IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v12y2025i1d10.1057_s41599-025-04861-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intergenerational differences in the homestead policy cognition of farmers within the context of institutional change: empirical evidence from villages in Jiangxi province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Ming Li

    (Research Center for Rural Land Resources Utilization and Conservation, Jiangxi Agricultural University)

  • Ni Zhan

    (Research Center for Rural Land Resources Utilization and Conservation, Jiangxi Agricultural University)

  • Ting Zhang

    (Research Center for Rural Land Resources Utilization and Conservation, Jiangxi Agricultural University)

  • Meiqiu Chen

    (Research Center for Rural Land Resources Utilization and Conservation, Jiangxi Agricultural University)

Abstract

A complete understanding of homestead policy is crucial for farmers and is key to China’s rural homestead system reform. However, intergenerational cognitive differences have hindered reform progress as the changes to the system are complex. Based on Distributed Cognition Theory, this study established a theoretical framework to explain the formation of farmers’ homestead policy cognition and constructed an indicator system addressing personal power, regional power, and cultural power dimensions. Based on 2445 questionnaires across 345 villages in 37 counties of Jiangxi province, China, this study employed an OLS regression model to analyze factors influencing intergenerational differences in farmers’ homestead policy cognition and the ISM model to explore the mechanisms and driving forces. First, homestead policy cognition of older generation farmers (OFs) was significantly lower than that of new generation farmers (NFs). Second, personal, regional, and cultural power exerted more significant influence on the homestead policy cognition of OFs, when compared to NFs. OFs who reported higher education, participation in the formulation of village rules and regulations, and acquisition of homestead by application exhibited higher homestead policy cognition. Finally, regional power was found to be the root factor contributing to the formation of homestead policy cognition between the two generations studied. The policy cognition formation mechanism of OFs was found to be “regional power - personal power - cultural power - policy cognition.” Conversely, the policy cognition formation mechanism of NFs was found to be “regional power - cultural power - policy cognition.” These results suggest that government agencies should respect intergenerational cognitive differences, improve the policy publicity system, and adopt targeted measures to address the specific cognitive characteristics of different generations. This study explored the intergenerational differences in farmers’ homestead policy cognition, as well as the mechanisms for their formation, offering insights for rural land system reforms in other countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Ming Li & Ni Zhan & Ting Zhang & Meiqiu Chen, 2025. "Intergenerational differences in the homestead policy cognition of farmers within the context of institutional change: empirical evidence from villages in Jiangxi province, China," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-04861-5
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-025-04861-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-025-04861-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-025-04861-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhang, Yuanxia & Halder, Pradipta & Zhang, Xiaoning & Qu, Mei, 2020. "Analyzing the deviation between farmers' Land transfer intention and behavior in China's impoverished mountainous Area: A Logistic-ISM model approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Kong, Xuesong & Liu, Yaolin & Jiang, Ping & Tian, Yasi & Zou, Yafeng, 2018. "A novel framework for rural homestead land transfer under collective ownership in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 138-146.
    3. Gao, Jinlong & Liu, Yansui & Chen, Jianglong, 2020. "China’s initiatives towards rural land system reform," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Weizhen Zhan & Zhenwu You, 2024. "Factors influencing villagers’ willingness to participate in grassroots governance: evidence from the Chinese social survey," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-8, December.
    5. Liu, Runqiu & Jiang, Jian & Yu, Chao & Rodenbiker, Jesse & Jiang, Yongmu, 2021. "The endowment effect accompanying villagers' withdrawal from rural homesteads: Field evidence from Chengdu, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Pang, Hua & Ruan, Yang, 2023. "Can information and communication overload influence smartphone app users' social network exhaustion, privacy invasion and discontinuance intention? A cognition-affect-conation approach," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    7. Chen, Hongxia & Zhao, Luming & Zhao, Zhenyu, 2017. "Influencing factors of farmers’ willingness to withdraw from rural homesteads: A survey in zhejiang, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 524-530.
    8. Lee, Jinkook & Smith, James P., 2014. "Regional disparities in adult height, educational attainment, and late-life cognition: Findings from the Longitudinal Aging Study in India (LASI)," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 26-34.
    9. Wen Fan & Lifang Zhang, 2019. "Does cognition matter? Applying the push‐pull‐mooring model to Chinese farmers' willingness to withdraw from rural homesteads," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 98(6), pages 2355-2369, December.
