IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0287022.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A study on the mode choice of large-scale households’ farmland transfer-in in rural China: Based on the economic analysis paradigm of transaction costs

Author

Listed:
  • Guoping He
  • Taofen Xiao

Abstract

Regarding the mode choice of farmland transfer, the existing literature have more examined the choices between market-based transfer (spontaneous transfer) and government or village committee-led transfer, and between formal contract and informal contract. However, the question that how the two parties choose among various specific transfer modes has not attracted extensive attention of scholars. Based on contract theory and transaction cost economics, this paper uses the public samples of the third national agricultural census data to investigate how large-scale households choose among the specific transfer modes when transferring into farmland, like the transfer of the contracted management right (TCMR), lease and shareholding. The findings of this paper are as follows. Firstly, with the increase in the transfer-in area and the education level of the household head, the probability of choosing lease and shareholding increases relatively, but the latter rises faster. Secondly, compared with large-scale farmers whose aim is to plant crop, the probability of those who transfer into farmland for gardening and forestry operation choosing shareholding has increased significantly. Thirdly, the age of the household head and the number of household laborers have an interactive effect on the mode choice of transferring into farmland. In addition, the mode choice of large-scale households’ transferring into farmland is also significantly affected by environmental factors such as local topography, irrigation, traffic conditions, industrial structure, and social security development. Therefore, adhering to the parties to choose the mode of farmland transfer independently is crucial. The government and rural grassroots organizations should help the parties to understand the characteristics, adaptability and supply and demand of different modes, and help the parties to explore the most economical mode. The contribution of this paper is that it expands the study of the transfer of rural land rights to the choices of specific transfer modes, and partially reveals the rule of choices, which provides a reference for the parties to choose the most efficient transfer mode under different conditions and for the government and rural grassroots organizations to play a role.

