IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i8p1212-d1450921.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Conservation Tillage on Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity in Black Soil Region: Evidence from Heilongjiang Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Mei Zhang

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Hanye Zhang

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Yun Deng

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Chuanqi Yi

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

Abstract

The implementation of conservation tillage is crucial for the preservation and utilization of black soil. This study examined 297 new agricultural management entities in five pilot counties in the black soil region of northeast China. Using the SBM-Undesirable model, this study measured and evaluated the agricultural green total factor productivity (AGTFP) of these entities. We further employed the Tobit model to explore the impact of conservation tillage on the AGTFP. The findings revealed that the average AGTFP value of the sample entities was 0.4364, indicating a generally low degree of AGTFP that exhibited significant variation. Improvement in input indicators (such as machinery) and undesirable output indicators (such as net carbon emissions) was particularly needed. Additionally, conservation tillage had a significant positive impact on AGTFP, with a higher number of applied technologies correlating with increased productivity. Material subsidies for conservation tillage offered greater direct cost relief and had a stronger positive effect on AGTFP in comparison with cash subsidies. Furthermore, apart from policy factors, key production and operation characteristics—such as access to agricultural materials—also significantly influenced AGTFP. The results of this study offer a valuable decision-making framework and scientific reference for countries in black soil regions worldwide, enabling them to enhance the conservation and sustainable utilization of this vital resource.

Suggested Citation

  • Mei Zhang & Hanye Zhang & Yun Deng & Chuanqi Yi, 2024. "Effects of Conservation Tillage on Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity in Black Soil Region: Evidence from Heilongjiang Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-23, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:8:p:1212-:d:1450921
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/8/1212/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/8/1212/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jian Liu & Xin Kang & Wei Wang, 2024. "Fintech’s Impact on Green Total Factor Productivity of High Carbon Enterprises," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(4), pages 744-768, March.
    2. Jussi Lankoski & Markku Ollikainen & Pekka Uusitalo, 2006. "No-till technology: benefits to farmers and the environment? Theoretical analysis and application to Finnish agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 33(2), pages 193-221, June.
    3. Huiquan Li & Qingning Lin & Yan Wang & Shiping Mao, 2023. "Can Digital Finance Improve China’s Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity?," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Greiner, Romy & Patterson, Louisa & Miller, Owen, 2009. "Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 99(2-3), pages 86-104, February.
    5. Qinhang Xu & Peixin Zhu & Liang Tang, 2022. "Agricultural Services: Another Way of Farmland Utilization and Its Effect on Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Serge Savary & Stephen Waddington & Sonia Akter & Conny J. M. Almekinders & Jody Harris & Lise Korsten & Reimund P. Rötter & Goedele den Broeck, 2022. "Revisiting food security in 2021: an overview of the past year," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(1), pages 1-7, February.
    7. Huayong Niu & Zhishuo Zhang & Yao Xiao & Manting Luo & Yumeng Chen, 2022. "A Study of Carbon Emission Efficiency in Chinese Provinces Based on a Three-Stage SBM-Undesirable Model and an LSTM Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-19, April.
    8. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    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. Xuezhi Ren & Jianya Zhao & Shu Wang & Chunpeng Zhang & Hongzhen Zhang & Nan Wei, 2025. "Exploration of Dual-Carbon Target Pathways Based on Machine Learning Stacking Model and Policy Simulation—A Case Study in Northeast China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-31, April.

    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. Lei Zhang & Lili Xu & Mingzi Gao & Mingdong Zhou, 2024. "Can Agricultural Credit Promote the Green Transformation of China’s Agriculture?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Greiner, Romy, 2015. "Motivations and attitudes influence farmers' willingness to participate in biodiversity conservation contracts," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 154-165.
    3. Powlen, Kathryn A. & Jones, Kelly W., 2019. "Identifying the determinants of and barriers to landowner participation in reforestation in Costa Rica," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 216-225.
    4. Asci, Serhat & Borisova, Tatiana & VanSickle, John J., 2015. "Role of economics in developing fertilizer best management practices," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 251-261.
    5. Cooke, Benjamin & Corbo-Perkins, Gabriella, 2018. "Co-opting and resisting market based instruments for private land conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-181.
    6. Patrick Bottazzi & David Crespo & Harry Soria & Hy Dao & Marcelo Serrudo & Jean Paul Benavides & Stefan Schwarzer & Stephan Rist, 2014. "Carbon Sequestration in Community Forests: Trade-offs, Multiple Outcomes and Institutional Diversity in the Bolivian Amazon," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(1), pages 105-131, January.
    7. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    8. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    9. Huayong Niu & Zhishuo Zhang & Manting Luo, 2022. "Evaluation and Prediction of Low-Carbon Economic Efficiency in China, Japan and South Korea: Based on DEA and Machine Learning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-28, October.
    10. Alain‐Désiré Nimubona & Jean‐Christophe Pereau, 2022. "Negotiating over payments for wetland ecosystem services," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1507-1538, August.
    11. Bishu, Kinfe & O'Reilly, Seamus & Lahiff, Edward & Steiner, Bodo, 2016. "Cattle farmers’ perceptions of risk and risk management strategies," MPRA Paper 74954, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. de Lauwere, Carolien & Slegers, Monique & Meeusen, Marieke, 2022. "The influence of behavioural factors and external conditions on Dutch farmers’ decision making in the transition towards circular agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    13. Luqi Qin & Erbao Cao, 2024. "Decision-making and performance of the agricultural supply chain: risk-neutral farmer vs target-oriented farmer," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 340(2), pages 961-980, September.
    14. Sommerville, Matthew & Jones, Julia P.G. & Rahajaharison, Michael & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2010. "The role of fairness and benefit distribution in community-based Payment for Environmental Services interventions: A case study from Menabe, Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1262-1271, April.
    15. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    16. Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2010. "Performance payments: A new strategy to conserve large carnivores in the tropics?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 405-412, December.
    17. Skidmore, Samuel & Santos, Paulo & Leimona, Beria, 2012. "Seeing REDD: A Microeconomic Analysis of Carbon Sequestration in Indonesia," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126688, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    19. Zhang, Qi & Bilsborrow, Richard E. & Song, Conghe & Tao, Shiqi & Huang, Qingfeng, 2019. "Rural household income distribution and inequality in China: Effects of payments for ecosystem services policies and other factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 114-127.
    20. Zhang, Jing & Brown, Colin & Qiao, Guanghua & Zhang, Bao, 2019. "Effect of Eco-compensation Schemes on Household Income Structures and Herder Satisfaction: Lessons From the Grassland Ecosystem Subsidy and Award Scheme in Inner Mongolia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 46-53.

    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:8:p:1212-:d:1450921. 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.