IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i8p1185-d874780.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Promote the Withdrawal of Rural Land Contract Rights? An Evolutionary Game Analysis Based on Prospect Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Mengling Tian

    (Business School, Wenzhou University, Wenzhou 325035, China)

  • Yangyang Zheng

    (Business School, Wenzhou University, Wenzhou 325035, China)

Abstract

The phenomenon of “separation of people and land” between urbanized farmers and rural land hinders the optimal allocation of land resources and is not conducive to the development of agricultural modernization and the implementation of rural revitalization strategies. Although the “separation of three rights” in agricultural land partially solves this problem, it also causes social inequity in the phenomenon of urbanized wealthy farmers collecting rent from poor farmers who depend on the land for a living. The Chinese government carried out a pilot reform aimed at the withdrawal of urbanized farmers from contracted land, and proposed a paid withdrawal policy, but the reform results were unsatisfactory. Based on evolutionary game theory and prospect theory, this paper constructed a two-party evolutionary game model between the government and farmers and simulated the behavioral strategies of the government and farmers in the contracted land withdrawal problem. The results show that first, the initial probability of government policy choice will affect the decision-making behavior of the government and farmers. Second, when the government’s economic compensation for farmers is higher than the farmers’ ideal expectation for land withdrawal compensation, the implementation of individualized withdrawal policy has a positive effect on farmers’ willingness to withdraw from contracted land. Third, farmers’ emotional needs for land, farmers’ ideal economic compensation, and farmers’ risk aversion all impede farmers’ withdrawal from contracted land. The government’s implementation of individualized withdrawal policy can improve farmers’ willingness to withdraw from contracted land by reducing farmers’ concerns about unstable land rights, improving the government’s security compensation, and reducing farmers’ sensitivity to profit and loss.

Suggested Citation

  • Mengling Tian & Yangyang Zheng, 2022. "How to Promote the Withdrawal of Rural Land Contract Rights? An Evolutionary Game Analysis Based on Prospect Theory," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-27, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:8:p:1185-:d:874780
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/8/1185/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/8/1185/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam Booij & Bernard Praag & Gijs Kuilen, 2010. "A parametric analysis of prospect theory’s functionals for the general population," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 115-148, February.
    2. Daniel Friedman, 1998. "On economic applications of evolutionary game theory," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 15-43.
    3. Kong, Xuesong & Liu, Yaolin & Jiang, Ping & Tian, Yasi & Zou, Yafeng, 2018. "A novel framework for rural homestead land transfer under collective ownership in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 138-146.
    4. Gunnar Breustedt & Thomas Glauben, 2007. "Driving Forces behind Exiting from Farming in Western Europe," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 115-127, February.
    5. 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.
    6. Shukun Wang & Dengwang Li & Tingting Li & Changquan Liu, 2021. "Land Use Transitions and Farm Performance in China: A Perspective of Land Fragmentation," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-22, July.
    7. Shenggen Fan & Connie Chan‐Kang, 2005. "Is small beautiful? Farm size, productivity, and poverty in Asian agriculture," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(s1), pages 135-146, January.
    8. Dong, Jun & Jiang, Yuzheng & Liu, Dongran & Dou, Xihao & Liu, Yao & Peng, Shicheng, 2022. "Promoting dynamic pricing implementation considering policy incentives and electricity retailers’ behaviors: An evolutionary game model based on prospect theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    9. Jeon, Yoong-Deok & Kim, Young-Yong, 2000. "Land Reform, Income Redistribution, and Agricultural Production in Korea," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(2), pages 253-268, January.
    10. Hoang Linh Nguyen & Jin Duan & Guo Qin Zhang, 2018. "Land Politics under Market Socialism: The State, Land Policies, and Rural–Urban Land Conversion in China and Vietnam," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-17, April.
    11. Li, Jing & Lo, Kevin & Zhang, Pingyu & Guo, Meng, 2021. "Reclaiming small to fill large: A novel approach to rural residential land consolidation in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    12. Xie, Hualin & Wang, Wei & Zhang, Xinmin, 2018. "Evolutionary game and simulation of management strategies of fallow cultivated land: A case study in Hunan province, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 86-97.
    13. Mwangi, Esther, 2007. "Subdividing the Commons: Distributional Conflict in the Transition from Collective to Individual Property Rights in Kenya's Maasailand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 815-834, May.
    14. Liu, Luo & Liu, Zhenjie & Gong, Jianzhou & Wang, Lu & Hu, Yueming, 2019. "Quantifying the amount, heterogeneity, and pattern of farmland: Implications for China’s requisition-compensation balance of farmland policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 256-266.
    15. Zhou, Nan & Cheng, Wenli & Zhang, Longyao, 2022. "Land rights and investment incentives: Evidence from China’s Latest Rural Land Titling Program," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    16. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    17. Talan B İşcan, 2018. "Redistributive Land Reform and Structural Change in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 732-761.
    18. Elizabeth Stanton & Peter Rosset & James Boyce, 2005. "Land Reform and Sustainable Development," Working Papers wp98, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    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. Xiuling Ding & Qian Lu & Lipeng Li & Apurbo Sarkar & Hua Li, 2023. "Does Labor Transfer Improve Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Farming?—A Bivariate Probit Modeling Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, August.

    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. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    2. Stephen G Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2021. "Household Portfolio Underdiversification and Probability Weighting: Evidence from the Field," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4524-4563.
    3. Yichi Zhang & Kai Xue & Huimin Cao & Yingen Hu, 2023. "The Non-Linear Relationship between the Number of Permanent Residents and the Willingness of Rural Residential Land Transfer: The Threshold Effect of per Capita Net Income," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-23, August.
    4. Orestis Kopsacheilis, 2018. "The role of information search and its influence on risk preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 311-339, May.
    5. Mengba Liu & Anlu Zhang & Xiong Zhang & Yanfei Xiong, 2022. "Research on the Game Mechanism of Cultivated Land Ecological Compensation Standards Determination: Based on the Empirical Analysis of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-29, September.
    6. Zhang, Jiayu & Yang, Xiaodong & Wang, Hao, 2021. "Age-friendly regeneration of urban settlements in China: Game and incentives of stakeholders in decision-making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    7. Brünner, Tobias & Reiner, Jochen & Natter, Martin & Skiera, Bernd, 2019. "Prospect theory in a dynamic game: Theory and evidence from online pay-per-bid auctions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 215-234.
    8. Pengguang Lu, 2023. "A Simple Model of Herding and Contrarian Behaviour with Biased Informed Traders," Economics Discussion Paper Series 2307, Economics, The University of Manchester, revised Dec 2023.
    9. K. Deininger & S. Jin & H. K. Nagarajan, 2009. "Land Reforms, Poverty Reduction, and Economic Growth: Evidence from India," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(4), pages 496-521.
    10. Bao, Helen X.H. & Robinson, Guy M., 2022. "Behavioural land use policy studies: Past, present, and future," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    11. Wenjing Han & Zhengfeng Zhang & Xiaoling Zhang & Li He, 2021. "Farmland Rental Participation, Agricultural Productivity, and Household Income: Evidence from Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, August.
    12. Caihua Zhou & Hualin Xie & Xinmin Zhang, 2019. "Does Fiscal Policy Promote Third-Party Environmental Pollution Control in China? An Evolutionary Game Theoretical Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-18, August.
    13. Bellemare, Charles & Kröger, Sabine & Sossou, Kouamé Marius, 2022. "Optimal frequency of portfolio evaluation in a choice experiment with ambiguity and loss aversion," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 248-264.
    14. Luc Meunier & Sima Ohadi, 2023. "When are two portfolios better than one? A prospect theory approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 503-538, April.
    15. Andrea Albarea & Michele Bernasconi & Anna Marenzi & Dino Rizzi, 2023. "Tax Evasion, Behavioral Microsimulation Models and Flat-Rate Tax Reforms: Analysis for Italy," Public Finance Review, , vol. 51(2), pages 262-310, March.
    16. Géraldine Bocquého & Julien Jacob & Marielle Brunette, 2020. "Prospect theory in experiments : behaviour in loss domain and framing effects," Working Papers hal-02987294, HAL.
    17. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2018. "Losses loom larger than gains and reference dependent preferences in Bernoulli’s utility function," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 220-237.
    18. Li, Ye & Yang, Tianjian & Zhang, Yu, 2022. "Evolutionary game theory-based system dynamics modeling for community solid waste classification in China," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    19. Yao Luo & Yumei Li & Chen Li & Qun Wu, 2023. "Influence of the Kinship Networks on Farmers’ Willingness to Revitalize Idle Houses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-14, June.
    20. Hota, Ashish R. & Garg, Siddharth & Sundaram, Shreyas, 2016. "Fragility of the commons under prospect-theoretic risk attitudes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 135-164.

    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:11:y:2022:i:8:p:1185-:d:874780. 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.