内蒙古草原区牧户草畜平衡决策行为的研究
|
摘要
内蒙古草原面积约8.67x107hm2,在确保区域乃至今全国的生态、经济建设及社会稳定等方面都发挥着重要作用,但受到超载过牧、气候变化等因素综合影响,草原退化严重,草畜矛盾突出。草原退化问题已引起社会各界的普遍关注。其中,草畜平衡被列为草原保护的三大措施之一,其目的是建立合理的载畜量标准,合理利用草原资源,实现草原畜牧业的可持续发展。但越来越多研究发现,草畜平衡政策在实行过程中,由于牧户的不理解、不配合或消极抵制,实行效果不尽如人意,为什么生态效益和经济效益兼顾的草畜平衡政策会出现失灵?牧户作为牧区畜牧业生产的微观主体,是畜牧业以及牧区经济中最基本的决策单元,是国家生态保护和建设政策的直接实践者,其决策行为直接决定畜牧业活动如何开展,因此,从家庭牧场尺度出发,剖析牧户草畜平衡决策过程及行为,及草畜平衡失效的原因和内在机制成为解决草原退化和草畜矛盾的关键突破口。
本文以分别地处内蒙古草甸草原、典型草原和荒漠草原的典型旗县新巴尔虎左旗县、锡林浩特市和苏尼特右旗为研究区域,以其中的典型牧户为研究对象,借助生态学、经济学、社会学等多学科知识,结合野外试验法、问卷调查法、情景实验法和模型模拟法,对牧户草场生态状况、牧户草畜平衡决策行为特征及其背后的推动因素,以及牧户接羔、草场流转、出售牲畜、购买饲草料等关键行为节点的影响因素进行了分析,主要结果如下：
(1)不同经济水平的牧户草场生态状况呈现趋同及牧户存在调整适应行为
根据在荒漠草原2011-2012年连续两年野外试验数据,不同经济水平牧户草场主要物种(小针茅、多根葱和无芒隐子草)的高度、盖度、密度、主要植物种群及主要物种地上生物量都在不同处理区之间出现同程度地差异不显著(P>0.05)；不同经济水平牧户草场土壤机械组成中0-10cm土层砂粒(1-0.05mm)含量呈现：低经济水平处理区>高经济水平处理区>对照>中经济水平处理区；0-10cm、10-20cm和20-30cm土层土壤全氮、全磷、全钾、速效氮、速效磷、速效钾亦在高、中、低经济水平处理区和对照区之间亦出现不同程度地差异不显著(P>0.05),不同经济水平牧户草场状况出现趋同。
根据上述不同经济水平牧户草场出现趋同结果,结合长期牧区调研发现,不同经济水平牧户流转草场、购买饲草料等能力存在分异,如低经济水平牧户(很多是贫困户)一般牲畜较少,而草场载畜率相对较低,但是由于经济等方面原因没有能力围栏,草场经常被相邻的牲畜大户或无草场户有意或无意占用；而高经济水平牧户则因为经济水平高、社会关系多,会采取租借草场、走场等措施,甚至通过购买草料等来减缓自家草场的放牧压力,同时保持牲畜头数的稳定或持续扩大,因此出现低经济水平牧户草场的实际载畜率不一定低,高经济水平牧户草场的实际载畜率不一定高,正是牧户在实际草畜平衡决策过程中,长期的、不同的调整适应行为,使得不同经济水平牧户草场生态状况趋同。
(2)牧户及其草畜平衡决策行为属有限理性
受到多种文化传统、民族习惯、市场、自然环境等内外因素综合影响,牧户行为个体及其在接羔、草场流转、出售牲畜、购买饲草料等草畜平衡关键节点决策行为上属“有限理性”,其中,风险规避是牧户畜牧业生产决策行为的最基本特征,但在面对风险状态下,牧户行为仍会表现出风险偏好特征；在面对草场和牲畜问题时,牧户表现出明显的禀赋效应和损失厌恶,在接羔行为决策上,牧户则容易受到周围亲戚、朋友等影响,表现出明显的框架效应。
(3)心理载畜率是影响牧户草畜平衡决策行为的主导因素
心理载畜率指牧户认为在一定时期内单位草场能够承载的牲畜头数,而且正是牧户的“心理载畜率”实际指导牧户畜牧业生产实践。根据调查数据,在新巴尔虎左旗、锡林浩特市和苏尼特右旗,分别有65.22%、60.71%和49.12%的牧户表示认为自己比2002年喂养的牲畜头数更多；74.42%、78.12%和68.42%的牧户仍然坚持认为自己家草场没有超载,而且被采访的牧户中仍有超过一半的牧户(新巴尔虎左旗51.16%、锡林浩特57.14%和苏尼特右旗63.16%)认为自家的草场能够饲养更多牲畜；而超过70%的牧户(新巴尔虎左旗80.43%、锡林浩特87.50%和苏尼特右旗75.86%)表示在决定是否扩大牲畜规模时,会考虑草场的承载力问题；在新巴尔虎左旗、锡林浩特和苏尼特右旗,调研牧户认为合理载畜率分别是0.75-1.50羊单位/ha、0.60-1.50羊单位/ha和0.50-0.75羊单位/ha,可见受到降水、草地生产力等影响,从草甸草原到典型草原,再到荒漠草原,牧户心理载畜率呈现逐渐下降的趋势。
(4)牧户草畜平衡关键节点的决策行为受自然、社会等多种因素综合影响
首先是牧户接羔行为,根据调查数据显示,在新巴尔虎左旗和锡林浩特,暖圈情况被牧户视为影响牧户选择接冬羔或接春羔的首要因素,其次为气候；苏尼特右旗有26%的牧户分别认为草场和经济收入是影响接羔行为的两大首要因素；在新巴尔虎左旗、锡林浩特和苏尼特右旗,则分别有25%、32%和23%的牧户选择饲草料亦是影响牧户接羔行为决策的重要因素。模型模拟结果显示,草原类型、信息可获得性、邻居的接羔行为对牧户的接羔时间选择均有不同程度的显著影响。
其次是牧户草场流转行为,在三个典型旗县,牲畜、草场和气候均被视为牧户.决定是否租借草场、走场等草场流转行为的三大首要因素。模型估计显示,在三大草原类型区,家庭纯收入与牧户草场流转行为之间存在显著正相关,交通便利程度亦显著影响牧户草场流转行为,并且牧户民族属性与牧户草场流转决策行为之间呈负相关；从整个内蒙古草原区看,牧户所处的草地类型、交通便利程度以及牧户民族属性显著影响牧户草场流转决策行为。
第三是牧户出售牲畜行为,在新巴尔虎左旗、锡林浩特和苏尼特右旗,均有超过70%的牧户表示牲畜是影响其出售牲畜决策的首要因素,分别有40%、17%和23%的牧户表示畜产品价格亦是影响其出售牲畜行为的重要因素。根据模型估计,交通便利程度、牧户文化水平及年龄、牲畜存栏数和牧户实际放牧地面积都显著影响牧户牲畜出栏数。
最后是牧户购买饲草料行为,在研究区域,牲畜、草场、气候均被牧户视为影响购买饲草料行为的关键因素,且顺序为牲畜>草场>气候。模型估计显示,草原类型、打草场面积与牧户购买饲草料行为呈显著正相关；同时,存栏数亦是影响锡林浩特、苏尼特右旗和整个内蒙古草原区牧户购买饲草料行为的重要因素,冬季牲畜存栏数越多,牧户越倾向于多储备饲草料；在整个研究区域中,户主性别与牧户枯草期干草储备量呈负相关,与男性相比,女性则表现出风险规避,倾向于多储备草料。
The grassland area is about8.67×107ha in Inner Mongolia, which plays an vital role in ensuring regionally and nationally economic development and ecological and social stability. However, the grassland is seriously degraded because of overgrazing and climate change. Such problem has caused widespread concern of many people. So the the "balancing animals and grass" policy has been proposed, and the policy aims at establishing a reasonable standard of carrying capacity for the reasonable use of grassland resources to achieve the sustainable development. However, these programs are commonly resisted by herders. Why are the biological policies resisted by herders? Under the Household Contract Responsibility System, the herders are directly responsible for managing these vast and important landscapes for China, and thei decisions have both direct and indirect impact on the balance between animal needs and forage supply. So it is necessary to explore the herders'grass-animal balance decision behavior and the reasons behind it. The study aims to provide the theoretical basis and support for the rational utilization and degraded grassland restoration of Inner Mongolia and even other pastoral areas in China.
The Xinbaerhu Left Banner, Xilinhot City and Sunite Right Banner were selected as the study area. These three counties are located in meadow steppe, typical steppe and desert steppe regions of Inner Mongolia. The typical herders were selected as the study objects. Based on the knowledge of multidiscipline, such as ecology, economics and sociology, and using the field tests, questionnaire, the scenario experiment and model simulation method, the paper studied the pastures ecological status of herders at different economic levels, herders'grass-animal balance decision-making behavior and the factors affecting the herders'lambing, the lease of grassland, selling livestock and buying forage. The main results are as follows:
(1) The community convergence of herders'pastures at different economic levels and their adaptability
The data from filed test in the herders'pastures at different economic levels revealed that the height, coverage intensity, and the aboveground biomass of the dominant species (including Stipa klemenzis, Cleistogenes songorica and Allium polyrhizum) showed convergence at different degrees (P>0.05); as for soil mechanical composition, the soil sand (1-0.05mm) content in0-10cm soil layer was highest at pastures of herders at low economic level; as for the total and available nitrogen, total and available phosphorus, and total and available potassium, their contents in0-10cm,10-20cm and20-30cm soil layer showed convergence at different degrees(P>0.05), respectively. Households of low economic level (LEL) had rented out excess lands and those of high economic level (HEL) had leased their available lands thus resulting uniform utilization and convergence of pastoralist households' pastures across all economic levels.
According to the results above and long-term investigation, It was found that the herders of different economic levels had different adaptability to adjust the balance between animals and grass:the herders of LEL, mostly of whom are poor, generally have relatively lager areas of rangelands compared with their livestock, and their rangelands are often occupied intentionally or unintentionally with little payment; The herders of middle economic level (MEL) have a most strong desire to breed more livestock, who often protect their own pastures by enclosure, and expand the number of livestock through leasing other herders' rangelands; The herders of HEL choose to lease rangelands,"otor" and buy forage all the year to reduce the grazing pressure of their own pastures, and at the same time, maintain or even increase the number of livestock they own. Therefore, the paper indicated that there existed the adaptive behavior in herders' production behavior, and according to the stocking rates they consider are necessary, the herders often shift their rangelands' gazing pressure by leasing pasture or buying forage. All these long-term behaviors resulted in different herders' pastures vegetation characteristics' homogeneity of different degrees.
