農地地主參與造林獎勵政策之決策行為分析

Abstract

我國現行的平地景觀造林政策自2002年實施以來，截至2005年為止，農地地主參與造林面積僅佔整體造林面積之8.53%。由此顯示農地地主參與造林意願不高，將可能使造林政策無法有效達成預定目標。故本研究分析現階段平地造林政策執行與推動上所遭遇之問題，透過問卷調查與計量模型，分析我國現行造林獎勵政策推動上所面臨之問題以及影響農地地主參與意願之因素，並提出相關修正建議。 本研究透過Probit二元選擇模型分析影響雲林縣、台南縣之農地地主參與造林意願之因素。根據實證結果，政府若提高造林獎勵金額度，將可有效提升農地地主參與造林意願。如果將獎勵金額度提高到受訪者對獎勵金額度之認同度提高一個單位，參與造林之機率可提升16.32%；政府若放寬造林面積限制，或發放已成林獎勵金，亦可提升農地地主參與造林之意願，提升參與機率幅度分別為9.2%以及18.16%。此外，農地地主所擁有的農地坵塊面積愈大，其參與造林之意願愈高，農地坵塊面積每增加1公頃可提升55.19%的參與機率。 本研究進一步分析政府若推動彈性獎勵給付方案，農地地主選擇不同彈性方案之決策行為。依據Multinomial Logit 模型之實證結果顯示，若是農地地主認為參與短期彈性方案，會使得其農地機會成本增加之程度愈高，則農地地主會偏向於選擇中長期彈性方案。若是農地地主認為參與長期彈性方案，會使得其未來造林收益增加之程度愈高，農地地主會偏向於選擇中長期彈性方案。此外，農家之農地總面積，對於農地地主選擇中長期彈性方案有正向影響，而農地與其農地地主住家之距離，對於農地地主選擇中長期彈性方案有負面影響。 影響農地地主參與造林意願以及其選擇不同彈性方案之因素，主要為其農地之機會成本、未來造林之預期收入、以及農地面積等。政府若於未來擬定造林政策時，實施彈性獎勵給付方案、發放已成林獎勵金，以及放寬造林面積限制等調整措施，將能降低農地使用的機會成本，以及未來收益之不確定性，應可提升農地地主參與造林之意願。

The policy of afforestation in the plain area was enacted by the Executive Yuan in January 1, 2002. Until 2005, the percentage of the private farmland among the total afforestation area was only 8.53%. Due to the low participation rate of farmer in the afforestation program, the objective of the afforestation policy might be jeopardized. The purpose of this study is to analyze the issues and problems which are related to the implementation of agricultural land afforestation policy in Taiwan. A survey and empirical analysis is conducted to analyze the problems of afforestation and also factors affecting the willingness of farmers participating in the afforestation policy. A probit model is used to analyze the factors affecting farmer’s willingness to participate in the afforestation program. According to the empirical results, if the amount of subsidy is increased, the participation rate of the program will be increased. If the amount of subsidy could be raised to a level which increases the average supporting scale by one point, the probability of farmers’ participation could be increased by 16.32%. If the government reduces the minimum acreage requirement level to the extent that the average supporting scale of farmers increases by one point, the probability of farmers’ participation could be increased by 9.2%. Likewise, if the government offers the subsidy to the matured forest, the probability of farmers’ participation could be increased by 18.16%. The empirical result also shows that the size of the agricultural land plot has positive effect on the willingness of farmers’ participation. If the size of agricultural land plot increases by 1 hectare, the probability of farmers’ participation could be increased by 55.19%. This study analyzes the famers’ choice-making behavior of the flexible afforestation period and subsidy payment if the measure of the afforestation policy is implemented by the government in the future. According to the empirical results of Multinomial Logit model, if the opportunity cost of farmland in the short term program of the flexible subsidy payment is higher, farmers prefer to choose the middle-term or long term program of the flexible subsidy payment. Likewise, if the future revenue of afforestation in the long-term program of the flexible subsidy payment is higher, farmers prefer to choose the middle-term or long-term program of the flexible subsidy payment. In addition, the total area of farmers’ farmland will have a positive effect on farmers’ decision to choose long term program, while the distance between farmland and farmers’ residence will have a negative effect on farmers’ decision to choose the long term program. According to the empirical result, we could generalize several different factors which affect the willingness of farmers’ participation in the afforestation program and the choice of the program of flexible afforestation period and subsidy payment. These factors include the opportunity cost of farmland, the future revenue of afforestation and the area of farmland, etc. Based on these findings, if the government could proposes revised measures to decrease the opportunity cost of the use of farmland and the uncertainty of future revenue of afforestation, such as the flexible afforestation period and subsidy payment, the payment for the matured forest, and the reduction of the minimum acreage requirement for consolidated afforestation, etc., it might enhance the willingness of farmers’ participation in the afforestation program.