IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i10p1892-d1255966.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of Farmers’ Cognition on Forest Land Transfer Behavior: A Case Study of Chengdu City

Author

Listed:
  • Ying Cheng

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work and should be regarded as co-first authors.)

  • Zhongbao Liu

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work and should be regarded as co-first authors.)

  • Yuan Hu

    (College of Management, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

  • Weizhong Zeng

    (College of Management, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

Abstract

In the context of China’s forest rights reform, promoting forest land circulation is the key to revitalizing forest land resources and promoting the development of the forestry industry. Based on the theoretical analysis of the effect of farmers’ cognition on forest land transfer behavior, data from 790 farmers in typical areas of Chengdu were used for empirical testing with the binary logit model. At the same time, the effects of the cognitive differences of the farmers with different education levels on forest land circulation are discussed. Finally, appropriate instrumental variables were selected to modify the model, and the IV probit model was used to test the endogeneity of the model. The results showed that the (1) farmers’ cognition had a significant positive effect on the forest land transfer behavior. Among them, in the order of the degree of impact, were the following: ecological cognition, policy cognition, risk cognition, social regulation, and benefit cognition. (2) Among the groups with different education levels, farmers with lower education levels will consider more aspects than farmers with higher education levels when choosing to transfer forest land. By broadening the research into the cognitive composition of farmers, this study deepens our understanding of the influence of farmers’ cognition on forest land transfer behavior. Moreover, it is found that Chinese farmers have strong ecological rationality in addition to economic rationality, and ecological cognition plays a greater role in forest land transfer behavior than benefit cognition, which is of considerable significance for further research on forest land transfer behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying Cheng & Zhongbao Liu & Yuan Hu & Weizhong Zeng, 2023. "The Influence of Farmers’ Cognition on Forest Land Transfer Behavior: A Case Study of Chengdu City," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1892-:d:1255966
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1892/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1892/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Konstantinos Chatzimichael & Margarita Genius & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2022. "Pesticide use, health impairments and economic losses under rational farmers behavior," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 765-790, March.
    2. Zhe Chen & Apurbo Sarkar & Ahmed Khairul Hasan & Xiaojing Li & Xianli Xia, 2021. "Evaluation of Farmers’ Ecological Cognition in Responses to Specialty Orchard Fruit Planting Behavior: Evidence in Shaanxi and Ningxia, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, October.
    3. Lin Meng & Wentao Si, 2022. "Pro-Environmental Behavior: Examining the Role of Ecological Value Cognition, Environmental Attitude, and Place Attachment among Rural Farmers in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-24, December.
    4. Koirala, Pankaj & Kotani, Koji & Managi, Shunsuke, 2022. "How do farm size and perceptions matter for farmers’ adaptation responses to climate change in a developing country? Evidence from Nepal," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 188-204.
    5. Daxini, Amar & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Barnes, Andrew & Buckley, Cathal & Daly, Karen, 2018. "Which factors influence farmers’ intentions to adopt nutrient management planning?," 92nd Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2018, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 273498, Agricultural Economics Society.
    6. Ranran Shi & Ling Hou & Binghui Jia & Yaya Jin & Weiwei Zheng & Xiangdong Wang & Xianhui Hou, 2022. "Effect of Policy Cognition on the Intention of Villagers’ Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Helliwell, Richard, 2018. "Where did the marginal land go? Farmers perspectives on marginal land and its implications for adoption of dedicated energy crops," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 166-172.
    8. Yazhen Gong & Kathy Baylis & Robert Kozak & Gary Bull, 2016. "Farmers’ risk preferences and pesticide use decisions: evidence from field experiments in China," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 411-421, July.