Suggested Citation

  • Guoping He & Taofen Xiao, 2023. "A study on the mode choice of large-scale households’ farmland transfer-in in rural China: Based on the economic analysis paradigm of transaction costs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(10), pages 1-23, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0287022
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287022
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287022&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0287022?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Royer, Jeffrey S., 1999. "Cooperative Organizational Strategies: A Neo-Institutional Digest," Journal of Cooperatives, NCERA-210, vol. 14, pages 1-24.
    2. Liu, Shouying & Carter, Michael R. & Yao, Yang, 1998. "Dimensions and diversity of property rights in rural China: Dilemmas on the road to further reform," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(10), pages 1789-1806, October.
    3. Zhang, Jian & Mishra, Ashok K. & Zhu, Peixin & Li, Xiaoshun, 2020. "Land rental market and agricultural labor productivity in rural China: A mediation analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    4. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    5. Mertens, Kewan & Vranken, Liesbet, 2021. "Pro-poor land transfers in the presence of landslides: New insights on norms in land markets," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Li, Xinyi & Ito, Junichi, 2021. "An empirical study of land rental development in rural Gansu, China: The role of agricultural cooperatives and transaction costs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    7. Deininger, Klaus & Zegarra, Eduardo & Lavadenz, Isabel, 2003. "Determinants and Impacts of Rural Land Market Activity: Evidence from Nicaragua," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 1385-1404, August.
    8. Klaus Deininger & Daniel Ayalew Ali & Tekie Alemu, 2013. "Productivity effects of land rental market operation in Ethiopia: evidence from a matched tenant--landlord sample," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(25), pages 3531-3551, September.
    9. Yingchao Li & Ruyu Du & Linli Li & Guanghui Jiang & Zhiyuan Fan, 2020. "Influences of the Transaction Intention of Farmland Transfer under Information Asymmetry: An Empirical Study of 1100 Questionnaires from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, May.
    10. Ali, Daniel Ayalew & Deininger, Klaus, 2022. "Institutional determinants of large land-based investments’ performance in Zambia: Does title enhance productivity and structural transformation?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    11. Sarah E. Tione & Stein T. Holden, 2022. "Nonconvex Transaction Costs and Land Rental Market Participation in Malawi," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 98(1), pages 150-164.
    12. Barzel,Yoram, 1997. "Economic Analysis of Property Rights," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521597135, February.
    13. Lucas Bispo de Oliveira Alves & Shinnosuke Maeda & So Morikawa & Hironori Kato, 2021. "Land titles and farmers’ perceptions about ease of conducting transactions: a case study in Brazil," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 484-495, May.
    14. Kewan Mertens & Liesbet Vranken, 2021. "Pro-poor land transfers in the presence of landslides: New insights on norms in land markets," Post-Print hal-03754089, HAL.
    15. Yali Zhang & Yihan Wang & Yunli Bai, 2019. "Knowing and Doing: The Perception of Subsidy Policy and Farmland Transfer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-15, April.
    16. Zhllima, Edvin & Rama, Klodjan & Imami, Drini, 2021. "Agriculture land markets in transition - The inherited challenge of the post-communist land reform in Albania," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    17. Ito, Junichi & Bao, Zongshun & Ni, Jing, 2016. "Land rental development via institutional innovation in rural Jiangsu, China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1-11.
    18. Lu, Shenghua & Wang, Hui, 2022. "Market-oriented reform and land use efficiency: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    19. Ayala-Cantu, Luciano & Morando, Bruno, 2020. "Rental markets, gender, and land certificates: Evidence from Vietnam," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    20. Geoghegan, Cathal & Kinsella, Anne & O'Donoghue, Cathal, 2021. "The effect of farmer attitudes on openness to land transactions: evidence for Ireland," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 10(2), April.
    21. Karwat-Woźniak, Bożena & Buks, Bogdan, 2022. "Scale and Conditions of Agricultural Land Lease in The Case of Individual Farms," Problems of Agricultural Economics / Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej 320314, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics - National Research Institute (IAFE-NRI).
    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. Zhang, Jian & Mishra, Ashok K. & Ma, Xianlei, 2023. "Mechanism of Chinese farmers’ land rental participation: The role of invisible markets and public intervention," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    2. Shichao Yuan & Jian Wang, 2022. "Involution Effect: Does China’s Rural Land Transfer Market Still Have Efficiency?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Meng Yang & Ting Sun & Tao Liu, 2023. "The Heterogeneous Effects of Multilevel Centers on Farmland Transfer: Evidence from Tai’an Prefecture, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Tingting Fang & Yuefei Zhuo & Cifang Wu & Yihu Zhou & Zhongguo Xu & Guan Li, 2022. "Exploration of Informal Farmland Leasing Mode: A Case Study of Huang Village in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Yuanjie Zhang & Shichao Yuan & Jian Wang & Jian Cheng & Daolin Zhu, 2022. "How Do the Different Types of Land Costs Affect Agricultural Crop-Planting Selections in China?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, October.
    6. Whitten, Stuart M. & Salzman, James & Shelton, Dave & Procter, Wendy, 2003. "Markets for ecosystem services: Applying the concepts," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 58269, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.
    8. Jérémie GIGNOUX & Karen MACOURS & Liam WREN-LEWIS, 2015. "Impact of land administration programs on agricultural productivity and rural development: existing evidence, challenges and new approaches," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 96(3), pages 467-498.
    9. Deininger, Klaus & Jin, Songqing, 2007. "Land rental markets in the process of rural structural transformation : productivity and equity impacts in China," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4454, The World Bank.
    10. Derek G. Stacey, 2011. "Tenure Insecurity, Adverse Selection, And Liquidity In Rural Land Markets," Working Paper 1269, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    11. Mehrdad Vahabi, 2011. "Appropriation, violent enforcement, and transaction costs: a critical survey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 227-253, April.
    12. Ma, Xianlei & Heerink, Nico & van Ierland, Ekko & Lang, Hairu & Shi, Xiaoping, 2020. "Decisions by Chinese households regarding renting in arable land—The impact of tenure security perceptions and trust," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    13. Mueller, Bernardo, 2018. "Property Rights Implications for the Brazilian Forest Code," Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural (RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 56(2), January.
    14. Zhllima, Edvin & Rama, Klodjan & Imami, Drini, 2021. "Agriculture land markets in transition - The inherited challenge of the post-communist land reform in Albania," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    15. Christophe Depres & Gilles Grolleau & Naoufel Mzoughi, 2008. "Contracting for Environmental Property Rights: The Case of Vittel," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 75(299), pages 412-434, August.
    16. Martina Eckardt & Wolfgang Kerber, 2024. "Property rights theory, bundles of rights on IoT data, and the EU Data Act," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 113-143, April.
    17. Besley, Timothy & Ghatak, Maitreesh, 2010. "Property Rights and Economic Development," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 4525-4595, Elsevier.
    18. Gerald Friedman, "undated". "The Sanctity of Property Rights in American History," Working Papers wp14, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    19. Mueller, Bernardo, 2022. "Property rights and violence in indigenous land in Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    20. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.

    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:plo:pone00:0287022. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.