“阿者科计划”对农户生计的影响分析——基于DFID可持续生计框架

农户生计状况是实现乡村振兴和乡村可持续发展过程中需要关注的重点。文章以阿者科村为案例地，通过笔者亲身驻村经历和入户调查获取数据，基于DFID可持续生计框架构建了农户生计资本评价指标体系，详细分析了“阿者科计划”这种结构与制度因素的转变对当地农户生计的影响，并探讨了其中的影响机制。研究发现：1）乡村旅游发展使农户参与其中，成为村集体公司员工或自主开展旅游经营，旅游与传统的生计方式共同构成了了农户多样化的生计组合；2）农户生计策略出现转型和分化，形成了旅游主导型、旅游务工型、参与旅游型、务工主导型和半工半农型5种类型农户；3）不同类型农户的生计水平和各生计资本组合形式存在差异，其中生计资本总量由高到低依次为旅游主导型、旅游务工型、参与旅游型、务工主导型、半工半农型；4）“阿者科计划”形成了在政府和高校支持下，农户内生动力充分发展的长效机制，旅游成为农户传统生计的重要补充，提升了其生计资本。

A Study of Farmer' Livelihoods in "Azheke Plan": Based on the DFID Sustainable Livelihood Framework

Farmer' livelihoods are an important issue for rural revitalization and rural sustainable development. It has been proven in recent years that rural tourism influences farmers' livelihoods and its impacts vary based on different tourism development modes. The DFID sustainable livelihoods framework has been widely used in research on rural tourism development and farmer' livelihoods. It offers a comprehensive perspective that links elements from the external livelihood environment, to investigate farmer' livelihoods. This study developed an evaluation index for farmer' livelihood capital based on the DFID sustainable livelihoods framework. The evaluation index was used to analyze the farmer' livelihood capital. Azheke village, Yunnan Province was chosen as an example in the present study, which successfully launched a tourism poverty reduction program, the "Azheke Plan", in 2018. The data used in this study were collected through questionnaire survey from July 2020 to February 2021, during which the first author lived in Azheke Village. The findings of this study were summarized as follows: (1) Farmers in Azheke used to have only one livelihood mode: farming or working in cities. Now rural tourism development has allowed local villagers to work within local tourism businesses or operate their own tourism businesses in the village. thus, farmers has formed a diversified livelihood mode. (2) Families with different livelihood modes have manifested different features and livelihood capital. Ranking from high to low, the livelihood modes are: tourism-oriented, tourism involved + working in cities, tourism-involved, working in cities, and farming + working in cities. The sequence highly correlates with the degree of farmer' participation in tourism. (3) Farmers whose livelihoods are tourism-oriented, tourism involved + working in cities and tourism-involved have the highest degree of participation in tourism, their household labor and livelihood capacity has improved, it have created more livelihood outcomes for their households, and has a higher level of livelihood capital. Farmers who work in cities and farming + working in cities experienced the growth of physical capital and financial capital mainly throughout the "Azheke Plan", but their livelihood capital is lower than the other three livelihood modes relating to tourism. (4) From the institution perspective, this study explores the relationship between tourism development and changes in livelihood. Several notes are summarized on villagers' livelihoods through "Azheke Plan" from basic conditions, external support, internal factors, livelihood strategies and livelihood results. Finally, the future research direction of tourism development and farmer' livelihood, as well as the possibility of replicating the "Azheke plan" in other regions are discussed.