Do Chinese farmers benefit from farmland leasing choices? Evidence from a nationwide survey

Using China Family Panel Studies (CFPS), this study investigates factors associated with the choice of farmland leasing strategies and the impact of leasing options on farm performance. Particular attention is given to off‐farm employment and farm subsidies. Additionally, the study applies a selectivity‐based approach to assess the relationship between farmland leasing choices and farm businesses’ performance. Off‐farm employment, older and educated operators, large farms and old‐age pension plans increase the likelihood of leasing out farmland. Part‐time off‐farm employment, grain subsidies and mechanised farms increase the likelihood of leasing in farmland. Finally, the selectivity correction terms in the value of crop production are significantly negative in the choices of farmland leasing, indicating the presence of sample selection effects. Accounting for selectivity is essential to ensure unbiased and consistent estimates.     

Money,Land or self-employment? Understanding preference heterogeneity in landowners’ choices for compensation under land acquisition in India

Land acquisition policies, upon which future land use patterns in India depend, are controversially tied to the question of whether to provide monetary or non-monetary compensation to affected landowners. However, turning to the preferences of landowners for answers only serves to complicate matters, as these are not homogenous on the question. This implies there is a need to identify the underlying factors giving rise to this preference heterogeneity, in order to develop more effective and efficient policy. This paper aims to address this gap using a contingent ranking experiment to study landowner disposition toward a range of compensation options, presented in a survey conducted in an ‘about-to-be-submerged’ region of a large, multi-stage irrigation project in India. Rankings were based on a selection of six compensation options, constituting different combinations of the attributes - cash, land, housing and self-employment. While the results suggest that landowners generally prefer non-monetary compensation, both the size of landholding and level of education of the landholder appear to influence the preferences for different compensation options. We find that landowners with more land or education tended to favour monetary compensation, while those with lower education or less land tended to favour housing and self-employment options. We close the text by exploring possible explanations for this specific form of heterogeneity, including access to information, to networks and capacities for income generation, and providing some reflections on the implications of these results for ensuring that rehabilitation and resettlement policies are both well targeted and effective.     

Do land renting-in and its marketization increase labor input in agriculture? Evidence from rural China

There exist problems of land abandonment and low-efficiency land use when China is undergoing active rural-urban migration. Whether increasing land scale can attract more labor engaged in land use is important to increase land-use efficiency and relieve labor shortage in agriculture. This paper uses data from the 2015 China Household Finance Survey to assess the relationship between land renting-in and labor input in agriculture. The results show that land renting-in increases labor input in agriculture. With higher land rents and profit motives, more labor in lessees’ households will be engaged in agriculture. Further analysis indicates that there is no difference in labor input in agriculture between lessees transacting with acquaintances and those transacting with non-acquaintances for the increasing marketization of land rentals between acquaintances in today’s China. Our analysis implies that developing land rental markets and promoting the marketization of land rentals are important approaches to land use sustainability and relieving labor shortage in agriculture, which has great policy implications for countries with rapid rural-urban migration and abandoned arable land.     

How Do Health and Social Insurance Programmes Affect the Land and Labour Allocations of Farm Households? Evidence from Taiwan

To protect farmers from health care costs and risks to livelihood, most countries have developed special health and social insurance programmes specifically for farmers. While numerous studies have examined the determinants of participation in these programmes, little is known about how they influence famers' land and labour allocations. Without government‐sponsored health and social insurance, farmers may seek off‐farm employment in order to obtain similar benefits. Conditioning eligibility for social insurance on minimum land holdings and on‐farm work days can lead to delayed retirement and other forms of job lock. We investigate these issues using a unique dataset of 703,287 farms in Taiwan. After controlling for non‐random participation in Taiwan's social insurance programme, we find that the programme increases (decreases) on (off) farm labour supply, and decreases the amount of set‐aside land. This suggests that payments from social insurance substitute for those issued through land set‐aside programmes to some extent, and that failing to account for this substitution increases the cost of achieving both programmes' objectives.