IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v108y2021ics0264837721002817.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nuanced insights into land buyer perceptions of engaging in rural land transactions from a cost perspective: Evidence from China’s emerging rural land market

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Weifang

Abstract

Understanding land buyer perceptions of engaging in rural land transactions is crucial towards institutional land reform, policymaking, and academia. Buyer perception is mostly determined by a goal in which maximising profits is central, either by increasing revenues or by decreasing costs. Since revenues are often overestimated, costs appear more relevant. Buyers were often argued positive about purchasing rural land because low historical costs were assumed important. However, contradictory conclusions from the future cost perspective emerged, leading to a new assumption that buyer perceptions cannot be sufficiently understood if the distinctive variants of costs are not taken into account. This study contributes nuanced insights of buyer perceptions from a cost perspective, based on China’s empirical evidence considering buyer characteristics, geography, and institutional settings. Data were collected employing 102 semi-structured interviews out of 430 rural land transactions in five Chinese counties and from factual materials. Within a mixed approach, the qualitative analysis was used as a predominant method. In sharp contrast to the literature, the general findings indicate that buyers are not that eager to engage in rural land transactions. The detailed nuances indicate that: 1) a higher percentage of buyers from inland region and peri-urban areas have neutral perceptions; 2) most new companies hold neutral perceptions; and companies operating within business & service and integrated service sectors are neutral; 3) there is not much difference of buyers’ perceptions between the group-led and village-led modes. The main reason for buyers’ neutral perceptions is that rather than historical costs, future costs explicitly dominate buyer perceptions. These shed new light on ongoing debates about buyers’ dilemmas in land investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Weifang, 2021. "Nuanced insights into land buyer perceptions of engaging in rural land transactions from a cost perspective: Evidence from China’s emerging rural land market," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:108:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721002817
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105558
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837721002817
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105558?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dadashpoor, Hashem & Ahani, Somayeh, 2019. "Land tenure-related conflicts in peri-urban areas: A review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 218-229.
    2. Kong, Xuesong & Liu, Yaolin & Jiang, Ping & Tian, Yasi & Zou, Yafeng, 2018. "A novel framework for rural homestead land transfer under collective ownership in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 138-146.
    3. Wang, Weifang & van Noorloos, Femke & Spit, Tejo, 2020. "Stakeholder power relations in Land Value Capture: comparing public (China) and private (U.S.) dominant regimes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Vivek Sah & Paul Gallimore & John Sherwood Clements, 2010. "Experience and real estate investment decision‐making: a process‐tracing investigation," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 207-219, July.
    5. Lorne Carmichael & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2003. "Caring About Sunk Costs: A Behavioral Solution to Holdup Problems with Small Stakes," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 106-118, April.
    6. Paul C. Cheshire, 2013. "Land market regulation: market versus policy failures," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 170-188, September.
    7. Paul Greenhalgh, 2008. "An Examination of Business Occupier Relocation Decision Making: Distinguishing Small and Large Firm Behaviour," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 107-126, November.
    8. Peter Fisher & Simon Robson, 2006. "The Perception and Management of Risk in UK Office Property Development," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 135-161, April.
    9. R. Preston Mcafee & Hugo M. Mialon & Sue H. Mialon, 2010. "Do Sunk Costs Matter?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(2), pages 323-336, April.
    10. Cath Jackson & Allison Orr, 2019. "Investment decision-making under economic policy uncertainty," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(2), pages 153-185, April.
    11. Mats Wilhelmsson, 2008. "Evidence of Buyer Bargaining Power in the Stockholm Residential Real Estate Market," Journal of Real Estate Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 475-500, January.
    12. Tan, Hun-Tong & Yates, J. Frank, 1995. "Sunk Cost Effects: The Influences of Instruction and Future Return Estimates," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 311-319, September.
    13. Tan, Rong & Wang, Rongyu & Heerink, Nico, 2020. "Liberalizing rural-to-urban construction land transfers in China: Distribution effects," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Sina Shahab & J. Peter Clinch & Eoin O'Neill, 2018. "Estimates of Transaction Costs in Transfer of Development Rights Programs," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 84(1), pages 61-75, January.
    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. Wen, Lanjiao & Yang, Shenjie & Qi, Mengna & Zhang, Anlu, 2024. "How does China’s rural collective commercialized land market run? New evidence from 26 pilot areas, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    2. Shenjie Yang & Lanjiao Wen, 2023. "Regional Heterogeneity in China’s Rural Collectively Owned Commercialized Land Market: An Empirical Analysis from 2015–2020," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, February.
    3. Meine Pieter van Dijk, 2022. "Crop Insurance, a Frugal Innovation in Tanzania, Helps Small Maize Farmers and Contributes to an Emerging Land Market," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-12, June.

