IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i2p111-d486543.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Farm Size, Risk Aversion and Overuse of Fertilizer: The Heterogeneity of Large-Scale and Small-Scale Wheat Farmers in Northern China

Author

Listed:
  • Haixia Wu

    (International Business School, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China)

  • Hantao Hao

    (International Business School, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China)

  • Hongzhen Lei

    (International Business School, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China)

  • Yan Ge

    (School of Public Finance and Tax, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Hengtong Shi

    (International Business School, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China)

  • Yan Song

    (International Business School, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China)

Abstract

The excessive use of fertilizer has resulted in serious environmental degradation and a high health cost in China. Understanding the reasons for the overuse of fertilizer is critical to the sustainable development of Chinese agriculture, and large-scale operation is considered as one of the measures to deal with the excessive fertilizer use. Under the premise of fully considering the resource endowment and heterogeneity of large-scale farmers and small-scale farmers in production and management, different production decision-making frameworks were constructed. Based on the 300 large-scale farmers and 480 small-scale farmers in eight provinces of northern China wheat region, we analyzed the optimal fertilizer use amount and its deviation as well as the influencing factors of small-scale and large-scale farmers, then further clarified whether the development of scale management could solve the problem of excessive fertilizer use. The empirical results show that: (1) both small-scale farmers and large-scale farmers deviated from the optimal fertilizer application amount, where the deviation degree of optimal fertilizer application of small-scale farmers is significantly higher than that of large-scale farmers, with a deviation degree of 35.43% and 23.69% for small and large scale farmers, respectively; (2) not all wheat growers in North China had the problem of excessive use of chemical fertilizer, as the optimal level of chemical fertilizer application in Heilongjiang and Inner Mongolia are 346.5 kgha −1 and 335.25 kgha −1 , while the actual fertilizer use amount was 337.2 kgha −1 and 324.6 kgha −1 , respectively; and (3) the higher the risk aversion level, farmers tended to apply more fertilizer to ensure grain output. Therefore, increasing farm size should be integrated into actions such as improving technological innovation and providing better information transfer to achieve the goal of zero-increase in Chinese fertilizer use.

