.实践与反思——反思社会学导引[M].北京：中央文献出版社,1998.
[12]王海岳.文化资本理论研究述评[J].南通职业大学学报,2012,26(1)：16-20.
[13]何振科.布丢文化资本理论与文化创业实践研究[D].山东大学,2012.
[14]朱伟珏.文化资本与人力资本——布迪厄文化资本理论的经济学意义[J].天津社会科学,2007(3)：84-89.
[15]徐明生.我国文化资本与经济发展的协调性研究[J].厦门大学学报：哲学社会科学版,2011(1)：30-37.
[16]姚俭建,岑文忠.文化资本的积累机制探微[J].上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,33(2)：35-40.
[17]陈青生.厘清文化资本的内涵[J].探索与争鸣,2007(1)：19-21.
[18]陈锋.文化资本导论[D].中共中央党校,2005.
[19]李丽.文化资本与企业发展研究[D].华中农业大学,2004.
[20]高波,张志鹏.文化资本：经济增长源泉的一种解释[J].南京大学学报(哲学.人文科学.社会科学版),2004(05)：102-112.
[21]许艳艳.景德镇陶瓷文化资源的资本化研究[D].景德镇陶瓷学院,2008.
[22]李旭.一个文化资本的生成与运作[D].中央民族大学,2011.
[23]从_木兰_到_花木兰_文化转换与文化资本的博弈的个例分析[J].
[24]周叮波.民族文化资本化的社会经济效应分析——广西百色民族文化资本化典型研究[J].百色学院学报,2011,24(5)：100-103.
[25]周叮波.民族文化资本化的困境与发展模式研究——以广西百色为例[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(11)：6756-6758,6761.
[26]覃雪梅.民族文化资本化与民族村寨社会转型——以云南为例[J].思想战线,2010(3)：141-142.
[27]胡优玄.广西民族文化资本化中的政府政策研究[D].广西师范学院,2010.
[28]李富强.让文化成为资本—中国西部民族文化资本化运营研究[M].北京：民族出版社,2004.
[29]马頨炜,陈庆德.民族文化资本化[M].北京：人民出版社,2004.
[30]马克思. 《资本论》第三卷[M].北京：人民出版社,2004.
[31]李增来.对资源转化为资本问题的研究[J].铜陵学院学报,2007,6(5)：30-31.
[32]余红燕.地方经济增长与资源资本化初探[J].山东行政学院山东省经济管理干部学院学报,2003(4)：19-20.
[33]温铁军.欠发达地区经济起飞的关键是“资源资本化”——中国扶贫体制改革试验区的实证经验[J].管理世界,1997(06)：136-144.
[34]范林娟.资源资本化：欠发达地区摆脱贫困的根本出路[J].发展,1998(05)：30-31.
[35]聂华林,高新才.欠发达地区区域经济发展的战略创新[J].中国人民大学学报,1999(02)：19-22,
[36]孙京海,朱学义.煤炭开采塌陷区土地资本化运作研究[J].煤炭经济研究,2009(02)：29-30.
[37]刘永湘,杨继瑞.论城市土地的资本化运营[J].经济问题探索,2003(3)：46-50.
[38]何晓星,王守军.论中国土地资本化中的利益分配问题[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,12(4)：11-16.
[39]李双海.国有土地资本化经营研究[D].西南财经大学,2007.
[40]李沛新.文化资本论[D].中央民族大学,2006.
[41]于嘉.浅析文化资源到文化资本的转化[J].消费导刊,2009(13)：216-217.
[42]杜明义.城乡统筹发展中农地资本化与农民土地权益保护[J].湖北社会科学,2012(3)：100-103.
[43]冯学荣,李小兵,冯梦雨.农村土地使用权资本化的可行性分析及政策建议[J].生产力研究,2012(7)：59-60.
[44]邹富良.土地资源商品化与土地资源资本化——对失地农民社会保障效果的比较[J].调研世界,2009(05)：10-13.
