Impact of rural-household differentiation on cultivated land protection behavior based on intermediary effect

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2020.12.18

Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis ›› 2020, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (12): 2261-2270.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2020.12.18

• Agricultural Economy and Development • Previous Articles Next Articles

Impact of rural-household differentiation on cultivated land protection behavior based on intermediary effect

CHEN Yinrong(), WANG Xiaomei

College of Public Administration, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China

Received:2020-07-03 Online:2020-12-25 Published:2020-12-25

Abstract

Abstract:

Clarifying the behavior logic of farmers participating in cultivated land protection is of great significance to improving the quality of cultivated land and increasing the area of effective cultivated land. Based on 483 questionnaires in Wuhan urban circle, by taking cultivated land value cognition as an intermediary variable, the mediating effect model was used to explore the specific mechanism of rural-household differentiation on cultivated land protection behavior. The results showed that the impact of rural-household differentiation on cultivated land protection behavior could be achieved by acting on the intermediary variable of cultivated land value cognition. At a higher level of cultivated land value cognition, the negative effect of rural household differentiation on cultivated land protection behavior would be weakened. The increase in income from non-farm employment would increase the possibility of labor force being replaced by capital, so the negative effect of rural-household differentiation on labor-biased protection behavior was greater than that on capital-biased protection behavior. Therefore, it was necessary to vigorously promote capital-biased cultivated land protection measures and increase the propaganda of the multi-functional value of cultivated land.

Key words: cultivated land protection, rural-household differentiation, cultivated land value cognition, labor-biased, capital-biased

CLC Number:

F301.2

CHEN Yinrong, WANG Xiaomei. Impact of rural-household differentiation on cultivated land protection behavior based on intermediary effect[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2020, 32(12): 2261-2270.