    10. Carolan, Michael, 2018. "Lands changing hands: Experiences of succession and farm (knowledge) acquisition among first-generation, multigenerational, and aspiring farmers," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 179-189.
    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. Tao Xia & Elias G. Carayannis & Stavros Sindakis & Saloome Showkat & Nikos Kanellos, 2024. "Technology transfer for sustainable rural development: evidence from homestead withdrawal with compensation in Chengdu–Chongqing," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 303-333, February.
    2. Shiguang Peng & Le Wang, 2025. "Does Participation in Social Security Increase Chinese Farmers’ Willingness of Homestead Withdrawal?," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Ying Chen & Xiaolu Ni & Yajia Liang, 2022. "The Influence of External Environment Factors on Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Rural Homesteads: Evidence from Wuhan and Suizhou City in Central China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, September.
    4. Xiuling Ding & Qian Lu & Lipeng Li & Apurbo Sarkar & Hua Li, 2023. "Does Labor Transfer Improve Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Farming?—A Bivariate Probit Modeling Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, August.
    5. Liu, Runqiu & Jiang, Jian & Yu, Chao & Rodenbiker, Jesse & Jiang, Yongmu, 2021. "The endowment effect accompanying villagers' withdrawal from rural homesteads: Field evidence from Chengdu, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Wentao Si & Chen Jiang & Lin Meng, 2022. "Leaving the Homestead: Examining the Role of Relative Deprivation, Social Trust, and Urban Integration among Rural Farmers in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-28, October.
    7. Ranran Shi & Ling Hou & Binghui Jia & Yaya Jin & Weiwei Zheng & Xiangdong Wang & Xianhui Hou, 2022. "Effect of Policy Cognition on the Intention of Villagers’ Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-17, August.
    8. Hanlong Gu & Yuqing He & Bingyi Wang & Fengkui Qian & Yan Wu, 2023. "The Influence of Aging Population in Rural Families on Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Homesteads in Shenyang, Liaoning Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-25, September.
    9. Qi Yin & Jinfu Hu & Zhanli Sun & Dingde Xu & Gideon Ntim-Amo & Hong Tang, 2020. "Assessing the Viability of Vacant Farmhouse Market in China: A Case Study in Sichuan," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-24, November.
    10. Peng Tang & Jing Chen & Jinlong Gao & Min Li & Jinshuo Wang, 2020. "What Role(s) Do Village Committees Play in the Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads? Evidence from Sichuan Province in Western China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, November.
    11. Jing Wang & Kai Zhao & Yue Cui & Hui Cao, 2022. "Formal and Informal Institutions in Farmers’ Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads in China: Heterogeneity Analysis Based on the Village Location," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, October.
    12. Xianjun Wang & Junfang Kang, 2023. "Decision Making and Influencing Factors in Withdrawal of Rural Residential Land-Use Rights in Suzhou, Anhui Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, February.
    13. Jia Gao & Ge Song & Shuhan Liu, 2022. "Factors influencing farmers’ willingness and behavior choices to withdraw from rural homesteads in China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 112-131, March.
    14. Yaoyang Zhao & Scott Cloutier & Hongqing Li, 2020. "Farmers’ Economic Status and Satisfaction with Homestead Withdrawal Policy: Expectation and Perceived Value," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-16, September.
    15. Yichi Zhang & Kai Xue & Huimin Cao & Yingen Hu, 2023. "The Non-Linear Relationship between the Number of Permanent Residents and the Willingness of Rural Residential Land Transfer: The Threshold Effect of per Capita Net Income," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-23, August.
    16. Jiafang Jin & Xinyi Li & Guoxiu Liu & Xiaowen Dai & Ruiping Ran, 2024. "Analysis of Influencing Factors on Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for the Use of Residential Land Based on Supervised Machine Learning Algorithms," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-20, March.
    17. Fachao Liang & Zehua Wang & Sheng-Hau Lin, 2022. "Can Land Policy Promote Farmers’ Subjective Well-Being? A Study on Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads in Jinjiang, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-17, June.
    18. Weiguo Fan & Wei Yao & Kehan Chen, 2023. "Integrating Energy Systems Language and Emergy Approach to Simulate and Analyze the Energy Flow Process of Land Transfer," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-24, May.
    19. Bao, Helen X.H. & Robinson, Guy M., 2022. "Behavioural land use policy studies: Past, present, and future," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    20. Guanglong Dong & Wenxin Zhang & Xinliang Xu & Kun Jia, 2021. "Multi-Dimensional Feature Recognition and Policy Implications of Rural Human–Land Relationships in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.

    More about this item

    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:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-04861-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.