大渡河上游不同地带居民对环境退化的响应

青藏高原的环境退化引起了极大的关注,但农牧民如何认识和响应环境退化,还缺乏实证研究.采用参与性农村评估法,对大渡河上游不同地带典型村（位于河谷区的丹扎木村、中山区的克尔马村和山原区的日科村）的农牧民进行调查和对比分析.研究表明：①大渡河上游不同地带的居民对环境退化具有不同的响应过程.河谷区通过劳动力向二、三产业转移,缓解了人口压力,采取积极的措施来应对自然灾害和森林退化;中山区以劳动力向二、三产业转移和发展畜牧业来缓解人口压力,没有采取积极的措施应对环境退化：山原区的劳动力不能转移到二、三产业,只能通过增加牲畜数量来解决生计,牧民仅采取一些积极的措施来应对草料不足的问题和雪灾等自然灾害.在大渡河上游,最脆弱的区域是中山区和山原区,而不是人口压力大的河谷区.②生计方式是影响居民响应人口压力和环境退化的关键因素.基于居民的生计方式来解释和解决生态脆弱区的人口压力和环境退化问题,将是一个新的方向.③劳动力向二、三产业转移有利于居民改善生计.降低教育收费和进行基础设施建设,将加快劳动力向二、三产业转移.

Residents' Response to Environmental Degradation: Case Studies from Three Villages in the Upper Dadu River Watershed

Environmental degeneration in the Tibetan Plateau has attracted great attention worldwide. However, case studies on how the residents understand and respond to environmental degeneration are scarce. Using Participatory Rural Appraisal method, this paper investigated how the people in different regions in the upper reaches of the Dadu River watershed understood and responded to environmental degradation, based on comparative field surveys in three villages, in which Danzamu village chosen from villages in the valley region, Kerma village from mountainside region and Rico village from mountain and plateau region. The results show that: (1) although realizing environmental degeneration, the villages in different regions responded diversely. As labor forces were transferred to the secondary and tertiary industries, population pressure in Danzamu and Kerma villages were relaxed. Residents in Danzamu village actively responded to natural hazards and forest degradation, as their livelihoods never relied on forest and rangeland. Whereas, the residents in Kerma village passively responded to natural hazards, forest and meadow degradation and exhausting of wildlife resources, as their livelihoods still relied on animal husbandry. Labor forces in Rico village were hard to be transferred to the secondary and tertiary industries, so they had to raise more livestock to make a living. Active measures were taken to avoid climate induced loss, not to avoid forest and meadow degradation and exhausting of wildlife resources. So the most fragile regions are the mountain and plateau region and mountainside region, not the valley region. (2) Livelihood strategy is the key factor affecting the villages to respond to population pressure and environmental degradation. So the framework of livelihood strategy should be used to explain and intervene in issues of population pressure and environmental degradation in ecotones. (3) Transferring labor forces to the secondary and tertiary industries was in favor of improving people's living standard. It is necessary to reduce education fee to speed up the pace of labor forces transferring in mountainside region. In mountain and plateau region, preferable ways also include development of towns, highways, education equipments and other establishments and, above all, the industrialization of traditional animal husbandry.