IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i8p6743-d1125299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis of the Factors Affecting Satisfaction with the Policy of Ecological Forest Rangers

Author

Listed:
  • Yonghua Zhang

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

  • Xue Wang

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

  • Shenwei Wan

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

  • Hongge Zhu

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

Abstract

The policy of ecological forest rangers (EFRs) is one of the important policy tools to consolidate the achievements of poverty alleviation in China. An in-depth analysis of the factors affecting the satisfaction of EFRs, and targeted improvement of related issues are conducive to the promotion of the policy implementation effect, which is of great significance to further consolidate the achievements of ecological poverty alleviation, promoting rural revitalization. Based on the field survey data of 412 ecological forest rangers in Qianshan City, Anhui Province, China, this paper uses the multivariable interaction fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis method to explore the level of ecological forest rangers’ policy satisfaction and the associated influencing factors. The results showed that (1) the overall evaluation of the ecological ranger groups’ satisfaction with EFRs was between “general” and “satisfied”; (2) the lack of policy identity and information mastery are the necessary conditions for low and high satisfaction of EFRs, respectively; (3) perception of implementation played a core role in high policy satisfaction, while a lack of information mastery and perception of implementation were the core variables that caused low policy satisfaction. Through comprehensive comparison, it was found that the conditional variables of policy cognition had an important impact on both high and low policy satisfaction. Enhancing the information grasp degree of ecological forest rangers and improving the perception level of policy implementation was the best strategy to effectively improve the satisfaction levels of ecological forest rangers with the policy. By exploring the influencing factors of the satisfaction with the current ecological forest ranger policy and analyzing the comprehensive effect of the configuration of each factor, this paper provides a reference for further improving the ecological forest ranger policy and consolidating the ecological poverty alleviation results in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Yonghua Zhang & Xue Wang & Shenwei Wan & Hongge Zhu, 2023. "Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis of the Factors Affecting Satisfaction with the Policy of Ecological Forest Rangers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6743-:d:1125299
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6743/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6743/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shir, Nadav & Nikolaev, Boris N. & Wincent, Joakim, 2019. "Entrepreneurship and well-being: The role of psychological autonomy, competence, and relatedness," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1-1.
    2. Gakou-Kakeu, Josiane & Di Gregorio, Monica & Paavola, Jouni & Sonwa, Denis Jean, 2022. "REDD+ policy implementation and institutional interplay: Evidence from three pilot projects in Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    3. Bhattarai, Sushma & Regmi, Bimal Raj & Pant, Basant & Uprety, Dharam Raj & Maraseni, Tek, 2021. "Sustaining ecosystem based adaptation: The lessons from policy and practices in Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    4. Hug, Simon, 2013. "Qualitative Comparative Analysis: How Inductive Use and Measurement Error Lead to Problematic Inference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 252-265, April.
    5. Mingyue Li & Pujie Zhao & Lianbei Wu & Kai Chen, 2021. "Effects of Value Perception, Environmental Regulation and Their Interaction on the Improvement of Herdsmen’s Grassland Ecological Policy Satisfaction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-23, March.
    6. Jie Pang & Leshan Jin & Yujie Yang & Heng Li & Zongling Chu & Fei Ding, 2022. "Policy Cognition, Household Income and Farmers’ Satisfaction: Evidence from a Wetland Ecological Compensation Project in the Poyang Lake Area at the Micro Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-14, September.
    7. Di Yang & Weixin Luan & Jun Yang & Bing Xue & Xiaoling Zhang & Hui Wang & Feng Pian, 2022. "The contribution of data-driven poverty alleviation funds in achieving mid-21st-Century multidimensional poverty alleviation planning," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Bingtao Qin & Yongwei Yu & Liming Ge & Le Yang & Yuanguo Guo, 2022. "Does Eco-Compensation Alleviate Rural Poverty? New Evidence from National Key Ecological Function Areas in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-21, September.
    9. Li, Jiaxin & Wang, Zihan & Cheng, Xin & Shuai, Jing & Shuai, Chuanmin & Liu, Jing, 2020. "Has solar PV achieved the national poverty alleviation goals? Empirical evidence from the performances of 52 villages in rural China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    10. Bulte, Erwin H. & Lipper, Leslie & Stringer, Randy & Zilberman, David, 2008. "Payments for ecosystem services and poverty reduction: concepts, issues, and empirical perspectives," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 245-254, June.
    11. Wang, Wenxiong & Lan, Yuanqin & Wang, Xu, 2021. "Impact of livelihood capital endowment on poverty alleviation of households under rural land consolidation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    12. Li, Kang & Lloyd, Bob & Liang, Xiao-Jie & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2014. "Energy poor or fuel poor: What are the differences?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 476-481.
    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. Aaron Kinyu Hoshide, 2023. "Sustainable Development Agricultural Economics and Policy: Intensification versus Diversification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-4, June.
    2. Ying Yan & Abdol Aziz Shahraki, 2023. "Exploring the Mutual Relationships between Public Space and Social Satisfaction with Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-15, May.

    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. Hong Sun & Feng Dai & Wenxing Shen, 2023. "How China’s Ecological Compensation Policy Improves Farmers’ Income?—A Test of Environmental Effects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-21, April.
    2. Do, Manh Hung & Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Grote, Ulrike, 2023. "Land consolidation, rice production, and agricultural transformation: Evidence from household panel data for Vietnam," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 157-173.
    3. Camboni, Riccardo & Corsini, Alberto & Miniaci, Raffaele & Valbonesi, Paola, 2021. "Mapping fuel poverty risk at the municipal level. A small-scale analysis of Italian Energy Performance Certificate, census and survey data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    4. Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, Edward & Boyer, Christopher & English, Burton, 2018. "Targeting Payments for Ecosystem Services Given Ecological and Economic Objectives," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266502, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Ibrahim Yilmaz, 2023. "A Hybrid DEA–Fuzzy COPRAS Approach to the Evaluation of Renewable Energy: A Case of Wind Farms in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Yosr Ben Tahar & Nada Rejeb & Adnane Maalaoui & Sascha Kraus & Paul Westhead & Paul Jones, 2023. "Emotional demands and entrepreneurial burnout: the role of autonomy and job satisfaction," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 701-716, August.
    7. Jessie Gevaert & Kim Bosmans & Deborah De Moortel & Christophe Vanroelen, 2023. "“I Thought It Would Have Been More about Only the Fun Stuff”—Exploring the Expectation–Reality Gap among the Novice Solo Self-Employed," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-16, February.
    8. Zhang, Zumeng & Ding, Liping & Wang, Chaofan & Dai, Qiyao & Shi, Yin & Zhao, Yujia & Zhu, Yuxuan, 2022. "Do operation and maintenance contracts help photovoltaic poverty alleviation power stations perform better?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    9. Inessa Love & Boris Nikolaev & Chandra Dhakal, 2024. "The well-being of women entrepreneurs: the role of gender inequality and gender roles," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 325-352, January.
    10. Manchiraju, Srikant, 2020. "Psychometric evaluation of the Ryff’s Scale of psychological wellbeing in self-identified American entrepreneurs," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    11. Xiaoyu Yu & Xiaotong Meng & Laura Stanley & Franz W. Kellermanns, 2024. "Self-employment and life satisfaction: The contingent role of formal institutions," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 135-163, June.
    12. Du, Hua & Han, Qi & de Vries, Bauke & Sun, Jun, 2024. "Community solar PV adoption in residential apartment buildings: A case study on influencing factors and incentive measures in Wuhan," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 354(PA).
    13. Ye, Yuxiang & Koch, Steven F., 2021. "Measuring energy poverty in South Africa based on household required energy consumption," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    14. Abbas, Khizar & Li, Shixiang & Xu, Deyi & Baz, Khan & Rakhmetova, Aigerim, 2020. "Do socioeconomic factors determine household multidimensional energy poverty? Empirical evidence from South Asia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    15. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    16. Martin Persson, U. & Alpízar, Francisco, 2013. "Conditional Cash Transfers and Payments for Environmental Services—A Conceptual Framework for Explaining and Judging Differences in Outcomes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 124-137.
    17. Yin, Zhichao & Wang, Rui & Wu, Xi, 2023. "Financial inclusion, natural disasters and energy poverty: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    18. Wise, Ramsey, 2015. "Does market-oriented education systems improve performance or increase inequality: A configurational comparative method for understanding (un)intended educational outcomes," TranState Working Papers 189, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    19. Shyamsundar, Priya & Ahlroth, Sofia & Kristjanson, Patricia & Onder, Stefanie, 2020. "Supporting pathways to prosperity in forest landscapes – A PRIME framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    20. Alberto Burchi & Bogdan Włodarczyk & Marek Szturo & Duccio Martelli, 2021. "The Effects of Financial Literacy on Sustainable Entrepreneurship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, April.

    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:8:p:6743-:d:1125299. 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.