【導(dǎo)讀】（，四川成都610041；大部分樣本村實施了村民最需要的道路項目，道路項目具有良好的效益。1中國科學(xué)院西部之光、中國科學(xué)院“百人計劃”項目“社區(qū)治理、農(nóng)村稅費改革與農(nóng)村公。共投資”和中國科學(xué)院重要方向性項目資助。共基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施之一。事來抓，強力推進農(nóng)村公路建設(shè)。

　　

【正文】 ly two types as county and townbased ones。 in 20xx, 70% of the sample villages got asphalt / cement roads, mostly villagebased ones,half of which are asphalt / cement (see as Figure 1). 然而四川省山丘區(qū)特別是山區(qū)的農(nóng)村道路數(shù)量和通行狀況與中國東部、中部相比較仍處于較差的水平（ 20xx 年底中國東、中部地區(qū)建制村通柏油路或水泥路比率分別為 %和 %）。 14 In mountainous and hilly Sichuan Province,however, the number of rural roads and traffic conditions in mountainous areas especially are still in the poor level, pared to those in the eastern and central regions of China (the asphalt or concrete roads ratio in these village was % and % by the end of 20xx). 有柏油路/ 水泥路經(jīng)過的村的比例（% ）省道5省道10省道10縣道20縣道20縣道10鄉(xiāng)道5鄉(xiāng)道15鄉(xiāng)道15村道5村道3505101520253035401998年 20xx年 20xx年 圖 1 有柏油路 /水泥路經(jīng)過的村所占的比例對比圖 Figure 1 Comparison Chart of Village Proportion That Has Asphalt / Cement Roads Going Through 30% 50% 70% villagebased Roads countybased Roads hamletbased Roads provincebased Roads 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Year 1998 Year 20xx Year 20xx Ratio of Village with Asphalt / Concrete Roads (%) 50% 30% 70% 5 5 200 200 5 150 100 100 100 150 350 15 4 道路項目效益評價 4 Road Projects Evaluation 道路項目社會效益指數(shù) Social Benefits Index of Road Projects 基于兩次調(diào)查的對比分析，四川省山丘區(qū)農(nóng)村道路項目社會效益指數(shù)整體有所提高，平均社會效益指數(shù)分值從 增加到 。其中，山區(qū)村增加更為顯著，社會效益指數(shù)分值從 增加到 ，而丘陵村僅從 增加到 （見圖 2）。 According to the two previous surveys, the social benefits index of rural road projects in Sichuan’s hilly and mountainous areas has made overall increase, with average score from to . Among those, the increase in mountainous villages is more significant, from to , while in hilly villages merely from to (sees in Figure 2). 所有的村 山區(qū)村 丘陵村社會效益指數(shù)199820xx年20xx20xx年 圖 2 樣本村社會效益指數(shù)分值變化圖 16 所有的村 山區(qū)村 丘陵村社會效益指數(shù)199820xx年20xx20xx年 Figure 2 Social Benefits Index Change of Sample Villages 同時，不同資金規(guī)模道路項目的社會效益也存在差異。通過將項目規(guī)模分成0— 2 萬元， 2— 10 萬元， 10— 20 萬元， 20— 30 萬元， 30— 50 萬元， 50— 100 萬元， 100 萬元以上七個組，計算每組別道路項目的平均社會效益，發(fā)現(xiàn)道路項目的效益隨著所投入資金規(guī)模增加而成線性增加（見圖 3），這可能是因為項目資金規(guī)模越大，從 這項投資中受益的人群越多，建設(shè)過程中就越受重視，體現(xiàn)出的社會效益也越好。但是，從樣本村的調(diào)查數(shù)據(jù)而言，四川省山丘區(qū)農(nóng)村道路項目主要以小規(guī)模投資為主，其中 %的道路項目資金規(guī)模在 10 萬元以下，超過50 萬元的項目只占 %，全部 49 個項目中超過 100 萬元只有 3 個，因而，要進一步提高四川省山丘區(qū)農(nóng)村道路項目的社會效益，今后需要加強對小規(guī)模項目的監(jiān)督。 Meanwhile, social benefits of different invested road projects also vary. For their investment sizes, these projects can be divided into 7 groups: 0— billion。 billion— billion。 billion— billion。 billion— billion。 billion— billion。 billion— 1 billion。