[45]杨帅,温铁军.经济波动、财税体制变迁与土地资源资本化——对中国改革开放以来”三次圈地”相关问题的实证分析[J].管理世界,2010(4)：32-41.
[46]朱强.资本化：农地经营权流转的基本趋势[J].农业经济,2010(9)：65-67.
[47]王云玺,张期陈,胡志平.中国农地资本化平衡发展机制探析——基于“三维联动”的观点[J].现代经济探讨,2012(11)：42-46.
[48]权小虎.试论新农村建设中的土地使用权资本化[J].生产力研究,2010(8)：44-45,47.
[49]刘守英.土地资本化与农村城市化道路——北京三模式调查[J].开放导报,2011(2)：17-22.
[50]王媛.土地资本化、城市化与城市经济增长——深圳土地制度改革的意义[J].中国房地产,2012(10)：50-52.
[5 1]廖丹.农地资本化的法律制度分析[J].学理论,2012(21)：78-80.
[52]黄国良,许之前,朱学义.矿产资源资本化问题的研究[J].煤炭学报,2002,27(6)：561-565.
[53]朱学义,张亚杰.论中国矿产资源的资本化改革[J].资源科学,2008,30(1)：134-139.
[54]朱学义,戴新颖.论我国矿产资源资本化改革的新思路[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2010,10(6)：41-44.
[55]刘滨谊,张琳.旅游资源资本化的机制和方法[J].长江流域资源与环境,2009,18(9)：825-830.
[56]孙京海.旅游资源资本化研究[D].中国矿业大学,2010.
[57]吴伟东.旅游资源资本化管理若干问题探讨[J].浙江统计,2005(12)：24-25.
[58]向书坚,孟祥兰.旅游资本形成核算的基本问题研究[J].统计与信息论坛,2004,19(2)：14-17.
[59]刘晓丽.意大利旅游资源向旅游资本转变的途径[D].对外经济贸易大学,2006.
[60]范定祥,傅丽华.旅游资源资本化的市场运行探析[J].湖南工业大学学报(社会科学版),2009,14(1)：129-131.
[61]伍新木,李雪松.流域开发的外部性及其内部化[J].长江流域资源与环境,2002,1 1(1)：21-26.
[62]严立冬,屈志光,方时姣.水资源生态资本化运营探讨[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2011,21(12)：81-84.
[63]吴必虎,余青.中国民族文化旅游开发研究综述[J].民族研究,2000(04)：85-94.
[64]黄海珠.民族旅游村寨建设研究[D].中央民族大学,2007.
[65]罗永常.民族村寨旅游发展问题与对策研究[J].贵州民族研究,2003,23(2)：102-107.
[66]覃德清.中国文化概论[M].南宁：广西师范大学出版社,2002.
[67]潘顺安.民族文化与旅游关系探讨[J].广西教育学院学报,2004(2)：97-100.
[68]金毅.民族文化旅游开发模式与评介[J].广东技术师范学院学报,2004(1)：41-44.
[69]杨慧,陈志明,张展鸿.旅游、人类学与中国社会[M].昆明：云南大学出版社,2001.
[70]King B. What is ethnic tourism? An Australian perspective[J]. Tourism Management, 1994,15(3):173-176.
[71]Yiping L. Ethnic tourism a Canadian experience[J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2000(1):115-131.
[72]Susan P. Ethnic tourism and nationalism in Wales[J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 1995(1):35-52.
[73]Robey C. Ethnic politics and tourism a British case study[J]. Annals of Tourism Research,1998(4):818-836.
[74]田敏,邓小艳.近十年国内民族村寨旅游开发与民族文化保护和传承研究述评[J].中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版),2012,32(6)：36-40.
[75]李天翼.镇山村”家庭主导型”民族村寨旅游开发模式成因分析[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(17)：10539-10541.
[76]马晓京.西部地区民族旅游开发与民族文化保护[J].旅游学刊,2000,15(5)：50-54.
