IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i17p13233-d1232319.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on the Rural Environmental Governance and Interaction Effects of Farmers under the Perspective of Circular Economy—Evidence from Three Provinces of China

Author

Listed:
  • Yijia Wang

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Senwei Huang

    (School of Public Administration & Law, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China)

  • Jia Liu

    (School of Urban Economics and Public Administration, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China)

Abstract

As an essential subject of rural environmental governance, farmers’ environmental governance behavior directly affects the level and efficiency of rural environmental governance. In traditional rural society, the characteristics of “acquaintance society”, “circle doctrine”, and “clan society” have led to farmers’ behaviors being influenced and constrained by their surrounding social support and social relations. Therefore, the interaction between farmers will affect the effectiveness of rural environmental governance, and the interaction effect will also affect the implementation of policies in rural environmental governance. In the strategic context of the policy of “building a beautiful and harmonious countryside that is desirable to live and work in” and “promoting green development and harmonious coexistence between human beings and nature” put forward by the 20th National Congress, we follow the principles of Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle from the perspective of circular economy, taking farmers as our research subject. We take the behavior of domestic garbage disposal as an example and, relying on the National Social Science Foundation project, use field research data and refer to neighbor groups and neighboring village groups. We use the Manski model to test the interaction effect of the two groups, analyze the interaction between individual farmers and the interaction between neighboring villages, and, finally, prove that there is an endogenous interaction effect and a situational interaction effect between the neighbor group and neighboring villages. Endogenous interaction effects, contextual interaction effects, and association effects exist between neighbor groups, while only contextual interaction effects and association effects exist between neighboring village groups. The above conclusions provide a policy reference for rural household waste and environmental management.

