Estimation of Determinants of Farmland Abandonment and Its Data Problems
Abstract
:1. Introduction
In order to prevent and eliminate abandoned farmland, we will strategically carry out measures such as promoting discussions on the future use of farmland in communities and villages through “payments for activities to enhance multifunctionality” and “direct payments to farmers in hilly and mountainous areas,” supporting collective actions, mitigating damage to crops through bird and animal damage, promoting the consolidation of farmland through “farmland intermediary management projects,” and effectively implementing the development of farmland infrastructure.
2. Method and Data
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Data
2.2.1. GIS Data
2.2.2. Farmland Abandonment Rate: Objective vs. Subjective Data
2.2.3. Community-Based Data
2.3. Confidential Data
2.4. Estimation Method and Performance Check
3. Results
3.1. Estimation Results
3.2. Performance of Models and Data
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
- The estimation results differed if objective or subjective data were used.
- There is a possibility of bias in the estimation when conventional census data, which farmers subjectively provide, was used in the analysis.
- Correlations (coefficient parameters) between the same types of data (objective or subjective) are easy to identify.
- When using data restricted from the perspective of privacy protection, a bias occurred in some estimates, but it did not reach a serious level. (This is the issue of confidentiality of community-based data, which has been used in many studies on Japanese agricultural policy.)
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Confidential Data | Data Excluding CD | Pairwise Comparison | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
(CD) | (ECD) | |||
Mean | Mean | p-Value | ||
(s.d.) | (s.d.) | |||
GIS | ||||
AFR-G | 26.38 | 11.22 | 0.001 | *** |
(36.12) | (12.13) | |||
AVAL | 198.89 | 159.2 | 0.149 | |
(160.96) | (133.39) | |||
GRAD | 12.17 | 9.72 | 0.012 | ** |
(6.54) | (4.25) | |||
CBD | ||||
AFR-C | 39.38 | 17.08 | 0.000 | *** |
(29.21) | (13.60) | |||
AREA | 8.08 | 19.15 | 0.001 | *** |
(6.48) | (10.65) | |||
PPUD | 59.81 | 70.53 | 0.001 | *** |
(24.20) | (13.52) | |||
ROUT | 16.17 | 21.95 | 0.060 | ** |
(21.64) | (12.35) | |||
NFHH | 50.81 | 28.8 | 0.001 | *** |
(24.09) | (11.81) | |||
NFHP | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.401 | |
0.00 | (0.14) | |||
TRAC | 0.09 | 0.42 | 0.001 | *** |
(0.16) | (0.18) | |||
GINI | 0.02 | 0.24 | 0.001 | *** |
(0.06) | (0.11) | |||
YOD | ||||
DEER | 0.86 | 5.3 | 0.001 | *** |
(2.07) | (7.72) | |||
BOAR | 0.17 | 0.92 | 0.026 | ** |
(0.61) | (1.98) | |||
DPFHM | 11.1 | 97.03 | 0.061 | * |
(60.78) | (245.88) | |||
PAEMF | 0.85 | 0.94 | 0.761 | |
(2.64) | (0.83) | |||
N | 36 | 102 |
References
- Keenleyside, C.; Tucker, G. Farmland Abandonment in the EU: An Assessment of Trends and Prospects; Institute for European Environmental Policy: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Terres, J.; Nisini, L.; Anguiano, E. Assessing the Risk of Farmland Abandonment in the EU; European Union: Brussels, Belgium, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Renwick, A.; Jansson, T.; Verburg, P.H.; Revoredo-Giha, C.; Britz, W.; Gocht, A.; McCracken, D. Policy reform and agricultural land abandonment in the EU. Land Use Policy 2013, 30, 446–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; Li, X. Global understanding of farmland abandonment: A review and prospects. J. Geogr. Sci. 2017, 27, 1123–1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ustaoglu, E.; Collier, M.J. Farmland abandonment in Europe: An overview of drivers, consequences, and assessment of the sustainability implications. Environ. Rev. 2018, 26, 396–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perpina Castillo, C.; Kavalov, B.; Diogo, V.; Jacobs-Crisioni, C.; Batista e Silva, F.; Lavalle, C. Agricultural