扶贫效益评价体系的问题与方法.doc

/ / / 如何构建一套科学而适用的效益评价体系，从来都是成功的扶贫行动不可或缺的内容。这对少数民族贫困地区而言，同样如此，而且意义更甚。因为，作为集自然环境复杂性、生态系统脆弱性、经济发展边缘性、社会文化过渡性等多种特殊性的综合叠加区域，民族地区的扶贫效益评价有别于一般汉区，这必然使得在汉区具有普适意义的主流效益评价体系难以真确反映民族地区反贫困政策效果。换言之，民族地区当下的扶贫效益评价体系还存在着诸多不适性。由此，在当前普适评价体系的基础上，针对存在缺陷，注重糅合民族地区的地理与人文特性来修正、重构其扶贫效益评价体系，无疑是一项紧迫任务。How to build a scientific and suitable system of benefit evaluation, has always been successful poverty reduction action indispensable content. This for poor ethnic minority areas, too, and is even more significance. Because, as the complexity of the natural environment, ecosystem vulnerability, marginal economic development, social and cultural transition, and other special overlay area, benefit evaluation for poverty alleviation in ethnic minority areas is different from the general han area, which inevitably makes in han district has the universal significance mainstream efficiency evaluation system is difficult to reflect true national anti-poverty policies in effect. The poverty alleviation efficiency evaluation system in national regions, in other words, there are a lot of discomfort. Thus, in the current universal evaluation system on the basis of in view of the defects, and pay attention to mix geographical and cultural characteristics of ethnic minority areas to revise and reconstruct the poverty alleviation efficiency evaluation system, is an urgent task. 一、民族地区扶贫效益评价体系存在的问题分析First, analysis the problems existing in the benefit evaluation system for poverty alleviation in ethnic minority areas 客观分析民族地区现行的扶贫效益评价体系，应该说经过10多年不断完善，其指标设置日趋多样化。然而，审视各地区的效益评估体系，我们发现，一个共同的特点就是经济效益方面的指标构建几乎替代了扶贫效益评估体系，尤其是财政扶贫资金投入对贫困户的脱贫与增收方面的评估，更是进步惊人。可以说，经济效益评估指标是当前扶贫效益评估体系中发展最为健全的子系统。这对于提高扶贫项目效益评估而言，固然大有裨益，只是我国大多数民族地区位于江河源区、资源源区、生态源区，集自然环境复杂性、生态系统脆弱性、经济发展边缘性、社会文化过渡性于一身，属于国家界定的四大功能区之禁止开发区和限制开发区范围，这样的自然、经济、社会以及文化体系的过渡、交错及融合，既构成民族地区复合生态系统有别于其它任何系统的特殊的复杂性和多样性，也说明了该区众多的景观体系或者说能量和物质体系高度集中在如此狭小有限的空间，其可被替代的概率较大，而且内涵了民族地区各种生态交错过渡带内，两种或多种能量和物质体系彼此间较强的相互依赖性和对干扰的敏感性。也正是基于如此特殊的地理环境特性，国家将民族地区的发展功能定位为提供生态环境产品。由此，显然民族地区扶贫政策的效益评估，在很多时候必须优先考虑生态环境、民族团结、社会稳定等方面的影响。或者说，生态环境等社会效益至少应该与经济效益评估被同等看待。有鉴于此，民族地区目前将经济性指标作为扶贫效益评估重心的做法，难免有失公允，它完全可能对后期的扶贫行动产生误导。这也恰恰解释了为何民族地区的扶贫模式与汉区如出一辙，为何扶贫资金使用存在重工轻农倾向，为何少数民族在成功脱贫之后又迅速返贫，其根本性的原因或许就在于社会效益评估指标缺失致使扶贫导向发生偏差，正所谓经济性增收难抵生态环境输出。Objective analysis of current poverty alleviation efficiency evaluation system in national regions, it should be said that more than ten years continuously improve, the index set has become increasingly diverse. Look at regional performance evaluation system, however, we found that one common feature is the economic efficiency indicators to construct almost replaced the poverty alleviation efficiency evaluation system, especially the financial poverty relief funds for the poor out of poverty and income in terms of evaluation, more progress. Evaluation index of economic benefit, as it were, is the most perfect in the current performance evaluation system for poverty alleviation development subsystems. This for improve the poverty alleviation project benefit evaluation, is beneficial, is our country most of the ethnic minority areas in river source region, source area resources, the ecological source area, complexity of the natural environment, ecosystem vulnerability, borderline of economic development, social and cultural transition at a suit, as defined in the national four big functions of prohibited development zones and restricted development zone, the natural, economic, social and cultural system transition, cross and fusion, is a compound ecological system is different from any other system in national regions of the special complexity and diversity, and also illustrates the area of landscape system or system highly concentrated energy and materials in such a narrow limited space, it can be replaced probability is bigger, and all kinds of ecological connotation of the ethnic areas staggered within the transition zone between two or more energy and matter system strong interdependence and their sensitivity to interference. It is based on the special geographical environment characteristics, countries will function orientation to provide the development of ecological environment in national regions. Thus, obviously benefit assessment policy for poverty alleviation in ethnic minority areas, most of the time must give priority to the ecological environment, national unity, social stability, etc. Or, ecological environment and other social benefits at least should be equal and the economic benefit evaluation. As a result, ethnic minority areas will now economy index as the practice of performance evaluation center of gravity for poverty alleviation, hard to avoid unfair, it is possible for poverty alleviation in the late action misleading. This also explains the ethnic areas of poverty alleviation and han area, why poverty alleviation funds use tend to heavy industry light agriculture, why minority Chinese quickly again after a successful poverty, its fundamental reason probably lies in the loss of social benefit evaluation index alleviation orientation deviation occurs, is the so-called output economy income difficult to ecological environment. 就经济效益评估来说，即便是目前扶贫效益评价中最为健全的指标体系，它仍然存在诸多漏洞。我们仅就扶贫资金效率贡献考核标准来看，在生产总值、总收入、平均收入、减贫人数、万元脱贫率、增收贡献率等一般性指标之外，它缺乏对经济效益进一步量化处理的分析。由于该项量化分析指标的欠缺，民族地区的扶贫效益评估结果通常难以有效引导后期行动安排。这方面最为显著的一个表现就是，扶贫资金的不同投向对贫困户的收入增加贡献分析并不明朗，扶贫资金输出领域与具体投向由于缺少量化依据，在输出方向上多少带有盲目性。同时，由于深入量化分析的不足，不同扶贫模式之间、同一项目不同实施单位之间，也难以进行效益比较与分析。既然没有效益的比较分析，又何来扶贫模式间的有效甄选？除了这一缺陷，经济效益评估的问题之二，则在于间接经济效益与连锁经济反应考核缺失。理论上，经济效益包括直接效益与间接效益两部分，因此，客观的项目效益评估，必须尽可能全面。但是，从目前民族地区扶贫项目的经济效益评估来看，通常只计算直接效益，至于间接经济效益则一笔带过。其中缘由，固然存在间接效益衡量技术较为繁杂的客观限制条件，然而对间接经济效益考核的忽略，完全可能使得扶贫行动错过那些真正具有联动性的综合影响项目。这也部分地回答了我国民族地区扶贫部门与其他部门间的有效衔接与资源整合的难题。In terms of economic benefit evaluation, even the most robust in the poverty alleviation efficiency evaluation index system, it still has many loopholes. We only poverty alleviation funds efficiency contribution assessment standards, the GDP, total revenue, average income of $ten thousand, the number of poverty reduction, TuoPinLv, general indicators such as income contribution, it lacks analysis of economic benefit further quantitative treatment. Due to the lack of quantitative analysis indicators of poverty alleviation in ethnic minority areas benefit evaluation results are usually difficult to effectively guide the late action. This is one of the most significant performance, poverty alleviation funds to different to increase the income of the poor contribution analysis is not clear, poverty alleviation funds output areas and specific to the lack of quantitative basis, in both senders upward with blindness. At the same time, due to lack of thorough quantitative analysis of the different between poverty alleviation mode, different same project implementation unit, also hard to compare benefits and analyze. Since there is no benefit of comparative analysis, and no