IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v12y2022i1p60-d717743.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Feminization of Agriculture: Do Female Farmers Have Higher Expectations for the Value of Their Farmland?—Empirical Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Zhongcheng Yan

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Feng Wei

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Xin Deng

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

  • Chuan Li

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

  • Qiang He

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

  • Yanbin Qi

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

Abstract

An individual’s expectations for the value of farmland are a manifestation of his or her awareness of farmland rights and interests. Differences between male and female farmers in their use of farmland, employment, education, and rights protection may ultimately lead to differences in the evaluation of land value between the two groups. Clarifying such gender differences in the valuation of farmland and the reasons for them is of great significance for the formulation of policies and scientific research in areas such as the protection of rural women’s rights, nonagricultural employment, and land transfer. In the context of the global “feminization of agriculture”, we start with individuals’ psychological expectations for the value of farmland. We use data on farmland from the 2015 China Household Finance Survey (CHFS) and estimate an OLS regression model. The moderating effects model identifies the impact of gender differences on such expectations and the underlying mechanism. We find that (1) rural female farmers’ psychological expectations for the value of farmland are much lower than those of males due to their disadvantages in receiving information through policy publicization and their greater willingness to transfer into nonagricultural employment, and (2), according to the heterogeneity analysis, better educated female farmers and those living in areas with greater economic and social development expect farmland to be more valuable. These conclusions show that female farmers are currently less aware of their economic rights in rural China than male farmers, and that education, policy propaganda, and economic and social underdevelopment hinder their awareness of women’s rights. We propose policy suggestions to ensure women’s educational rights, promote the adjustment of the industrial structure and of policy propaganda, and balance regional economic and social development.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhongcheng Yan & Feng Wei & Xin Deng & Chuan Li & Qiang He & Yanbin Qi, 2022. "Feminization of Agriculture: Do Female Farmers Have Higher Expectations for the Value of Their Farmland?—Empirical Evidence from China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:1:p:60-:d:717743
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/1/60/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/1/60/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Isis Gaddis & Stephan Klasen, 2014. "Economic development, structural change, and women’s labor force participation:," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 27(3), pages 639-681, July.
    2. Sylvia Chant, 2006. "Re-thinking the “Feminization of Poverty” in Relation to Aggregate Gender Indices," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 201-220.
    3. Gbemisola Oseni & Paul Corral & Markus Goldstein & Paul Winters, 2015. "Explaining gender differentials in agricultural production in Nigeria," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 285-310, May.
    4. Vanya Slavchevska, 2015. "Gender differences in agricultural productivity: the case of Tanzania," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 335-355, May.
    5. Tsang, Eric W. K., 2014. "Old and New," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(03), pages 390-390, November.
    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. Qiang Xing & Chaoyang Wu & Fang Chen & Jianguo Liu & Prajal Pradhan & Brett A. Bryan & Thomas Schaubroeck & L. Roman Carrasco & Alemu Gonsamo & Yunkai Li & Xiuzhi Chen & Xiangzheng Deng & Andrea Alban, 2024. "Intranational synergies and trade-offs reveal common and differentiated priorities of sustainable development goals in China," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Siyi Pei & Sudan Zhao & Xuan Li & Jiahui Li, 2024. "Impacts of Rural–Urban Labour Transfer and Land Transfer on Land Efficiency in China: A Analysis of Mediating Effects," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-22, May.
    3. Xufang Zhang & Minghua Zhao & Xiaojie Wang & Rongqing Han, 2022. "Regional Differences of Farmers’ Willingness to Grow Grain and Its Influencing Factors in Shandong Province under the Background of New-Type Urbanization," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Ying Cheng & Yuan Hu & Weizhong Zeng & Zhongbao Liu, 2022. "Farmer Heterogeneity and Land Transfer Decisions Based on the Dual Perspectives of Economic Endowment and Land Endowment," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, February.
    5. Cheng, Ying & Hu, Yuan & Zeng, Weizhong & Liu, Zhongbao, 2022. "Farmer heterogeneity and land transfer decisions based on the dual perspectives of economic endowment and land endowment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 11(3).
    6. Xinwei Pei & Xinger Zheng & Cong Wu, 2024. "How Part-Time Farming Affects Cultivated Land Use Sustainability: Survey-Based Assessment in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, August.
    7. Dongmei Guo & Shuning Kong & Xin Li & Yiming Liu & Weizeng Sun, 2025. "Urbanization and subjective well-being of native urban residents: evidence from the “new-type urbanization pilot policy” in China," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 74(1), pages 1-27, March.

