IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v70y2018icp94-105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Farmland transition and its influences on grain production in China

Author

Listed:
  • Ge, Dazhuan
  • Long, Hualou
  • Zhang, Yingnan
  • Ma, Li
  • Li, Tingting

Abstract

Land use transitions and socio-economic transitions jointly drive urban-rural transformation development in China. Farmland resources are a core element contributing to food security, and the characteristics of farmland transition and its influences on grain production in the urban-rural transformation development process help reveal the underlying laws governing farmland transition. Farmland transition characteristics also help effectively regulate grain production transition in China. Given the “man-land relationship” defined by large populations with relatively little arable land in China, this paper constructs a theoretical model for farmland transition using the per capita farmland area (PCFA) metric, which consists of the temporal changes in PCFA and PCFA spatial transitions as elevations change. Based on the theoretical model for farmland transition, we designed a coupling coefficient between PCFA and per capita grain possession, uncovering the inner link between farmland transition and grain production transition in China. Based on transitions measured at a 1km gridded resolution of PCFA across the country, this study found that China’s PCFA transitioned from a gradual decline to a steady rise during 1990–2010. In addition, the spatial transition trends for farmland were significant. The elevations of 1000m and 500m marked two important lines in the spatial transition of farmland, representing inflection points for the PCFA change trend and PCFA growth rate, respectively. The study concludes that regional differences in grain production transition are significant in the farmland transition process. While traditional agricultural areas gradually transitioned from an “Intensive type” to a “Modern type,” grain production in South China experienced a significant “Declining type” transition trend. Regulating the farmland transition process can provide a basis for decision making about appropriate grain production scales of farmers in China. Farmland transition and urban-rural transformation development are closely related; as such, properly coordinating the relationship between them can help stabilize the socio-economic transition in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Ge, Dazhuan & Long, Hualou & Zhang, Yingnan & Ma, Li & Li, Tingting, 2018. "Farmland transition and its influences on grain production in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 94-105.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:94-105
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837717310712
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.010?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. Gbemisola Oseni & Paul Winters, 2009. "Rural nonfarm activities and agricultural crop production in Nigeria," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(2), pages 189-201, March.
    2. Wang, Xiaobing & Huang, Jikun & Rozelle, Scott, 2017. "Off-farm employment and agricultural specialization in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 155-165.
    3. Hussain, Athar, 2002. "Demographic Transition in China and its Implications," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(10), pages 1823-1834, October.
    4. Zhang, Qianwen & Gao, Wujun & Su, Shiliang & Weng, Min & Cai, Zhongliang, 2017. "Biophysical and socioeconomic determinants of tea expansion: Apportioning their relative importance for sustainable land use policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 438-447.
    5. Su, Shiliang & Hu, Yi’na & Luo, Fanghan & Mai, Gengchen & Wang, Yaping, 2014. "Farmland fragmentation due to anthropogenic activity in rapidly developing region," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 87-93.
    6. Xu, Zhigang & Xu, Jintao & Deng, Xiangzheng & Huang, Jikun & Uchida, Emi & Rozelle, Scott, 2006. "Grain for Green versus Grain: Conflict between Food Security and Conservation Set-Aside in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 130-148, January.
    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. 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.
    2. Emmanuel Olatunbosun Benjamin & Oreoluwa Ola & Hannes Lang & Gertrud Buchenrieder, 2021. "Public-private cooperation and agricultural development in Sub-Saharan Africa: a review of Nigerian growth enhancement scheme and e-voucher program," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(1), pages 129-140, February.
    3. Almeida, Alexandre N. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E., 2019. "Agricultural productivity, shadow wages and off-farm labor decisions in Nicaragua," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 99-110.
    4. Yibin, Wang & Fei, Li & Jian, Wang & Hongyu, Cao & Mengfei, Li, 2024. "The social-ecological benefits of grain for green program based on coupled coordination network: Taking the China’s Loess Plateau as an example," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    5. repec:gat:wpaper:1509 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Chen, Xuan & Vuong, Nguyen, 2018. "Climate and Off-farm Labor Supply of Agricultural Households: Evidence from Rural Vietnam," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274187, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Huang, Wei, 2019. "Forest condition change, tenure reform, and government-funded eco-environmental programs in Northeast China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 67-74.
    8. Zhihai Yang & Amin W. Mugera & Ning Yin & Yumeng Wang, 2018. "Soil conservation practices and production efficiency of smallholder farms in Central China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 1517-1533, August.
    9. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    10. Poignant, Adrian, 2023. "Small-scale mining and agriculture: Evidence from northwestern Tanzania," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    11. Akpan, Uduak & Morimoto, Risako, 2022. "An application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) to the prioritization of rural roads to improve rural accessibility in Nigeria," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).
    12. Zhihai Yang & Amin W. Mugera & Fan Zhang, 2016. "Investigating Yield Variability and Inefficiency in Rice Production: A Case Study in Central China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-11, August.
    13. Laura Barasa & Bethuel K. Kinuthia & Abdelkrim Araar & Stephene Maende & Faith Mariera, 2023. "Nonfarm entrepreneurship, crop output, and household welfare in Tanzania: An exploration of transmission channels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(3), pages 762-792, July.
    14. Takeshima, Hiroyuki & Nin-Pratt, Alejandro & Diao, Xinshen, 2013. "Agricultural mechanization patterns in Nigeria: Insights from farm household typology and agricultural household model simulation:," IFPRI discussion papers 1291, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    15. Hao Chen & Luuk Fleskens & Simon W. Moolenaar & Coen J. Ritsema & Fei Wang, 2022. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions towards Land Restoration and Its Impacts on Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in the Chinese Loess Plateau," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, November.
    16. Wusheng Yu & Hans G. Jensen, 2010. "China’s Agricultural Policy Transition: Impacts of Recent Reforms and Future Scenarios," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 343-368, June.
    17. Zhang, Yumei & Diao, Xinshen, 2020. "The changing role of agriculture with economic structural change – The case of China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    18. Nkechi S. Owoo & Wim Naudé, 2017. "Spatial proximity and firm performance: evidence from non-farm rural enterprises in Ethiopia and Nigeria," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(5), pages 688-700, May.
    19. Zainab Oyetunde-Usman & Kehinde Oluseyi Olagunju, 2019. "Determinants of Food Security and Technical Efficiency among Agricultural Households in Nigeria," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-13, October.
    20. Phiri, Isaac, 2020. "The effect of access to finance on commercialisation of smallholder maize farmers in Eswatini," Research Theses 334755, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    21. Tran Quang, Tuyen, 2014. "Determinants of nonfarm participation among ethnic minorities in the Northwest Mountains, Vietnam," MPRA Paper 59158, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 08 Oct 2014.

    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:lauspo:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:94-105. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.