(2) The bounded rationality of herders and their grass-animal balance decision behavior
Affected by the culture, tradition, habits, markets, and natural environments, the herders and their grass-animal balance decision behavior, such as lambing, the lease of grassland, selling livestock and buying forage, were characterized by significant bounded rationality. And risk aversion was the most basic feature of herders decision behavior, while the herders would still exhibit risk preference under extreme risk; Herders showed significant endowment effect and loss aversion dealing with the problems regarding rangelands and livestock; and they were more likely to be impacted by neighbors and surrounding friends and showed a significant framing effect.
(3) Mental stocking rate as the key factor affecting herders'grass-animal balance decision behavior
The mental stocking rate refers to the number of animals that the herders think they can graze on a piece of rangeland over a specified period of time. According to the survey, in Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite,65.22%,60.71%and49.12%of respondents admitted that they bred more livestock now than2002, when the "balancing animals and grass" policy was implemented in these three counties. While74.42%,78.57%and68.42%of herders interviewed hold that there was no overstocking on their grasslands, and51.16%,57.14%and63.16%even believed that their rangelands could still graze more livestock. Surprisingly,80.43%,87.50%and75.86%respondents still insisted that they always took into consideration the carrying capacity of grassland when deciding whether to breed more livestock. Interestingly, in the three regions, herders insisted that the necessary and reasonable stocking rates were0.75-1.50sheep unit/ha,0.60-1.50sheep unit/ha, and0.50-0.75sheep unit/ha, respectively. It was obvious that from meadow steppe, the typical steppe to desert steppe, the herders'mental stocking rates showed a gradually declining trend, affected by precipitation and grassland productivity.
(4) Natural and social factors affecting herders'grass-animal balance decision behavior
Firstly, the survey data showed that herders of Xinbaerhu and Xilinhot considered the warming sheds as the first and important factor affecting their decisions about winter or spring lambing, followed by the climate; In Sunite,26%of herders interviewed thought that the meadows and economic levels were the main two factors associated with the decision regarding lambing; In Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite,25%,32%and23%of the herders hold that forage was also one important factor affecting their lambing behavioral decision, respectively; Multivariate analysis showed that grassland type, access to policy and market information, and the neighbors'lambing decision had significant impacts on the herders'decion behavior about lambing time at different degrees.
Secondly, in Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite, livestock, pastures and climate were considered as the first three primary factors associated with herders'decisions about the lease of grassland; Multivariate analysis revealed that in three counties, the household's economic income was significantly and positively related to the lease of grassland; The transportation also significantly affected the herder's pasture transfer behavior; The ethnical background had a significantly negative impact on the herder's decision-making behavior regarding leasing grassland; and in the grassland regions of Inner Mongolia, the grassland type, transportation and respondent's ethnical background significantly affected the herder's decision-making behavior about the lease of grassland.
Thirdly, in Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite, more than70%of the herders interviewed thought that that livestock was the most important factor that affected their decision behavior with regard to selling livestock;40%,17%and23%of the respondents also said that the prices of animal products were also important factors associated with to the sales of livestock, respectively; and multivariate analysis showed that the transportation, access to policy and market information, the herder's education, the livestock number and the areas of grassland in transfer and the grazing land of household significantly affected the herder's selling livestock.
Lastly, in Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite, the livestock, pastures and climate were deemed as the key factors affecting herder's decision behavior with regard to buying forage, and the order was livestock>pasture>climate; multivariate analysis revealed that the grassland type and meadow area for hay-cutting were significantly and positively related to the herder's buying forage; In Xilinhot, Sunite and the pastoral regions of Inner Mongolia, the livestock number significantly positively affected herder's decision behavior with respect to buying forage; in the pastoral regions of Inner Mongolia, the gender of herder was significantly and negatively correlated with their buying forage. Compared with men, women showed more risk aversion in their behavior, and were more likely to reserve more fodder.
本文以分别地处内蒙古草甸草原、典型草原和荒漠草原的典型旗县新巴尔虎左旗县、锡林浩特市和苏尼特右旗为研究区域,以其中的典型牧户为研究对象,借助生态学、经济学、社会学等多学科知识,结合野外试验法、问卷调查法、情景实验法和模型模拟法,对牧户草场生态状况、牧户草畜平衡决策行为特征及其背后的推动因素,以及牧户接羔、草场流转、出售牲畜、购买饲草料等关键行为节点的影响因素进行了分析,主要结果如下：
(1)不同经济水平的牧户草场生态状况呈现趋同及牧户存在调整适应行为
根据在荒漠草原2011-2012年连续两年野外试验数据,不同经济水平牧户草场主要物种(小针茅、多根葱和无芒隐子草)的高度、盖度、密度、主要植物种群及主要物种地上生物量都在不同处理区之间出现同程度地差异不显著(P>0.05)；不同经济水平牧户草场土壤机械组成中0-10cm土层砂粒(1-0.05mm)含量呈现：低经济水平处理区>高经济水平处理区>对照>中经济水平处理区；0-10cm、10-20cm和20-30cm土层土壤全氮、全磷、全钾、速效氮、速效磷、速效钾亦在高、中、低经济水平处理区和对照区之间亦出现不同程度地差异不显著(P>0.05),不同经济水平牧户草场状况出现趋同。
根据上述不同经济水平牧户草场出现趋同结果,结合长期牧区调研发现,不同经济水平牧户流转草场、购买饲草料等能力存在分异,如低经济水平牧户(很多是贫困户)一般牲畜较少,而草场载畜率相对较低,但是由于经济等方面原因没有能力围栏,草场经常被相邻的牲畜大户或无草场户有意或无意占用；而高经济水平牧户则因为经济水平高、社会关系多,会采取租借草场、走场等措施,甚至通过购买草料等来减缓自家草场的放牧压力,同时保持牲畜头数的稳定或持续扩大,因此出现低经济水平牧户草场的实际载畜率不一定低,高经济水平牧户草场的实际载畜率不一定高,正是牧户在实际草畜平衡决策过程中,长期的、不同的调整适应行为,使得不同经济水平牧户草场生态状况趋同。
(2)牧户及其草畜平衡决策行为属有限理性
受到多种文化传统、民族习惯、市场、自然环境等内外因素综合影响,牧户行为个体及其在接羔、草场流转、出售牲畜、购买饲草料等草畜平衡关键节点决策行为上属“有限理性”,其中,风险规避是牧户畜牧业生产决策行为的最基本特征,但在面对风险状态下,牧户行为仍会表现出风险偏好特征；在面对草场和牲畜问题时,牧户表现出明显的禀赋效应和损失厌恶,在接羔行为决策上,牧户则容易受到周围亲戚、朋友等影响,表现出明显的框架效应。
(3)心理载畜率是影响牧户草畜平衡决策行为的主导因素
心理载畜率指牧户认为在一定时期内单位草场能够承载的牲畜头数,而且正是牧户的“心理载畜率”实际指导牧户畜牧业生产实践。根据调查数据,在新巴尔虎左旗、锡林浩特市和苏尼特右旗,分别有65.22%、60.71%和49.12%的牧户表示认为自己比2002年喂养的牲畜头数更多；74.42%、78.12%和68.42%的牧户仍然坚持认为自己家草场没有超载,而且被采访的牧户中仍有超过一半的牧户(新巴尔虎左旗51.16%、锡林浩特57.14%和苏尼特右旗63.16%)认为自家的草场能够饲养更多牲畜；而超过70%的牧户(新巴尔虎左旗80.43%、锡林浩特87.50%和苏尼特右旗75.86%)表示在决定是否扩大牲畜规模时,会考虑草场的承载力问题；在新巴尔虎左旗、锡林浩特和苏尼特右旗,调研牧户认为合理载畜率分别是0.75-1.50羊单位/ha、0.60-1.50羊单位/ha和0.50-0.75羊单位/ha,可见受到降水、草地生产力等影响,从草甸草原到典型草原,再到荒漠草原,牧户心理载畜率呈现逐渐下降的趋势。
(4)牧户草畜平衡关键节点的决策行为受自然、社会等多种因素综合影响
首先是牧户接羔行为,根据调查数据显示,在新巴尔虎左旗和锡林浩特,暖圈情况被牧户视为影响牧户选择接冬羔或接春羔的首要因素,其次为气候；苏尼特右旗有26%的牧户分别认为草场和经济收入是影响接羔行为的两大首要因素；在新巴尔虎左旗、锡林浩特和苏尼特右旗,则分别有25%、32%和23%的牧户选择饲草料亦是影响牧户接羔行为决策的重要因素。模型模拟结果显示,草原类型、信息可获得性、邻居的接羔行为对牧户的接羔时间选择均有不同程度的显著影响。
其次是牧户草场流转行为,在三个典型旗县,牲畜、草场和气候均被视为牧户.决定是否租借草场、走场等草场流转行为的三大首要因素。模型估计显示,在三大草原类型区,家庭纯收入与牧户草场流转行为之间存在显著正相关,交通便利程度亦显著影响牧户草场流转行为,并且牧户民族属性与牧户草场流转决策行为之间呈负相关；从整个内蒙古草原区看,牧户所处的草地类型、交通便利程度以及牧户民族属性显著影响牧户草场流转决策行为。
第三是牧户出售牲畜行为,在新巴尔虎左旗、锡林浩特和苏尼特右旗,均有超过70%的牧户表示牲畜是影响其出售牲畜决策的首要因素,分别有40%、17%和23%的牧户表示畜产品价格亦是影响其出售牲畜行为的重要因素。根据模型估计,交通便利程度、牧户文化水平及年龄、牲畜存栏数和牧户实际放牧地面积都显著影响牧户牲畜出栏数。
最后是牧户购买饲草料行为,在研究区域,牲畜、草场、气候均被牧户视为影响购买饲草料行为的关键因素,且顺序为牲畜>草场>气候。模型估计显示,草原类型、打草场面积与牧户购买饲草料行为呈显著正相关；同时,存栏数亦是影响锡林浩特、苏尼特右旗和整个内蒙古草原区牧户购买饲草料行为的重要因素,冬季牲畜存栏数越多,牧户越倾向于多储备饲草料；在整个研究区域中,户主性别与牧户枯草期干草储备量呈负相关,与男性相比,女性则表现出风险规避,倾向于多储备草料。
The grassland area is about8.67×107ha in Inner Mongolia, which plays an vital role in ensuring regionally and nationally economic development and ecological and social stability. However, the grassland is seriously degraded because of overgrazing and climate change. Such problem has caused widespread concern of many people. So the the "balancing animals and grass" policy has been proposed, and the policy aims at establishing a reasonable standard of carrying capacity for the reasonable use of grassland resources to achieve the sustainable development. However, these programs are commonly resisted by herders. Why are the biological policies resisted by herders? Under the Household Contract Responsibility System, the herders are directly responsible for managing these vast and important landscapes for China, and thei decisions have both direct and indirect impact on the balance between animal needs and forage supply. So it is necessary to explore the herders'grass-animal balance decision behavior and the reasons behind it. The study aims to provide the theoretical basis and support for the rational utilization and degraded grassland restoration of Inner Mongolia and even other pastoral areas in China.
