The so-called green agriculture, it is to point to to production and processing and sales of green food to the axis of the agricultural production and operation mode. At present, the positive development of green agriculture, has become the strategic measures to meet the international challenges. At the same time, the development of green agriculture is to maintain sustainable development, protect the environment needs. “Black agriculture” the management way often highly dependent on large agricultural machinery and implement, chemical fertilizers, pesticides, not only consumed a lot of non-renewable resources, also leads to soil erosion, air and water pollution effect. And the green agriculture development may be fundamentally solve these problems. Green agriculture to “green environment”, “green technology” and “green products” as the main body, make relying too much on chemical fertilizers, pesticides chemical agriculture to rely mainly on the biological mechanism of ecological agriculture to change.
Green agriculture is the generalized “top”, including: green agriculture, white agriculture, blue, black agriculture, agricultural fungi agriculture, agricultural facilities, gardening agriculture, tourism agriculture, environmental protection agriculture, agricultural information, etc. In the specific application we generally will “expanded”, namely pollution-free agricultural products, green food and organic food, known collectively as the green agriculture. After joining the WTO, international market for agricultural products of high grade, high quality, excellent varieties and avirulent and harmless pollution-free requirements, China must go green agriculture development way.
Human development of environmental damage make people realize the importance of sustainable development. We must base on China’s national conditions, practical and world agriculture development community, with the development of economy and environment with green agriculture enhance China agriculture strengths.
Our country agriculture in natural resources has inestimable advantage, our country agricultural natural resources have diverse characteristics: from north to south over nine heat belt, the region is vast, mountainous, grassland, biological resources more variety, variety, especially in the Midwest in northeast, northwest, southwest, green more resources, for the development of all kinds of characteristics of green agricultural products have created favorable conditions.
Our country agriculture in human, material also it has certain features: China’s farmers after thousands of years accumulate, has the rich and intensive cultivation technology and green agriculture traditional basis; China labor resource is rich, and the price is low, but the development of labor-intensive and technology-intensive value of combining big green agricultural products; Most of the region is damaged, but in low industrial pollution or did not reach the but irreversible chemical poisoning point; China has one thousand food cooking, the Chinese medicine history, history of health history and traditional green food diversity.
The Midwest green agriculture in the rapid rise, green, deep processing of agricultural product, machining, environmental protection and ecological industry second and third industry is developing rapidly. The eastern region technology, talent, capital and the west green resource, and the combination of the rapid development of green agriculture and agricultural products export the depiction of integration base. Countries in traffic, electric power, communications infrastructure investment for the development of green agriculture have created favorable conditions.
Especially government proposed the new countryside construction and development direction, to the rural infrastructure construction investment increase, thus improving overall rural living environment improvement, education and quality education double input, can cause a series of economic and life changing. So, this is the agricultural industrial structure change of great opportunity once in a blue moon.
At present China agricultural productivity has greatly improved, many agricultural surplus began to appear, the government attached great importance to environmental protection, the latter the development of agriculture, farmer’s quality consciousness and environmental awareness has also greatly enhanced, develop green agriculture are the basic conditions of also already has. In the early 1980 s so far, the country develops the ecological environment protection and management policies and measures. 1998 years and issued a “national ecological environment construction planning”, the parts of goods and food has started green marks and environmental labeling system.
This paper attempts to factor analysis, gray relational degree method, the AHP, TOPSIS, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation specific analysis of the evaluation process, to illustrate the five methods empirical results in the reasons for the differences, and the selection of evaluation methods of some Suggestions.
Since the beginning of the twentieth century dupont use investment return rate since the performance evaluation indexes, performance evaluation from the single index evaluation has developed into many indexes and comprehensive assessment. In many indexes and comprehensive assessment, the evaluation method of the evaluation results of the appropriate choice has the important influence. This paper on the AHP, and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, the gray correlation analysis method, factor analysis and TOPSIS method in the listed company five operating performance evaluation for empirical comparison, and through various evaluation method of the evaluation process specific analysis of the differences of the comparison results, try to explain the differences, so as to provide reference for the selection of evaluation methods.
A listed company management, performance evaluation index system
The focus of this article is to study because of evaluation methods, so it is for the selection of evaluation indicators don’t be further discussed. The listed company business performance evaluation index is considering based on the characteristics of the listed company, and by reference to the state-owned capital performance evaluation rules and its effect to the construction of detailed rules, as shown in figure 1 below.
Two, the performance of the companies listed on the empirical analysis
This article selects the Shanghai 8 highway operating company for analysis, samples were with the five kinds of evaluation method to evaluate its performance. The original data from the “information” (the tidal wave http://gsgg.cninfo.com.cn), on the original data pretreatment principle is: (1) for extremely small index, take its bottom use into a very large index; (2) the appropriate type index (such as asset-liability ratio), according to the formula xij = 1 / conversion, including k for the primitive data xij “mean, xij for processing the data; (3) dimensionless processing method is the approach to the mean.
1. Using AHP operating performance evaluation
The construction of level analysis structure according to the figure 1, through the model construction experts, in each layer of elements in the comparison between two, tectonic judgment matrix, and all of the judgment matrix are passed the consistency check, and the enzyme flapping your trade, ㄖ Mao drain vice steamer wu with ㄖ Xin may third vice Gao Mao ㄗ Feng crumbs especially and vinegar Feng Mao think armpit and the application Sou dong dong dong “ mirror ㄐ Ы wood letter Mao known to heavenly? Shows:
Table 2
Evaluation objects through the northeast central anhui high-speed high-speed fujian high-speed chutian high-speed ganyue high-speed ninghu high-speed deep high speed
1.3214 0.0671 1.4672 1.4733 performance score of 1.3131 1.5139 1.0635 1.1020
Ranking 4 8 3 2 1 and 5 6
2. By using the gray correlation analysis, management performance evaluation
Take eight companies of the index series as a maximum of the optimal index collection, calculation grey correlation coefficient factor = 0.5, take weighted relational grade, the weight calculation when take the AHP method have been weight. According to the calculation of the grey correlation degree, the weighted eight companies operating performance evaluation results such as table 3 shows:
Table 3
Evaluation objects through the northeast central anhui high-speed high-speed fujian high-speed chutian high-speed ganyue high-speed ninghu high-speed deep high speed
0.9244 0.8516 0.9413 0.9394 performance score of 0.9279 0.9439 0.9010 0.9066
2 3 4 5 8 rank 1 7 6
3. The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method for the management performance evaluation
Here, the evaluation factors sets figure 1 14 index, namely:
U = {X1 X2 X3 X4,,,,,,, X6 X5 X7 X8, X9, X10, X11, X12 X13, X14},
Collect V = {evaluation operating performance, high performance V1, operating performance in V2 low V3};
Evaluation factors concentration of all indexes for quantitative index, so the trapezoidal membership functions and establish index rating of the subordinate relationship between (as shown in figure 2 shows). Will the data pretreatment into the membership function, can get three evaluation levels of membership vector R1, R2, R3, three levels to take weight (this article take (0.5, 0.3, 0.2)) calculation judgment matrix R, the judgment matrix R = 0.5 R1 + 0.3 R2 + 0.2 R3. In this example establish fuzzy assessment model, each of A weight of the evaluation factors determine by using the AHP method is determined, the weights of evaluation model for: B = A * R, including synthetic operation using common matrix multiplication. The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method of the above eight companies operating performance of the results of the evaluation of such as table 4 shows:
Table 4
Evaluation objects through the northeast central anhui high-speed high-speed fujian high-speed chutian high-speed ganyue high-speed ninghu high-speed deep high speed
0.4635 0.2421 0.5964 0.5000 performance score of 0.5982 0.5179 0.3566 0.3911
5 8 2 4 1 in 3 and 6
4. Adopt TOPSIS method to conduct business performance evaluation
Adopt TOPSIS method, take eight companies of the index series as a maximum of the optimal vector, and the minimum that form a sequence as the most bad vector, through calculation of the evaluated object the optimal vector and the index between vector of the Euclidean distance, to obtain the optimal evaluation objects and vector of the “fitting in” degree, as a basis for evaluation. The basic model for: Ci = (Di-/ Di-+ Di +), of which Di-for evaluation objects to the most bad vector distance between the evaluation objects, Di + for the optimal vector distance between the object and the evaluation, Ci for the optimal vector of the relatively close to degrees, the greater the Ci is the better performance, the weight of the weighted when still AHP method is adopted the weight of income. Adopt TOPSIS method to the results of the evaluation of such as shown in table 5:
Table 5
Evaluation objects through the northeast central anhui high-speed high-speed fujian high-speed chutian high-speed ganyue high-speed ninghu high-speed deep high speed
0.6561 0.0837 0.7226 0.7253 performance score of 0.6523 0.7439 0.5385 0.5560
Ranking 4 8 3 2 1 and 5 6
5. Using the factor analysis method for evaluating the performance of management
The software of SPSS can be directly obtained the eight companies of factor score, in this case, through the factor analysis, the characteristics of the first four factors is greater than 1, the variance explained by 91.35% of the total variance for precise reasons, this example take seven factors before, the seven factors explain all of the variance. On the performance of the companies in its comprehensive evaluation score based on the synthetical score, the calculation method of each factor is the contribution of each company for weight in seven factors on the linear weighted score and the obtained. Using the factor analysis method, the results of the evaluation of such as table 6 shows:
Table 6
Evaluation objects through the northeast central anhui high-speed high-speed fujian high-speed chutian high-speed ganyue high-speed ninghu high-speed deep high speed
Performance score 0.0185 1.0799 0.2755 0.3073 0.2318 0.3956 0.1511 0.0024
5 4 3 2 rank 8 1 and 6
3. The evaluation results of comparative analysis
The empirical process of five species of summary table 7 ranking results such as shown:
Table 7
Sorting method on the northeast central anhui high-speed high-speed fujian high-speed chutian high-speed ganyue high-speed ninghu high-speed deep high speed
AHP 4 8 3 2 1 and 5 6
2 3 4 5 8 gray 1 and 6
5 and 1 2 4 fuzzy 3 7 6
4 8 3 2 5 TOPSIS 1 7 6
Factor 2 3 4 5 and 7 6 1
Serial number 5 4 3 2 total 8 1 7 6
In the example above all kinds of evaluation method of the evaluation index system and original data and pretreatment method, so the same are shown in table 7 empirical evaluation result difference depends on just evaluation method, namely from various methods itself input raw data to output the evaluation results this process to difference of the evaluation results of the differences. In this paper, the process is the premise of difference analysis, factor analysis and correlation coefficient, Euclidean distance etc, based on mathematical theory are reliable, all can truly reflect the objective evaluation of the differences between objects.
For to compare, the above five kinds of method according to the evaluation process includes the extent of the subjective factors are classification: factor analysis of objective evaluation method, the AHP, grey evaluation method and subjective evaluation method for the TOPSIS Ⅰ, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of subjective evaluation method Ⅱ. In table 8 shows is the various evaluation methods were to sort results of the correlation coefficient between Spearman, the greater the coefficient ranking results show that the closer.
Table 8
Sorting method an objective evaluation method subjective evaluation method Ⅰ subjective evaluation method Ⅱ
Gray TOPSIS fuzzy AHP factor
An objective evaluation method 1 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.786 factor
Subjective evaluation method Ⅰ AHP 00.976 1 0.952 1 0.69
0.976 0.952 0.952 0.833 1 gray
0.976 1 0.952 1 0.69 TOPSIS
Subjective evaluation method of fuzzy 0.786 0.69 0.833 0.69 Ⅱ 1
1.) an objective evaluation method and subjective evaluation method of Ⅰ comparison: through the table 8 Spearman correlation coefficient, factor analysis that the sort of the results and the three kind of subjective evaluation method Ⅰ results with the same correlation coefficient of correlation, which is 0.976.