Figures/Tables 6

References 25

[1]	张利国, 陈苏. 中国人均粮食占有量时空演变及驱动因素[J]. 经济地理, 2015,35(3):171-177.
	ZHANG L G, CHEN S. Empirical analysis on spatio-temporal evolution and driving forces of per capita grain possession in China[J]. Economic Geography, 2015,35(3):171-177.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	陈美球, 吴月红, 刘桃菊. 基于农户行为的我国耕地保护研究与展望[J]. 南京农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2012,12(3):66-72.
	CHEN M Q, WU Y H, LIU T J. Researches on cultivated land protection based on the behavior of farm households in China: retrospective and prospective[J]. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University(Social Sciences Edition), 2012,12(3):66-72.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	王喜, 梁流涛, 陈常优. 不同类型农户参与耕地保护意愿差异分析: 以河南省传统农区周口市为例[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2015,29(8):52-56.
	WANG X, LIANG L T, CHEN C Y. The willingness of cultivated land protection for different households[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2015,29(8):52-56.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	李兆亮, 罗小锋, 丘雯文. 经营规模、地权稳定与农户有机肥施用行为: 基于调节效应和中介效应模型的研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019,28(8):1918-1928.
	LI Z L, LUO X F, QIU W W. Land scale, tenure security and adoption of organic fertilizer of farmer: a mediation and moderated model[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2019,28(8):1918-1928.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	胡乃娟, 孙晓玲, 许雅婷, 等. 基于Logistic-ISM模型的农户有机肥施用行为影响因素及层次结构分解[J]. 资源科学, 2019,41(6):1120-1130. DOI URL
	HU N J, SUN X L, XU Y T, et al. Influencing factors of farmers’ organic fertilizer application behavior and their stratification based on Logistic-ISM model[J]. Resources Science, 2019,41(6):1120-1130.(in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
[6]	李宪宝, 高强. 行为逻辑、分化结果与发展前景: 对1978年以来我国农户分化行为的考察[J]. 农业经济问题, 2013,34(2):56-65.
	LI X B, GAO Q. Behavioral logic, differentiation results and prospects: the inspection of rural-household differentiation since the reform in China[J]. Issues in Agricultural Economy, 2013,34(2):56-65. (in Chinese)
[7]	杨钢桥, 靳艳艳, 杨俊. 农地流转对不同类型农户农地投入行为的影响: 基于江汉平原和太湖平原的实证分析[J]. 中国土地科学, 2010,24(9):18-23.
	YANG G Q, JIN Y Y, YANG J. The impacts of farmland transfer on the farmland investment behaviors of different types of farmers: empirical study based on Jianghan Plain and Taihu Lake Plain[J]. China Land Science, 2010,24(9):18-23. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	DIAO X S, MAGALHAES E, SILVER J. Cities and rural transformation: a spatial analysis of rural livelihoods in Ghana[J]. World Development, 2019,121:141-157. DOI URL
[9]	陈美球, 袁东波, 邝佛缘, 等. 农户分化、代际差异对生态耕种采纳度的影响[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2019,29(2):79-86.
	CHEN M Q, YUAN D B, KUANG F Y, et al. Household differentiation, generational difference and ecological farming adoption[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2019,29(2):79-86.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	杨志海, 王雅鹏, 麦尔旦·吐尔孙. 农户耕地质量保护性投入行为及其影响因素分析: 基于兼业分化视角[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2015,25(12):105-112.
	YANG Z H, WANG Y P, TUERSUN M. Farm households’ input behavior of land conservation and its driving factors: from a perspective of farm household differentiation[J]. China Population,Resources and Environment, 2015,25(12):105-112.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	BERCHOUX T, HUTTON C W. Spatial associations between household and community livelihood capitals in rural territories: an example from the Mahanadi Delta, India[J]. Applied Geography, 2019,103:98-111. DOI URL
[12]	史雨星, 李超琼, 赵敏娟. 非市场价值认知、社会资本对农户耕地保护合作意愿的影响[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2019,29(4):94-103.
	SHI Y X, LI C Q, ZHAO M J. The impact of non-market value cognition and social capital on farmers’ willingness in farmland protection cooperation[J]. China Population,Resources and Environment, 2019,29(4):94-103.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	钱龙, 缪书超, 陆华良. 新一轮确权对农户耕地质量保护行为的影响: 来自广西的经验证据[J]. 华中农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2020(1):28-37.
	QIAN L, MIAO S C, LU H L. The impact of a new round certification on farmer’s protection behaviors to cultivated land quality: empirical evidence from Guangxi Province[J]. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition), 2020(1):28-37. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	赵丹丹, 周宏. 农村土地流转对农户耕地质量保护选择行为的影响研究[J]. 价格理论与实践, 2017(11):54-57.
	ZHAO D D, ZHOU H. Study on the influence of rural land transfer on the behavior of farmers’ cultivated land quality protection selection[J]. Price (Theory & Practice), 2017(11):54-57.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	毕继业, 朱道林, 王秀芬. 耕地保护中农户行为国内研究综述[J]. 中国土地科学, 2010,24(11):77-81.
	BI J Y, ZHU D L, WANG X F. Literature review on farmer behaviors during the farmland preservation process based on domestic studies in China[J]. China Land Science, 2010,24(11):77-81.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	杨万江, 李琪. 农户兼业、生产性服务与水稻种植面积决策: 基于11省1 646户农户的实证研究[J]. 中国农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2018,35(1):100-109.
	YANG W J, LI Q. Farmers’ concurrent business, productive service and rice production decision: a study using household survey data of 1 646 farmers’ in 11 provinces[J]. China Agricultural University Journal of Social Sciences Edition, 2018,35(1):100-109.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	姜广辉, 张凤荣, 孔祥斌, 等. 耕地多功能的层次性及其多功能保护[J]. 中国土地科学, 2011,25(8):42-47.
	JIANG G H, ZHANG F R, KONG X B, et al. The different levels and the protection of multi-functions of cultivated land[J]. China Land Science, 2011,25(8):42-47.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	宋小青, 欧阳竹. 耕地多功能内涵及其对耕地保护的启示[J]. 地理科学进展, 2012,31(7):859-868. DOI URL
	SONG X Q, OUYANG Z. Connotation of multifunctional cultivated land and its implications for cultivated land protection[J]. Progress in Geography, 2012,31(7):859-868.(in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
[19]	马才学, 金莹, 柯新利, 等. 基于全排列多边形图示法的湖北省耕地多功能强度与协调度典型模式探究[J]. 中国土地科学, 2018,32(4):51-58.
	MA C X, JIN Y, KE X L, et al. Study on the typical modes of farmland multi-functional intensity and coordination in Hubei Province based on the entire-array-polygon indicator method[J]. China Land Science, 2018,32(4):51-58.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	曹慧, 赵凯. 代际差异视角下粮农保护性耕作投入意愿的影响因素分析[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2018,18(1):115-123.
	CAO H, ZHAO K. Influencing factors of grain farmers’ willingness of arable land conservation input: based on perspective of intergenerational differences[J]. Journal of Northwest A & F University (Social Science Edition), 2018,18(1):115-123.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[21]	李晓平, 谢先雄, 赵敏娟. 资本禀赋对农户耕地面源污染治理受偿意愿的影响分析[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2018,28(7):93-101.
	LI X P, XIE X X, ZHAO M J. Analysis about the influence of capital on the willingness to accept for controlling the nonpoint pollution of cultivated land[J]. China Population,Resources and Environment, 2018,28(7):93-101.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	朱庆莹, 陈银蓉, 胡伟艳, 等. 社会资本、耕地价值认知与农户耕地保护支付意愿: 基于一个有调节的中介效应模型的实证[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2019,29(11):120-131.
	ZHU Q Y, CHEN Y R, HU W Y, et al. A study on the relationship between social capital, cultivated land value cognition and farmers’ willingness to pay for cultivated land protection: an empirical analysis based on a moderated mediator model[J]. China Population,Resources and Environment, 2019,29(11):120-131.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	温忠麟, 叶宝娟. 中介效应分析: 方法和模型发展[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014,22(5):731-745. DOI URL
	WEN Z L, YE B J. Analysis of mediating effects: the development of methods and models[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014,22(5):731-745.(in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
[24]	刘同山, 牛立腾. 农户分化、土地退出意愿与农民的选择偏好[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2014,24(6):114-120.
	LIU T S, NIU L T. Rural-household differentiation, willingness of land usufruct abdication and farmers’ choice preference[J]. China Population,Resources and Environment, 2014,24(6):114-120.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[25]	许恒周, 郭玉燕, 吴冠岑. 农民分化对耕地利用效率的影响: 基于农户调查数据的实证分析[J]. 中国农村经济, 2012(6):31-39.
	XU H Z, GUO Y Y, WU G C. Impact of farmers’ differention on farmland-use efficiency: evidence from household survey data in rural China[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2012(6):31-39. (in Chinese)