    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. Kaitlyn Spangler & Maria Elisa Christie, 2020. "Renegotiating gender roles and cultivation practices in the Nepali mid-hills: unpacking the feminization of agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(2), pages 415-432, June.
    2. repec:ags:aaea22:335489 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Mukhamedova, Nozilakhon & Wegerich, Kai, 2018. "The feminization of agriculture in post-Soviet Tajikistan," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 57, pages 128-139.
    4. Songsermsawas, Tisorn & Kafle, Kashi & Winters, Paul, 2021. "Decomposing the Impacts of an Agricultural Value Chain Investment by Gender and Ethnicity: The case of Nepal," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315047, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Tanguy Bernard & Jessica Hoel & Melissa Hidrobo & Maha Ashour, 2017. "Productive inefficiency in dairy farming and cooperation between spouses, evidence from Senegal," Working Papers hal-02146159, HAL.
    6. Hirpa Tufa, Adane & Alene, Arega D. & Cole, Steven M. & Manda, Julius & Feleke, Shiferaw & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Chikoye, David & Manyong, Victor, 2022. "Gender differences in technology adoption and agricultural productivity: Evidence from Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    7. Meinzen-Dick, Ruth S. & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Theis, Sophie & Doss, Cheryl R., 2017. "Women’s land rights as a pathway to poverty reduction: A framework and review of available evidence," IFPRI discussion papers 1663, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Rachmat Mulia & Elisabeth Simelton & Tan Quang Nguyen & Magnus Jirström, 2021. "Non-Farm Activities and Impacts beyond the Economy of Rural Households in Vietnam: A Review and Link to Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-22, September.
    9. Doss, Cheryl, 2015. "Women and Agricultural Productivity: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Center Discussion Papers 212153, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    10. Araar, Abdelkrim, 2021. "The Gender Gap in Smallholder Agricultural Productivity: The Case of Cameroon," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315902, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Eva‐Maria Egger & Aslihan Arslan & Emanuele Zucchini, 2022. "Does connectivity reduce gender gaps in off‐farm employment? Evidence from 12 low‐ and middle‐income countries," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(1), pages 197-218, March.
    12. Kwabena Nyarko Addai & Wencong Lu & Omphile Temoso, 2021. "Are Female Rice Farmers Less Productive than Male Farmers? Micro-evidence from Ghana," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(6), pages 1997-2039, December.
    13. Ali, Daniel & Bowen, Derick & Deininger, Klaus & Duponchel, Marguerite, 2016. "Investigating the Gender Gap in Agricultural Productivity: Evidence from Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 152-170.
    14. Rama Lionel Ngenzebuke, 2017. "The Returns of "I Do": Multifaceted Female Decision-making and Agricultural Yields in Tanzania," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2017-05, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    15. Mahajan, Kanika, 2019. "Back to the plough: Women managers and farm productivity in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Palacios-Lopez, Amparo & Christiaensen, Luc & Kilic, Talip, 2017. "How much of the labor in African agriculture is provided by women?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 52-63.
    17. Girma Gezimu Gebre & Hiroshi Isoda & Dil Bahadur Rahut & Yuichiro Amekawa & Hisako Nomura, 0. "Gender Gaps in Market Participation Among Individual and Joint Decision-Making Farm Households: Evidence from Southern Ethiopia," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 0, pages 1-35.
    18. Geoffrey Muricho & Jourdain Lokossou & Hippolyte Affognon & Benjamin Ahmed & Haile Desmae & Hakeem Ajeigbe & Michael Vabi & Jummai Yila & Essegbemon Akpo & Christopher Ojiewo, 2020. "Estimating and Decomposing Groundnut Gender Yield Gap: Evidence from Rural Farming Households in Northern Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    19. Makate, Clifton & Mutenje, Munyaradzi, 2021. "Discriminatory effects of gender disparities in improved seed and fertilizer use at the plot-level in Malawi and Tanzania," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 23(C).
    20. Julien, Jacques C. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Rada, Nicholas E., 2023. "Gender and agricultural Productivity: Econometric evidence from Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    21. Cheryl R. Doss & Agnes R. Quisumbing, 2020. "Understanding rural household behavior: Beyond Boserup and Becker," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 47-58, January.

    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:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:1:p:60-:d:717743. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.