IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v81y2019icp785-801.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of payment for ecosystem services and agricultural subsidy programs on rural household land use decisions in China: Synergy or trade-off?

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Ying
  • Bilsborrow, Richard E.
  • Zhang, Qi
  • Li, Jiangfeng
  • Song, Conghe

Abstract

While agri-environmental policies that target different problems are often simultaneously implemented at the same place, little attention has been paid to the interactions of the policies, either in policy design or evaluation. The goal of this study is to understand the potential interactions (synergies or trade-offs) between an agricultural subsidy program and two payments for ecosystem services (PES) programs, namely the Conversion of Cropland to Forest Program (CCFP) and the Ecological Welfare Forest Program (EWFP), and their effects on household land use decisions. Data collected from 481 rural households in Anhui, China are used for the exploration. The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework is used to identify factors that may affect household land use decisions, i.e., whether to expand, stabilize, or shrink the cropland area, and further to identify whether to abandon or rent out land if the shrinkage decision is made. The results show that: (1) most rural households (58%) in the study area reduce cultivated land, and mostly via cropland abandonment, while only 16% of the interviewed households expand land area; (2) the most important factors determining cropland expansion include farm tools and transportation equipment, while the number of parcels and financial support are the dominant factors that stimulate households to adopt abandoning over renting-out decisions when deciding to shrink cropland; (3) EWFP payment has a significant direct impact on cropland management, while no significant influences are observed from the other two programs; (4) there exist complex trade-offs among the three government programs with similar or conflicting aims, which highlights the need to take policy interactions into account when designing new agri-environmental policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Ying & Bilsborrow, Richard E. & Zhang, Qi & Li, Jiangfeng & Song, Conghe, 2019. "Effects of payment for ecosystem services and agricultural subsidy programs on rural household land use decisions in China: Synergy or trade-off?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 785-801.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:81:y:2019:i:c:p:785-801
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718302928
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.057?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. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    2. Yu, Wusheng & Jensen, Hans G, 2014. "Trade policy responses to food price crisis and implications for existing domestic support measures: the case of China in 2008," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 651-683, October.
    3. Zhang, Lan & Feng, Shuyi & Heerink, Nico & Qu, Futian & Kuyvenhoven, Arie, 2018. "How do land rental markets affect household income? Evidence from rural Jiangsu, P.R. China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 151-165.
    4. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    5. Babigumira, Ronnie & Angelsen, Arild & Buis, Maarten & Bauch, Simone & Sunderland, Terry & Wunder, Sven, 2014. "Forest Clearing in Rural Livelihoods: Household-Level Global-Comparative Evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 67-79.
    6. Ellis, Frank, 2000. "Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198296966.
    7. 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.
    8. Hayes, Tanya & Murtinho, Felipe & Wolff, Hendrik, 2017. "The Impact of Payments for Environmental Services on Communal Lands: An Analysis of the Factors Driving Household Land-Use Behavior in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 427-446.
    9. Song, Conghe & Bilsborrow, Richard & Jagger, Pamela & Zhang, Qi & Chen, Xiaodong & Huang, Qingfeng, 2018. "Rural Household Energy Use and Its Determinants in China: How Important Are Influences of Payment for Ecosystem Services vs. Other Factors?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 148-159.
    10. Anderson, Dennis & Leiserson, Mark W, 1980. "Rural Nonfarm Employment in Developing Countries," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(2), pages 227-248, January.
    11. Emi Uchida & Scott Rozelle & Jintao Xu, 2009. "Conservation Payments, Liquidity Constraints, and Off-Farm Labor: Impact of the Grain-for-Green Program on Rural Households in China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 70-86.
    12. Alary, Véronique & Corniaux, Christian & Gautier, Denis, 2011. "Livestock's Contribution to Poverty Alleviation: How to Measure It?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1638-1648, September.
    13. Steven Were Omamo, 1998. "Farm-to-market transaction costs and specialisation in small-scale agriculture: Explorations with a non-separable household model," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 152-163.
    14. Walker, Robert & Homma, Alfredo Kingo Oyama, 1996. "Land use and land cover dynamics in the Brazilian Amazon: an overview," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 67-80, July.
    15. Meng, Lei, 2012. "Can grain subsidies impede rural–urban migration in hinterland China? Evidence from field surveys," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 729-741.
    16. Sierra, Jorge & Causeret, François & Chopin, Pierre, 2017. "A framework coupling farm typology and biophysical modelling to assess the impact of vegetable crop-based systems on soil carbon stocks. Application in the Caribbean," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 172-180.
    17. Frank Ellis, 2000. "The Determinants of Rural Livelihood Diversification in Developing Countries," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 289-302, May.
    18. Wunder, Sven & Angelsen, Arild & Belcher, Brian, 2014. "Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 1-11.
    19. Walker, Robert, 1996. "Land Use Dynamics in the Brazilian Amazon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-2, July.
