IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i5p676-d1393750.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Farmland Rental Market, Outsourcing Services Market and Agricultural Green Productivity: Implications for Multiple Forms of Large-Scale Management

Author

Listed:
  • Heng Zhang

    (College of Agriculture, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China
    Development Research Center of Modern Agriculture, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Xiangyu Guo

    (Development Research Center of Modern Agriculture, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China
    College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

Abstract

Large-scale management is the key to realizing long-term agricultural growth in smallholder countries. Land-scale management and service-scale management are two forms of agricultural large-scale management. The former is committed to changing the small-scale management pattern, but the latter tends to maintain it. There has been a lack of discussion and controversy about the relationship between the two. From the perspective of market maturity, this paper explores whether the two are complementary or mutually exclusive and how their complementary or mutually exclusive relationship affects agricultural green productivity. The results show the following: Land-scale management and service-scale management are complementary, not superficially contradictory. The benign interaction between the two has a consistent improvement effect on green productivity in both the short and long term, which has spatial spillovers appearing in the long term. The reasons are as follows: The farmland rental market can reverse the inhibitory effect of the current low-maturity outsourcing services market on green productivity. The outsourcing services market can delay the arrival of the inflection point beyond which expansion of farmland rental transactions reduces green productivity, and amplify the positive effect of farmland rental on it. Although the degree of benign interaction between the two forms of large-scale management has gradually increased in recent years, it is still low overall. Agricultural large-scale management in China is still in the stage driven by land-scale management. Smallholder countries such as China need not worry prematurely about which large-scale management path to take, and they should treat both forms of large-scale management with an equal perspective to accelerate the high-level interaction between them.

Suggested Citation

  • Heng Zhang & Xiangyu Guo, 2024. "Farmland Rental Market, Outsourcing Services Market and Agricultural Green Productivity: Implications for Multiple Forms of Large-Scale Management," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-23, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:5:p:676-:d:1393750
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/5/676/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/5/676/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    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. Tasso Adamopoulos & Loren Brandt & Jessica Leight & Diego Restuccia, 2022. "Misallocation, Selection, and Productivity: A Quantitative Analysis With Panel Data From China," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(3), pages 1261-1282, May.
    3. Yu Sheng & Jiping Ding & Jikun Huang, 2019. "The Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity in Agriculture: Evidence from Maize Production in Northern China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(3), pages 790-806.
    4. Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo & Ernest Reig‐Martínez, 2006. "Outsourcing and efficiency: the case of Spanish citrus farming," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 35(2), pages 213-222, September.
    5. Habtamu Alem, 2023. "The role of green total factor productivity to farm-level performance: evidence from Norwegian dairy farms," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    6. Markus Goldstein & Christopher Udry, 2008. "The Profits of Power: Land Rights and Agricultural Investment in Ghana," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(6), pages 981-1022, December.
    7. Zhang, Xiaobo & Yang, Jin & Reardon, Thomas, 2020. "Mechanization outsourcing clusters and division of labor in Chinese agriculture," IFPRI book chapters, in: An evolving paradigm of agricultural mechanization development: How much can Africa learn from Asia?, chapter 2, pages 71-96, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Chang-Tai Hsieh & Peter J. Klenow, 2009. "Misallocation and Manufacturing TFP in China and India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(4), pages 1403-1448.
    9. Cao, Yueming & Bai, Yunli & Zhang, Linxiu, 2020. "The impact of farmland property rights security on the farmland investment in rural China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    10. Hansen, Bruce E., 1999. "Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 345-368, December.
    11. Young, Allyn A., 1928. "Increasing Returns and Economic Progress," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 38, pages 527-542.
    12. Eswaran, Mukesh & Kotwal, Ashok, 1986. "Access to Capital and Agrarian Production Organisation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(382), pages 482-498, June.
    13. Qiu, Tongwei & Shi, Xinjie & He, Qinying & Luo, Biliang, 2021. "The paradox of developing agricultural mechanization services in China: Supporting or kicking out smallholder farmers?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    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. Xiang Li & Xiaoqin Guo, 2023. "Can Policy Promote Agricultural Service Outsourcing? Quasi-Natural Experimental Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-18, January.
    2. Fernando Aragon & Diego Restuccia & Juan Pablo Rud, 2021. "Heterogeneity, Measurement Error, and Misallocation in African Agriculture: A Comment," Working Papers tecipa-697, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    3. Fernando Aragon & Diego Restuccia & Juan Pablo Rud, 2022. "Assessing misallocation in agriculture: plots versus farms," Working Papers tecipa-718, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    4. Chaoran Chen, 2017. "Untitled Land, Occupational Choice, and Agricultural Productivity," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 91-121, October.
    5. Aragón, Fernando M. & Restuccia, Diego & Rud, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Are small farms really more productive than large farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    6. Chaoran Chen & Diego Restuccia & Raül Santaeulàlia-Llopis, 2023. "Land Misallocation and Productivity," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 441-465, April.
    7. Britos, Braulio & Hernandez, Manuel A. & Robles, Miguel & Trupkin, Danilo R., 2022. "Land market distortions and aggregate agricultural productivity: Evidence from Guatemala," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Meilin Ma & Jessie Lin & Richard J. Sexton, 2022. "The Transition from Small to Large Farms in Developing Economies: A Welfare Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(1), pages 111-133, January.
    9. beg, Sabrin, 2019. "Computerization and Development: Formalizing Property Rights and its Impact on Land and Labor Allocation," MPRA Paper 96110, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Chen, Chaoran, 2020. "Technology adoption, capital deepening, and international productivity differences," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Chaoran Chen & Diego Restuccia & Raul Santaeulalia-Llopis, 2022. "The Effects of Land Markets on Resource Allocation and Agricultural Productivity," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 45, pages 41-54, July.
    13. beg, Sabrin, 2021. "Digitization and Development: Formalizing Property Rights and its Impact on Land and Labor Allocation," MPRA Paper 108115, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Meilin Ma & Richard J. Sexton, 2021. "Modern agricultural value chains and the future of smallholder farming systems," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(4), pages 591-606, July.
    15. Ma, Meilin, 2023. "Interdependent investments in attached and movable assets under insecure land rights," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    16. Gao, Xuwen & Shi, Xinjie & Fang, Shile, 2021. "Property rights and misallocation: Evidence from land certification in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    17. Le, Kien, 2020. "Land use restrictions, misallocation in agriculture, and aggregate productivity in Vietnam," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    18. Shouhong Xie & Jizhou Zhang & Xiaojing Li & Zhe Chen & Xiaoning Zhang & Xianli Xia, 2023. "Impact of Farmer Participation in Production Chain Outsourcing Services on Agricultural Output Level and Output Risk: Evidence from the Guanzhong Plain, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, December.
    19. Shuai Qin & Hong Chen & Tuyen Thi Tran & Haokun Wang, 2022. "Analysis of the Spatial Effect of Capital Misallocation on Agricultural Output—Taking the Main Grain Producing Areas in Northeast China as an Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-17, May.
    20. Marijn A. Bolhuis & Swapnika R. Rachapalli & Diego Restuccia, 2021. "Misallocation in Indian Agriculture," NBER Working Papers 29363, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:5:p:676-:d:1393750. 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.