The Xinbaerhu Left Banner, Xilinhot City and Sunite Right Banner were selected as the study area. These three counties are located in meadow steppe, typical steppe and desert steppe regions of Inner Mongolia. The typical herders were selected as the study objects. Based on the knowledge of multidiscipline, such as ecology, economics and sociology, and using the field tests, questionnaire, the scenario experiment and model simulation method, the paper studied the pastures ecological status of herders at different economic levels, herders'grass-animal balance decision-making behavior and the factors affecting the herders'lambing, the lease of grassland, selling livestock and buying forage. The main results are as follows:
(1) The community convergence of herders'pastures at different economic levels and their adaptability
The data from filed test in the herders'pastures at different economic levels revealed that the height, coverage intensity, and the aboveground biomass of the dominant species (including Stipa klemenzis, Cleistogenes songorica and Allium polyrhizum) showed convergence at different degrees (P>0.05); as for soil mechanical composition, the soil sand (1-0.05mm) content in0-10cm soil layer was highest at pastures of herders at low economic level; as for the total and available nitrogen, total and available phosphorus, and total and available potassium, their contents in0-10cm,10-20cm and20-30cm soil layer showed convergence at different degrees(P>0.05), respectively. Households of low economic level (LEL) had rented out excess lands and those of high economic level (HEL) had leased their available lands thus resulting uniform utilization and convergence of pastoralist households' pastures across all economic levels.
According to the results above and long-term investigation, It was found that the herders of different economic levels had different adaptability to adjust the balance between animals and grass:the herders of LEL, mostly of whom are poor, generally have relatively lager areas of rangelands compared with their livestock, and their rangelands are often occupied intentionally or unintentionally with little payment; The herders of middle economic level (MEL) have a most strong desire to breed more livestock, who often protect their own pastures by enclosure, and expand the number of livestock through leasing other herders' rangelands; The herders of HEL choose to lease rangelands,"otor" and buy forage all the year to reduce the grazing pressure of their own pastures, and at the same time, maintain or even increase the number of livestock they own. Therefore, the paper indicated that there existed the adaptive behavior in herders' production behavior, and according to the stocking rates they consider are necessary, the herders often shift their rangelands' gazing pressure by leasing pasture or buying forage. All these long-term behaviors resulted in different herders' pastures vegetation characteristics' homogeneity of different degrees.
(2) The bounded rationality of herders and their grass-animal balance decision behavior
Affected by the culture, tradition, habits, markets, and natural environments, the herders and their grass-animal balance decision behavior, such as lambing, the lease of grassland, selling livestock and buying forage, were characterized by significant bounded rationality. And risk aversion was the most basic feature of herders decision behavior, while the herders would still exhibit risk preference under extreme risk; Herders showed significant endowment effect and loss aversion dealing with the problems regarding rangelands and livestock; and they were more likely to be impacted by neighbors and surrounding friends and showed a significant framing effect.
(3) Mental stocking rate as the key factor affecting herders'grass-animal balance decision behavior
The mental stocking rate refers to the number of animals that the herders think they can graze on a piece of rangeland over a specified period of time. According to the survey, in Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite,65.22%,60.71%and49.12%of respondents admitted that they bred more livestock now than2002, when the "balancing animals and grass" policy was implemented in these three counties. While74.42%,78.57%and68.42%of herders interviewed hold that there was no overstocking on their grasslands, and51.16%,57.14%and63.16%even believed that their rangelands could still graze more livestock. Surprisingly,80.43%,87.50%and75.86%respondents still insisted that they always took into consideration the carrying capacity of grassland when deciding whether to breed more livestock. Interestingly, in the three regions, herders insisted that the necessary and reasonable stocking rates were0.75-1.50sheep unit/ha,0.60-1.50sheep unit/ha, and0.50-0.75sheep unit/ha, respectively. It was obvious that from meadow steppe, the typical steppe to desert steppe, the herders'mental stocking rates showed a gradually declining trend, affected by precipitation and grassland productivity.
(4) Natural and social factors affecting herders'grass-animal balance decision behavior
Firstly, the survey data showed that herders of Xinbaerhu and Xilinhot considered the warming sheds as the first and important factor affecting their decisions about winter or spring lambing, followed by the climate; In Sunite,26%of herders interviewed thought that the meadows and economic levels were the main two factors associated with the decision regarding lambing; In Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite,25%,32%and23%of the herders hold that forage was also one important factor affecting their lambing behavioral decision, respectively; Multivariate analysis showed that grassland type, access to policy and market information, and the neighbors'lambing decision had significant impacts on the herders'decion behavior about lambing time at different degrees.
Secondly, in Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite, livestock, pastures and climate were considered as the first three primary factors associated with herders'decisions about the lease of grassland; Multivariate analysis revealed that in three counties, the household's economic income was significantly and positively related to the lease of grassland; The transportation also significantly affected the herder's pasture transfer behavior; The ethnical background had a significantly negative impact on the herder's decision-making behavior regarding leasing grassland; and in the grassland regions of Inner Mongolia, the grassland type, transportation and respondent's ethnical background significantly affected the herder's decision-making behavior about the lease of grassland.
Thirdly, in Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite, more than70%of the herders interviewed thought that that livestock was the most important factor that affected their decision behavior with regard to selling livestock;40%,17%and23%of the respondents also said that the prices of animal products were also important factors associated with to the sales of livestock, respectively; and multivariate analysis showed that the transportation, access to policy and market information, the herder's education, the livestock number and the areas of grassland in transfer and the grazing land of household significantly affected the herder's selling livestock.
Lastly, in Xinbaerhu, Xilinhot and Sunite, the livestock, pastures and climate were deemed as the key factors affecting herder's decision behavior with regard to buying forage, and the order was livestock>pasture>climate; multivariate analysis revealed that the grassland type and meadow area for hay-cutting were significantly and positively related to the herder's buying forage; In Xilinhot, Sunite and the pastoral regions of Inner Mongolia, the livestock number significantly positively affected herder's decision behavior with respect to buying forage; in the pastoral regions of Inner Mongolia, the gender of herder was significantly and negatively correlated with their buying forage. Compared with men, women showed more risk aversion in their behavior, and were more likely to reserve more fodder.
引文
[1]Alevy, Jonathan E, John A List, and Wiktor L Adamowicz.How can behavioral economics inform nonmarket valuation? an example from the preference reversal Iiterature[J].Land Economics.2011,87(3):365-381.
[2]Allais, Maurice.The so-called Allais paradox and rational decisions under uncertainty [M]. Springer,1979.
[3]Arrow, Kenneth Joseph.Aspects of the theory of risk-bearing[M].Yrjo Jahnssonin Saatio,1965.
[4]Ayalew, Workneh, B Rischkowsky, JM King, et al.Crossbreds did not generate more net benefits than indigenous goats in Ethiopian smallholdings[J]. Agricultural Systems. 2003,76(3):1137-1156.
[5]Ayoub, Ali Taha.Extent, severity and causative factors of land degradation in the Sudan[J] Journal of Arid Environments.1998,38(3):397-409.
[6]Baucells, Manel, and Antonio Villasis. Stability of risk preferences and the reflection effect of prospect theory[J].Theory and Decision.2010,68(1-2):193-211.
[7]Beedell, Jason, and Tahir Rehman.Using social-psychology models to understand farmers' conservation behaviour[J].Journal of rural studies.2000,16(1):117-127.
[8]Behnke, JR, and H Roy.Measuring the benefits of subsistence versus commercial livestock production in Africa[J].Agricultural Systems.1985,16(2):109-135.
[9]Bergman, Oscar, Tore Ellingsen, Magnus Johannesson, et al.Anchoring and cognitive ability[J].Economics letters.2010,107(1):66-68.
[10]Bernoulli, Daniel.Daniellis Bernouilli... Hydrodynamica, sive de Viribus et motibus fluidorum commentarii, opus academicum[M].Sumptibus Johannis Reinholdi Dulseckeri,1738.
[11]Bischoff, Ivo.Endowment effect theory, prediction bias and publicly provided goods:an experimental study[J].Environmental and Resource Economics.2008,39(3):283-296.
[12]Burton, Rob JF.Seeing through the 'good farmer's' eyes:towards developing an understanding of the social symbolic value of 'productivist'behaviour[J].Sociologia Ruralis.2004,44(2):195-215.
[13]Burton, Rob, Carmen Kuczera, and Gerald Schwarz.Exploring Farmers' Cultural Resistance to Voluntary Agri-environmental Schemes[J].Sociologia Ruralis.2008,48(1):16-37.
[14]Cohen, Michele, and Jean-Yves Jaffray. Approximations of rational criteria under complete ignorance and the independence axiom[J].Theory and Decision.1983,15(2):121-150.
[15]Craine, Joseph M, Troy W Ocheltree, Jesse B Nippert, et al.Global diversity of drought tolerance and grassland climate-change resilience[J].Nature Climate Change.2012.
[16]De Ridder, N, and KT Wagenaar.Energy and protein balances in traditional livestock systems and ranching in eastern Botswana[J].Agricultural Systems.1986,20(1):1-16.
[17]Devendra, C.Goats:challenges for increased productivity and improved livelihoods[J].Outlook on Agriculture.1999,28(4):215-226.
[18]Edwards-Jones, GModelling farmer decision-making:concepts, progress and challenges[J]. Animal science.2006,82(6):783.
[19]Edwards, Ward.The theory of decision making[J]. Psychological bulletin.1954,51(4):380.
[20]Edwards, Ward.Subjective probabilities inferred from decisions[J].Psychological review.1962,69:109.
[21]Esch, Franz-Rudolf, Bernd H Schmitt, Joern Redler, et al.The brand anchoring effect:A judgment bias resulting from brand awareness and temporary accessibility[J].Psychology & Marketing.2009,26(4):383-395.
[22]Flemming, Timothy M, Owen D Jones, Laura Mayo, et al.The endowment effect in orangutans[J].International Journal of Comparative Psychology.2012,25:285-298.
[23]Frederick, Shane.Cognitive reflection and decision making[J].The Journal of Economic Perspectives.2005,19(4):25-42.
[24]Guerin, LJ, and TF Guerin.Constraints to the adoption of innovations in agricultural research and environmental management:a review[J]. Animal Production Science. 1994,34(4):549-571.
