“草原环境与牧民生活变迁”专题会议由中国社会科学院社会学所农村环境与社会研究中心（CRESS）组织，于2009年7月27日下午至28日举行，为期一天半。分会共收集论文26篇，19人在会上作报告，有50余人参加了本专题会议。本专题会议分为6个专题：草原产权、传统文化、社区与草原管理、生态移民、牧区可持续发展、草原政策与牧民生计。

在草原产权方面的论述中，盖志毅等指出我国牧区存在土地产权的三个不对称：牧区的土地集体所有权与土地国家所有权不对称，土地集体所有成员之间承包权不对称，草原承包权的明晰与保护草原激励的不对称性。杨理论述了目前草原管理制度存在的两方面的不平等，强调在草原管理体系改革中，保障贫困农牧民收益的机会公平和避免利用草地资源的权利被剥夺是必须首先重视的根本性问题。张倩通过东乌旗与苏尼特左旗和右旗的调查，比较分析了畜草双承包责任制对不同类型的草原畜牧业的影响，强调了理解牧民和草原，以及制定政策的时候要注意草原生态系统的特征，且应认识到牧民和牲畜是该生态系统的一部分。阿德力汗·叶斯汗在其文章中讨论了草原产权的重要性，新疆地区建国后草原产权制度变迁的历史及目前的产权制度的实行所面临的挑战。王建兵等在甘肃草原地区的案例调查比较了完全个体承包制、多户联合承包制、公开竞标承包制和完全禁牧制四种不同的产权制下的农牧民生产生活中的利与弊。

在传统文化部分主要涉及传统文化的价值及传统与现代的关系。恩和介绍了蒙古族传统的“浩特-阿寅勒”体制，认为该制度找到了蒙古高原上经营畜牧业的放牧生态单元，是草原牧区今后发展合作经济的一个出发点，强调了传统游牧智慧的科学性。陈祥军探讨了准噶尔盆地野马野放工程与当地哈萨克牧民传统游牧的生计方式之间的矛盾，强调了当地牧民社会的参与及其利益，以及本土知识的重要性。张雯通过对毛乌素沙地北缘一个嘎查的人类学调查，讨论了20世纪80年代以来国家实施的一套现代制度（草畜承包制度和市场机制）和其中蕴涵的文化（“私有地”的观念和“自然资本化”的态度）如何改变了当地牧民原有的放牧模式、经济形态、合作精神以及自然观念，从而一定程度上加深了草原沙漠化的程度，指出现代性与沙漠化之间具有的逻辑联系。

       在社区与草原管理方面，傅丽通过分析草原管理项目中的各利益相关者的影响，提出由于利益的分化和内部的权力关系，地方参与可能同时具有积极和消极的作用，当地人在发展中的作用需要考虑其对不同利益相关者的各种影响，资源分配的评估是达到公正的发展同时又令地方参与更加有效的关键。付娆通过四川省松潘县一个半农半牧村和一个纯牧村对比案例，研究了放牧制度和社区管理等因素对草场可持续利用的实际影响，肯定了“承包到户、联合放牧”的放牧制度和传统的社区管理模式的作用。张鹤巾在文章中分析了目前政府在牧区广泛推广的奶牛合作社存在的问题，她从组织决策的角度，分析了在“合作社”这个政府推动的集体行动中，奶农和乡村精英作为自由行动者的权力和行为选择，以解释合作社集体行动所遇到的困境。Andreas Wilkes等在其文章中指出了草原管理中存在的“社区迷信”，通过四川省红原县的两个社区的放牧制度案例说明了以社区为基础的草地管理不见得是可持续的管理。

在移民方面，荀丽丽对内蒙某旗的生态移民案例进行研究，认为“生态移民”是一个国家权力深入地方社区的过程，是一个以国家权力为核心的推动力量将传统族群纳入到现代化进程当中的过程  。张倩基于锡林郭勒某乡的案例调查，认为目前生态移民项目的普遍失败，一方面是我国政治体制本身和地方基层政府的特性所造成的，另一方面，移民由于生计的压力往往会回归牧区，通过原有的社会网络来利用资源，反而造成草场使用的混乱，在不确定的和多变的政策下，各相关利用群体采取短视的行为。夏循祥考察了阿拉善地区的生态移民政策，认为该政策忽视了当地生态退化是宏观调控政策失当和市场经济过分掠夺的结果，而简单地以农代牧，造成更为严重的生态恶化，指出蒙族游牧文明及传统生产生活方式有益于保护当地的生态平衡。史俊宏等在其文章中通过文献总结和内蒙古乌拉特中旗的实地调查，分析了草原牧区生态移民的可持续性问题。

