IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v12y2022i9p1442-d912608.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Routes Determine Results? Comparing the Performance of Differentiated Farmland Conservation Policies in China Based on Farmers’ Perceptions

Author

Listed:
  • Min Song

    (School of Business Administration, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan 430073, China)

  • Yuxin Ji

    (School of Business Administration, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan 430073, China)

  • Mingdi Zhu

    (School of Business Administration, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan 430073, China)

  • Junji Yue

    (School of Business Administration, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan 430073, China)

  • Luping Yi

    (College of Land Management, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

Abstract

Revealing the performance of farmland conservation policies that use different types of policy instruments can provide a basis for optimizing such policies. Based on farmers’ perceptions of farmland conservation policies, this paper conducted an empirical analysis using data on 986 rural households which were collected from seven towns/districts in three provinces of China. More specifically, this paper first uses propensity score matching to analyze the impact of the comprehensive application of economic incentive and command-and-control policy instruments on farmland conservation. Then, it explores the differences between the effects of local economic incentive farmland conservation policies (FCP-LE) that employed different policy instruments. Finally, the factors affecting farmers’ perceptions of FCP-LE performance were identified. The results show that the combination of economic incentives and command-and-control policy instruments significantly improved the performance of farmland conservation policies. Furthermore, after comparing FCP-LE with payments to rural communities in the form of monetary compensation only, it is evident that a combination of FCP-LE with payments to farmers and integrated monetary compensation and social security subsidies yields better farmland conservation. Additionally, there are differences between the factors affecting farmers’ perceptions of FCP-LE performance in different areas. Our findings aim to help encourage more areas to develop diversified local incentive policies in order to conserve farmland.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:9:p:1442-:d:912608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/9/1442/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/9/1442/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Chen, Zhu & Zhang, Anlu & Zhou, Kehao & Huang, Lingxiang, 2021. "Can payment tools substitute for regulatory ones? Estimating the policy preference for agricultural land preservation, Tianjin, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Liu, Moucheng & Yang, Lun & Bai, Yanying & Min, Qingwen, 2018. "The impacts of farmers’ livelihood endowments on their participation in eco-compensation policies: Globally important agricultural heritage systems case studies from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 231-239.
    4. David Card & Alexandre Mas & Enrico Moretti & Emmanuel Saez, 2012. "Inequality at Work: The Effect of Peer Salaries on Job Satisfaction," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2981-3003, October.
    5. Xin Yang & Xiaohe Zhou & Shuwen Cao & Anlu Zhang, 2021. "Preferences in Farmland Eco-Compensation Methods: A Case Study of Wuhan, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Zavalloni, Matteo & D’Alberto, Riccardo & Raggi, Meri & Viaggi, Davide, 2021. "Farmland abandonment, public goods and the CAP in a marginal area of Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    7. Dongyang Xiao & Haipeng Niu & Liangxin Fan & Suxia Zhao & Hongxuan Yan, 2019. "Farmers’ Satisfaction and its Influencing Factors in the Policy of Economic Compensation for Cultivated Land Protection: A Case Study in Chengdu, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    8. Yunxiao Bai & Moucheng Liu & Lun Yang, 2021. "Calculation of Ecological Compensation Standards for Arable Land Based on the Value Flow of Support Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    9. Del Rossi, Gemma & Hecht, Jory S. & Zia, Asim, 2021. "A mixed-methods analysis for improving farmer participation in agri-environmental payments for ecosystem services in Vermont, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    10. Mudaca, Joao Daniel & Tsuchiya, Toshiyuki & Yamada, Masaaki & Onwona-Agyeman, Siaw, 2015. "Household participation in Payments for Ecosystem Services: A case study from Mozambique," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-27.
    11. Narducci, Jenna & Quintas-Soriano, Cristina & Castro, Antonio & Som-Castellano, Rebecca & Brandt, Jodi S., 2019. "Implications of urban growth and farmland loss for ecosystem services in the western United States," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-11.
    12. 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.
    13. Benra, Felipe & Nahuelhual, Laura, 2019. "A trilogy of inequalities: Land ownership, forest cover and ecosystem services distribution," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 247-257.
    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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. Weidong Xiao & Liquan Qu & Kai Li & Chuanxu Guo & Jie Li, 2022. "An Assessment of the Rational Range of Eco-Compensation Standards: A Case Study in the Nujiang Prefecture, Southwestern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, August.
    5. Hua Li & Dan Su & Yu Cao & Jiayi Wang & Yu Cao, 2022. "Optimizing the Compensation Standard of Cultivated Land Protection Based on Ecosystem Services in the Hangzhou Bay Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    6. Yunyun Qi & Tianye Zhang & Jing Cao & Cai Jin & Tianyu Chen & Yue Su & Chong Su & Srikanta Sannigrahi & Arabinda Maiti & Shiqi Tao & Qi Zhang & Tan Li, 2022. "Heterogeneity Impacts of Farmers’ Participation in Payment for Ecosystem Services Based on the Collective Action Framework," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-20, November.
    7. Jie Pang & Leshan Jin & Yujie Yang & Heng Li & Zongling Chu & Fei Ding, 2022. "Policy Cognition, Household Income and Farmers’ Satisfaction: Evidence from a Wetland Ecological Compensation Project in the Poyang Lake Area at the Micro Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-14, September.
    8. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    9. Cardoso, Ana Rute, 2012. "Money and rank in the labor market," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 325-328.
    10. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    11. Thorvaldur Gylfason, 2019. "Inequality Undermines Democracy and Growth," CESifo Working Paper Series 7486, CESifo.
    12. Amrei Lahno & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2015. "Peer effects in risk taking: Envy or conformity?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 73-95, February.
    13. Hoffman, Mitchell & Burks, Stephen V., 2017. "Worker Overconfidence: Field Evidence and Implications for Employee Turnover and Returns from Training," IZA Discussion Papers 10794, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Xiaogeng Xu & Satu Metsälampi & Michael Kirchler & Kaisa Kotakorpi & Peter Hans Matthews & Topi Miettinen, 2023. "Which income comparisons matter to people, and how? Evidence from a large field experiment," Working Papers 10, Finnish Centre of Excellence in Tax Systems Research.
    15. Ouellet, F. & Mundler, P. & Dupras, J. & Ruiz, J., 2020. "“Community developed and farmer delivered.” An analysis of the spatial and relational proximities of the Alternative Land Use Services program in Ontario," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    16. Ghadir Asadi & Mohammad H. Mostafavi-Dehzooei, 2022. "The Role of Learning in Adaptation to Technology: The Case of Groundwater Extraction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-37, June.
    17. Clément Bellet, 2017. "Essays on Inequality, Social Preferences and Consumer Behavior," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/vbu6kd1s68o, Sciences Po.
    18. Jäger, Simon & Roth, Christopher & Roussille, Nina & Schoefer, Benjamin, 2021. "Worker Beliefs about Outside Options," IZA Discussion Papers 14963, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Van Landeghem, Bert & Vandeplas, Anneleen, 2018. "The relationship between status and happiness: Evidence from the caste system in rural India," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 62-71.
    20. Lahno, Amrei M. & Serra-Garcia, Marta, 2012. "Peer Effects in Risk Taking," Discussion Papers in Economics 14309, University of Munich, Department of Economics.

    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:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:9:p:1442-:d:912608. 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.