IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i2p262-d1341608.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Internet Use on Land Productivity: Evidence from China Land Economy Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Xiang Deng

    (School of Economics, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Jie Peng

    (School of Economics, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Chunlin Wan

    (School of Economics, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

Abstract

Enhancing land productivity is a crucial strategy for addressing key sustainable development issues, such as poverty reduction and ensuring food security. Farmers’ Internet use behavior offers the potential to improve land productivity. However, relatively little is known about the association between Internet use and land productivity. To fill this void, this study examines the impact of Internet use on land productivity and its mechanisms. The results indicate that farmers’ use of the Internet has a positive impact on improving agricultural land productivity. Internet use increases land productivity by 12.3%, and the conclusion still holds after a series of robustness tests and endogeneity tests. Heterogeneity analysis indicates that Internet use significantly enhances land productivity in the central and northern parts of Jiangsu Province, while it does not have the same effect in the province’s southern regions. Without the addition of county fixed effects, the central sample regression results show that the coefficient for Internet use is 0.165 and significant at the 10% confidence level. When county fixed effects are added, the coefficient decreases to 0.117 and is not significant. The coefficient on Internet use for the northern sample is 0.128 and is significant at the 5% confidence level. Mechanistic analyses demonstrate that Internet use also enhances land productivity primarily by expanding the cultivated land area, facilitating mechanized production, and strengthening farmers’ social networks. The results of the study indicate that the positive effects of Internet use in improving land productivity should be fully released by strengthening the communication infrastructure, further enhancing farmers’ Internet use capacity, improving the land transfer system, upgrading the socialized service level of agricultural machinery, and strengthening agricultural financial support.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiang Deng & Jie Peng & Chunlin Wan, 2024. "The Impact of Internet Use on Land Productivity: Evidence from China Land Economy Survey," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:2:p:262-:d:1341608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/2/262/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/2/262/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barrett, Christopher B., 1996. "On price risk and the inverse farm size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 193-215, December.
    2. Barrett, Christopher B. & Bellemare, Marc F. & Hou, Janet Y., 2010. "Reconsidering Conventional Explanations of the Inverse Productivity-Size Relationship," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 88-97, January.
    3. Carletto, Calogero & Savastano, Sara & Zezza, Alberto, 2013. "Fact or artifact: The impact of measurement errors on the farm size–productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 254-261.
    4. Yangchenhao Wu & Kaifeng Duan & Wang Zhang, 2023. "The Impact of Internet Use on Farmers’ Land Transfer under the Framework of Transaction Costs," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, September.
    5. Bevis, Leah EM. & Barrett, Christopher B., 2020. "Close to the edge: High productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    6. Mittal, Surabhi & Tripathi, Gaurav, 2009. "Role of Mobile Phone Technology in Improving Small Farm Productivity," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 22(Conferenc).
    7. Tadesse, Getaw & Bahiigwa, Godfrey, 2015. "Mobile Phones and Farmers’ Marketing Decisions in Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 296-307.
    8. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Nguyen, Thanh-Tung & Grote, Ulrike, 2022. "Internet use, natural resource extraction and poverty reduction in rural Thailand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    9. Negi, Digvijay S. & Birthal, Pratap S. & Roy, Devesh & Khan, Md. Tajuddin, 2018. "Farmers’ choice of market channels and producer prices in India: Role of transportation and communication networks," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 106-121.
    10. Heath Henderson, 2015. "Considering Technical and Allocative Efficiency in the Inverse Farm Size–Productivity Relationship," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 442-469, June.
    11. Fernando, A. Nilesh, 2021. "Seeking the treated: The impact of mobile extension on farmer information exchange in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    12. Hernan Galperin & M. Fernanda Viecens, 2017. "Connected for Development? Theory and evidence about the impact of Internet technologies on poverty alleviation," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 35(3), pages 315-336, May.
    13. Nina Czernich & Oliver Falck & Tobias Kretschmer & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Broadband Infrastructure and Economic Growth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(552), pages 505-532, May.
    14. Desiere, Sam & Jolliffe, Dean, 2018. "Land productivity and plot size: Is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 84-98.
    15. Meili Huan & Fengxia Dong & Liang Chi, 2022. "Mechanization services, factor allocation, and farm efficiency: Evidence from China," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 1618-1639, August.
