IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i10p1848-d1249574.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Green Production Technologies Improve Household Income? Evidence from Rice Farmers in China

Author

Listed:
  • Foyuan Kuang

    (School of Economics, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics, Nanjing 210023, China)

  • Jiatong Li

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology (ESPRE), Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Jianjun Jin

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology (ESPRE), Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Xin Qiu

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology (ESPRE), Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

Abstract

Revealing the behavioral decision-making mechanism and behavioral effects of farmers adopting green production technologies will help motivate farmers to actively adopt green production technologies, thereby promoting the development of green agriculture. A stratified random sampling technique was used to select 607 Chinese rice farmers, while the endogenous switching regression model was used to analyze the influencing factors and behavioral effects of farmers adopting green production technologies. The results show that the adoption of green production technologies by farmers can significantly increase household income. Among the green production technologies, soil testing and formula fertilization technology has the greatest impact on farmers’ income, followed by straw returning technology and planting green manure. The main influencing factors of farmers adopting green production technologies are education level, cultivated land area, cultivated land fragmentation, soil fertility, and the distance between home and agricultural technology stations. The results of this study provide an empirical basis for relevant government departments to carry out agricultural technology extension work and formulate relevant policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Foyuan Kuang & Jiatong Li & Jianjun Jin & Xin Qiu, 2023. "Do Green Production Technologies Improve Household Income? Evidence from Rice Farmers in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1848-:d:1249574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1848/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1848/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niki A. Rust & Rebecca M. Jarvis & Mark S. Reed & Julia Cooper, 2021. "Framing of sustainable agricultural practices by the farming press and its effect on adoption," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 753-765, September.
    2. Shikuku, Kelvin Mashisia, 2019. "Information exchange links, knowledge exposure, and adoption of agricultural technologies in northern Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 94-106.
    3. Wang, Lei & Li, Lianqing & Cheng, Kun & Pan, Genxing, 2019. "Comprehensive evaluation of environmental footprints of regional crop production: A case study of Chizhou City, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Lai, Zhaohao & Chen, Meiqiu & Liu, Taoju, 2020. "Changes in and prospects for cultivated land use since the reform and opening up in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Tongwei Qiu & S.T. Boris Choy & Biliang Luo, 2022. "Is small beautiful? Links between agricultural mechanization services and the productivity of different-sized farms," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(4), pages 430-442, January.
    6. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    7. Clay, Nathan & Zimmerer, Karl S., 2020. "Who is resilient in Africa’s Green Revolution? Sustainable intensification and Climate Smart Agriculture in Rwanda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. Kansanga, Moses & Andersen, Peter & Atuoye, Kilian & Mason-Renton, Sarah, 2018. "Contested commons: Agricultural modernization, tenure ambiguities and intra-familial land grabbing in Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 215-224.
    9. Michael Lokshin & Zurab Sajaia, 2004. "Maximum likelihood estimation of endogenous switching regression models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 4(3), pages 282-289, September.
    10. Abera, Wondwosen & Assen, Mohammed & Budds, Jessica, 2020. "Determinants of agricultural land management practices among smallholder farmers in the Wanka watershed, northwestern highlands of EthiopiaI," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    11. Ma, Wanglin & Abdulai, Awudu, 2016. "Does cooperative membership improve household welfare? Evidence from apple farmers in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 94-102.
    12. Krah, Kwabena & Michelson, Hope & Perge, Emilie & Jindal, Rohit, 2019. "Constraints to adopting soil fertility management practices in Malawi: A choice experiment approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Anwar Naseem & David J. Spielman & Steven Were Omamo, 2010. "Private-sector investment in R&D: a review of policy options to promote its growth in developing-country agriculture," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(1), pages 143-173.
    14. Yazhen Gong & Kathy Baylis & Robert Kozak & Gary Bull, 2016. "Farmers’ risk preferences and pesticide use decisions: evidence from field experiments in China," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 411-421, July.
    15. Ranjan Bhattacharyya & Birendra Nath Ghosh & Prasanta Kumar Mishra & Biswapati Mandal & Cherukumalli Srinivasa Rao & Dibyendu Sarkar & Krishnendu Das & Kokkuvayil Sankaranarayanan Anil & Manickam Lali, 2015. "Soil Degradation in India: Challenges and Potential Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-43, March.
    16. Makaiko G. Khonje & Julius Manda & Petros Mkandawire & Adane Hirpa Tufa & Arega D. Alene, 2018. "Adoption and welfare impacts of multiple agricultural technologies: evidence from eastern Zambia," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(5), pages 599-609, September.
    17. Shilong Piao & Philippe Ciais & Yao Huang & Zehao Shen & Shushi Peng & Junsheng Li & Liping Zhou & Hongyan Liu & Yuecun Ma & Yihui Ding & Pierre Friedlingstein & Chunzhen Liu & Kun Tan & Yongqiang Yu , 2010. "The impacts of climate change on water resources and agriculture in China," Nature, Nature, vol. 467(7311), pages 43-51, September.
    18. Chaopeng Hong & Jennifer A. Burney & Julia Pongratz & Julia E. M. S. Nabel & Nathaniel D. Mueller & Robert B. Jackson & Steven J. Davis, 2021. "Global and regional drivers of land-use emissions in 1961–2017," Nature, Nature, vol. 589(7843), pages 554-561, January.
    19. Glover, Dominic & Poole, Nigel, 2019. "Principles of innovation to build nutrition-sensitive food systems in South Asia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 63-73.
    20. Wossen, Tesfamicheal & Alene, Arega & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Feleke, Shiferaw & Manyong, Victor, 2019. "Agricultural technology adoption and household welfare: Measurement and evidence," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-1.
    21. Konstantinos Giannakas & Amalia Yiannaka, 2018. "Doing well by doing good: agricultural biotechnology in the fight against hunger," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 725-739, November.
    22. Ward, Patrick S. & Bell, Andrew R. & Droppelmann, Klaus & Benton, Tim G., 2018. "Early adoption of conservation agriculture practices: Understanding partial compliance in programs with multiple adoption decisions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 27-37.
    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. Yuyang Li & Jiahui Li & Xinjie Li & Qian Lu, 2024. "Does Participation in Digital Supply and Marketing Promote Smallholder Farmers’ Adoption of Green Agricultural Production Technologies?," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Caiyan Yang & Weihong Huang & Yu Xiao & Zhenhong Qi & Yan Li & Kun Zhang, 2024. "Adoption of Fertilizer-Reduction and Efficiency-Increasing Technologies in China: The Role of Information Acquisition Ability," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-18, August.

