An Estimation of the Extent of Rent-Free Farmland Transfer and Its Driving Forces in Rural China: A Multilevel Logit Model Analysis
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data
2.1.1. Rural Permanent Observation Sites Survey
2.1.2. Chinese Household Income Project
2.1.3. Survey Data of Different Agricultural Regions
2.1.4. Survey Data of Typical Mountainous Areas
2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Calculation of the Proportion of Rent-Free Land Transfer
2.2.2. Calculation of Net Income from Farmland
2.2.3. Empirical Analysis of the Determinants of Rent-Free Land Transfer
- (1)
- Rent-free land transfer as a land use behavior for farmers is not only affected by the land quality, land scale, and irrigation condition but may also be affected by the characteristics of the farm households and regional economic development.
- (2)
- The characteristics of the land parcel is the most important factor that affects the rent-free land transfer.
- (3)
- The proportion of the land with a higher quality and larger scale to be transferred in the rent-free form is lower.
3. Extent and Characteristics of Rent-Free Land Transfer
3.1. Extent of Rent-Free Land Transfer in Rural China
3.2. Extent of Rent-Free Land Transfer in Different Agricultural Regions
3.3. Extent of Rent-Free Land Transfer in Different Topographic Types
3.4. Extent of Rent-Free Land Transfer in Typical Mountainous Areas
4. Determinants of Rent-Free Land Transfer in Rural China
4.1. Cost-Benefit Analysis for Land Parcels in Rural Areas
4.2. Empirical Results of the Multilevel Logit Model
5. Conclusions and Discussions
5.1. Conclusions
5.2. Discussions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, Y.X.; Zhang, W.F.; Ma, L.; Huang, G.Q.; Oenema, O.; Zhang, F.S.; Dou, Z.X. An analysis of china’s fertilizer policies: Impacts on the industry, food security, and the environment. J. Environ. Qual. 2013, 42, 972–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pu, L.M.; Zhang, S.W.; Yang, J.C.; Chang, L.P.; Bai, S.T. Spatio-temporal dynamics of maize potential yield and yield gaps in northeast china from 1990 to 2015. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khantachavana, S.V.; Turvey, C.G.; Kong, R.; Xia, X.L. On the transaction values of land use rights in rural china. J. Comp. Econ. 2013, 41, 863–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.H.; Li, X.B.; Xin, L.J.; Tan, M.; Li, W. The impact of farm land management scale on agricultural labor productivity in china and its regional differentiation. J. Nat. Resour. 2017, 32, 539–552. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Rodgers, C. Property rights, land use and the rural environment: A case for reform. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, S134–S141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.H.; Qiu, R.X.; Li, K.M.; Xu, W. Informal land development on the urban fringe. Sustainability 2018, 10, 128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, Z.P.; Rahman, S. Economic drivers of contemporary smallholder agriculture in a transitional economy: A case study of hu village from southwest china. Singap. J. Trop. Geogr. 2015, 36, 324–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, J.; Feng, L.; JIang, Y. The survey on land use rights in rural china in 2016-the findings and policy implications based on 17 provinces. Manag. World 2018, 3, 98–108. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Qian, Z.; Ji, X. The status of farmland transfer and policy improvement in china-the survey data analysis based on jiangsu, guangxi, hubei and heilongjiang. Manag. World 2016, 2, 71–81. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.H.; Li, X.B.; Xin, L.J.; Tan, M.H.; Jiang, M. Spatiotemporal changes in chinese land circulation between 2003 and 2013. J. Geogr. Sci. 2018, 28, 707–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, S.Q.; Jayne, T.S. Land rental markets in kenya: Implications for efficiency, equity, household income, and poverty. Land Econ. 2013, 89, 246–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.; Zhong, F.; Ji, Y. Why does “zero rent” exist in farmland transfer-an empirical analysis from the perspective of rent type. China Rural Surv. 2017, 4, 43–56. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, J.; Mishra, A.K.; Zhu, P.X. Identifying livelihood livelihood strategies and transitions in rural china: Is land holding an obstacle? Land Use Policy 2019, 80, 107–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, L.L.; Sun, D.Q.; Ma, C.P. The impact of farmland transfers on agricultural investment in china: A perspective of transaction cost economics. China World Econ. 2019, 27, 93–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Li, X.; Song, W.; Zhai, L. Land abandonment under rural restructuring in china explained from a cost-benefit perspective. J. Rural Stud. 2016, 47, 524–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, L.L.; Huang, J.K.; Rozelle, S. Rental markets for cultivated land and agricultural investments in china. Agric. Econ. 2012, 43, 391–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Li, X.B. Irrigation water availability and winter wheat abandonment in the north china plain (ncp): Findings from a case study in cangxian county of hebei province. Sustainability 2018, 10, 354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sakane, N.; van Wijk, M.T.; Langensiepen, M.; Becker, M. A quantitative model for understanding and exploring land use decisions by smallholder agrowetland households in rural areas of east africa. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2014, 197, 159–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, S.L.; Zhou, X.C.; Wan, C.; Li, Y.K.; Kong, W.H. Land use changes to cash crop plantations: Crop types, multilevel determinants and policy implications. Land Use Policy 2016, 50, 379–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.; Chen, J.W.; Yu, W.C. Influence factors on gender wage gap: Evidences from chinese household income project survey. Forum Soc. Econ. 2017, 46, 371–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peters, G.H. Land use studies in britain-review of literature with special reference to applications of cost-benefit analysis. J. Agric. Econ. 1970, 21, 171–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, H.; Chiabai, A.; Tobar, D. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Alternative Land-Use Scenarios a Sustainability Study for the Volcanic Central Talamanca Biological Corridor; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2015; pp. 152–177. [Google Scholar]
- Li, S.F.; Li, X.B.; Sun, L.X.; Cao, G.Y.; Fischer, G.; Tramberend, S. An estimation of the extent of cropland abandonment in mountainous regions of china. Land Degrad. Dev. 2018, 29, 1327–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Li, X.; Song, W. Determinants of cropland abandonment at the parcel, household and village levels in mountain areas of china: A multi-level analysis. Land Use Policy 2014, 41, 186–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, T.; Li, X.; Xin, L.; Xu, X. The spatial distribution of farmland abandonment and its influential factors at the township level: A case study in the mountainous area of china. Land Use Policy 2018, 70, 510–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.F.; Li, X.B. Global understanding of farmland abandonment: A review and prospects. J. Geogr. Sci. 2017, 27, 1123–1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latruffe, L.; Piet, L. Does land fragmentation affect farm performance? A case study from brittany, france. Agric. Syst. 2014, 129, 68–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teklu, T.; Lemi, A. Factors affecting entry and intensity in informal rental land markets in southern ethiopian highlands. Agric. Econ. 2004, 30, 117–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tao, R.; Xu, Z.G. Urbanization, rural land system and social security for migrants in china. J. Dev. Stud. 2007, 43, 1301–1320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agricultural Type | Case Regions | Village | Household | Effective Households | Effective Rate (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