牧区可持续发展专题更多地集中在技术层面的探讨上。柴军等使用投影寻踪回归（PPR）技术研究了新疆阿勒泰牧区草地退化驱动因子的影响力。董世魁等在其文章中讨论了全球变化对于牧区可持续发展的不利影响，包括牧业生产系统的崩溃、游牧文化的侵蚀、游牧少数民族文化多样性的丧失。唐新调查了四川两个村庄的产业结构，并从产业结构的角度讨论了草原的可持续发展问题。李颖明在文章中构建了草原可持续发展技术集成系统，进而分析草原制度演变过程以及制度改革与技术进步的内在关系。邓林以四川省甘孜州新龙县为例，探讨适用于长江上游高原牧区这类生态脆弱区域绿色GDP体系性。许英明通过一个草原地区的自然保护区案例，指出自然保护区范围的确定必须根据保护对象和保护目的来确定，不应该因为行政的原因把一些地区排除在外。

草原政策与牧民生计专题在更为开放的层次上讨论了现行的草原政策和牧民生计相关的问题。王晓毅在文章中通过兴安盟一个嘎查的实地调查，讨论了持续的干旱对牧民生计的影响及从长期效果来看，现在应对干旱的手段是否可行的问题，文章认为持续干旱正在造成牧区的普遍贫困化，增加了大牧户的成本，但却打破了小牧户的脆弱平衡；在畜牧业收入占主导地位的情况下，资源占有的不均衡导致了更严重的社会问题；在干旱的条件下，试图通过草原产权制度的改革和补偿性的生态政策经常会在运行过程中导致生态的进一步恶化。白永利等以内蒙锡林郭勒盟正镶白旗等地为例，分析了“围封禁牧、收缩转移、集约经营”为主要内容的生态治理对策造成转变，及转变的前因后果和牧民应对变化的态度和表现。廖祖君介绍了其对四川省松潘县和雅江县的草原围栏建设和牧民定居的调查，分析了该政策对牧民的草场产权制度变迁、放牧方式演变、生计活动变化的综合影响。何苑等介绍了其对甘肃河西农户草原保护意识的调查，在此基础上分析农牧民草原保护意愿的影响因素。阿拉坦宝力格在田野调查的基础上，结合历史档案资料，分析了西辽河流域一个牧业嘎查逐渐转变为农业村落的历史，强调了在制定干旱草原地区的政策时，需要注意生态环境特征，生活方式与生态环境之间和制约与适应关系。

       分会讨论的问题主要从当前草原地区生态退化、牧民贫困、草原利用方式改变的现实及家庭承包经营、生态移民、禁牧休牧等制度和政策出发，关注的核心点主要有：（1）草地产权，讨论了有效的草地产权形式，现行的草地承包经营制的作用和问题，尤其讨论了围栏的目的、作用及生态社会影响。（2）社区自组织管理和地方性知识在草原管理中的作用，重点关注了地方自组织管理与政策、基层行政组织之间的关系。（3）政府在草原环境保护和管理中的角色和定位。（4）草原功能的定位，尤其强调了草原的生态服务和文化功能，相应地讨论了生态补偿的问题。(5)草原生态退化的原因，尤其是放牧对于生态环境和生态退化的影响。

本分会的特色主要在于，基本上集中了国内几大牧区的研究，包括了内蒙、新疆、西藏、甘肃、四川等地，基本上涵盖了目前对于我国草原地区的生态保护、社会经济发展与牧民生计相关的焦点问题，是对我国草原牧区问题的一次系统性地梳理、交流和讨论。

Summary of “Changes in Grassland Environment and Livelihood of Herders” Session

The session of “Changes in Grassland Environment and Livelihood of Herders” was organized by Center for Rural Environmental Social Studies (CRESS), Institute of Sociology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and held during July 27^th to 28^th, lasting for one day and a half. The session collected 26 papers, 19 scholars gave presentations on the meeting and more than 50 people attended the meeting.

