Next Article in Journal
Dependence on Mountains and Water: Local Characteristics and Regeneration Patterns of Rural Industrial Heritage in China
Next Article in Special Issue
Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Land Cover and Their Driving Forces in the Yellow River Basin since 1990
Previous Article in Journal
Obstacles to the Development of Integrated Land-Use Planning in Developing Countries: The Case of Paraguay
Previous Article in Special Issue
Optimization Model of Permanent Basic Farmland Indicators Distribution from the Perspective of Equity: A Case from W County, China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 11
Issue 8
10.3390/land11081340
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Agricultural Population Supported in Rural Areas under Traditional Planting Mode Based on Opportunity Cost Analysis

by
Qingsheng Bi
1,2,
Weiqiang Chen
1,2,
Ling Li
1,2,
Xiuli Wang
1,2 and
Enxiang Cai
1,2,*
1
College of Resources and Environment, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450002, China
2
Henan Engineering Research Center of Land Consolidation and Ecological Restoration, Zhengzhou 450002, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2022, 11(8), 1340; https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081340
Submission received: 16 July 2022 / Revised: 7 August 2022 / Accepted: 16 August 2022 / Published: 18 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Territory Spatial Planning toward High-Quality Development in China)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The return of rural migrant workers through increasing agricultural income by expanding farming scale is significant for rural sustainable development without rural population loss. This paper selected six representative counties in Henan Province, China’s major grain-producing province, to conduct a questionnaire survey, investigated the incomes of farmers from farming and migrant workers, calculated moderate farming scale under different opportunity costs, and also estimated the agricultural population that can be supported by arable land resources. Results are as follows: (1) Under the traditional planting mode, annual per capita income of farmers in farming was USD 342.18, which was substantially lower than USD 5255.63 in migrant workers. This huge income gap has led to continuous rural population loss. (2) Under the opportunity cost of farming income equal to migrant workers income, moderate farming scales of the six selected counties were 1.39, 1.17, 1.22, 1.08, 1.34, and 1.01 ha, respectively. Under the 0.8x and 0.6x opportunity cost, corresponding moderate farming scales were 1.11, 0.94, 1.11, 0.86, 1.07, and 1.34 ha; and 0.84, 0.70, 0.73, 0.65, 0.80 and 1.01 ha, respectively. (3) On the basis of the three moderate farming scales and status quo of arable land resources, agricultural populations that can be supported by rural Henan Province were 8.0386 million, 10.0479 million and 13.3942 million, respectively. Findings can guide the formulation of rural revitalization strategic measures and the preparation of village territorial spatial planning.

1. Introduction

Given China’s rapid economic growth over the past 40 years since the implementation of the reform and the opening-up policy, the country has been experiencing rapid urbanization caused by the largest flow of rural-to-urban migration in human history. Massive rural-to-urban migration has been reversing the traditional rural-dominated urban–rural population structure and transforming China from an agricultural society to an urban and industrial society [1]. Since the implementation of the rural household responsibility system and the weakening restrictions of China’s household registration system, the increasing surplus of rural laborers in the country has been constantly pouring into cities to seek jobs and earn high incomes, leading to a significant decrease in China’s rural agricultural population [2]. This rural population has decreased by 298.45 million in the past two decades, resulting in the disappearance of villages at a rate of about 80 daily [3]. The loss of rural population has also caused a series of problems, such as the hollow village phenomena [4], rural population aging [5,6], and abandoned arable land [7,8], which have significantly restricted the modernization of rural areas [9]. China is the world’s largest developing country with a large population and limited cultivated land, so rural issues are vital to the country’s economy and the people’s livelihood. Rural issues have constantly been the top priority of the Chinese government. To solve the problem of lagging rural development, the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China proposed a national strategy for rural revitalization with the view of achieving rural prosperity and stability [10]. Rural revitalization aims to realize rural modernization through rural construction and development, requiring the support of a stable rural population. Therefore, curbing the loss of rural population and enticing migrants to return to rural areas are primary issues in realizing the rural revitalization strategy [11].
Problems caused by rural population loss in China have consistently been research hotspots. China’s per capita arable land has consistently under 0.1 hectares. Accordingly, the limited arable land makes farmers’ income substantially lower than that of urban residents, which is the primary cause of rural population loss [12]. Depopulation of rural areas has led to the abandonment of numerous rural houses and the wastage of rural homesteads, making hollow villages a common phenomenon in rural China [13,14]. Lack of labor has also diminished the attractiveness of rural areas for investments, and the construction of rural infrastructure has stagnated, contributing to the deterioration of rural living conditions [15,16]. Most of the lost population in rural areas are young and middle-aged laborers, and those who stay in rural areas are mainly the elderly and left-behind children [17]. Lack of family care has resulted in elderly care and children’s education in rural areas becoming a hotspot of social concern [18,19]. Given that rural teenagers are generally willing to work in cities rather than farming, extensive arable land has been abandoned and uncultivated. Consequently, the abandonment of arable land has posed a huge challenge to China’s food security [20,21]. Living conditions of migrant workers in cities have also attracted scholars’ increasing attention. Given that the household registration of migrant workers is generally in rural areas, they cannot obtain equal social welfare as urban citizens (e.g., they cannot enroll their children in school) and have no endowment insurance [22,23,24]. Therefore, most migrant workers experience difficulty integrating into urban life and have a low sense of identity in cities [25]. If they can receive ideal income in rural areas, then migrant workers are generally willing to return to their hometown [26]. Existing studies have mainly focused on the negative impact of out-migration population on rural areas and social security issues. With the implementation of the national strategy for rural revitalization, realizing the return of migrant workers to rural areas and quantitatively measuring the number of agricultural workers that can be supported in rural areas are important topics that need further research.
In 2021, there were 292.51 million migrant workers in China, accounting for 58.7% of the total rural population [27]. The primary issue of rural revitalization is to realize the revitalization of rural talents (i.e., to encourage the return of young labor among migrant workers) [28]. Village territorial spatial planning also requires the return scale of migrant workers to guide the rearrangement of villages’ facilities and industries. This study selected Henan Province, China’s largest agricultural and most populous province, as the research area. The opportunity cost analysis method was used to predict the agricultural population that can be supported by existing arable land resources under the traditional planting mode. The objectives are as follows: (1) estimate difference between the incomes of migrant workers working in cities and farming at home; (2) estimate agricultural planting scale based on the traditional planting model under different scenarios where income from farming matches the income of migrant workers in cities; (3) calculate the agricultural population that the current arable land resources can support under the estimated agricultural planting scale; and (4) explore appropriate measures and policies for rural revitalization under the return of migrant workers.

