猪肉销售商可追溯体系参与行为及其影响因素——基于北京、上海、济南3市636位销售商的实证分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.03.20

浙江农业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 541-552.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.03.20

猪肉销售商可追溯体系参与行为及其影响因素——基于北京、上海、济南3市636位销售商的实证分析

金俪雯¹, 刘增金²^,^*(), 刘爱军¹

1. 南京农业大学经济管理学院,江苏南京 210095
2.上海市农业科学院农业科技信息研究所,上海 201403

收稿日期:2020-08-28 出版日期:2021-04-02 发布日期:2021-03-25
通讯作者: 刘增金
作者简介:*, 刘增金, E-mail: liuzengjin200632@126.com
金俪雯(1995—),女,浙江杭州人,硕士研究生,主要从事食品安全方面的研究。E-mail: jlw619@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(71603169,71273137);上海市哲学社会科学规划课题(2018EJB009);2020年度江苏省社科应用研究精品工程财经发展专项课题(20SCB-05)

Participation behavior of pork seller in traceability system: empirical analysis of 636 sellers in Beijing, Shanghai and Jinan, China

JIN Liwen¹, LIU Zengjin²^,^*(), LIU Aijun¹

1. College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China
2. Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology Information, Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Shanghai 201403, China

Received:2020-08-28 Online:2021-04-02 Published:2021-03-25
Contact: LIU Zengjin

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

基于北京、上海、济南3个城市636位猪肉销售商的调研数据,运用双变量Probit模型,分析猪肉销售商可追溯体系参与行为及其影响因素。研究结果显示,批发市场与农贸市场的猪肉销售商参与可追溯体系的水平参差不齐,仅有28.62%的销售商所售猪肉具备可追溯能力。就可追溯体系参与行为而言,仍有较大的改善空间。目前猪肉销售商多为中青年人,学历普遍较低,对猪肉可追溯体系的重要性认识程度较为一般。分析发现,采购关系、销售年限、销售利润、销售业态、关注程度、惩治力度、监控力度与年龄显著(P<0.1)影响销售商的参与行为。据此提出加强猪肉可追溯体系宣传工作、给予规范实施可追溯体系参与行为的猪肉销售商适当奖励、政府相关部门和市场管理方应加强对猪肉销售商的监管力度等建议。

关键词: 猪肉可追溯体系, 参与行为, 销售商, 双变量Probit模型

Abstract:

Based on the survey data of 636 pork sellers in three cities of Beijing, Shanghai and Jinan, a bivariate Probit model was used to analyze the influencing factors of pork sellers' participation behavior in traceability system. It was found that the participation level of pork sellers in wholesale market and wet market was different. Only 28.62% of the pork sellers took part in the traceability system, and the pork sold by them had the “traceability”. So, the participation level needs to be substantially improved. At present, most pork sellers are young and middle-aged people, their education is generally low, and they have a relatively low level of awareness of the importance of pork traceability. The purchasing relationship, the years of sales, the sales profit, the sales format, the degree of attention, the punishment intensity, the monitoring intensity and the age significantly (P<0.1) affected the pork sellers' participation behavior. Therefore, it is proposed to strengthen the publicity of pork traceability system, to give appropriate rewards to pork sellers who standardize the participation behavior in traceability system, and to strengthen supervision of pork sellers by the government departments and market managers.

Key words: pork traceability system, participation behavior, sellers, bivariate Probit model

中图分类号:

S-9
F323.3

金俪雯, 刘增金, 刘爱军. 猪肉销售商可追溯体系参与行为及其影响因素——基于北京、上海、济南3市636位销售商的实证分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(3): 541-552.

JIN Liwen, LIU Zengjin, LIU Aijun. Participation behavior of pork seller in traceability system: empirical analysis of 636 sellers in Beijing, Shanghai and Jinan, China[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(3): 541-552.