    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. Daniel Friedman & Kai Pommerenke & Rajan Lukose & Garrett Milam & Bernardo Huberman, 2007. "Searching for the sunk cost fallacy," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(1), pages 79-104, March.
    2. Wang, Qingri & Hu, Hongwei & Hu, Rumei, 2024. "Local government behavior in rural construction land marketization in China: An archetype analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    3. Jiao, Man & Xu, Hengzhou, 2022. "How do Collective Operating Construction Land (COCL) Transactions affect rural residents’ property income? Evidence from rural Deqing County, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Weiguo Fan & Wei Yao & Kehan Chen, 2023. "Integrating Energy Systems Language and Emergy Approach to Simulate and Analyze the Energy Flow Process of Land Transfer," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-24, May.
    5. Yu Wang & Li Tian & Ziyi Wang & Chenyue Wang & Yuan Gao, 2023. "Effects of Transfer of Land Development Rights on Urban–Rural Integration: Theoretical Framework and Evidence from Chongqing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Mukesh Eswaran & Hugh M. Neary, 2016. "The Evolutionary Logic Of Honoring Sunk Costs," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(2), pages 835-846, April.
    7. Mace, Alan & Holman, Nancy & Paccoud, Antoine & Sundaresan, Jayaraj, 2015. "Coordinating density; working through conviction, suspicion and pragmatism," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 56768, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Kleemann, Janina & Struve, Berenike & Spyra, Marcin, 2023. "Conflicts in urban peripheries in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    9. Jieying Yang & Li Yu & Jingxiang Zhang, 2024. "Impacts on Rural Community Development and Governance by Different Land Ownership: A Comparative Study Based on Two Villages in China," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 36(6), pages 1616-1635, December.
    10. Sirirat Sae Lim & Hong Ngoc Nguyen & Chia-Li Lin, 2022. "Exploring the Development Strategies of Science Parks Using the Hybrid MCDM Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-29, April.
    11. R. Preston Mcafee & Hugo M. Mialon & Sue H. Mialon, 2010. "Do Sunk Costs Matter?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(2), pages 323-336, April.
    12. Zehua Wang & Fachao Liang & Sheng-Hau Lin, 2023. "Can socially sustainable development be achieved through homestead withdrawal? A hybrid multiple-attributes decision analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    13. Yasmin Mohd Adnan & Nor Adibah Mohd Arif & Muhammad Najib Razali, 2022. "Exploring Green Office Building Choices by Corporate Tenants in Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-23, November.
    14. Emine Mine Thompson & Paul Greenhalgh & Kevin Muldoon-Smith & James Charlton & Michal Dolník, 2016. "Planners in the Future City: Using City Information Modelling to Support Planners as Market Actors," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 1(1), pages 79-94.
    15. Hongbin Liu & Yuepeng Zhou, 2020. "The Marketization of Rural Collective Construction Land in Northeastern China: The Mechanism Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    16. Shafi, Ahsan & Wang, Zhanqi & Ehsan, Muhsan & Riaz, Faizan Ahmed & Ali, Muhammad Rashid & Xu, Feng, 2023. "A game theory approach to land acquisition conflicts in Pakistan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    17. Li, Bowei & Shen, Yueqin, 2021. "Effects of land transfer quality on the application of organic fertilizer by large-scale farmers in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    18. Xiuling Ding & Qian Lu & Lipeng Li & Apurbo Sarkar & Hua Li, 2023. "Does Labor Transfer Improve Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Farming?—A Bivariate Probit Modeling Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, August.
    19. Weihang Gong & Jing (Victor) Li & Mee Kam Ng, 2021. "Deciphering Property Development around High-Speed Railway Stations through Land Value Capture: Case Studies in Shenzhen and Hong Kong," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.
    20. David Asante Edwin & Evam Kofi Glover & Edinam K. Glover, 2020. "When Tradition Meets Modernity in Land Registration: Evidence from Dagbon, Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-28, October.

    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:eee:lauspo:v:108:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721002817. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.