urban agriculture | Daxing, Tongzhou and Shunyi District | 23 | 234 | 204 | 87.18 |
intensive agriculture | Shouguang, Qingzhou, Changle City | 19 | 202 | 172 | 85.15 |
plain field agriculture | Jianli County and Honghu City | 24 | 287 | 257 | 89.55 |
mountain agriculture | Wulong District and Youyang County | 18 | 302 | 272 | 90.07 |
total sample | - | 84 | 1025 | 905 | 88.29 |
Variable | Definition | Mean | S. D |
---|---|---|---|
Dependent variable | |||
Whether rent-free transfer out farmland | Rent-free land transfer = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.69 | 0.45 |
Land parcel level (N = 325) | |||
Land parcel area | The actual planting area of the land parcel (mu) | 1.71 | 3.41 |
Distance to homestead | Distance between the land parcel and homestead (m) | 779 | 821 |
Quality level | First-class = 5, second-class = 4, third-class = 3, fourth-class = 2, fifth and other class = 1 | 3.23 | 0.87 |
Irrigation condition | Surface water = 3, only groundwater = 2, no = 1 | 1.99 | 0.7 |
Is connected with transferee’s land parcel | Connected = 1, not connected = 0 | 0.73 | 0.45 |
Household level (N = 241) | |||
Householder’s age | Actual age of the householder (years old) | 58.99 | 12.32 |
Householder’s gender | Male = 1, female = 0 | 0.91 | 0.29 |
Householder’s education level | Education years of householders (years) | 7.48 | 3.15 |
Ratio of farmers’ non-agricultural income | Ratio of farmers’ non-agricultural income to total income | 0.62 | 0.37 |
Dependency ratio | Number of people not participating in the labor divide by number of people participating in labor | 0.86 | 1.02 |
Land fragmentation | Total number of planted plots divided by total area of cultivated land | 0.68 | 0.43 |
Amount of household productive assets | Total value of productive assets (yuan) | 9711 | 38,608 |
Village level (N = 26) | |||
Ratio of the number of farmers that transferred out land to transferred into | Number of households transferred out land divided by number of households transferred into land | 1.56 | 1.77 |
Distance from the village to the centre of the county | The shortest distance between the village and the centre county (km) | 24.53 | 12.19 |
Net income per capita in village | Annual net income per capita in the village (yuan per year) | 11,168 | 5276 |
Topographic Type | Number of Households | LR = 0 | 0 < LR ≤ 500 Yuan | 500 < LR ≤ 1000 Yuan | LR > 1000 Yuan | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of Households | Ratio % | Number of Households | Ratio % | Number of Households | Ratio % | Number of Households | Ratio % | ||
plain area | 5782 | 2163 | 37.41 | 2457 | 42.49 | 794 | 13.73 | 368 | 6.36 |
hilly area | 5402 | 3077 | 56.96 | 1227 | 22.71 | 672 | 12.44 | 426 | 7.88 |
mountain area | 7917 | 4554 | 57.52 | 2929 | 36.99 | 326 | 4.12 | 108 | 1.36 |
national level | 19,397 | 10,009 | 51.60 | 6640 | 34.23 | 1680 | 8.66 | 927 | 4.78 |
County | Number of Land Parcel | LR = 0 | 0 < LR ≤ 500 Yuan | 500 < LR ≤ 1000 Yuan | LR > 1000 Yuan | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of Land Parcels | Ratio % | Number of Land Parcels | Ratio % | Number of Land Parcels | Ratio % | Number of Land Parcels | Ratio % | ||
Yongchuan | 243 | 137 | 56.38 | 71 | 29.22 | 19 | 7.82 | 16 | 6.58 |
Zhongxian | 281 | 263 | 93.59 | 11 | 3.91 | 5 | 1.78 | 2 | 0.72 |