变量 Variable		变量说明及其赋值 Variable description and assignment	均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation
Y₁	耕地保护行为 Cultivated land protection behavior	是否采取耕地保护行为(是=1;否=0) Do you take cultivated land protection behavior (Yes=1; No=0)	0.26	0.44
Y₂	劳动偏向型耕地保护行为 Labor-biased behavior	是否采取劳动偏向型耕地保护行为(是=1;否=0) Do you take labor-biased behavior (Yes=1; No=0)	0.13	0.34
Y₃	资金偏向型耕地保护行为 Capital-biased behavior	是否采取资金偏向型耕地保护行为(是=1;否=0) Do you take capital-biased behavior (Yes=1; No=0)	0.18	0.39
F	农户分化 Rural-household differentiation	纯农户=0;Ⅰ兼农户=1;Ⅱ兼农户=2 Full-time farmers=0; Type Ⅰ farmers=1; Type Ⅱfarmers=2	1.04	0.65
V₀	耕地价值认知 Cultivated land value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.72	0.08
V₁	经济产出价值认知 Economic output value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.81	0.14
V₂	社会保障价值认知 Social security value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.84	0.09
V₃	生态保育价值认知 Ecological conservation value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.82	0.10
V₄	景观文化价值认知 Landscape cultural value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.79	0.12
X₁	性别 Gender	男=1;女=0 Male=1; Female=0	0.59	0.49
X₂	年龄 Age	<35=1;35~45=2;46~55=3;56~65=4;>65=5	3.57	1.10
X₃	家庭劳动力人数 Family labor number	实测数值 Measured value	3.36	1.58
X₄	家庭劳动力平均文化程度 Average education level of family labor	未上过学=1;小学=2;初中=3;高中(中专)=4;大专及以上=5 Have not attended school=1; Elementary school=2; Junior high school=3; High school (secondary school)=4; Junior college and above=5	3.10	0.71
X₅	耕地规模 Cultivated land scale	耕地总面积Cultivated land area(<1 000 m²=1;1 000~<3000 m²=2; 3 000~<5 000 m²=3;5 000~<8 000 m²=4;8 000~<12 000 m²= 5;12 000~<15 000 m²=6;≥15 000m²=7)	2.45	1.56
X₆	耕地破碎度 Cultivated land fragmentation	耕地总块数Cultivated land number(<3=1;3~5=2;6~8=3; 9~12=4;13~18=5;>18=6)	1.68	1.06
X₇	耕地水肥条件 Water and fertilizer conditions of cultivated land	很差~非常好=1~5 Very bad-Very good=1-5	2.19	0.88
X₈	务工环境满意度 Satisfaction toward working environment	村民对当地务工环境的满意度(极不满意~极其满意=1~5) Villagers’ satisfaction toward the local working environment (Extremely dissatisfied-Extremely satisfied=1-5)	2.65	0.97
X₉	耕地保护补贴政策满意度 Satisfaction toward cultivated land protection subsidy policy	极不满意~非常满意=1~5 Extremely dissatisfied-Extremely satisfied=1-5	2.94	1.09
X₁₀	周围农户是否参与耕地保护 Whether neighbors participate in cultivated land protection	是=1;否=0 Yes=1; No=0	0.25	0.43