Suggested Citation

  • Yijia Wang & Senwei Huang & Jia Liu, 2023. "Research on the Rural Environmental Governance and Interaction Effects of Farmers under the Perspective of Circular Economy—Evidence from Three Provinces of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:13233-:d:1232319
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/13233/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/13233/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fortin, Bernard & Yazbeck, Myra, 2015. "Peer effects, fast food consumption and adolescent weight gain," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 125-138.
    2. Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Payments for environmental services and the poor: concepts and preliminary evidence," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 279-297, June.
    3. Foster, Andrew D & Rosenzweig, Mark R, 1995. "Learning by Doing and Learning from Others: Human Capital and Technical Change in Agriculture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(6), pages 1176-1209, December.
    4. Charles F. Manski, 2000. "Economic Analysis of Social Interactions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 115-136, Summer.
    5. Jisheng Yang & Jiaolong Li & Yanjun Cao, 2023. "Analysis of peer effects on consumption in rural China based on social networks," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(6), pages 617-635, February.
    6. Munshi, Kaivan, 2004. "Social learning in a heterogeneous population: technology diffusion in the Indian Green Revolution," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 185-213, February.
    7. Charles F. Manski, 1993. "Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 60(3), pages 531-542.
    8. Diane K Denis & Torsten Jochem & Anjana Rajamani & Wei Jiang, 2020. "Shareholder Governance and CEO Compensation: The Peer Effects of Say on Pay," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(7), pages 3130-3173.
    9. Jisheng Yang & Yanjun Cao & Jiaolong Li, 2023. "Peer effects on consumption in rural China," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(10), pages 1390-1394, June.
    10. Case, Anne, 1992. "Neighborhood influence and technological change," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 491-508, September.
    11. Theodoros Skevas & Ioannis Skevas & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2022. "The role of peer effects on farmers’ decision to adopt unmanned aerial vehicles: evidence from Missouri," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(12), pages 1366-1376, March.
    12. Jeffrey R. Brown & Zoran Ivković & Paul A. Smith & Scott Weisbenner, 2008. "Neighbors Matter: Causal Community Effects and Stock Market Participation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(3), pages 1509-1531, June.
    13. Navarro Ferronato & Vincenzo Torretta, 2019. "Waste Mismanagement in Developing Countries: A Review of Global Issues," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-28, March.
    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. Kaustia, Markku & Knüpfer, Samuli, 2012. "Peer performance and stock market entry," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 321-338.
    2. Ishika Gupta & Prakashan Chellattan Veettil & Stijn Speelman, 2020. "Caste, Social Networks and Variety Adoption," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 15(2), pages 155-183, August.
    3. Mekonnen, Daniel Ayalew & Gerber, Nicolas & Matz, Julia Anna, 2018. "Gendered Social Networks, Agricultural Innovations, and Farm Productivity in Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 321-335.
    4. Kiichi Tokuoka, 2017. "Is stock investment contagious among siblings?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1505-1528, June.
    5. Feng, Yao, 2011. "Local spillovers and learning from neighbors: Evidence from durable adoptions in rural China," MPRA Paper 33924, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Fishman, Arthur & Fishman, Ram & Gneezy, Uri, 2019. "A tale of two food stands: Observational learning in the field," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 101-108.
    7. Bet Caeyers, 2014. "Peer effects in development programme awareness of vulnerable groups in rural Tanzania," CSAE Working Paper Series 2014-11, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    8. Muzhe Yang & Hsien-Ming Lien & Shin-Yi Chou, 2014. "Is There A Physician Peer Effect? Evidence From New Drug Prescriptions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(1), pages 116-137, January.
    9. Mekonnen Daniel Ayalew & Gerber Nicolas & Matz Julia Anna, 2016. "Working Paper 235 - Social Networks, Agricultural Innovations, and Farm Productivity in Ethiopia," Working Paper Series 2330, African Development Bank.
    10. Matuschke, Ira, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of social networks in rural innovation systems: An overview," IFPRI discussion papers 816, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. Bennett, Daniel & Chiang, Chun-Fang & Malani, Anup, 2015. "Learning during a crisis: The SARS epidemic in Taiwan," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 1-18.
    12. repec:oxf:wpaper:wps/2014-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Liu, Hong & Sun, Qi & Zhao, Zhong, 2014. "Social learning and health insurance enrollment: Evidence from China's New Cooperative Medical Scheme," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 84-102.
    14. Nakano, Yuko & Tsusaka, Takuji W. & Aida, Takeshi & Pede, Valerien O., 2015. "The Impact of Training on Technology Adoption and Productivity of Rice Farming in Tanzania: Is Farmer-to-Farmer Extension Effective?," Working Papers 90, JICA Research Institute.
    15. Chen, Xiaodong & Lupi, Frank & An, Li & Sheely, Ryan & Viña, Andrés & Liu, Jianguo, 2012. "Agent-based modeling of the effects of social norms on enrollment in payments for ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 16-24.
    16. Adjognon, Serge & Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O., 2014. "Spatial Dependence in the Adoption of the Urea Deep Placement for Rice Production in Niger State, Nigeria: A Bayesian Spatial Autoregressive Probit Estimation Approach," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170515, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Wendy Janssens, 2005. "Measuring Externalities in Program Evaluation," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 05-017/2, Tinbergen Institute, revised 30 Mar 2006.
    18. Le, Thi Quynh Anh & Shimamura, Yasuharu & Yamada, Hiroyuki, 2020. "Information acquisition and the adoption of a new rice variety towards the development of sustainable agriculture in rural villages in Central Vietnam," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    19. Nakano, Yuko & Tsusaka, Takuji W. & Aida, Takeshi & Pede, Valerien O., 2018. "Is farmer-to-farmer extension effective? The impact of training on technology adoption and rice farming productivity in Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 336-351.
    20. Jose Funes & Laixiang Sun & Fernando Sedano & Giovanni Baiocchi & Todd Benson, 2022. "Social interaction and geographic diffusion of iron‐biofortified beans in Rwanda," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(4), pages 503-528, July.

    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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:13233-:d:1232319. 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.