Wulong | 127 | 104 | 81.89 | 23 | 18.11 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 0.00 |
Youyang | 173 | 148 | 85.55 | 14 | 8.09 | 6 | 3.47 | 5 | 2.89 |
Overall | 824 | 652 | 79.13 | 119 | 14.44 | 30 | 3.64 | 23 | 2.79 |
Variable | Rent-Paying Land Parcels (N = 101) | Rent-Free Land Parcels (N = 224) | Difference | T Value | p Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Average output value per mu/yuan | 984.88 | 866.03 | 118.85 | 1.66 * | 0.09 |
Average cost per mu/yuan | |||||
Labour | 536.46 | 533.92 | 2.54 | 0.06 | 0.95 |
Seed | 98.86 | 99.7 | −0.84 | −0.06 | 0.95 |
Insecticide | 36.63 | 31.83 | 4.79 | 0.37 | 0.71 |
Herbicide | 17.76 | 26.29 | −8.54 | −2.14 ** | 0.03 |
Fertilizer | 197.73 | 198.02 | −0.29 | −0.01 | 0.99 |
Irrigation and land replanting | 43.60 | 30.57 | 13.04 | 1.32 | 0.18 |
Harvesting | 4.68 | 2.11 | 2.57 | 0.69 | 0.49 |
Film | 9.72 | 5.77 | 3.96 | 1.67 * | 0.09 |
Other cost | 4.86 | 3.56 | 1.31 | 0.98 | 0.33 |
Average net income per mu/yuan | 34.57 | −65.73 | 100.31 | 2.17 ** | 0.03 |
Variable | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
β | Odds Ratio | β | Odds Ratio | β | Odds Ratio | β | Odds Ratio | |
Fixed effect | ||||||||
Intercept term | −4.664 *** | 0.009 *** | 5.194 | 180.336 | 25.054 | 76.110 | −20.932 | 0.001 |
Land parcel area | −0.441 ** | 0.643 ** | −0.582 ** | 0.558 ** | −0.312 ** | 0.345 ** | ||
Distance to homestead | 0.001 | 1.001 | 0.001 | 1.000 | 0.001 | 1.001 | ||
Quality level | −1.075 * | 0.206 * | −1.122 * | 0.325 * | −1.951 * | 0.142 * | ||
Irrigation condition | −1.578 ** | 0.341 * | −0.711 | 0.491 | −0.861 * | 0.902 * | ||
Is connected with transferee’s land parcel | −3.142 ** | 0.043 ** | −3.443 ** | 0.031 * | −1.167 | 0.311 | ||
Householder’s age | −0.446 | 0.639 | −0.433 | 0.648 | ||||
Square of householder’s age | 0.003 | 1.003 | 0.004 | 1.004 | ||||
Householder’s gender | −0.799 | 0.449 | −1.548 | 0.212 | ||||
Householder’s education level | −1.077 ** | 0.341 *** | −0.408 | 0.664 | ||||
Ratio of farmers’ non-agricultural income | 4.454 ** | 8.976 ** | 5.520 * | 9.670 * | ||||
Dependency ratio | 0.688 | 1.991 | −1.047 | 0.351 | ||||
Land fragmentation | 2.385 * | 10.866 * | 2.004 * | 0.134 * | ||||
Log (amount of productive assets) | −0.347 * | 0.706 * | 0.197 | 1.218 | ||||
Ratio of the number of farmers that transferred out land to transferred into | −0.135 | 0.873 | ||||||
Distance from the village to the centre of the county | −0.049 | 0.951 | ||||||
Log (net income per capita in village) | 2.105 | 8.211 | ||||||
Regional dummy variable | ||||||||
Youyang County | 1.076 ** | 2.180 ** | ||||||
Random effect | ||||||||
Household level | ||||||||
Var(r0) | 2.293 * | 2.066 ** | 2.120 ** | 2.091 ** | ||||
ρ2 | 0.249 | 0.239 | 0.248 | 0.247 | ||||
Village level | ||||||||
Var(µ00) | 3.255 ** | 3.278 *** | 3.130 *** | 3.054 *** | ||||
ρ3 | 0.368 | 0.379 | 0.366 | 0.362 | ||||
Area under ROC curve | 0.732 | 0.777 | 0.887 | 0.971 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, Y.; Xin, L.; Zhang, H.; Li, Y. An Estimation of the Extent of Rent-Free Farmland Transfer and Its Driving Forces in Rural China: A Multilevel Logit Model Analysis. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3161. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113161
Wang Y, Xin L, Zhang H, Li Y. An Estimation of the Extent of Rent-Free Farmland Transfer and Its Driving Forces in Rural China: A Multilevel Logit Model Analysis. Sustainability. 2019; 11(11):3161. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113161
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Yahui, Liangjie Xin, Haozhe Zhang, and Yuanqing Li. 2019. "An Estimation of the Extent of Rent-Free Farmland Transfer and Its Driving Forces in Rural China: A Multilevel Logit Model Analysis" Sustainability 11, no. 11: 3161. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113161