变量 Variable		变量说明及其赋值 Variable description and assignment	均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation
Y₁	耕地保护行为 Cultivated land protection behavior	是否采取耕地保护行为(是=1;否=0) Do you take cultivated land protection behavior (Yes=1; No=0)	0.26	0.44
Y₂	劳动偏向型耕地保护行为 Labor-biased behavior	是否采取劳动偏向型耕地保护行为(是=1;否=0) Do you take labor-biased behavior (Yes=1; No=0)	0.13	0.34
Y₃	资金偏向型耕地保护行为 Capital-biased behavior	是否采取资金偏向型耕地保护行为(是=1;否=0) Do you take capital-biased behavior (Yes=1; No=0)	0.18	0.39
F	农户分化 Rural-household differentiation	纯农户=0;Ⅰ兼农户=1;Ⅱ兼农户=2 Full-time farmers=0; Type Ⅰ farmers=1; Type Ⅱfarmers=2	1.04	0.65
V₀	耕地价值认知 Cultivated land value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.72	0.08
V₁	经济产出价值认知 Economic output value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.81	0.14
V₂	社会保障价值认知 Social security value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.84	0.09
V₃	生态保育价值认知 Ecological conservation value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.82	0.10
V₄	景观文化价值认知 Landscape cultural value cognition	采用熵值法进行测算 Calculated by Entropy method	0.79	0.12
X₁	性别 Gender	男=1;女=0 Male=1; Female=0	0.59	0.49
X₂	年龄 Age	<35=1;35~45=2;46~55=3;56~65=4;>65=5	3.57	1.10
X₃	家庭劳动力人数 Family labor number	实测数值 Measured value	3.36	1.58
X₄	家庭劳动力平均文化程度 Average education level of family labor	未上过学=1;小学=2;初中=3;高中(中专)=4;大专及以上=5 Have not attended school=1; Elementary school=2; Junior high school=3; High school (secondary school)=4; Junior college and above=5	3.10	0.71
X₅	耕地规模 Cultivated land scale	耕地总面积Cultivated land area(<1 000 m²=1;1 000~<3000 m²=2; 3 000~<5 000 m²=3;5 000~<8 000 m²=4;8 000~<12 000 m²= 5;12 000~<15 000 m²=6;≥15 000m²=7)	2.45	1.56
X₆	耕地破碎度 Cultivated land fragmentation	耕地总块数Cultivated land number(<3=1;3~5=2;6~8=3; 9~12=4;13~18=5;>18=6)	1.68	1.06
X₇	耕地水肥条件 Water and fertilizer conditions of cultivated land	很差~非常好=1~5 Very bad-Very good=1-5	2.19	0.88
X₈	务工环境满意度 Satisfaction toward working environment	村民对当地务工环境的满意度(极不满意~极其满意=1~5) Villagers’ satisfaction toward the local working environment (Extremely dissatisfied-Extremely satisfied=1-5)	2.65	0.97
X₉	耕地保护补贴政策满意度 Satisfaction toward cultivated land protection subsidy policy	极不满意~非常满意=1~5 Extremely dissatisfied-Extremely satisfied=1-5	2.94	1.09
X₁₀	周围农户是否参与耕地保护 Whether neighbors participate in cultivated land protection	是=1;否=0 Yes=1; No=0	0.25	0.43