2. Study Area

Henan Province is located in Central China, the mid-lower reaches of the Yellow River, and southwest of Huanghuaihai Plain. The terrain is high in the west and low in the east, with plains, mountains, and hills comprising 55.7%, 26.6% and 17.7%, respectively, of the province’s total area. Henan Province has a vast area of plains, rich agricultural resources, and a long history of farming. It is one of the 13 major grain-producing provinces and the second largest grain-producing province in China. Henan Province plays an important role in national agricultural production and has contributed immensely to China’s food security [29]. Moreover, Henan Province is the most populous province in China. In 2020, its registered population was 115.26 million, permanent population was 99.41 million, and the population lost 15.85 million [30]. Henan Province is an important export destination for migrant workers in China. The long-term population loss has caused the province to face serious problems (Figure 1), such as rural hollowing and arable land abandonment [31]. The selection of Henan Province as the research area is mainly based on the following reasons: (1) Henan Province is at the middle level of China’s economic development and is undergoing rapid urbanization, which can reflect the overall development status of China and is a typical area for studying China’s development issues; (2) Henan Province is a traditional agricultural province, with arduous tasks in grain production and rural development, its rural problems are universal; (3) The rural population loss in Henan Province is serious, and the villages are characterized by obvious decline. The primary issue of realizing the rural revitalization strategy is to realize the return of the rural population.
We divided Henan Province into five regions according to natural and socioeconomic conditions: northern, eastern, southern, western and central Henan. Moreover, we selected six representative counties in the five regions for questionnaire survey: Huaxian (north), Suiyang (east), Xixian (south), Mengjin (west), Huojia and Yuanyang (central) (see Figure 2). Huaxian has 155,340 hectares of arable land; its grain output ranks first in Henan Province, and its wheat output ranks first in China. Suiyang has 75,700 hectares of arable land and is located at the core area of national grain production. Xixian has 152,200 hectares of arable land, and it is the first county in Henan Province to complete the adjustment and delineation of permanent basic farmland. Mengjin has an area of 53,240 hectares of arable land and is one of the largest grain-producing counties in Henan Province. Lastly, arable land areas of Huojia and Yuanyang are 38,200 hectares and 103,300 hectares, respectively, both of which are mainly planted with wheat and rice.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Data Sources

Data on farmers’ farming income and migrant workers’ income came from questionnaire surveys. Through one-to-one questionnaire surveys on farmers in the selected study sample areas, relevant information on farmers was obtained after statistical sorting. Population and some economic statistics were from the Annual Statistical Yearbook of Henan Province or prefecture-level cities. Arable land data were obtained from the statistics of land use data interpreted by Landsat TM/ETM+ images in Henan Province in 2020.

