IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i3p358-d1355314.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Government–Farmer Cooperation Mechanism and Its Implementation Path to Realize the Goals of Optimizing Grain Planting Structure

Author

Listed:
  • Gaofeng Ren

    (School of Management, Shenyang Normal University, Shenyang 110034, China)

  • Xiao Cui

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
    Department of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China)

Abstract

In order to alleviate the grain supply–demand structural contradictions and ensure the realization of grain planting structure optimization goals, it is necessary to clarify the interactive relationship between multiple entities, establish a cooperation mechanism, and explore its implementation paths. To this end, a differential game model is built to compare and analyze the optimal strategies, optimal benefits, and overall system outcomes for both the government and farmers under three scenarios: the Nash non-cooperative game, the Stackelberg game, and the collaborative cooperation game. Then, key factors and their influencing mechanisms that affect the government–farmer cooperation mechanism are revealed. Finally, the csQCA model is used to explore the implementation paths for different stakeholders to ensure the sound operation of the cooperation mechanism. The results show the following: (1) The government–farmer cooperation mechanism should consist of an inner core system with the government–farmer interaction as the core and an outer system comprising the market environment, cooperation environment, and institutional environment. These two systems should coordinate with each other, respond to each other, and drive progress together. (2) The cooperation mechanism can optimize behavioral enthusiasm, resulting in individual and overall benefits for both the government and farmers. However, its scientific and orderly implementation is affected by factors such as the cost coefficient. Additionally, subsidies serve as a powerful policy tool to enhance farmers’ enthusiasm, thereby increasing the benefits for both parties and maximizing the effectiveness of the cooperation mechanism. (3) There are three implementation paths corresponding to large-scale farmers, rural elites, and small-scale farmers: being led by external policy tools, linkage guidance between decision-making environment and willing subjects, and factor allocation and environmentally driven decision-making. These findings can provide theoretical support and case reference for marginal farmland management and planting structure optimization management in underdeveloped areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaofeng Ren & Xiao Cui, 2024. "The Government–Farmer Cooperation Mechanism and Its Implementation Path to Realize the Goals of Optimizing Grain Planting Structure," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-25, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:3:p:358-:d:1355314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/3/358/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/3/358/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moniruzzaman, Shaikh, 2015. "Crop choice as climate change adaptation: Evidence from Bangladesh," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 90-98.
    2. Akihiko Yanase, 2009. "Global environment and dynamic games of environmental policy in an international duopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 97(2), pages 121-140, June.
    3. Yuan, Shiwei & Li, Xin & Du, Erhu, 2021. "Effects of farmers’ behavioral characteristics on crop choices and responses to water management policies," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    4. Shiwei Liu & Pingyu Zhang & Ben Marley & Wenxin Liu, 2019. "The Factors Affecting Farmers’ Soybean Planting Behavior in Heilongjiang Province, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-13, September.
    5. Jorgensen, Steffen & Zaccour, Georges, 2001. "Time consistent side payments in a dynamic game of downstream pollution," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(12), pages 1973-1987, December.
    6. Dominik Bertram & Tobias Chilla & Carola Wilhelm, 2021. "Short Value Chains in Food Production: The Role of Spatial Proximity for Economic and Land Use Dynamics," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-21, September.
    7. Xie, Gang & Wang, Shouyang & Lai, K.K., 2011. "Quality improvement in competing supply chains," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 262-270, November.
    8. Ge Song & Hongmei Zhang, 2021. "Cultivated Land Use Layout Adjustment Based on Crop Planting Suitability: A Case Study of Typical Counties in Northeast China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, January.