Land Abandonment in the EU within 2015–2030; Joint Research Centre of the European Commission: Seville, Spain, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Ito, J.; Feuer, H.N.; Kitano, S.; Asahi, H. Assessing the effectiveness of Japan’s community-based direct payment scheme for hilly and mountainous areas. Ecol. Econ. 2019, 160, 62–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koshida, C.; Katayama, N. Meta-analysis of the effects of rice-field abandonment on biodiversity in Japan. Conserv. Biol. 2018, 32, 1392–1402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MAFF. Basic Plan for Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas 2015. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/keikaku/k_aratana/pdf/1_27keikaku.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Zavalloni, M.; D’Alberto, R.; Raggi, M.; Viaggi, D. Farmland abandonment, public goods and the CAP in a marginal area of Italy. Land Use Policy 2019, 104365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, D.; Deng, X.; Guo, S.; Liu, S. Labor migration and farmland abandonment in rural China: Empirical results and policy implications. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 232, 738–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Senda, T. An Econometric Analysis for Farmer’s Behavior of Abandoned Cultivated Land in Japan: Microdata Evidence from “The Census of Agriculture” in 1990. Statistics 1998, 75, 26–40. [Google Scholar]
- Senda, T. A Quantitative Analysis of Abandoned Cultivated Land in Japan. Jpn. J. Farm. Manag. 1998, 36, 57–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoshida, S.; Sato, T.; Datai, H. Factors’s Analysis for Increasing Abandoned Cultivated Land Areas at chugoku area: Paying attention to differences among areas and relation among factors. J. Rural Plan. Assoc. 2004, 23, 277–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hoi, H.C.; Yodogawa, T.; Yazawa, M. Space structural characteristic of agricultural settlement with an abandoned cultivation lands: Case study in two municipalities of Hokkaido. J. Rural Plan. Assoc. 2004, 23, 259–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Takayama, T.; Nakatani, T. Evaluating Factors Affecting the Occurrence of Abandoned Cultivated Lands in Rural Communities. 2011. Available online: https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10030395462/ (accessed on 25 May 2021). (In Japanese).
- Matsui, T.; Ugata, T.; Machimura, T. A Development of Factor Analyzing and Predicting Model of Abandoned Agricultural Land with Machine Learning Algorithms. J. Environ. Syst. Res. 2014, 70, II_131–II_139. [Google Scholar]
- Takeyama, E.; Sasayama, S.; Nonaka, Y.; Kuki, Y. Influence of Abandoned Farmland and Protection Fence on Agglomeration and Connectivity of Wild Boar Habitat around Orchard Field―Field survey in the island of Seto Inland Sea Area with citrus fruit production. IDRE J. 2015, 83, I_25–I_31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, G.; Okahashi, H.; Chen, L. Spatial Pattern of Farmland Abandonment in Japan: Identification and Determinants. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- MAFF. 2015 Census of Agriculture and Forestry in Japan Report and Data on the Result. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/e/data/stat/index.html (accessed on 15 February 2021).
- Krumpal, I. Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: A literature review. Qual. Quant. 2013, 47, 2025–2047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MAFF. Amendment of the Agricultural Land Act 2009. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/keiei/koukai/kaikaku/ (accessed on 28 February 2021).
- National Chamber of Agriculture. Agricultural Land Patrol (Utilization Survey): Implementation Guidelines. 2019. Available online: https://www.sanoukai.jp/wp/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/patrol.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2021).