3.2. Methods

3.2.1. Questionnaire Survey

Using the typical sampling method, 2 towns were randomly selected in each sampling county, and 25 sample farmers were randomly selected for the questionnaires. In this survey, 300 questionnaires were distributed and all were effectively collected. After excluding 7 questionnaires with incomplete information and logical errors, 293 valid questionnaires were obtained: 50 in Huaxian, 48 in Suiyang, 48 inXixian, 49 in Mengjin, and 98 in Huojia and Yuanyang (Table 1).
Questionnaire content mainly includes two parts: economic benefits of farming and income of migrant workers. Economic benefits of farming include seed cost, fertilizer cost, pesticide cost, irrigation cost, machinery cost, government subsidy, unit yield, and grain purchase price. Income of migrant workers includes the gender, age, education, type of work, and average daily income of migrant workers. Details of the questionnaire are shown in Table 2 and Table 3.
The farmers in the questionnaire were all in the traditional planting mode, that is, the main crops are wheat/maize or wheat/rice. Economic benefits of farming mainly include expenditure and income (Table 2). Expenses include seed fees, fertilizer fees, pesticide fees, irrigation cost, and machinery rental fees. Given that the sample farmers operate independently on a small scale, they do not include land contract fees. Income mainly includes government subsidies, yield, and crop sales price. Values in Table 2 are the sample average.
As shown in Table 3, about 90% of the rural labor force went out to work, among which men accounted for 58%, slightly higher than women. A total of 89% were young adults under the age of 50. Education was mostly junior high school. Main types of work were construction, manufacturing, and service industries, and some migrant workers did odd jobs. Income varies depending on the type of work they were engaged in.
Most of the migrant workers were engaged in non-contract manual work, of which 55% were construction workers, 15% were factory workers, 10% were restaurant or hotel waiters, 8% were self-employed drivers, and the rest were mostly odd jobs (Figure 3).
Expenditures for migrant workers are mainly reflected in rental housing, food, and transportation. Since most of the migrant workers live in free and simple collective dormitories provided by their employers, only a small number of them have to pay for accommodation rent, which does not exceed USD 150 per month. Public transportation is the main way to go out at ordinary times, and the expenditure on transportation is negligible. In terms of diet, most of them cook independently, and the food expenditure is basically the same as that in their hometown in rural areas.

3.2.2. Moderate Farming Scale Model

The area of arable land that farmers cultivated to obtain the same or close to the income of migrant workers is regarded as the moderate farming scale. When income from farming is typically lower than that of migrant workers within a certain range, migrant workers are also willing to return to rural hometowns. This willingness can be corrected by coefficients in the model. The formula is expressed as follows:
S = (M/R) × r
where S represents the moderate farming scale per capita, M represents the average annual income of migrant workers, R represents the average annual farming income per ha, and r represents the correction coefficient.

3.2.3. Agricultural Population Estimation Model

Agricultural population refers to the number of farming people who can be supported in all arable lands in the study area can generate satisfactory income under the moderate farming scale. This population is calculated as follows:
P = C/S
where P represents the agricultural population that can be supported in all arable lands, C represents the total amount of arable land in the study areas, and S represents the moderate farming scale per capita.

4. Theories and Concepts

4.1. Moderate Farming Scale under Opportunity Cost

Opportunity cost refers to the cost of arable land that farmers are willing to give up to earn income from migrant workers when they engage in agricultural production. When income from farming is significantly lower than that of migrant workers, farmers will leave their families to work in cities. However, when the two incomes are equal, farmers prefer to stay in their rural hometowns [32]. Existing research has indicated that moderate farming scale under opportunity cost refers to the area of arable land that farmers need to cultivate when their income is equal to that of migrant workers under the current productivity level [33]. Accordingly, defining a moderate farming scale based on opportunity cost is ideal. Migrant workers in cities face difficulties in household registration, schooling for children, and supporting the elderly. Moreover, migrant workers have had markedly limited access to social benefits compared with the majority of urban workers, face immense pressure on survival, and lack a strong sense of life identity [34]. When income from farming is slightly lower than that of migrant workers, farmers also have the willingness to return to their rural hometowns. Therefore, combined with the results of the questionnaire survey, this paper corrected the income from farming to make it less than 80–60% of the income of migrant workers under the analysis of opportunity cost.

4.2. Traditional Planting Mode

China needs huge amounts of food to feed the world’s largest population. Wheat, maize, and rice are the three major staple grains in China, and their output is directly related to national food security. Henan Province is a large grain-producing province, and its traditional planting mode is winter wheat/summer maize, or winter wheat/summer rice [35]. In 2020, Henan Province’s total grain output was 68.258 million tons, accounting for about one-tenth of the national total; wheat output was 37.5 million tons, accounting for about one-third of the national total; agricultural population was 25.83 million, accounting for over 10% of the national total [36]. Given that Henan Province shoulders the important task of stabilizing food security, it should optimize the traditional planting mode and steadily increase food production.
Henan Province has an average annual water resource volume of 40.353 billion cubic meters and per capita water resources of only about 370 cubic meters. This province has severe a water shortage and is not suitable for large-scale planting of commercial crops, such as forest fruits and vegetables, which consume considerable amounts of water [37]. Most Chinese farmers were born in a relatively poor period (i.e., 1960s and 1970s), they have low-level education and lack the ability to master the professional skills of economic crop planting. Wheat, maize, and rice have a long history of cultivation in Henan Province, and farmers have rich planting experience. Therefore, for national food security and considering the farmers’ capabilities, the traditional planting model with wheat, rice, and maize as main crops should be continuously developed. In addition, China’s rural development relatively lags behind, the degree of agricultural modernization is low, and high-tech agriculture has yet to gain popularity; this leads to a relative vulnerability of agricultural development. Evidently, the American agricultural model dominated by large-scale farms with high capital and technical input is unsuitable for China. However, the experience of small- and medium-sized farms represented by France and Germany is more valuable [38]. The traditional planting mode referred to in this paper refers to small- and medium-scale farming modes, with wheat, rice, and maize as dominant crops.

