IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ifaamr/308816.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Support policy preferences of grain family farms: evidence from Huang-huai-hai plain of China

Author

Listed:
  • Yu, Lili
  • Niu, Ziheng
  • Gao, Yang
  • Tian, Borui

Abstract

This study uses the choice experiment method with 570 grain family farms located in the Huang-huai-hai Plain and determine various support policy attributes and the attribute levels for the two dimensions of policy measures and policy communication channels. Ordering effects are eliminated by warming up subjects in advance and using information disclosure. This paper uses the inferred attribute non-attendance method to process attributes ignored by the grain family farms and analyzes grain family farms’ preferences for different support policies with a mixed logit model and then uses a latent class model to analyze how the characteristics of grain family farms relate to different preference types. We find that grain family farms have a strong preference for agricultural subsidies, credit support, and technical support (the mean coefficient is greater than 0.8). Moreover, the preferences of grain family farms over the policy communication channel (the mean coefficient is greater than 0.5) cannot be ignored. Faced with the same policy attribute combination, grain family farms with high education levels, reasonable scales of operation, and good understanding of support policies are more likely to improve their profit margins. There are four preference types of grain family farms: finance preference (43.2%), knowledge and technology preference (28.5%), land transfer preference (15.4%), and policy information preference (12.9%).

Suggested Citation

  • Yu, Lili & Niu, Ziheng & Gao, Yang & Tian, Borui, 2019. "Support policy preferences of grain family farms: evidence from Huang-huai-hai plain of China," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 23(5), October.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:308816
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.308816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/308816/files/ifamr2019.0124.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.308816?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tomas Baležentis & Irena Kriščiukaitienė & Alvydas Baležentis, 2014. "A nonparametric analysis of the determinants of family farm efficiency dynamics in Lithuania," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(5), pages 589-599, September.
    2. Bir, Courtney & Cummins, Ann M. & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Wolf, Chistopher A., 2018. "Willingness to pay estimates informing agribusiness decision making: a cautionary tale," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(7), August.
    3. Hazell, Peter & Poulton, Colin & Wiggins, Steve & Dorward, Andrew, 2010. "The Future of Small Farms: Trajectories and Policy Priorities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1349-1361, October.
    4. Gao, Yang & Zhang, Xiao & Wu, Lei & Yin, Shijiu & Lu, Jiao, 2017. "Resource basis, ecosystem and growth of grain family farm in China: Based on rough set theory and hierarchical linear model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 157-167.
    5. Hoppe, Robert A. & Banker, David E., 2010. "Structure and Finances of U.S. Farms: Family Farm Report, 2010 Edition," Economic Information Bulletin 291950, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Thang Cong Nguyen & Jackie Robinson & Shinji Kaneko & The Chinh Nguyen, 2015. "Examining ordering effects in discrete choice experiments: A case study in Vietnam," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(c), pages 39-57.
    7. Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Schulz, Norbert & Breustedt, Gunnar, 2014. "Assessing Farmers' Willingness to Accept "Greening": Insights from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Gremany," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 170560, Agricultural Economics Society.
    8. James Vercammen, 2007. "Farm bankruptcy risk as a link between direct payments and agricultural investment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 34(4), pages 479-500, December.
    9. Yang, Dennis Tao & An, Mark Yuying, 2002. "Human capital, entrepreneurship, and farm household earnings," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 65-88, June.
    10. Byun, Hyunsuk & Lee, Chul-Yong, 2017. "Analyzing Korean consumers’ latent preferences for electricity generation sources with a hierarchical Bayesian logit model in a discrete choice experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 294-302.
    11. David L. Ortega & Patrick S. Ward, 2016. "Information processing strategies and framing effects in developing country choice experiments: results from rice farmers in India," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(5), pages 493-504, September.
    12. Sitakanta Panda, 2015. "Farmer education and household agricultural income in rural India," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 42(6), pages 514-529, June.
    13. Deininger, Klaus & Jin, Songqing, 2005. "The potential of land rental markets in the process of economic development: Evidence from China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 241-270, October.
    14. Malte Reimers & Stephan Klasen, 2013. "Revisiting the Role of Education for Agricultural Productivity," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(1), pages 131-152.
    15. David Hensher & Nina Shore & Kenneth Train, 2005. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Water Service Attributes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(4), pages 509-531, December.
    16. Norbert Schulz & Gunnar Breustedt & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2014. "Assessing Farmers' Willingness to Accept “Greening”: Insights from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 26-48, January.
    17. Hess, Stephane & Hensher, David A., 2010. "Using conditioning on observed choices to retrieve individual-specific attribute processing strategies," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 781-790, July.
    18. Kihl, Young W., 1982. "Farm structure and rural policy in Japan," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 332-336, November.
    19. Gao, Yang & Niu, Ziheng & Yang, Haoran & Yu, Lili, 2019. "Impact of green control techniques on family farms' welfare," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 91-99.
