IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i19p12140-d924893.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The National Target Program for New Rural Development in Vietnam: An Understanding of People’s Participation and Its Determinants

Author

Listed:
  • Diep Thanh Tung

    (School of Economics and Law, Tra Vinh University, Tra Vinh 87000, Vietnam)

  • Le Thi Thu Diem

    (School of Economics and Law, Tra Vinh University, Tra Vinh 87000, Vietnam)

  • Do Xuan Luan

    (Faculty of Economics and Rural Development, Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry, Thai Nguyen 24119, Vietnam)

  • Nguyen Hoang Khanh Linh

    (International School, Hue University, Hue 530000, Vietnam)

Abstract

This study proposes a participation scale of people in the national new rural program, namely the levels of know, discuss, implement, and monitor identifies participation and their determinants by employing Tobit regression models. From a dataset of 508 household respondents collected in seven regions across countries, we find that the highest level of participation is still at the level of know, while the lowest level is at the level of monitor. Additionally, in some areas of the program, people are mobilized to participate in certain activities, even though they do not have a good understanding nor thoroughly discuss how to carry it out. Considering the findings, we recommend increasing the active participation of the people in the bottom-up approach, associated with the practical needs of the people and the program’s sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Diep Thanh Tung & Le Thi Thu Diem & Do Xuan Luan & Nguyen Hoang Khanh Linh, 2022. "The National Target Program for New Rural Development in Vietnam: An Understanding of People’s Participation and Its Determinants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-17, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12140-:d:924893
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12140/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12140/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agrawal, Arun & Gupta, Krishna, 2005. "Decentralization and Participation: The Governance of Common Pool Resources in Nepal's Terai," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 1101-1114, July.
    2. Dolisca, Frito & McDaniel, Josh M. & Teeter, Lawrence D., 2007. "Farmers' perceptions towards forests: A case study from Haiti," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(6), pages 704-712, February.
    3. Rifkin, Susan B. & Muller, Frits & Bichmann, Wolfgang, 1988. "Primary health care: on measuring participation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 931-940, January.
    4. repec:asi:ajosrd:2012:p:422-446 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Tianlan Fu & Sanqin Mao, 2022. "Individual Social Capital and Community Participation: An Empirical Analysis of Guangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-14, June.
    6. Edi Defrancesco & Paola Gatto & Ford Runge & Samuele Trestini, 2008. "Factors Affecting Farmers’ Participation in Agri‐environmental Measures: A Northern Italian Perspective," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 114-131, February.
    7. Gerard Wynn & Bob Crabtree & Jacqueline Potts, 2001. "Modelling Farmer Entry into the Environmentally Sensitive Area Schemes in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 65-82, January.
    8. Sarah C White, 1996. "Depoliticising development: The uses and abuses of participation," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 6-15.
    9. Young-joo Ahn & Jeanne Bessiere, 2022. "The Role of Participative Leadership in Empowerment and Resident Participation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Dang Ngoc Toan, 2012. "Participation in Development: A Case Study on Local Participation in Rural Water Supply and Sanitation in Vietnam," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 2(3), pages 422-446.
    11. G. A. A. Wossink, 2003. "Biodiversity conservation by farmers: analysis of actual and contingent participation," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 30(4), pages 461-485, December.
    12. Toan, Dang Ngoc, 2012. "Participation in Development: A Case Study on Local Participation in Rural Water Supply and Sanitation in Vietnam," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society (AESS), vol. 2(03), pages 1-25, 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. Xiaojuan Yang & Weiwei Li & Ping Zhang & Hua Chen & Min Lai & Sidong Zhao, 2023. "The Dynamics and Driving Mechanisms of Rural Revitalization in Western China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-26, July.

    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. Whitten, Stuart M. & Reeson, Andrew & Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2013. "Designing conservation tenders to support landholder participation: A framework and case study assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 82-92.
    2. Alló, Maria & Igleasias, Eva & Loureiro, Maria L., 2013. "Farmers’ preferences and social capital towards agri-environmental schemes for protecting birds," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150620, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Stephen Hynes & Eoghan Garvey, 2009. "Modelling Farmers’ Participation in an Agri‐environmental Scheme using Panel Data: An Application to the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Ireland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 546-562, September.
    4. Mäntymaa, Erkki & Pouta, Eija & Hiedanpää, Juha, 2021. "Forest owners' interest in participation and their compensation claims in voluntary landscape value trading: The case of wind power parks in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    5. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Bojnec, Štefan, 2015. "Farm size and participation in agri-environmental measures: Farm-level evidence from Slovenia," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46, pages 273-282.
    6. Campus, Daniela, 2014. "Evaluating agri-environmental schemes. The case of Tuscany," 2014 Third Congress, June 25-27, 2014, Alghero, Italy 172969, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    7. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Bojnec, Štefan, 2016. "Sustainable participation behaviour in agri-environmental measures," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 138, pages 47-58.
    8. Canessa, Carolin & Ait-Sidhoum, Amer & Wunder, Sven & Sauer, Johannes, 2024. "What matters most in determining European farmers’ participation in agri-environmental measures? A systematic review of the quantitative literature," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    9. Stephen Hynes & Eoghan Garvey, 2008. "Modelling Structural State Dependency in Agri-Environmental Schemes," Working Papers 0827, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    10. Murphy, Geraldine & Hynes, Stephen & Murphy, Eithne & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Green, Stuart, 2011. "Assessing the compatibility of farmland biodiversity and habitats to the specifications of agri-environmental schemes using a multinomial logit approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 111-121.
    11. Graversgaard, Morten & Jacobsen, Brian H. & Hoffmann, Carl Christian & Dalgaard, Tommy & Odgaard, Mette Vestergaard & Kjaergaard, Charlotte & Powell, Neil & Strand, John A. & Feuerbach, Peter & Tonder, 2021. "Policies for wetlands implementation in Denmark and Sweden – historical lessons and emerging issues," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    12. Doris Läpple, 2010. "Adoption and Abandonment of Organic Farming: An Empirical Investigation of the Irish Drystock Sector," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 697-714, September.
    13. Ioanna Grammatikopoulou & Eija Pouta & Sami Myyrä, 2016. "Exploring the determinants for adopting water conservation measures. What is the tendency of landowners when the resource is already at risk?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(6), pages 993-1014, June.
    14. Cullen, Paula & Bougard, Maxime & Heery, Declan & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary, 2017. "Farmers with Attitudes (to the Environment and Agri-environment Schemes)," 91st Annual Conference, April 24-26, 2017, Royal Dublin Society, Dublin, Ireland 258648, Agricultural Economics Society.
    15. Xavier Vollenweider & Salvatore Di Falco & Cathal O�Donoghue, 2011. "Risk preferences and voluntary agrienvironmental schemes: does risk aversion explain the uptake of the Rural Environment Protection Scheme?," GRI Working Papers 48, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    16. Emadul Islam & Haris Bin Abd Wahab & Odessa Gonzalez Benson, 2022. "Community Participation in Disaster Recovery Programs: A Study of a Coastal Area in Bangladesh," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(5), pages 2438-2462, October.
    17. Christensen, Tove & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Nielsen, Helle Oersted & Mørkbak, Morten Raun & Hasler, Berit & Denver, Sigrid, 2011. "Determinants of farmers' willingness to participate in subsidy schemes for pesticide-free buffer zones--A choice experiment study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1558-1564, June.
    18. Unay Gailhard, Ilkay & Bavorova, Miroslava & Pirscher, Frauke, 2012. "The Influence of Communication Frequency with Social Network Actors on the Continuous Innovation Adoption: Organic Farmers in Germany," 131st Seminar, September 18-19, 2012, Prague, Czech Republic 135786, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Alessandra La Notte & Sonia Marongiu & Mauro Masiero & Pietro Molfetta & Riccardo Molignoni & Luca Cesaro, 2015. "Livestock and Ecosystem Services: An Exploratory Approach to Assess Agri-Environment-Climate Payments of RDP in Trentino," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-23, August.
    20. María Pérez Urdiales & Alfons Oude Lansink & Alan Wall, 2016. "Eco-efficiency Among Dairy Farmers: The Importance of Socio-economic Characteristics and Farmer Attitudes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(4), pages 559-574, August.

    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:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12140-:d:924893. 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.