IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jecomi/v13y2025i4p85-d1617044.html

Does Digital Village Construction Promote Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity? An Empirical Study Based on China’s Provincial Panel Data

Author

Listed:
  • Lingling Xu

    (Faculty of Economics, Srinakharinwirot University, 114 Sukhumvit 23, Bangkok 10110, Thailand)

  • Danai Tanamee

    (Faculty of Economics, Srinakharinwirot University, 114 Sukhumvit 23, Bangkok 10110, Thailand)

  • Suppanunta Romprasert

    (Faculty of Economics, Srinakharinwirot University, 114 Sukhumvit 23, Bangkok 10110, Thailand)

Abstract

Based on endogenous growth theory and technological innovation theory, this paper uses panel data from 30 provinces in China from 2011 to 2022 to investigate the impact of digital village construction on agricultural green total factor productivity (AGTFP). AGTFP was measured by the EBM-GML method, and mediated effects and heterogeneity analysis were used to reveal its conduction pathway. The findings are as follows: (1) AGTFP showed an overall upward trend during the sample period, and most provinces peaked in 2018. Among them, the AGTFP index value of the eastern coastal provinces (such as Tianjin and Beijing) is between 1.059 and 1.129, maintaining the leading position. The western region fluctuates greatly; e.g., the AGTFP value of Qinghai Province fluctuates between 0.915 and 1.047. (2) Digital village construction significantly improves AGTFP by promoting green technology progress (coefficient 0.105, significant at the 5% level) but has no significant impact on technical efficiency. (3) Agricultural informatization (coefficient 0.040, significant at the 5% level) and rural human capital (coefficient 0.115, significant at the 5% level) are important intermediary channels for digital village construction to affect AGTFP. (4) Regional heterogeneity analysis showed that the effect of digital village construction in the eastern region (coefficient 0.151, significant at the 5% level) and the southern provinces (coefficient 0.170, significant at the 1% level) was more significant. The digital village construction in the main producing areas (coefficient 0.113, significant at the 1% level) also significantly promoted AGTFP. Based on the research results, it is suggested that the promotion and application of digital technology be strengthened, the land transfer system improved, an agricultural information platform built, rural human capital improved, and regional differentiated development strategies implemented.