[25]Halevy, Yoram.Strotz meets Allais:Diminishing impatience and the certainty effect[J].The American Economic Review.2008,98(3):1145-1162.
[26]Han, G.D., L. Na, M.L. Zhao, et al.Changing livestock numbers and farm management to improve the livelihood of farmers and rehabilitate grasslands in desert steppe:a case study in Siziwang Banner, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region[J].development of sustainable livestock systems on grasslands in north-western china.2011:80-96.
[27]Han, JG, YJ Zhang, CJ Wang, et al.Rangeland degradation and restoration management in China[J].The Rangeland Journal.2008,30(2):233-239.
[28]Harbaugh, William T, Kate Krause, and Lise Vesterlund.Are adults better behaved than children? Age, experience, and the endowment effect[J]. Ecnomic letters.2001, 70(2):175-181.
[29]Harris, Richard B.Rangeland degradation on the Qinghai-Tibetan plateau:a review of the evidence of its magnitude and causes[J] Journal of Arid Environments.2010,74(1):1-12.
[30]Haynes, RJ.The decomposition process:mineralization, immobilization, humus formation, and degradation[J].Mineral nitrogen in the plant-soil system.1986:52-126.
[31]Herzon, Irina, and Merit Mikk.Farmers' perceptions of biodiversity and ther willingness to enhance it through agri-environment schemes:A comparative study from Estonia and Finland[J].Journal for Nature Conservation.2007,15(1):10-25.
[32]Hunt, HW, MJ Trlica, EF Redente, et al.Simulation model for the effects of climate change on temperate grassland ecosystems[J].Ecological Modelling.1991,53:205-246.
[33]Juan, JA de, JM Tarjuelo, M Valiente, et al.Model for optimal cropping patterns within the farm based on crop water production functions and irrigation uniformity I:Development of a decision model[J].Agricultural Water Management.1996,31(1):115-143.
[34]Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L Knetsch, and Richard H Thaler.Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem[J] Journal of political Economy.1990:1325-1348.
[35]Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L Knetsch, and Richard H Thaler.Anomalies:The endowment effect, loss aversion and status quo bias[J].The Journal of Ecnomic Perspectives.1991,5(1):193-206.
[36]Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.Subjective probability:A judgment of representativcness[J].Cogniti ve psychology.1972,3(3):430-454.
[37]Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.Prospect theory:An analysis of decision under risk[J].Econometrica:Journal of the Econometric Society.1979:263-291.
[38]Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.Choices, frames and values[J].The American Psychologist.1984,39(4):341-350.
[39]Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.Choices, values, and frames[M].Cambridge University Press,2000.
[40]Kaufmann, Brigitte A.Second-order cybernetics as a tool to understand why pastoralists do what they do[J].Agricultural Systems.2011,104(9):655-665.
[41]Kemp, D., C. Brown, GD Han, et al.Chinese grasslands:problems, dilemmas and finding solutions[J].Development of sustainable livestock systems on grasslands in north-western China'. ACIAR Proceedings.2011,(134):12-23.
[42]Kemp, DR, and DL Michalk.Towards sustainable grassland and livestock management[J].Journal of Agricultural Science.2007,145(6):543.
[43]Knetsch, Jack L, and John A Sinden.Willingness to pay and compensation demanded: Experimental evidence of an unexpected disparity in measures of value[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics.1984,99(3):507-521.
[44]Knetsch, Jack L, and Wei-Kang Wong.The endowment effect and the reference state: Evidence and manipulations[J].Journal of Ecnomic Behavior & Orgazation. 2009,71(2):407-413.
[45]Lau, Annie, and Enrico W Coiera.Do people experience cognitive biases while searching for information?[J].Journal of the American Medical Informatics Assocation.2007,14(5): 599-608.
[46]Laury, Susan K, and Charles A Holt.Further reflections on the reflection effect[J].Research in Experimental Economics.2008,12:405-440.
[47]List, John A.Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? [J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics.2003,118(1):41-71.
[48]Liu, Weixing, Zhe Zhang, and Shiqiang Wan.Predominant role of water in regulating soil and microbial respiration and their responses to climate change in a semiarid grassland[J].Global Change Biology.2009,15(1):184-195.
[49]Loomes, Graham, and Robert Sugden.Incorporating a stochastic element into decision theories[J].European Economic Review.1995,39(3):641-648.
[50]Loughran, Thomas A, Greg Pogarsky, Alex R Piquero, et al.Re-examining the functional form of the certainty effect in deterrence theory[J]. Justice Quarterly.2012a,29(5):712-741.
[51]Loughran, Thomas A, Greg Pogarsky, Alex R Piquero, et al.Reassessing the certainty effect in deterrence theory:using insight from prospect theory [J].Justice Q (forthcoming).2012b.
[52]MacDonald, HF, and James Michael Bowker.The endowment effect and WTA:a quasi-experimental test[J].Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics.1994,26:545-545.
[53]Macdonald, KA, D Beca, JW Penno, et al. Effect of stocking rate on the economics of pasture-based dairy farms[J]. Journal of dairy science.2011,94(5):2581-2586.
[54]Macdonald, KA, JW Penno, JAS Lancaster, et al.Effect of stocking rate on pasture production, milk production, and reproduction of dairy cows in pasture-based systems[J].Journal of dairy science.2008,91 (5):2151-2163.
[55]Mathijs, Erik.Social capital and farmers' willingness to adopt countryside stewardship schemes[J].Outlook on Agriculture.2003,32(1):13-16.
[56]Michalk, DL, Hua Limin, David Kemp, et al.Redesigning livestock systems to improve household income and reduce stocking rates in China's western grasslands.//Towards Sustainable Use of Rangelands in North-West China.301-324:Springer,2010.
[57]Moxey, AP.The economic component of NELUP[J].Journal of Environmental Planning and Management.1995,38(1):21-34.
[58]Neumann, J von, and Oskar Morgenstern.Theory of gamesand ecnomic behavior[M]. Priceton, NJ:Priceton University Press,1944.
[59]Neupane, Ramji P, Khem R Sharma, and Gopal B Thapa.Adoption of agroforestry in the hills of Nepal:a logistic regression analysis[J]. Agricultural Systems.2002,72(3):177-196.
[60]Nkonya, Ephraim, Ted Schroeder, and David Norman.Factors affecting adoption of improved maize seed and fertiliser in northern Tanzania[J]. Journal of Agricultural Economics. 1997,48(1):1-12.
[61]Oldeman, LR.The global extent of soil degradation[J].Soil resilience and sustainable land use.1994:99-118.
[62]Oldeman, LR, RTA Hakkeling, and Wim G Sombroek.World map of the status of human-induced soil degradation:an explanatory note[M].International Soil Reference and Information Centre,1990.
[63](?)rskov, ER, and EF Viglizzo.The role of animals in spreading farmers' risks:a new paradigm for animal science[J].Outlook on Agriculture.1994,23.
[64]Parton, WJ, JMO Scurlock, DS Ojima, et al.Impact of climate change on grassland production and soil carbon worldwide[J].Global Change Biology,1995,1(1):13-22.
[65]Popkin, Samuel L.The rational peasant[M].University of California Press,1979.
[66]Pratt, John W.Risk Aversion in the small and in the large[J].Econometrica:Journal of the Econometric Society.1964:122-136.
[67]Samuelson, Paul A, and William D Nordhaus.Economics.[M].Irwin, McGraw-Hill,1998.
[68]Samuelson, William, and Richard Zeckhauser. Status quo bias in decision making[J].Journal of risk and uncertainty.1988,1(1):7-59.
[69]Savage, L.The Foundations of Statistics Wiley, New York[J].Develops the expected utility Theory of economics for making decision with complete subjective probabilistic information.1954.
[70]Savage, Leonard J.Allais' Paradox[J].Gardenfors and Sahlin (eds.).1953,1988:163-5.
[71]Scoones, Ian.The economic value of livestock in the communal areas of southern Zimbabwe[J].Agricultural Systems.1992,39(4):339-359.
[72]Sheikh, AD, T Rehman, and CM Yates.Logit models for identifying the factors that influence the uptake of new 'no-tillage'technologies by farmers in the rice-wheat and the cotton-wheat farming systems of Pakistan's Punjab[J].Agricultural Systems.2003,75(1):79-95.
[73]Simon, Herbert A Administrative behavior[M]. New York:The Free Press,1947.
[74]Simon, Herbert A.Rational choice and the structure of the environment[J].Psychological review.1956,63(2):129-138.
[75]Simon, Herbert A. Theories of bounded rationnality[J]. Decision and orgazation. 1972,1:161-176.
[76]Simon, Herbert A.Bounded rationnality[J].The new Palgrave:Utility and probality. 1987:15-18.
[77]Simon, Herbert A, Massimo Egidi, Riccardo Viale, et al.Economics, bounded rationality and the cognitive revolution[M].Edward Elgar Publishing,2008.
[78]Simon, Herbert Alexander.Models of bounded rationality:Empirically grounded economic reason[M].Volume 3:MIT Press (MA),1982.
[79]Solano, C, H Leon, E" Perez, et al.The role of personal information sources on the decision-making process of Costa Rican dairy farmers[J] Agricultural Systems.2003,76(1): 3-18.
[80]Stewart, Richard E, and Barbara D Stewart.The loss of the certainty effect[J].Risk Management and Insurance Review.2001,4(2):29-49.
[81]Takahashi, T., and R. Jones.2011 Steady-state modelling for better understanding of current livestock production systems and exploring optimal short-term strategies. In 'Development of sustainable livestock systems on grasslands in north-western China', ed. by DR Kemp and DL Michalk. ACIAR Proceedings,2011, pp.26-35.
[82]Tarjuelo, JM, JA De Juan, M Valiente, et al.Model for optimal cropping patterns within the farm based on crop water production functions and irrigation uniformity II:A case study of irrigation scheduling in Albacete, Spain[J].Agricultural Water Mangaement.1996,31(1): 145-163.
[83]Teversy, A, and D Kahneman. Judgment under uncertainty:heuristics and biases[J].Science. 1974,185(4157):1124-1131.
[84]Thaler, Richard.Toward a positive theory of consumer choice[J] Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization.1980,1 (1):39-60.
[85]Theurillat, Jean-Paul, and Antoine Guisan.Potential impact of climate change on vegetation in the European Alps:a review[J].Climatic change.2001,50(1-2):77-109.
[86]Thornley, JHM, and MGR Cannell.Temperate grassland responses to climate change:an analysis using the Hurley pasture model[J]. Annals of Botany.1997,80(2):205-221.
[87]Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman.The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice[J].Science.1981,211 (4481):453-458.
[88]Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman.Availability:A heuristic for judging frequency and probability[J].Cognitive psychology.1973,5(2):207-232.
[89]Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman.Rational choice and the framing of decisions[J].Journal of business.1986:S251-S278.