图/表 5

参考文献 34

[1]	朱增勇, 李梦希, 孟君丽 . 非洲猪瘟对中国生猪市场和产业发展影响的研究[J]. 价格理论与实践, 2019 ( 7):20-23.
	ZHU Z Y, LI M X, MENG J L . Analysis on China's pig market and industry development under new situation[J]. Price: Theory & Practice, 2019 ( 7):20-23.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	汪爱娥, 游梦琪 . 消费者对安全猪肉的认知及支付意愿研究: 基于湖北省武汉市的实地调研[J]. 农产品质量与安全, 2016 ( 3):60-66.
	WANG A E, YOU M Q . Research on consumers' perception of safe pork and their willingness to pay: based on field investigation in Wuhan, Hubei Province[J]. Quality and Safety of Agro-Products, 2016 ( 3):60-66.(in Chinese)
[3]	AKERLOF G . The market for “Lemons”: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism[J] . Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1970,84(3):488-500.
[4]	CASWELL J A, MOJDUSZKA E M . Using informational labeling to influence the market for quality in food products[J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1996,78(5):1248-1253.
[5]	BROWN D M, ANTLE J M . Choice and efficiency in food safety policy[J]. Southern Economic Journal, 1997,63(3):819.
[6]	HOBBS J E . Information asymmetry and the role of traceability systems[J]. Agribusiness, 2004,20(4):397-415. DOI URL
[7]	MEUWISSEN M P M, VELTHUIS A G J, HOGEVEEN H , et al. Traceability and certification in meat supply chains[J]. Journal of Agribusiness, 2003,21(2):167-181.
[8]	孔洪亮, 李建辉 . 全球统一标识系统在食品安全跟踪与追溯体系中的应用[J]. 食品科学, 2004,25(6):188-194.
	KONG H L, LI J H . Application review of the global identification system (EAN·UCC system) in the traceability of the food safety supply chain[J]. Food Science, 2004,25(6):188-194.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	谢菊芳 . 猪肉安全生产全程可追溯系统的研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2005.
	XIE J F . Research of traceability system in the pork safety production chain[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2005. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	OLSEN P, BORIT M . How to define traceability[J]. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2013,29(2):142-150. DOI URL
[11]	WYNN M T, OUYANG C, TER HOFSTEDE A H M, et al. Data and process requirements for product recall coordination[J]. Computers in Industry, 2011,62(7):776-786. DOI URL
[12]	HOBBS J E, BAILEY D, DICKINSON D L , et al. Traceability in the Canadian red meat sector: do consumers care?[J]. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2005,53(1):47-65.
[13]	DHOUIB S, DHOUIB S, CHABCHOUB H. Artificial bee colony metaheuristic to optimize traceability in food industry [C]//2013 International Conference on Advanced Logistics and Transport, May 29-31, 2013, Sousse, Tunisia. IEEE, 2013: 417-420.
[14]	KHOIFIN K, NIMSAI S . Investigating traceability costs and benefits in food supply chain: case study in serang City, Indonesia[J]. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 2018,7(5):153-161.
[15]	LEHTINEN U . Traceability in agrifood chains[M] //Intelligent agrifood chains and networks. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011: 151-166.
[16]	MATTEVI M, JONES J A . Food supply chain: are UK SMEs aware of concept, drivers, benefits and barriers, and frameworks of traceability?[J]. British Food Journal, 2016,118(5):1107-1128.
[17]	SALTINI R, AKKERMAN R . Testing improvements in the chocolate traceability system: impact on product recalls and production efficiency[J]. Food Control, 2012,23(1):221-226.
[18]	刘增金, 乔娟, 张莉侠 . 溯源能力信任对养猪场户质量安全行为的影响: 基于北京市6个区县183位养猪场户的调研[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2016,37(11):105-112.
	LIU Z J, QIAO J, ZHANG L X . The influence of traceability ability trust on safety behavior of pig farms and households: based on the survey of 183 pig farms and households in 6 counties in Beijing City[J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2016,37(11):105-112.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	刘增金, 乔娟, 王晓华 . 品牌可追溯性信任对消费者食品消费行为的影响: 以猪肉产品为例[J]. 技术经济, 2016,35(5):104-111.
	LIU Z J, QIAO J, WANG X H . Influence of brand's traceability trust on consumers' food consumption behavior: taking pork products as example[J]. Technology Economics, 2016,35(5):104-111.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	刘鹏, 刘文, 李强 , 等. 基于RFID技术的肉牛养殖追溯系统建立[J]. 食品研究与开发, 2015,36(24):190-193.
	LIU P, LIU W, LI Q , et al. Cattle breeding research traceability system based on RFID technology[J]. Food Research and Development, 2015,36(24):190-193.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[21]	CHEN T B, DING K F, HAO S K , et al. Batch-based traceability for pork: a mobile solution with 2D barcode technology[J]. Food Control, 2020,107:106770.
[22]	应瑞瑶, 侯博, 陈秀娟 , 等. 消费者对可追溯食品信息属性的支付意愿分析: 猪肉的案例[J]. 中国农村经济, 2016(11):44-56.
	YING R Y, HOU B, CHEN X J , et al. Analysis of consumers' willingness to pay for traceable food information attributes: the case of pork[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2016(11):44-56.(in Chinese)
[23]	刘增金, 俞美莲, 乔娟 . 信息源信任对消费者食品购买行为的影响研究: 以可追溯猪肉为例[J]. 农业现代化研究, 2017,38(5):755-763.
	LIU Z J, YU M L, QIAO J . Effects of information source trust on consumers' food purchasing behaviors: a case study of pork traceability[J]. Research of Agricultural Modernization, 2017,38(5):755-763.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	吴林海, 龚晓茹, 陈秀娟 , 等. 具有事前质量保证与事后追溯功能的可追溯信息属性的消费偏好研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2018,28(8):148-160.
	WU L H, GONG X R, CHEN X J , et al. Attribute with pre-incident quality assurance and post-incident traceability[J]. China Population,Resources and Environment, 2018,28(8):148-160.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[25]	ARGEMÍ-ARMENGOL I, VILLALBA D, RIPOLL G , et al. Credence cues of pork are more important than consumers' culinary skills to boost their purchasing intention[J]. Meat Science, 2019,154:11-21. DOI URL PMID
[26]	刘增金, 乔娟, 王晓华 . 生猪养殖场户参与猪肉可追溯体系的行为与意愿分析: 基于北京市6个区养殖场户的问卷数据[J]. 农林经济管理学报, 2018,17(1):72-81.
	LIU Z J, QIAO J, WANG X H . Pig farmers' behavior and intention of participating in pork traceability system: an analysis based on questionnaire data of farmers from 6 districts of Beijing[J]. Journal of Agro-Forestry Economics and Management, 2018,17(1):72-81.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[27]	刘增金, 乔娟, 张莉侠 . 猪肉可追溯体系质量安全效应研究: 基于生猪屠宰加工企业的视角[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2016,21(10):127-134.
	LIU Z J, QIAO J, ZHANG L X . Study on safety effect of pork traceability system: based on the perspective of pig slaughter enterprise[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2016,21(10):127-134.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[28]	夏兆敏 . 优质猪肉供应链中屠宰加工与销售环节的质量行为协调机制研究[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2014.
	XIA Z M . Study on the coordination mechanism of quality behavior between slaughterhouse and supermarket in high quality pork supply chain[D]. Tai'an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2014. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[29]	卢凌霄, 张晓恒, 曹晓晴 . 内外资超市食品安全控制行为差异研究: 基于采购与销售环节[J]. 中国食物与营养, 2014,20(8):46-51.
	LU L X, ZHANG X H, CAO X Q . Differences of domestic and foreign supermarket's control behavior on food safety: based on procurement and sales link[J]. Food and Nutrition in China, 2014,20(8):46-51.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[30]	曲芙蓉, 孙世民, 彭玉珊 . 供应链环境下超市良好质量行为实施意愿的影响因素分析: 基于山东省456家超市的调查数据[J]. 农业技术经济, 2011 ( 11):64-70.
	QU F R, SUN S M, PENG Y S . Analysis of the influencing factors of the willingness to implement good quality behaviors in supermarkets under the supply chain environment: based on the survey data of 456 supermarkets in Shandong Province[J]. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, 2011 ( 11):64-70.(in Chinese)
[31]	陈雨生, 房瑞景, 尹世久 , 等. 超市参与食品安全追溯体系的意愿及其影响因素: 基于有序Logistic模型的实证分析[J]. 中国农村经济, 2014 ( 12):41-49.
	CHEN Y S, FANG R J, YIN S J , et al. The willingness of supermarkets to participate in the food safety traceability system and its influencing factors: an empirical analysis based on the ordered Logistic model[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2014 ( 12):41-49.(in Chinese)
[32]	刘增金 . 溯源追责信任、纵向协作关系与猪肉销售商质量安全行为控制: 兼议猪肉可追溯体系质量安全效应的现实效果[J]. 中国食品安全治理评论, 2019 ( 1):90-117.
	LIU Z J . Traceability to responsibility for trust, vertical collaboration and control of the pork sellers' behavior about quality and safety: the practical effect of the quality and safety effect of the pork traceability system[J]. China Food Safety Management Review, 2019 ( 1):90-117.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[33]	刘李峰, 武拉平, 张照新 . 价格、质量对超市农产品经营影响的实证研究: 来自消费者角度的证据[J]. 中国农村观察, 2007 ( 1):24-35.
	LIU L F, WU L P, ZHANG Z X . Empirical study on impacts of price and quality on supermarkets' agricultural product business: evidence from consumers[J]. China Rural Survey, 2007 ( 1):24-35.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[34]	乔娟 . 基于食品质量安全的批发商认知和行为分析: 以北京市大型农产品批发市场为例[J]. 中国流通经济, 2011,25(1):76-80.
	QIAO J . Analysis of wholesaler's cognition and behavior based on food safety[J]. China Business and Market, 2011,25(1):76-80.(in Chinese with English abstract)

变量名称 Variable	含义与赋值 Connotation and assignment	均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation
品牌猪肉采购行为 Single brand pork purchasing behavior	是否销售单一品牌的猪肉:是=1;否=0 Whether to sell a single brand of pork: Yes=1; No=0	0.49	0.50
可追溯体系规范经营行为 Standardized business behavior in traceability system	是否建立猪肉购销台账、积极索要采购凭证、主动给予消费者购物小票:是=1;否=0 Whether to establish a pork purchase and sales account, actively ask for purchase vouchers, and actively give consumers shopping receipts: Yes=1; No=0	0.46	0.50
采购关系 Purchasing relationship	是否有固定的采购关系:是=1;否=0 Whether there is a fixed relationship in procurement: Yes=1; No=0	0.71	0.45
销货关系 Sales relationship	是否有固定的销货关系:是=1;否=0 Whether there is a fixed sales relationship: Yes=1; No=0	0.72	0.45
销售年限 Years of sales	实际销售年限数值 Actual years of sales	10.21	6.27
销售数量1 Sales quantity 1	日销售量500 kg以下=1;其他=0 Daily sales below 500 kg=1; others=0	0.57	0.50
销售数量2 Sales quantity 2	日销售量在500~999 kg=1;其他=0 Daily sales in 500-999 kg=1; others=0	0.34	0.47
销售利润1 Sales profit 1	销售价与采购价价差在1.0元·kg^-1以下=1;其他=0 The sales price is 0-<1.0 yuan·kg^-1 higher than the purchase price=1; others=0	0.39	0.49
销售利润2 Sales profit 2	销售价与采购价价差在1.0~1.9元·kg^-1=1;其他=0 The sales price is 1.0-1.9 yuan·kg^-1 higher than the purchase price=1; others=0	0.35	0.48
销售业态 Sales format	批发市场=1;农贸市场=0 Wholesale market=1; Agricultural market=0	0.81	0.40
关注程度 Degree of attention	平时是否关注与猪肉质量安全相关的法律法规或政策:非常关注、比较关注=1; 一般关注、不太关注、很不关注=0 Whether concerned about laws, regulations or policies related to the safety of pork quality: Very concerned, concerned=1; general, not concerned, not concerned at all=0	0.39	0.49

变量名称 Variable	含义与赋值 Connotation and assignment	均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation
品牌猪肉采购行为 Single brand pork purchasing behavior	是否销售单一品牌的猪肉:是=1;否=0 Whether to sell a single brand of pork: Yes=1; No=0	0.49	0.50
可追溯体系规范经营行为 Standardized business behavior in traceability system	是否建立猪肉购销台账、积极索要采购凭证、主动给予消费者购物小票:是=1;否=0 Whether to establish a pork purchase and sales account, actively ask for purchase vouchers, and actively give consumers shopping receipts: Yes=1; No=0	0.46	0.50
采购关系 Purchasing relationship	是否有固定的采购关系:是=1;否=0 Whether there is a fixed relationship in procurement: Yes=1; No=0	0.71	0.45
销货关系 Sales relationship	是否有固定的销货关系:是=1;否=0 Whether there is a fixed sales relationship: Yes=1; No=0	0.72	0.45
销售年限 Years of sales	实际销售年限数值 Actual years of sales	10.21	6.27
销售数量1 Sales quantity 1	日销售量500 kg以下=1;其他=0 Daily sales below 500 kg=1; others=0	0.57	0.50
销售数量2 Sales quantity 2	日销售量在500~999 kg=1;其他=0 Daily sales in 500-999 kg=1; others=0	0.34	0.47
销售利润1 Sales profit 1	销售价与采购价价差在1.0元·kg^-1以下=1;其他=0 The sales price is 0-<1.0 yuan·kg^-1 higher than the purchase price=1; others=0	0.39	0.49
销售利润2 Sales profit 2	销售价与采购价价差在1.0~1.9元·kg^-1=1;其他=0 The sales price is 1.0-1.9 yuan·kg^-1 higher than the purchase price=1; others=0	0.35	0.48
销售业态 Sales format	批发市场=1;农贸市场=0 Wholesale market=1; Agricultural market=0	0.81	0.40
关注程度 Degree of attention	平时是否关注与猪肉质量安全相关的法律法规或政策:非常关注、比较关注=1; 一般关注、不太关注、很不关注=0 Whether concerned about laws, regulations or policies related to the safety of pork quality: Very concerned, concerned=1; general, not concerned, not concerned at all=0	0.39	0.49

变量名称 Variable	含义与赋值 Connotation and assignment	均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation
责任意识 Sense of responsibility	若出售的猪肉因养殖、流通、屠宰环节原因出现质量安全问题,您自认为是否应承担责任:应承担=1;不应承担=0 If the quality and safety of pork was threatened during breeding, circulation, or slaughtering, whether you would bear responsibility: Would bear=1; Would not bear=0	0.53	0.50
监控力度 Monitoring intensity	市场管理方和政府部门对猪肉质量安全的监控力度:非常强、比较强=1;一般、比较弱、非常弱=0 The monitoring intensity of pork quality and safety by market management and government departments: Very strong, strong=1; General, weak, very weak=0	0.88	0.32
惩治力度 Punishment intensity	市场管理方和政府部门对猪肉质量安全问题责任人的惩治力度:非常强、比较强=1; 一般、比较弱、非常弱=0 The penalties of market management and government departments on the person responsible for pork quality and safety issues: Very strong, strong=1; General, weak, very weak=0	0.80	0.40
性别 Gender	男=1;女=0 Male=1; Female=0	0.47	0.50
年龄 Age	实际数值 Actual value	39.55	8.91
学历1 Education 1	初中及以下=1;其他=0 Junior high school and below=1; Others=0	0.72	0.45
学历2 Education 2	高中/中专=1;其他=0 High school/technical secondary school=1; Others=0	0.23	0.42

变量名称 Variable	含义与赋值 Connotation and assignment	均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation
责任意识 Sense of responsibility	若出售的猪肉因养殖、流通、屠宰环节原因出现质量安全问题,您自认为是否应承担责任:应承担=1;不应承担=0 If the quality and safety of pork was threatened during breeding, circulation, or slaughtering, whether you would bear responsibility: Would bear=1; Would not bear=0	0.53	0.50
监控力度 Monitoring intensity	市场管理方和政府部门对猪肉质量安全的监控力度:非常强、比较强=1;一般、比较弱、非常弱=0 The monitoring intensity of pork quality and safety by market management and government departments: Very strong, strong=1; General, weak, very weak=0	0.88	0.32
惩治力度 Punishment intensity	市场管理方和政府部门对猪肉质量安全问题责任人的惩治力度:非常强、比较强=1; 一般、比较弱、非常弱=0 The penalties of market management and government departments on the person responsible for pork quality and safety issues: Very strong, strong=1; General, weak, very weak=0	0.80	0.40
性别 Gender	男=1;女=0 Male=1; Female=0	0.47	0.50
年龄 Age	实际数值 Actual value	39.55	8.91
学历1 Education 1	初中及以下=1;其他=0 Junior high school and below=1; Others=0	0.72	0.45
学历2 Education 2	高中/中专=1;其他=0 High school/technical secondary school=1; Others=0	0.23	0.42

项目 Item	选项 Option	样本数 Number of samples	比例 Proportion/%
性别	男Male	299	47.01
Gender	女Female	337	52.99
年龄Age	18~39	286	44.97
	40~59	345	54.25
	≥60	5	0.79
学历Education	小学及以下Primary school and below	118	18.55
	初中Junior high school	343	53.93
	高中/中专High school/technical secondary school	143	22.48
	大专Junior college	28	4.40
	本科及以上Bachelor and above	4	0.63
经营年限Operating years	0~4	112	17.61
	5~9	185	29.09
	10~19	248	38.99
	≥20	91	14.31
销售数量Sales quantity	≤499 kg·d^-1	360	56.60
	500~999 kg·d^-1	217	34.12
	≥1 000 kg·d^-1	59	9.28
销售利润Sales profit	<1.0 yuan·kg^-1	251	39.47
	1.0~1.9 yuan·kg^-1	224	35.22
	≥2.0 yuan·kg^-1	161	25.31

猪肉销售商可追溯体系参与行为及其影响因素——基于北京、上海、济南3市636位销售商的实证分析

Participation behavior of pork seller in traceability system: empirical analysis of 636 sellers in Beijing, Shanghai and Jinan, China

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 34

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

解释变量 Explanatory variable		品牌猪肉采购行为 Single brand pork purchasing behavior		可追溯体系规范经营行为 Business behavior standardized by traceability system
解释变量 Explanatory variable		系数 Coefficient	标准误 Standard error	系数 Coefficient	标准误 Standard error
纵向协作关系	采购关系Purchasing relationship	-0.273 1^*	0.118 7	0.149 0	0.117 9
Vertical collaboration	销货关系Sales relationship	0.178 0	0.121 6	0.080 0	0.119 8
经营销售情况	销售年限Years of sales	0.002 7	0.010 1	-0.020 5^*	0.010 3
Operation and sales	销售数量1 Sales quantity 1	-0.249 0	0.192 4	-0.048 1	0.196 4
performance	销售数量2 Sales quantity 2	0.200 7	0.195 4	0.110 6	0.199 0
	销售利润1 Sales profit 1	0.483 0^**	0.155 9	0.414 8^**	0.155 9
	销售利润2 Sales profit 2	0.131 5	0.149 4	-0.020 8	0.151 4
	销售业态Sales format	0.194 6	0.163 2	0.607 8^***	0.166 8
猪肉安全认知	关注程度Degree of attention	-0.207 0	0.121 3	0.243 8^*	0.121 9
Pork safety awareness
外界监管情况	监控力度Monitoring intensity	0.132 3	0.181 2	0.417 4^*	0.183 1
External supervision	惩治力度Punishment intensity	-0.416 4^**	0.155 1	-0.235 4	0.150 2
个体特征	性别Gender	0.062 9	0.111 2	0.046 1	0.110 1
Individual characteristics	年龄Age	-0.016 8^*	0.007 0	0.003 2	0.007 0
	学历1 Education level 1	-0.050 8	0.251 2	-0.200 1	0.251 1
	学历2 Education level 2	0.074 8	0.260 7	-0.164 9	0.259 9
常数项Constant term		0.656 2	0.421 1	-0.962 2^*	0.425 4

[1]	张莎莎, 郑循刚, 张必忠. 交通基础设施、空间溢出与农村减贫——基于面板数据的实证研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(3): 553-564.
[2]	文长存, 孙玉竹. 农户对区域指数类农业附加险购买意愿的实证研究——以河北棉花种植户为例[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(2): 346-354.
[3]	富丽莎, 秦涛, 潘焕学, 邓晶. 森林保险保费补贴政策的林业产出规模效应实证分析——基于双重差分模型与事件研究模型[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(2): 355-368.
[4]	李海涛, 傅琳琳, 黄祖辉, 朋文欢. 农业适度规模经营的多种形式与展望[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(1): 161-169.
[5]	董艳敏, 严奉宪. 中国农业高质量发展的时空特征与协调度[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(1): 170-182.
[6]	胡晨沛, 李辉尚, 郭昕竺. 1978—2017年中国区域农业经济发展差距与结构特征[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(12): 2253-2260.
[7]	李梦璐, 张社梅. 媒体负面报道对蜂蜜消费预期变动的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(12): 2282-2290.
[8]	高芸, 赵芝俊. 进口蜂蜜对我国蜂产品市场的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(11): 2088-2093.
[9]	程亚, 李欣月, 张春, 张社梅. 农业经理人压力与合作社绩效关系的实证研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(11): 2094-2102.
[10]	黄河啸, 李宝值, 朱奇彪, 杨良山, 吴敬华. 高素质农民培育的浙江实践——以浙江农艺师学院为例[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(10): 1890-1898.
[11]	谢庆, 瞿理铜, 闫世雄. 基于城市建设用地扩张预测的城郊村土地经营权流转最优期限确定[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(10): 1899-1909.
[12]	刘姣姣, 张钢仁, 高群. 基于VEC-BEKK-GARCH和溢出指数模型的畜产品价格联动效应研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(9): 1711-1721.
[13]	郭延景, 肖海峰. 世界玉米主产国家和地区玉米补贴政策支持水平与结构特征[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(9): 1722-1731.
[14]	张公望, 朱明芬. 农村宅基地制度改革与农民增收——基于6个试点县(市、区)面板数据的双重差分分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(8): 1475-1484.
[15]	胡巧莲, 杨君, 邵劲松, 周鹏全, 郭佳瑞, 侯满平. 田园综合体建设初期土地利用效益综合评价——以鲁家村为例[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2020, 32(8): 1485-1492.