IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v9y2020i1p6-d303909.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of Agricultural Infrastructure Construction in China: Based on the “Participation of Beneficiary Groups” Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Mengting Liu

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China)

  • Yueqing Ji

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China)

Abstract

Agricultural infrastructure is a typical public good, and it plays an important role in rural development. The “participation of beneficiary groups (PBG)” system is encouraged by government to supply village level public goods in China. Based on micro survey data from the village level in Jiangsu Province, this study analyzes the status of agricultural infrastructure construction and the promotion of PBG model and quantitatively analyzes the impact of different factors using an econometric model. The results found that the PBG model of agricultural infrastructure construction only accounted for 22.8% of projects, and the bottleneck was the challenge in raising funds at the village level; the total number of projects and the number of projects in the PBG model significantly increased with collective irrigation, and the farmland lease was found to hinder the promotion of the PBG model. The government should take measures to enhance farmers’ awareness of social trust, continuously improve the governance capacity of the village collectives, improve the role of village self-governance and social forces in agricultural infrastructure construction, and actively guide farmers and private enterprises to participate in agricultural infrastructure construction so that farmers can obtain more practical benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Mengting Liu & Yueqing Ji, 2020. "Determinants of Agricultural Infrastructure Construction in China: Based on the “Participation of Beneficiary Groups” Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:1:p:6-:d:303909
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/1/6/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/1/6/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Selman, 2004. "Community participation in the planning and management of cultural landscapes," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 365-392.
    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. Yinhao Wu & Hengyun Ma, 2022. "How Much Farmland Are Farmers Willing to Lease? The Construction and Evaluation of a Farmland Transfer Supply Function with Application to a Case Study in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Xiang Gao & Ke Wang & Kevin Lo & Ruiyang Wen & Xiaoting Mi & Kuanmei Liu & Xingxing Huang, 2021. "An Evaluation of Coupling Coordination between Rural Development and Water Environment in Northwestern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.

    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. GEVAERT, Anouk & KUPERS, Stefan Jonathan & HEIJMAN, Wim, 2014. "Participatory Landscape Planning: The Case Of The “Westvaardersplassen” In The Netherlands," Review of Agricultural and Applied Economics (RAAE), Faculty of Economics and Management, Slovak Agricultural University in Nitra, vol. 17(2), pages 1-11, November.
    2. Luis Miguel Moctezuma Teresa & José Luis Aparicio López & Columba Rodríguez Alviso & Herlinda Gervacio Jiménez & Rosa María Brito Carmona, 2022. "Environmental Competencies for Sustainability: A Training Experience with High School Teachers in a Rural Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Hongtao Jia & Lei Zhu & Jing Du, 2022. "Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Model of the Farmers’ Sense of Gain in the Provision of Rural Infrastructures: The Case of Tourism-Oriented Rural Areas of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Donghyun Kim & Up Lim, 2016. "Urban Resilience in Climate Change Adaptation: A Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Antonio Santoro & Martina Venturi & Mauro Agnoletti, 2021. "Landscape Perception and Public Participation for the Conservation and Valorization of Cultural Landscapes: The Case of the Cinque Terre and Porto Venere UNESCO Site," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, January.
    6. Nienaber, Birte, 2018. "Partizipation in Großschutzgebieten: Untersucht am Beispiel der Beteiligung an den Workshops zur Erstellung des Rahmenkonzeptes des Biosphärenreservates Bliesgau 2014," Arbeitsberichte der ARL: Aufsätze, in: Weber, Florian & Weber, Friedericke & Jenal, Corinna (ed.), Wohin des Weges? Regionalentwicklung in Grossschutzgebieten, volume 21, pages 192-205, ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft.
    7. Mercer, Nicholas & Sabau, Gabriela & Klinke, Andreas, 2017. "“Wind energy is not an issue for government”: Barriers to wind energy development in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 673-683.
    8. Christian Albert & Christina Von Haaren & Juan Carlos Vargas-Moreno & Carl Steinitz, 2015. "Teaching Scenario-Based Planning for Sustainable Landscape Development: An Evaluation of Learning Effects in the Cagliari Studio Workshop," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-21, May.
    9. Haiyun Xu & Tobias Plieninger & Guohan Zhao & Jørgen Primdahl, 2019. "What Difference Does Public Participation Make? An Alternative Futures Assessment Based on the Development Preferences for Cultural Landscape Corridor Planning in the Silk Roads Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-24, November.
    10. Hiroaki Saito, 2017. "The Role of Intermediaries in Community Capacity Building: Pro-Poor Tourism Perspective," Academica Turistica - Tourism and Innovation Journal, University of Primorska Press, vol. 10(1), pages 1-3.17.
    11. Jiazhen Zhang & Jeremy Cenci & Vincent Becue & Sesil Koutra & Chenyang Liao, 2022. "Stewardship of Industrial Heritage Protection in Typical Western European and Chinese Regions: Values and Dilemmas," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, May.
    12. Morgan, Edward A. & Osborne, Natalie & Mackey, Brendan, 2022. "Evaluating planning without plans: Principles, criteria and indicators for effective forest landscape approaches," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    13. Peter J. Ellery & Jane Ellery, 2019. "Strengthening Community Sense of Place through Placemaking," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(2), pages 237-248.
    14. Frantál, Bohumil & Van der Horst, Dan & Martinát, Stanislav & Schmitz, Serge & Teschner, Na´ama & Silva, Luis & Golobic, Mojca & Roth, Michael, 2018. "Spatial targeting, synergies and scale: Exploring the criteria of smart practices for siting renewable energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 85-93.
    15. Yirga Ayele, Bosena & Megento, Tebarek Lika & Habetemariam, Kumelachew Yeshitela, 2021. "‘‘Governance of green infrastructure planning in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia’’," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    16. Anna Mazur & Krystyna Kurowska & Mariusz Antolak & Tomasz Podciborski, 2024. "Transformation of the Cultural Landscape in the Central Part of the Historical Region of Warmia in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-20, July.
    17. Maria Rosa Trovato & Salvatore Giuffrida & Giuseppe Collesano & Ludovica Nasca & Filippo Gagliano, 2023. "People, Property and Territory: Valuation Perspectives and Economic Prospects for the Trazzera Regional Property Reuse in Sicily," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-38, March.
    18. Judith Nzyoka & Peter A. Minang & Priscilla Wainaina & Lalisa Duguma & Lucas Manda & Emmanuel Temu, 2021. "Landscape Governance and Sustainable Land Restoration: Evidence from Shinyanga, Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-24, July.

    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:9:y:2020:i:1:p:6-:d:303909. 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.