       The papers and presentations were divided into six sections: property rights of grassland, traditional culture, community and grassland management, Migration, sustainable development of pastoral area, and grassland policies and herders’ livelihood.

       In the section of property rights of grassland, Gai Zhiyi et al pointed out that there are three asymmetric on the Pastoral Land Ownership in China: asymmetric between the collective ownership and state ownership of land in pastoral area, the asymmetric on operation rights among collective members and the asymmetric between clarifying property rights and incentive to grassland conservation; Yangli demonstrate the two inequalities in China’s grassland institution, emphasized that it is the key problem in the transformation of current institution to ensure the poor herders’ opportunity equity to benefit of and to avoid the deprivation of their rights to use the grassland.  Zhang Qian conducted comparative surveys in East Uzhumuchin Banner and Sunit Left Banner and Sunit Right Banner to compare the impacts of “Household Responsibility System” on grassland animal husbandry in different types of grassland. She emphasized that when understanding herders and grassland and making policies, it is important to consider the characteristics of local ecosystems and consider the herders and livestock as parts of the system. In his paper, Adelihan Yesihan discussed the importance of grassland property systems, the history of grassland property system in Xinjiang since the foundation of P.R.C. and the challenges present property system facing. Wang Jianbin et al conducted a case study in Gansu’s grassland and compared the impacts of four systems, individual operation, joint household operation, public bidding contract and forbidden grazing, on the livelihood of herders.

       The section of traditional culture mainly involved in the value and role of traditional culture and the relationship between modern and tradition. Enkhe introduced the traditional Mongolia system-‘Khot-Ayil System’. He believed this system which found the suitable ecological grazing unit for animal husbandry in Mongolia Plateau can be a start-point for future cooperative economy in pastoral area. He also emphasized the scientific feature of traditional nomadic wisdom. Chen Xiangjun discussed the conflicts between the Wild horses Restoration Project and the livelihoods of local Kazak nomad, emphasizing the participant and interests of local herders and the importance of indigenous knowledge. In a anthropologic study in a Gacha in northern Mu Us Sandy Land, Zhang Wen analyzed how a set of modern system (Household Responsibility System and Market Mechanism) and culture contained in it (sense of ‘privates’ and ‘capitalization of nature’) implemented by the state since 1980’s have changed the original herding pattern, economic mode, cooperation spirit and the ideas about nature of local people, then aggravating the problem of desertification to some extent, based on which she pointed out there are some logistic relationships between modernity and desertification.

In the section of community and grassland management, Fu Li analyzed the impacts of stakeholders on a grassland management program in Inner Mongolia, suggested that local participation could have both positive and negative impacts because of diverse interests and internal power relationships, the role of local people in the development process needs to be mapped with regard to their various impacts of different stakeholders. She believed with an assessment of resource allocation as key to achieving just development processes and simultaneously making local participation more effective. Through a comparative case study in a semi-agricultural semi-pastoral village and a pure pastoral village in Songpan county, Sichuan Province, Fu Rao studied the impacts of factors such as grazing institutions and community management on the sustainable use of grassland, which study affirmed the role of ‘grassland contracted to individual household and grazing in joint-household system’ and traditional community management mode. Zhang Hejin analyzed the problems in the ‘Dairy Cow Coordinate’ widely promoted by the government in her paper. From the organization decision-making's angle, she regarded the coordinate as a collective action initiated by the government, sought for the reason of difficulties the coordinate meets through analyses the authority and behavior choices of both milk farmers and village elites as the free movers in this collective action. Andreas Wilkes et al pointed out in their paper that there existed a ‘myth of community’ in current grassland management. Through two grazing case studies in Hongyuan County in Sichuan, they suggested that community-based management of grasslands is not necessarily sustainable.

