IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i6p603-d569814.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Asset Specificity on the Intention of Farmers to Continue Land Recuperation: Based on the Perspective of Farmer Differentiation

Author

Listed:
  • Siyang Zhang

    (College of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Xianxiong Xie

    (College of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Minjuan Zhao

    (College of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

Abstract

Land recuperation is an important institutional guarantee for green agricultural development and an important measure to promote rural revitalization. Asset specificity is a crucial factor that affects farmers’ subsequent willingness to participate in land recuperation. Based on the perspective of farmer differentiation, this study uses survey data of 605 farmers in four counties of Gansu Province and employs the entropy method and the double-hurdle model to measure asset specificity and how it affects the subsequent willingness of different types of farmers to participate in land recuperation. The results show that: (1) farmers’ willingness to participate in land recuperation increases with the degree of their part-time occupations; (2) geographical location specificity has a significant negative effect on farmers’ intention and degree of subsequent land recuperations, and the impacts on non-farmers and II part-time farmers are significantly smaller than that on pure farmers and part-time farmers; (3) physical asset specificity has the most negligible influence on farmers’ subsequent willingness to participate; (4) human capital specificity has a significant negative impact on the intention and degree of land recuperation by farmers, and the effect is more significant for pure farmers than non-farmers; (5) factors such as land recuperation compensation satisfaction, land recuperation policy trust, social connection, and off-farm employment willingness promote the subsequent land recuperation willingness and degree of land recuperation of farmers, while the cultivated land area reduces the subsequent degree of participation in land recuperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Siyang Zhang & Xianxiong Xie & Minjuan Zhao, 2021. "Asset Specificity on the Intention of Farmers to Continue Land Recuperation: Based on the Perspective of Farmer Differentiation," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:6:p:603-:d:569814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/6/603/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/6/603/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Rodney B. W. & Shogren, Jason F., 2002. "Voluntary Incentive Design for Endangered Species Protection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 169-187, March.
    2. David E. Dowall & Paavo Monkkonen, 2008. "Urban Development and Land Markets in Chennai, India," International Real Estate Review, Global Social Science Institute, vol. 11(2), pages 142-165.
    3. Cragg, John G, 1971. "Some Statistical Models for Limited Dependent Variables with Application to the Demand for Durable Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(5), pages 829-844, September.
    4. Songqing Jin & T. S. Jayne, 2013. "Land Rental Markets in Kenya: Implications for Efficiency, Equity, Household Income, and Poverty," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(2), pages 246-271.
    5. Juutinen, Artti & Mantymaa, Erkki & Monkkonen, Mikko & Svento, Rauli, 2008. "Voluntary agreements in protecting privately owned forests in Finland -- To buy or to lease," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 230-239, February.
    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, Linfei & Khan, Sufyan Ullah & Guo, Chenhao & Huang, Yanfen & Xia, Xianli, 2022. "Non-agricultural labor transfer, factor allocation and farmland yield: Evidence from the part-time peasants in Loess Plateau region of Northwest China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    2. Yue Zhang & Guihua Liu & Zhixing Ma & Xin Deng & Jiahao Song & Dingde Xu, 2022. "The Influence of Land Attachment on Land Abandonment from the Perspective of Generational Difference: Evidence from Sichuan Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Gang Cui & Zhicheng Liu, 2022. "The Impact of Environmental Regulations and Social Norms on Farmers’ Chemical Fertilizer Reduction Behaviors: An Investigation of Citrus Farmers in Southern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Yongzheng Cui & Wenxiong Wang & Lihong Yu & Wei Zhou & Zitong Fu, 2022. "Influence of Livelihood Capital Level and Structure on Rural Households’ Payment Willingness for Rural Human Settlement Improvement: Evidence from Hubei Province, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-22, October.

    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. Alia, Didier & Kusunose, Yoko & Theriault, Veronique, 2016. "Land rental, farm investment, productivity, and efficiency in Burkina Faso," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236169, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Juutinen, Artti & Mäntymaa, Erkki & Ollikainen, Markku, 2013. "Landowners’ conservation motives and the size of information rents in environmental bidding systems," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 128-148.
    3. Oliver Schulte & Trung Thanh Nguyen & Ulrike Grote, 2022. "The Effect of Renting in Cropland on Livelihood Choices and Agricultural Commercialization: A Case Study from Rural Vietnam," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(6), pages 2878-2898, December.
    4. Wineman, Ayala & Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O., 2017. "Land Markets and Land Access Among Female-Headed Households in Northwestern Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 108-122.
    5. Otieno, David Jakinda, 2021. "Determinants of Rural Households’ Participation in Land Markets in Kenya," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315128, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Juutinen, Artti & Mönkkönen, Mikko & Ylisirniö, Anna-Liisa, 2009. "Does a voluntary conservation program result in a representative protected area network?: The case of Finnish privately owned forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2974-2984, October.
    7. Signe Anthon & Serge Garcia & Anne Stenger, 2010. "Incentive Contracts for Natura 2000 Implementation in Forest Areas," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 281-302, July.
    8. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    9. Jensen, Kimberly L., 1995. "Fluid Milk Purchase Patterns In The South: Effects Of Use Of Nutrition Information And Household Characteristics," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-14, December.
    10. Marcén, Miriam & Molina, José Alberto & Morales, Marina, 2018. "The effect of culture on the fertility decisions of immigrant women in the United States," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 15-28.
    11. Langyintuo, Augustine S. & Mungoma, Catherine, 2008. "The effect of household wealth on the adoption of improved maize varieties in Zambia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 550-559, December.
    12. Dorotic, Matilda & Verhoef, Peter C. & Fok, Dennis & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A., 2014. "Reward redemption effects in a loyalty program when customers choose how much and when to redeem," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 339-355.
    13. Bradfield, Tracy & Butler, Robert & Dillon, Emma J. & Hennessy, Thia & Loughrey, Jason, 2023. "The impact of long-term land leases on farm investment: Evidence from the Irish dairy sector," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    14. repec:zbw:rwirep:0200 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Ronelle Burger & Canh Thien Dang & Trudy Owens, 2017. "Better performing NGOs do report more accurately: Evidence from investigating Ugandan NGO financial accounts," Discussion Papers 2017-10, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    16. Niclas Hagelin, 2003. "Why firms hedge with currency derivatives: an examination of transaction and translation exposure," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 55-69.
    17. Subir K. Chakrabarti & Srikant Devaraj & Pankaj C. Patel, 2021. "Minimum wage and restaurant hygiene violations: Evidence from Seattle," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(1), pages 85-99, January.
    18. Frank Crowley & John Eakins & Declan Jordan, 2012. "Participation,Expenditure and Regressivity in the Irish Lottery:Evidence from Irish Household Budget Survey 2004/2005," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 43(2), pages 199-225.
    19. Helen Jensen & Justo Manrique, 1998. "Demand for food commodities by income groups in Indonesia," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 491-501.
    20. Deng, Xin & Xu, Dingde & Zeng, Miao & Qi, Yanbin, 2019. "Does early-life famine experience impact rural land transfer? Evidence from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 58-67.
    21. Torres, Marcelo de O. & Felthoven, Ronald G., 2014. "Productivity growth and product choice in catch share fisheries: The case of Alaska pollock," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PA), pages 280-289.

    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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:6:p:603-:d:569814. 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.