IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i7p2490-d158270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Impacts of Land Consolidation on Agricultural Technical Efficiency of Producers: A Survey from Jiangsu Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Siyan Zeng

    () (School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221043, China)

  • Fengwu Zhu

    () (Key Laboratory of Coastal Zone Exploitation and Protection, Ministry of Land and Resource, Institute of Land Surveying and Planning of Jiangsu, Nanjing 210096, China)

  • Fu Chen

    () (School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221043, China
    Low Carbon Energy Institute, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221008, China)

  • Man Yu

    () (School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221043, China)

  • Shaoliang Zhang

    () (School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221043, China)

  • Yongjun Yang

    () (School of Environment Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221043, China)

Abstract

Since the year 2000, China has implemented large-scale land consolidation, which was used to reduce land fragmentation, enhance grain yield capability, facilitate land tenure transfer, and promote agricultural operational scale. However, the impacts of land consolidation on agricultural technical efficiency of producers in practice is not yet clear. A field survey was executed at two points of time during July 2010 and July 2016. A total of 900 producers were chosen from 30 land consolidation projects at random in the Jiangsu Province. The agricultural technical efficiency caused by land consolidation was calculated by using a stochastic frontier analysis method. The results of a stochastic frontier production function reveal that land tenure transfer, land fragmentation, non-agricultural income, and crop diversity has undergone significant changes after land consolidation. The overall agricultural technical efficiency of producers had also increased considerably and the average technical efficiency was estimated at 0.924 after land consolidation. Land consolidation directly promotes land tenure transfer while indirectly encouraging non-agricultural employment, which could improve agricultural technical efficiency of producers. Non-agricultural income and crop diversity had a significant correlation with agricultural technical efficiency, but land fragmentation after land consolidation does not significantly improve technical efficiency. These conclusions are helpful in understanding the impacts of land consolidation, which enriches the academic literature in related fields and improves the policy of land consolidation in China and other developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Siyan Zeng & Fengwu Zhu & Fu Chen & Man Yu & Shaoliang Zhang & Yongjun Yang, 2018. "Assessing the Impacts of Land Consolidation on Agricultural Technical Efficiency of Producers: A Survey from Jiangsu Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2490-:d:158270
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2490/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2490/
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Taylor, Timothy G. & Scott Shonkwiler, J., 1986. "Alternative stochastic specifications of the frontier production function in the analysis of agricultural credit programs and technical efficiency," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 149-160, April.
    2. Bizimana, Claude & Nieuwoudt, W. Lieb & Ferrer, Stuart R.D., 2004. "Farm size, land fragmentation and economic efficiency in southern Rwanda," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 43(2), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Van Hung, Pham & MacAulay, T. Gordon & Marsh, Sally P., 2007. "The economics of land fragmentation in the north of Vietnam," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 1-17.
    4. Guvele, C. A., 2001. "Gains from crop diversification in the Sudan Gezira scheme," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 319-333, October.
    5. Jeffrey D. Michler & Gerald E. Shively, 2015. "Land Tenure, Tenure Security and Farm Efficiency: Panel Evidence from the Philippines," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(1), pages 155-169, February.
    6. Jin Yang & Hui Wang & Songqing Jin & Kevin Chen & Jeffrey Riedinger & Chao Peng, 2016. "Migration, local off-farm employment, and agricultural production efficiency: evidence from China," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 247-259, June.
    7. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:2:p:402-:d:130180 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Coelli, Tim & Fleming, Euan, 2004. "Diversification economies and specialisation efficiencies in a mixed food and coffee smallholder farming system in Papua New Guinea," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 31(2-3), pages 229-239, December.
    9. Kawasaki, Kentaro, 2010. "The costs and benefits of land fragmentation of rice farms in Japan," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(4), pages 1-18.
    10. Alan de Brauw & Jikun Huang & Linxiu Zhang & Scott Rozelle, 2013. "The Feminisation of Agriculture with Chinese Characteristics," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 689-704, May.
    11. Rahman, Sanzidur, 2009. "Whether crop diversification is a desired strategy for agricultural growth in Bangladesh?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 340-349, August.
    12. Kentaro Kawasaki, 2010. "The costs and benefits of land fragmentation of rice farms in Japan ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(4), pages 509-526, October.
    13. Latruffe, Laure & Fogarasi, József & Desjeux, Yann, 2012. "Efficiency, productivity and technology comparison for farms in Central and Western Europe: The case of field crop and dairy farming in Hungary and France," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 264-278.
    14. George Vlontzos & Garyfallos Arabatzis & Basil Manos, 2014. "Investigation of the relative efficiency of LEADER+ in rural areas of Northern Greece," International Journal of Green Economics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 37-48.
    15. Coelli, Tim & Perelman, Sergio, 1999. "A comparison of parametric and non-parametric distance functions: With application to European railways," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 326-339, September.
    16. Llewelyn, Richard V. & Williams, Jeffery R., 1996. "Nonparametric analysis of technical, pure technical, and scale efficiencies for food crop production in East Java, Indonesia," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 113-126, November.
    17. Guang Wan & Enjiang Cheng, 2001. "Effects of land fragmentation and returns to scale in the Chinese farming sector," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 183-194.
    18. Chen, Zhuo & Huffman, Wallace E. & Rozelle, Scott, 2009. "Farm technology and technical efficiency: Evidence from four regions in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 153-161, June.
    19. Nel, A.A. & Loubser, H.L., 2004. "The impact of crop rotation on profitability and production risk in the Eastern and North Western Free State," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 43(1), pages 1-11, March.
    20. Martine Audibert, 1997. "Technical Inefficiency Effects Among Paddy Farmers in the Villages of the ‘Office du Niger’, Mali, West Africa," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 379-394, November.
    21. Tim Coelli & Sanzidur Rahman & Colin Thirtle, 2002. "Technical, Allocative, Cost and Scale Efficiencies in Bangladesh Rice Cultivation: A Non‐parametric Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 607-626, November.
    22. repec:taf:ceasxx:v:64:y:2012:i:6:p:1101-1126 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Lowder, Sarah K. & Skoet, Jakob & Raney, Terri, 2016. "The Number, Size, and Distribution of Farms, Smallholder Farms, and Family Farms Worldwide," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 16-29.
    24. Sherlund, Shane M. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Adesina, Akinwumi A., 2002. "Smallholder technical efficiency controlling for environmental production conditions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 85-101, October.
    25. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:1304-:d:142759 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Fleur Wouterse, 2010. "Migration and technical efficiency in cereal production: evidence from Burkina Faso," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(5), pages 385-395, September.
    27. Abdul Wadud & Ben White, 2000. "Farm household efficiency in Bangladesh: a comparison of stochastic frontier and DEA methods," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(13), pages 1665-1673.
    28. repec:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1678-:d:112621 is not listed on IDEAS
    29. John Pender & Marcel Fafchamps, 2006. "Land Lease Markets and Agricultural Efficiency in Ethiopia," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE), vol. 15(2), pages 251-284, June.
    30. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:2029-:d:152707 is not listed on IDEAS
    31. Battese, G E & Coelli, T J, 1995. "A Model for Technical Inefficiency Effects in a Stochastic Frontier Production Function for Panel Data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 325-332.
    32. Pham Van Hung & T. Gordon MacAulay & Sally P. Marsh, 2007. "The economics of land fragmentation in the north of Vietnam ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 195-211, June.
    33. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:2039-:d:152831 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3072-:d:166419 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:8:p:2213-:d:222283 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    land tenure transfer; land fragmentation; crop diversity; stochastic frontier analysis; rural development;

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2490-:d:158270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.