Suggested Citation

  • Haixia Wu & Hantao Hao & Hongzhen Lei & Yan Ge & Hengtong Shi & Yan Song, 2021. "Farm Size, Risk Aversion and Overuse of Fertilizer: The Heterogeneity of Large-Scale and Small-Scale Wheat Farmers in Northern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:111-:d:486543
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/2/111/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/2/111/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tasso Adamopoulos & Diego Restuccia, 2014. "The Size Distribution of Farms and International Productivity Differences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(6), pages 1667-1697, June.
    2. Julien, Jacques C. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E. & Rada, Nicholas E., 2019. "Assessing farm performance by size in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 153-164.
    3. Andrew D. Foster & Mark R. Rosenzweig, 2022. "Are There Too Many Farms in the World? Labor Market Transaction Costs, Machine Capacities, and Optimal Farm Size," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(3), pages 636-680.
    4. Latruffe, Laure & Piet, Laurent, 2013. "Does land fragmentation affect farm performance? A case study from Brittany, France," Working Papers 207854, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    5. Jianying Wang & Kevin Z. Chen & Sunipa Das Gupta & Zuhui Huang, 2015. "Is small still beautiful? A comparative study of rice farm size and productivity in China and India," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(3), pages 484-509, September.
    6. Paudel, K. P. & Lohr, L. & Martin, N. R., 2000. "Effect of risk perspective on fertilizer choice by sharecroppers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 115-128, November.
    7. Xu, Xiaosong & Jeffrey, Scott R., 1998. "Efficiency and technical progress in traditional and modern agriculture: evidence from rice production in China," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 157-165, March.
    8. Douglas Gollin & Stephen Parente & Richard Rogerson, 2002. "The Role of Agriculture in Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 160-164, May.
    9. Michael Kuhwald & Wolfgang B. Hamer & Joachim Brunotte & Rainer Duttmann, 2020. "Soil Penetration Resistance after One-Time Inversion Tillage: A Spatio-Temporal Analysis at the Field Scale," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-21, December.
    10. Laure Latruffe & Laurent Piet, 2013. "Does land fragmentation affect farm performance?," Working Papers hal-01208858, HAL.
    11. Latruffe, Laure & Piet, Laurent, 2013. "Does land fragmentation affect farm performance? A case study from Brittany," Factor Markets Working Papers 151, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    12. Khanal, Uttam & Wilson, Clevo & Shankar, Sriram & Hoang, Viet-Ngu & Lee, Boon, 2018. "Farm performance analysis: Technical efficiencies and technology gaps of Nepalese farmers in different agro-ecological regions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 645-653.
    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. Haixia Wu & Yan Ge, 2019. "Excessive Application of Fertilizer, Agricultural Non-Point Source Pollution, and Farmers’ Policy Choice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Xiaosong Xu & Scott R. Jeffrey, 1998. "Efficiency and technical progress in traditional and modern agriculture: evidence from rice production in China," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 18(2), pages 157-165, March.
    16. Dingde Xu & Zhuolin Yong & Xin Deng & Linmei Zhuang & Chen Qing, 2020. "Rural-Urban Migration and its Effect on Land Transfer in Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, March.
    17. Heath Henderson, 2015. "Considering Technical and Allocative Efficiency in the Inverse Farm Size–Productivity Relationship," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 442-469, June.
    18. Rios, Ana R. & Shively, Gerald E., 2005. "Farm size and nonparametric efficiency measurements for coffee farms in Vietnam," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19159, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    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. Guoqun Ma & Minjuan Li & Yuxi Luo & Tuanbiao Jiang, 2023. "Agri-Ecological Policy, Human Capital and Agricultural Green Technology Progress," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Meiling Cui & Yang Guo & Jiwei Chen, 2023. "Influence of Transfer Plot Area and Location on Chemical Input Reduction in Agricultural Production: Evidence from China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Mengling Tian & Ruifeng Liu & Jian Wang & Jiahao Liang & Yefan Nian & Hengyun Ma, 2023. "Impact of Environmental Values and Information Awareness on the Adoption of Soil Testing and Formula Fertilization Technology by Farmers—A Case Study Considering Social Networks," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-22, October.
    4. Pingping Fang & David Abler & Guanghua Lin & Ali Sher & Quan Quan, 2021. "Substituting Organic Fertilizer for Chemical Fertilizer: Evidence from Apple Growers in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    5. Gang Cui & Zhicheng Liu, 2022. "The Impact of Environmental Regulations and Social Norms on Farmers’ Chemical Fertilizer Reduction Behaviors: An Investigation of Citrus Farmers in Southern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, July.
    6. Mengyang Hou & Zenglei Xi & Suyan Zhao, 2022. "Evaluating the Heterogeneity Effect of Fertilizer Use Intensity on Agricultural Eco-Efficiency in China: Evidence from a Panel Quantile Regression Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-22, May.
    7. Meili Huan & Shaoguo Zhan, 2022. "Agricultural Production Services, Farm Size and Chemical Fertilizer Use in China’s Maize Production," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, October.
    8. Yong Liu & Jixin Yang & Guanghong Zhang & Xufeng Cui, 2024. "Driving factors of green production behaviour among farmers of different scales: Evidence from North China," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 70(10), pages 474-494.
    9. Linwei Wang & Yixin Hu & Rong Kong, 2023. "The Impact of Bancassurance Interaction on the Adoption Behavior of Green Production Technology in Family Farms: Evidence from China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, April.
    10. Hao Dong & Yang Zhang & Tianqing Chen & Juan Li, 2023. "Acceptance Intention and Behavioral Response to Soil-Testing Formula Fertilization Technology: An Empirical Study of Agricultural Land in Shaanxi Province," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-13, January.
    11. Camille Tevenart & Marielle Brunette, 2021. "Role of Farmers’ Risk and Ambiguity Preferences on Fertilization Decisions: An Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-27, August.
    12. Wu, Haixia & Li, Jianping & Ge, Yan, 2022. "Ambiguity preference, social learning and adoption of soil testing and formula fertilization technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    13. Xinru Han & Ping Xue & Ningning Zhang, 2021. "Impact of Grain Subsidy Reform on the Land Use of Smallholder Farms: Evidence from Huang-Huai-Hai Plain in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, September.
    14. Ningbo Cui & Xuezhen Ba & Jin Dong & Xiaofan Fan, 2022. "Does Farmland Transfer Contribute to Reduction of Chemical Fertilizer Use? Evidence from Heilongjiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-15, September.
    15. Qianhui Ma & Shaofeng Zheng & Peng Deng, 2022. "Impact of Internet Use on Farmers’ Organic Fertilizer Application Behavior under the Climate Change Context: The Role of Social Network," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, September.
    16. Dan Qiao & Ningjie Li & Li Cao & Desheng Zhang & Yanan Zheng & Tao Xu, 2022. "How Agricultural Extension Services Improve Farmers’ Organic Fertilizer Use in China? The Perspective of Neighborhood Effect and Ecological Cognition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-20, June.
    17. Wu, Haixia & Ge, Yan & Li, Jianping, 2023. "Uncertainty, time preference and households’ adoption of rooftop photovoltaic technology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    18. Shiyao Zhou & Chen Qing & Jia He & Dingde Xu, 2023. "Impact of Agricultural Division of Labor on Fertilizer Reduction Application: Evidence from Western China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-17, February.
    19. Yuanzhi Guo & Jieyong Wang, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Changes of Chemical Fertilizer Application and Its Environmental Risks in China from 2000 to 2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-14, November.
    20. Muziyun Liu & Hui Liu, 2023. "Influence of Climate Change on Carbon Emissions during Grain Production and Its Mechanism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-15, June.

