IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i6p5343-d1100067.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study on the Impact of Social Capital on Farmers’ Decision-Making Behavior of Adopting Trusteeship Services

Author

Listed:
  • Xiuru Zhang

    (College of Economics and Management, Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, Daqing 163319, China)

  • Lin Zhang

    (College of Economics and Management, Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, Daqing 163319, China)

  • Tangzhe Nie

    (School of Water Conservancy and Electric Power, Heilongjiang University, Harbin 150006, China
    School of Water Conservancy and Civil Engineering, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China
    Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources Use, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China
    College of Agriculture, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

Abstract

The development of sustainable agriculture is an important link in promoting agricultural modernization. As a new sustainable agricultural production model, the promotion effect of agricultural production trust depends on the participation of farmers. Therefore, based on the micro-data of 461 valid questionnaires from farmers in the Heilongjiang Province and the Heckman sample selection model, this study empirically analyzed the impact of social capital on the decision behavior of farmers to adopt custody services from two aspects of adoption behavior and adoption degree. The results showed that social capital had a significant positive impact on the adoption behavior and the degree of adoption of rural households’ trusteeship services. From the perspective of different business scales, for large-scale households, participation in the service promotion activities of agricultural means of production suppliers and trust in the technical information disseminated by the government had a significant positive impact on the adoption of custody services. However, for small farmers, participating in village collective service promotion activities and trusting the service information spread by their neighbors’ relatives and friends had a significant positive impact on trust adoption behavior. Therefore, more attention should be paid to the impact of social capital on farmers’ trust adoption behavior decision making in the future agricultural trust service promotion process to accelerate the promotion of sustainable agricultural development.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiuru Zhang & Lin Zhang & Tangzhe Nie, 2023. "Study on the Impact of Social Capital on Farmers’ Decision-Making Behavior of Adopting Trusteeship Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5343-:d:1100067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5343/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5343/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lin Xie & Biliang Luo & Wenjing Zhong, 2021. "How Are Smallholder Farmers Involved in Digital Agriculture in Developing Countries: A Case Study from China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    2. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Analyzing collective action," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(s1), pages 155-166, November.
    3. Hu, Ruifa & Cai, Yaqing & Chen, Kevin Z. & Huang, Jikun, 2012. "Effects of inclusive public agricultural extension service: Results from a policy reform experiment in western China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 962-974.
    4. T Vernimmen & W Verbeke & G van Huylenbroeck, 2000. "Transaction cost analysis of outsourcing farm administration by Belgian farmers," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 27(3), pages 325-345, September.
    5. Lillian Mwanri & Emily Miller & Moira Walsh & Melanie Baak & Anna Ziersch, 2023. "Social Capital and Rural Health for Refugee Communities in Australia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-18, January.
    6. Nie, Tangzhe & Huang, Jianyi & Zhang, Zhongxue & Chen, Peng & Li, Tiecheng & Dai, Changlei, 2023. "The inhibitory effect of a water-saving irrigation regime on CH4 emission in Mollisols under straw incorporation for 5 consecutive years," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    7. Ruining Li & Yanli Yu, 2022. "Impacts of Green Production Behaviors on the Income Effect of Rice Farmers from the Perspective of Outsourcing Services: Evidence from the Rice Region in Northwest China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-27, October.
    8. Zirong Ren & Guoan Yue & Weilong Xiao & Qinghui Fan, 2022. "The Influence of Subjective Socioeconomic Status on Life Satisfaction: The Chain Mediating Role of Social Equity and Social Trust," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-10, November.
    9. Qiangqiang Zhang & Beibei Yan & Xuexi Huo, 2018. "What Are the Effects of Participation in Production Outsourcing? Evidence from Chinese Apple Farmers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, November.
    10. Yun Teng & Peiwen Lin, 2022. "Research on Behavioral Decision-Making of Subjects on Cultivated Land Conservation under the Goal of Carbon Neutrality," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-25, September.
    11. Haiyan Yu & Wenjie Zhang & Shuai Pang, 2022. "Exploring the Role of Land Transfer and Social Capital in Improving Agricultural Income under the Background of Rural Revitalization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-17, December.
    12. Jianhua Ren & Hongzhen Lei & Haiyun Ren, 2022. "Livelihood Capital, Ecological Cognition, and Farmers’ Green Production Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-16, December.
    13. Xue Qu & Daizo Kojima & Laping Wu & Mitsuyoshi Ando, 2022. "Do Farming Scale and Mechanization Affect Moral Hazard in Rice Harvest Outsourcing Service in China?," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-12, August.
    14. Wei Wang & Shengbo Zhang, 2022. "The Impact of Internet Use on Rural Women’s Off-Farm Work Participation: Empirical Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-18, December.
    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. Chunfang Yang & Changming Cheng & Nanyang Cheng & Yifeng Zhang, 2023. "Research on the Impact of Internet Use on Farmers’ Adoption of Agricultural Socialized Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Qi Li & Menghui Gao, . "Trust evolution, institutional constraints, and land trusteeship decisions among Chinese farmers," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 0.
    3. Qi Li & Menghui Gao, 2023. "Trust evolution, institutional constraints, and land trusteeship decisions among Chinese farmers," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(12), pages 485-497.

