中国分省耕地警戒值区域差异及指示功能研究

基于国家耕地警戒值，系统地研究大陆各省区的耕地警戒值及其指示作用，为国家耕地管理决策提供参考。设计了区域人均耕地警戒值的算法，计算31个大陆省区的耕地警戒值、耕地压力指数、耕地盈余/赤字量，构建利益驱动型的激励-约束耕保机制。结果表明：在不考虑人均食物消费支出的省区差异时，甘肃的人均耕地警戒值是湖南的7.78倍，北京的耕地压力是黑龙江的15.04倍，相反，在考虑人均食物消费支出的省区差异时分别为5.31倍和37.77倍，耕地警戒值和耕地压力有省区差异。结论是：全国耕地管理划分为3个激励-约束级，北京、上海、天津和广东4个省(市)为耕地管理的强力约束级，山西、浙江、福建、西藏、陕西、青海和辽宁7个省(区)为一般约束级，其余20个省区为政策性激励级，国家应制定差异性的耕地管理激励-约束政策;北京、天津、上海、浙江、福建、广东、山西、陕西、西藏、青海和辽宁等11个省区，用于生产食物的耕地有不同程度的赤字，其他20个省区有耕地盈余，提出构建国家粮食-生态安全金的省区差异性分担制度的政策性建议，以抑制耕地赤字省区的耕地继续减少行为和激励耕地盈余省区的耕地保护行为。

Regional Differences in Alert Values of Cultivated Land and Its Instruction Functions at Provincial Levels in Mainland China

The purpose of this paper is to systematically analyze the alert values of cultivated landin 31 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities of mainland China, based on the nationalwarning values of cultivated land, with the aim to provide reference for national land managementdecision-making. The warning values of arable land at provincial levels vary greatly. On the basisof differences in the pressure index, cultivated land pressures in major provinces in China wereanalyzed in detail in order to build the interest-driven mechanism for arable land protection withincentives-constraint. The major regional coefficients were designed accordingly. An algorithm forquantifying the alert values of per capita arable land and examining regional differences infarmland alert values in 31 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities was used in thisanalysis. The pressure index of cultivated land, and the farmland surplus or deficit were calculatedto understand the Red Line of arable land protection given by government. Results showed thatthere were marked differences in the warning values of the arable land without taking into accountdifferences in food consumption expenditure in each province. In terms of the warning values ofthe arable land, Hunan Province was the smallest and Gansu Province was the largest. As for thepressure index of the cultivated land, Heilongjiang was the smallest and Beijing was the largest.Without accounting for differences in consumption, the warning value of the arable land in Gansuwas found to be 7.78 times more than that in Hunan. The pressure index of the cultivated land inBeijing was estimated to be 15.04 times more than that in Heilongjiang. But the warning value ofthe arable land under the condition of taking differences in consumption into consideration inGansu was 5.31 times more than that in Hunan. The pressure index of the cultivated land in Beijingwas 37.77 times more than that in Heilongjiang. It can be drawn that the pressures from thecultivated land in light of the warning values of the arable land at the provincial level vary greatly.In terms of the pressure differences, a land incentives-constraint management at different levelswas pointed out. Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin and Guangdong were the strong constraint levelprovince and municipalities in farmland management. Shanxi, Zhejiang, Fujian, Tibet, Shaanxi,Qinghai, and Liaoning were under a general constraint level. The others were taken aspolicy-encouraging provinces in arable management. In terms of the arable land demand for foodproduction, farmland deficit provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities involve Beijing,Tianjin, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, Shanxi, Shaanxi, Tibet, Qinghai, and Liaoning,showing varying magnitudes of deficits. The others were farmland surplus provinces. Based on thesurplus or deficit of arable land, where farmland was utilized to produce food, national Food -Ecological Security payments paid by provinces and autonomous regions and the transfer-paymentsystem regulated by governments should be built to prevent the arable land from consistentlydecreasing in these deficit provinces and to stimulate protection of cultivated land in those surplusprovinces.