5. Results

5.1. Income from Farming

Planting modes of farmers in the survey sample include two types: winter wheat/ summer maize and winter wheat/summer rice. Huaxian, Huojia, and Suiyang have only the planting mode of wheat/maize, while Mengjin, Xixian and Yuanyang have both planting modes. After processing the survey data, the average annual farming income under the two planting modes was calculated based on the input–output difference. Through the questionnaire survey, the ratio of wheat/maize to wheat/rice in counties where the two planting patterns coexist was 4:1, and the average annual income of the selected counties was calculated (Table 4). Note the following average annual income from farming per hectare of arable land in the six selected counties: USD 4034.25, 4590.78, 4271.41, 4338.66, 3849.65, and 3235.17, respectively.
The latest data released by the People’s Government of Henan Province in 2020 indicate that the per capita arable land area in Henan Province was 0.075 ha [39]. Therefore, per capita annual farming income of the six counties could be estimated as follows: USD 336.73, 383.18, 356.52, 362.13, 321.32, and 270.03, respectively. According to the Henan Provincial Bureau of Statistics, farming income in 2021 was substantially lower than the annual income of USD 7518.28 per capita for urban employees [40]. To significantly increase farming income under the existing farming mode is difficult owing to the fragmentation of agricultural land, small-scale arable land, and lack of agricultural technical support. Agriculture has gradually lost its attractiveness to rural youth, thereby exacerbating rural population loss.

5.2. Income from Migrant Workers

Destinations of farmers going to cities to work are mainly domestic megacities, such as Zhengzhou (capital city of Henan Province), Beijing, and Shanghai. Over 70% of rural migrant workers only have a junior high school education or below. Moreover, most of them lack professional skills, and they can only engage in some physical jobs, such as construction workers, restaurant waiters, and taxi drivers. Most of these jobs are manual labor that urban residents are unwilling to engage in. After deducting daily expenses, average daily income of migrant workers is in the range of USD 15.63–31.25. Migrant workers in the six counties had a slight difference in their preferred destinations (Table 5).
Most migrant workers have left their parents or children in their rural hometowns. Influenced by the traditional Chinese custom, migrant workers will stop working during the Spring Festival and return to their hometown to reunite with parents and children. Therefore, migrant workers often do not work throughout the year. Annual working time is calculated as 10 months, and average annual income of each migrant worker is USD 5255.63, which is 15.36 times the annual income of USD 342.18 for farming. Evidently, there is a significant income gap between home farming and migrant work.

5.3. Moderate Farming Scale

5.3.1. Moderate Farming Scale under Opportunity Cost

Opportunity cost theory indicates that when the income from farming is equal to income from migrant workers, the area of arable land that should be cultivated is a moderate farming scale. On the basis of the above data on the average annual income of farming and migrant workers, the correction factor of Formula (1) was 1, and the moderate farming scales of Huaxian, Huojia, Mengjin, Suiyang, Xixian and Yuanyang were calculated at 1.39, 1.17, 1.22, 1.08, 1.34, and 1.01 ha, respectively (Figure 4).

5.3.2. Corrected Moderate Farming Scale

Social insurance system for migrant workers in cities is lacking, and problems related to housing, social security, medical care, education, and pensions for migrant workers cannot be solved in cities. Therefore, migrant workers are willing to return to their rural hometowns to engage in farming even when their income from farming cannot match the income of migrant workers. According to questionnaire survey feedback, over 90% of migrant workers are willing to return to their rural hometowns when income from farming reaches 80% of that of migrant workers. When income from farming reaches 60% of that of migrant workers, 70% of migrant workers are also willing to return to their rural hometowns. Therefore, we took the correction coefficients of Formula (1) as 0.8 and 0.6 to calculate the corresponding moderate farming scales.
When the correction coefficient was 0.8, moderate farming scales per capita in the six counties were 1.11, 0.94, 1.11, 0.86, 1.07, and 1.34 ha, respectively. When the correction coefficient was 0.6, moderate farming scales of households in the six counties were 0.84, 0.70, 0.73, 0.65, 0.80 and 1.01 ha, respectively (Figure 5).

5.4. Agricultural Population Estimation

Arable land in Henan Province was derived from the land use data interpreted from Landsat TM/ETM+ images in 2020. According to statistics, arable land area of Henan Province in 2020 is 103,209.97 km2, mainly distributed in the central, eastern and northern areas of the province (Figure 6). In particular, arable land areas of central, eastern, northern, southern, and western Henan were 25,132.72, 17,791.40, 12,107.32, 30,321.06, and 17,857.41 km2, respectively.
Moderate farming scale of the whole five regions in Henan Province was represented by the moderate farming scale of each sample county (moderate farming scale in central Henan was represented by the average value of Huojia and Yuanyang). On the basis of arable land area and moderate farming scale, Formula (2) was used to calculate the agricultural population supported by Henan Province (Figure 7).
(1)
Under opportunity cost, when the coefficient of Formula (2) was 1, agricultural populations supported by central, eastern, northern, southern, and western Henan were 1.7745, 1.6526, 0.8702, 2.2706, and 1.4707 million people, respectively. Total agricultural population of Henan Province was 8.0386 million people;
(2)
When the coefficient of Formula (2) was 0.8, agricultural populations supported by central, eastern, northern, southern, and western Henan were 2.2174, 2.0664, 1.0881, 2.8379, and 1.8381 million people, respectively. Total agricultural population of Henan Province was 10.0479 million people;
(3)
When the coefficient of Formula (2) was 0.6, agricultural populations supported by central, eastern, northern, southern, and western Henan were 2.9571, 2.7537, 1.4502, 3.7830, and 2.4502 million people, respectively. Total agricultural population of Henan Province was 13.3942 million people.
In 2020, the rural registration population in Henan Province was 51.3714 million, and the agricultural population under opportunity cost accounted for only 15.65% to 20.07% of the rural registration population. Evidently, there was large difference between the two populations. The results will have important implications for future village governance, industrial development, and facility layout in rural areas.