    20. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    21. Wiggins, Steve & Kirsten, Johann & Llambí, Luis, 2010. "The Future of Small Farms," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1341-1348, October.
    22. Krishnakumar, Jyotsna & Chan-Halbrendt, Catherine, 2010. "Consumer Preferences for Imported Kona Coffee in South India: A Latent Class Analysis," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19.
    23. Eric Ruto & Guy Garrod, 2009. "Investigating farmers' preferences for the design of agri-environment schemes: a choice experiment approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 631-647.
    24. Calum G. Turvey & Xueping Xiong, 2017. "Financial inclusion, financial education, and e‐commerce in rural china," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(2), pages 279-285, April.
    25. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    26. Barrett E. Kirwan, 2009. "The Incidence of U.S. Agricultural Subsidies on Farmland Rental Rates," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(1), pages 138-164, February.
    27. Luis Orea & Subal C. Kumbhakar, 2004. "Efficiency measurement using a latent class stochastic frontier model," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 169-183, January.
    28. Riccardo Scarpa & Timothy J. Gilbride & Danny Campbell & David A. Hensher, 2009. "Modelling attribute non-attendance in choice experiments for rural landscape valuation," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 36(2), pages 151-174, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dan Pan, 2016. "The Design of Policy Instruments towards Sustainable Livestock Production in China: An Application of the Choice Experiment Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Na-na Wang & Liang-guo Luo & Ya-ru Pan & Xue-mei Ni, 2019. "Use of discrete choice experiments to facilitate design of effective environmentally friendly agricultural policies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1543-1559, August.
    3. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    5. Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Rodriguez-Entrena, Macario & Arriaza, Manuel & Gomez-Limon, Jose A., 2015. "Matching supply-side and demand-side analyses for the assessment of agri-environmental schemes: The case of irrigated olive groves of southern Spain," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211919, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Pham, Hung Duy & Crase, Lin & Burton, Michael & Cooper, Bethany, 2019. "Strategies for integrating farmers into modern vegetable supply chains in Vietnam: farmer attitudes and willingness to accept," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(2), April.
    7. Gonçalves, Tânia & Lourenço-Gomes, Lina & Pinto, Lígia M. Costa, 2022. "The role of attribute non-attendance on consumer decision-making: Theoretical insights and empirical evidence," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 788-805.
    8. Star, Megan & Rolfe, John & Barbi, Emily, 2019. "Do outcome or input risks limit adoption of environmental projects: Rehabilitating gullies in Great Barrier Reef catchments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 73-82.
    9. Sponagel, Christian & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Piepho, Hans-Peter & Bahrs, Enno, 2021. "Farmers’ preferences for nature conservation compensation measures with a focus on eco-accounts according to the German Nature Conservation Act," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    10. Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Rodríguez-Entrena, Macario & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Arriaza Balmón, Manuel, 2014. "Agri-environmental schemes in olive growing: farmers’ preferences towards collective participation and ecological focus areas," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182918, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Sylvaine Lemeilleur & Julie Subervie & Anderson Edilson Presoto & Roberta de Castro Souza & Maria Sylvia Macchione Saes, 2020. "Coffee farmers’ motivations to comply with sustainability standards," Post-Print halshs-02278751, HAL.
    12. Pham, Hung Duy & Crase, Lin & Burton, Michael & Cooper, Bethany, 2019. "Strategies for integrating farmers into modern vegetable supply chains in Vietnam: farmer attitudes and willingness to accept," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(2), April.
    13. Chen, Xuqi & Shen, Meng & Gao, Zhifeng, 2017. "Impact of Intra-respondent Variations in Attribute Attendance on Consumer Preference in Food Choice," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258509, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Caputo, Vincenzina & Loo, Ellen J. Van & Scarpa, Riccardo & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "“Using Experiments to Address Attribute Non-attendance in Consumer Food Choices”," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 177173, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Granado-Díaz, Rubén & Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Gómez-Limón, José A., 2022. "Willingness to accept for rewilding farmland in environmentally sensitive areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    17. Massfeller, Anna & Meraner, Manuela & Hüttel, Silke & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2022. "Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: A German perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    18. Lizin, Sebastien & Van Passel, Steven & Schreurs, Eloi, 2015. "Farmres' Perceived Cost of Land Use restrictions: A Simulated Purchasing Decision Using Dscrete Choice Experiments," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212054, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Christensen, Tove & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Nielsen, Helle Oersted & Mørkbak, Morten Raun & Hasler, Berit & Denver, Sigrid, 2011. "Determinants of farmers' willingness to participate in subsidy schemes for pesticide-free buffer zones--A choice experiment study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1558-1564, June.
    20. Wittstock, Felix & Paulus, Anne & Beckmann, Michael & Hagemann, Nina & Baaken, Marieke Cornelia, 2022. "Understanding farmers’ decision-making on agri-environmental schemes: A case study from Saxony, Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:308816. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifamaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.