Farmers’ Livelihood, Risk Expectations, and Homestead Withdrawal Policy: Evidence on Jinjiang Pilot of China

Liang, Fachao; Lin, Caiyun; Lin, Sheng-Hau

doi:10.3846/ijspm.2022.16174

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first column of Table 7 shows that the direction of the coefficients for economic, social, and environmental factors remains significantly positive, which supports the pooled result in Table 5 . We also drew on the work of Liang et al [ 58 ] and reduced the total number of samples from 315 to 285 through bilateral shrinking of the 5% quantile. The second column of Table 7 shows that coefficients of all variables remained unchanged and reached significance.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Land Policy Promote Farmers’ Subjective Well-Being? A Study on Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads in Jinjiang, China

Liang

Wang

Lin

2022

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urbanization and aging populations are threatening the sustainability of rural development around the world. Improving the happiness of rural residents is closely related not only to rural development but also to the harmony and stability of a country. Sustainable development has become an important strategy for China’s rural areas. Although withdrawal from rural homesteads is an important issue in rural land policy, few researchers have examined the determinants of the subjective well-being of farmers following withdrawal. The current paper investigated 315 rural residents under three models of the “withdrawal from homestead” policy in Jinjiang City, Fujian Province, China. The application of the orderly probit model revealed how satisfaction with economic, social, environment, cultural, and policy factors impacted their subjective well-being. The pooled results showed that satisfaction with cultural and policy factors had no significant impact; however, the other aspects significantly promoted their subjective well-being. The empirical model with interaction terms indicated the significant positive impact of economic, environmental, and social factors on subjective well-being under the index replacement model, while only environment and social factors exerted a significant positive impact under the asset replacement and monetary compensation models. Corresponding policy implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Land Policy Promote Farmers’ Subjective Well-Being? A Study on Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads in Jinjiang, China

Liang

Wang

Lin

2022

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Farmers' land withdrawal refers to farmers' abandonment of land rights such as contracted land and homesteads [25,26]. However, decision-makers face challenges to form the bond between rural people and land by supporting farmers to transfer employment to cities and settle there [27,28].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Labor Transfer Improve Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Farming?—A Bivariate Probit Modeling Approach

Ding

et al. 2023

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because of the increased expansion of the non-agricultural industry spurred on by vigorous urbanization, labor migration or transfer from farm to urban regions is to become more predominant in China. Studying the effect of labor transfer on farmers’ willingness to withdraw from land is conducive to deepening the understanding of the reality of the “separation of human and farmland”. As most rural livelihoods, directly and indirectly, depend upon farming, the socio-economic impact of leaving the homestead fosters profound research value. Moreover, it would provide a decision-making reference for the government to improve the design of the rural land withdrawal system and related support policies. This article uses the survey data of 953 farmers in Shaanxi, Sichuan, and Anhui, China, to empirically analyze labor transfer’s effect on farmers’ willingness to withdraw from farmland. We construct a bivariate Probit model by eliminating the endogenous issue to craft its findings. This study outlines its findings: (i) 61.805% of the farmers were unwilling, and 18.048% were willing to withdraw from the contracted land and homestead. While 12.067% of the farmers were only willing to withdraw from the contracted land, 8.080% of the farmers were only willing to withdraw from the homestead. Further testing found a positive correlation between farmers’ willingness to withdraw from contracted land and the homestead. (ii) The overall labor transfer of households can increase the willingness of farmers to quit contracted land and homestead farming. The incomplete labor transfer of households can improve the willingness of farmers to quit contracted land. Still, it has no significant impact on the willingness of farmers to quit their homesteads. The family’s complete labor transfer incentivizes farmers’ willingness to withdraw from contracted land and the homestead, which is more potent than incomplete family labor transfer. (iii) Incomplete labor transfer of female households has an incentive effect on farmers’ willingness to quit contracted land, and the effect is more robust than that of incomplete household labor transfer. Seemingly, complete female labor transfer of households has an incentive effect on farmers’ willingness to quit contracted land and the homestead, and the effect is stronger than the complete labor transfer of the family. Because of this, the government should respect the wishes of farmers and strengthen the effective connection and mutual promotion between the homestead and contracted land withdrawal policy. Moreover, pay concentrated attention to the vital role of different types of labor transfer, and targeted labor transfer mechanisms should be used to guide farmers in an orderly manner.

show abstract

“…This approach, to some extent, compromises the future welfare of rural households. On the other hand, existing welfare allocation schemes often misalign with the actual welfare needs of households, resulting in increased government burden and low welfare benefits from the homestead withdrawal policy [ [9] , [10] , [11] ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bilateral matching decision-making for rural homesteads withdrawal patterns and types of peasant households’ welfare needs: Evidence from China in the context of land spatial planning regulation

Zhu,

Wang,

Niu

et al. 2024

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmers’ Livelihood, Risk Expectations, and Homestead Withdrawal Policy: Evidence on Jinjiang Pilot of China

Cited by 11 publications

References 36 publications

Can Land Policy Promote Farmers’ Subjective Well-Being? A Study on Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads in Jinjiang, China

Can Land Policy Promote Farmers’ Subjective Well-Being? A Study on Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads in Jinjiang, China

Does Labor Transfer Improve Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Farming?—A Bivariate Probit Modeling Approach

Bilateral matching decision-making for rural homesteads withdrawal patterns and types of peasant households’ welfare needs: Evidence from China in the context of land spatial planning regulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About