IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v124y2023ics0264837722004872.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The price gap between state-owned and collective farmlands: Evidence from Xinjiang and Heilongjiang, China

Author

Listed:
  • Qi, Yuan
  • Hou, Yuchen
  • Li, Yaoyao
  • Li, Luyue
  • Zhang, Jiaqing
  • Chang, Yuyang
  • Zhu, Daolin

Abstract

With the ongoing advancement of China’s agricultural modernization in recent years, researchers have recognized the importance of state-owned farmlands. However, there has been a lack of research investigating the differences between state-owned and collective farmlands in terms of price. To explore the effect of ownership differences on farmland price, this study constructs a four-dimensional theoretical framework that uses natural endowment, land utilization, economic environment, and asset expectations as the factors influencing prices. Moreover, to analyze the formation of price gaps in the framework, we include the differences between state-owned and collective farmlands in terms of the cropping structure, inputs, operation scale, and endowment effects. On this basis, we conduct an empirical test with a mediating effects model using 1103 data samples from the Xinjiang and Heilongjiang provinces in China. The results show the following: (1) As a production factor and living asset, the farmland price is affected by four factors: natural endowment, land utilization, economic environment, and asset expectations. (2) The price of state-owned farmlands is 3000 yuan/hm2/a, which is lower than that of collective farmlands. The main drivers of the price gap are the limited autonomy of the planting structure, insufficient factor input incentives, the effect of weak endowment, and the scale effect of state-owned farmlands. However, the scale effect of state-owned farmlands plays a positive role in narrowing the price gap. (3) Compared with the production scale of non-grain plots, that of grain plots makes it easier to exert their advantages, and the price gap for grain plots is smaller than that of non-grain plots. Therefore, it is necessary to emphasize the resource attributes of farmlands, weaken the function of assets, and increase the return of the output to agricultural producers while ensuring food security by increasing the scale of farmland operations.

Suggested Citation

  • Qi, Yuan & Hou, Yuchen & Li, Yaoyao & Li, Luyue & Zhang, Jiaqing & Chang, Yuyang & Zhu, Daolin, 2023. "The price gap between state-owned and collective farmlands: Evidence from Xinjiang and Heilongjiang, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:124:y:2023:i:c:s0264837722004872
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106460
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722004872
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106460?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. Qiu, Tongwei & Boris Choy, S.T. & Li, Shangpu & He, Qinying & Luo, Biliang, 2020. "Does land renting-in reduce grain production? Evidence from rural China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    2. Yu-Hui Chen & Chun-Lin Lee & Guan-Rui Chen & Chiung-Hsin Wang & Ya-Hui Chen, 2018. "Factors Causing Farmland Price-Value Distortion and Their Implications for Peri-Urban Growth Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Guo, Yuanzhi & Liu, Yansui, 2021. "Poverty alleviation through land assetization and its implications for rural revitalization in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    4. Erik D. Hanson & Bruce J. Sherrick & Todd H. Kuethe, 2018. "The Changing Roles of Urban Influence and Agricultural Productivity in Farmland Price Determination," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(2), pages 199-205.
    5. Megan Horst, 2019. "Changes in Farmland Ownership in Oregon, USA," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-22, February.
    6. Yan, Jinming & Yang, Yumeng & Xia, Fangzhou, 2021. "Subjective land ownership and the endowment effect in land markets: A case study of the farmland “three rights separation” reform in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    7. Olena Myrna & Martin Odening & Matthias Ritter, 2019. "The Influence of Wind Energy and Biogas on Farmland Prices," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, January.
    8. Liu, Yu & Yan, Binjian & Wang, Yue & Zhou, Yingheng, 2019. "Will land transfer always increase technical efficiency in China?—A land cost perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 414-421.
    9. Markus Goldstein & Christopher Udry, 2008. "The Profits of Power: Land Rights and Agricultural Investment in Ghana," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(6), pages 981-1022, December.
    10. Zhang, Jian & Mishra, Ashok K. & Hirsch, Stefan & Li, Xiaoshun, 2020. "Factors affecting farmland rental in rural China: Evidence of capitalization of grain subsidy payments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    11. Huy, Hoang Trieu & Nguyen, Trung Thanh, 2019. "Cropland rental market and farm technical efficiency in rural Vietnam," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 408-423.
    12. Lin, Wensheng & Huang, Jikun, 2021. "Impacts of agricultural incentive policies on land rental prices: New evidence from China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    13. Besley, Timothy, 1995. "Property Rights and Investment Incentives: Theory and Evidence from Ghana," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(5), pages 903-937, October.
    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. Ting Du & Chao Li & Zhaolin Wang, 2023. "Spatial Differentiation and Influencing Mechanisms of Farmland Transfer Rents in Mountainous Areas: Evidence from Chongqing and Its Surrounding Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, March.

