China National Forestry Economics and Development Research Center, State Forestry Administration, East Heping Street No. 18, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Environ Manage. 2010 Mar;45(3):526-40. doi: 10.1007/s00267-010-9433-2. Epub 2010 Feb 7.
In the late 1990s, the Chinese government initiated some new programs and consolidated other existing ones of ecological restoration and resource development in its forest sector, and renamed them as "Priority Forestry Programs," or PFPs. They include the Natural Forest Protection Program (NFPP), the Sloping Land Conversion Program (SLCP), the Desertification Combating Program around Beijing and Tianjin (DCBT), the Shelterbelt Development Program (SBDP), and the Wildlife Conservation and Nature Reserve Development Program (WCNR). In addition to improving the environmental and resource conditions, a frequently reiterated goal of these PFPs is to increase rural households' income, therefore discussing why looking at rural household income impacts might be an important part of forest program evaluation. Thus, an interesting and important question is: How has implementing the PFPs affected the farmers' income and poverty status? This article addresses this question using a fixed-effects model and a panel dataset that covers 1968 households in four provinces for ten consecutive years (1995-2004). The empirical evidence indicates that their effects are mixed. The SLCP, the SBDP, and the NFPP have made positive impact and, by far, the SLCP has the largest effect. But the WCNR and the DCBT still have not had a pronounced overall effect due to their short time span of execution, even though they may have exerted certain influence at the margin. Notably, the impact of the WCNR, if any, is negative.
20 世纪 90 年代末，中国政府在林业领域启动了一些新的项目，并整合了其他现有的生态恢复和资源开发项目，将其重新命名为“重点林业计划”（PFPs）。这些项目包括天然林保护工程（NFPP）、退耕还林还草工程（SLCP）、京津风沙源治理工程（DCBT）、三北及长江中下游地区等重点防护林体系建设工程（SBDP）和野生动植物保护及自然保护区建设工程（WCNR）。除了改善环境和资源条件外，这些 PFPs 的一个经常被重申的目标是增加农村家庭的收入，因此讨论为什么关注农村家庭收入的影响可能是森林项目评估的重要组成部分。因此，一个有趣而重要的问题是：实施 PFPs 对农民的收入和贫困状况有何影响？本文使用固定效应模型和一个涵盖四个省份的 1968 户家庭连续十年（1995-2004 年）的面板数据集来回答这个问题。实证证据表明，它们的影响是混合的。SLCP、SBDP 和 NFPP 产生了积极的影响，到目前为止，SLCP 的影响最大。但是，WCNR 和 DCBT 由于执行时间短，仍然没有产生显著的整体影响，尽管它们可能在边缘产生了一定的影响。值得注意的是，WCNR 的影响（如果有的话）是负面的。
