村民参与山林环境治理的现实困境与优化路径研究——以黄山市H村为例
Research on Practical Dilemmas and Optimization Paths of Villagers’ Participation in Mountain Forest Environmental Governance—A Case Study of Village H in Huangshan City
DOI: 10.12677/aep.2026.167120, PDF,   
作者: 刘丹丹, 姬忠圆, 李宏宇, 焦琳琳:大连海洋大学经济管理学院,辽宁 大连;高增琦:大连海洋大学海洋科技与环境学院,辽宁 大连
关键词: 山林环境治理村民参与协同治理参与阶梯生态积分制Mountain Forest Environmental Governance Villagers’ Participation Collaborative Governance Participation Ladder Ecological Point System
摘要: 在乡村振兴、生态文明建设和林长制持续推进的背景下,山林环境治理已成为山区乡村基层治理的重要内容。村民既是山林资源的直接使用者,也是生态治理成果的直接受益者,其参与程度直接影响山林环境治理的持续性与有效性。本文以黄山市H村为案例,综合运用公众参与理论、协同治理理论和公共池塘资源治理理论,在实地走访、半结构式访谈、村级资料整理和政策文本分析基础上,分析H村村民参与山林环境治理的现实困境、形成原因及优化路径。研究发现,H村山林治理已形成“乡镇政府指导–村委会组织–护林员巡查–村民配合”的基本格局,但村民参与仍主要停留在参与阶梯中的“告知–咨询–被动配合”层次,尚未充分进入共同决策、共同监督和共同受益阶段。协同治理网络中,村委会和护林员是关键节点,旅游经营主体、社会组织、外出务工村民与普通农户之间的关系较弱,导致治理资源整合不足。造成上述问题的原因包括生态价值认知不足、生态收益分配不清、基层组织动员方式单一、人口结构失衡、制度化参与平台缺乏等。基于此,本文提出以“生态积分制”为核心的村民参与闭环方案,将巡山护林、森林防火、垃圾分类、生态监督、游客劝导等行为量化为积分,并与村集体分红、公益岗位、小额信贷、评优评先和村规民约约束相衔接,以推动H村山林环境治理由行政动员型向协同共治型转变。
Abstract: Against the backdrop of continuous advancement of rural revitalization, ecological civilization construction and the forest chief system, mountain forest environmental governance has become a vital component of grassroots governance in mountainous villages. As direct users of mountain forest resources and primary beneficiaries of ecological governance outcomes, villagers’ participation level directly determines the sustainability and effectiveness of mountain forest environmental governance. Taking Village H in Huangshan City as a case, this paper adopts public participation ladder theory, collaborative governance theory and common-pool resource theory. On the basis of field investigations, semi-structured interviews, sorting of village-level documents and analysis of policy texts, it analyzes the practical dilemmas, contributing factors and optimization paths of villagers’ participation in mountain forest environmental governance in Village H. The study reveals that a basic governance framework featuring “guidance by township governments, organization by village committees, patrols by forest rangers and coordination by villagers” has taken shape in Village H’s mountain forest management. Nevertheless, villagers’ participation mostly remains at the “information-notice-consultation-passive cooperation” stage on the participation ladder, failing to fully advance to the phases of joint decision-making, joint supervision and shared benefits. Within the collaborative governance network, village committees and forest rangers act as core nodes, while loose connections exist among tourism operators, social organizations, migrant villagers and ordinary farmers, resulting in inadequate integration of governance resources. The underlying causes of these problems include insufficient awareness of ecological value, ambiguous distribution of ecological benefits, simplistic mobilization approaches of grassroots organizations, unbalanced population structure and the lack of institutionalized participation platforms. Accordingly, this paper proposes a closed-loop villagers’ participation mechanism centered on an ecological point system. Activities such as mountain patrol and forest protection, wildfire prevention, garbage classification, ecological supervision and tourist persuasion are quantified into points, which are linked to village collective dividends, public welfare posts, microcredit, merit evaluation and village regulations. This mechanism aims to transform the mountain forest environmental governance model of Village H from administrative mobilization to collaborative co-governance.
文章引用:刘丹丹, 姬忠圆, 高增琦, 李宏宇, 焦琳琳. 村民参与山林环境治理的现实困境与优化路径研究——以黄山市H村为例[J]. 环境保护前沿, 2026, 16(7): 1184-1191. https://doi.org/10.12677/aep.2026.167120

参考文献

[1] 费孝通. 乡土中国[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2012.
[2] Arnstein, S.R. (1969) A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, 216-224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] Ansell, C. and Gash, A. (2008) Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18, 543-571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[4] Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef