社区民宿邻避效应：风险感知、权益冲突与形成机制研究——以上海地区为例

旅游科学 ›› 2023, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (2): 100-116.

社区民宿邻避效应：风险感知、权益冲突与形成机制研究——以上海地区为例

黄和平¹, 邴振华^1,*, 钟伟¹, 裘亦书¹, 赖庆晟²

1.上海商学院酒店管理学院,上海 201400;
2.复旦大学经济学院,上海 200433

收稿日期:2022-09-01 修回日期:2023-03-02 出版日期:2023-04-30 发布日期:2023-05-12
通讯作者: ^*邴振华（1986—）,女,博士,上海商学院酒店管理学院副教授,研究方向为游憩服务评估与旅游可持续发展,E-mail：xiaobing0707@126.com。
作者简介:黄和平（1979—）,男,博士,上海商学院酒店管理学院副教授,研究方向为经济地理、乡村旅游和文旅融合,E-mail：hhping8805@163.com。裘亦书（1983—）,女,博士,上海商学院酒店管理学院讲师,研究方向为地理科学信息系统。钟伟（1980—）,男,博士,上海商学院酒店管理学院讲师,研究方向为酒店收益管理。赖庆晟（1982—）,男,博士,复旦大学经济学院博士后,研究方向为国际服务贸易。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金青年项目“景观服务空间异质性评估与供给侧预测模拟——以上海崇明东滩湿地鸟类自然保护区为例”（41701633）; 教育部人文社科基金项目“我国乡村旅游发展与社区居民获得感：时空分布、市场潜力与提升路径”（20YJA790029）

Nimby Effect of Community Homestays：A Study of Risk Perception, Conflicts of Rights and Interests and Formation Mechanism —Taking the Shanghai Area for Example

HUANG Heping¹, BING Zhenhua^1,*, ZHONG wei¹, QIU Yishu¹, LAI Qingsheng²

1. School of Hotel Management, Shanghai Business School, Shanghai 201400, China;
2. School of Economics, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China

Received:2022-09-01 Revised:2023-03-02 Online:2023-04-30 Published:2023-05-12

摘要/Abstract

摘要： “治理”是未来我国社会改革的价值取向。社会治理的关键在基层,基层的有效治理是化解矛盾、实现社会公平的保证。民宿经营打破了基层社区原有的生活状态,对社区经济、文化、环境、服务、治安等多个维度构成挑战。厘清民宿治理的逻辑体系,实现社区民宿治理现代化对提升基层治理水平具有重要意义。文章采用理论分析与实证检验相结合的方式,探究上海市社区民宿邻避效应的存在性与影响因素,为社区民宿的有效治理提供决策依据。结果表明：（1）社区居民对社区民宿态度较为负面,表现出“不在我家社区”（not in my backyard）的邻避效应。社区民宿所引发的反抗情绪与抵制行为符合邻避效应的三要素必要构件。（2）以社区居民对民宿的接受水平作为社区民宿邻避效应的测度因子,显著影响因素包括环境正义感知、风险感知、社区属性与居民特征4个部分,实证结果验证了社区民宿邻避效应的存在性。（3）回归弹性系数实际反映了居民对该变量的敏感程度,也即社区民宿治理中不同影响因素的边际报酬测度指标,社区治理资源投入弹性系数大的影响指标可以获得更大的边际治理效果。（4）社区民宿邻避效应是“经济理性”与“民生权利”的冲突,冲突根源在于社区民用设施的商业化运营中,公共权益、集体权益与个体权益3个层面的环境正义未得到充分保证。

