IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/caerpp/v5y2013i1p154-170.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forest land rights, tenure types, and farmers' investment incentives in China

Author

Listed:
  • Ping Qin
  • Jintao Xu

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of land rights and tenure types on farmers' investment behavior in Chinese collective forests, using household survey data from Fujian Province. Design/methodology/approach - In this study, the authors conducted a household survey in Fujian province of 520 randomly selected forest farmers. The authors used a random‐effects Tobit model to estimate the impact of land rights and other components on, for example, tenure security and harvest quota, and the impact of tenure types on farmers' investment incentives. Findings - This study produced three main findings: perceived tenure security in the context of frequent agricultural land redistribution negatively affects input intensity; farmers still perceive some tenure arrangements to be more uncertain than others, which discourages them from undertaking investments on such plots; and the harvest quota regulation, introduced to conserve forest stock, has in fact acted as a disincentive in forestry management. Originality/value - Almost all previous studies are based on national or regional data, which have primarily focused on the links between tenure types and investment incentives. In this study, based on the plot‐level data, the authors are able to assess not only the impacts of tenure types but also how specific land rights and their components affect farmers' investment behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Ping Qin & Jintao Xu, 2013. "Forest land rights, tenure types, and farmers' investment incentives in China," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(1), pages 154-170, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:caerpp:v:5:y:2013:i:1:p:154-170
    DOI: 10.1108/17561371311294829
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/17561371311294829/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/17561371311294829/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/17561371311294829?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. Xie, Lunyu & Berck, Peter & Xu, Jintao, 2016. "The effect on forestation of the collective forest tenure reform in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 116-129.
    2. Hong, Yan-Zhen & Chang, Hung-Hao, 2020. "Does digitalization affect the objective and subjective wellbeing of forestry farm households? Empirical evidence in Fujian Province of China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    3. Xie, Yi & Gong, Peichen & Han, Xiao & Wen, Yali, 2014. "The effect of collective forestland tenure reform in China: Does land parcelization reduce forest management intensity?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 126-140.
    4. Hong, Yan-Zhen & Chang, Hung-Hao & Dai, Yong-Wu, 2018. "Is deregulation of forest land use rights transactions associated with economic well-being and labor allocation of farm households? Empirical evidence in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 694-701.
    5. Krul, Kees & Ho, Peter & Yang, Xiuyun, 2020. "Incentivizing household forest management in China's forest reform: Limitations to rights-based approaches in Southwest China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. He, Jun & Kebede, Bereket & Martin, Adrian & Gross-Camp, Nicole, 2020. "Privatization or communalization: A multi-level analysis of changes in forest property regimes in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    7. Min, Shi & Waibel, Hermann & Huang, Jikun, 2017. "Smallholder participation in the land rental market in a mountainous region of Southern China: Impact of population aging, land tenure security and ethnicity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 625-637.
    8. Zhu, Zhen & Xu, Zhigang & Shen, Yueqin & Huang, Chenming, 2020. "How forestland size affects household profits from timber harvests: A case-study in China’s Southern collective forest area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    9. Yang, Xiaojun & Xu, Jintao & Xu, Xiaojie & Yi, Yuanyuan & Hyde, William F., 2020. "Collective forest tenure reform and household energy consumption: A case study in Yunnan Province, China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    10. Zhu, Zhen & Xu, Zhigang & Shen, Yueqin & Huang, Chenming & Zhang, Yaoqi, 2019. "How off-farm work drives the intensity of rural households' investment in forest management: The case from Zhejiang, China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 30-43.
    11. Xie, Fangting & Zhu, Shubin & Cao, Mengtian & Kang, Xiaolan & Du, Juan, 2019. "Does rural labor outward migration reduce household forest investment? The experience of Jiangxi, China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 62-69.
    12. Yiwen, Zhang & Kant, Shashi & Dong, Jiayun & Liu, Jinlong, 2020. "How communities restructured forest tenure throughout the top-down devolution reform: Using the case of Fujian, China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    13. Yuepeng Zhou & Xiaoping Shi & Dengyan Ji & Xianlei Ma & Satish Chand, 2019. "Property rights integrity, tenure security and forestland rental market participation: Evidence from Jiangxi Province, China," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(2), pages 95-110, May.
    14. Duan, Wei & Shen, Jinyu & Hogarth, Nicholas J. & Chen, Qian, 2021. "Risk preferences significantly affect household investment in timber forestry: Empirical evidence from Fujian, China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    15. Yiwen, Zhang & Kant, Shashi & Liu, Jinlong, 2019. "Principal-agent relationships in rural governance and benefit sharing in community forestry: Evidence from a community forest enterprise in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Min, Shi & Bai, Junfei & Wang, Xiaobing & Waibel, Hermann, 2024. "Does an inconsistent land tenure certificate affect technical efficiency of smallholder rubber farming: Evidence from a panel data in Southwest China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).

    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:eme:caerpp:v:5:y:2013:i:1:p:154-170. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.