Factor analysis in the comprehensive evaluation value structure involved when the weight of the mathematical transformation from with the generation, and factor analysis of the specific process in mathematics has strict logic, can say factor analysis method to deal with data from start until the comprehensive factor score output of the process is strong objectivity; And subjective evaluation method Ⅰ and factor analysis, the AHP method compared to the original index weighting method of grey correlation degree before, correlation coefficient, TOPSIS method before weighting of Euclidean distance before the weighting process is a mathematical process, the difference is that in the determination of weighted weighted function on subjective evaluation method Ⅰ is subjective certain; So from the result of evaluation, factor analysis to see output process and subjective evaluation method Ⅰ difference depends on the weighted weighted function.
2.) an objective evaluation method and subjective evaluation method Ⅱ quite: the sort of the factor analysis results and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, the result of low correlation correlation coefficient is 0.786.
Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method of the evaluation set from the definition, especially the membership functions of the building, and the selection of synthetic operator until the weights of the selection, the output process evaluation results are included subjective judgment factors, optional sex is bigger, the evaluation result depends largely on the participation of the quality evaluation experts. So fuzzy evaluation and factor analysis evaluation result differences may result from the evaluation process of any one of the link, the results of the evaluation of both very easy to produce bigger difference.
3.) the subjective evaluation method Ⅰ and subjective evaluation method Ⅱ comparison: both the evaluation results of correlation is not high also, such as mentioned above, subjective evaluation method in Ⅰ weighting of the process is before mathematical process, and the comprehensive fuzzy evaluation weighted before the process is subjective judgment, if both used in the integrated weight weight by the same method is obtained above all is the example (AHP method is adopted to get weight of), the evaluation results depends on the integrated weight difference before any link.
4.) the three kind of subjective evaluation method Ⅰ the comparison between the TOPSIS method AHP and: the sort of the same results, both highly correlated with grey correlation method, correlation coefficient is 0.976.
The three methods are through to the original data, using the mathematical operation of subjective determined this weight to the results of the mathematical operation weighting output after the result of evaluation, the weight of the weighted in the same situation, should be the same results above output, and the sort of the method of AHP TOPSIS exactly the same also confirmed it; But grey correlation method in weighting mathematical process before the grey correlation coefficient calculation, when “resolution” the determination factor without a reasonable standard (this example take factor = 0.5), this and AHP method and the difference, also a little TOPSIS is this difference, make the grey correlation TOPSIS method and AHP method and the results of the evaluation of differences are.
The above analysis and empirical results but can’t explain the process of evaluation and objective of the mathematical operation and subjective judgment, in fact the merits of the mathematical operation sometimes may distort truth, subjective judgment can sometimes combined with the characteristics of evaluation objects formed the more a reflection of reality.
But some scholars believe that the results of the comprehensive evaluation method of can find an optimal sort, and put forward the theory, the serial number sum number theory and weighted average theory, the so-called “serial number and theory” refers to the various evaluation methods of the sort of the serial number, serial number sum sum, according to get the sort of the serial number since the sum is the best place for sequence, the serial number sum equal to when sorting, can press the number theory determine its a sequence, and in this case according to the results of the serial number sum sorting table 7. Using relevant analysis here spearman various sorting and serial number sum of correlation sort is briefly analyzed in this paper, the results as the chart 9 shows:
Chart 9
Sorting method an objective evaluation method subjective evaluation method Ⅰ subjective evaluation method Ⅱ
Factor analysis method AHP grey correlation TOPSIS fuzzy evaluation
Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.976 0.976 0.976 0.786 1
From the table, it is known that the objective weighting 9 that factor analysis and serial number of the combined method same results, three kind of subjective evaluation method Ⅰ and serial number sum of correlation method, and the same highly correlated correlation coefficient is 0.976 (are), and the fuzzy evaluation method combined with the serial number of the lowest correlation, correlation coefficient is 0.786.
Four, last word
In view of the above all kinds of evaluation methods in the evaluation process between the differences, in choosing evaluation method to evaluate when combined with the characteristics of the object, and fully consider these differences may give the influence caused by the evaluation results. Such as when a decision evaluation objects to highlight certain aspects of the features, use the evaluation method of subjectivity stronger may get better results; And the characteristics of evaluation objects vague, or evaluation personnel not accurate enough to grasp the knowledge of the characteristics of evaluation objects, use the objectivity of the evaluation method stronger more appropriate.