and more than 1 billion. Through evaluating average social benefit of each group, we can find that benefits of road projects increase linearly with their investment sizes (sees in figure 3). Maybe it is because the bigger the investment size, the more people get benefits from the projects, the instruction process gets more attention, which means better social benefits. But from the data of sample villages, we can see the road projects in Sichuan39。s hilly and mountainous areas are mainly in smallsize investments, in which the investments of % projects are under billion, % are over billion, only 3 are over 1 billion. So in order to further improve the social benefits of Sichuan hilly rural road projects in Sichuan39。s hilly and mountainous areas, we need to strengthen the supervision of smallsize projects in the future. Social Benefits Index All villages Mountainous villages hilly villages 17 不同資金規(guī)模項目的社會效益2 0 —3 01 0 —2 02 —1 00 —23 0 —5 05 0 —1 0 0100—y = x + R2 = 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 圖 3 不同資金規(guī)模項目的社會效益線性圖 不同資金規(guī)模項目的社會效益2 0 —3 01 0 —2 02 —1 00 —23 0 —5 05 0 —1 0 0100—y = x + R2 = 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Figure 3 Linear Graph of Social Benefits of Different Invested Projects 從農(nóng)村道路項目的三種不同投資方式而言，單純政府投資道路項目的社會效益指數(shù)最高，為 ；政府和村民共同投資的道路項目社會效益指數(shù)其次，為；完全村民自籌資金投資的道路項目社會效益指數(shù)相對較低，為 。這種不同可能是因 為村自籌資金規(guī)模較小，投資道路類型以碎石路和土路為主，其通行狀況較差，影響村民對其社會效益的判斷。另外一個可能原因是與負(fù)責(zé)道路實施的單位不同有關(guān)，完全村民自籌資金實施項目多數(shù)由村民小組和村委會負(fù)責(zé)，由政府投資的項目主要由項目辦或?qū)I(yè)交通部門組織實施，兩者在技術(shù)和管理方面存在的顯著差距，也直接影響到道路投資的社會效益。然而，在四川省山丘區(qū)農(nóng)村道路投資方式中，仍然有超過 1/3 的項目完全由村民自籌資金投資，因此要加強村自籌資金的運用和管理，以提高其社會效益。 In terms of the three different investment ways of rural road projects, the governmentinvested social benefits index is highest, at 。 the 2nd highest is Social Benefits of Different Invested Projects 18 invested by the government and villagers together, at 。 villagers entirely selffinanced projects get relatively low index . This difference may be due to the small size of the villagers selffinancing. In these projects, main invested road types are gravel and dirt roads, whose poor traffic condition affects villagers’ judgments on their social benefits. Another reason may be related to different institutes responsible for roads building. Most of the villagers selffinanced projects are in the charge of villagers groups and mittees, while the governmentinvested projects are mainly operated by special project offices and also the transport sectors. Significant differences exist between those two in aspects of technology and management, which directly affect the social benefits of road projects. However, over 1/3 rural road projects are still entirely selffinanced by villagers in Sichuan39。s hilly and mountainous areas. So we need to strengthen the management and application of finance in order to improve the social benefits. 道路投資的需求供給評價 Evaluation of Demand and Supply in Road Investment 在 20xx 年的調(diào)查中，如果村里有 5 萬元，調(diào)查員要被訪談人對修建道路、修建學(xué)校、修建灌溉水利、修建飲用水設(shè)施和修建診所這 5 個項目進行投資排序，結(jié)果顯示山區(qū)村道路項目的投資意愿指數(shù)為 ，丘陵村為