IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v14y2024i10p1719-d1489853.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on the Impact of Agricultural Production Outsourcing on Farmers’ Fertilizer Application Intensity: An Inverse U-Shaped Relationship

Author

Listed:
  • Yongze Niu

    (College of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Jiahui Li

    (College of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

  • Xianli Xia

    (College of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China)

Abstract

Agricultural production outsourcing services encourage a shift in the way crops are grown in developing countries and make it easier for small farmers to join the social division of labor in agriculture. This makes production more efficient and has a big effect on the inputs used in agriculture, especially fertilizer. This paper empirically tests the impact of production outsourcing on farmers’ fertilizer intensity using the instrumental variables method with non-planar panel data from the 2020–2022 China Land Economy Survey (CLES) of farm plots. The results showed that there was a significant inverted U-shaped relationship between the degree of agricultural production outsourcing and the intensity of fertilization on farmers’ plots. Mechanistic analysis shows that agricultural production outsourcing affects the fertilizer intensity by changing the labor allocation of farmers. Especially as the degree of agricultural production outsourcing increases, the intensity of farm labor inputs by farmers gradually decreases, and the impact of fertilizer intensity on the plots showed a tendency to be promoted first and then suppressed. The moderating effect showed that plot size was a major moderating factor. This means that the bigger the plot, the flatter the inverted U-shaped curve became, and the same level of outsourcing could lead to less fertilizer application. This happened by moving the inflection point of the inverted U-shaped curve to the left, which stopped the fertilizer application at a lower level of outsourcing. Heterogeneity analysis showed that participation in technology-intensive production outsourcing was beneficial in terms of reducing fertilizer intensity, and that an increased degree of agriculture production outsourcing was beneficial for farmers with large plot sizes and younger heads of household.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongze Niu & Jiahui Li & Xianli Xia, 2024. "Research on the Impact of Agricultural Production Outsourcing on Farmers’ Fertilizer Application Intensity: An Inverse U-Shaped Relationship," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-23, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:10:p:1719-:d:1489853
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/10/1719/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/10/1719/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stark, Oded & Bloom, David E, 1985. "The New Economics of Labor Migration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 173-178, May.
    2. Zhang, Xiaobo & Yang, Jin & Reardon, Thomas, 2020. "Mechanization outsourcing clusters and division of labor in Chinese agriculture," IFPRI book chapters, in: An evolving paradigm of agricultural mechanization development: How much can Africa learn from Asia?, chapter 2, pages 71-96, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Fang Cai & Meiyan Wang, 2008. "A Counterfactual Analysis on Unlimited Surplus Labor in Rural China," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 16(1), pages 51-65, January.
    4. Blane D. Lewis & Daan Pattinasarany, 2009. "Determining Citizen Satisfaction with Local Public Education in Indonesia: The Significance of Actual Service Quality and Governance Conditions," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 85-115, March.
    5. HU, Ruifa & YANG, Zhijian & KELLY, Peter & HUANG, Jikun, 2009. "Agricultural extension system reform and agent time allocation in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, June.
    6. Sumner, Daniel A, 1981. "Wage Functions and Occupational Selection in a Rural Less Developed Country Setting," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(4), pages 513-519, November.
    7. Tahirou Abdoulaye & John H. Sanders, 2005. "Stages and determinants of fertilizer use in semiarid African agriculture: the Niger experience," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(2), pages 167-179, March.
