IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v44y2014icp42-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rural households' willingness to participate in the Grain for Green program again: A case study of Zhungeer, China

Author

Listed:
  • Guo, Huanhuan
  • Li, Bo
  • Hou, Ying
  • Lu, Shubing
  • Nan, Bo

Abstract

The Grain for Green program (GGP) is one of the most ambitious forestry projects in China. The GGP uses a public payment scheme to propel the participation of rural households in order to make the program acceptable and sustainable. The modification of the GGP for its long-term effectiveness has raised interest from researchers. However, few researchers have realized the role that rural households play in adjusting the GGP. By building an econometric model, we found that the decision making of rural households is optimal when the sum of the marginal benefit from residual farmland and the marginal benefit from agricultural labor time equals the sum of the subsidies for retired farmland, benefits from the increased forest/grassland and the opportunity cost rate of the rural household engaged in agricultural labor divided by agricultural labor efficiency. The results derived by a Logit regression method indicate that the economic benefit and non-monetary values stimulate households' willingness to participate, and households' attitudes have significant effects on their willingness. Our attempt to comprehensively explore the influencing factors concerning households' attitudes, the environment benefits and benefits from the GGP proves to be promising as a reference for future studies and for decision making regarding GGP.

Suggested Citation

  • Guo, Huanhuan & Li, Bo & Hou, Ying & Lu, Shubing & Nan, Bo, 2014. "Rural households' willingness to participate in the Grain for Green program again: A case study of Zhungeer, China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 42-49.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:44:y:2014:i:c:p:42-49
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2014.05.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934114000707
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2014.05.002?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kilgore, Michael A. & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Schertz, Joseph & Taff, Steven J., 2008. "What does it take to get family forest owners to enroll in a forest stewardship-type program?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(7-8), pages 507-514, October.
    2. Bennett, Michael T., 2008. "China's sloping land conversion program: Institutional innovation or business as usual?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 699-711, May.
    3. Mullan, Katrina & Grosjean, Pauline & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2011. "Land Tenure Arrangements and Rural-Urban Migration in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 123-133, January.
    4. Fortney, Jennifer & Arano, Kathryn G. & Jacobson, Michael, 2011. "An evaluation of West Virginia's Managed Timberland Tax Incentive Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 69-78, January.
    5. Bergseng, Even & Vatn, Arild, 2009. "Why protection of biodiversity creates conflict - Some evidence from the Nordic countries," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 147-165, August.
    6. Silvia Secchi & Bruce A. Babcock, 2007. "Impact of High Crop Prices on Environmental Quality: A Case of Iowa and the Conservation Reserve Program," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 07-wp447, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    7. Lindhjem, Henrik & Mitani, Yohei, 2012. "Forest owners’ willingness to accept compensation for voluntary conservation: A contingent valuation approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 290-302.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wu, Xutong & Wang, Shuai & Fu, Bojie & Zhao, Yan & Wei, Yongping, 2019. "Pathways from payments for ecosystem services program to socioeconomic outcomes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. Yuchen Gao & Zehao Liu & Ruipeng Li & Zhidan Shi, 2020. "Long-Term Impact of China’s Returning Farmland to Forest Program on Rural Economic Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Gebregziabher, Dawit & Soltani, Arezoo, 2019. "Exclosures in people’s minds: perceptions and attitudes in the Tigray region, Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 1-14.
    4. He, Juan & Shi, Xueyi & Fu, Yangjun & Yuan, Ye, 2020. "Evaluation and simulation of the impact of land use change on ecosystem services trade-offs in ecological restoration areas, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Qianru Yu & Chen-Chieh Feng & NuanYin Xu & Luo Guo & Dan Wang, 2019. "Quantifying the Impact of Grain for Green Program on Ecosystem Service Management: A Case Study of Exibei Region, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-17, June.
    6. Linjing Ren & Jie Li & Cong Li & Shuzhuo Li & Gretchen C. Daily, 2018. "Does Poverty Matter in Payment for Ecosystem Services Program? Participation in the New Stage Sloping Land Conversion Program," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, June.
    7. Ting Ma & Kun Xu & Yiming Xing & Hang Shu & Weiguo Sang, 2020. "Tendencies of Residents in Sanjiangyuan National Park to the Optimization of Livelihoods and Conservation of the Natural Reserves," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-17, June.
    8. Ming Guan, 2016. "Income diversification of Chinese rural households after they rent out land," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1265803-126, December.
    9. Chen, Xin & Jiang, Li & Zhang, Guoliang & Meng, Lijun & Pan, Zhihua & Lun, Fei & An, Pingli, 2021. "Green-depressing cropping system: A referential land use practice for fallow to ensure a harmonious human-land relationship in the farming-pastoral ecotone of northern China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    10. Yu Hu & Tong Wu & Luo Guo & Shidong Zhang, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Relationships between Ecosystem Health and Urbanization on the Tibetan Plateau from a Coupling Coordination Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, August.