    9. Ying Cheng & Yuan Hu & Weizhong Zeng & Zhongbao Liu, 2022. "Farmer Heterogeneity and Land Transfer Decisions Based on the Dual Perspectives of Economic Endowment and Land Endowment," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, February.
    10. Yong-Ji Xue & Ting Deng & KuoRay Mao, 2018. "Influencing Factors on the Ecological Protection Behaviors of Entrepreneurial Farmers in Chinese Forest Zones," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    11. Gutierrez-Castillo, Ana & Penn, Jerrod & Tanger, Shaun & Blazier, Michael A., 2022. "Conservation easement landowners' willingness to accept for forest thinning and the impact of information," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Xiaoyan Yi & Qinqi Zou & Zewei Zhang & Sheng-Han-Erin Chang, 2023. "What Motivates Greenhouse Vegetable Farmers to Adapt Organic-Substitute-Chemical-Fertilizer (OSCF)? An Empirical Study from Shandong, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-14, January.
    13. Cheng, Ying & Hu, Yuan & Zeng, Weizhong & Liu, Zhongbao, 2022. "Farmer heterogeneity and land transfer decisions based on the dual perspectives of economic endowment and land endowment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 11(3).
    14. Sidney Madsen, 2022. "Farm-level pathways to food security: beyond missing markets and irrational peasants," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 135-150, March.
    15. Jiang Du & Miao Zeng & Zhengjuan Xie & Shikun Wang, 2019. "Power of Agricultural Credit in Farmland Abandonment: Evidence from Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-14, December.
    16. Markowski-Lindsay, Marla & Butler, Brett J. & Kittredge, David B., 2017. "The future of family forests in the USA: Near-term intentions to sell or transfer," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 577-585.
    17. Jinna Yu & Yiming Wei & Wei Fang & Zhen Liu & Yujie Zhang & Jing Lan, 2021. "New Round of Collective Forest Rights Reform, Forestland Transfer and Household Production Efficiency," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    18. Daxini, Amar & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Buckley, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2018. "Factors influencing farmers' intentions to adopt nutrient management planning: accounting for heterogeneity," 166th Seminar, August 30-31, 2018, Galway, West of Ireland 276183, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Xiaoyong Li & Giuseppe T. Cirella & Yali Wen & Yi Xie, 2020. "Farmers’ Intentions to Lease Forestland: Evidence from Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, March.
    20. Jagger, Pamela & Luckert, Martin (Marty) K. & Duchelle, Amy E. & Lund, Jens Friis & Sunderlin, William D., 2014. "Tenure and Forest Income: Observations from a Global Study on Forests and Poverty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 43-55.
    21. Daxini, Amar & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Barnes, Andrew & Buckley, Cathal & Daly, Karen, 2018. "Which factors influence farmers’ intentions to adopt nutrient management planning?," 92nd Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2018, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 273494, Agricultural Economics Society.
    22. Jianhua Ren & Hongzhen Lei & Haiyun Ren, 2022. "Livelihood Capital, Ecological Cognition, and Farmers’ Green Production Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-16, December.
    23. Zhansheng Li & Qiying Yang & Xuchao Yang & Zutao Ouyang & Xiumin Cai & Jiaguo Qi, 2022. "Assessing Farmers’ Attitudes towards Rural Land Circulation Policy Changes in the Pearl River Delta, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, April.
    24. Maybery, Darryl & Crase, Lin & Gullifer, Chris, 2005. "Categorising farming values as economic, conservation and lifestyle," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 59-72, February.
    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. Li, Fuduo & Zhang, Kangjie & Ren, Jing & Yin, Changbin & Zhang, Yang & Nie, Jun, 2021. "Driving mechanism for farmers to adopt improved agricultural systems in China: The case of rice-green manure crops rotation system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    2. Xuezhen Xu & Fang Wang & Tao Xu & Sufyan Ullah Khan, 2023. "How Does Capital Endowment Impact Farmers’ Green Production Behavior? Perspectives on Ecological Cognition and Environmental Regulation," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, August.