    16. Chiarella, Cristina & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Abeygunawardane, Dilini & Conforti, Piero, 2023. "Balancing the trade-offs between land productivity, labor productivity and labor intensity," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(10), pages 1618-1634.
    17. Wanglin Ma & Peng Nie & Pei Zhang & Alan Renwick, 2020. "Impact of Internet use on economic well‐being of rural households: Evidence from China," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 503-523, May.
    18. Assuncao, Juliano J. & Ghatak, Maitreesh, 2003. "Can unobserved heterogeneity in farmer ability explain the inverse relationship between farm size and productivity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 189-194, August.
    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. Aragón, Fernando M. & Restuccia, Diego & Rud, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Are small farms really more productive than large farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    2. Helfand, Steven M. & Taylor, Matthew P.H., 2021. "The inverse relationship between farm size and productivity: Refocusing the debate," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    3. Mensah, Edouard R. & Kostandini, Genti, 2020. "The inverse farm size-productivity relationship under land size mis-measurement and in the presence of weather and price risks: Panel data evidence from Uganda," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304477, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Desiere, Sam & Jolliffe, Dean, 2018. "Land productivity and plot size: Is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 84-98.
    5. Gourlay, Sydney & Kilic, Talip & Lobell, David B., 2019. "A new spin on an old debate: Errors in farmer-reported production and their implications for inverse scale - Productivity relationship in Uganda," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    6. C. S. C. Sekhar & Namrata Thapa, 2023. "Rural market imperfections in India: Revisiting old debates with new evidence," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 41(5), September.
    7. Xingguang Li & Xuexi Huo, 2022. "Agricultural labor markets and the inverse plot size–productivity relationship: Evidence from China's apple growers," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 2163-2183, November.
    8. Ayala Wineman & Thomas S. Jayne, 2021. "Factor Market Activity and the Inverse Farm Size-Productivity Relationship in Tanzania," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(3), pages 443-464, March.
    9. Hailemariam Ayalew & Jordan Chamberlin & Carol Newman & Kibrom A. Abay & Frederic Kosmowski & Tesfaye Sida, 2024. "Revisiting the size–productivity relationship with imperfect measures of production and plot size," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(2), pages 595-619, March.
    10. Chiarella, Cristina & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Abeygunawardane, Dilini & Conforti, Piero, 2023. "Balancing the trade-offs between land productivity, labor productivity and labor intensity," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(10), pages 1618-1634.
    11. Klaus Deininger & Songqing Jin & Yanyan Liu & Sudhir K. Singh, 2018. "Can Labor-Market Imperfections Explain Changes in the Inverse Farm Size–Productivity Relationship? Longitudinal Evidence from Rural India," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(2), pages 239-258.
    12. William J. Burke & Stephen N. Morgan & Thelma Namonje & Milu Muyanga & Nicole M. Mason, 2023. "Beyond the “inverse relationship”: Area mismeasurement may affect actual productivity, not just how we understand it," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(4), pages 557-569, July.
    13. Fang Xia & Lingling Hou & Songqing Jin & Dongqing Li, 2020. "Land size and productivity in the livestock sector: evidence from pastoral areas in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 867-888, July.
    14. Abay, Kibrom A. & Abate, Gashaw T. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Bernard, Tanguy, 2019. "Correlated non-classical measurement errors, ‘Second best’ policy inference, and the inverse size-productivity relationship in agriculture," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 171-184.
    15. Kilic, Talip & Zezza, Alberto & Carletto, Calogero & Savastano, Sara, 2017. "Missing(ness) in Action: Selectivity Bias in GPS-Based Land Area Measurements," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 143-157.
    16. Taylor, Matthew P.H. & Helfand, Steven M., 2021. "The Farm Size – Productivity Relationship in the Wake of Market Reform: An Analysis of Mexican Family Farms," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315138, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Omotilewa, Oluwatoba J. & Jayne, T.S. & Muyanga, Milu & Aromolaran, Adebayo B. & Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O. & Awokuse, Titus, 2021. "A revisit of farm size and productivity: Empirical evidence from a wide range of farm sizes in Nigeria," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    18. Bevis, Leah EM. & Barrett, Christopher B., 2020. "Close to the edge: High productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    19. Mengistu Assefa Wendimu & Arne Henningsen & Tomasz Gerard Czekaj, 2017. "Incentives and moral hazard: plot level productivity of factory-operated and outgrower-operated sugarcane production in Ethiopia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(5), pages 549-560, September.
    20. Zou, Baoling & Mishra, Ashok K., 2022. "Engaging Information Technology in Farmland Rental Market: An Empirical Study from Rural China," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322265, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:13:y:2024:i:2:p:262-:d:1341608. 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.