6. Discussion

6.1. Rural Public Management and Economic Pracitice

Loss of rural population, particularly the youth, has results in China’s rural revitalization strategy facing labor shortage crisis [41]. This study found that under opportunity cost, rural Henan Province can attract up to 13.39 million migrant workers to return to their rural hometowns. These workers can provide significant talent guarantee for rural revitalization. However, the gap between urban and rural development in China is huge, and such problems as backward village governance and lagging economic development are common in rural areas; these aspects are the main factors for rural-to-urban migration [42]. Therefore, the rural government needs to take measures to improve public management and develop village economy to ensure that migrant workers are willing to return to their hometowns, and more importantly, they will stay in rural areas.
The first measure is to improve the rural pension insurance system. Urban employers often pay pension insurance for employees, thereby enabling them to receive ample pension after retirement. However, China’s rural areas implement the basic pension insurance system by the government for free. The pension received by farmers is markedly lower than that of urban residents, so may be unable to support their later life. Therefore, the same occupational pension insurance system as in cities should be established in rural areas. Under the system of government subsidies and farmers’ self-payment, farmers can receive significantly improved pensions and address the worry of returning migrant workers with their inability to support the elderly.
The second measure is to develop agro-processing and the service economy. Under the mode of moderate-scale farming, the farmland cultivated by farmers is larger than before, and the large-scale production of crops can be realized. Rural areas should develop an agro-processing economy according to local conditions, and process crops produced by farmers into agricultural commodities. The agro-processing economy can not only increase the value of agricultural production, but also provide jobs for farmers during slack farming, which will significantly increase the income of returning migrant workers. On the other hand, due to the expansion of the scale of farming, farmers are more dependent on the use of agricultural machinery, which will also generate greater demand for the agricultural machinery service. Therefore, in the future, rural areas should vigorously develop a service economy such as agricultural machinery maintenance.

6.2. Implications for Village Territorial Spatial Planning

Village territorial space planning is the direct basis for rural development orientation, territorial space control, and management of various construction activities [43]. The village territorial spatial planning is mainly to improve the infrastructure and reconstruct the land use pattern, so as to realize the rural revitalization goal of suitable living and a beautiful environment in rural areas. The Chinese government is promoting the preparation of the village territorial space planning. Moderate farming scale and agriculture population are estimated to have important guiding significance for the village territorial spatial planning.
Migrant workers returning home under opportunity cost will be different from the original rural population in size and spatial distribution. Many rural infrastructures have been abandoned or are unable to meet the needs of returning migrant workers for a better rural life. Family members, such as parents and children, accompany migrant workers back to rural areas. They have new requirements for the layout and scale of public facilities, especially elderly care and educational facilities. Therefore, when planning the village territorial space, rural infrastructure should be rationally arranged and upgraded to the predicted scale of returning migrant workers to realize the spatial reconstruction of rural natural and social resources. Moreover, previous small-scale farming practices have resulted in small patches of arable land that were common in rural areas, but which is not conducive to the expansion of the farming scale. Village territorial space planning can arrange farmland consolidation projects according to a moderate farming scale. The estimated agricultural population also can guide the reclamation of abandoned rural homesteads, reconstruct rural living and production space, and achieve intensive and efficient use of rural construction land.

6.3. Reform the Rural Land System

Rural land contractual management rights implemented in rural China have a 30-year term and can be automatically renewed upon expiration [44]. Moreover, rural land is collectively owned and cannot enter the land market for circulation [45]. The system of land contractual management rights enables every farmer in China to obtain land for self-management, thereby contributing significantly to solving farmers’ food and clothing problems in the past poverty period [46]. However, this land system based on small-scale farming by farmers has difficulty in expanding the farming scale and increasing farming income, thereby proving problematic for encouraging migrant workers to return to rural areas. To implement the national strategy of rural revitalization, the reform of the rural land system is imperative. Chinese farmers have traditional materials and emotional dependence on farmland, and rural land system reform cannot deprive them of their right to contract land, even if they are no longer engaged in agriculture. Farmers should be encouraged to transfer the land they no longer cultivate to returning migrant workers who are willing to engage in farming.
The specific measure is to separate the contract right and management right of rural land from the rural land contractual management right. Accordingly, “division of three rights” in rural land should be realized: (1) land ownership is collectively owned; (2) land contract right continues to be owned by the original owner; and (3) land management right is owned by the returning migrant workers who implement large-scale land farming. On the basis of maintaining the public ownership system of land in China, such a reform protects the existing land rights and interests of farmers, facilitates the transfer of management rights to returning migrant workers, and helps to achieve moderate farming scale under opportunity costs. Moreover, the distribution of agricultural subsidies should be mainly targeted at farmers who actually cultivate arable land, and technical training and guidance should be given to them.