- Pingali, P.L. From Subsistence to Commercial Production Systems: The Transformation of Asian Agriculture. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1997, 79, 628–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayami, Y.; Ruttan, V.W. Factor Prices and Technical Change in Agricultural Development: The United States and Japan, 1880–1960. J. Political Econ. 1970, 78, 1115–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Otsuka, K. Food insecurity, income inequality, and the changing comparative advantage in world agriculture. Agric. Econ. 2013, 44, 7–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Otsuka, K.; Liu, Y.; Yamauchi, F. Growing advantage of large farms in Asia and its implications for global food security. Glob. Food Secur. 2016, 11, 5–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanaka, T.; Hosoe, N. Does agricultural trade liberalization increase risks of supply-side uncertainty? Effects of productivity shocks and export restrictions on welfare and food supply in Japan. Food Policy 2011, 36, 368–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Terres, J.-M.; Scacchiafichi, L.N.; Wania, A.; Ambar, M.; Anguiano, E.; Buckwell, A.; Coppola, A.; Gocht, A.; Källström, H.N.; Pointereau, P.; et al. Farmland abandonment in Europe: Identification of drivers and indicators, and development of a composite indicator of risk. Land Use Policy 2015, 49, 20–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ohizumi, K. Land reform aims to eliminate farmers aging and abandoned farmland in Japan. Jpn. J. Real Estate Sci. 2010, 23, 66–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MAFF. Basic Plan for Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas 2020. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/keikaku/k_aratana/attach/pdf/index-13.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- MAFF. Current Status of and Measures for Degraded Farmland. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/nousin/tikei/houkiti/Genzyo/PDF/Genzyo_0204.pdf (accessed on 25 February 2021).
- MAFF. FY2019: Summary of the Annual Report on Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas in Japan. 2020. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/e/data/publish/attach/pdf/index-177.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2021).
- Engel, S.; Pagiola, S.; Wunder, S. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65, 663–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wunder, S. Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecol. Econ. 2015, 117, 234–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, Y.; Li, F.; Xie, H. A Scientometrics Review on Farmland Abandonment Research. Land 2020, 9, 263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katoh, K.; Sakai, S.; Takahashi, T. Factors maintaining species diversity in satoyama, a traditional agricultural landscape of Japan. Biol. Conserv. 2009, 142, 1930–1936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corbelle-Rico, E.; Crecente-Maseda, R.; Santé-Riveira, I. Multi-scale assessment and spatial modelling of agricultural land abandonment in a European peripheral region: Galicia (Spain), 1956–2004. Land Use Policy 2012, 29, 493–501. [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]
- Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications e-Stat. Available online: https://www.e-stat.go.jp/ (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Geospatial Information Authority of Japan. Fundamental Geospatial Data Download Service. Available online: https://fgd.gsi.go.jp/download/menu.php (accessed on 14 February 2021).
- Esri. What Is a TIN Surface? Available online: https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/manage-data/tin/fundamentals-of-tin-surfaces.htm (accessed on 22 February 2021).
- Takeshima, K.; Akiyama, M. Possibility of Maintenance and Management of Local Farmland: Case Study of W-town. Jpn. J. Farm Manag. 2010, 48, 61–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MAFF. Comprehensive Database Based Mainly on Agricultural and Forestry Census. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/tokei/census/shuraku_data/ (accessed on 15 January 2021).
- Kitano, S. An Evaluation of a Direct Payment Policy for Community-based Environmental Conservation Agricultural Practices: A case of Shiga prefecture in Japan. J. Environ. Inf. Sci. 2019, 2019, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kitano, S. Formation Factors and Effects on Common Property Resource Conservation of Community Farms. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ito, J.; Feuer, H.N.; Kitano, S.; Komiyama, M. A Policy Evaluation of the Direct Payment Scheme for Collective Stewardship of Common Property Resources in Japan. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 152, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ito, J.; Nishikori, M.; Toyoshi, M.; Feuer, H.N. The contribution of land exchange institutions and markets in countering farmland abandonment in Japan. Land Use Policy 2016, 57, 582–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MAFF. Overview of the Census of Agriculture and Forestry. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/tokei/kouhyou/noucen/gaiyou/ (accessed on 16 February 2021).
- MAFF. Annual Report on Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas in Japan FY2019. 2020. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/wpaper/w_maff/r1/pdf/1-3-5.pdf (accessed on 20 February 2021).
