欢迎访问《应用生态学报》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

应用生态学报 ›› 2018, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (3): 997-1005.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201803.018

• 目录 • 上一篇    下一篇

遗产旅游地居民对生态移民影响感知的历时性研究——以武陵源风景名胜区为例

王凯, 陈勤昌, 李志苗*   

  1. 湖南师范大学旅游学院, 长沙 410081
  • 收稿日期:2017-07-27 出版日期:2018-03-18 发布日期:2018-03-18
  • 通讯作者: * E-mail: kingviry@163.com
  • 作者简介:王 凯,男,1969 年生,博士,教授. 主要从事生态旅游研究,发表论文71篇,出版专著2部. E-mail: kingviry@163.com.
  • 基金资助:

    本文由国家自然科学基金项目(D010202)和湖南省教育厅科学研究重点项目(14A088)资助

A diachronic study on resettlers’ perceptions toward ecological relocation in world heritage site: A case study of Wulingyuan Scenic Area, China.

WANG Kai, CHEN Qin-chang, LI Zhi-miao*   

  1. Tourism College of Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, China
  • Received:2017-07-27 Online:2018-03-18 Published:2018-03-18
  • Contact: * E-mail: kingviry@163.com
  • Supported by:

    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (D010202) and the Key Scientific Research Project of Education Department of Hunan Province (14A088)

摘要: 安置区居民的生态移民感知状况对于把握生态移民实施效果、实现遗产旅游地可持续发展意义重大.以湖南武陵源3个不同移民安置方式的社区居民为调研对象,通过对比分析2010和2016年两次系统性调研数据,分析不同时段安置区居民对生态移民影响感知的历时性变化和促成感知差异的主要影响因素.结果表明: 2010、2016年,研究区居民对“就业机会增多”、“科教培训机会增多”、“景区环境卫生得到改善”和“认同移民后的‘农转非’身份”等指标反应消极;强烈赞同“传统价值观受到冲击”、“政策实施过程中缺乏监督”等指标选项. 2016年,不同性别、年龄、月均收入水平的安置区居民对生态移民经济和心理影响感知差异较为显著;不同文化程度和收入水平的居民对移民政策的感知分异明显;投资兴业安置方式的居民对生态移民经济影响感知相对积极.经济影响感知和移民政策感知成为影响居民对生态移民整体感知的主要因素;就业问题、子女教育问题和移民保障体系等问题是居民持续关注的重点.

Abstract: Perceptions of residents in ecological resettlement area are important for evaluating the implementation effect of ecological relocation and sustainable development of world heritage site. With the residents from three different resettlement communities in Wulingyuan Scenic Area as the research object, we carried out a diachronic study on changes of the resettlers’ perceptions of ecological relocation at different times and the main driving factors based on systematic survey data in 2010 and 2016. The results showed that in the year 2010 and 2016, resettlers reacted negatively to the indicators such as “enhancement of employment opportunity”, “improvement of education and training opportunity”, “enhanced environment in scenic area”, “recognizing the identity change ‘from rural to non-rural’ after relocation”. They favored the indicators such as “undermining traditional value”, “lack of supervision during the implementation of policies”. In 2016, resettlers of different gender, age and average monthly income had substantial different opinions on the economic and psychological impacts of ecological relocation. Education and income level had great impacts on their opinions of ecological relocation policies. Resettlers relocated by the way of investment for developing perceived were more sensitive to the economic impacts. Economic and policy impacts became the dominant driving factors for their general perception of ecological relocation. They pay more attention to employment, children’s education opportunity as well as social security system for relocation.