6.4. Research Limitations

This paper uses the opportunity cost analysis method to calculate the moderate farming scale, and further estimated the agricultural population supported in rural areas, which is of great significance for future village governance and rural revitalization. However, there are still some limitations that need to be improved in future research: first, the number of interviewees in the questionnaire survey is relatively small, and large-scale interviews are required for large-scale provincial research areas to obtain rich data to better support the research conclusions; second, the traditional planting model may not be suitable for some specific areas, so the future rural revitalization must be a diversified development model where the agricultural population estimation under various farming modes can be carried out for small-scale research areas.

7. Conclusions

This paper used Henan Province, China’s main grain-producing province, as an example and selected six representative counties to conduct a questionnaire survey. By investigating farmers’ income from farming and migrant workers’ income, the moderate farming scale to meet the return of migrant workers was calculated under the opportunity cost, and agricultural population that can be supported by arable land in Henan Province under the moderate farming scale was estimated. The outcomes have an important reference for the implementation of the rural revitalization strategy and preparation of the village territorial spatial planning. The main conclusions are as follows:
(1)
Under the traditional planting mode of wheat/maize and wheat/rice, annual per capita income of farmers in Henan Province was USD 342.18, and annual per capita income of farmers working in cities was USD 5255.63. Farmers’ income from farming was considerably lower than that of migrant workers. The huge income gap has prompted numerous young rural laborers to give up farming and leave the rural areas to work in cities;
(2)
Under the opportunity cost of farming income equal to migrant workers income, the moderate farming scales of Huaxian, Huojia, Mengjin, Suiyang, Xixian and Yuanyang were 1.39, 1.17, 1.22, 1.08, 1.34, and 1.01 ha, respectively; under the opportunity cost of farming income of 0.8 or 0.6 times the income of migrant workers, moderate farming scales per capita in the six counties were 1.11, 0.94, 1.11, 0.86, 1.07, and 1.34 ha, respectively; and 0.84, 0.70, 0.73, 0.65, 0.80 and 1.01 ha, respectively;
(3)
On the basis of the scale of arable land in Henan Province in 2020, agricultural population that can be supported by the province’s rural areas under full, 0.8 times, and 0.6 times opportunity costs were 8.0386 million, 10.0479 million and, 13.3942 million, respectively. The results provide guidance for optimizing rural infrastructure, rural land system reform, and village spatial reconstruction.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Q.B. and E.C.; methodology, W.C.; software, X.W.; validation, W.C., L.L. and X.W.; formal analysis, Q.B. and E.C.; investigation, W.C.; resources, X.W.; data curation, L.L.; writing—original draft preparation, Q.B. and E.C.; writing—review and editing, E.C.; visualization, Q.B.; supervision, E.C.; project administration, Q.B.; funding acquisition, L.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Key R&D Program of China (grant no. 2021YFD1700900), Henan Philosophy and Social Science Planning Project (grant no. 2021BSH003), Humanities and Social Science Research Projects of Higher Education Institutions in Henan Province (grant no. 2020RKXF0104), Open Research Fund Project of Key Laboratory of Digital Mapping and Land Information Application, Ministry of Natural Resources (grant no. ZRZYBWD202103).