[90]Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. Loss aversion in riskless choice:A reference-dependent model[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics.1991,106(4):1039-1061.
[91]Vanslembrouck, Isabel, Guido Huylenbroeck, and Wim Verbeke.Determinants of the Willingness of Belgian Farmers to Participate in Agri-environmental Measures[J].Journal of Agricultural Economics.2002,53(3):489-511.
[92]Venkatachalam, L.Behavioral economics for environmental policy[J]. Ecological Ecnomics. 2008,67(4):640-645.
[93]Villainil, Maria Bonita, Nilda Mabel Amiotti, and Norman Peinemann.Soil degradation related to overgrazing in the semi-arid southern Caldenal area of Argentina[J].Soil Science.2001,166(7):441-452.
[94]Wallace, Michael T, and Joan E Moss.Farmer Decision-making with Conflicting Goals:A recursive strategic programming analysis[J].Journal of Agricultural Economics.2002,53(1): 82-100.
[95]Wauters, Erwin, Charles Bielders, Jean Poesen, et al.Adoption of soil conservation practices in Belgium:An examination of the theory of planned behaviour in the agri-environmental domain[J].Land use policy.2010,27(1):86-94.
[96]Wezel, A, and S Bender.Degradation of agro-pastoral village land in semi-arid southeastern Cuba[J].Journal of Arid Environments.2004,59(2):299-311.
[97]Willock, Joyce, Ian J Deary, Gareth Edwards-Jones, et al.The Role of Attitudes and Objectives in Farmer Decision Making:Business and Environmentally-Oriented Behaviour in Scotland[J].Journal of Agricultural Economics.1999,50(2):286-303.
[98]Yu, F. F., K. P. Price, J. Ellis, et al.Response of seasonal vegetation development to climatic variations in eastern central Asia[J].Remote Sensing of Environment.2003,87(1):42-54.
[99]Zhao, Wei, Shi-Ping Chen, Xing-Guo Han, et al.Effects of long-term grazing on the morphological and functional traits of Leymus chinensis in the semiarid grassland of Inner Mongolia, China[J].Ecological research.2009,24(1):99-108.
[100]Zheng, Y., Z. Xu, D. Kemp, et al.Modeling Optimal Grazing Management for Grassland Rehabilitation on the Typical Steppe:A Case Study in Taipusi Banner, Inner Mongolia, China[J].The Philippine Agricultural Scientist.2011,93(4).
[101]敖仁其.草原产权制度变迁与创新[J].内蒙古社会科学(汉文版).2003,(4)：116-120.
[102]包乌日乐.牧户草原流转行为研究[D].呼和浩特：内蒙古大学,2012.
[103]宝希吉日,根锁,乌日根巴雅尔.牧户草场经营行为的实证分析——基于内蒙古锡林郭勒盟三个旗(市)的牧户调查数据[J].中国农村经济.2012,(9)：26-36.
[104]蔡博峰.内蒙古巴林右旗草场退化问题探析[J].中国人口.资源与环境.2003,(4)：120-121.
[105]柴军,张陆彪,毛炜峄.基于PP回归技术的草地退化驱动因子影响力研究——以新疆阿勒泰牧区为例[J].农业技术经济.2009,(2)：96-100.
[106]陈秋红.草原生态敏感地区牧户畜牧业生产经营行为及影响因素分析[J].农业技术经济.2010,(11)：65-75.
[107]陈烨.蒙古族文化的生态学思考[J].内蒙古社会科学(汉文版).2001,5.
[108]成盛超,谢如贤,吴健中.效用理论的历史与现状[J].系统工程理论与实践.1994,(12)：16-21.
[109]达林太,娜仁高娃.对内蒙古草原畜牧业过牧理论和制度的反思[J].北方经济.2010,(11)：32-35.
[110]达林太,郑易生.真过牧与假过牧——内蒙古草地过牧问题分析[J].中国农村经济.2012,(5)：4-18.
[111]邓大才.社会化小农：动机与行为[J].华中师范大学学报：人文社会科学版.2006,45(3)：9-16.
[112]邓汉慧,张子刚.西蒙的有限理性研究综述[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学 版).2004,(6)：37-41.
[113]董志勇.行为经济学原理[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[114]哈耶克.个人主义与经济秩序[M].上海：生活.读书.新知三联书店,2003.
[115]韩颖.温性荒漠草原牧户对气候变化的感知和适应的实证研究——以内蒙古苏尼特右旗为例[D].北京：中国农业科学院,2011.
[116]郝伯特.西蒙.现代决策理论的基石：有限理性说[M].杨砾and徐立,译.北京：北京经济学院出版社,1989.
[117]侯向阳,尹燕亭,运向军,等.北方草原牧户心理载畜率与草畜平衡模式转移研究[J].中国草地学报.2013,35(1)：1-11.
[118]侯向阳,尹燕亭,运向军,等.中国北方草原退化治理和草畜平衡模式转移研究[J].内蒙古草业.2012,(4)：6-14.
[119]侯向阳.2004草业科技发展重点问题研究.中国草学会第六届二次会议暨国际学术研讨会,中国呼和浩特,2004,pp.7.
[120]黄成.行为决策理论及决策行为实证研究方法探讨[J].经济经纬.2006,(5)：102-105.
[121]黄宗智.长江三角洲小农家庭与乡村发展[M].中华书局,2000.
[122]贾树海,崔学明,李绍良,等.牧压梯度上土壤理化性质的变化.／／中国科学院内蒙古生态系统定位站.草原生态系统研究(第5集).12-1,1995.
[123]蒋全民,王梦琳,任继周,等.草畜平衡：刻不容缓的百年方略[J].四川草原.2003,(6)：52-56.
[124]颉耀文,徐建华.基于3S技术的土地详查方法创新[J].国土资源遥感.2002,2(4).
[125]李爱梅.心理账户与非理性经济决策行为的实证研究[D]：暨南大学,2006.
[126]李博.中国北方草地退化及其防治对策[J].中国农业科学.1997,(6)：2-10.
[127]李怀祖.决策理论导引[M].北京：北京机械工业出版社,1993.
[128]李金花,潘浩文,王刚.内蒙古典型草原退化原因的初探[J].草业科学.2004,(5)：49-51.
[129]李青丰,刘天明.草畜平衡管理——以时间机制调控的思路[J].中国草地.2005,(1)：73-75.
[130]李素英,李晓兵,王丹丹.基于马尔柯夫模型的内蒙古锡林浩特典型草原退化格局预测[J].生态学杂志.2007,(1)：78-82.
[131]李晓兵,陈云浩,张云霞,等.气候变化对中国北方荒漠草原植被的影响[J].地球科学进展.2002,(2)：254-261.
[132]李秀兰.效用理论及其应用[J].山东师大学报(自然科学版).2001,16(63)：354-356.
[133]李永宏.放牧空间梯度上和恢复演替时间梯度上羊草草原的群落特征及其对应性[J].草原生态研究.1992,4：1-8.
[134]李永宏.内蒙古草原草场放牧退化模式研究及退化监测专家系统雏议[J].植物学通报.1993,,(S1)：42.
[135]李永宏.内蒙古锡林河流域羊草草原和大针茅草原在放牧影响下的分异和趋同[J].植物生态学与地植物学学报.1988,(3)：27-34.
[136]刘爱军,邢旗,倪小光,等.内蒙古天然草地现状与风沙源区植被变化分析[J].内蒙古草业.2003,(01)：25-27.
[137]刘艳,卫智军,杨静,等.短花针茅草原不同放牧制度的植物补偿性生长[J].中国草地.2004,(3)：19-24.
[138]刘媛媛,张文秀.微观主体行为对草地退化的影响及原因分析——基于川西北牧区两县牧户的调查[J].四川农业大学学报.2008,(1)：81-84.
[139]刘钟龄,王炜,郝敦元,等.内蒙古草原退化与恢复演替机理的探讨[J].干旱区资源与环境.2002,(1)：84-91.
[140]龙迪.效用理论回顾[J].科技信息(科学教研).2007,(36)：521+563.
[141]吕晓英.西部主要牧区气候暖干化及草地畜牧业可持续发展的政策建议[J].农业经济问题.2003,(7)：51-55+80.
[142]吕子君,卢欣石,辛晓平.中国北方草原沙化现状与趋势[J].草地学报.2005,(S1)：24-27.
[143]彭克明.农业化学：总论[M].农业出版社,1990.
[144]普劳斯.决策与判断[M].施俊琦and王星,译.北京：人民邮电出版社,2004.
[145]齐顾波,胡新萍.草场禁牧政策下的农民放牧行为研究——以宁夏盐池县的调查为例[J].中国农业大学学报(社会科学版).2006,(2)：12-16.
[146]任海彦,郑淑霞,白永飞.放牧对内蒙古锡林河流域草地群落植物茎叶生物量资源分配的影响[J].植物生态学报.2009,(6)：1065-1074.
[147]任继周,王钦,牟新待,等.草原生产流程及草原季节畜牧业[J].中国农业科学.1978,2(8)：87-92.
[148]戎郁萍,韩建国,王培,等.放牧强度对草地土壤理化性质的影响[J].中国草地.2001,23(4)：41-47.
[149]舒尔茨.改造传统农业[M].商务印书馆,1987.
[150]苏吉安,朱幼军,哈斯.内蒙古草地生态问题及其对策探讨[J].中国草地.2003,(6)：69-72.
[151]仝川,郗风江,杨景荣,等.锡林河流域中游草原植被退化遥感监测及合理放牧强度的确定[J].草业学报.2003,(4)：78-83.
[152]汪诗平,李永宏.内蒙古典型草原退化机理的研究[J].应用生态学报.1999,(4)：54-58.
[153]汪诗平,王艳芬.不同放牧率下糙隐子草种群补偿性生长的研究[J].植物学报.2001,(4)：413-418.
[154]汪诗平,王艳芬,陈佐忠.放牧生态系统管理[M].科学出版社,2003.
[155]王卉.草原管理政策不能“一刀切”[N].科技时报：A1,2010.
[156]王炜,梁存柱,刘钟龄,等.草原群落退化与恢复演替中的植物个体行为分析[J].植物生态学报.2000b,(3)：268-274.
[157]王炜,梁存柱,刘钟龄,等.羊草+大针茅草原群落退化演替机理的研究[J].植物生态学报.2000a,(4)：468-472.
[158]王炜,刘钟龄,郝敦元,等.内蒙古草原退化群落恢复演替的研究—Ⅰ.退化草原的基本特征与恢复演替动力[J].植物生态学报.1996,(5)：449-459.
[159]王炜,刘钟龄,郝敦元,梁存柱.内蒙古草原退化群落恢复演替的研究—Ⅱ.恢复演替时间进程的分析[J].植物生态学报.1996,(5)：460-471.