[77]金颖若.试论贵州民族文化村寨旅游[J].贵州民族研究,2002,22(1)：61-65.
[78]罗永常.黔东南民族文化旅游资源开发现状分析与对策研究[J].贵州民族研究,2004,24(3)：118-121.
[79]田敏.民族社区社会文化变迁的旅游效应再认识[J].中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版),2003,23(5)：40-44.
[80]杨慧.民族旅游与族群认同、传统文化复兴及重建--云南民族旅游开发中的”族群”及其应用泛化的检讨[J].思想战线,2003,29(1)：41-44,79.
[81]王国祥.民族旅游地区保护与开发互动机制探索——云南省邱北县仙人洞彝族文化生态村个案研究[J].云南社会科学,2003(2)：75-78.
[82]杨桂华.民族生态旅游接待村多维价值的研究--以香格里拉霞给村为例[J].旅游学刊,2003,18(4)：76-79.
[83]林锦屏,周鸿,何云红.纳西东巴民族文化传统传承与乡村旅游发展研究--以云南丽江三元村乡村旅游开发为例[J].人文地理,2005,20(5)：78-80.
[84]岳坤.旅游与传统文化的现代生存--以泸沽湖畔落水下村为例[J].民俗研究,2003(4)：114-128.
[85]路幸福,陆林.少数民族社区旅游的舞台化特征研究——以云南若干村镇为例[J].旅游学刊,2007,22(2)：38-42.
[86]谭丽林,吴笛霜.原生态侗族文化旅游开发研究——以三江县高友侗寨为例[J].广西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,44(3)：53-56.
[87]高婕.民族旅游发展背景下的民族文化变迁与保护研究[D].华中农业大学,2009.
[88]蒋焕洲.贵州民族村寨旅游发展与新农村建设互动关系及实现路径研究[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(22)：12096-12098.
[89]何景明.边远贫困地区民族村寨旅游发展的省思——以贵州西江千户苗寨为中心的考察[J].旅游学刊,2010(02)：59-65.
[90]杨昌儒,潘梦澜.贵州民族文化村寨旅游发展问题与对策研究[J].贵州民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2004(5)：5-9.
[91]徐赣丽.民俗旅游的表演化倾向及其影响[J].民俗研究,2006(3)：57-66.
[92]艾菊红.文化生态旅游的社区参与和传统文化保护与发展——云南三个傣族文化生态旅游村的比较研究[J].民族研究,2007(4)：49-58.
[93]贺能坤.旅游开发中民族文化变迁的三个层次及其反思——基于贵州省黎平县肇兴侗寨的田野调查[J].广西民族研究,2009(3)：172-177.
[94]吴其付.旅游发展与公共空间的变迁——以阿坝州理县桃坪羌族为例[J].旅游论坛,2011,04(4)：13-17.
[95]麻三山.民族文化村旅游开发热：威胁与保护[J].湖南工程学院学报(社会科学版),2009,19(1)：1-5.
[96]黄泽虎,戴贤君.民族地区旅游产业利益相关者的产权关系研究[J].旅游管理研究,2012(12)：18-21.
[97]李强.少数民族村寨旅游的社区自主和民族文化保护与发展——以云南泸沽湖与青海小庄村为例[J].贵州民族研究,2010(02)：106-112.
[98]杨娜,赵耀.民族旅游开发中的村寨文化景观恢复探析——以贵州剑河小广侗寨为例[J].沿海企业与科技,2007(7)：116-118.
[99]黄华.社区参与民族村寨旅游开发的初步研究[D].云南师范大学,2004.
[100]李菁.少数民族民族社区农户参与旅游发展问题的研究[D].云南师范大学,2006.
[101]刘韫.困境与选择：民族村寨旅游的社区参与研究[J].青海社会科学,2008(2)：133-135.
[102]保继刚,孙九霞.雨崩村社区旅游：社区参与方式及其增权意义[J].旅游论坛,2008,1(1)：58-65.
