农户生计恢复力对多维贫困的影响——来自陕西易地扶贫搬迁地区的证据.

This research extended the theory of resilience of the social-ecological system to the study of rural households’ livelihood system. Based on the survey data of over 900 samples obtained in the poverty alleviation relocation areas of Shaanxi Province, this study used the space vector method of System Engineering to measure livelihood resilience from the two dimensions of general resilience and specific resilience. This research also used the A-F method to measure the multidimensional poverty of rural households from the three dimensions of education, health and living standards, and finally applied the threshold regression model to analyze the impact of livelihood resilience on rural households’ multidimensional poverty. The research found that:（1） The livelihood resilience of relocated households（0.207 5） was significantly lower than that of local households（0.255 9）, and thus relocated households in the process of livelihood reconstruction had the risk of returning to poverty to a certain degree.（2） Increasing the diversification of livelihoods had become an important strategy for rural households to resist risks, but there were risks of livelihood transformation simultaneously.（3） The livelihood resilience significantly reduced the multidimensional poverty of rural households, but its marginal effect would enter the ‘bottleneck period’ as the livelihood resilience crossed the threshold: the marginal effect of general resilience to multidimensional poverty levels diminished, while the specific resilience weakened the effect of poverty reduction before crossing the threshold, presenting a positive impact on multi-dimensional poverty. So effective policies should be implemented to make them avoid multidimensional poverty.（4）Although the assistance measures played a positive role in the process of livelihood resilience, the threshold（0.247 6） for relocated households to fall into the multidimensional poverty trap was lower than that of local households（0.321 5）. Based on the above conclusions, this paper puts forward some suggestions: firstly, we should fully understand the implications of poverty, and make more explorations in eliminating social injustice, improving social security, and solving the lack of endogenous power of the poor. Secondly, we should develop industries according to local conditions, and create multiple employment opportunities. Thirdly, we should strengthen infrastructure construction and improve the level of public services. Finally, new-type urbanization and rural vitalization strategies should be vigorously promoted so as to break the ‘curse’ of households’ livelihood involution, and fundamentally enhance the ability of the poor to resist risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]