In the section of migrants, Xun Lili conducted a case study in ecological migrants in a Banner of Inner Mongolia. She believed that Ecological migration is a process that the state and global capitalism penetrate into the local communities, a process that an ethnic group is incorporated into the modernization project. Zhang Qian, based on a case study in a township in Xinlingol League in Inner Mongolia, contributed part of the popular failure of ecological migrant project to the nature of political institution of Chinese state and local government. And under the pressure of substances, the migrants return to the grassland and use the pasture via social connections which generates chaos in grassland utilization.  She suggested that under policies which are incertitude and changeful, the stakeholders will act based on short-term interests. Xia Xunxiang studied the ecological migrant policy in Alax. He believed that this policy ignored the fact that ecological degradation in Alax resulted from the improper macro policies and over-explorations of the market, while just simply displaced grazing with agriculture, which will result in more serious ecological deterioration. He considered the Mongolia nomadic culture and traditional way of living and producing is beneficial to maintain local ecological balance. Shi Junhong et al. based on literature review and field work in Wulate Midum Banner in Inner Mongolia, discussed the sustainability of ecological migrant project in grassland pastoral area.

The section of sustainable development for pastoral area mainly focused on the technology aspects. Chai Jun et al. studied the driving factors for the degradation in Alta grassland in Xinjiang through PPR method. Dong Shikui et al discussed the negative impacts of global change on the sustainable development of pastoral area in his paper, including the collapse of pastoral production system, erosion of pastoral civilization and loss of pastoral ethno-cultural diversity. Tang Xin surveyed the industry structure of two villages in Sichuan and discussed the sustainable development in grassland area from the perspective of industry structure. Li Yingmin constructed a integrate system of prairie sustainable development technologies in her paper, and analysed the institutional evolution in prairie, as well as the relation between institutional evolution and technology advancement. Deng Lin took Xinling County of Sichuan as an example; explored Green GDP system viable in vulnerable grassland pastoral area of upriver of the Changjiang River. Xu Yingming, based on a natural reserve case in grassland area, pointed out that the boundary of natural reserve should decided according to the conservation objects and goals and should not exclude some areas because of the administrative boundary.   

In the section of grassland policies and livelihood of herders, topics were more open. Topics related to current grassland policies and herders’ livelihood were discussed. Wang Xiaoyi discussed the impacts of persistent drought on local livelihood and whether current measures to coop with drought worked well for the long term perspective in his paper. Based on a case case study in Horqin Sandy Land, he suggested that the poverty has been more serious because of drought, it increased the production cost for rich herders, but broken the vulnerable balance in poor households; the uneven distribution of resource in household brought more social problems in the community; the wrong means to cope with drought, which focused on property and ecological compensation, would intensify the poverty problem in pastoralist. Bai Yongli et al took the case of Zheng Xiang Bai Banner, Xilingol League, Inner Mongolia as an example, explored the transformation resulted from the ecological restoration approaches which were mainly through ‘enclosure and forbidden grazing, concentration and migration, intensive operation’. She analyzed the cause and effects of such transformation and the herders’ attitudes and behaviors response to the transformation.  Liao Zujun introduced his survey about the enclosure and settlement policies in Songpan County and Yajiang County in Sichuan; analyzed the synthesis impacts of these policies on grassland’s property institution, grazing mode and herder’ livelihood. He Yuan et al introduced her surveys about the grassland protection consciousness of herders’ living in Hexi area Gansu, based on which she analyzed the factors that affect the consciousness. Alatan Baolige analyzed the history and process of a pastoral Gacha in Xiliaohe River Drainage Basin gradually changed into a agricultural village in his paper, based on historical records and field survey. He emphasized that it is important to consider the ecological environmental characters and the constraining and adapting between livelihood and ecological environment.

       The discussions of the session started from current situation of grassland degradation, poverty of herders and change of grassland use and from the policies and institutions such as Household Responsibility System, Ecological Resettlement, Rest and Forbidden Grazing. The focal points included: (1) Grassland property right system. Scholars discussed the effective mode of property right system, functions and shortages of current Household Responsibility System in grassland area, especially the objects, effects and social and ecological impacts of fencing. (2) The role of community self-organized management and local knowledge in grassland management, focusing on the relationship between the local self-organized management and policies and grass roots administrative structures. (3) Role of the government in ecological protection and management in grassland. (4) Identity of the grassland and its functions, emphasizing the ecological services and cultural functions. The problems about ecological compensation were discussed as well. (5)Causes of grassland degradation, especially about the impacts of grazing on grassland ecology and ecological degradation.

       This session covered the researches in the main pastoral areas in China, including Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, Gansu, Sichuan and Tibetan, and the focal problems related to the ecological protection, social and economic development and herders’ livelihood in China’s grassland area. It is a systemic analysis, discussion and communication about problems in China’s grassland pastoral area.