IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i21p13797-d951268.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effectiveness Assessment of Agricultural Subsidy Policies on Food Security: Evidence from China’s Poverty-Stricken Villages

Author

Listed:
  • Chengyou Li

    (The Center for Economic Research, Shandong University, Jinan 250100, China
    School of Finance, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Zhouhao Sha

    (School of Statistics and Mathematics, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Xiaoqin Sun

    (School of Finance, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Yong Jiao

    (College of Economics & Management, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China)

Abstract

This paper builds a theoretical model based on a representative peasant household in the neoclassical model, comprehensively considers three types of farmer households in China, and evaluates the effects of the agricultural subsidy policy under equilibrium conditions. Based on the two bottom lines of guaranteeing China’s grain security and ensuring no large-scale return to poverty, this paper uses 2010, 2012, and 2014 tracking survey data from the Mutual Aid Fund for Poverty-Stricken Villages in China to construct an econometric model to evaluate agricultural subsidy effectiveness from the three aspects of farmers’ total sown area, total grain output, and total income. The research draws the following conclusions: (1) Agricultural subsidies can significantly increase the sown area, grain production, and total income of farmers in poverty-stricken areas, which is conducive to improving the farmers’ comprehensive capacity for grain production as well as income, and this conclusion remains valid after performing a series of robustness tests and solving endogeneity problems. (2) The effects of the agricultural subsidy policy are affected by natural conditions, economic development levels, and functional orientation of grain production in different regions, and they have divergent influences on farmers’ total sown area, total output, and total income. (3) Agricultural subsidies boost farmers’ willingness to cultivate grain, reduce land abandonment, and increase the total sown area, total output, and total grain income. The willingness to cultivate grain is an important mechanism that affects the effectiveness of the agricultural subsidy policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Chengyou Li & Zhouhao Sha & Xiaoqin Sun & Yong Jiao, 2022. "The Effectiveness Assessment of Agricultural Subsidy Policies on Food Security: Evidence from China’s Poverty-Stricken Villages," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-17, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:13797-:d:951268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/13797/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/13797/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jayne, Thomas S. & Mason, Nicole M. & Burke, William J. & Ariga, Joshua, 2018. "Review: Taking stock of Africa’s second-generation agricultural input subsidy programs," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-14.
    2. Bojnec, Štefan & Fertő, Imre, 2022. "Do different types of Common Agricultural Policy subsidies promote farm employment?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Thia C. Hennessy & Tahir Rehman, 2008. "Assessing the Impact of the ‘Decoupling’ Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy on Irish Farmers’ Off‐farm Labour Market Participation Decisions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 41-56, February.
    4. Yi, Fujin & Sun, Dingqiang & Zhou, Yingheng, 2015. "Grain subsidy, liquidity constraints and food security—Impact of the grain subsidy program on the grain-sown areas in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 114-124.
    5. Zou, Baoling & Mishra, Ashok K. & Luo, Biliang, 2020. "Grain subsidy, off-farm labor supply and farmland leasing: Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    6. Li, Chengyou & Jiao, Yong & Sun, Tao & Liu, Anran, 2021. "Alleviating multi-dimensional poverty through land transfer: Evidence from poverty-stricken villages in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    7. Garrone, Maria & Emmers, Dorien & Olper, Alessandro & Swinnen, Johan, 2019. "Jobs and agricultural policy: Impact of the common agricultural policy on EU agricultural employment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Panichvejsunti, Thitiya & Kuwornu, John K.M. & Shivakoti, Ganesh P. & Grünbühel, Clemens & Soni, Peeyush, 2018. "Smallholder farmers’ crop combinations under different land tenure systems in Thailand: The role of flood and government policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 129-137.
    9. Martin Nordin, 2014. "Does the Decoupling Reform Affect Agricultural Employment in Sweden? Evidence from an Exogenous Change," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(3), pages 616-636, September.
    10. T.S. Jayne & Shahidur Rashid, 2013. "Input subsidy programs in sub-Saharan Africa: a synthesis of recent evidence," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(6), pages 547-562, November.
    11. Ray D. Bollman & Shon M. Ferguson, 2019. "The Local Impacts of Agricultural Subsidies: Evidence from the Canadian Prairies," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 507-528, June.
    12. Barry K. Goodwin & Ashok K. Mishra, 2006. "Are “Decoupled” Farm Program Payments Really Decoupled? An Empirical Evaluation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(1), pages 73-89.
    13. Bola Amoke Awotide & Aziz Karimov & Aliou Diagne & Tebila Nakelse, 2013. "The impact of seed vouchers on poverty reduction among smallholder rice farmers in Nigeria," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(6), pages 647-658, November.
    14. Akber, Nusrat & Paltasingh, Kirtti Ranjan & Mishra, Ashok K., 2022. "How can public policy encourage private investments in Indian agriculture? Input subsidies vs. public investment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    15. David R. Just & Jaclyn D. Kropp, 2013. "Production Incentives from Static Decoupling: Land Use Exclusion Restrictions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1049-1067.
    16. Xinru Han & Ping Xue & Ningning Zhang, 2021. "Impact of Grain Subsidy Reform on the Land Use of Smallholder Farms: Evidence from Huang-Huai-Hai Plain in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lin Zhang & Jinyan Chen & Faustino Dinis & Sha Wei & Chengzhi Cai, 2022. "Decoupling Effect, Driving Factors and Prediction Analysis of Agricultural Carbon Emission Reduction and Product Supply Guarantee in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Na Xu & Liqin Zhang & Xiyuan Leng, 2022. "Sustainable Food Production from a Labor Supply Perspective: Policies and Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.