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Long, H.; Li, T. The coupling characteristics and mechanism of farmland and rural housing land transition in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2012, 22, 548–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Liu, Y.S.; Liu, Y. Progress and prospect on the study of rural hollowing in China. Geogr. Res.-Aust. 2010, 29, 35–42. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ministry of Housing and Urban Rural Development. China Urban-Rural. Construction Statistical Yearbook; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2020.
  4. Li, Y.; Liu, Y.; Long, H.; Cui, W. Community-based rural residential land consolidation and allocation can help to revitalize hollowed villages in traditional agricultural areas of China: Evidence from Dancheng County, Henan Province. Land Use Policy 2014, 39, 188–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ahmad, M.; Khan, Z.; Anser, M.K.; Jabeen, G. Do rural-urban migration and industrial agglomeration mitigate the environmental degradation across China’s regional development levels? Sustain. Prod. 2021, 27, 679–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Davies, A. On constructing ageing rural populations: ‘Capturing’ the grey nomad. J. Rural. Stud. 2011, 27, 191–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Selod, H.; Shilpi, F. Rural-urban migration in developing countries: Lessons from the literature. Reg. Sci. Urban. Econ. 2021, 91, 103713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Jin, G.; Chen, K.; Wang, P.; Guo, B.; Dong, Y.; Yang, J. Trade-offs in land-use competition and sustainable land development in the North China Plain. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 2019, 141, 36–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Bettenhausen, J.L.; Winterer, C.M.; Colvin, J.D. Health and Poverty of Rural Children: An Under-Researched and Under-Resourced Vulnerable Population. Acad. Pediatr. 2021, 21 (Suppl. 8), S126–S133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Guo, Y.; Liu, Y. Poverty alleviation through land assetization and its implications for rural revitalization in China. Land Use Policy 2021, 105, 105418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, Y.; Li, Y. Revitalize the world’s countryside. Nature 2017, 548, 275–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Guo, L.; Li, H.; Cao, A.; Gong, X. The effect of rising wages of agricultural labor on pesticide application in China. Environ. Impact. Assess. 2022, 95, 106809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zhou, Y.; Li, Y.; Xu, C. Land consolidation and rural revitalization in China: Mechanisms and paths. Land Use Policy 2020, 91, 104379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Cai, E.; Chen, W.; Wei, H.; Li, J.; Wang, H.; Guo, Y.; Feng, X. The coupling characteristics of population and residential land in rural areas of China and its implications for sustainable land use. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 28, 646–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhang, H.; Wang, Z. Human activities and natural geographical environment and their interactive effects on sudden geologic hazard: A perspective of macro-scale and spatial statistical analysis. Appl. Geogr. 2022, 143, 102711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Pan, D.; Zhang, N. The role of agricultural training on fertilizer use knowledge: A randomized controlled experiment. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 148, 77–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zou, B.; Mishra, A.K.; Luo, B. Aging population, farm succession, and farmland usage: Evidence from rural China. Land Use Policy 2018, 77, 437–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Liu, D.; Xi, J.; Hall, B.J.; Fu, M.; Zhang, B.; Guo, J.; Feng, X. Attitudes toward aging, social support and depression among older adults: Difference by urban and rural areas in China. J. Affect. Disord. 2020, 274, 85–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Antman, F.M. The intergenerational effects of paternal migration on schooling and work: What can we learn from children’s time allocations? J. Dev. Econ. 2011, 96, 200–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liao, L.; Long, H.; Gao, X.; Ma, E. Effects of land use transitions and rural aging on agricultural production in China’s farming area: A perspective from changing labor employing quantity in the planting industry. Land Use Policy 2019, 88, 104152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhou, B.; Aggarwal, R.; Wu, J.; Lv, L. Urbanization-associated farmland loss: A macro-micro comparative study in China. Land Use Policy 2021, 101, 105228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Démurger, S.; Gurgand, M.; Li, S.; Yue, X. Migrants as second-class workers in urban China? A decomposition analysis. J. Comp. Econ. 2009, 37, 610–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wahba, J.; Zenou, Y. Out of sight, out of mind: Migration, entrepreneurship and social capital. Reg. Sci. Urban. Econ. 2012, 42, 890–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Cheng, Q.; Wang, H.; Li, Y. The effect of urban cultural diversity on the entrepreneurship of rural-to-urban migrant workers. China Econ. Rev. 2022, 74, 101810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Murphy, R. The gendered reflections of stayers in China’s migrant sending villages. J. Rural. Stud. 2021, 88, 317–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Démurger, S.; Xu, H. Return Migrants: The Rise of New Entrepreneurs in Rural China. World Dev. 2011, 39, 1847–1861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. National Bureau of Statistics of China. China Statistical Yearbook 2021; China Statistical Press: Beijing, China, 2022.
  28. Plummer, P.; Tonts, M.; Argent, N. Sustainable rural economies, evolutionary dynamics and regional policy. Appl. Geogr. 2018, 90, 194–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Gao, G.; Wang, Y.; Xu, Z.; Guo, Y.; Niu, N. Work location choice of returnee migrant workers: Case study of 45 villages in Henan Province. Prog. Geogr. 2020, 39, 2083–2093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Statistics Bureau of Henan Province. Henan Statistical Yearbook 2021; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2022.