变量 Variable	Y₁	Y₁	Y₂	Y₂	Y₃	Y₃
变量 Variable	模型9 Model 9	模型10 Model 10	模型11 Model 11	模型12 Model 12	模型13 Model 13	模型14 Model 14
F	-0.918^*** (0.277)	-0.742^*** (0.265)	-0.716^** (0.262)	-0.533^** (0.257)	-0.560^* (0.279)	-0.410^* (0.271)
V₀	5.581^*** (1.004)	—	3.138^*** (0.997)	—	2.775^*** (1.011)	—
V₁	—	4.869^*** (0.822)	—	3.026^*** (0.797)	—	1.733^** (0.806)
V₂	—	3.857^*** (0.794)	—	1.845^** (0.762)	—	1.672^** (0.766)
V₃	—	2.164^** (1.035)	—	1.496^* (0.991)	—	1.953^** (1.027)
V₄	—	4.343^*** (0.946)	—	2.871^*** (0.881)	—	3.764^*** (0.895)

变量 Variable	Y₁	Y₁	Y₂	Y₂	Y₃	Y₃
变量 Variable	模型9 Model 9	模型10 Model 10	模型11 Model 11	模型12 Model 12	模型13 Model 13	模型14 Model 14
F	-0.918^*** (0.277)	-0.742^*** (0.265)	-0.716^** (0.262)	-0.533^** (0.257)	-0.560^* (0.279)	-0.410^* (0.271)
V₀	5.581^*** (1.004)	—	3.138^*** (0.997)	—	2.775^*** (1.011)	—
V₁	—	4.869^*** (0.822)	—	3.026^*** (0.797)	—	1.733^** (0.806)
V₂	—	3.857^*** (0.794)	—	1.845^** (0.762)	—	1.672^** (0.766)
V₃	—	2.164^** (1.035)	—	1.496^* (0.991)	—	1.953^** (1.027)
V₄	—	4.343^*** (0.946)	—	2.871^*** (0.881)	—	3.764^*** (0.895)

变量 Variable	Y₁	Y₁	Y₂	Y₂	Y₃	Y₃
变量 Variable	模型9 Model 9	模型10 Model 10	模型11 Model 11	模型12 Model 12	模型13 Model 13	模型14 Model 14
F	-0.554^*** (0.218)	-0.569^*** (0.217)	-0.475^** (0.220)	-0.427^** (0.218)	-0.320^* (0.223)	-0.323^* (0.222)
V₀	7.243^*** (0.659)	—	4.592^*** (0.647)	—	2.866^*** (0.655)	—
V₁	—	6.721^*** (0.886)	—	5.184^*** (0.872)	—	3.226^*** (0.874)
V₂	—	4.967^*** (1.217)	—	3.225^** (1.214)	—	2.940^** (1.198)
V₃	—	2.983^** (1.105)	—	2.009^* (1.110)	—	2.255^* (1.106)
V₄	—	5.799^*** (0.943)	—	2.145^** (0.945)	—	5.113^*** (0.951)

Impact of rural-household differentiation on cultivated land protection behavior based on intermediary effect

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 6

References 25

Related Articles 6

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	XIE Qing, QU Litong, YAN Shixiong. Determination of optimal term of land transfer in suburban villages based on construction land expansion prediction [J]. , 2020, 32(10): 1899-1909.
[2]	HU Qiaolian, YANG Jun, SHAO Jingsong, ZHOU Pengquan, GUO Jiarui, HOU Manping. Comprehensive evaluation of land use benefit in early stage of pastoral complex construction: taking Lujia Village as an example [J]. , 2020, 32(8): 1485-1492.
[3]	LI Zilin, HAN Yi, GUO Xi, GUO Jiaxin, LIN Wenlu. Analysis into influencing factors of cultivated land productivity in Gao'an City based on structural equation model [J]. , 2020, 32(5): 866-877.
[4]	MENG Mei, YANG Yawei, YANG Lei. Study on coupling relationship between reserve resources development and ecological environment of cultivated land in Xinjiang [J]. , 2020, 32(3): 543-551.
[5]	ZHANG Han, ZHAO Xiaomin, KUANG Lihua, GUO Xi, LI Weifeng, OUYANG Zhencheng, HUANG Cong, WANG Xiaoyan, YE Yingcong. Spatial distribution features of cultivated land quality based on spatial autocorrelation: A case study of Nanchang County, Jiangxi Province [J]. , 2017, 29(8): 1365-1374.
[6]	ZHU Xiao-li, WANG San, XIE De-ti. Analysis into terrain gradient features and functional spatial planning of land use in mountainous city [J]. , 2016, 28(12): 2090-2097.