    3. Okumah, Murat & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Chapman, Pippa J. & Novo, Paula & Cassidy, Rachel & Lyon, Christopher & Higgins, Alex & Doody, Donnacha, 2021. "The role of experiential learning in the adoption of best land management practices," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    4. Jane Musole Kwenye & Xiaoting Hou Jones & Alan Renwick, 2023. "Understanding Land-Use Trade-off Decision Making Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process: Insights from Agricultural Land Managers in Zambia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
    5. Daxini, Amar & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2019. "Understanding farmers’ intentions to follow a nutrient management plan using the theory of planned behaviour," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 428-437.
    6. Alan Renwick & Robyn Dynes & Paul Johnstone & Warren King & Lania Holt & Jemma Penelope, 2019. "Challenges and Opportunities for Land Use Transformation: Insights from the Central Plains Water Scheme in New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Dimitrios Iakovidis & Yiorgos Gadanakis & Julian Park, 2023. "Farmer and Adviser Perspectives on Business Planning and Control in Mediterranean Agriculture: Evidence from Argolida, Greece," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, February.
    8. Javier Martínez-Dalmau & Julio Berbel & Rafaela Ordóñez-Fernández, 2021. "Nitrogen Fertilization. A Review of the Risks Associated with the Inefficiency of Its Use and Policy Responses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, May.
    9. José A. Aznar-Sánchez & Luis J. Belmonte-Ureña & Juan F. Velasco-Muñoz & Diego L. Valera, 2019. "Aquifer Sustainability and the Use of Desalinated Seawater for Greenhouse Irrigation in the Campo de Níjar, Southeast Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Somjai Nupueng & Peter Oosterveer & Arthur P. J. Mol, 2023. "Global and local sustainable certification systems: Factors influencing RSPO and Thai-GAP adoption by oil palm smallholder farmers in Thailand," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 6337-6362, July.
    11. Mahfuza Begum & Muhammad Mehedi Masud & Lubna Alam & Mazlin Bin Mokhtar & Ahmad Aldrie Amir, 2022. "The Adaptation Behaviour of Marine Fishermen towards Climate Change and Food Security: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour and Health Belief Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-24, October.
    12. Cullen, Paula & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & hUallacháin, Daire Ó & Sheridan, Helen, 2020. "Impact of farmer self-identity and attitudes on participation in agri-environment schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    13. Zengwei Xu & Jing Li & Jiliang Ma, 2022. "Impacts of Extension Contact on the Adoption of Formulated Fertilizers and Farm Performance among Large-Scale Farms in Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, November.
    14. Che, Yuyuan & Feng, Hongli & Hennessy, David A., 2023. "Will adoption occur if a practice is win-win for profit and the environment? An application to a rancher's grazing practice choices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    15. Juan Wu & Wenjing Yu & Xiaobing Liu & Yali Wen, 2022. "Analysis of Influencing Factors and Income Effect of Heterogeneous Agricultural Households’ Forestland Transfer," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    16. Marie Asma Ben-Othmen & Mariia Ostapchuk, 2023. "How diverse are farmers’ preferences for large-scale grassland ecological restoration? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 341-375, December.
    17. Pathak, Santosh & Wang, Hua & Adusumilli, Naveen C., 2021. "Quantifying the dynamics of agricultural conservation practices in the Delta region," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313916, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Daxini, Amar & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Buckley, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2018. "Factors influencing farmers' intentions to adopt nutrient management planning: accounting for heterogeneity," 166th Seminar, August 30-31, 2018, Galway, West of Ireland 276183, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Yang, Xin & Zhou, Xiaohe & Deng, Xiangzheng, 2022. "Modeling farmers’ adoption of low-carbon agricultural technology in Jianghan Plain, China: An examination of the theory of planned behavior," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    20. Tsakiridis, Andreas & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Cullen, Paula & ÓhUallacháin, Daire & Sheridan, Helen & Stout, Jane, 2021. "Examining the relationship between farmer participation in an agri-environment scheme and the quantity and quality of semi-natural habitats on farms - An Irish case study," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315280, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1892-:d:1255966. 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.