IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i21p15227-d1266435.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Farmers’ Cognition of and Satisfaction with Policy Affect Willingness of Returning Straw to Field: Based on Evolutionary Game Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Hong Chen

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China)

  • Haoyan Wang

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China)

  • Sishu Zhou

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China)

Abstract

As an important measure to promote the black soil protection strategy, returning straw to the fields is the choice of government policy to affect the decision-making behavior of farmers, and the policy implementation process is a dynamic game equilibrium process between farmers and the government. In order to explore the influence of policies on farmers’ straw-returning decision-making and stability processes, this paper used a logit model to analyze the influencing factors on farmers’ straw-returning decision-making behavior based on the survey data of 397 farmers in Hailun City, Heilongjiang Province. This study also constructs the evolutionary game model between farmers and government, carrying out a stability strategy analysis and numerical simulation. The results evidence that farmers’ cognition of fertilization technology, ecological protection, policy satisfaction and cognition of straw returning recipients have a significant negative influence on their willingness to return to the field, and the effect intensity decreases successively. What is more, cognition of crop disease resistance has a positive effect on the willingness of returning straw to the field. It is found that the game balancing process of farmers’ behavior and government straw returning policy evolution can be divided into three stages. At present, China’s straw returning policy is in the intermediate stage, and government needs to provide comprehensive compensation for returning straw to the field according to local conditions such as farmers’ willingness, crop conditions and so on.

Suggested Citation

  • Hong Chen & Haoyan Wang & Sishu Zhou, 2023. "Farmers’ Cognition of and Satisfaction with Policy Affect Willingness of Returning Straw to Field: Based on Evolutionary Game Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:21:p:15227-:d:1266435
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/21/15227/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/21/15227/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nancy Anders Norton & Tim T. Phipps & Jerald J. Fletcher, 1994. "Role Of Voluntary Programs In Agricultural Nonpoint Pollution Policy," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 12(1), pages 113-121, January.
    2. Joyce Willock & Ian J. Deary & Gareth Edwards‐Jones & Gavin J. Gibson & Murray J. McGregor & Alistair Sutherland & J. Barry Dent & Oliver Morgan & Robert Grieve, 1999. "The Role of Attitudes and Objectives in Farmer Decision Making: Business and Environmentally‐Oriented Behaviour in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 286-303, May.
    3. Wang, Zhanwu & Wang, Zhenfeng & Tahir, Nadeem & Wang, Heng & Li, Jin & Xu, Guangyin, 2020. "Study of synergetic development in straw power supply chain: Straw price and government subsidy as incentive," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    4. Zhaoxu Liu & Jinghua Sun & Weiya Zhu & Yanbo Qu, 2021. "Exploring Impacts of Perceived Value and Government Regulation on Farmers’ Willingness to Adopt Wheat Straw Incorporation in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Henning Best, 2008. "Organic agriculture and the conventionalization hypothesis: A case study from West Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(1), pages 95-106, January.
    2. Qianchun Dai & Kequn Cheng, 2022. "What Drives the Adoption of Agricultural Green Production Technologies? An Extension of TAM in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    3. Francisco J. André & Laura Riesgo, 2006. "A Duality Procedure to Elicit Nonlinear Multiattribute Utility Functions," Working Papers 06.02, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    4. Peter Howley & Emma Dillon & Thia Hennessy, 2014. "It’s not all about the money: understanding farmers’ labor allocation choices," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(2), pages 261-271, June.
    5. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Gutiérrez-Martín, Carlos & Riesgo, Laura, 2016. "Modeling at farm level: Positive Multi-Attribute Utility Programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 17-27.
    6. Hermann, Daniel & Musshoff, Oliver & Agethen, Katrin, 2014. "I will never switch sides: an experimental approach to determine drivers for investment decisions of conventional and organic hog farmers," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183084, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen, 2018. "Heterogeneous economic and behavioural drivers of the Farm afforestation decision," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 63-74.
    8. Lang, Le Dang & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar & Hieu, Hoang Ngoc & Ha, Nguyen Minh & Gaur, Jighyasu, 2023. "The role of structural social capital in driving social-oriented sustainable agricultural entrepreneurship," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    9. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    10. Joost M. E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2003. "The Shape of Utility Functions and Organizational Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1251-1263, September.
    11. Riesgo, Laura & Gómez-Limón, José A., 2005. "Multi-Criteria Policy Scenarios Analysis for Public Management of Irrigated Agriculture," 89th Seminar, February 2-5, 2005, Parma, Italy 239276, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. André, Francisco J. & Herrero, Inés & Riesgo, Laura, 2010. "A modified DEA model to estimate the importance of objectives with an application to agricultural economics," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 371-382, October.
    13. Ondersteijn, C.J.M. & Giesen, G.W.J. & Huirne, R.B.M., 2006. "Perceived environmental uncertainty in Dutch dairy farming: The effect of external farm context on strategic choice," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 205-226, June.
    14. Lefebvre, Marianne & Midler, Estelle & Bontems, Philippe, 2020. "Adoption of environmentally-friendly agricultural practices with background risk: experimental evidence," TSE Working Papers 20-1079, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    15. Murphy, Geraldine & Meredith, David, 2015. "A typology of cattle farmers in Ireland: An overview of data, method and indicators," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212518, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. McGregor, Murray J. & Rola-Rubzen, Maria Fay & Murray-Prior, Roy B. & Dymond, John & Bent, Martin J.M., 2003. "Farm Management - Bugger the roots, where is the future?," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57923, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    17. José A. Gómez-Limón & Yolanda Martínez Martínez, 2004. "Multicriteria Modelling of Irrigation Water Market at Basin Level," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/26, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    18. Zhang, Huan & Duan, Xianglei & Jiang, Jianli, 2024. "Fixed rebate subsidy vs. unit price subsidy: Incentive effect on the biomass power supply chain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    19. Geoghegan, Cathal & Kinsella, Anne & O’Donoghue, Cathal, 2015. "Policy Drivers of Land Mobility in Irish Agriculture," 150th Seminar, October 22-23, 2015, Edinburgh, Scotland 212658, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Bayard, Budry & Jolly, Curtis, 2007. "Environmental behavior structure and socio-economic conditions of hillside farmers: A multiple-group structural equation modeling approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 433-440, May.

    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:15:y:2023:i:21:p:15227-:d:1266435. 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.