IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i12p1325-d85265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors Influencing Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Wetland Restoration: Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Honggen Zhu

    (School of Marketing and Logistics Management, Nanjing University of Finance & Economics, 3 Wen Yuan Road, Xian Lin University City, Nanjing 210023, China
    School of Economics and Management, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang Economic and Technological Development District, 1101 Zhimin Road, Nanchang 330045, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Zhengfei Guan

    (Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, University of Florida, 14625 CR 672, Wimauma, FL 33598, USA
    Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, P.O. Box 110240 IFAS, Gainesvile, FL 32611, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Xuan Wei

    (Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, University of Florida, 14625 CR 672, Wimauma, FL 33598, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

The Poyang Lake wetland has been at the center of discussion in China’s wetland restoration initiative because of the extent of its ecosystem degradation. The purpose of this paper is to model farmers’ willingness to participate in wetland restoration and analyze factors that will affect farmers’ participation decisions. A household survey was conducted among 300 randomly selected farm-households in the Poyang Lake area, Jiangxi Province. A binary probit regression model is applied to investigate the impacts of farmer demographics, farm characteristics, and farmers’ perceptions of wetland and wetland restoration policies on willingness to participate in wetland restoration. Results show that farmers’ education level, household migrant members, number of dependents, household net income, farm type, and distance to urban areas have significant effects on farmers’ participation in wetland restoration. Farmers’ perceptions about the ecological values and benefits of wetlands and their knowledge about wetland restoration policies do not appear to significantly influence farmers’ willingness to participate. A gap is identified between awareness of the importance of wetland restoration and willingness to take actions to restore wetlands. Farm-households tend to weigh personal needs and economic conditions when making participation decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Honggen Zhu & Zhengfei Guan & Xuan Wei, 2016. "Factors Influencing Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Wetland Restoration: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-12, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:12:p:1325-:d:85265
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/12/1325/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/12/1325/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loomis, John B., 1990. "Comparative reliability of the dichotomous choice and open-ended contingent valuation techniques," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 78-85, January.
    2. 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.
    3. Soderqvist, Tore, 2003. "Are farmers prosocial? Determinants of the willingness to participate in a Swedish catchment-based wetland creation programme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 105-120, November.
    4. John Pattison & Peter C. Boxall & Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2011. "The Economic Benefits of Wetland Retention and Restoration in Manitoba," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 59, pages 223-244, June.
    5. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, April.
    6. Dhakal, Bhubaneswor & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2008. "Determinants of Forestry Investment and Extent of Forestry Expansion by Smallholders in New Zealand," Review of Applied Economics, Lincoln University, Department of Financial and Business Systems, vol. 4(1-2), pages 1-12.
    7. Kalpana Ambastha & Syed Ainul Hussain & Ruchi Badola, 2007. "Social and economic considerations in conserving wetlands of indo-gangetic plains: A case study of Kabartal wetland, India," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 261-273, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Woodward, Richard T. & Wui, Yong-Suhk, 2001. "The economic value of wetland services: a meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 257-270, May.
    10. Fanbin Kong & Kai Xiong & Ning Zhang, 2014. "Determinants of Farmers’ Willingness to Pay and Its Level for Ecological Compensation of Poyang Lake Wetland, China: A Household-Level Survey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-15, September.
    11. Jia Yu & Ken Belcher, 2011. "An Economic Analysis of Landowners’ Willingness to Adopt Wetland and Riparian Conservation Management," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 59, pages 207-222, June.
    12. Prosun Kumar Ghosh & M. Shahjahan Mondal, 2013. "Economic valuation of the non-use attributes of a south-western coastal wetland in Bangladesh," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(9), pages 1403-1418, November.
    13. Jennifer Horney & Matt Simon & Shannon Grabich & Philip Berke, 2015. "Measuring participation by socially vulnerable groups in hazard mitigation planning, Bertie County, North Carolina," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(5), pages 802-818, May.
    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. Gidey Kidu Mezgebo & Teklay Negash Gebrezgiabher & Metkel Aregay Gebreyesus & Kidane Tesfay Gebrezgiabher & Leake Gebreslassie Weldegiwergis & Haileslasie Gebrezgiabher Hailu, 2022. "Impact of community-based exclosure to smallholder farmers’ livelihood and their willingness to pay: empirical evidences from Tigrai, Ethiopia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2598-2615, February.
    2. Haibo Ruan & Jun Chen & Chao Wang & Wendong Xu & Jiayi Tang, 2022. "Social Network, Sense of Responsibility, and Resident Participation in China’s Rural Environmental Governance," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Yanyun Zhao & Yongzhi Yan & Qingfu Liu & Frank Yonghong Li, 2018. "How Willing Are Herders to Participate in Carbon Sequestration and Mitigation? An Inner Mongolian Grassland Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-10, August.
    4. Bass, Daniel A. & McFadden, Brandon R. & Messer, Kent D., 2021. "A case for measuring negative willingness to pay for consumer goods," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    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. 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.
    2. Wang, Hua & Keithly, Walter & Caffey, Rex, 2018. "Determinants of Participation and Intensity for Commercial-based Activities in Coastal Louisiana," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266552, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    3. 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).
    4. Yanyun Zhao & Yongzhi Yan & Qingfu Liu & Frank Yonghong Li, 2018. "How Willing Are Herders to Participate in Carbon Sequestration and Mitigation? An Inner Mongolian Grassland Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-10, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Jonathan Darkwah Baffoe & Takeshi Mizunoya & Helmut Yabar, 2021. "Determinants of Rice Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Conservation and Sustainable Use of Swampy Wetlands in Ghana’s Northern and Ashanti Regions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, May.
    7. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Withey, Patrick & Wong, Linda, 2011. "Climate Change Impacts on Waterfowl Habitat in Western Canada," Working Papers 107094, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    8. 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.
    9. Mirosław Biczkowski & Roman Rudnicki & Justyna Chodkowska-Miszczuk & Łukasz Wiśniewski & Mariusz Kistowski & Paweł Wiśniewski, 2023. "Neo-colonialism in the Polish rural world: CAP approach and the phenomenon of suitcase farmers," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(2), pages 667-691, June.
    10. Sergei Schaub & Jaboury Ghazoul & Robert Huber & Wei Zhang & Adelaide Sander & Charles Rees & Simanti Banerjee & Robert Finger, 2023. "The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri‐environmental schemes: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 617-660, September.
    11. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ollikainen, Markku, 2019. "Drivers of Participation in Gypsum Treatment of Fields as an Innovation for Water Protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 382-393.
    12. Wiśniewski, Łukasz & Rudnicki, Roman & Chodkowska-Miszczuk, Justyna, 2021. "What non-natural factors are behind the underuse of EU CAP funds in areas with valuable habitats?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    13. Morrison, Mark & Oczkowski, Eddie & Greig, Jenni, 2011. "The primacy of human capital and social capital in influencing landholders’ participation in programmes designed to improve environmental outcomes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(4), pages 1-19.
    14. Buckley, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Mechan, Sarah, 2012. "Operating or not Operating at the Margin: Farmers Willingness to Adopt a Riparian Buffer Zone," Working Papers 148830, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    15. Zimmermann, Andrea & Britz, Wolfgang, 2014. "European Farms’ Participation in Agri-environmental Measures," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183073, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Sheng, Jichuan & Qiu, Hong & Zhang, Sanfeng, 2019. "Opportunity cost, income structure, and energy structure for landholders participating in payments for ecosystem services: Evidence from Wolong National Nature Reserve, China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 230-238.
    17. Läpple, Doris & Rensburg, Tom Van, 2011. "Adoption of organic farming: Are there differences between early and late adoption?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1406-1414, May.
    18. Murphy, Geraldine & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Murphy, Eithne, 2014. "Modelling the Participation Decision in Agri-Environmental Schemes," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183069, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Elcin Akcura, 2013. "Mandatory versus voluntary payment for green electricity," Working Papers 161, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Office of the Chief Economist.
    20. Elofsson, Katarina, 2014. "International knowledge diffusion and its impact on the cost-effective clean-up of the Baltic Sea," Working Paper Series 2014:06, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.

    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:8:y:2016:i:12:p:1325-:d:85265. 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.