    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. Junying Lin & Songqing Jin & Hongdong Guo, 2023. "Do outsourcing services provided by agricultural cooperatives affect technical efficiency? Insights from tobacco farmers in China," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(3), pages 781-804, September.
    2. Wen Xiang & Jianzhong Gao, 2023. "Do Not Be Anticlimactic: Farmers’ Behavior in the Sustainable Application of Green Agricultural Technology—A Perceived Value and Government Support Perspective," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Meng Qu & Kai Zhao & Renhui Zhang & Yuan Gao & Jing Wang, 2022. "Divergence between Willingness and Behavior of Farmers to Purchase Socialized Agricultural Services: From a Heterogeneity Perspective of Land Scale," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-21, July.
    4. Robert Roßner & Dimitrios Zikos, 2018. "The Role of Homogeneity and Heterogeneity Among Resource Users on Water Governance: Lessons Learnt from an Economic Field Experiment on Irrigation in Uzbekistan," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(03), pages 1-30, July.
    5. Siyang Zhang & Minjuan Zhao & Qi Ni & Yu Cai, 2021. "Modelling Farmers’ Watershed Ecological Protection Behaviour with the Value-Belief-Norm Theory: A Case Study of the Wei River Basin," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Meyer, Maximilian & Hulke, Carolin & Kamwi, Jonathan & Kolem, Hannah & Börner, Jan, 2022. "Spatially heterogeneous effects of collective action on environmental dependence in Namibia’s Zambezi region," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    7. Kassis, Grâce & Bertrand, Nathalie, 2022. "Institutional changes in farmland governance emerging from a collective land preservation procedure upholding local food projects: Evidence from a French case study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. Xin Luo & Shubin Zhu & Zhenjiang Song, 2023. "Quantifying the Income-Increasing Effect of Digital Agriculture: Take the New Agricultural Tools of Smartphone as an Example," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Shoumin Yue & Ying Xue & Jie Lyu & Kangkang Wang, 2023. "The Effect of Information Acquisition Ability on Farmers’ Agricultural Productive Service Behavior: An Empirical Analysis of Corn Farmers in Northeast China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-26, February.
    10. Ariel Singerman & Pilar Useche, 2019. "The Role of Strategic Uncertainty in Area-wide Pest Management Decisions of Florida Citrus Growers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(4), pages 991-1011.
    11. Krumalova, Veronika & Ratinger, Tomas, 2002. "Provision of Environmental Goods on Potentially Abandoned Land- The White Carpathians Protected Landscape Area," Discussion Papers 18885, CEESA: Central and Eastern European Sustainable Agriculture International Research Project.
    12. Han, Yu & Zhang, Zhongxue & Li, Tiecheng & Chen, Peng & Nie, Tangzhe & Zhang, Zuohe & Du, Sicheng, 2023. "Straw return alleviates the greenhouse effect of paddy fields by increasing soil organic carbon sequestration under water-saving irrigation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 287(C).
    13. Skurray, James H., 2015. "The scope for collective action in a large groundwater basin: An institutional analysis of aquifer governance in Western Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 128-140.
    14. Henk Folmer & Olof Johansson-Stenman, 2011. "Does Environmental Economics Produce Aeroplanes Without Engines? On the Need for an Environmental Social Science," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 337-361, March.
    15. Xuezhen Xu & Fang Wang & Tao Xu & Sufyan Ullah Khan, 2023. "How Does Capital Endowment Impact Farmers’ Green Production Behavior? Perspectives on Ecological Cognition and Environmental Regulation," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, August.
    16. Asproudis, Elias & Filippiadis, Eleftherios, 2021. "Bargaining for Community Fishing Quotas," MPRA Paper 107409, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Shinichi Kitano, 2020. "Formation Factors and Effects on Common Property Resource Conservation of Community Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Ian David Soane & Rocco Scolozzi & Beatrice Marelli & Cristina Orsatti & Klaus Hubacek & Alessandro Gretter, 2011. "Developing a panarchy model of landscape conservation and management of alpine-mountain grassland in Northern Italy," Openloc Working Papers 1107, Public policies and local development.
    19. Richter, Andries & Grasman, Johan, 2013. "The transmission of sustainable harvesting norms when agents are conditionally cooperative," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 202-209.
    20. Zezza, Alberto & Llambi, Luis, 2002. "Meso-Economic Filters Along the Policy Chain: Understanding the Links Between Policy Reforms and Rural Poverty in Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 1865-1884, November.

    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:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5343-:d:1100067. 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.