    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. Nielsen, Anne Sofie Elberg & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Strange, Niels, 2018. "Landowner participation in forest conservation programs: A revealed approach using register, spatial and contract data," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Nana Tian & Neelam Poudyal & Fadian Lu, 2021. "Assessments of Landowners’ Willingness to Accept Compensation for Participating in Forest Certification in Shandong, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    3. Gutierrez-Castillo, Ana & Penn, Jerrod & Tanger, Shaun & Blazier, Michael A., 2022. "Conservation easement landowners' willingness to accept for forest thinning and the impact of information," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    4. Mäntymaa, Erkki & Pouta, Eija & Hiedanpää, Juha, 2021. "Forest owners' interest in participation and their compensation claims in voluntary landscape value trading: The case of wind power parks in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    5. Huff, Emily S. & Floress, Kristin & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Ma, Zhao & Butler, Sarah, 2019. "Where farm and forest meet: Comparing National Woodland Owner Survey respondents with and without farmland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    6. Meier, Justin T. & Kilgore, Michael A. & Frey, Gregory E. & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Blinn, Charles R., 2019. "A comparison of participants and non-participants of state forest property tax programs in the United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 10-16.
    7. Khanal, Puskar N. & Grebner, Donald L. & Munn, Ian A. & Grado, Stephen C. & Grala, Robert K. & Henderson, James E., 2017. "Evaluating non-industrial private forest landowner willingness to manage for forest carbon sequestration in the southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 112-119.
    8. Håbesland, Daniel E. & Kilgore, Michael A. & Becker, Dennis R. & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Solberg, Birger & Sjølie, Hanne K. & Lindstad, Berit H., 2016. "Norwegian family forest owners' willingness to participate in carbon offset programs," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 30-38.
    9. Chen, Cheng & Matzdorf, Bettina & Meyer, Claas & König, Hannes & Zhen, Lin, 2018. "How socioeconomic and institutional conditions at the household level shape the environmental effectiveness of governmental PES: China’s Sloping Land Conversion Program," SocArXiv jzvqh, Center for Open Science.
    10. Zhang, Qi & Song, Conghe & Chen, Xiaodong, 2018. "Effects of China’s payment for ecosystem services programs on cropland abandonment: A case study in Tiantangzhai Township, Anhui, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 239-248.
    11. Miljand, Matilda & Bjärstig, Therese & Eckerberg, Katarina & Primmer, Eeva & Sandström, Camilla, 2021. "Voluntary agreements to protect private forests – A realist review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    12. Kang, Moon Jeong & Siry, Jacek P. & Colson, Gregory & Ferreira, Susana, 2019. "Do forest property characteristics reveal landowners' willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services contracts in southeast Georgia, U.S.?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 144-152.
    13. Wu, Xutong & Wang, Shuai & Fu, Bojie & Zhao, Yan & Wei, Yongping, 2019. "Pathways from payments for ecosystem services program to socioeconomic outcomes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    14. Frey, Gregory E. & Meier, Justin T. & Kilgore, Michael A. & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Blinn, Charles R., 2019. "Factors associated with family forest landowner enrollment in state preferential forest property tax programs in the United States," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    15. Li, Lingchao & Liu, Can & Liu, Jinlong & Cheng, Baodong, 2021. "Has the Sloping Land Conversion Program in China impacted the income and employment of rural households?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    16. Mitani, Yohei & Shimada, Hideki, 2021. "Self-selection bias in estimating the determinants of landowners' Re-enrollment decisions in forest incentive programs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    17. Gutierrez, Ana L. & Penn, Jerrod & Tanger, Shaun & Blazier, Michael, 2020. "Conservation Easement Landowners’ WTA Compensation to Thin their Forest," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304551, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    19. repec:gat:wpaper:1509 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Mullan, Katrina & Grosjean, Pauline & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2011. "Land Tenure Arrangements and Rural-Urban Migration in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 123-133, January.
    21. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.

    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:forpol:v:44:y:2014:i:c:p:42-49. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.