IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v12y2022i7p976-d857323.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corn Grain or Corn Silage: Effects of the Grain-to-Fodder Crop Conversion Program on Farmers’ Income in China

Author

Listed:
  • Shukun Wang

    (Rural Development Institute, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100732, China)

  • Changquan Liu

    (Rural Development Institute, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100732, China)

  • Lei Han

    (Rural Development Institute, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100732, China)

  • Tingting Li

    (Rural Development Institute, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100732, China)

  • Guolei Yang

    (Institute of Technology and Economy of Grain Industry, Academy of National Food and Strategic Reserves Administration, Beijing 100037, China)

  • Taofeng Chen

    (School of Economics, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China)

Abstract

The Grain-to-Fodder Crop Conversion Program (GCCP) in China mainly promotes the green and sustainable development of grain crops, economic crops, and silage crops by subsidizing livestock farms to encourage farmers to plant silage crops, such as corn silage and alfalfa silage. In this context, this study assesses the impact of planting silage crops on farm household income. Based on a survey of 495 households in Henan and Hebei Provinces, China, we first constructed a theoretical model of the program’s effect on farmers’ income, and then used an ordinary least squares (OLS) method to estimate the magnitude of the GCCP on farmers’ income. To identify endogeneity and further test the stability of the results, we adopted instrumental variable estimation, subsample estimation, and matching methods. The GCCP significantly increased smallholder farm income. Compared with growing corn grain, corn silage increased income by approximately CNY 101/mu. Meanwhile, corn silage reduced the capital input cost of farmers by 10.71% per mu and labor input by 26.6% per mu. Heterogeneity analysis revealed that farmers who plant corn silage on a large scale, closer to dairy farms, have higher incomes. Few scholars have empirically analyzed the impact of GCCP on farm household income from a micro-farm household perspective. This study enriches the empirical literature on the effects of the GCCP on farmers in China, which can help policymakers understand policy implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Shukun Wang & Changquan Liu & Lei Han & Tingting Li & Guolei Yang & Taofeng Chen, 2022. "Corn Grain or Corn Silage: Effects of the Grain-to-Fodder Crop Conversion Program on Farmers’ Income in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:7:p:976-:d:857323
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/7/976/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/7/976/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emiko Fukase & Will Martin, 2016. "Who Will Feed China in the 21st Century? Income Growth and Food Demand and Supply in China," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(1), pages 3-23, February.
    2. Ding, Shijun & Meriluoto, Laura & Reed, W. Robert & Tao, Dayun & Wu, Haitao, 2011. "The impact of agricultural technology adoption on income inequality in rural China: Evidence from southern Yunnan Province," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 344-356, September.
    3. Jikun Huang & Shukun Wang & Zhihua Xiao, 2017. "Rising Herbicide Use and Its Driving Forces in China," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 29(3), pages 614-627, July.
    4. Tristan Kenderdine, 2018. "Insurance Plus Futures: Agricultural Commodity Price Reform in China," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies 201824, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    5. Shukun Wang & Dengwang Li & Tingting Li & Changquan Liu, 2021. "Land Use Transitions and Farm Performance in China: A Perspective of Land Fragmentation," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-22, July.
    6. Yu Sheng & Jiping Ding & Jikun Huang, 2019. "The Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity in Agriculture: Evidence from Maize Production in Northern China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(3), pages 790-806.
    7. Huang, Jikun & Rozelle, Scott, 2006. "The emergence of agricultural commodity markets in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 266-280.
    8. Mishra, Ashok & El-Osta, Hisham & Gillespie, Jeffrey M., 2009. "Effect of agricultural policy on regional income inequality among farm households," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 325-340, May.
    9. Kristen Hopewell, 2019. "US-China conflict in global trade governance: the new politics of agricultural subsidies at the WTO," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 207-231, March.
    10. Sheng, Yu & Song, Ligang, 2019. "Agricultural production and food consumption in China: A long-term projection," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 15-29.
    11. Robert, Marion & Thomas, Alban & Bergez, Jacques Eric, 2016. "Processes of adpatation in farm decision-making models. A review," TSE Working Papers 16-731, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    12. Tang, Lin & Luo, Xiaofeng, 2021. "Can agricultural insurance encourage farmers to apply biological pesticides? Evidence from rural China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    13. Carter, Michael R, 1984. "Identification of the Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: An Empirical Analysis of Peasant Agricultural Production," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 131-145, March.
    14. Tristan Kenderdine, 2018. "Insurance Plus Futures: Agricultural Commodity Price Reform in China," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 331-346, May.
    15. Wang, Jieyong & Zhang, Ziwen & Liu, Yansui, 2018. "Spatial shifts in grain production increases in China and implications for food security," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 204-213.
    16. Shijun Ding & Laura Meriluoto & W. Robert Reed & Daoyun Tao & Haitao Wu, 2010. "The Impact of Agricultural Technology Adoption of Income Inequality in Rural China," Working Papers in Economics 10/41, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    17. Qianrong Wu & Wendong Zhang, 2016. "Of Maize and Markets: China's New Corn Policy," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications apr-fall-2016-4, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    18. Ashok Gulati & Yuan Zhou & Jikun Huang & Alon Tal & Ritika Juneja, 2021. "From Food Scarcity to Surplus," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-981-15-9484-7, March.
    19. Lalani, Baqir & Dorward, Peter & Holloway, Garth & Wauters, Erwin, 2016. "Smallholder farmers' motivations for using Conservation Agriculture and the roles of yield, labour and soil fertility in decision making," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 80-90.
    20. Mishra, Ashok K. & Kumar, Anjani & Joshi, Pramod K. & D'souza, Alwin, 2016. "Impact of contracts in high yielding varieties seed production on profits and yield: The case of Nepal," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 110-121.
    21. Lopez, Rigoberto A. & He, Xi & De Falcis, Eleonora, 2017. "What Drives China’s New Agricultural Subsidies?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 279-292.
    22. Charles Towe & Constant I. Tra, 2013. "Vegetable Spirits and Energy Policy," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(1), pages 1-16.
    23. Bhatt, Mohammad Sultan & Bhat, Showkat Ahmad, 2014. "Technical Efficiency and Farm Size Productivity ― Micro Level Evidence from Jammu & Kashmir," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 2(4), pages 1-22, October.
    24. Desiere, Sam & Jolliffe, Dean, 2018. "Land productivity and plot size: Is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 84-98.
    25. Gong, Binlei, 2018. "Agricultural reforms and production in China: Changes in provincial production function and productivity in 1978–2015," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 18-31.
    26. Mugera, Amin W. & Langemeier, Michael R., 2011. "Does Farm Size and Specialization Matter for Productive Efficiency? Results from Kansas," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(4), pages 515-528, November.
    27. Yang, Guolei & Huang, Jikun & Kalkuhl, Matthias & von Braun, Joachim & Hu, Jiliang, 2015. "Spatial price transmission under different policy regimes: the case of Chinese soy and maize market," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205665, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    28. Liu, Min & Dries, Liesbeth & Huang, Jikun & Min, Shi & Tang, Jianjun, 2019. "The impacts of the eco-environmental policy on grassland degradation and livestock production in Inner Mongolia, China: An empirical analysis based on the simultaneous equation model," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    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. Lu, Yongli & Ma, Renshi & Gao, Wei & You, Yongliang & Jiang, Congze & Zhang, Zhixin & Kamran, Muhammad & Yang, Xianlong, 2024. "Optimizing the nitrogen application rate and planting density to improve dry matter yield, water productivity and N-use efficiency of forage maize in a rainfed region," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).

