耕地流转模式绩效评价及差异分析  

Performance evaluation and differentialanalysis of cultivated land transfer mode

作　　者：杨彩林 贺蓉 YANG Cailin;HE Rong(School of Finance,Hunan University of Technology and Business,Changsha 410205,China;Changsha Water Group Co.,Ltd,Changsha 410015,China)

机构地区：[1]湖南工商大学财政金融学院,湖南长沙410205 [2]长沙水业集团有限公司,湖南长沙410015

出　　处：《湖南农业大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第2期30-37,共8页Journal of Hunan Agricultural University(Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目(19BJY159)。

摘　　要：基于河南省滑县问卷调研数据,从经济、社会、生态三个维度建立耕地流转绩效评价指标体系,运用层次分析法(AHP)与模糊综合评价法(FCE)相结合的方法对农户自发、集体主导、市场参与三种耕地流转模式的绩效进行综合评价。结果表明:从单一绩效来看,经济绩效和社会绩效的评分排序同为“市场参与模式>集体主导模式>农户自发模式”,生态绩效评分排序为“农户自发模式>市场参与模式>集体主导模式”;综合绩效评价的评分排序与经济绩效和社会绩效的评分排序相同;市场参与模式除生态绩效外,绩效优势明显,集体主导模式次之,农户自发模式除生态绩效占优势外,整体绩效落后。Based on the questionnaire survey data of Huaxian County,Henan Province,a performance evaluation index system of cultivated land transfer has been constructed from the three dimensions of economic,social and ecological performance,and the performances of three cultivated land transfer modes:farmers’self-organized mode,collective-dominated mode and market-participating mode have been comprehensively assessed by using analytic hierarchy process method(AHP)and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method(FCE).The research shows that from the perspective of single performance evaluation,the rankings of both the economic performance and the social performance are“market-participating mode>collective-dominated mode>farmers’self-organized mode”,and the ranking of ecological performance is“farmers’self-organized mode>market-participating mode>collective-dominated mode”.The ranking of comprehensive performance is in line with the ranking of single performance as for economic performance and social performance;the market-participating mode has obvious performance advantages except for ecological performance,the collective-dominated mode takes the second position,and the farmers’self-organized mode ranks last except for ecological performance.

关 键 词：耕地流转模式 经济绩效 社会绩效 生态绩效 

分 类 号：F325.2[经济管理—产业经济]