IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i23p15698-d984028.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Voluntary Field Water Management Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Projects Based on a Context–Attitude–Behavior Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Yiyuan Rong

    (School of Arts and Sciences, Guangxi Open University, Nanning 530023, China)

  • Yanping Hou

    (School of Resources, Environment and Materials, Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, China)

Abstract

The development of the greenhouse gas (GHGs) voluntary emission reduction market has created a new way for all agricultural GHGs emission reduction projects. Figuring out how to drive farmers to participate in the market is the key to the development of the agricultural voluntary emission reduction project mechanism. Current research on farmers’ participation in voluntary emission reduction projects has mostly been conducted from the perspective of the economic, social, and ecological benefits of the project and lacks research on analyzing farmers’ willingness to participate in combination with specific GHGs operational mechanisms. To find out how the operational mechanism of the field water management voluntary emission reduction (FWMVER) projects influences farmers’ willingness to participate in the project, this study constructed the attitude–context–behavior theoretical framework to consider the FWMVER operational mechanism. Based on the survey data of 789 rice farmers in GuangXi, China, the structural equation model (SEM) was adopted to analyze the impact of social networks, social trust, social norms, profit expectations, cost expectations, and satisfaction with the government in relation to the farmers’ willingness to participate in FWMVER projects. Results showed that social networks, social trust, social norms, profit expectations, cost expectations, and satisfaction with the government had significant impacts on the willingness of farmers to participate in FWMVER projects. Satisfaction with the government can effectively regulate the profit expectations and cost expectations for farmers to participate in the FWMVER projects. Policy implications were proposed based on analytical results to advise local governments to develop agricultural carbon finance, to improve public services in agricultural production, and to encourage establishing non-governmental organizations in rural areas involved in voluntary agricultural GHGs emission reduction projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Yiyuan Rong & Yanping Hou, 2022. "Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Voluntary Field Water Management Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Projects Based on a Context–Attitude–Behavior Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:23:p:15698-:d:984028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/15698/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/23/15698/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geussens, K. & Van den Broeck, G. & Vanderhaegen, K. & Verbist, B. & Maertens, M., 2019. "Farmers’ perspectives on payments for ecosystem services in Uganda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 316-327.
    2. Delacote, Philippe & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Simonet, Gabriela, 2022. "Revisiting the location bias and additionality of REDD+ projects: the role of project proponents status and certification," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    3. Castro-Nunez, Augusto & Mertz, Ole & Quintero, Marcela, 2016. "Propensity of farmers to conserve forest within REDD+ projects in areas affected by armed-conflict," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 22-30.
    4. Ke He & Junbiao Zhang & Junhui Feng & Ting Hu & Lu Zhang, 2016. "The Impact of Social Capital on farmers' Willingness to Reuse Agricultural Waste for Sustainable Development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(2), pages 101-108, March.
    5. Ickowitz, Amy & Sills, Erin & de Sassi, Claudio, 2017. "Estimating Smallholder Opportunity Costs of REDD+: A Pantropical Analysis from Households to Carbon and Back," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 15-26.
    6. Loaiza, T. & Nehren, U. & Gerold, G., 2016. "REDD+ implementation in the Ecuadorian Amazon: Why land configuration and common-pool resources management matter," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 67-79.
    7. Maria Alló & Maria L. Loureiro & Eva Iglesias, 2015. "Farmers' Preferences and Social Capital Regarding Agri‐environmental Schemes to Protect Birds," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 672-689, September.
    8. Garnett, Tara, 2011. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 23-32.
    9. Brouwer, Nils & de Haan, Jakob, 2022. "The impact of providing information about the ECB’s instruments on inflation expectations and trust in the ECB: Experimental evidence," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    10. Sanz-Blas, Silvia & Buzova, Daniela & Pérez-Ruiz, Pilar, 2021. "Building relational worth in an online social community through virtual structural embeddedness and relational embeddedness," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    11. Ba, Feng & Liu, Jinlong & Zhu, Ting & Liu, Yonggong & Zhao, Jiacheng, 2020. "CDM forest carbon sequestration projects in western China: An analysis using actor-centered power theory," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    12. Qiang Wang & Thomas Dogot & Guosheng Wu & Xianlei Huang & Changbin Yin, 2019. "Residents’ Willingness for Centralized Biogas Production in Hebei and Shandong Provinces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-16, December.
    13. Garnett, Tara, 2011. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 23-32, January.
