The Study Of Village Public Spaces Based On Negative Externalities Of Households’behavior

The village space is the container of village life, especially the village public space is closelylinked with human activities. The present research on public space most sights of urban public space, only littleresearch on rural public space. The research focused on rural public space mostly see public space as ahomogeneous unity of the whole or independent of a certain type (such as teahouse, pond, temples, ancestralhalls, etc.).This article research the region focus on village, taking Shuanggou village, Anyang City, HenanProvince for example. Based on deeply and detailed field survey data in November26-30,2010and March11-14,2011. Comprehensively study the ability of every particular public space and human activities. The paperattempts to apply the theories of economics, sociology and geography to establish a research structure abouthouseholders’ behavior and village public space. Discuss how farmers’ activities scope village public space.In addition to the foreword and conclusion, the paper still has4parts:The first part, the core concepts involved in the study, such as village, village public space, negativeexternalities of farmers’ behavior are defined. In the same time, the theoretical basis of the article, such asexternality theory, rational choice theory and tragedy of the commons theory are briefly described.The second part, on the basis of the classification of rural public space, the detailed description of thedeterioration of village public space and related farmer behavior characteristics based on the survey data andinterview data.The third part, revealing the farmers’ external behaviors associated with the village public space startfrom the farmers motives to participate in public space and explain householders’ behavior peasant public spacemechanism in the basis of the relevant theory.The fourth part, optimizing the village public space from the perspective of a reasonable norms ofhouseholds’ behavior to avoid the perspective of government and social organizations which used in the study ofpresent village governance.Through the above analysis, the following is a summary of the conclusions:(1) The negative externalities of households’ behavior is the main reason for the destruction of villagepublic space. The farmers are almost always a variety of public spaces in the village within the contact as actorswithin the Village, influence the extent and effect the deepest, which play a major role. (2) The negative externalities of households’ behavior are majorly role in the more own closely publicspaces. Villages exist various types of public space, they all play an important role in the lives of farmers,however, most farmers only influence the public space which close to them. Farmers mainly role in these pubicspace based on their interests and needs, such as gender, age and other characteristics.(3) The extent of the damage to public space has big difference among different farmers. Differentincome levels of farmers have large differences in the destruction of public spaces. From the results of theinvestigation and analysis, high-income farmers’ impact on the village public space greatly and deeply, whilelower income households have limited influence to village public space as the production and consumptionbehavior of them is almost the continuation of the traditional way. But their meanings of improving andprotecting the public space is relatively poor.(4)The nature of public resources of village public space easily lead to its own excessive used. As thesubjects of property rights and their rights of village public space boundary is not clear, resulting in the collectivebecame fact main body of village public space. The village public space has the nature of public resources, It iseasy for the actors to generate negative externalities to maximize their own interests, the farmers as much aspossible to use the public space without thinking about the destruction.(5) Farmers’ willingness are significant different to improve village public space. A range of factorsaffect the willingness of each household to pay for the maintenance and improvement of village public space.These include: age, education, occupation, income and an individual’s perception of the condition of villagepublic spaces. The age of the respondents was a key factor. It was found that the readiness to pay decreased asage increased. In terms of education, the higher the educational attainment of a household, the less motivationthere is to pay. The households with better jobs are more likely to pay for village public space. The source ofincome has a minimal effect, but nonetheless can be considered. The greater the contribution to income fromagriculture, there is a higher willingness to pay towards village public space. The households are more likely topay where their village public spaces are in a poorer condition.