[160]卫智军,乌日图,达布希拉图,等.荒漠草原不同放牧制度对土壤理化性质的影响[J].中国草地.2005,27(5)：6-10.
[161]谢双红.北方牧区草畜平衡与草原管理研究[D]：中国农业科学院,2005.
[162]辛翔飞,秦富.影响农户投资行为因素的实证分析[J].农业经济问题.2005,(10)：36-39+81.
[163]邢旗,双全,金玉,等.草甸草原不同放牧制度群落物质动态及植物补偿性生长研究[J].畜牧与饲料科学.2010,(Z1)：274-277.
[164]邢旗,双全,金玉,等.草甸草原不同放牧制度群落物质动态及植物补偿性生长研究[J].中国草地.2004,(5)：27-32.
[165]徐勇,邓大才.社会化小农：解释当今农户的一种视角[J].学术月刊.2006,7：5-13.
[166]闫瑞瑞,卫智军,辛晓平,等.放牧制度对荒漠草原生态系统土壤养分状况的影响[J].生态学报.2010,(1)：43-51.
[167]杨理,侯向阳.对草畜平衡管理模式的反思[J].中国农村经济.2005b,(9)：62-66.
[168]杨理,侯向阳.以草定畜的若干理论问题研究[J].中国农学通报.2005a,(3)：346-349.
[169]杨婷婷,吴新宏,李鹏,等.中国北方草原区县域气候变化脆弱性评价指标体系构建和分析[J].干早区资源与环境.2012,(1)：113-116.
[170]尹燕亭,侯向阳,运向军.气候变化对内蒙古草原生态系统影响的研究进展[J].草业科学.2011,(6)：1132-1139.
[171]尹燕亭,侯向阳,丁勇,等.荒漠草原区畜牧业对气候变化的响应研究——以内蒙古苏尼特右旗为例[J].干旱区资源与环境.2012,(8)：153-160.
[172]尤莉,沈建国,裴浩.内蒙古近50年气候变化及未来10～20年趋势展望[J].内蒙古气象.2002,4：14-18.
[173]运向军,卫智军,杨静,等.禁牧休牧短花针茅草原地上现存量与土壤含水量的关系[J].中国草地学报.2010,(2)：75-79.
[174]张杰.西蒙的有限理性说与卡尼曼的行为经济思想比较研究[D].上海：上海社会科学院,2009.
[175]张林秀,徐晓明.农户生产在不同政策环境下行为研究—农户系统模型的应用[J].农业技术经济.1996,(4)：27-32.
[176]赵成章,龙瑞军,马永欢,等.草地产权制度对过度放牧的影响——以肃南县红石窝乡的调查为例[J].草业学报.2005,(1)：1-5.
[177]钟方雷,樊胜岳.河西走廊祁连山区牧户经济行为分析——以肃南县为例[J].人文地理.2005,(5)：118-123.
[178]周国梅,傅小兰.决策的期望效用理论的发展[J].心理科学.2001,,(2)：219-220.
[179]周纪纶,郑师章,杨持.植物种群生态学[M].高等教育出版社,1992.
[180]周圣坤,刘娟.草场退化：牧民认知与对策的个案研究[J].农业经济.2009,(4)：24-26.
[181]周圣坤.草场资源：牧民视角的利用和管理——对内蒙—纯牧区嘎查(村)的个案研究[J].农业经济.2008,(7)：42-45.
[2]Allais, Maurice.The so-called Allais paradox and rational decisions under uncertainty [M]. Springer,1979.
[3]Arrow, Kenneth Joseph.Aspects of the theory of risk-bearing[M].Yrjo Jahnssonin Saatio,1965.
[4]Ayalew, Workneh, B Rischkowsky, JM King, et al.Crossbreds did not generate more net benefits than indigenous goats in Ethiopian smallholdings[J]. Agricultural Systems. 2003,76(3):1137-1156.
[5]Ayoub, Ali Taha.Extent, severity and causative factors of land degradation in the Sudan[J] Journal of Arid Environments.1998,38(3):397-409.
[6]Baucells, Manel, and Antonio Villasis. Stability of risk preferences and the reflection effect of prospect theory[J].Theory and Decision.2010,68(1-2):193-211.
[7]Beedell, Jason, and Tahir Rehman.Using social-psychology models to understand farmers' conservation behaviour[J].Journal of rural studies.2000,16(1):117-127.
[8]Behnke, JR, and H Roy.Measuring the benefits of subsistence versus commercial livestock production in Africa[J].Agricultural Systems.1985,16(2):109-135.
[9]Bergman, Oscar, Tore Ellingsen, Magnus Johannesson, et al.Anchoring and cognitive ability[J].Economics letters.2010,107(1):66-68.
[10]Bernoulli, Daniel.Daniellis Bernouilli... Hydrodynamica, sive de Viribus et motibus fluidorum commentarii, opus academicum[M].Sumptibus Johannis Reinholdi Dulseckeri,1738.
[11]Bischoff, Ivo.Endowment effect theory, prediction bias and publicly provided goods:an experimental study[J].Environmental and Resource Economics.2008,39(3):283-296.
[12]Burton, Rob JF.Seeing through the 'good farmer's' eyes:towards developing an understanding of the social symbolic value of 'productivist'behaviour[J].Sociologia Ruralis.2004,44(2):195-215.
[13]Burton, Rob, Carmen Kuczera, and Gerald Schwarz.Exploring Farmers' Cultural Resistance to Voluntary Agri-environmental Schemes[J].Sociologia Ruralis.2008,48(1):16-37.
[14]Cohen, Michele, and Jean-Yves Jaffray. Approximations of rational criteria under complete ignorance and the independence axiom[J].Theory and Decision.1983,15(2):121-150.
[15]Craine, Joseph M, Troy W Ocheltree, Jesse B Nippert, et al.Global diversity of drought tolerance and grassland climate-change resilience[J].Nature Climate Change.2012.
[16]De Ridder, N, and KT Wagenaar.Energy and protein balances in traditional livestock systems and ranching in eastern Botswana[J].Agricultural Systems.1986,20(1):1-16.
[17]Devendra, C.Goats:challenges for increased productivity and improved livelihoods[J].Outlook on Agriculture.1999,28(4):215-226.
[18]Edwards-Jones, GModelling farmer decision-making:concepts, progress and challenges[J]. Animal science.2006,82(6):783.
[19]Edwards, Ward.The theory of decision making[J]. Psychological bulletin.1954,51(4):380.
[20]Edwards, Ward.Subjective probabilities inferred from decisions[J].Psychological review.1962,69:109.
[21]Esch, Franz-Rudolf, Bernd H Schmitt, Joern Redler, et al.The brand anchoring effect:A judgment bias resulting from brand awareness and temporary accessibility[J].Psychology & Marketing.2009,26(4):383-395.
[22]Flemming, Timothy M, Owen D Jones, Laura Mayo, et al.The endowment effect in orangutans[J].International Journal of Comparative Psychology.2012,25:285-298.
[23]Frederick, Shane.Cognitive reflection and decision making[J].The Journal of Economic Perspectives.2005,19(4):25-42.
[24]Guerin, LJ, and TF Guerin.Constraints to the adoption of innovations in agricultural research and environmental management:a review[J]. Animal Production Science. 1994,34(4):549-571.
[25]Halevy, Yoram.Strotz meets Allais:Diminishing impatience and the certainty effect[J].The American Economic Review.2008,98(3):1145-1162.
[26]Han, G.D., L. Na, M.L. Zhao, et al.Changing livestock numbers and farm management to improve the livelihood of farmers and rehabilitate grasslands in desert steppe:a case study in Siziwang Banner, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region[J].development of sustainable livestock systems on grasslands in north-western china.2011:80-96.
[27]Han, JG, YJ Zhang, CJ Wang, et al.Rangeland degradation and restoration management in China[J].The Rangeland Journal.2008,30(2):233-239.
[28]Harbaugh, William T, Kate Krause, and Lise Vesterlund.Are adults better behaved than children? Age, experience, and the endowment effect[J]. Ecnomic letters.2001, 70(2):175-181.
[29]Harris, Richard B.Rangeland degradation on the Qinghai-Tibetan plateau:a review of the evidence of its magnitude and causes[J] Journal of Arid Environments.2010,74(1):1-12.
[30]Haynes, RJ.The decomposition process:mineralization, immobilization, humus formation, and degradation[J].Mineral nitrogen in the plant-soil system.1986:52-126.
[31]Herzon, Irina, and Merit Mikk.Farmers' perceptions of biodiversity and ther willingness to enhance it through agri-environment schemes:A comparative study from Estonia and Finland[J].Journal for Nature Conservation.2007,15(1):10-25.
[32]Hunt, HW, MJ Trlica, EF Redente, et al.Simulation model for the effects of climate change on temperate grassland ecosystems[J].Ecological Modelling.1991,53:205-246.
[33]Juan, JA de, JM Tarjuelo, M Valiente, et al.Model for optimal cropping patterns within the farm based on crop water production functions and irrigation uniformity I:Development of a decision model[J].Agricultural Water Management.1996,31(1):115-143.
[34]Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L Knetsch, and Richard H Thaler.Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem[J] Journal of political Economy.1990:1325-1348.
[35]Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L Knetsch, and Richard H Thaler.Anomalies:The endowment effect, loss aversion and status quo bias[J].The Journal of Ecnomic Perspectives.1991,5(1):193-206.
[36]Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.Subjective probability:A judgment of representativcness[J].Cogniti ve psychology.1972,3(3):430-454.
[37]Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.Prospect theory:An analysis of decision under risk[J].Econometrica:Journal of the Econometric Society.1979:263-291.
[38]Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.Choices, frames and values[J].The American Psychologist.1984,39(4):341-350.
[39]Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.Choices, values, and frames[M].Cambridge University Press,2000.
[40]Kaufmann, Brigitte A.Second-order cybernetics as a tool to understand why pastoralists do what they do[J].Agricultural Systems.2011,104(9):655-665.
[41]Kemp, D., C. Brown, GD Han, et al.Chinese grasslands:problems, dilemmas and finding solutions[J].Development of sustainable livestock systems on grasslands in north-western China'. ACIAR Proceedings.2011,(134):12-23.
[42]Kemp, DR, and DL Michalk.Towards sustainable grassland and livestock management[J].Journal of Agricultural Science.2007,145(6):543.
[43]Knetsch, Jack L, and John A Sinden.Willingness to pay and compensation demanded: Experimental evidence of an unexpected disparity in measures of value[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics.1984,99(3):507-521.
[44]Knetsch, Jack L, and Wei-Kang Wong.The endowment effect and the reference state: Evidence and manipulations[J].Journal of Ecnomic Behavior & Orgazation. 2009,71(2):407-413.
