IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i10p1051-d651196.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring Impacts of Perceived Value and Government Regulation on Farmers’ Willingness to Adopt Wheat Straw Incorporation in China

Author

Listed:
  • Zhaoxu Liu

    (School of Public Administration and Policy, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Jinghua Sun

    (School of Public Administration and Policy, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Weiya Zhu

    (Shandong Land Surveying and Planning Institute, Jinan 250014, China)

  • Yanbo Qu

    (School of Public Administration and Policy, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan 250014, China)

Abstract

In China, wheat straw incorporation (WSI) is the most popular way of utilizing wheat straw. WSI can manage agricultural residues to improve soil quality and avoid open burning in fields. However, farmers have been reluctant to implement WSI, which hinders sustainability. This study collected first-hand data about 1027 wheat growers, and used a Logit model to explore the influence of perceived value, government regulation, and their interaction on farmer willingness to adopt WSI. The results also reveal the differences between farmers with different farm sizes, as well as differences in other characteristics impacting WSI willingness. The study found that implementing government regulations and increasing the positive perceived value by farmers can effectively improve farmer willingness to adopt WSI. For example, government subsidies and farmers’ perceptions about cost-related risks impact farmer willingness. There is an interaction effect between government regulation and perceived value with respect to farmer willingness. Policy outreach could effectively strengthen the positive impacts of farmers’ perception of social benefits on farmer willingness. Government subsidies could effectively weaken the negative impacts of farmers’ perception of cost-related and time-related risks on farmer willingness. Farmers with different sized farms are influenced differently by government regulation and perceived value. The willingness of large-scale farmers to adopt WSI is generally influenced by government regulation and perceived value; in contrast, the willingness of traditional farmers is mainly influenced by policy outreach and perceived economic benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhaoxu Liu & Jinghua Sun & Weiya Zhu & Yanbo Qu, 2021. "Exploring Impacts of Perceived Value and Government Regulation on Farmers’ Willingness to Adopt Wheat Straw Incorporation in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:10:p:1051-:d:651196
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/10/1051/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/10/1051/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daxini, Amar & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2019. "Understanding farmers’ intentions to follow a nutrient management plan using the theory of planned behaviour," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 428-437.
    2. David Roodman, 2011. "Fitting fully observed recursive mixed-process models with cmp," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 11(2), pages 159-206, June.
    3. Li, Chengyou & Jiao, Yong & Sun, Tao & Liu, Anran, 2021. "Alleviating multi-dimensional poverty through land transfer: Evidence from poverty-stricken villages in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    4. Morais, Manoela & Borges, João Augusto Rossi & Binotto, Erlaine, 2018. "Using the reasoned action approach to understand Brazilian successors’ intention to take over the farm," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 445-452.
    5. Ekman, Anna & Wallberg, Ola & Joelsson, Elisabeth & Börjesson, Pål, 2013. "Possibilities for sustainable biorefineries based on agricultural residues – A case study of potential straw-based ethanol production in Sweden," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 299-308.
    6. Yao, Chunsheng & Chen, Chongying & Li, Ming, 2012. "Analysis of rural residential energy consumption and corresponding carbon emissions in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 445-450.
    7. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    8. Woldegebrial Zeweld & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & Girmay Tesfay & Stijn Speelman, 2020. "Smallholder farmers' behavioural intentions towards sustainable agricultural practices," 2020 Papers pze115, Job Market Papers.
    9. Jing Hou & Bo Hou, 2019. "Farmers’ Adoption of Low-Carbon Agriculture in China: An Extended Theory of the Planned Behavior Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, March.
    10. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    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. Dakuan Qiao & Lei Luo & Xingqiang Zheng & Xinhong Fu, 2022. "External Supervision, Face Consciousness, and Pesticide Safety Use: Evidence from Sichuan Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-16, June.
    2. Guo, Zhangdong & Chen, Xiaoqi & Zhang, Yongwang, 2022. "Impact of environmental regulation perception on farmers' agricultural green production technology adoption: A new perspective of social capital," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    3. Jutao Zeng & Jie Lyu, 2023. "Simultaneous Decisions to Undertake Off-Farm Work and Straw Return: The Role of Cognitive Ability," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Lei Luo & Dakuan Qiao & Jin Tang & Ailin Wan & Ling Qiu & Xiaoyu Liu & Yuying Liu & Xinhong Fu, 2022. "Training of Farmers’ Cooperatives, Value Perception and Members’ Willingness of Green Production," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Qianchun Dai & Kequn Cheng, 2022. "What Drives the Adoption of Agricultural Green Production Technologies? An Extension of TAM in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    6. Hong Chen & Haoyan Wang & Sishu Zhou, 2023. "Farmers’ Cognition of and Satisfaction with Policy Affect Willingness of Returning Straw to Field: Based on Evolutionary Game Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-16, October.

