IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i14p3821-d247867.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Fallow Farming Decision-Making Behavior of Farmers Based on Hawk-Dove Game Theory: The Case of Guizhou Province

Author

Listed:
  • Hualin Xie

    (Institute of Ecological Civilization, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330013, China)

  • Qing Wu

    (Institute of Ecological Civilization, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330013, China)

Abstract

Implementing a land fallow policy is of great significance for ensuring China’s food security and promoting the improvement of the ecological environment. The implementation of a fallow project involves different stakeholders. Farmers are the main participants in the fallow project. The decision of farmers to practice fallow is the key factor for the successful development of the fallow project. Therefore, this study theoretically reveals the decision-making mechanism of farmers’ participation in cultivated land fallow by utilizing the hawk-dove evolutionary game theory among farmers and explains some challenges in the implementation of fallow in Guizhou Province. We drew the following conclusions: (1) The behavior of farmers will be affected by other farmers in the same situation, and the effects of mutual incentives and imitations between the groups of farmers are affected by their interests; (2) in the fallow project, the rate of choosing either fallow or unfallow depends on the ratio of fallow income to planting income. If the income of participating in fallow is higher, the demonstration effect of farmers participating in fallow is stronger, and the strategy of continued cultivation is adopted. The fewer unfallow farmers there are, the more consolidated the results of fallow will be; and (3) the government should protect the income of farmers after fallow as much as possible, implement flexible subsidy policies, and formulate corresponding policies to successfully consolidate the fallow results.

Suggested Citation

  • Hualin Xie & Qing Wu, 2019. "Analysis of Fallow Farming Decision-Making Behavior of Farmers Based on Hawk-Dove Game Theory: The Case of Guizhou Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:14:p:3821-:d:247867
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3821/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3821/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. JunJie Wu, 2005. "Slippage Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program: Reply," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(1), pages 251-254.
    2. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    3. Xie, Hualin & Wang, Wei & Zhang, Xinmin, 2018. "Evolutionary game and simulation of management strategies of fallow cultivated land: A case study in Hunan province, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 86-97.
    4. Ruben N. Lubowski & Michael J. Roberts, 2005. "How Cost-Effective Are Land Retirement Auctions? Estimating the Difference between Payments and Willingness to Accept in the Conservation Reserve Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1239-1247.
    5. Ibendahl, Gregory A., 2004. "Risk-Adjusted Comparison of Conservation Reserve Program Payments Versus Production Payments for a Corn-Soybean Farmer," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-10, August.
    6. Xie, Hualin & Cheng, Lingjuan & Lu, Hua, 2018. "Farmers’ responses to the winter wheat fallow policy in the groundwater funnel area of China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 195-204.
    7. Ibendahl, Gregory, 2004. "Risk-Adjusted Comparison of Conservation Reserve Program Payments Versus Production Payments for a Corn-Soybean Farmer," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 425-434, August.
    8. Luanne Lohr & Timothy A. Park, 1995. "Utility-Consistent Discrete-Continuous Choices in Soil Conservation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(4), pages 474-490.
    9. Iain Fraser & Robert Waschik, 2005. "Agricultural Land Retirement and Slippage: Lessons from an Australian Case Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    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. Shengyue Fan & Chenxi Zhao & Shuai Zha, 2022. "Analysis of the Impact of Policy Instruments on Payment for Grasslands Ecosystem Services (PGES) Implementation: A Case Study from Northwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-15, 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. Xie, Hualin & Jin, Shengtian, 2019. "Evolutionary Game Analysis of Fallow Farmland Behaviors of Different Types of Farmers and Local Governments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    2. Assogba, Noel Perceval & Zhang, Daowei, 2022. "The conservation reserve program and timber prices in the southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    3. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    4. Lu, Hua & Xie, Hualin & Lv, Tiangui & Yao, Guanrong, 2019. "Determinants of cultivated land recuperation in ecologically damaged areas in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 160-166.
    5. Chen, Xin & Jiang, Li & Zhang, Guoliang & Meng, Lijun & Pan, Zhihua & Lun, Fei & An, Pingli, 2021. "Green-depressing cropping system: A referential land use practice for fallow to ensure a harmonious human-land relationship in the farming-pastoral ecotone of northern China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    6. Miguel Cantillo, 2015. "Dynamic Investment with Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard," Working Papers 201501, Universidad de Costa Rica, revised Mar 2015.
    7. He, Yafen & Xie, Hualin & Peng, Chaozhong, 2020. "Analyzing the behavioural mechanism of farmland abandonment in the hilly mountainous areas in China from the perspective of farming household diversity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. David A. Fleming, 2014. "Slippage effects of land-based policies: Evaluating the Conservation Reserve Program using satellite imagery," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93, pages 167-178, November.
    9. Yunxian Yan & Lingqing Wang & Jun Yang, 2022. "The Willingness and Technology Preferences of Farmers and Their Influencing Factors for Soil Remediation," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Zhifei Liu & Qianru Chen & Hualin Xie, 2018. "Influence of the Farmer’s Livelihood Assets on Livelihood Strategies in the Western Mountainous Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-12, March.
    11. Xie, Xianxiong & Cui, Yu & Yao, Liuyang & Ni, Qi & Khan, Sufyan Ullah & Zhao, Minjuan, 2022. "Does fallow policy affect rural household income in poor areas? A quasi-experimental evidence from fallow pilot area in Northwest China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    12. You, Heyuan & Hu, Xiaowei & Wu, Yizhou, 2018. "Farmland use intensity changes in response to rural transition in Zhejiang province, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 350-361.
    13. Qi, Xiaoxing & Dang, Heping, 2018. "Addressing the dual challenges of food security and environmental sustainability during rural livelihood transitions in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 199-208.
    14. Juan Robalino & Alexander Pfaff & Laura Villalobos, 2015. "Deforestation spillovers from Costa Rican protected areas," Working Papers 201502, Universidad de Costa Rica, revised Sep 2015.
    15. Yang, Wanhong & Bryan, Brett A. & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Ward, John R. & Wells, Geoff & Crossman, Neville D. & Connor, Jeffrey D., 2010. "A conservation industry for sustaining natural capital and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 680-689, February.
    16. Qianru Chen & Hualin Xie & Qunli Zhai, 2022. "Management Policy of Farmers’ Cultivated Land Abandonment Behavior Based on Evolutionary Game and Simulation Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, February.
    17. Nobuhiko Fuwa & Asa Jose U. Sajise, 2009. "Exploring Environmental Services Incentive Policies for the Philippines Rice Sector: The Case of Intra-Species Agrobiodiversity Conservation," Natural Resource Management and Policy, in: Leslie Lipper & Takumi Sakuyama & Randy Stringer & David Zilberman (ed.), Payment for Environmental Services in Agricultural Landscapes, chapter 10, pages 221-238, Springer.
    18. Breustedt, Gunnar & Schulz, Norbert & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2013. "Kalibrierung von Vertragsnaturschutzprogrammen mittels eines zweistufigen Discrete-Choice-Experimentes," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 62(04), pages 1-17, November.
    19. Ouellet, F. & Mundler, P. & Dupras, J. & Ruiz, J., 2020. "“Community developed and farmer delivered.” An analysis of the spatial and relational proximities of the Alternative Land Use Services program in Ontario," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    20. Author-Name: Luca Di Corato & Cesare Dosi & Michele Moretto, 2014. "Bidding for Conservation Contracts," Working Papers 2014.65, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:14:p:3821-:d:247867. 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.