    20. Barrett, C. B. & Reardon, T. & Webb, P., 2001. "Nonfarm income diversification and household livelihood strategies in rural Africa: concepts, dynamics, and policy implications," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 315-331, August.
    21. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Nguyen, Loc Duc & Lippe, Rattiya Suddeephong & Grote, Ulrike, 2017. "Determinants of Farmers’ Land Use Decision-Making: Comparative Evidence From Thailand and Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 199-213.
    22. Gray, Clark L., 2009. "Environment, Land, and Rural Out-migration in the Southern Ecuadorian Andes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 457-468, February.
    23. van Wijk, Mark T., 2014. "From global economic modelling to household level analyses of food security and sustainability: How big is the gap and can we bridge it?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P2), pages 378-388.
    24. Thulstrup, Andreas Waaben, 2015. "Livelihood Resilience and Adaptive Capacity: Tracing Changes in Household Access to Capital in Central Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 352-362.
    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. Li, Lingchao & Liu, Can & Liu, Jinlong & Cheng, Baodong, 2021. "Has the Sloping Land Conversion Program in China impacted the income and employment of rural households?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Long, Kaisheng & Omrani, Hichem & Pijanowski, Bryan C., 2020. "Impact of local payments for ecosystem services on land use in a developed area of China: A qualitative analysis based on an integrated conceptual framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Weiwen Wang & Jian Gong & Ying Wang & Yang Shen, 2022. "The Causal Pathway of Rural Human Settlement, Livelihood Capital, and Agricultural Land Transfer Decision-Making: Is It Regional Consistency?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-24, July.
    4. Wang, Weiwen & Gong, Jian & Wang, Ying & Shen, Yang, 2021. "Exploring the effects of rural site conditions and household livelihood capitals on agricultural land transfers in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Xufang Zhang & Minghua Zhao & Xiaojie Wang & Rongqing Han, 2022. "Regional Differences of Farmers’ Willingness to Grow Grain and Its Influencing Factors in Shandong Province under the Background of New-Type Urbanization," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, August.
    6. Min Song & Yuxin Ji & Mingdi Zhu & Junji Yue & Luping Yi, 2022. "Routes Determine Results? Comparing the Performance of Differentiated Farmland Conservation Policies in China Based on Farmers’ Perceptions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-20, September.
    7. Zhang, Qi & Bilsborrow, Richard E. & Song, Conghe & Tao, Shiqi & Huang, Qingfeng, 2019. "Rural household income distribution and inequality in China: Effects of payments for ecosystem services policies and other factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 114-127.
    8. Xinhai Lu & Yanwei Zhang & Handong Tang, 2021. "Modeling and Simulation of Dissemination of Cultivated Land Protection Policies in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Hongbin Liu & Jie Lyu, 2021. "Drive Mechanisms of Soil Quality Changes in Peri-Urban Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Wenhai Xie & Wanfu Jin & Kairui Chen & Jilin Wu & Chunshan Zhou, 2019. "Land Use Transition and Its Influencing Factors in Poverty-Stricken Mountainous Areas of Sangzhi County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-19, September.
    11. Jianying Wang & Yumei Xu & Lilin Zou & Ying Wang, 2021. "Does Culture Affect Farmer Willingness to Transfer Rural Land? Evidence from Southern Fujian, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    12. Giefer, Madeline M. & An, Li, 2022. "Divergent impacts of the grain to green program, landholdings, and demographic factors on livelihood diversification in rural China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    13. Thang Quyet Nguyen & Nguyen Tan Huynh & Wen-Kai K. Hsu, 2021. "Estimate the Impact of Payments for Environmental Services on Local Livelihoods and Environment: An Application of Propensity Scores," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    14. Meijun Zhu & Kengcheng Zheng & Baoliu Liu & Fang Jin, 2024. "Can Agricultural Support and Protection Subsidy Policies Promote High-Quality Development of Grain Industry? A Case Study of China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-22, September.
    15. Lili Chen & Jiquan Peng & Yufeng Chen & Qingyan Cao, 2024. "Will Agricultural Infrastructure Construction Promote Land Transfer? Analysis of China’s High-Standard Farmland Construction Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-19, October.
    16. Yaofeng Yang & Yajuan Chen & Zhenrong Yu & Pengyao Li & Xuedong Li, 2020. "How Does Improve Farmers’ Attitudes toward Ecosystem Services to Support Sustainable Development of Agriculture? Based on Environmental Kuznets Curve Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    17. Jiang, Yanan & Guan, Dongjie & He, Xiujuan & Yin, Boling & Zhou, Lilei & Sun, Lingli & Huang, Danan & Li, Zihui & Zhang, Yanjun, 2022. "Quantification of the coupling relationship between ecological compensation and ecosystem services in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    18. Jing Zhang & Xueming Li & Tongliga Bao & Zhenghai Li & Chong Liu & Yuan Xu, 2021. "Linking Demographic Factors, Land Use, Ecosystem Services, and Human Well-Being: Insights from an Sandy Landscape, Uxin in Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, April.
    19. Wang, Ying & Zhang, Qi & Bilsborrow, Richard & Tao, Shiqi & Chen, Xiaodong & Sullivan-Wiley, Kira & Huang, Qingfeng & Li, Jiangfeng & Song, Conghe, 2020. "Effects of payments for ecosystem services programs in China on rural household labor allocation and land use: Identifying complex pathways," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    20. Zhang, Qi & Wang, Ying & Tao, Shiqi & Bilsborrow, Richard E. & Qiu, Tong & Liu, Chong & Sannigrahi, Srikanta & Li, Qirui & Song, Conghe, 2020. "Divergent socioeconomic-ecological outcomes of China’s conversion of cropland to forest program in the subtropical mountainous area and the semi-arid Loess Plateau," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).