[45]Lau, Annie, and Enrico W Coiera.Do people experience cognitive biases while searching for information?[J].Journal of the American Medical Informatics Assocation.2007,14(5): 599-608.
[46]Laury, Susan K, and Charles A Holt.Further reflections on the reflection effect[J].Research in Experimental Economics.2008,12:405-440.
[47]List, John A.Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? [J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics.2003,118(1):41-71.
[48]Liu, Weixing, Zhe Zhang, and Shiqiang Wan.Predominant role of water in regulating soil and microbial respiration and their responses to climate change in a semiarid grassland[J].Global Change Biology.2009,15(1):184-195.
[49]Loomes, Graham, and Robert Sugden.Incorporating a stochastic element into decision theories[J].European Economic Review.1995,39(3):641-648.
[50]Loughran, Thomas A, Greg Pogarsky, Alex R Piquero, et al.Re-examining the functional form of the certainty effect in deterrence theory[J]. Justice Quarterly.2012a,29(5):712-741.
[51]Loughran, Thomas A, Greg Pogarsky, Alex R Piquero, et al.Reassessing the certainty effect in deterrence theory:using insight from prospect theory [J].Justice Q (forthcoming).2012b.
[52]MacDonald, HF, and James Michael Bowker.The endowment effect and WTA:a quasi-experimental test[J].Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics.1994,26:545-545.
[53]Macdonald, KA, D Beca, JW Penno, et al. Effect of stocking rate on the economics of pasture-based dairy farms[J]. Journal of dairy science.2011,94(5):2581-2586.
[54]Macdonald, KA, JW Penno, JAS Lancaster, et al.Effect of stocking rate on pasture production, milk production, and reproduction of dairy cows in pasture-based systems[J].Journal of dairy science.2008,91 (5):2151-2163.
[55]Mathijs, Erik.Social capital and farmers' willingness to adopt countryside stewardship schemes[J].Outlook on Agriculture.2003,32(1):13-16.
[56]Michalk, DL, Hua Limin, David Kemp, et al.Redesigning livestock systems to improve household income and reduce stocking rates in China's western grasslands.//Towards Sustainable Use of Rangelands in North-West China.301-324:Springer,2010.
[57]Moxey, AP.The economic component of NELUP[J].Journal of Environmental Planning and Management.1995,38(1):21-34.
[58]Neumann, J von, and Oskar Morgenstern.Theory of gamesand ecnomic behavior[M]. Priceton, NJ:Priceton University Press,1944.
[59]Neupane, Ramji P, Khem R Sharma, and Gopal B Thapa.Adoption of agroforestry in the hills of Nepal:a logistic regression analysis[J]. Agricultural Systems.2002,72(3):177-196.
[60]Nkonya, Ephraim, Ted Schroeder, and David Norman.Factors affecting adoption of improved maize seed and fertiliser in northern Tanzania[J]. Journal of Agricultural Economics. 1997,48(1):1-12.
[61]Oldeman, LR.The global extent of soil degradation[J].Soil resilience and sustainable land use.1994:99-118.
[62]Oldeman, LR, RTA Hakkeling, and Wim G Sombroek.World map of the status of human-induced soil degradation:an explanatory note[M].International Soil Reference and Information Centre,1990.
[63](?)rskov, ER, and EF Viglizzo.The role of animals in spreading farmers' risks:a new paradigm for animal science[J].Outlook on Agriculture.1994,23.
[64]Parton, WJ, JMO Scurlock, DS Ojima, et al.Impact of climate change on grassland production and soil carbon worldwide[J].Global Change Biology,1995,1(1):13-22.
[65]Popkin, Samuel L.The rational peasant[M].University of California Press,1979.
[66]Pratt, John W.Risk Aversion in the small and in the large[J].Econometrica:Journal of the Econometric Society.1964:122-136.
[67]Samuelson, Paul A, and William D Nordhaus.Economics.[M].Irwin, McGraw-Hill,1998.
[68]Samuelson, William, and Richard Zeckhauser. Status quo bias in decision making[J].Journal of risk and uncertainty.1988,1(1):7-59.
[69]Savage, L.The Foundations of Statistics Wiley, New York[J].Develops the expected utility Theory of economics for making decision with complete subjective probabilistic information.1954.
[70]Savage, Leonard J.Allais' Paradox[J].Gardenfors and Sahlin (eds.).1953,1988:163-5.
[71]Scoones, Ian.The economic value of livestock in the communal areas of southern Zimbabwe[J].Agricultural Systems.1992,39(4):339-359.
[72]Sheikh, AD, T Rehman, and CM Yates.Logit models for identifying the factors that influence the uptake of new 'no-tillage'technologies by farmers in the rice-wheat and the cotton-wheat farming systems of Pakistan's Punjab[J].Agricultural Systems.2003,75(1):79-95.
[73]Simon, Herbert A Administrative behavior[M]. New York:The Free Press,1947.
[74]Simon, Herbert A.Rational choice and the structure of the environment[J].Psychological review.1956,63(2):129-138.
[75]Simon, Herbert A. Theories of bounded rationnality[J]. Decision and orgazation. 1972,1:161-176.
[76]Simon, Herbert A.Bounded rationnality[J].The new Palgrave:Utility and probality. 1987:15-18.
[77]Simon, Herbert A, Massimo Egidi, Riccardo Viale, et al.Economics, bounded rationality and the cognitive revolution[M].Edward Elgar Publishing,2008.
[78]Simon, Herbert Alexander.Models of bounded rationality:Empirically grounded economic reason[M].Volume 3:MIT Press (MA),1982.
[79]Solano, C, H Leon, E" Perez, et al.The role of personal information sources on the decision-making process of Costa Rican dairy farmers[J] Agricultural Systems.2003,76(1): 3-18.
[80]Stewart, Richard E, and Barbara D Stewart.The loss of the certainty effect[J].Risk Management and Insurance Review.2001,4(2):29-49.
[81]Takahashi, T., and R. Jones.2011 Steady-state modelling for better understanding of current livestock production systems and exploring optimal short-term strategies. In 'Development of sustainable livestock systems on grasslands in north-western China', ed. by DR Kemp and DL Michalk. ACIAR Proceedings,2011, pp.26-35.
[82]Tarjuelo, JM, JA De Juan, M Valiente, et al.Model for optimal cropping patterns within the farm based on crop water production functions and irrigation uniformity II:A case study of irrigation scheduling in Albacete, Spain[J].Agricultural Water Mangaement.1996,31(1): 145-163.
[83]Teversy, A, and D Kahneman. Judgment under uncertainty:heuristics and biases[J].Science. 1974,185(4157):1124-1131.
[84]Thaler, Richard.Toward a positive theory of consumer choice[J] Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization.1980,1 (1):39-60.
[85]Theurillat, Jean-Paul, and Antoine Guisan.Potential impact of climate change on vegetation in the European Alps:a review[J].Climatic change.2001,50(1-2):77-109.
[86]Thornley, JHM, and MGR Cannell.Temperate grassland responses to climate change:an analysis using the Hurley pasture model[J]. Annals of Botany.1997,80(2):205-221.
[87]Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman.The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice[J].Science.1981,211 (4481):453-458.
[88]Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman.Availability:A heuristic for judging frequency and probability[J].Cognitive psychology.1973,5(2):207-232.
[89]Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman.Rational choice and the framing of decisions[J].Journal of business.1986:S251-S278.
[90]Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. Loss aversion in riskless choice:A reference-dependent model[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics.1991,106(4):1039-1061.
[91]Vanslembrouck, Isabel, Guido Huylenbroeck, and Wim Verbeke.Determinants of the Willingness of Belgian Farmers to Participate in Agri-environmental Measures[J].Journal of Agricultural Economics.2002,53(3):489-511.
[92]Venkatachalam, L.Behavioral economics for environmental policy[J]. Ecological Ecnomics. 2008,67(4):640-645.
[93]Villainil, Maria Bonita, Nilda Mabel Amiotti, and Norman Peinemann.Soil degradation related to overgrazing in the semi-arid southern Caldenal area of Argentina[J].Soil Science.2001,166(7):441-452.
[94]Wallace, Michael T, and Joan E Moss.Farmer Decision-making with Conflicting Goals:A recursive strategic programming analysis[J].Journal of Agricultural Economics.2002,53(1): 82-100.
[95]Wauters, Erwin, Charles Bielders, Jean Poesen, et al.Adoption of soil conservation practices in Belgium:An examination of the theory of planned behaviour in the agri-environmental domain[J].Land use policy.2010,27(1):86-94.
[96]Wezel, A, and S Bender.Degradation of agro-pastoral village land in semi-arid southeastern Cuba[J].Journal of Arid Environments.2004,59(2):299-311.
[97]Willock, Joyce, Ian J Deary, Gareth Edwards-Jones, et al.The Role of Attitudes and Objectives in Farmer Decision Making:Business and Environmentally-Oriented Behaviour in Scotland[J].Journal of Agricultural Economics.1999,50(2):286-303.
[98]Yu, F. F., K. P. Price, J. Ellis, et al.Response of seasonal vegetation development to climatic variations in eastern central Asia[J].Remote Sensing of Environment.2003,87(1):42-54.
[99]Zhao, Wei, Shi-Ping Chen, Xing-Guo Han, et al.Effects of long-term grazing on the morphological and functional traits of Leymus chinensis in the semiarid grassland of Inner Mongolia, China[J].Ecological research.2009,24(1):99-108.
[100]Zheng, Y., Z. Xu, D. Kemp, et al.Modeling Optimal Grazing Management for Grassland Rehabilitation on the Typical Steppe:A Case Study in Taipusi Banner, Inner Mongolia, China[J].The Philippine Agricultural Scientist.2011,93(4).
[101]敖仁其.草原产权制度变迁与创新[J].内蒙古社会科学(汉文版).2003,(4)：116-120.
[102]包乌日乐.牧户草原流转行为研究[D].呼和浩特：内蒙古大学,2012.
[103]宝希吉日,根锁,乌日根巴雅尔.牧户草场经营行为的实证分析——基于内蒙古锡林郭勒盟三个旗(市)的牧户调查数据[J].中国农村经济.2012,(9)：26-36.
[104]蔡博峰.内蒙古巴林右旗草场退化问题探析[J].中国人口.资源与环境.2003,(4)：120-121.
[105]柴军,张陆彪,毛炜峄.基于PP回归技术的草地退化驱动因子影响力研究——以新疆阿勒泰牧区为例[J].农业技术经济.2009,(2)：96-100.
[106]陈秋红.草原生态敏感地区牧户畜牧业生产经营行为及影响因素分析[J].农业技术经济.2010,(11)：65-75.
