IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/reowae/338421.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resources Integration Theory and Gray Correlation Analysis: A Study for Evaluating China's Agri-food Systems Supply Capacity

Author

Listed:
  • Yang, Shaowen
  • Wang, Ping
  • Fu, Zhaogang

Abstract

China's agri-food systems face the challenge of ensuring food and grain security for a large population with limited resources. This paper constructs a resources integration theory, which classifies agricultural resources into six types and measures their correlation with food and grain supply capacity using grey correlation analysis. The results show that, during 2002-2020, among the factor resources, the highest correlation with food and grain was technology; among the related industry resources, the highest correlation with food was rural roads, and with grain was agricultural machinery; among the demand resources, the highest correlation was domestic market; among the six types of resources, the highest correlation was government resources; and the static correlation evaluation indices of agricultural resources with food and grain supply capacity were 0.8312 and 0.8090, respectively, indicating a compare match. Based on the results, this paper argues that the Chinese agri-food system is matched with agricultural resources, but still needs to be improved to achieve a high match. Opportunity resources, foreign investment, and international markets are disadvantageous resources because China has insufficient ability to stably utilize foreign resources. China’s proposal of a "big food view" is conducive to reducing dependence on factor resources, especially cultivated land and water resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang, Shaowen & Wang, Ping & Fu, Zhaogang, 2023. "Resources Integration Theory and Gray Correlation Analysis: A Study for Evaluating China's Agri-food Systems Supply Capacity," Research on World Agricultural Economy, Nan Yang Academy of Sciences Pte Ltd (NASS), vol. 4(3), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:reowae:338421
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.338421
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/338421/files/RWAE-0403-902.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.338421?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. Steven R. McGreevy & Christoph D. D. Rupprecht & Daniel Niles & Arnim Wiek & Michael Carolan & Giorgos Kallis & Kanang Kantamaturapoj & Astrid Mangnus & Petr Jehlička & Oliver Taherzadeh & Marlyne Sah, 2022. "Sustainable agrifood systems for a post-growth world," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 5(12), pages 1011-1017, December.
    2. Abhishek Chaudhary & David Gustafson & Alexander Mathys, 2018. "Multi-indicator sustainability assessment of global food systems," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Biraj Adhikari & Trakarn Prapaspongsa, 2019. "Environmental Sustainability of Food Consumption in Asia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-14, October.
    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. Genia Hill & Rachel Friedman & Paul Dargusch, 2022. "Food Systems Development: The Necessary Paradigm Shift for a Healthy and Sustainable Agrarian Transition, a Case Study from Bougainville, Papua New Guinea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Yi-Wen Chiu, 2019. "Environmental Implications of Taiwanese Oolong Tea and the Opportunities of Impact Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-13, October.
    3. Edler, Jakob, 2023. "Demand, public procurement and transformation," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 79, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    4. Guojing Li & Xinru Han & Qiyou Luo & Wenbo Zhu & Jing Zhao, 2021. "A Study on the Relationship between Income Change and the Water Footprint of Food Consumption in Urban China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-16, June.
    5. Chuai, Xiaowei & Gao, Runyi & Huang, Xianjin & Lu, Qinli & Zhao, Rongqin, 2021. "The embodied flow of built-up land in China's interregional trade and its implications for regional carbon balance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    6. John R. Schramski & C. Brock Woodson & Garrett Steck & Dylan Munn & James H. Brown, 2019. "Declining Country-Level Food Self-Sufficiency Suggests Future Food Insecurities," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 1-9, September.
    7. Stoeckli, Sabrina & Merian, Sybilla & Wanner, Silvan & Stucki, Matthias & Chaudhary, Abhishek, 2024. "Advancing Biodiversity Footprinting for Food-Related Behavior Change," OSF Preprints zpvq4, Center for Open Science.
    8. Mercedes Campi & Marco Duenas & Giorgio Fagiolo, 2020. "Specialization in food production, global food security and sustainability," LEM Papers Series 2020/05, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    9. Juan Manuel Madrid-Solórzano & Jorge Luis García-Alcaraz & Eduardo Martínez Cámara & Julio Blanco Fernández & Emilio Jiménez Macías, 2022. "Sustainable Industrial Sotol Production in Mexico—A Life Cycle Assessment," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-12, December.
    10. Axel Lindfors & Roozbeh Feiz & Mats Eklund & Jonas Ammenberg, 2019. "Assessing the Potential, Performance and Feasibility of Urban Solutions: Methodological Considerations and Learnings from Biogas Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-20, July.
    11. Karina O. Utenkova & Andrii V. Dukhnevych & Nataliia V. Karpinska & Liudmyla M. Berezina & Bohdan V. Bratanov, 2020. "Economic Security of the Agrarian Sector in the Context of the Global Sustainable Development Goals," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(Special 1), pages 284-298.
    12. Barbara Bigliardi & Serena Filippelli, 2022. "Sustainability and Open Innovation: Main Themes and Research Trajectories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-22, May.
    13. Bolson, Natanael & Yutkin, Maxim & Rees, William & Patzek, Tadeusz, 2022. "Resilience rankings and trajectories of world's countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    14. Hebinck, Aniek & Zurek, Monika & Achterbosch, Thom & Forkman, Björn & Kuijsten, Anneleen & Kuiper, Marijke & Nørrung, Birgit & van ’t Veer, Pieter & Leip, Adrian, 2020. "A sustainability compass for policy navigation to sustainable food systems," SocArXiv ab8ts, Center for Open Science.
    15. Tsz Wing Tang & Tanja Sobko, 2019. "Environmental Impact of the Average Hong Kong Diet: A Case for Adopting Sustainable Diets in Urban Centers," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-11, December.
    16. Aghahosseini, Arman & Solomon, A.A. & Breyer, Christian & Pregger, Thomas & Simon, Sonja & Strachan, Peter & Jäger-Waldau, Arnulf, 2023. "Energy system transition pathways to meet the global electricity demand for ambitious climate targets and cost competitiveness," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 331(C).
    17. Xiaofang Wu & Hsi-Chi Yang, 2021. "An Ecological Sustainability Assessment Approach for Strategic Decision Making in International Shipping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    18. Kliem, Lea & Sagebiel, Julian, 2023. "Consumers' preferences for commons-based and open-source produce: A discrete choice experiment with directional information manipulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    19. Abhishek Chaudhary & Arne O. Mooers, 2018. "Terrestrial Vertebrate Biodiversity Loss under Future Global Land Use Change Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    20. José V. Matos & Rui J. Lopes, 2021. "Food System Sustainability Metrics: Policies, Quantification, and the Role of Complexity Sciences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-38, November.

    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:ags:reowae:338421. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nassg.org/ .

    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.