[103]孙九霞.赋权理论与旅游发展中的社区能力建设[J].旅游学刊,2008,23(9)：22-27.
[104]王汝辉,刘旺.民族村寨旅游开发的内生困境及治理路径——基于资源系统特殊性的深层次考察[J].旅游科学,2009,23(3)：1-5.
[105]文红,唐德彪.民族文化多样性保护与文化旅游资源适度开发——从文化生态建设的角度探讨[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(9)：2700-2702,2715.
[106]高婕,田敏.民族旅游的困惑与选择——中国民族旅游与少数民族传统文化保护能否双赢的思考[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社科版),2009,30(6)：204-208.
[107]罗永常.民族村寨社区参与旅游开发的利益保障机制[J].旅游学刊,2006,21(10)：45-48.
[108]徐新建.开发中国：“民族旅游”与“旅游民族”的形成与影响——以“穿青人”、“银水寨”和“藏羌村”为案例的评述[J].西南民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2000(07)：1-9.
[109]马晓京.民族旅游文化商品化与民族传统文化的发展[J].中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版),2002,22(6)：104-107.
[110]杨慧.民族旅游与族群认同、传统文化复兴及重建--云南民族旅游开发中的“族群”及其应用泛化的检讨[J].思想战线,2003,29(1)：41-44,79.
[111]罗永常.文化经济背景下的民族村寨旅游开发[J].思想战线,2006,32(4)：96-101.
[112]罗永常.关于贵州民族村寨旅游开发的几个问题[J].贵州社会科学,2006(3)：47-49.
[113]王生鹏.民族旅游开发的羁绊及突破探析[J].甘肃科技,2004,20(12)：209-210.
[114]蒋丽芹.少数民族村寨旅游资源开发与可持续发展战略研究--以贵州省凯里市麻塘革家村寨为例[J].江南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2005,4(4)：66-69.
[115]谢彦君.永续旅游_新观念_新课题_新挑战_谢彦君[J].旅游学刊,1994,9(1).
[116]李天元.中国旅游可持续发展研究[M].天津：南开大学出版社,2004.
[117]陶表红.生态旅游产业可持续发展研究[D].武汉理工大学,2012.
[118]邓超颖.生态旅游可持续发展动力系统研究[D].北京交通大学,2012.
[119]魏敏.基于生态经济模型的泰安旅游可持续发展评析与预测[D].山东农业大学,2012.
[120]王忠成.基于旅游生态足迹模型的海岛旅游可持续发展研究[D].青岛大学,2010.
[121]安颖.试论民族文化保护与民族文化旅游可持续发展[J].黑龙江民族丛刊,2006(3)：94-97.
[122]姜爱,李永诚.少数民族非物质文化遗产旅游可持续发展的思考——以云南、贵 州、海南为例[J].贵州民族研究,2012(04)：110-114.
[123]陈刚.我国多民族地区文化生态旅游可持续发展路径探讨[J].旅游学刊,2012,27(11)：21-23.
[124]徐永志.传统节日小长假与民族地区旅游可持续发展[J].旅游学刊,2009,24(10)：10-11.
[125]马剑平,黄先禄.贵州乡村旅游可持续发展对策研究[J].贵州社会科学,2011(5)：53-56.
[126]朱万春.基于民族特色视角的贵州少数民族非物质文化遗产旅游可持续发展研究[J].贵州民族研究,2012(5)：104-107.
[127]李承来.村寨生态旅游可持续发展研究——以黔东南苗侗村寨建筑为例[J].黑龙江民族丛刊,2010(1)：75-78.
[128]龚娜.贵州民族地区乡村旅游可持续发展探析[J].贵州民族研究,2010,31(2)：96-100.
[129]叶春,李渊妮,陈志永.社区参与视角下民族村寨旅游可持续发展评估[J].生态经济,2009(9)：98-101.
[130]萨缪尔森保罗,诺德豪斯威廉.经济学(第15版)[M].北京：华夏出版社,1999.