    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. Ting Du & Chao Li & Zhaolin Wang, 2023. "Spatial Differentiation and Influencing Mechanisms of Farmland Transfer Rents in Mountainous Areas: Evidence from Chongqing and Its Surrounding Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Zhou, Yang & Zhong, Zhen & Cheng, Guoqiang, 2023. "Cultivated land loss and construction land expansion in China: Evidence from national land surveys in 1996, 2009 and 2019," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Ritter, Matthias & Hüttel, Silke & Odening, Martin & Seifert, Stefan, 2020. "Revisiting the relationship between land price and parcel size in agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Fernando M. Aragon, 2014. "Do better property rights improve local income?: Evidence from First Nations' treaties," Discussion Papers dp14-02, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    5. Thiemo Fetzer & Samuel Marden, 2017. "Take What You Can: Property Rights, Contestability and Conflict," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(601), pages 757-783, May.
    6. Fenske, James, 2014. "Trees, tenure and conflict: Rubber in colonial Benin," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 226-238.
    7. Sonia Bhalotra & Abhishek Chakravarty & Dilip Mookherjee & Francisco J. Pino, 2019. "Property Rights and Gender Bias: Evidence from Land Reform in West Bengal," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 205-237, April.
    8. Ramírez-Álvarez, Aurora Alejandra, 2019. "Land titling and its effect on the allocation of public goods: Evidence from Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Chen, Shuo & Lan, Xiaohuan, 2020. "Tractor vs. animal: Rural reforms and technology adoption in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    10. Fatema, Naureen, 2019. "Can land title reduce low-intensity interhousehold conflict incidences and associated damages in eastern DRC?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.
    12. Gani Aldashev, 2009. "Legal institutions, political economy, and development," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 25(2), pages 257-270, Summer.
    13. Gottlieb, Charles & Grobovšek, Jan, 2019. "Communal land and agricultural productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 135-152.
    14. Ali, Daniel Ayalew & Deininger, Klaus & Goldstein, Markus, 2014. "Environmental and gender impacts of land tenure regularization in Africa: Pilot evidence from Rwanda," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 262-275.
    15. Susanne Väth & Michael Kirk, 2014. "Do property rights and contract farming matter for rural development? Evidence from a large-scale investment in Ghana," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201416, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    16. Bambio, Yiriyibin & Bouayad Agha, Salima, 2018. "Land tenure security and investment: Does strength of land right really matter in rural Burkina Faso?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 130-147.
    17. Liesbet Vranken & Karen Macours & Nivelin Noev & Johan Swinnen, 2007. "Property Rights Imperfections, Asset Allocation, and Welfare: Co-Ownership in Bulgaria," LICOS Discussion Papers 18007, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    18. Castells-Quintana, David & del Pilar Lopez-Uribe, Maria & McDermott, Thomas K.J., 2018. "A review of adaptation to climate change through a development economics lens," Working Papers 309605, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    19. 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.
    20. Manara, Martina & Regan, Tanner, 2022. "Ask a local: improving the public pricing of land titles in urban Tanzania," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117856, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:124:y:2023:i:c:s0264837722004872. 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.