- MAFF. About Direct Payment to Farmers in Hilly and Mountainous Areas. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/nousin/tyusan/siharai_seido/s_about/index.html (accessed on 22 February 2021).
- MAFF. Payments for Activities to Enhance Multi-Functionality. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/nousin/kanri/tamen_siharai.html (accessed on 25 February 2021).
- Tobin, J. Estimation of Relationships for Limited Dependent Variables. Econometrica 1958, 26, 24–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Greene, W.H. Econometiric Analysis, 5th ed.; Pearson Education: Cranbury, NJ, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Venables, W.N.; Ripley, B.D. Modern Applied Statistics with S, 4th ed.; SpringerLink: New York, NY, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Yabiki, N. Analysis of the Abandonment of Cultivated Area and Community-based Farm Cooperatives from Statistical Data. Technical. Rep. Natl. Inst. Rural Eng. 2015, 217, 75–83. [Google Scholar]
- Lasanta, T.; Arnáez, J.; Pascual, N.; Ruiz-Flaño, P.; Errea, M.P.; Lana-Renault, N. Space–time process and drivers of land abandonment in Europe. Catena 2017, 149, 810–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dolton-Thornton, N. Viewpoint: How should policy respond to land abandonment in Europe? Land Use Policy 2021, 102, 105269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MAFF. About Hilly and Mountainous Areas in Japan. Available online: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/nousin/tyusan/siharai_seido/s_about/cyusan/ (accessed on 25 April 2021).
- Tsuneyoshi, R. The ‘new’ foreigners and the social reconstruction of difference: The cultural diversification of Japanese education. Comp. Educ. 2004, 40, 55–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, T.; Koomen, E.; Ke, X. Determinants of Farmland Abandonment on the Urban–Rural Fringe. Environ. Manag. 2020, 65, 369–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Angrist, J. Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records. Am. Econ. Rev. 1990, 80, 313–336. [Google Scholar]
Mean | s.d. | |
---|---|---|
GIS | ||
Abandoned farmland ratio from GIS (objective data) (%): AFR-G | 15.18 | 22.05 |
Average altitude of farmlands in the village (m): AVAL | 169.55 | 141.57 |
Average slope of farmlands in the village (degree): GRAD | 10.36 | 5.04 |
CBD | ||
Abandoned farmland ratio from CBD (subjective data) (%): AFR-C | 22.41 | 20.75 |
Farmland area in community (ha): AREA | 16.26 | 10.87 |
Percentage of paddy fields in AREA (%): PPUD | 67.74 | 17.51 |
Percentage of rented out farmland (%): ROUT | 20.57 | 15.20 |
Percentage of land tenure non-farm households (%): NFHH | 34.05 | 18.16 |
Number of non-farm household producers: NFHP | 0.01 | 0.12 |
Number of tractors per farm household: TRAC | 0.35 | 0.23 |
Variation (Gini coefficient) in farmland size: GINI | 0.18 | 0.14 |
YOD | ||
Number of deer caught annually: DEER | 4.14 | 6.99 |
Number of boars caught annually: BOAR | 0.72 | 1.76 |
Direct payments to farmers in hilly and mountainous areas (yen/FHH): DPFHM | 77.5 | 220.76 |
Payment for activities to enhance multi-functionality (yen/FHH): PAEMF | 0.92 | 1.44 |
N | 138 |