[131]赵玲,王尔大,苗翠翠ITCM在我国游憩价值评估中的应用及改进[J].旅游学刊,2009,24(3)：63-69.
[132]Choi S, Ritchie W. Economic valuation of cultural heritage sites:A choice modeling approach[J]. Tourism Management,2010,31(2):213-220.
[133]郭剑英,王乃昂.敦煌旅游资源非使用价值评估[J].资源科学,2005,27(5)：187-192.
[134]穆贤清,黄祖辉,张小蒂.国外环境经济理论研究综述[J].国外社会科学,2004(2)：29-37.
[135]喻燕,卢新海.九华山景区旅游价值货币化估算研究[J].国土资源科技管理,2009(02)：83-88.
[136]许抄军,刘沛林,王良健,等.历史文化古城的非利用价值评估研究--以凤凰古城为例[J].经济地理,2005,25(2)：240-243.
[137]杨干忠.社会主义市场经济理论(第二版)[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,1999.
[138]杨晓霞.我国旅游资源产权问题探析[J].经济地理,2004(03)：419-422.
[139]王鹤云.保护民族民间文化的立法模式思索[M].北京：中国方正出版社,2002.
[140]郭蓓薇.民间文学艺术作品法律保护初探[J].新疆社会经济,1996(04)：75-79.
[141]张革新.民间文学艺术作品权属问题探析[J].知识产权,2003,13(2)：48-50.
[142]凯尔森.法与国家的一般理论[M].北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1996.
[143]刘晖.”摩梭人文化保护区”质疑--论少数民族文化旅游资源的保护与开发[J].旅游学刊,2001,16(5)：27-30.
[144]严永和.论传统知识的知识产权保护[M].北京：法律出版社,2006.
[145]袁金平.文化产权下的传统文化保护问题研究[D].湖南师范大学,2012.
[146]焦斌龙.文化资源的产权属性演变与文化体制改革[J].开发研究,2004(5)：28-30.
[147]Ryan C. Equity, management, power sharing and sustain ability:issue of "new tourism"[J]. Tourism Management,2002,23(1):17-26.
[148]Stonich C. Political Ecology of Tourism[J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 1998,25(1):2554.
[149]Holden A. In Need of New Environmental Ethics for Tourism[J]. Annals of Tourism Research,2003,30(1):94-108.
[150]Aas C, Ladkin A, Fletcher J. Stakeholder collaboration and heritage managemen[J]. Annals of Tourism research,2005,32(1):28-48.
[151]孙九霞,保继刚.社区参与的旅游人类学研究-以西双版纳傣族园为例[J].广西民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,26(6)：128-136,171.
[152]林璧属,张希,赵韶芬,等.武夷山封闭式管理对利益相关者的影响研究[J].旅游学刊,2006,21(7)：33-37.
[153]郑媛媛.旅游社区的利益平衡机制研究[D].厦门大学,2006.
[154]李凡,蔡桢燕.古村落旅游开发中的利益主体研究——以大旗头古村为例[J].旅游学刊,2007,22(1)：42-48.
[155]Robson J, Robson I. From Shareholders to Stakeholders:Critical Issues for Tourism Marketers[J]. Tourism Management,1996(17):533-540.
[156]胡海燕.世界文化遗产利益相关者管理的理想模式研究--以布达拉宫为例[J].西藏大学学报,2006,21(1)：23-28.
[157]唐晓云,赵黎明.农村社区生态旅游发展分析--基于利益相关者理论[J].西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版),2006,6(2)：93-97.
[158]张维,郭鲁芳.旅游景区门票价格调整的经济学分析--利益相关者理论视角[J].桂林旅游高等专科学校学报,2006,17(1)：44-47,60.
[159]姚国荣,陆林.旅游风景区核心利益相关者界定——以安徽九华山旅游集团有限公司为例[J].安徽师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2007,35(1)：102-105.
[160]郭华.制度变迁视角的乡村旅游社区利益相关者管理研究[D].暨南大学,2007.