    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. Bevis, Leah EM. & Barrett, Christopher B., 2020. "Close to the edge: High productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Chiarella, Cristina & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Abeygunawardane, Dilini & Conforti, Piero, 2023. "Balancing the trade-offs between land productivity, labor productivity and labor intensity," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(10), pages 1618-1634.
    3. Aragón, Fernando M. & Restuccia, Diego & Rud, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Are small farms really more productive than large farms?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    4. Marijn A. Bolhuis & Swapnika R. Rachapalli & Diego Restuccia, 2021. "Misallocation in Indian Agriculture," NBER Working Papers 29363, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. 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).
    6. Ciaian, Pavel & Guri, Fatmir & Rajcaniova, Miroslava & Drabik, Dusan & Paloma, Sergio Gomez y, 2018. "Land fragmentation and production diversification: A case study from rural Albania," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 589-599.
    7. 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).
    8. Artan Qineti & Miroslava Rajcaniova & Kushtrim Braha & Pavel Ciaian & Jona Demaj, 2015. "Status quo bias of agrarian land structures in rural Albania," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(4), pages 517-536, December.
    9. Orea, Luis & Pérez, Jose A. & Roibás, David, 2013. "Evaluating the double effect of land fragmentation on technology choice and dairy farm productivity: A latent class model approach," Efficiency Series Papers 2013/08, University of Oviedo, Department of Economics, Oviedo Efficiency Group (OEG).
    10. Ciaian, Pavel & Guri, Fatmir & Rajcaniova, Miroslava & Drabik, Dusan & Paloma, Sergio, 2015. "Land Fragmentation, Production Diversification, and Food Security: A Case Study from Rural Albania," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211539, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Sauer, Johannes & Gorton, Matthew & Davidova, Sophia, 2014. "Migration and Agricultural Efficiency," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 172684, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Edward Martey & Prince M. Etwire & Alexander Nimo Wiredu & Benjamin D. K. Ahiabor, 2017. "Establishing the link between market orientation and agricultural commercialization: Empirical evidence from Northern Ghana," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(4), pages 849-866, August.
    13. Wójcik-Leń, Justyna & Leń, Przemysław & Mika, Monika & Kryszk, Hubert & Kotlarz, Paweł, 2019. "Studies regarding correct selection of statistical methods for the needs of increasing the efficiency of identification of land for consolidation—A case study in Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    14. Liu, Shouying & Ma, Sen & Yin, Lijuan & Zhu, Jiong, 2023. "Land titling, human capital misallocation, and agricultural productivity in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    15. Ciaian, P. & Guri, F. & Rajcaniova, M. & Drabik, D. & Gomez Y Paloma, S., 2018. "Does Land Fragmentation Increase Agricultural Production Diversification in Rural Albania?," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277093, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Temesgen, Chalachew & Dupraz, Pierre, 2014. "The role of farmers’ competition on farmland price in local markets: Bretagne region of France," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170610, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Arnaud Deseau, 2023. "Land Reform and Productivity: Evidence from the Dissolution of the French Monasteries," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2023009, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    18. Eliška Svobodová & Radka Redlichová & Gabriela Chmelíková & Ivana Blažková, 2022. "Are the Agricultural Subsidies Based on the Farm Size Justified? Empirical Evidence from the Czech Republic," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, September.
    19. Juanjuan Cheng & Qian Wang & Huanmin Zhang & Toyohiko Matsubara & Naoki Yoshikawa & Jin Yu, 2022. "Does Farm Size Expansion Improve the Agricultural Environment? Evidence from Apple Farmers in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Do, Manh Hung & Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Grote, Ulrike, 2023. "Land consolidation, rice production, and agricultural transformation: Evidence from household panel data for Vietnam," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 157-173.

    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:2:p:111-:d:486543. 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.