Suggested Citation

  • Lingling Xu & Danai Tanamee & Suppanunta Romprasert, 2025. "Does Digital Village Construction Promote Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity? An Empirical Study Based on China’s Provincial Panel Data," Economies, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jecomi:v:13:y:2025:i:4:p:85-:d:1617044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/13/4/85/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/13/4/85/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weilun Huang & Xucheng Wang, 2024. "The Impact of Technological Innovations on Agricultural Productivity and Environmental Sustainability in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-37, September.
    2. Tone, Kaoru & Tsutsui, Miki, 2010. "An epsilon-based measure of efficiency in DEA - A third pole of technical efficiency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1554-1563, December.
    3. Robert Chambers & Teresa Serra & Spiro Stefanou, 2015. "Using ex ante output elicitation to model state-contingent technologies," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 75-83, February.
    4. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    5. Zu Wang & Zhihao Wu & Longbao Wei, 2024. "Effects of fiscal support for agriculture on grain production technical efficiency: empirical evidence from Chinese farms," Journal of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 2347687-234, December.
    6. Xiaojing Li & Raj Bahadur Singh Chandel & Xianli Xia, 2022. "Analysis on Regional Differences and Spatial Convergence of Digital Village Development Level: Theory and Evidence from China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, January.
    7. Yankang Hu & Hongchao Yu & Xinglong Yang, 2023. "Can Rural Human Capital Improve Agricultural Ecological Efficiency? Empirical Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-18, August.
    8. Danni Lu & Xinhuan Zhang & Degang Yang & Shubao Zhang, 2025. "What Affects Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity in China? A Configurational Perspective Based on Dynamic Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-25, January.
    9. Ying Tang & Menghan Chen, 2022. "The Impact Mechanism and Spillover Effect of Digital Rural Construction on the Efficiency of Green Transformation for Cultivated Land Use in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-18, December.
    10. Lucas, Robert Jr., 1988. "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-42, July.
    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. Kawalec Paweł, 2020. "The dynamics of theories of economic growth: An impact of Unified Growth Theory," Economics and Business Review, Sciendo, vol. 6(2), pages 19-44, June.
    2. van de Klundert, T.C.M.J. & Smulders, J.A., 1991. "Reconstructing growth theory : A survey," Other publications TiSEM 19355c51-17eb-4d5d-aa66-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    4. repec:rza:wpaper:029 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Sodiq Arogundade & Mduduzi Biyase & Hinaunye Eita, 2021. "Foreign Direct Investment and Inclusive Human Development in Sub-Saharan African Countries:Does local Economic Conditions Matter?," Economic Development and Well-being Research Group Working Paper Series edwrg-01-2021, University of Johannesburg, College of Business and Economics, revised 2021.
    6. Claude DIEBOLT & Jamel TRABELSI, 2009. "Human Capital and French Macroeconomic Growth in the Long Run," Economies et Sociétés (Serie 'Histoire Economique Quantitative'), Association Française de Cliométrie (AFC), issue 40, pages 901-917, May.
    7. Blomström, Magnus & Kokko, Ari, 2003. "Human Capital and Inward FDI," CEPR Discussion Papers 3762, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    8. Olusanya, Oluwakorede, 2016. "Causality between Human Resource Development and the Nigerian Economic Performance," MPRA Paper 100854, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Patel, Dev & Sandefur, Justin & Subramanian, Arvind, 2021. "The new era of unconditional convergence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    10. B. Bhaskara Rao & Arusha Cooray, 2012. "How useful is growth literature for policies in the developing countries?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(6), pages 671-681, February.
    11. Paula Bustos & Juan Manuel Castro Vincenzi & Joan Monras & Jacopo Ponticelli, 2019. "Structural Transformation, Industrial Specialization, and Endogenous Growth," Working Papers wp2019_1906, CEMFI.
    12. Carlos Morales, 2011. "Variedades de recursos naturales y crecimiento económico," Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad, Universidad de los Andes,Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    13. George Halkos & Iacovos Psarianos, 2016. "Exploring the effect of including the environment in the neoclassical growth model," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 18(3), pages 339-358, July.
    14. Fahad Maqnas & Rozina Shaheen, 2025. "Services Sector Led Growth Hypothesis, A Fractionally Integrated Heterogeneous Panel Data Analysis for G20 Countries," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(4), pages 21582440251, December.
    15. Alessandro STERLACCHINI, 2006. "Innovation, Knowledge and Regional Economic Performances: Regularities and Differences in the EU," Working Papers 260, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    16. Panagiotis Pegkas & Constantinos Tsamadias, 2017. "Are There Separate Effects of Male and Female Higher Education on Economic Growth? Evidence from Greece," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 8(1), pages 279-293, March.
    17. Andrea Asoni, 2008. "Protection Of Property Rights And Growth As Political Equilibria," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 953-987, December.
    18. Saima Javed & Yu Rong & Hafiz Muhammad Ihsan Zafeer & Samra Maqbool & Babar Nawaz Abbasi, 2024. "Unleashing the potential: a quest to understand and examine the factors enriching research and innovation productivities of South Asian universities," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Ángeles Sánchez-Domínguez & Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2013. "Europe 2020 strategy: a strategy for which type of growth?," ThE Papers 13/11, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    20. Simplice A. Asongu & Voxi Amavilah & Antonio R. Andrés, 2014. "Economic Implications of Business Dynamics for KE-Associated Economic Growth and Inclusive Development in African Countries," Research Africa Network Working Papers 14/023, Research Africa Network (RAN).
    21. I. Hakan Yetkiner, 2006. "Saglik ile Buyume," Ege Academic Review, Ege University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 83-91.

    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:jecomi:v:13:y:2025:i:4:p:85-:d:1617044. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.