[161]保继刚,孙九霞.社区参与旅游发展的中西差异[J].地理学报,2006,61(4)：401-413.
[162]Maureen G R. Power Relations and Community-based Tourism Planning[J]. Annals of Tourism Research,1997(3).
[163]Sofield T. Empowerment for Sustainable Tourism Development[M]. London: Pergamon Press,2003.
[164]左冰,保继刚.从”社区参与”走向”社区增权”——西方”旅游增权”理论研究述评[J].旅游学刊,2008,23(4)：58-63.
[165]朱玉熹.民族地区旅游开发中的社区增权问题研究[D].西南财经大学,2011.
[166]李乐京,陈志永,吴亚平.贵州参与式乡村旅游发展研究——以郎德、天龙屯堡、镇山村参与式乡村旅游发展模式为例[J].贵州教育学院学报,2007,18(2)：97-101.
[167]陈爱宣.古村落旅游公司利益相关者共同治理模式研究——以浙江为例[D].厦门大学,2008.
[168]陈英.古村镇旅游资源的产权问题研究[D].江西财经大学,2006.
[169]董俊杰.基于产权理论的古村镇可持续开发研究[D].上海社会科学院,2012.
[170]保继刚,左冰.为旅游吸引物权立法[J].旅游学刊,2012,27(7)：11-18.
[171]王亚娟.社区参与旅游的制度性增权研究[J].旅游科学,2012,26(3)：18-26,94.
[172]武魏巍.民族旅游发展与民族文化保护的研究[D].广西大学,2004.
[173]徐万邦.中国少数民族文化通论[M].北京：中央民族学院出版社,1993.
[174]唐晓云,吴忠军.论西部民族文化资源的旅游开发--一个文化经济学的视角[J].广西经济管理干部学院学报,2006,18(1)：55-59,68.
[175]陈彦均.文化产权下的民族民间传统文化保护问题[D].重庆师范大学,2008.
[176]张文勋,施惟达,张胜冰.民族文化学[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1998.
[177]马波.现代旅游文化学[M].青岛：青岛出版社,1998.
[178]邓涛涛.民族文化旅游主题公园式开发研究——以西双版纳傣族园景区为例[D].华东师范大学,2007.
[179]黄明玉.文化遗产的价值评估及记录建档[D].复旦大学,2009.
[180]金剑,王贺敏,王建祥.关于非物质文化遗产价值核算的相关理论问题探讨[J].河北企业,2012(5)：93-94.
[181]刘敏,陈田,刘爱利.旅游地游憩价值评估研究进展[J].人文地理,2008,23(1)：13-19.
[182]周军,何小芊,张涛,龚胜生.屈原故里景区旅游总经济价值评估研究[J].旅游学刊,2011,26(12)：64-71.
[183]郭剑英,王乃昂.旅游资源价值评估的意义与评估系统的构建[J].乐山师范学院学报,2004,19(7)：121-126.
[184]陈浮,张捷.旅游价值货币化核算研究--九寨沟案例分析[J].南京大学学报(自然科学版),2001,37(3)：298-303.
[185]李向明.旅游资源资产评估及其指标体系的构建[J].资源科学,2006,28(3)：143-150.
[186]苏卉.非物质文化遗产旅游价值的多层次灰色评价[J].北京第二外国语学院学报,2010(9)：72-77.
[187]詹丽,杨昌明,李江风.用改进的旅行费用法评估文化旅游资源的经济价值--以湖北省博物馆为例[J].软科学,2005,19(5)：94-96.
[188]周军,何小芊,张涛,等.文物景区游憩价值评估的旅行费用法与收益法应用比较——以凤凰山景区为例[J].旅游论坛,2012,05(1)：23-28.
[189]白榆军.武汉黄鹤楼公园游憩价值研究[D].湖北大学,2012.
[190]谢贤政,马中.应用旅行费用法评估环境资源价值的研究进展[J].合肥工业大学学报(自然科学版),2005,28(7)：730-737.