    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. Xie, Hualin & Huang, Yingqian, 2021. "Influencing factors of farmers' adoption of pro-environmental agricultural technologies in China: Meta-analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Khushbu Mishra & Abdoul G. Sam & Gracious M. Diiro & Mario J. Miranda, 2020. "Gender and the dynamics of technology adoption: Empirical evidence from a household‐level panel data," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(6), pages 857-870, November.
    3. Shahzad, Muhammad Faisal & Abdulai, Awudu, 2020. "Adaptation to extreme weather conditions and farm performance in rural Pakistan," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    4. Jiang, Meishan & Li, Jingrong & Mi, Yunsheng, 2024. "Farmers’ cooperatives and smallholder farmers’ access to credit: Evidence from China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    5. Hongyun Zheng & Wanglin Ma & Gucheng Li, 2021. "Adoption of organic soil amendments and its impact on farm performance: evidence from wheat farmers in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(2), pages 367-390, April.
    6. Bright O. Asante & Kwabena N. Addai & Stephen Prah & Omphile Temoso & John N. Ng'ombe, 2023. "Hand pollination, mass spraying, and hybrid seedlings: Do these technologies affect the welfare of smallholder cocoa farmers in Ghana?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 2271-2300, November.
    7. Martinson Ankrah Twumasi & Yuansheng Jiang & Bismark Addai & Zhao Ding & Abbas Ali Chandio & Prince Fosu & Dennis Asante & Anthony Siaw & Frank Osei Danquah & Bright Asiamah Korankye & Gideon Ntim-Amo, 2021. "The Impact of Cooperative Membership on Fish Farm Households’ Income: The Case of Ghana," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-16, January.
    8. Tufa, Adane Hirpa & Alene, Arega D. & Manda, Julius & Akinwale, M.G. & Chikoye, David & Feleke, Shiferaw & Wossen, Tesfamicheal & Manyong, Victor, 2019. "The productivity and income effects of adoption of improved soybean varieties and agronomic practices in Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Jing Zhang & Jianhua Wang & Xiaoshi Zhou, 2019. "Farm Machine Use and Pesticide Expenditure in Maize Production: Health and Environment Implications," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-13, May.
    10. Federico Antonioli & Simone Severini & Mauro Vigani, 2023. "Visa for competitiveness: foreign workforce and Italian dairy farms’ performance," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 50(1), pages 115-150.
    11. Ndiaye, Alioune, 2021. "Diversify or Specialise? Impacts of Diversification on Household Welfare and Inequalities in Pastoral Areas in Senegal," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315898, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Nguyen Duc Kien & Truong Quang Dung & Dinh Thi Kim Oanh & Le Thanh An & Nguyen Cong Dinh & Nguyen Thai Phan & Le Thi Thanh Nga, 2023. "Climate‐resilient practices and welfare impacts on rice‐cultivating households in Vietnam: Does joint adoption of multiple practices matter?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(2), pages 263-284, April.
    13. Nsabimana, Aimable, 2021. "Is change worth it? The effects of adopting modern agricultural inputs on household welfare in Rwanda," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(3), September.
    14. Mohammad Mahbubur Rahman & Jeffry D. Connor, 2022. "Impact of Agricultural Extension Services on Fertilizer Use and Farmers’ Welfare: Evidence from Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-16, July.
    15. Wanglin Ma & R. Quentin Grafton & Alan Renwick, 2020. "Smartphone use and income growth in rural China: empirical results and policy implications," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 713-736, December.
    16. Xu, Ying & Findlay, Christopher, 2019. "Farmers’ constraints, governmental support and climate change adaptation: Evidence from Guangdong Province, China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), October.
    17. Mossie, Mengistie & Gerezgiher, Alemseged & Ayalew, Zemen & Nigussie, Zerihun, 2021. "Welfare effects of small-scale farmers' participation in apple and mango value chains in Ethiopia," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 60(2), May.
    18. repec:lic:licosd:31912 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Verena Preusse & Nils Nölke & Meike Wollni, 2024. "Urbanization and adoption of sustainable agricultural practices in the rural‐urban interface of Bangalore, India," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 72(2), pages 167-198, June.
    20. Backson Mwangi & Ibrahim Macharia & Eric Bett, 2021. "Ex-post Impact Evaluation of Improved Sorghum Varieties on Poverty Reduction in Kenya: A Counterfactual Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 447-467, April.
    21. Song, Chunxiao & Liu, Ruifeng & Oxley, Oxley & Ma, Hengyun, 2018. "The adoption and impact of engineering-type measures to address climate change: evidence from the major grain-producing areas in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 62(4), October.

    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:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1848-:d:1249574. 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.