IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/asagre/243168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantity Calculation of the Land Unsuitable for Farming: A Case Study of Anze County in Shanxi Province

Author

Listed:
  • CHANG, Kangkang
  • XUE, Longyi
  • XUE, Tao

Abstract

Adhering to the "red line" of 1800 million mu of arable land is China's arable land protection guideline and policy, and the "red line" places emphasis on both quantity and quality of arable land. Taking Shanxi's Anze County as an example, based on ecological safety and natural suitability criteria, we select 10 evaluation indicators to evaluate the farming suitability of existing land in the county. Results show that Anze County needs to reuse 48.7% of the existing arable land for ecological purpose in order to ensure ecological safety. It still retains 51.3% of existing arable land after abandoning tillage, which can ensure 0.15 ha of arable land per capita, 743.12 kg of grain per capita and 170% of food self-sufficiency rate, thereby fully ensuring food safety. The farming suitability evaluation of land resources should not only consider the natural suitability of land, but also consider ecological safety. Faced with the new situation of arable land protection, it is necessary to explore new farmland protection theories and indicator systems based on actual conditions, to meet the requirements of sustainable development of population, resources and ecology.

Suggested Citation

  • CHANG, Kangkang & XUE, Longyi & XUE, Tao, 2016. "Quantity Calculation of the Land Unsuitable for Farming: A Case Study of Anze County in Shanxi Province," Asian Agricultural Research, USA-China Science and Culture Media Corporation, vol. 8(05), pages 1-4, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:asagre:243168
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.243168
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/243168/files/17.PDF
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.243168?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    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:asagre:243168. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: .

    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.