    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. Na Xu & Liqin Zhang & Xiyuan Leng, 2022. "Sustainable Food Production from a Labor Supply Perspective: Policies and Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Bojnec, Štefan & Fertő, Imre, 2022. "Do different types of Common Agricultural Policy subsidies promote farm employment?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Xinru Han & Ping Xue & Ningning Zhang, 2021. "Impact of Grain Subsidy Reform on the Land Use of Smallholder Farms: Evidence from Huang-Huai-Hai Plain in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, September.
    4. Song, Ge & Ren, Gaofeng, 2022. "Spatial response of cultivated land use efficiency to the maize structural adjustment policy in the "Sickle Bend" region of China: An empirical study from the cold area of northeast," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    5. Zein Kallas & Teresa Serra & Jos頠 M. Gil, 2012. "Effects of policy instruments on farm investments and production decisions in the Spanish COP sector," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(30), pages 3877-3886, October.
    6. Sylvester Amoako Agyemang & Tomáš Ratinger & Miroslava Bavorová, 2022. "The Impact of Agricultural Input Subsidy on Productivity: The Case of Ghana," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(3), pages 1460-1485, June.
    7. Fujimoto, Takefumi & Suzuki, Aya, 2021. "Do Fertilizer and Seed Subsidies Strengthen Farmers' Market Participation? the Impact of Tanzania NAIVS on Farmers' Purchase of Agricultural Inputs and Their Maize-Selling Activities," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315044, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Kanyamuka, Joseph S. & Nankhuni, Flora J. & Jayne, Thomas S. & Munthali, Moses W., 2018. "Making Fertilizer Use More Effective and Profitable: The Role of Complementary Interventions," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Briefs 275670, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    9. Mockshell, Jonathan & Birner, Regina, 2020. "Who has the better story? On the narrative foundations of agricultural development dichotomies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    10. Hammond, Jim & Rosenblum, Nathaniel & Breseman, Dana & Gorman, Léo & Manners, Rhys & van Wijk, Mark T. & Sibomana, Milindi & Remans, Roseline & Vanlauwe, Bernard & Schut, Marc, 2020. "Towards actionable farm typologies: Scaling adoption of agricultural inputs in Rwanda," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    11. Mason, Nicole & Tembo, Solomon, 2015. "Do input Subsidies Reduce Poverty among Smallholder Farm Households? Panel Survey Evidence from Zambia," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212233, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Malacarne, J.G. & Paul, L.A., 2022. "Do the benefits of improved management practices to nutritional outcomes “dry up” in the presence of drought? Evidence from East Africa," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    13. Hodjo, Manzamasso & Dalton, Timothy & Nakelse, Tebila & Acharya, Ram N & Blayney, Don, 2021. "From coupon to calories: Assessing input coupon impact on household food calories production," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 22(C).
    14. Jindo, Keiji & Schut, Antonius G.T. & Langeveld, Johannes W.A., 2020. "Sustainable intensification in Western Kenya: Who will benefit?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    15. Nicole M. Mason & Ayala Wineman & Solomon T. Tembo, 2020. "Reducing poverty by ‘ignoring the experts’? Evidence on input subsidies in Zambia," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(5), pages 1157-1172, October.
    16. Feng Ye & Zhongna Yang & Mark Yu & Susan Watson & Ashley Lovell, 2023. "Can Market-Oriented Reform of Agricultural Subsidies Promote the Growth of Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity? Empirical Evidence from Maize in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    17. Song, Xiaoqing & Wang, Xiong & Li, Xinyi & Zhang, Weina & Scheffran, Jürgen, 2021. "Policy-oriented versus market-induced: Factors influencing crop diversity across China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    18. Jayne, T.S. & Mason, Nicole M. & Burke, William J. & Ariga, Joshua, 2016. "Agricultural Input Subsidy Programs in Africa: An Assessment of Recent Evidence," Food Security International Development Working Papers 245892, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    19. Mason, Nicole M. & Tembo, Solomon T., 2014. "Do input subsidies reduce poverty among smallholder farm households? Evidence from Zambia," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170617, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Yinhao Wu & Enru Wang & Changhong Miao, 2019. "Fertilizer Use in China: The Role of Agricultural Support Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-23, August.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:13797-:d:951268. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.