[107]陈烨.蒙古族文化的生态学思考[J].内蒙古社会科学(汉文版).2001,5.
[108]成盛超,谢如贤,吴健中.效用理论的历史与现状[J].系统工程理论与实践.1994,(12)：16-21.
[109]达林太,娜仁高娃.对内蒙古草原畜牧业过牧理论和制度的反思[J].北方经济.2010,(11)：32-35.
[110]达林太,郑易生.真过牧与假过牧——内蒙古草地过牧问题分析[J].中国农村经济.2012,(5)：4-18.
[111]邓大才.社会化小农：动机与行为[J].华中师范大学学报：人文社会科学版.2006,45(3)：9-16.
[112]邓汉慧,张子刚.西蒙的有限理性研究综述[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学 版).2004,(6)：37-41.
[113]董志勇.行为经济学原理[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2006.
[114]哈耶克.个人主义与经济秩序[M].上海：生活.读书.新知三联书店,2003.
[115]韩颖.温性荒漠草原牧户对气候变化的感知和适应的实证研究——以内蒙古苏尼特右旗为例[D].北京：中国农业科学院,2011.
[116]郝伯特.西蒙.现代决策理论的基石：有限理性说[M].杨砾and徐立,译.北京：北京经济学院出版社,1989.
[117]侯向阳,尹燕亭,运向军,等.北方草原牧户心理载畜率与草畜平衡模式转移研究[J].中国草地学报.2013,35(1)：1-11.
[118]侯向阳,尹燕亭,运向军,等.中国北方草原退化治理和草畜平衡模式转移研究[J].内蒙古草业.2012,(4)：6-14.
[119]侯向阳.2004草业科技发展重点问题研究.中国草学会第六届二次会议暨国际学术研讨会,中国呼和浩特,2004,pp.7.
[120]黄成.行为决策理论及决策行为实证研究方法探讨[J].经济经纬.2006,(5)：102-105.
[121]黄宗智.长江三角洲小农家庭与乡村发展[M].中华书局,2000.
[122]贾树海,崔学明,李绍良,等.牧压梯度上土壤理化性质的变化.／／中国科学院内蒙古生态系统定位站.草原生态系统研究(第5集).12-1,1995.
[123]蒋全民,王梦琳,任继周,等.草畜平衡：刻不容缓的百年方略[J].四川草原.2003,(6)：52-56.
[124]颉耀文,徐建华.基于3S技术的土地详查方法创新[J].国土资源遥感.2002,2(4).
[125]李爱梅.心理账户与非理性经济决策行为的实证研究[D]：暨南大学,2006.
[126]李博.中国北方草地退化及其防治对策[J].中国农业科学.1997,(6)：2-10.
[127]李怀祖.决策理论导引[M].北京：北京机械工业出版社,1993.
[128]李金花,潘浩文,王刚.内蒙古典型草原退化原因的初探[J].草业科学.2004,(5)：49-51.
[129]李青丰,刘天明.草畜平衡管理——以时间机制调控的思路[J].中国草地.2005,(1)：73-75.
[130]李素英,李晓兵,王丹丹.基于马尔柯夫模型的内蒙古锡林浩特典型草原退化格局预测[J].生态学杂志.2007,(1)：78-82.
[131]李晓兵,陈云浩,张云霞,等.气候变化对中国北方荒漠草原植被的影响[J].地球科学进展.2002,(2)：254-261.
[132]李秀兰.效用理论及其应用[J].山东师大学报(自然科学版).2001,16(63)：354-356.
[133]李永宏.放牧空间梯度上和恢复演替时间梯度上羊草草原的群落特征及其对应性[J].草原生态研究.1992,4：1-8.
[134]李永宏.内蒙古草原草场放牧退化模式研究及退化监测专家系统雏议[J].植物学通报.1993,,(S1)：42.
[135]李永宏.内蒙古锡林河流域羊草草原和大针茅草原在放牧影响下的分异和趋同[J].植物生态学与地植物学学报.1988,(3)：27-34.
[136]刘爱军,邢旗,倪小光,等.内蒙古天然草地现状与风沙源区植被变化分析[J].内蒙古草业.2003,(01)：25-27.
[137]刘艳,卫智军,杨静,等.短花针茅草原不同放牧制度的植物补偿性生长[J].中国草地.2004,(3)：19-24.
[138]刘媛媛,张文秀.微观主体行为对草地退化的影响及原因分析——基于川西北牧区两县牧户的调查[J].四川农业大学学报.2008,(1)：81-84.
[139]刘钟龄,王炜,郝敦元,等.内蒙古草原退化与恢复演替机理的探讨[J].干旱区资源与环境.2002,(1)：84-91.
[140]龙迪.效用理论回顾[J].科技信息(科学教研).2007,(36)：521+563.
[141]吕晓英.西部主要牧区气候暖干化及草地畜牧业可持续发展的政策建议[J].农业经济问题.2003,(7)：51-55+80.
[142]吕子君,卢欣石,辛晓平.中国北方草原沙化现状与趋势[J].草地学报.2005,(S1)：24-27.
[143]彭克明.农业化学：总论[M].农业出版社,1990.
[144]普劳斯.决策与判断[M].施俊琦and王星,译.北京：人民邮电出版社,2004.
[145]齐顾波,胡新萍.草场禁牧政策下的农民放牧行为研究——以宁夏盐池县的调查为例[J].中国农业大学学报(社会科学版).2006,(2)：12-16.
[146]任海彦,郑淑霞,白永飞.放牧对内蒙古锡林河流域草地群落植物茎叶生物量资源分配的影响[J].植物生态学报.2009,(6)：1065-1074.
[147]任继周,王钦,牟新待,等.草原生产流程及草原季节畜牧业[J].中国农业科学.1978,2(8)：87-92.
[148]戎郁萍,韩建国,王培,等.放牧强度对草地土壤理化性质的影响[J].中国草地.2001,23(4)：41-47.
[149]舒尔茨.改造传统农业[M].商务印书馆,1987.
[150]苏吉安,朱幼军,哈斯.内蒙古草地生态问题及其对策探讨[J].中国草地.2003,(6)：69-72.
[151]仝川,郗风江,杨景荣,等.锡林河流域中游草原植被退化遥感监测及合理放牧强度的确定[J].草业学报.2003,(4)：78-83.
[152]汪诗平,李永宏.内蒙古典型草原退化机理的研究[J].应用生态学报.1999,(4)：54-58.
[153]汪诗平,王艳芬.不同放牧率下糙隐子草种群补偿性生长的研究[J].植物学报.2001,(4)：413-418.
[154]汪诗平,王艳芬,陈佐忠.放牧生态系统管理[M].科学出版社,2003.
[155]王卉.草原管理政策不能“一刀切”[N].科技时报：A1,2010.
[156]王炜,梁存柱,刘钟龄,等.草原群落退化与恢复演替中的植物个体行为分析[J].植物生态学报.2000b,(3)：268-274.
[157]王炜,梁存柱,刘钟龄,等.羊草+大针茅草原群落退化演替机理的研究[J].植物生态学报.2000a,(4)：468-472.
[158]王炜,刘钟龄,郝敦元,等.内蒙古草原退化群落恢复演替的研究—Ⅰ.退化草原的基本特征与恢复演替动力[J].植物生态学报.1996,(5)：449-459.
[159]王炜,刘钟龄,郝敦元,梁存柱.内蒙古草原退化群落恢复演替的研究—Ⅱ.恢复演替时间进程的分析[J].植物生态学报.1996,(5)：460-471.
[160]卫智军,乌日图,达布希拉图,等.荒漠草原不同放牧制度对土壤理化性质的影响[J].中国草地.2005,27(5)：6-10.
[161]谢双红.北方牧区草畜平衡与草原管理研究[D]：中国农业科学院,2005.
[162]辛翔飞,秦富.影响农户投资行为因素的实证分析[J].农业经济问题.2005,(10)：36-39+81.
[163]邢旗,双全,金玉,等.草甸草原不同放牧制度群落物质动态及植物补偿性生长研究[J].畜牧与饲料科学.2010,(Z1)：274-277.
[164]邢旗,双全,金玉,等.草甸草原不同放牧制度群落物质动态及植物补偿性生长研究[J].中国草地.2004,(5)：27-32.
[165]徐勇,邓大才.社会化小农：解释当今农户的一种视角[J].学术月刊.2006,7：5-13.
[166]闫瑞瑞,卫智军,辛晓平,等.放牧制度对荒漠草原生态系统土壤养分状况的影响[J].生态学报.2010,(1)：43-51.
[167]杨理,侯向阳.对草畜平衡管理模式的反思[J].中国农村经济.2005b,(9)：62-66.
[168]杨理,侯向阳.以草定畜的若干理论问题研究[J].中国农学通报.2005a,(3)：346-349.
[169]杨婷婷,吴新宏,李鹏,等.中国北方草原区县域气候变化脆弱性评价指标体系构建和分析[J].干早区资源与环境.2012,(1)：113-116.
[170]尹燕亭,侯向阳,运向军.气候变化对内蒙古草原生态系统影响的研究进展[J].草业科学.2011,(6)：1132-1139.
[171]尹燕亭,侯向阳,丁勇,等.荒漠草原区畜牧业对气候变化的响应研究——以内蒙古苏尼特右旗为例[J].干旱区资源与环境.2012,(8)：153-160.
[172]尤莉,沈建国,裴浩.内蒙古近50年气候变化及未来10～20年趋势展望[J].内蒙古气象.2002,4：14-18.
[173]运向军,卫智军,杨静,等.禁牧休牧短花针茅草原地上现存量与土壤含水量的关系[J].中国草地学报.2010,(2)：75-79.
[174]张杰.西蒙的有限理性说与卡尼曼的行为经济思想比较研究[D].上海：上海社会科学院,2009.
[175]张林秀,徐晓明.农户生产在不同政策环境下行为研究—农户系统模型的应用[J].农业技术经济.1996,(4)：27-32.
[176]赵成章,龙瑞军,马永欢,等.草地产权制度对过度放牧的影响——以肃南县红石窝乡的调查为例[J].草业学报.2005,(1)：1-5.
[177]钟方雷,樊胜岳.河西走廊祁连山区牧户经济行为分析——以肃南县为例[J].人文地理.2005,(5)：118-123.
[178]周国梅,傅小兰.决策的期望效用理论的发展[J].心理科学.2001,,(2)：219-220.
[179]周纪纶,郑师章,杨持.植物种群生态学[M].高等教育出版社,1992.
[180]周圣坤,刘娟.草场退化：牧民认知与对策的个案研究[J].农业经济.2009,(4)：24-26.
[181]周圣坤.草场资源：牧民视角的利用和管理——对内蒙—纯牧区嘎查(村)的个案研究[J].农业经济.2008,(7)：42-45.