In view of the phenomenon of overgrazing in grassland areas in western China, some economists have put forward the following control schemes:
First, the government intervenes or collects cattle and sheep taxes from herders. For example, at the international academic conference entitled "Taking the Road of Economic Globalization: Opportunities and Challenges for China in the New Century" held in Shanghai in 2000, Professor Xu Dianqing, a Canadian Chinese economist, called on the China government to levy consumption tax on cattle and sheep. According to him, part of the tax collected from the consumption of beef and mutton is used to help farmers and herdsmen return farmland to forests and grasslands; The other part can be used to solve the source of financial funds needed by the government to help farmers and herdsmen switch to other industries. But in my opinion, although there is a theoretical or legal basis for taxing cattle and sheep (even if the state taxes herders, there is a basis. Because in our country's law, the property right of grassland resources is defined as belonging to the state, and the state, as the subject of property right, obviously has the right to levy shepherd tax on herders. However, there are still great problems in the implementation of China's tax policy. The economic significance of taxation on cattle and sheep is the supply curve of mobile cattle and sheep products. The increase of tax will shift the supply curve to the upper left, which will inevitably lead to the shift of equilibrium point, the increase of the price of cattle and sheep products and the decrease of equilibrium output. Even if the consumption tax is levied on cattle and sheep, the final result may increase the economic burden of the people in pastoral areas, which may seriously lead to the loss of livelihood of herders. Especially under the premise that herdsmen have no other employment channels, the increase of tax burden will undoubtedly slow down the speed of people in pastoral areas to get rid of poverty and become rich, and even make them fall into the predicament of survival crisis.
Specifically, if the consumers who consume cattle and sheep products are non-ethnic groups who are not restricted by religion and customs, the collection of cattle and sheep consumption tax and the objective substitution effect are likely to change their demand for beef and mutton products, that is, the slope of the demand curve will change, and the demand curve is likely to become more gentle or more price elastic. As a result, the price increase caused by the decrease of supply will not only increase the income of cattle and sheep product providers, but also lead to the decline of the income of cattle and sheep product providers (people in the western region).
On the other hand, if the consumers who consume beef and mutton are ethnic minorities mainly distributed in the western region, their reaction to the taxation of beef and mutton will not obviously change the slope of their demand curve because of the influence of consumption customs or religious factors. At this time, the problem faced by ethnic minorities in the western region will be that they have to share more taxes. As for the producers of cattle and sheep products in the western region, due to the reduction of balanced output, the actual total income will decrease. Although the increased government tax revenue can be used for returning farmland to forests and grazing land, it is an indisputable fact that the direct income of farmers and herdsmen has decreased recently due to the "double retreat and double return" measures. In a word, tax will not only increase the cost of cattle and sheep producers, weaken their market competitiveness and reduce the income of herders; And it will increase the living expenses of consumers in western minority areas; In addition, it will also lead to unnecessary losses of "consumer surplus". Therefore, before providing other effective sources of livelihood for herders, it is not appropriate to levy cattle and sheep tax in poor areas in the west (it is even more unreasonable to prohibit herders from raising sheep by administrative means).
Second, redefine grassland property rights. That is, to define the subject of grassland property rights, or to allow land (grassland) to trade freely. When Yang Xiaokai, a famous economist, inspected the enterprise restructuring in Jiangsu in 2000, he proposed that the urbanization process of China should be promoted by "further clarifying land property rights". Economists who advocate reforming the property right of land (or grassland) resources believe that the property right system, as a social arrangement, has the function of saving costs, and it can solve the contradiction in the use of scarce resources (such as grassland) in a low-cost way. In other words, according to the view of property right school, distributing grassland to herders for private use will encourage herders to pay full attention to the utilization efficiency of land resources and the phenomenon of overgrazing can be completely solved. However, we believe that under the existing institutional framework in China, there are insurmountable major obstacles in both the "privatization" reform and the "free trade" reform of land resources.
Because administrative intervention measures such as "prohibiting herders from raising sheep", "collecting cattle and sheep tax" and "reforming land property right system" are either not desirable or not feasible in the near future, we put forward the countermeasures of "population migration or reducing the population in pastoral areas".
In fact, the fundamental reason for the deterioration of the ecological environment in western China lies in overpopulation. According to the regulations of the United Nations desert conference, the critical index of carrying population per square kilometer in arid area is 7 people, and that in semi-arid area is 20 people. However, what is the situation in the western provinces of China? The population in most areas has exceeded this critical index. Take Ningxia as an example. At present, the population in its mountainous areas has increased by 2.5 million compared with the early 1950s, and the population has exceeded the critical index by 2.3-2.4 times. It must be noted that in traditional societies or backward areas where industrialization and modernization have not been completed, overpopulation or rapid population growth will inevitably lead to over-utilization of natural resources and over-grazing of grasslands, because under the premise of underdeveloped industrialization, people in grassland areas can only maintain their own survival and development by increasing the number of cattle and sheep grazing. For example, at present, the number of cattle and sheep in Ningxia mountainous areas has increased by 274% compared with the early 1950s, and the livestock is overloaded by 2.3 times. (9) It can be seen that the primary cause of grassland overgrazing is grassland population overload. Therefore, in order to fundamentally solve the problem, the first consideration should be to reduce the total population of the western pastoral areas as much as possible, rather than simply "eliminating goats or preventing herders from raising sheep" as in some areas now. Moreover, theoretically speaking, the reduction of herders or population transfer in pastoral areas in the western region is actually an inevitable law accompanied by China's social and economic development and the further promotion of industrialization and modernization. Population transfer is not only an objective need for ecological environment protection in the western region; It is also the inevitable requirement of industrialization in the western region.