    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. C. S. C. Sekhar & Namrata Thapa, 2023. "Rural market imperfections in India: Revisiting old debates with new evidence," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 41(5), September.
    2. Tao Tang & Lizeth Cuesta & Brayan Tillaguango & Rafael Alvarado & Abdul Rehman & Diana Bravo-Benavides & Natalia Zárate, 2022. "Causal Link between Technological Innovation and Inequality Moderated by Public Spending, Manufacturing, Agricultural Employment, and Export Diversification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-25, July.
    3. Shaolong Zeng & Bingying Qi & Minglin Wang, 2022. "Agricultural Insurance and Agricultural Economic Growth: The Case of Zhejiang Province in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-21, October.
    4. Hailemariam Ayalew & Jordan Chamberlin & Carol Newman & Kibrom A. Abay & Frederic Kosmowski & Tesfaye Sida, 2024. "Revisiting the size–productivity relationship with imperfect measures of production and plot size," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(2), pages 595-619, March.
    5. Aragón, Fernando M. & Restuccia, Diego & Rud, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Are small farms really more productive than large farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    6. Thanos Fragkandreas, 2022. "Three Decades of Research on Innovation and Inequality: Causal Scenarios, Explanatory Factors, and Suggestions," Working Papers 60, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2022.
    7. Fang Xia & Lingling Hou & Songqing Jin & Dongqing Li, 2020. "Land size and productivity in the livestock sector: evidence from pastoral areas in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 867-888, July.
    8. Mensah, Edouard R. & Kostandini, Genti, 2020. "The inverse farm size-productivity relationship under land size mis-measurement and in the presence of weather and price risks: Panel data evidence from Uganda," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304477, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Hua, Ye, 2015. "Influential factors of farmers' demands for agricultural science and technology in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 249-254.
    10. Helfand, Steven M. & Taylor, Matthew P.H., 2021. "The inverse relationship between farm size and productivity: Refocusing the debate," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    11. Marcelo Santos & Tiago Neves Sequeira & Alexandra Ferreira-Lopes, 2017. "Income Inequality and Technological Adoption," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(4), pages 979-1000, October.
    12. Nguyen, Canh Phuc & Doytch, Nadia, 2022. "The impact of ICT patents on economic growth: An international evidence," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5).
    13. Tiago Neves Sequeira & Marcelo Santos & Alexandra Ferreira-Lopes, 2017. "Income Inequality, TFP, and Human Capital," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(300), pages 89-111, March.
    14. Binlei Gong, 2020. "New Growth Accounting," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(2), pages 641-661, March.
    15. Jabłoński Łukasz, 2019. "Inequality in Economics: The Concept, Perception, Types, and Driving Forces," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 27(1), pages 17-43, March.
    16. Keijiro Otsuka, 2021. "Changing Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity and Its Implications for Philippine Agriculture," Discussion Papers 2102, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    17. Baoling Zou & Zanjie Ren & Ashok K. Mishra & Stefan Hirsch, 2022. "The role of agricultural insurance in boosting agricultural output: An aggregate analysis from Chinese provinces," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 923-945, October.
    18. F. Vidogbéna & A. Adégbidi & R. Tossou & F. Assogba-Komlan & T. Martin & M. Ngouajio & S. Simon & L. Parrot & S. T. Garnett & K. K. Zander, 2016. "Exploring factors that shape small-scale farmers’ opinions on the adoption of eco-friendly nets for vegetable production," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 1749-1770, December.
    19. Omotilewa, Oluwatoba J. & Jayne, T.S. & Muyanga, Milu & Aromolaran, Adebayo B. & Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O. & Awokuse, Titus, 2021. "A revisit of farm size and productivity: Empirical evidence from a wide range of farm sizes in Nigeria," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    20. Desiere, Sam & Jolliffe, Dean, 2018. "Land productivity and plot size: Is measurement error driving the inverse relationship?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 84-98.

    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:7:p:976-:d:857323. 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.