[191]Lansdell N, Gangadharan L. Comparing Travel Cost Models and The Precision Of Their Consumer Surplus Estimates Albert Park and Maroondah Reservoir[J]. Australian Economic Papers,2001,42(4):41-46.
[192]李巍,李文军.用改进的旅行费用法评估九寨沟的游憩价值[J].北京大学学报(自然科学版),2003,39(4)：548-555.
[193]张茵,蔡运龙.基于分区的多目的地TCM模型及其在游憩资源价值评估中的应用--以九寨沟自然保护区为例[J].自然资源学报,2004,19(5)：651-661.
[194]屈小娥,李国平.意愿价值评估法：理论基础及研究进展[J].统计与决策,2011(7)：156-160.
[195]Wantrup C. Capical Returns from Soil Conservation Practices[J]. ournal of Farm Economics,1947,29.
[196]董雪旺,张捷,刘传华,等.条件价值法中的偏差分析及信度和效度检验——以九寨沟游憩价值评估为例[J].地理学报,2011,66(2)：267-278.
[197]Loomis B, Bateman I. Some empirical evidence on embedding effect in contingent valuation of forest protection[J]. Journa of Environmental Economics and Management, 1993,24(1):45-55.
[198]池静,崔凤军.乡村旅游地发展过程中的“公地悲剧”研究——以杭州梅家坞、龙坞茶村、山沟沟景区为例[J].旅游学刊,2006,21(07)：17-23.
[199]斯蒂格利茨.经济学[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2000.
[200]保罗.萨缪尔森,威廉.诺德豪斯,萧琛译.微观经济学[M].北京：华夏出版社,1999.
[201]敖荣军,龚胜生.旅游业的外部不经济性及其内化研究[J].旅游学刊,2002,17(3)：14-17.
[202]吴昌南.外部经济、市场失败与旅游业的发展[J].韶关学院学报,2002,23(1)：89-93.
[203]刘旺,张文忠.对构建旅游资源产权制度的探讨[J].旅游学刊,2002(04)：27-29.
[204]饶品样,李树民.产权边界、层次差异与旅游用地资源配置效率[J].旅游学刊,2008(11)：42-47.
[205]刘旺,孙璐,吴明星.少数民族村寨旅游开发中的“公地悲剧”及其对策研究——以丹巴县甲居藏寨为例[J].开发研究,2008(1)：125-129.
[206]马鑫.民族文化旅游资源的产权界定及利益分配问题研究[J].云南民族大学学报：哲学社会科学版,2011,28(4)：35-39.
[207]姜文来.关于自然资源资产化管理的几个问题[J].资源科学,2000,22(1)：5-8.
[208]左冰,保继刚.制度增权：社区参与旅游发展之土地权利变革[J].旅游学刊,2012,27(2)：23-31.
[209]郑均,黄高钰.少数民族文化产权关系的现状及其重构[J].市场论坛,2007(6)：90-92.
[210]汪侠,甄峰,吴小根,等.旅游开发的居民满意度驱动因素——以广西阳朔县为例[J].地理研究,2010,29(5)：841-851.
[211]淳秋红.公共景区产权管理模式研究[D].华东师范大学,2011.
[212]贺红权,刘伟.我国旅游资源产权制度的演进趋势及启示——基于一个文化古镇背景模型的分析[J].中国软科学,2007(12)：66-72.
[213]贺善侃.资本文明的伦理评价[J].上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,36(3)：21-28.
[214]姚俭建.论西方社会的中产阶级--文化资本理论框架内的一种解读[J].上海大学学报(社会科学版),2005,12(3)：107-112.
[215]焦世泰.边远少数民族贫困地区民族村寨旅游开发研究——以贵州黔东南西江苗寨为例[J].资源开发与市场,2012,28(10)：941-944.
[216]张遵东,章立峰.贵州民族地区乡村旅游扶贫对农民收入的影响研究——以雷山县西江苗寨为例[J].贵州民族研究,2011(06)：66-71.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |