返贫风险、生计抵御力与规避策略实践——祁连山国家级自然保护区内8县的调查与分析

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000–6060.2021.06.26

Abstract

Abstract:

The identification and response to farmers’ livelihood risks have always been core issues that require attention regarding rural economic development and social construction procedures. Adequate and high-quality livelihood capital determines the livelihood status of farmers. Farmers also effectively need to minimize livelihood vulnerability, northwest China and sustainably strengthen livelihood risk resilience. After being lifted out of poverty, in particular, poverty-stricken households in ecologically fragile areas are prone to returning to poverty because of livelihood vulnerability. In the new era, enhancing their “resilience” will be the key and focus of poverty alleviation. This research analyzes farmers’ livelihood capital and the risk of returning to poverty in the Qilian Mountains National Nature Reserve, northwest China and sorts out farmers’ risk aversion practices. The correspondence between livelihood characteristics and risk coping techniques of different groups is summarized based on the analysis of the correlation between livelihood risks and livelihood resilience. The study shows that enhancing the responsiveness, adaptability, and resilience of livelihood networks and strengthening the resilience to the risk of returning to poverty, especially for households or broader livelihood systems, can help improve the diversity and effectiveness of farmers’ avoidance strategies and help them acquire sustainable and stable poverty alleviation after eliminating poverty.

Key words: livelihood resilience, risk aversion strategy, poverty alleviation strategy, Qilian Mountains

SHANG Haiyang,SONG Nini. Poverty risk, livelihood resilience and prevention strategy practice: Investigation and analysis of 8 counties in Qilian Mountains National Nature Reserve[J].Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(6): 1784-1795.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Tab. 1

Tab. 2

Tab. 3

Tab. 4

Tab. 5

Risk assessment system for returning to poverty"

	风险变量	变量定义与描述	均值	标准差
健康风险	自身患病风险	是否经常患感冒等常见病（是=1,否=0）	0.485	0.500
		是否有残疾或家族遗传病史（是=1,否=0）	0.193	0.395
		是否有突发性重大疾病（是=1,否=0）	0.264	0.441
	外部环境引起的患病风险	是否患有牲畜瘟疫（是=1,否=0）	0.202	0.402
		是否患有痢疾等常见病（是=1,否=0）	0.223	0.416
		是否患有工业污染引起的疾病（是=1,否=0）	0.195	0.397
	医疗保障不足引起的患病风险	所在地区的医疗条件是否很不完善（是=1,否=0）	0.352	0.478
	医疗保障不足引起的患病风险	是否有家庭成员未取得医疗保险（是=1,否=0）	0.263	0.440
环境风险	极端天气	冻害、暴雨、沙尘暴的发生频率（低=0,高=1）	0.450	0.498
	地质灾害	滑坡、泥石流、地震的发生频率（低=0,高=1）	0.345	0.475
	病虫害流行	病虫害的流行程度（低=0,高=1）	0.355	0.475
	荒漠化或盐碱化	土壤侵蚀状况（不严重=0,严重=1）	0.375	0.484
	地下水矿化	地下水质矿化度（不严重=0,严重=1）	0.308	0.462
	植被损坏及森林破坏	植被破坏或森林破坏的程度（不严重=0,严重=1）	0.427	0.495
	水资源短缺	水资源稀缺度（低=0,高=1）	0.485	0.500
金融风险	农产品价格波动	农产品价格波动的程度（小=0,大=1）	0.370	0.483
	假资农产品	购买假资农产品（假种子或者肥料）的概率（小=0,大=1）	0.378	0.485
	经营战略失误	由于农作物种类选择失误造成亏损（是=1,没有=0）	0.380	0.486
	亏损程度	损失程度（很低=1,比较低=2,一般=3,较高=4,很高=5）	1.256	1.835
	借贷的数量限制	当地信用贷款有数量限制（是=1,没有=0）	0.454	0.498
	融资有限	贷款的门槛设置（很低=1,比较低=2,一般=3,较高=4,很高=5）	2.145	1.171
社会风险	社会网络异质性	家庭成员中有乡村干部/企业家/国企职工（是=1,没有=0）	0.070	0.280
	集体协会	您所在村内是否有集体协会（是=1,没有=0）	0.092	0.290
	社会关系网	与周围朋友或者邻里之间的关系（很差=1,比较差=2,一般=3,较好=4,很好=5）	3.219	1.521
	困难时获得帮助的机会	困难时期外界的帮助作用（没有作用=1,作用不大=2,作用一般=3,作用较大=4,作用很大=5）	3.212	1.559
	社会安全状况	社会治安状况（很差=1,比较差=2,一般=3,较好=4,很好=5）	2.990	1.471
信息风险	农业市场信息的获取度	是否获得种子信息（是=0,否=1）	0.455	0.498
		是否获得良种信息（是=0,否=1）	0.312	0.463
		是否获得饲料信息（是=0,否=1）	0.385	0.487
		是否获得农机服务信息（是=0,否=1）	0.355	0.479
		是否获得农产品市场信息（是=0,否=1）	0.357	0.479
		其他市场信息的可获得性（是=0,否=1）	0.168	0.374

Tab. 5

Tab. 6

Fig. 3

Tab. 7

Link between livelihood capital, livelihood strategies and risk resistance"

生计资本	生计策略	风险抵御力
农村最富裕群体,多以年轻男性为户主的家庭,有受过良好教育的家庭成员;生产性土地资源丰富。	平均的农业收入最高;务农之外非农业生计活动比较最高;经营自有企业、农场;单位时间工资最高。	拥有大量土地并不是其提高生活水平的必要条件,而是取决于是否有机会从事非农就业和自我创业;接受良好的教育对于稳定脱贫非常重要。
经常由年轻男性主导的合作社模式,通过高于平均土地收益的经营方式获取更高的收益;土地的收益高于贫困线。	积极从事非农活动的比例高,畜牧业所占比例也很高;经营活动的收益潜力仍需要充分挖掘。	协会、合作社可以提供风险保险和获得信贷担保;协会可以提供适当的援助,培训其从事新农业生产的技术和帮助其参加非农企业经营。
自然资源丰富,大量的土地和牲畜,家庭成员中以男性、多成年劳动力为主;表现为略低于贫困线。	农业生产收入高,农产品销售量较大;可从事非农活动人数多,预期工资水平较高。	提高市场收益高的作物比例;提升作物品质以获得更高收益;参与合作社获得风险保险、信贷机会。
富力土地资源占有量少,牲畜量少;家庭成员中,年长的男性劳动力为主,“3860部队”的年老群体。	收入很大程度上取决于自给自足的生产;少量参与农场、合作社的劳务雇佣,工资收入低于平均水平。	改善获得非农就业机会;通过培训和教育可以获得更高的工资。挖掘非农小规模创业的潜力,大力引导和激励参与协会、合作社,获得更高收益。
资源贫乏/生活位置优越。生活靠近公路及公共服务设施可获得性好,但缺少土地及牲畜,多以年轻人为主。	能够在非农行业获得相当可观的收入。	改善非农就业的机会。探索、引导小农场的集约经营、创业。
生活在偏远地区,孤立于社会,土地利用率仍有待提高;男性劳动力为主,物质资本存量有限。	以农产品销售为主,但收入较低;平均劳动收入较低;少量的个体经营可以获得更多的劳动报酬。	通过改善农村道路基础设施,提高进入市场的机会。改善公共服务的可获得性。
由年长的女性劳动力为主,人力资本有限,受教育有限;“3860部队”的女性群体。	高度依赖自给生产;农产品销售与非农收入最少。	消除劳动力雇佣中的性别歧视,开拓女性劳动性务工市场。
多劣势并存的群体,在土地、牲畜、可用劳动力等各个方面都存在明显劣势。	高度依赖自给生产,少量的农业销售但收入非常有限;参与非农部门的经营活动较少。	改善农业市场的一体化,改善获得风险保险/信贷的机会,刺激非农部门的创业活动,通过一般性劳动密集型工作和农业基建增长,来刺激对劳动力的需求。

Tab. 7

References 30

[1]	Bhamra R, Dani S, Burnard K. Resilience: The concept, a literature review and future directions[J]. International Journal of Production Research, 2011, 49(18):5375-5393. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2011.563826
[2]	Cannon T, Twigg J. Social vulnerability, sustainable livelihoods and disasters[R]. London: Report to DFID Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance Department (CHAD), 2013.
[3]	Sina D, Chang-Richards A Y, Wilkinson S, et al. A conceptual framework for measuring livelihood resilience: Relocation experience from Aceh, Indonesia[J]. World Development, 2019, 117:253-265. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.01.003
[4]	Singh C, Tebboth M, Spear D, et al. Exploring methodological approaches to assess climate change vulnerability and adaptation: Reflections from using life history approaches[J]. Regional Environmental Change, 2019, 19(8):2667-2682. doi: 10.1007/s10113-019-01562-z
[5]	Kumar S, Mishra A K, Pramanik S, et al. Climate risk, vulnerability and resilience: Supporting livelihood of smallholders in semiarid India[J]. Land Use Policy, 2020, 97:1-12.
[6]	Thulstrup A W. Livelihood resilience and adaptive capacity: Tracing changes in household access to capitals in Central Vietnam[J]. World Development, 2015, 74:352-362. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.05.019
[7]	Sarker M N I, Qian C, Wu M, et al. Vulnerability and livelihood resilience in the face of natural disaster: A critical conceptual review[J]. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 2019, 17(6):12769-12785. doi: 10.15666/aeer/1706_1276912785
[8]	陈传波. 农户风险与脆弱性: 一个分析框架及贫困地区的经验[J]. 农业经济问题, 2005(8):47-50.
	[ Chen Chuanbo. Farmers’ risks and vulnerabilities: An analysis framework and the experience of poor regions[J]. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2005(8):47-50. ]
[9]	谢楠, 张磊, 伏绍宏. 深度贫困地区脱贫户的可持续生计及风险分析——基于凉山彝区812户贫困户的调查[J]. 软科学, 2020, 34(1):139-144.
	[ Xie Nan, Zhang Lei, Fu Shaohong. Sustainability and risk analysis of farmers’ livelihood in deep poverty area: Based on the investigation of 812 poor families in Liangshan[J]. Soft Science, 2020, 34(1):139-144. ]
[10]	Janardan M, Narcisa G P. Mapping the need for adaptation: Assessing drought vulnerability using the livelihood vulnerability index approach in a mid-hill region of Nepal[J]. Climate and Development, 2019, 11(7):607-622. doi: 10.1080/17565529.2018.1521329
[11]	付少平, 石广洲. 乡村振兴背景下脱贫人口面临的生计风险及其防范[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2021, 21(1):19-28.
	[ Fu Shaoping, Shi Guangzhou. Livelihood risk and its prevention of poverty alleviation under the background of rural revitalization[J]. Journal of Northwest A & F University (Social Science Edition), 2021, 21(1):19-28. ]
[12]	董海宾, 李平, 侯向阳. 牧户生计风险应对策略对生计资本的响应研究——以内蒙古为例[J]. 中国草地学报, 2019, 41(6):143-151.
	[ Dong Haibin, Li Ping, Hou Xiangyang. Study on the influence of livelihood capital affecting choice of risk coping strategic for herdsmen: A case of Inner Mongolia[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2019, 41(6):143-151. ]
[13]	Jin J J, Gao Y W, Wang X M, et al. Farmer’s risk preferences and their climate change adaptation strategies in the Yongqiao District, China[J]. Land Use Policy, 2015(47):365-372.
[14]	孙晗霖, 刘新智, 张鹏瑶. 贫困地区精准脱贫户生计可持续及其动态风险研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2019, 29(2):145-155.
	[ Sun Hanlin, Liu Xinzhi, Zhang Pengyao. Study on livelihood sustainability and its dynamic risk of targeted poverty-alleviation households in poverty-stricken areas[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2019, 29(2):145-155. ]
[15]	黎洁. 陕西安康移民搬迁农户的生计适应策略与适应力感知[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016, 26(9):44-52.
	[ Li Jie. Livelihood adaptation strategy and perceived adaptive capacity of rural relocated households in southern Shaanxi Province, China[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2016, 26(9):44-52. ]
[16]	高帅, 史婵, 唐建军. 基于增能赋权视角的农户贫困脆弱性缓解研究——以太行山连片特困地区为例[J]. 中国农村观察, 2020(1):61-75.
	[ Gao Shuai, Shi Chan, Tang Jianjun. The alleviation of household-level poverty vulnerability through ability enhancement and empowerment: A case study of Taihang Mountain contiguous poverty-stricken areas[J]. China Rural Survey, 2020(1):61-75. ]
[17]	刘伟, 黎洁, 徐洁. 连片特困地区易地扶贫移民生计恢复力评估[J]. 干旱区地理, 2019, 42(3):673-680.
	[ Liu Wei, Li Jie, Xu Jie. Evaluation of rural household’s livelihood resilience of the Relocation and Settlement Project in contiguous poor areas[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2019, 42(3):673-680. ]
[18]	李立娜, 何仁伟, 李平, 等. 典型山区农户生计脆弱性及其空间差异——以四川凉山彝族自治州为例[J]. 山地学报, 2018, 36(5):792-805.
	[ Li Lina, He Renwei, Li Ping, et al. Assessment and spatial difference of peasant household’s livelihood vulnerability in representative mountain areas: A case study of Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture of Sichuan, China[J]. Mountain Research, 2018, 36(5):792-805. ]
[19]	杨涛, 陈海, 刘迪, 等. 黄土丘陵沟壑区乡村社区恢复力时空演变及影响因素研究——以陕西省米脂县高渠乡为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2021, 40(2):245-256. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.02.006
	[ Yang Tao, Chen Hai, Liu Di, et al. Spatiotemporal change of rural community resilience in loess hilly-gully region and influencing factors: A case study of Gaoqu Township in Mizhi County, Shannxi Province[J]. Progress in Geography, 2021, 40(2):245-256. ] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.02.006
[20]	苏芳, 殷娅娟, 尚海洋. 甘肃石羊河流域农户生计风险感知影响因素分析[J]. 经济地理, 2019, 39(6):191-197, 240.
	[ Su Fang, Yin Yajuan, Shang Haiyang. Influencing factors of farmers’ livelihood risk perception in Shiyang River Basin of Gansu Province[J]. Economic Geography, 2019, 39(6):191-197, 240. ]
[21]	郭秀丽, 杨彬如. 高寒牧区农户的生计风险及应对策略:以甘南州夏河县为例[J]. 草业科学, 2020, 37(10):2142-2151.
	[ Guo Xiuli, Yang Binru. Livelihood risk and coping strategies of farmers in alpine pastoral areas in China: A case of Xiahe County, Gannan Prefecture[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2020, 37(10):2142-2151. ]
[22]	吴孔森, 刘倩, 张戬, 等. 干旱环境胁迫下民勤绿洲农户生计脆弱性与适应模式[J]. 经济地理, 2019, 39(12):157-167.
	[ Wu Kongsen, Liu Qian, Zhang Jian, et al. Farmers’ livelihood vulnerability and adaptation model in Minqin Oasis under the arid environment stress[J]. Economic Geography, 2019, 39(12):157-167. ]
[23]	刘佳茹, 赵军, 沈思民, 等. 基于SRP概念模型的祁连山地区生态脆弱性评价[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(6):1573-1582.
	[ Liu Jiaru, Zhao Jun, Shen Simin, et al. Ecological vulnerability assessment of Qilian Mountains region based on SRP conceptual model[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(6):1573-1582. ]
[24]	Sharp K. Measuring destitution: Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches in the analysis of survey data[R]. Brighton: IDS Working Paper, 2003.
[25]	李小云, 董强, 饶小龙, 等. 农户脆弱性分析方法及其本土化应用[J]. 中国农村经济, 2007(4):32-39.
	[ Li Xiaoyun, Dong Qiang, Rao Xiaolong, et al. Farmer’s vulnerability analysis methodology and its localization application[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2007 (4):32-39. ]
[26]	杨伦, 刘某承, 闵庆文, 等. 农户生计策略转型及对环境的影响研究综述[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(21):8172-8182.
	[ Yang Lun, Liu Moucheng, Min Qingwen, et al. Review of eco-environmental effect of farmers’ livelihood strategy transformation[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(21):8172-8182. ]
[27]	马艳艳, 赵雪雁, 兰海霞, 等. 重点生态功能区农户的生计风险多维感知及影响因素——以甘南黄河水源补给区为例[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(5):1810-1824.
	[ Ma Yanyan, Zhao Xueyan, Lan Haixia, et al. Livelihood risk multi-dimensional perception and influencing factors in key ecological function area: A case of the Yellow River water supply area of Gannan[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(5):1810-1824. ]
[28]	Poudel S, Funakawa S, Shinjo H, et al. Understanding households’ livelihood vulnerability to climate change in the Lamjung District of Nepal[J]. Environment Development and Sustainability, 2020, 22:8159-8182. doi: 10.1007/s10668-019-00566-3
[29]	Papa C, Nzokou P, Mbow C. Farmer livelihood strategies and attitudes in response to climate change in agroforestry systems in Kedougou, Senegal[J]. Environmental Management, 2020, 66:218-231. doi: 10.1007/s00267-020-01302-8
[30]	李小云, 苑军军, 于乐荣. 论2020后农村减贫战略与政策: 从“扶贫”向“防贫”的转变[J]. 农业经济问题, 2020(2):15-22.
	[ Li Xiaoyun, Yuan Junjun, Yu Lerong. The prospects on the China’s post-2020 rural poverty reduction strategy and policy: Transformation from “Poverty Alleviation” to “Poverty Prevention”[J]. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2020(2):15-22. ]

调查项目	类别	频数/个	有效百分比/%
年龄	≤29岁	420	43.2
	30~39岁	212	21.8
	40~49岁	220	22.6
	50~59岁	84	8.6
	≥60岁	36	3.7
性别	男	476	48.7
性别	女	502	51.3
家庭人口	≤2	80	9.2
	3~4	592	67.7
	5~6	180	20.6
	≥7	22	2.5
受教育程度	小学及以下	272	27.9
	初中	280	28.7
	高中或中专	242	24.8
	大专及以上	182	18.6

资本类型	极小值	极大值	中位数	众数	均值	标准差
人力资本	0.002	0.013	0.008	0.011	0.079	0.067
物质资本	0.000	0.042	0.001	0.003	0.009	0.004
自然资本	0.000	0.049	0.006	0.006	0.007	0.005
金融资本	0.000	0.305	0.072	0.006	0.002	0.002
社会资本	0.000	0.426	0.017	0.007	0.047	0.058
生计资本	0.009	0.676	0.128	0.059	0.143	0.095

方式	频数/户	百分比/%	方式	频数/户	百分比/%
畜牧/养殖业	348	34.87	打工	556	55.88
种植业	630	63.32	个体运输	50	5.03
采集	50	5.13	经商	110	10.15
家庭副业	120	11.96	工资性工作	88	8.84

农户类型	年龄/%					受教育水平/%					户均年收入/元
农户类型	≤29岁	30~39岁	40~49岁	50~59岁	≥60岁	小学及以下	初中	高中或中专	大专	大学及以上	户均年收入/元
纯农户	33.1	31.0	24.2	9.6	2.1	23.8	26.2	22.7	5.3	22.0	7469.4
一兼户	43.3	22.3	20.2	11.6	2.6	19.2	30.8	19.7	5.6	24.8	8747.4
二兼户	43.3	15.4	24.2	8.8	7.9	16.7	26.7	16.3	9.2	31.3	9740.6

变量	资产转换现金	贷款	减少消费	孩子辍学	等待政府救援	外出打工
常数	-0.494 （5.881）	-0.540 （18.778）	-0.463 （14.075）	-2.501 （12.363）	-1.123 （6.685）	0.137 （1.301）
健康风险型	0.358^** （4.437）	0.784^*** （21.039）	0.776 （20.727）	1.023^*** （14.175）	0.919^*** （25.505）	0.788 （9.965）
环境风险性	0.366^** （4.410）	1.085^*** （37.190）	0.960 （29.573）	0.507 （2.951）	1.265^*** （4.347）	0.956^*** （6.554）
金融风险型	0.435^** （4.220）	1.277 （33.224）	0.610^*** （8.314）	0.620 （3.330）	0.796 （12.764）	0.774^*** （11.865）
社会风险型	0.599 （1.584）	1.079 （4.815）	1.493 （7.772）	1.471^** （6.700）	0.804^*** （2.749）	-0.911 （3.213）
信息风险型	-0.382^*** （6.973）	-0.993 （6.129）	-0.829 （3.754）	-0.791^*** （10.048）	-1.022^*** （4.691）	-0.794 （9.459）

Poverty risk, livelihood resilience and prevention strategy practice: Investigation and analysis of 8 counties in Qilian Mountains National Nature Reserve

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 30

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	FENG Yiming, LYU Chunyan, WANG Ling, ZHAO Weijun, MA Xue’e, DU Junlin, HE Junling. Carbon and nitrogen storage and allocation patterns of Picea crassifolia forest with different stand density [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(7): 1133-1144.
[2]	LU Xiongying, LIU Xiande, MA Rui, ZHAO Weijun, JING Wenmao, HE Xiaoling, ZHAO Changxing. Response of Picea crassifolia forest regeneration characteristics to topographic factors in Pailugou watershed of Qilian Mountains [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(4): 604-613.
[3]	WEN Yuhua,LYU Yuemin,LI Zongxing. Changes of extreme precipitation in Qilian Mountains in recent 60 years [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(5): 1199-1212.
[4]	MA Jian,LIU Xiande,HE Xiaoling,WANG Shunli,HE Yongyan,WU Xiurong,ZHAO Jingzhong,MA Xue'e. Structural characteristics and diversity of typical shrub communities in Qilian Mountains [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(5): 1427-1437.
[5]	SONG Jie,LIU Xuelu. Estimation of forest aboveground carbon density in Qilian Mountains National Park based on remote sensing [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(4): 1045-1057.
[6]	SUN Meiping,SHI Jihua,YAO Xiaojun,ZHANG Haiyu,ZHAO Linlin,MA Weiqian. Effects of glacial surface on cloud structure and cloud water content in summer: A case study of the Shulenan Mountain of Qilian Mountains [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(1): 141-148.
[7]	ZHANG Kun, XIAO Yan, HE Zhen-fang, GAO Min. Topography features of Qilian Mountains nature reserve based on SRTM DEM [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(6): 1559-1566.
[8]	LIU Jia-ru, ZHAO Jun, SHEN Si-min, ZHAO Yan-jun. Ecological vulnerability assessment of Qilian Mountains region based on SRP conceptual model [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(6): 1573-1582.
[9]	CHENG Peng, KONG Xiang-wei, LUO Han, LI Bao-zi, WANG Yan-feng. Climate change and its runoff response in the middle section of the Qilian Mountains in the past 60 years [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(5): 1192-1201.
[10]	WANG Qing-tao, ZHAO Chuan-yan, WANG Xiao-ping, HU Shan-shan, LIU Mei-yan, SHI Wen-yu, WANG Xiao-yu, SHAN Wen-rong. Simulating the biomass carbon distribution of young-and-middle aged Picea crassifolia forests based on FAREAST model along altitude gradients [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(5): 1316-1326.
[11]	MA Jian, LIU Xian-de, LI Guang, ZHAO Wei-jun, WANG Shun-li, JING Wen-mao, MA Xue-e. Spatial and temporal variations of soil moisture and temperature of Picea Crassifolia forest in north piedmont of central Qilian Mountains [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(4): 1033-1040.
[12]	QIU Li-sha, HE Yi, ZHANG Li-feng, WANG Wen-hui, TANG Yuan-wei. Spatiotemporal variation characteristics and influence factors of MODIS LST in Qilian Mountains [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(3): 726-737.
[13]	ZHAO Jian-lin, KANG De-kui, PENG Wei-en, WANG Jian-li, SHI Zhong-xing, CHEN Tian-shun, DONG Zhi-yang, WANG Jie, CHANG Zhao-feng. Relative ecological value of vegetation restoration after migrating people from Qilian Mountains to Jingdian Irrigation Area [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(1): 182-189.
[14]	MA Jian, LIU Xian-de, LI Guang, ZHAO Wei-jun, WANG Shun-li, JING Wen-mao, WANG Rong-xin, ZHAO Yong-hong. Evaluation on soil fertility quality of Picea crassifolia forest in middle Qilian Mountains [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2019, 42(6): 1368-1377.
[15]	MA Xinggang, JIA Wenxiong, DING Dan, ZHU Guofeng, GONG Ninggang, XU Xiuting, YUAN Ruifeng. Variation characteristics of δ¹⁷O in precipitation and moisture transports in eastern Qilian Mountains [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2019, 42(3): 517-525.