IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v145y2018icp380-390.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Households' Decisions to Participate in China's Sloping Land Conversion Program and Reallocate Their Labour Times: Is There Endogeneity Bias?

Author

Listed:
  • Yin, Runsheng
  • Liu, Hao
  • Liu, Can
  • Lu, Gang

Abstract

Past impact evaluations of China's largest ecological restoration program have assumed the absence of self-selection (endogeneity) in the likelihood and extent of participation. Using appropriate testing procedures and a panel dataset of >1000 households over 11years in two primary provinces, we found evidence of self-selection in household behavior of generating off-farm income. But the hypothesis was rejected that there was a significant self-selection component in households' decision to participate in the program and generate farming income. Evaluations ignoring the self-section for off-farm labor were found to be biased and overly positive on program income impact. Self-selection should thus be explicitly included, unless there is counter evidence, in any study of this kind.

Suggested Citation

  • Yin, Runsheng & Liu, Hao & Liu, Can & Lu, Gang, 2018. "Households' Decisions to Participate in China's Sloping Land Conversion Program and Reallocate Their Labour Times: Is There Endogeneity Bias?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 380-390.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:145:y:2018:i:c:p:380-390
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.11.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180091730945X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.11.020?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Liu, Ping & Yin, Runsheng & Zhao, Minjuan, 2019. "Reformulating China's ecological restoration policies: What can be learned from comparing Chinese and American experiences?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 54-61.
    2. Zhang, Yingjie & Zhang, Tianzheng & Zeng, Yingxiang & Cheng, Baodong & Li, Hongxun, 2021. "Designating National Forest Cities in China: Does the policy improve the urban living environment?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Giefer, Madeline M. & An, Li, 2022. "Divergent impacts of the grain to green program, landholdings, and demographic factors on livelihood diversification in rural China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    4. Li Li & Atsushi Tsunekawa & Yangshangyu Zuo & Atsushi Koike, 2019. "Conservation Payments and Technical Efficiency of farm Households Participating in the Grain for Green Program on the Loess Plateau of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Zhang, Zhaohui & Paudel, Krishna P., 2019. "Policy improvements and farmers' willingness to participate: Insights from the new round of China's Sloping Land Conversion Program," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 121-132.
    6. Lu, Gang & Yin, Runsheng, 2020. "Evaluating the Evaluated Socioeconomic Impacts of China's Sloping Land Conversion Program," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Wang, Ying & Zhang, Qi & Bilsborrow, Richard & Tao, Shiqi & Chen, Xiaodong & Sullivan-Wiley, Kira & Huang, Qingfeng & Li, Jiangfeng & Song, Conghe, 2020. "Effects of payments for ecosystem services programs in China on rural household labor allocation and land use: Identifying complex pathways," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Mengmeng Liu & Limin Bai & Hassan Saif Khan & Hua Li, 2023. "The Influence of the Grassland Ecological Compensation Policy on Regional Herdsmen’s Income and Its Gap: Evidence from Six Pastoralist Provinces in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, March.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:145:y:2018:i:c:p:380-390. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.