    9. D. Gale Johnson, 1973. "Government and Agricultural Adjustment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 55(5), pages 860-867.
    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. Baccar, Mariem & Raynal, Hélène & Sekhar, Muddu & Bergez, Jacques-Eric & Willaume, Magali & Casel, Pierre & Giriraj, P. & Murthy, Sanjeeva & Ruiz, Laurent, 2023. "Dynamics of crop category choices reveal strategies and tactics used by smallholder farmers in India to cope with unreliable water availability," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    2. Hao Xu & Ming Luo, 2022. "Optimal Environmental Policy in a Dynamic Transboundary Pollution Game: Emission Standards, Taxes, and Permit Trading," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-25, July.
    3. He, Liuyue & Xu, Zhenci & Wang, Sufen & Bao, Jianxia & Fan, Yunfei & Daccache, Andre, 2022. "Optimal crop planting pattern can be harmful to reach carbon neutrality: Evidence from food-energy-water-carbon nexus perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 308(C).
    4. Gonzalez, Stéphane & Rostom, Fatma Zahra, 2022. "Sharing the global outcomes of finite natural resource exploitation: A dynamic coalitional stability perspective," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-10.
    5. Smala Fanokoa, Pascaux & Telahigue, Issam & Zaccour, Georges, 2011. "Buying cooperation in an asymmetric environmental differential game," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 935-946, June.
    6. Mingjing Guo & Ziyu Jiang & Yan Bu & Jinhua Cheng, 2019. "Supporting Sustainable Development of Water Resources: A Social Welfare Maximization Game Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-15, August.
    7. Sedakov, Artem & Qiao, Han & Wang, Shouyang, 2021. "A model of river pollution as a dynamic game with network externalities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(3), pages 1136-1153.
    8. Tianli Wang & Yanji Ma & Siqi Luo, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Evolution and Influencing Factors of Soybean Production in Heilongjiang Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-29, November.
    9. Benchekroun, H. & Ray Chaudhuri, A., 2010. "'The Voracity Effect' and Climate Change : The Impact of Clean Technologies," Discussion Paper 2010-97, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    10. Eyland, Terry & Zaccour, Georges, 2014. "Carbon tariffs and cooperative outcomes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 718-728.
    11. Martín-Herrán, Guiomar & Rubio, Santiago J., 2016. "The Strategic Use of Abatement by a Polluting Monopoly," ETA: Economic Theory and Applications 244532, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    12. Yue Tan & Chunxiang Guo, 2019. "Research on Two-Way Logistics Operation with Uncertain Recycling Quality in Government Multi-Policy Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, February.
    13. Benchekroun, Hassan & Ray Chaudhuri, Amrita, 2011. "Environmental policy and stable collusion: The case of a dynamic polluting oligopoly," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 479-490, April.
    14. Calvo, Emilio & Rubio, Santiago J., 2013. "Dynamic Models of International Environmental Agreements: A Differential Game Approach," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(4), pages 289-339, April.
    15. Wenguang Tang & Shuhua Zhang, 2019. "Modeling and Computation of Transboundary Pollution Game Based on Joint Implementation Mechanism," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-18, August.
    16. Tubman, Wendy, 1977. "A Note On Off-Farm Income Of Farm Families In Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 21(3), pages 1-6, December.
    17. Sifat E. Rabbi & Reza Shant & Sourav Karmakar & Azhar Habib & Jürgen P. Kropp, 2021. "Regional mapping of climate variability index and identifying socio-economic factors influencing farmer’s perception in Bangladesh," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 11050-11066, July.
    18. Zhe Zhao & Pengyu Peng & Fan Zhang & Jiayin Wang & Hongxuan Li, 2022. "The Impact of the Urbanization Process on Agricultural Technical Efficiency in Northeast China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-20, September.
    19. Chen, Jingxian & Liang, Liang & Yang, Feng, 2015. "Cooperative quality investment in outsourcing," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 174-191.
    20. Coronese, Matteo & Occelli, Martina & Lamperti, Francesco & Roventini, Andrea, 2023. "AgriLOVE: Agriculture, land-use and technical change in an evolutionary, agent-based model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).

    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:3:p:358-:d:1355314. 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.