IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v14y2024i7p1081-d1429425.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost–Benefit Analysis of Mulch Film Management and Its Policy Implications in Northern China

Author

Listed:
  • Aibo Hao

    (State Key Laboratory of Efficient Utilization of Arid and Semi-arid Arable Land in Northern China, Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
    Economics and Rural Development Laboratory, TERRA Teaching and Research Centre, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liège, 5030 Gembloux, Belgium)

  • Changbin Yin

    (State Key Laboratory of Efficient Utilization of Arid and Semi-arid Arable Land in Northern China, Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
    Research Center for Agricultural Green Development in China, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Angélique Léonard

    (Laboratory of Chemical Engineering, Department of Applied Chemistry, University of Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium)

  • Thomas Dogot

    (Economics and Rural Development Laboratory, TERRA Teaching and Research Centre, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liège, 5030 Gembloux, Belgium)

Abstract

Agricultural white pollution is a pressing concern in China. However, the efficiency and rationality of the government’s subsidies for mulch film management remain ambiguous. To formulate reasonable policies for mulch film management and optimize fiscal resource allocation, the study employs cost–benefit analysis to evaluate the economic performance of mulch film management. Two environmentally friendly measures being primarily proposed in China, namely the application of thicker mulch film (hereinafter referred to as thicker film) and the substitution of biodegradable mulch film (hereinafter referred to as biodegradable film), are selected for analysis, with conventional mulch film (hereinafter referred to as conventional film) serving as the benchmark for comparison. Primary data obtained through field surveys, supplemented by secondary data from national statistics, industry reports, and literature reviews, are used for the study. Results show that thicker film application is cost-effective, with a net benefit of CNY 3208.8/ha (USD 449.2/ha; 1 CNY = 0.14 USD), which is CNY 253.8/ha (USD 35.5/ha) higher than that of conventional film. The net benefit for biodegradable film application is lower than that for conventional film, at CNY 2244.6/ha (USD 314.2/ha). The results reveal the significant potential of promoting the use of thicker film due to its recycling and economic advantages. Findings imply that the further promotion of its use lies in improving farmers’ cognition and optimizing subsidy dimensions to allocate government financial resources more effectively. On the contrary, biodegradable film utilization is unprofitable and relies on continuous external subsidies. The government can optimize the subsidy standard based on the cost–benefit performance of different mulch films applied and provide incentives to promote cost reductions and efficiency increases. Further analysis indicates that sustainable mulch film management entails developing mechanisms to internalize the external benefits of management and innovating a new governance landscape.

Suggested Citation

  • Aibo Hao & Changbin Yin & Angélique Léonard & Thomas Dogot, 2024. "Cost–Benefit Analysis of Mulch Film Management and Its Policy Implications in Northern China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-20, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:7:p:1081-:d:1429425
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/7/1081/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/7/1081/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:7:p:1081-:d:1429425. 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: 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.