    14. Cerbu, Gillian A. & Sonwa, Denis J. & Pokorny, Benno, 2013. "Opportunities for and capacity barriers to the implementation of REDD+ projects with smallholder farmers: Case study of Awae and Akok, Centre and South Regions, Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 60-70.
    15. Lindhjem, Henrik & Mitani, Yohei, 2012. "Forest owners’ willingness to accept compensation for voluntary conservation: A contingent valuation approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 290-302.
    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. Yinrong Chen & Yanqing Qin & Qingying Zhu, 2023. "Study on the Impact of Social Capital on Agricultural Land Transfer Decision: Based on 1017 Questionnaires in Hubei Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, 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. Tyllianakis, Emmanouil & Martin-Ortega, Julia, 2021. "Agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity and environmental protection: How we are not yet “hitting the right keys”," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Dorward, Leejiah J., 2012. "Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? A comment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 463-466.
    3. Yue, Shen & Munir, Irfan Ullah & Hyder, Shabir & Nassani, Abdelmohsen A. & Qazi Abro, Muhammad Moinuddin & Zaman, Khalid, 2020. "Sustainable food production, forest biodiversity and mineral pricing: Interconnected global issues," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    4. Maiyar, Lohithaksha M & Thakkar, Jitesh J, 2019. "Environmentally conscious logistics planning for food grain industry considering wastages employing multi objective hybrid particle swarm optimization," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 220-248.
    5. Danilo Bertoni & Daniele Cavicchioli & Franco Donzelli & Giovanni Ferrazzi & Dario G. Frisio & Roberto Pretolani & Elena Claire Ricci & Vera Ventura, 2018. "Recent Contributions of Agricultural Economics Research in the Field of Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    6. Ujué Fresán & Maximino Alfredo Mejia & Winston J Craig & Karen Jaceldo-Siegl & Joan Sabaté, 2019. "Meat Analogs from Different Protein Sources: A Comparison of Their Sustainability and Nutritional Content," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-10, June.
    7. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Morena Bruno & Marianne Thomsen & Federico Maria Pulselli & Nicoletta Patrizi & Michele Marini & Dario Caro, 2019. "The carbon footprint of Danish diets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 489-507, October.
    9. Ancuta Isbasoiu & Pierre-Alain Jayet & Stéphane De Cara, 2021. "Increasing food production and mitigating agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union: impacts of carbon pricing and calorie production targeting," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(2), pages 409-440, April.
    10. Susana G. Azevedo & Minelle E. Silva & João C. O. Matias & Gustavo P. Dias, 2018. "The Influence of Collaboration Initiatives on the Sustainability of the Cashew Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-29, June.
    11. Tjärnemo, Heléne & Södahl, Liv, 2015. "Swedish food retailers promoting climate smarter food choices—Trapped between visions and reality?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 130-139.
    12. Peter Scarborough & Paul Appleby & Anja Mizdrak & Adam Briggs & Ruth Travis & Kathryn Bradbury & Timothy Key, 2014. "Dietary greenhouse gas emissions of meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 179-192, July.
    13. Bonnet, Céline & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Réquillart, Vincent & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Viewpoint: Regulating meat consumption to improve health, the environment and animal welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    14. Nina Repar & Pierrick Jan & Thomas Nemecek & Dunja Dux & Martina Alig Ceesay & Reiner Doluschitz, 2016. "Local versus Global Environmental Performance of Dairying and Their Link to Economic Performance: A Case Study of Swiss Mountain Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
    15. Panzone, Luca A. & Ulph, Alistair & Zizzo, Daniel John & Hilton, Denis & Clear, Adrian, 2021. "The impact of environmental recall and carbon taxation on the carbon footprint of supermarket shopping," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    16. Rohmer, S.U.K. & Gerdessen, J.C. & Claassen, G.D.H., 2019. "Sustainable supply chain design in the food system with dietary considerations: A multi-objective analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1149-1164.
    17. Vázquez-Rowe, Ian & Villanueva-Rey, Pedro & Moreira, Mª Teresa & Feijoo, Gumersindo, 2013. "The role of consumer purchase and post-purchase decision-making in sustainable seafood consumption. A Spanish case study using carbon footprinting," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 94-102.
    18. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Alberto Pardossi, 2020. "Improving Policy Evidence Base for Agricultural Sustainability and Food Security: A Content Analysis of Life Cycle Assessment Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-29, February.
    19. Halloran, Afton & Clement, Jesper & Kornum, Niels & Bucatariu, Camelia & Magid, Jakob, 2014. "Addressing food waste reduction in Denmark," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 294-301.
    20. Nathalie Gröfke & Valérie Duplat & Christopher Wickert & Brian Tjemkes, 2021. "A Multi-Stakeholder Perspective on Food Labelling for Environmental Sustainability: Attitudes, Perceived Barriers, and Solution Approaches towards the “Traffic Light Index”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-23, January.

    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:23:p:15698-:d:984028. 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.