关键词: 社会治理, 社区民宿, 邻避效应, 环境正义, 风险建构

Abstract: “Governance” is the value orientation of China’s future social reform,and the key to social governance lies at the grass-roots level,and the effective governance at the grass-roots level is the guarantee of resolving conflicts and realizing social fairness.The operation of homestay breaks the original living conditions of grassroots communities and poses challenges to the community economy,culture,environment,service,public security and other dimensions.It is of great significance to comb out the logic system of homestay governance and realize the modernization of community homestay governance to improve the level of grass-roots governance.This paper used theoretical analysis and empirical test to explore the existence and influencing factors of the NIMBY（not in my backyard） effect of community homestays in Shanghai,and constructed the symbiotic mechanism between homestays and communities,providing decision-making basis for the effective governance of community homestays.The results show that：（1） the residents have contradictory and negative attitudes towards community homestays,showing the “not in my home community” （NIMBY） mood.Compared with the traditional NIMBY facilities （transformer power plant,nuclear power plant,waste incineration ground,etc.）,the community homestay cause less intense NIMBY behavior and NIMBY crisis,but the resistance and resistance behavior accord with the necessary components of NIMBY effect;（2） taking community residents'acceptance level of homestay as the measure factor of the NIMBY effect,the significant influencing factors include environmental equity,risk perception,community attributes and residents'characteristics.The analysis verifies the existence of the NIMBY effect of homestay;（3） the regression elasticity coefficient actually reflects the sensitivity of residents to this index,which is the order of marginal remuneration of different influencing factors in the governance of community home stay facilities,and putting community governance resources into the impact index with large elasticity coefficient can achieve higher marginal governance effect;（4） NIMBY effect is a conflict between “economic rationality” and “people’s livelihood rights”.The conflict is rooted in the commercial operation of community civil facilities,and the environmental equity of public rights,collective rights and individual rights is not fully guaranteed.

Key words: social governance, community homestay, nimby effect, environmental equity, risk construction

中图分类号:

F592.7

黄和平, 邴振华, 钟伟, 裘亦书, 赖庆晟. 社区民宿邻避效应：风险感知、权益冲突与形成机制研究——以上海地区为例[J]. 旅游科学, 2023, 37(2): 100-116.

HUANG Heping, BING Zhenhua, ZHONG wei, QIU Yishu, LAI Qingsheng. Nimby Effect of Community Homestays：A Study of Risk Perception, Conflicts of Rights and Interests and Formation Mechanism —Taking the Shanghai Area for Example[J]. TOURISM SCIENCE, 2023, 37(2): 100-116.