    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. Mamadou Sissoko & Melinda Smale & Annick Castiaux & Veronique Theriault, 2019. "Adoption of New Sorghum Varieties in Mali Through a Participatory Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Love Offeibea Asiedu-Ayeh & Xungang Zheng & Kobina Agbodah & Bright Senyo Dogbe & Adjei Peter Darko, 2022. "Promoting the Adoption of Agricultural Green Production Technologies for Sustainable Farming: A Multi-Attribute Decision Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.
    3. Jaap Sok & Joao Rossi Borges & Peter Schmidt & Icek Ajzen, 2021. "Farmer Behaviour as Reasoned Action: A Critical Review of Research with the Theory of Planned Behaviour," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 388-412, June.
    4. Nadia Adnan & Shahrina Md Nordin, 2021. "How COVID 19 effect Malaysian paddy industry? Adoption of green fertilizer a potential resolution," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 8089-8129, June.
    5. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Jinhua Xie & Gangqiao Yang & Ge Wang & Shuoyan He, 2024. "How does social capital affect farmers’ environment-friendly technology adoption behavior? A case study in Hubei Province, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(7), pages 18361-18384, July.
    7. Teimuraz Gogokhia & George Berulava, 2021. "Business environment reforms, innovation and firm productivity in transition economies," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(2), pages 221-245, June.
    8. Aziz Barhmi & Omar Hajaji, 2023. "Multidisciplinary Approach to Supply Chain Resilience: Conceptualization and Scale Development," Central European Business Review, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2023(5), pages 43-69.
    9. Fetene, G.M. & Getehun, T.D., 2018. "Agricultural Technology Adoption for Food and Nutrition Security: Evidence from Ethiopia," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277332, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Venugopal Gopalakrishna-Remani & Robert Paul Jones & Kerri M. Camp, 2019. "Levels of EMR Adoption in U.S. Hospitals: An Empirical Examination of Absorptive Capacity, Institutional Pressures, Top Management Beliefs, and Participation," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1325-1344, December.
    11. Elbanna, Amany & Newman, Mike, 2022. "The bright side and the dark side of top management support in Digital Transformaion –A hermeneutical reading," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    12. Morosan, Cristian, 2016. "An empirical examination of U.S. travelers’ intentions to use biometric e-gates in airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 120-128.
    13. Tuccio, Michele & Wahba, Jackline & Hamdouch, Bachir, 2016. "International Migration: Driver of Political and Social Change?," IZA Discussion Papers 9794, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Mercedes Rodríguez & José Antonio Camacho, 2023. "The importance of agriculture and rural areas for the future in the European Union: An exploration of public opinion," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(10), pages 394-403.
    15. Sarv Devaraj & Robert F. Easley & J. Michael Crant, 2008. "Research Note ---How Does Personality Matter? Relating the Five-Factor Model to Technology Acceptance and Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 93-105, March.
    16. Hajime Seya & Junyi Zhang & Makoto Chikaraishi & Ying Jiang, 2020. "Decisions on truck parking place and time on expressways: an analysis using digital tachograph data," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 555-583, April.
    17. Mingyue Li & Jingjing Wang & Kai Chen & Lianbei Wu, 2020. "Willingness and Behaviors of Farmers’ Green Disposal of Pesticide Packaging Waste in Henan, China: A Perceived Value Formation Mechanism Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-18, May.
    18. Michael Grimm & Carole Treibich, 2013. "Why Do Some Bikers Wear a Helmet and Others Don't? Evidence from Delhi, India," AMSE Working Papers 1348, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France, revised 10 Oct 2013.
    19. Donatella Furia & Alessandro Crociata & Massimiliano Agovino, 2018. "Voluntary work and cultural capital: an exploratory analysis for Italian regional data," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 35(3), pages 789-808, December.
    20. Guozhong Zheng & Wentao Bu, 2018. "Review of Heating Methods for Rural Houses in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.

    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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:10:p:1051-:d:651196. 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.