AFR-C | AFR-G | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OLS | Tobit | OLS | Tobit | |||||||||
coef. | s.e. | coef. | s.e. | coef. | s.e. | coef. | s.e. | |||||
const. | 15.243 | ** | 7.648 | 15.243 | * | 7.961 | −4.743 | 8.237 | −12.731 | 9.385 | ||
AVAL | 0.029 | ** | 0.013 | 0.029 | * | 0.016 | 0.056 | *** | 0.014 | 0.057 | *** | 0.014 |
GRAD | 0.474 | 0.343 | 0.474 | 0.551 | 0.764 | ** | 0.370 | 0.927 | * | 0.475 | ||
AREA | 0.223 | 0.136 | 0.223 | ** | 0.113 | −0.154 | 0.146 | −0.115 | 0.113 | |||
PPUD | −0.139 | * | 0.083 | −0.139 | * | 0.077 | 0.022 | 0.089 | 0.089 | 0.085 | ||
ROUT | −0.456 | *** | 0.096 | −0.456 | *** | 0.101 | −0.119 | 0.103 | −0.139 | 0.128 | ||
NFHH | 0.608 | *** | 0.083 | 0.608 | *** | 0.077 | 0.128 | 0.089 | 0.110 | 0.118 | ||
NFHP | −10.976 | 9.451 | −10.976 | *** | 3.489 | 6.381 | 10.180 | 7.077 | 5.953 | |||
TRAC | −22.755 | *** | 6.507 | −22.755 | *** | 6.249 | −7.975 | 7.009 | −10.387 | 7.197 | ||
GINI | −3.078 | 10.708 | −3.078 | 7.364 | 15.355 | 11.533 | 20.249 | ** | 10.283 | |||
DEER | 0.122 | 0.213 | 0.122 | 0.150 | 0.483 | ** | 0.230 | 0.453 | ** | 0.217 | ||
BOAR | 0.724 | 0.676 | 0.724 | * | 0.381 | −0.722 | 0.728 | −0.889 | 0.598 | |||
DPFHM | 0.004 | 0.006 | 0.004 | 0.006 | −0.012 | * | 0.007 | −0.011 | ** | 0.005 | ||
PAEMF | −0.253 | 0.841 | −0.253 | 1.003 | −0.286 | 0.906 | 0.097 | 0.512 | ||||
Log(scale) | 2.518 | *** | 0.080 | 2.721 | *** | 0.109 | ||||||
aj-R2/pseudoR2 | 0.606 | 0.116 | 0.320 | 0.054 | ||||||||
AIC | 1116.7 | 1116.7 | 1137.2 | 1030.9 |
AFR-C | AFR-G | ||
---|---|---|---|
RMSE | MAE | RMSE | MAE |
20.12 | 15.22 | 13.36 | 9.27 |
AFR-C | AFR-G | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
coef. | Ratio | Welch t Test | coef. | Ratio | Welch t Test | |||
p-Value | p-Value | |||||||
AREA | 0.279 | 1.252 | 0.000 | *** | 0.223 | |||
PPUD | −0.075 | −0.139 | ||||||
ROUT | −0.606 | 1.329 | 0.000 | *** | −0.456 | |||
NFHH | 0.529 | 0.870 | 0.000 | *** | 0.608 | |||
NFHP | −10.713 | 0.976 | 0.523 | −10.976 | ||||
TRAC | −14.990 | 0.659 | 0.000 | *** | −22.755 | |||
GINI | 0.062 | −3.078 | 1.105 | 0.102 | ||||
DEER | −0.070 | 0.122 | 1.103 | 0.094 | * | |||
BOAR | 0.484 | 0.724 | ||||||
AVAL | 0.005 | 0.029 | 1.128 | 0.000 | *** | |||
GRAD | 0.977 | 0.474 | ||||||
DPHMC | 0.005 | 0.004 | 0.823 | 0.001 | *** | |||
PAEMF | 0.113 | −0.253 | ||||||
Bias | 0.215 | 0.128 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the author. 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kitano, S. Estimation of Determinants of Farmland Abandonment and Its Data Problems. Land 2021, 10, 596. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10060596
Kitano S. Estimation of Determinants of Farmland Abandonment and Its Data Problems. Land. 2021; 10(6):596. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10060596
Chicago/Turabian StyleKitano, Shinichi. 2021. "Estimation of Determinants of Farmland Abandonment and Its Data Problems" Land 10, no. 6: 596. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10060596
APA StyleKitano, S. (2021). Estimation of Determinants of Farmland Abandonment and Its Data Problems. Land, 10(6), 596. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10060596