The Impact Of Ecological Compensation On The Peasants’ Livelihoods

There have238.6million hm~2grassland in the Yellow River water supply area ofGannan, is known as "the first natural pasture in Asian", have the important source ofwater supply and water conservation function, and maintenance of ecological securityhas the role that cannot be replaced. But now,90%of natural grassland has appeareddegradation in different level, in order to curb the natural grassland degradation trendand promote the grassland ecological restoration, since2003, the Governmentlaunched the Ecological Compensation project that return grazing to grassland in theYellow River water supply area of Gannan. As an effective policy tools to solve theecological environment problems, the project that returns grazing to grassland plays anactive role at ecological protection of Gannan.However, peasant as the main program participants of ecological compensationand the main provider of ecosystem services, the implementation of ecologicalcompensation influencing on the livelihoods of farmers sustainability. And thestrength of peasants’ living ability not only affects the natural resources use andecological environment protection, but also related to the ecological compensationproject efficiency and sustainability of the project.In this paper, based on the theory of public goods and sustainable livelihoodtheory, combining with the empirical research and the condition of ecologicalenvironment, natural resource endowment, customs and other c ultural characteristic inthe Yellow River water supply, establishes the livelihood capital index system andlivelihood diversity index, using variance covariance analysis, analysis of the effectswhich brought by the ecological compensation in the peasants’ living capital andlivelihood mode. At last the proposal is put forward, in order to improve the peasants’livelihood ability and promote the effectiveness and sustainability of the ecologicalcompensation program.The main conclusions are as follows:(1) After carrying out the programs of ecological compensation, the totallivelihoods capital of peasants is increased. Among the captions, the peasants’ humancapital, physical capital, financial capital and social capital is significantly increased,but the natural capital index is significantly reduced. (2) The impact of ecological compensation to livelihoods capital is regionaldisparity. The amplitudes of livelihood capital in the pasture area, the farming-pasturearea and the farming area were0.264、0.344、0.313. In the pasture area, the largestincrease is the physical capital, but the human capital and social capital is slightlyincreased; in the farming-pasture area, the largest increase is financial capital,followed by physical capital and social capital, but the nature capital is decreased; inthe farming area the largest increase is human capital and social capital, followed byphysical capital and financial capital.(3) After ecological compensation, peasants’ social capital and natural capitalaccounting for the percentage of the total capital of the livelihood of the farmers isreduced, and the proportion of its financial capital, physical capital and human capitalis increased. But, the affect of ecological compensation to the structure of thepeasants’ livelihood capital in the pasture area, the farming-pasture area and farmingarea is different. The human capital proportion biggest is pasture area, and the rest ofthe largest proportion of livelihood capital luffing is the farming-pasture area.(4) After the ecological compensation, the livelihood activities of peasants havechanged from the agricultural and animal husbandry to the non-farming mode. Theaffect of ecological compensation to the type and the structure of the peasants’livelihood activities in the pasture area, the farming-pasture area and farming area aredifferent.(5) Ecological compensation as a driving force, promote effectively the diversityindex of peasants’ livelihood activities increase. The growth amplitudes of thepeasants’ livelihood diversity index in the farming area(1.17) are larger than in thefarming-pasture area (0.81) and in the pasture area (0.57).The proportion that peasantstake up only one living activities is decreased in three area and the descend value are31.03%、22.23%、19.23%respectively; The proportion that peasants take up two orthree living activities is increased in the three area, and the relatively larger increasedarea are the farming area and the farming-pasture area, meanwhile the growthamplitude are17.24%、22.22%respectively.