    8. Diiro, Gracious M. & Fisher, Monica & Kassie, Menale & Muriithi, Beatrice W. & Muricho, Geoffrey, 2021. "How does adoption of labor saving agricultural technologies affect intrahousehold resource allocations? The case of push-pull technology in Western Kenya," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    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. Zhang, Jian & Mishra, Ashok K. & Zhu, Peixin, 2023. "Land Markets and Labor Productivity: Empirical Evidence from China," IZA Discussion Papers 16575, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Deng, Xin & Xu, Dingde & Zeng, Miao & Qi, Yanbin, 2019. "Does Internet use help reduce rural cropland abandonment? Evidence from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    3. Lin, Yang & Hu, Ruifa & Zhang, Chao & Chen, Kevin, 2022. "The role of public agricultural extension services in driving fertilizer use in rice production in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    4. Qian, Long & Lu, Hua & Gao, Qiang & Lu, Hualiang, 2022. "Household-owned farm machinery vs. outsourced machinery services: The impact of agricultural mechanization on the land leasing behavior of relatively large-scale farmers in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Jian Zhang & Ashok K. Mishra & Peixin Zhu, 2021. "Land rental markets and labor productivity: Evidence from rural China," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 69(1), pages 93-115, March.
    6. Yuxin Cui, 2023. "Mechanization's impact on agricultural total factor productivity," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(11), pages 446-457.
    7. Xu, Mingjun & Chen, Changling & Ahmed, Memon Aftab, 2024. "Market-oriented farmland transfer and outsourced machinery services: Evidence from China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 1214-1226.
    8. Zhang, Jian & Mishra, Ashok K. & Zhu, Peixin & Li, Xiaoshun, 2020. "Land rental market and agricultural labor productivity in rural China: A mediation analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    9. Hajer Habib, 2023. "Remittances and Labor Supply: Evidence from Tunisia," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 1870-1899, June.
    10. Ziesemer, Thomas H.W., 2010. "The impact of the credit crisis on poor developing countries: Growth, worker remittances, accumulation and migration," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 1230-1245, September.
    11. Ning Xu & Chang’an Li, 2023. "Migration and Rural Sustainability: Relative Poverty Alleviation by Geographical Mobility in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-27, April.
    12. Guy Stecklov & Paul Winters & Marco Stampini & Benjamin Davis, 2003. "Can Public Transfers Reduce Mexican Migration? A study based on randomized experimental data," Working Papers 03-16, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    13. Karina Acosta & Hengyu Gu, 2022. "Locked up? The development and internal migration nexus in Colombia," Documentos de Trabajo Sobre Economía Regional y Urbana 19931, Banco de la República, Economía Regional.
    14. Atsede Desta Tegegne & Marianne Penker, 2016. "Determinants of rural out-migration in Ethiopia: Who stays and who goes?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 35(34), pages 1011-1044.
    15. Maxmillan Martin & Yi hyun Kang & Motasim Billah & Tasneem Siddiqui & Richard Black & Dominic Kniveton, 2017. "Climate-influenced migration in Bangladesh: The need for a policy realignment," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 35, pages 357-379, October.
    16. Li, Linfei & Khan, Sufyan Ullah & Guo, Chenhao & Huang, Yanfen & Xia, Xianli, 2022. "Non-agricultural labor transfer, factor allocation and farmland yield: Evidence from the part-time peasants in Loess Plateau region of Northwest China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    17. Alex Sienaert, 2007. "Migration, Remittances and Public Transfers: Evidence from South Africa," Economics Series Working Papers 351, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    18. Tineke Fokkema & Eralba Cela & Elena Ambrosetti, 2013. "Giving from the Heart or from the Ego? Motives behind Remittances of the Second Generation in Europe," International Migration Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 539-572, September.
    19. Valbuena, Diego & Tui, Sabine Homann-Kee & Erenstein, Olaf & Teufel, Nils & Duncan, Alan & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Swain, Braja & Mekonnen, Kindu & Germaine, Ibro & Gérard, Bruno, 2015. "Identifying determinants, pressures and trade-offs of crop residue use in mixed smallholder farms in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 107-118.
    20. Bahta, Y. & Owusu-Sekyeer, E., 2018. "Nexus between homestead food garden programme and land ownership in South Africa: Implication on the income of vegetable farmers," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277732, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:14:y:2024:i:10:p:1719-:d:1489853. 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.