IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v15y2025i16p1713-d1720266.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Regulation vs. Perceived Value About Manure and Sewage Resource Utilization in Chinese Dairy Farms

Author

Listed:
  • Hao Liu

    (College of Economics, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410000, China)

  • Jing Zhang

    (School of Agriculture and Food Sustainability, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia)

  • Hua Peng

    (Institute of Agricultural Information, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Zetian Yu

    (Institute of Agricultural Information, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Xiaoxia Dong

    (Institute of Agricultural Information, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China)

Abstract

Clarifying the key driving factors behind the adoption of manure resource utilization technology and promoting its widespread application are crucial for achieving the high-quality development of animal husbandry. This study analyses survey data from 412 large-scale dairy farms across 23 provinces in China. The Cov-AHP method is used to measure the adoption intensity of technology and analyse its mechanisms and underlying logic. The results indicate that value perception, particularly economic value perception, is the strongest driver of adoption intensity. Although the direct effect of environmental regulation is limited, it significantly amplifies the influence of value perception—particularly economic value perception—on technology adoption intensity, especially in large-scale farms. Furthermore, incentive-based regulations (e.g., government subsidies) markedly promote the adoption of manure resource utilization technologies, whereas constraint-based measures (e.g., fines) exert stronger effects on small-scale farms. Additionally, demonstration farms serve as critical catalysts for disseminating best practices and accelerating technology adoption. This study suggests that policies should integrate value perception with targeted financial subsidies and regulatory measures to improve technology adoption, especially with support for small-scale farms. By leveraging demonstration farms to promote successful experiences, the comprehensive adoption of manure resource utilization technologies across the industry can be further improved.

Suggested Citation

  • Hao Liu & Jing Zhang & Hua Peng & Zetian Yu & Xiaoxia Dong, 2025. "Environmental Regulation vs. Perceived Value About Manure and Sewage Resource Utilization in Chinese Dairy Farms," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-19, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:16:p:1713-:d:1720266
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/16/1713/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/16/1713/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Su, Hongwei & Liang, Biming, 2021. "The impact of regional market integration and economic opening up on environmental total factor energy productivity in Chinese provinces," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PA).
    2. Sardianou, E. & Genoudi, P., 2013. "Which factors affect the willingness of consumers to adopt renewable energies?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1-4.
    3. Damania, Richard & Fredriksson, Per G. & List, John A., 2003. "Trade liberalization, corruption, and environmental policy formation: theory and evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 490-512, November.
    4. Syed H. Jafri & K. M. Mehedi Adnan & Stefan Baimbill Johnson & Anzalin Ali Talukder & Mark Yu & Edward Osei, 2024. "Challenges and Solutions for Small Dairy Farms in the U.S.: A Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-25, December.
    5. McInnes, Morris & Ramakrishnan, Ram T. S., 1991. "A decision-theory model of motivation and its usefulness in the diagnosis of management control systems," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 167-184.
    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. Yu-Bong Lai, 2004. "Trade liberalization, consumption externalities and the environment," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(5), pages 1-9.
    2. Otrachshenko, Vladimir & Popova, Olga, 2026. "Environment vs. economic growth: Do environmental preferences translate into support for Green parties?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    3. Daniel Fiorino, 2011. "Explaining national environmental performance: approaches, evidence, and implications," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(4), pages 367-389, November.
    4. Gani, Azmat & Scrimgeour, Frank, 2014. "Modeling governance and water pollution using the institutional ecological economic framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 363-372.
    5. Galinato, Gregmar I. & Chouinard, Hayley H., 2018. "Strategic interaction and institutional quality determinants of environmental regulations," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 114-132.
    6. Copeland, Brian R., 2005. "Policy Endogeneity and the Effects of Trade on the Environment," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 1-15, April.
    7. Monde Rapiya & Mthunzi Mndela & Wayne Truter & Abel Ramoelo, 2025. "Assessing the Economic Viability of Sustainable Pasture and Rangeland Management Practices: A Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, March.
    8. Maurizio Lisciandra & Carlo Migliardo, 2017. "An Empirical Study of the Impact of Corruption on Environmental Performance: Evidence from Panel Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(2), pages 297-318, October.
    9. Degirmenci, Tunahan & Yavuz, Hakan, 2024. "Environmental taxes, R&D expenditures and renewable energy consumption in EU countries: Are fiscal instruments effective in the expansion of clean energy?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 299(C).
    10. Briguglio, Marie & Formosa, Glenn, 2017. "When households go solar: Determinants of uptake of a Photovoltaic Scheme and policy insights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 154-162.
    11. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    12. Lan, Haifeng & Gou, Zhonghua & Yang, Linchuan, 2020. "House price premium associated with residential solar photovoltaics and the effect from feed-in tariffs: A case study of Southport in Queensland, Australia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 907-916.
    13. Zhen Wang & Xupeng Zhang & Chaozheng Zhang & Qing Yang, 2022. "How Regional Integration Affects Urban Green Development Efficiency: Evidence from Urban Agglomeration in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-16, June.
    14. Baharoon, Dhyia Aidroos & Rahman, Hasimah Abdul & Fadhl, Saeed Obaid, 2016. "Publics׳ knowledge, attitudes and behavioral toward the use of solar energy in Yemen power sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 498-515.
    15. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Nilson, Roberta S. & Katkar, Venktesh V. & Stedman, Richard C. & Kay, David L. & Ifft, Jennifer E. & Zhang, K. Max, 2021. "Integrating social considerations in multicriteria decision analysis for utility-scale solar photovoltaic siting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    16. Arminen, Heli & Menegaki, Angeliki N., 2019. "Corruption, climate and the energy-environment-growth nexus," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 621-634.
    17. Dana C. Andersen, 2016. "Credit Constraints, Technology Upgrading, and the Environment," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(2), pages 283-319.
    18. Wang, Yubao & Zhen, Junjie, 2024. "Regional electricity cooperation model for cost-effective electricity management with an emphasis on economic efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    19. Akan, Taner & Gündüz, Halil İbrahim & Emirmahmutoğlu, Furkan & Işık, Ali Haydar, 2023. "Disaggregating renewable energy-growth nexus: W-ARDL and W-Toda-Yamamoto approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    20. Melita Steenberghe & Aislinn D’hulster & Johannes Weytjens & Marten Ovaere & Koen Schoors, 2025. "Tracking demographic and financial trends in renewable energy cooperative membership in Belgium using survey and bank transaction data," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:16:p:1713-:d:1720266. 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.