effective selection between poverty alleviation mode? In addition to this, the problem of economic benefit evaluation, two is lack of assessment of indirect economic benefits and chain reaction. In theory, the economic benefit includes both direct and indirect benefits, therefore, the objective of the project benefit evaluation, must be complete as soon as possible. However, from the current project for poverty alleviation in ethnic minority areas economic benefit evaluation, usually only calculate benefit directly, as for the indirect economic benefits are one has brought. Why, there is indirect benefit objective constraints measure technology is more complex, the ignoring of the assessment of indirect economic benefits, however, entirely possible that poverty alleviation and the real action to miss the effects have been correlated. It also partly answered the poverty alleviation department and other departments in national regions between the effective cohesion and resource integration problem. 此外，就社会效益评估来看，当前民族地区扶贫项目的社会效益考核比较偏向生态环境效益考察。生态环境影响作为是民族地区扶贫项目效益评价的重点之一，需要客观评价。但是社会效益在民族地区至少包含有民族团结、社会稳定、国防安全、文化传承、心理与能力培育等多重含义。而目前将社会效益简单浓缩为生态环境效益考核的做法，无疑致使社会结构变更、民族融合发展、社会平等程度、妇女地位提升、社区文化传承、生活方式变迁、产业结构调整、农村土地流转等诸多内容得不到应有的关注。然而，恰恰是这样一些看似模糊的内容构成了影响民族地区脱贫的至关重要的“民族性”因素，它使得民族地区的社会发展常常进入另一条轨道。仅此而言，对于民族地区这一具有特殊研究意义的反贫困单元，其社会效益评估，也应重点关注这样一些“民族性”因素。当然，从可行性角度看，民族地区扶贫项目的社会效益评估，我们不能也没有办法将如此之多的社会效益因子一一容纳进去，所以结合当前国际上公认的扶贫机制，即扶贫应具有社会保险机制、社会服务机制、生态保护机制、心理与能力培育机制来看，目前民族地区扶贫的社会效益评估的问题之一就在于社会稳定、性别平等、文化传承、贫困人口能力建设四个方面指标设置的严重缺失。也因为缺乏这四个方面的考评指标，部分具有良好社会效益的扶贫项目通常被掩盖在“短、平、快”项目的光芒之下，从而也致使不少民族地区陷入了“扶贫经济发展社会调适不良”的困惑与难题之中。社会效益评估的问题之二，在于诸多社会影响评估停留于定性描述，进行定量分析与处理的指标设置不足，而且也没有形成规范的定性分析方法。由于规范与定量分析指标欠缺，民族地区的扶贫项目社会效益权衡通常缺乏可比依据，这同样可能致使扶贫行动走入误区。In addition, in the context of social benefit assessment, the current poverty alleviation project in national regions of social benefit assessment be more ecological and environmental benefits. As ecological environmental impact is one of the highlights of national regions poverty alleviation project benefit evaluation, objective evaluation. But social benefits in ethnic minority areas at least contains national unity and social stability, national security, cultural inheritance, psychology and ability cultivation, etc. Multiple meanings. Now, condensed the social benefit is simple for the practice of ecological and environmental benefits assessment, there is no doubt that caused social structure change, the degree of integration development, social equality, womens status, community cultural inheritance, lifestyle changes, industrial structure adjustment, the rural land circulation, and many other content cant get the attention it deserves. However, is precisely this seemingly fuzzy influence constitute the content of the ethnic minority areas out of poverty of crucial factors nationality, it makes the development of society in national regions often enter another track. Only, for the ethnic minority areas has special research meaning the anti-poverty unit, its social benefit evaluation, should also focus on such factors nationality. , of course, from the perspective of the feasibility project for poverty alleviation in ethnic minority areas of the social benefit evaluation, we cant also have no way to will accommodate so many social factors, so combining the internationally accepted poverty alleviation mechanism, which should have social insurance, social service mechanism for poverty allev