参考文献

[1] 陈宝胜,2013.邻避冲突基本理论的反思与重构[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版)(6):81-88.
[2] 党艺,余建辉,张文忠,2020.环境类邻避设施对北京市住宅价格影响研究——以大型垃圾处理设施为例[J].地理研究(8):1769-1781.
[3] 高军波,乔伟峰,刘彦随,等,2016.超越困境:转型期中国城市邻避设施供给模式重构——基于番禺垃圾焚烧发电厂选址反思[J].中国软科学(1):98-108.
[4] 何艳玲,2014.对“别在我家后院”的制度化回应探析——城镇化中的“邻避冲突”与“环境正义”[J].人民论坛·学术前沿(6):56-61;95.
[5] 黄和平,邴振华,2021.民宿文化微空间的游客感知多维分异与地方认同研究——以上海地区为例[J].地理研究:2066-2085.
[6] 黄岩,文锦,2010.邻避设施与邻避运动[J].城市问题(12):96-101.
[7] 黄峥,2017.金钱、公园还是养老保障:邻避设施的补偿效应研究[J].中国行政管理(10):108-113.
[8] 李高阳,2014.价值学的两种元价值:良心与自主权利[D].浙江:浙江大学.
[9] 李伊祺,余建辉,张文忠,2021.机场设施邻避效应对北京市住宅价格空间影响研究——以北京首都国际机场为例[J].地理研究(7):1993-2004.
[10] 李宇环,梁晓琼,2018.社会心态理论视阈下中国邻避冲突的发生机理与调适对策[J].中国行政管理(12):102-107.
[11] 刘小峰,丁翔,2021.建设工程项目邻避风险演化[J].公共管理学报(1):102-113;172.
[12] 吕书鹏,王琼,2017.地方政府邻避项目决策困境与出路——基于“风险-利益”感知的视角[J].中国行政管理(4):113-118.
[13] 彭小兵,谢虹,2017.应对信息洪流:邻避效应向环境群体性事件转化的机理及治理[J].情报科学(2):10-15.
[14] 宋民雪,刘德海,尹伟巍,2021.经济新常态、污染防治与政府规制:环境突发事件演化博弈模型[J].系统工程理论与实践(6):1454-1464.
[15] 谭爽,2017.邻避运动与环境公民社会建构——一项“后传式”的跨案例研究[J].公共管理学报(2):48-58;154-155.
[16] 陶鹏,童星,2010.邻避型群体性事件及其治理[J].南京社会科学(8):63-68.
[17] 万筠,王佃利,2019.中国邻避冲突结果的影响因素研究——基于40个案例的模糊集定性比较分析[J].公共管理学报(1):66-76.
[18] 王佃利,徐晴晴,2012.邻避冲突的属性分析与治理之道——基于邻避研究综述的分析[J].中国行政管理(12):83-88.
[19] 王奎明,2021.统合式治理何以有效:邻避困境破局的中国路径[J].探索与争鸣(4):130-140.
[20] 吴勇,扶婷,2021.社区利益协议视角下邻避项目信任危机与应对[J].湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(2):19-25.
[21] 吴云清,翟国方,李莎莎,2012.邻避设施国内外研究进展[J].人文地理(6):7-12;42.
[22] 邢占军,2002.主观幸福感测量研究综述[J].心理科学(3):336-338;342.
[23] 许晖,许守任,王睿智,2013.消费者旅游感知风险维度识别及差异分析[J].旅游学刊(12):71-80.
[24] 杨建国,李紫衍,2021.空间正义视角下的邻避设施选址影响因素研究——基于24个案例的多值集定性比较分析[J].江苏行政学院学报(1):111-118.
[25] 杨槿,朱竑,2013.“邻避主义”的特征及影响因素研究——以番禺垃圾焚烧发电厂为例[J].世界地理研究(1):148-157;88.
[26] 原珂,2016.中国特大城市社区冲突与治理研究[D].天津:南开大学.
[27] 赵小燕,2014.邻避冲突参与动机及其治理:基于三种人性假设的视角[J].武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(2):36-41.
[28] 肖薇,罗瑾琏,李成彦,等,2019.共享经济嵌入理性:众包社区嵌入对创意领地行为影响机制研究[J].科技进步与对策(24):8-17.
[29] ALHAKAMI A S,SLOVIC P,2010.A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit[J].Risk analysis,14(6):1085-1096.
[30] AMIN A J,CHOUNERT J L,COMBES P,et al.,2018.Neighborhood effects in the Brazilian Amazônia:protected areas and deforestation[J].Journal of environmental economics and management,93(1):272-288.
[31] FEATHERMAN M S,PAVLOU P A,2003.Predicting e-services adoption:a perceived risk facets perspective[J].International journal of human-computer studies,59(4):451-474.
[32] FEINERMAN E,FINKELSHTAIN I,KAN I,2004.On a political solution to the NIMBY conflict[J].The American economic review,94(1):369-381.
[33] FOSTER D,WARREN J,2022.The NIMBY problem[J].Journal of theoretical politics,34(1):145-172.
[34] KAPLAN L B,SZYBILLO G J,JACOBY J,1974.Components of perceived risk in product purchase: a cross-validation[J].Journal of applied psychology,59(3):287.
[35] LIU H M,WANG S S,HE H,et al.,2022.Nip risk in the bud:a system dynamic model to govern NIMBY conflict[J].Environmental impact assessment review,97(12):1-16.
[36] MITCHELL V W,VASSOS V,1998.Perceived risk and risk reduction in holiday purchases:a cross-cultural and gender analysis[J].Journal of euro-marketing,6(3):47-79.
[37] MOUTINHO L,1987.Consumer behavior in tourism[J].European journal of marketing,21(10):5-44.
[38] PEARCE P L,STRINGER P F,1991.Psychology and tourism[J].Annals of tourism research,18(1):136-154.
[39] ROEHL W S,FESENMAIER D R,1992.Risk perceptions and pleasure travel:an exploratory analysis[J].Journal of travel research,30(4):17-26.
[40] WAKEFIELD S E,ELLIOTT S J,COLE D C,et al.,2001.Environmental risk and (re)action:air quality,health,and civic involvement in an urban industrial neighborhood[J].Health & place,7(3):163-177.
[41] WANG Y,TANG Y,ZUO J,et al.,2022.Exploring rumor combating behavior of social media on NIMBY conflict:temporal modes,frameworks and strategies[J].Environmental impact assessment review,96(9):1-12.
[42] WU H Z,HUANG L Y,YUAN L H,et al.,2021.Young Chinese people’s perceptions of nuclear power:connection with enthusiasm for information,perceptions of nuclear reactor technology and NIMBY[J].Progress in nuclear energy,141(11): 1-9.
[43] YI G,YANG G H,2021.Research on the tripartite evolutionary game of public participation in the facility location of hazardous materials logistics from the perspective of NIMBY events[J].Sustainable cities and society,72(9):1-7.