    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. Wang, Ying & Zhang, Qi & Bilsborrow, Richard & Tao, Shiqi & Chen, Xiaodong & Sullivan-Wiley, Kira & Huang, Qingfeng & Li, Jiangfeng & Song, Conghe, 2020. "Effects of payments for ecosystem services programs in China on rural household labor allocation and land use: Identifying complex pathways," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Zhang, Qi & Bilsborrow, Richard E. & Song, Conghe & Tao, Shiqi & Huang, Qingfeng, 2019. "Rural household income distribution and inequality in China: Effects of payments for ecosystem services policies and other factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 114-127.
    3. Fengchun Wang & Hua Zheng & Xiaoke Wang & Wenjia Peng & Dongchun Ma & Cong Li, 2017. "Classification of the Relationship between Household Welfare and Ecosystem Reliance in the Miyun Reservoir Watershed, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Wunder, Sven & Angelsen, Arild & Belcher, Brian, 2014. "Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 1-11.
    5. Fred Mawunyo Dzanku, 2018. "Rational But Poor? An Explanation for Rural Economic Livelihood Strategy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(2), pages 365-381, June.
    6. Longjunjiang Huang & Cong Liao & Xuan Guo & Yanlin Liu & Xiaojin Liu, 2023. "Analysis of the Impact of Livelihood Capital on Livelihood Strategies of Leased-In Farmland Households: A Case Study of Jiangxi Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-29, June.
    7. Kazungu, Moses & Zhunusova, Eliza & Yang, Anastasia Lucy & Kabwe, Gillian & Gumbo, Davison J. & Günter, Sven, 2020. "Forest use strategies and their determinants among rural households in the Miombo woodlands of the Copperbelt Province, Zambia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    8. Sarah Turner & Thi-Thanh-Hiên Pham, 2015. "“Nothing Is Like It Was Before”: The Dynamics between Land-Use and Land-Cover, and Livelihood Strategies in the Northern Vietnam Borderlands," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-30, November.
    9. Antonelli, Chiara & Coromaldi, Manuela & Pallante, Giacomo, 2022. "Crop and income diversification for rural adaptation: Insights from Ugandan panel data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    10. Tran, Tuyen Quang & Vu, Huong Van, 2020. "The pro-poor impact of non-crop livelihood activities in rural Vietnam: A panel data quantile regression analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 348-362.
    11. Coomes, Oliver T. & Barham, Bradford L. & Takasaki, Yoshito, 2004. "Targeting conservation-development initiatives in tropical forests: insights from analyses of rain forest use and economic reliance among Amazonian peasants," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 47-64, November.
    12. Felkner, John S. & Lee, Hyun & Shaikh, Sabina & Kolata, Alan & Binford, Michael, 2022. "The interrelated impacts of credit access, market access and forest proximity on livelihood strategies in Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    13. Giefer, Madeline M. & An, Li & Chen, Xiaodong, 2021. "Normative, livelihood, and demographic influences on enrollment in a payment for ecosystem services program," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    14. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Do, Truong Lam & Halkos, George & Wilson, Clevo, 2020. "Health shocks and natural resource extraction: A Cambodian case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    15. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Do, Truong Lam & Bühler, Dorothee & Hartje, Rebecca & Grote, Ulrike, 2015. "Rural livelihoods and environmental resource dependence in Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 282-295.
    16. Jue Wang & Haiwei Jiang & Yuan He, 2023. "Determinants of Smallholder Farmers’ Income-Generating Activities in Rubber Monoculture Dominated Region Based on Sustainable Livelihood Framework," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    17. Wenjia Peng & Brian E. Robinson & Hua Zheng & Cong Li & Fengchun Wang & Ruonan Li, 2019. "Telecoupled Sustainable Livelihoods in an Era of Rural–Urban Dynamics: The Case of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    18. Yost, Alexandra & An, Li & Bilsborrow, Richard & Shi, Lei & Chen, Xiaodong & Yang, Shuang & Zhang, Weiyong, 2020. "Mechanisms behind concurrent payments for ecosystem services in a Chinese nature reserve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    19. Jan Fałkowski & Maciej Jakubowski & Paweł Strawiński, 2014. "Returns from income strategies in rural Poland," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 22(1), pages 139-178, January.
    20. Maria Mwaipopo Fibaek, 2021. "Working Poor? A Study of Rural Workers' Economic Welfare in Kenya," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 41-69, January.

    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:81:y:2019:i:c:p:785-801. 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.