  31. Guan, F. The Land Scale of Grain Production Family Farms in North China Plain: An Example from Henan, a Major Grain Production Province. Chin. Rural. Econ. 2018, 10, 22–38. [Google Scholar]
  32. Piotrowski, M. Economic and Non-Economic Determinants of Return Migration: Evidence from Rural Thailand. Population 2010, 62, 333–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Tian, Y.; Guo, Q. A study on the appropriate scale of family farm under the income scale—an analysis based on the samples of Jilin Province. Rural. Econ. 2019, 11, 36–46. [Google Scholar]
  34. Gao, Q.; Yang, S.; Li, S. Labor contracts and social insurance participation among migrant workers in China. China Econ. Rev. 2012, 23, 1195–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Geng, J.; Yang, X.; Nie, S.; Zhang, J.; He, Y.; Yang, H.; Chen, J.; Gao, X. Progress on Application of Controlled-Release Nitrogen Fertilizer in Wheat-Maize Rotation System in China. Chin. J. Soil Sci. 2021, 52, 722–727. [Google Scholar]
  36. Survey Office of the National Bureau of Statistics in Henan. Henan Province Survey Yearbook 2021; Geological Press: Beijing, China, 2022.
  37. Han, M.; Liu, Y.; Du, H.; Yang, X. Advances in Study on Water Resources Carrying Capacity in China. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2010, 2, 1894–1903. [Google Scholar]
  38. Lu, Q.; Jiang, C. The Evolution of the European Union’s Agriculture and Rural Policies and Enlightenment to China’s Rural Revitalization Strategy. Chin. Rural. Econ. 2018, 10, 119–135. [Google Scholar]
  39. Henan Provincial People’s Government. Situation of Henan Province. 30 April 2021. Available online: https://www.henan.gov.cn/2018/05-31/2408.html (accessed on 29 June 2022).
  40. Henan Provincial Bureau of Statistics. In 2021, The Average Annual Salary of Employees in Urban Private Units in Henan Province is 48,117 Yuan. 2 June 2022. Available online: https://tjj.henan.gov.cn/2022/06-02/2460986.html (accessed on 29 June 2022).
  41. Gao, T.; Ivolga, A.; Erokhin, V. Sustainable rural development in northern China: Caught in a vice between poverty, urban attractions, and migration. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1467. [Google Scholar]
  42. Bairoliya, N.; Miller, R. Social insurance, demographics, and rural-urban migration in China. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 2021, 91, 103615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yan, J.; Zhang, D.; Xia, F. Evaluation of village land use planning risks in green concepts: The case of Qiwangfen Village in Beijing. Land Use Policy 2021, 104, 105386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Zhou, Y.; Li, X.; Liu, Y. Rural land system reforms in China: History, issues, measures and prospects. Land Use Policy 2020, 91, 104330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Wang, W. Short-term or long-term? New insights into rural collectives’ perceptions of Land Value Capture within China’s rural land marketization reform. J. Rural. Stud. 2022, 89, 87–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Zhang, H.; Wang, Z.; Liu, J.; Chai, J.; Wei, C. Selection of targeted poverty alleviation policies from the perspective of land resources-environmental carrying capacity. J. Rural. Stud. 2022, 93, 318–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Land 11 01340 g001 550
Figure 1. Problems caused by the loss of rural population: (a) Left-behind elderly and children. (b) Abandoned homesteads. (c) Small patch arable land. (d) Abandoned arable land.
Figure 1. Problems caused by the loss of rural population: (a) Left-behind elderly and children. (b) Abandoned homesteads. (c) Small patch arable land. (d) Abandoned arable land.
Land 11 01340 g001
Land 11 01340 g002 550
Figure 2. Location and terrain of Henan Province (The administrative division vector data were downloaded from the Global Administrative Division Database (http://gadm.org/) (accessed on 12 May 2022)).
Figure 2. Location and terrain of Henan Province (The administrative division vector data were downloaded from the Global Administrative Division Database (http://gadm.org/) (accessed on 12 May 2022)).
Land 11 01340 g002
Land 11 01340 g003 550
Figure 3. Types of work of migrant workers.
Figure 3. Types of work of migrant workers.
Land 11 01340 g003
Land 11 01340 g004 550
Figure 4. The moderate farming scale under opportunity cost.
Figure 4. The moderate farming scale under opportunity cost.
Land 11 01340 g004
Land 11 01340 g005 550
Figure 5. Corrected moderate farming scale.
Figure 5. Corrected moderate farming scale.
Land 11 01340 g005
Land 11 01340 g006 550
Figure 6. Arable land in Henan Province in 2020.
Figure 6. Arable land in Henan Province in 2020.
Land 11 01340 g006
Land 11 01340 g007 550
Figure 7. Agricultural population supported by Henan Province.
Figure 7. Agricultural population supported by Henan Province.
Land 11 01340 g007
Table
Table 1. Distribution of questionnaire samples.
Table 1. Distribution of questionnaire samples.
Number of QuestionnairesHuaxianHuojiaMengjinSuiyangXixianYuanyangTotal
Interviews505050505050300
Available504849484850293
Table
Table 2. Economic benefits of farming per hectare of arable land.
Table 2. Economic benefits of farming per hectare of arable land.
IndexesWheatMaizeRice
ExpenditureSeed (USD)163.80180.32252.18
Fertilizer (USD)327.60352.54308.46
Pesticide (USD)166.14170.0773.71
Irrigation (USD)58.5072.42165.39
Machinery rental (USD)293.23293.23175.73
Total (USD)1011.611068.58975.48
IncomeSbusidies (USD)234.00234.00234.00
Yield (kg/ha)7811.108550.0010,984.05
Sales Prices (USD/kg)0.150.150.17
Total (USD)2963.493248.394517.79
Net income (USD)1951.892179.803542.32
Table
Table 3. Information of migrant workers.
Table 3. Information of migrant workers.
ItemsFrequencyPercentage
GenderMale17058%
Female12342%
AgeUnder 5026189%
Over 503211%
EducationPrimary school or below4415%
Junior high school17359%
High school4415%
Above high school3211%
Job typeConstruction9432%
Manufacturing10335%
Service industry7526%
Odd job217%
Income———
Table
Table 4. Farming income from traditional planting patterns in selected counties (unit: USD).
Table 4. Farming income from traditional planting patterns in selected counties (unit: USD).
CountiesWheat/MaizeWheat/Riceper Ha Incomeper Capita Income
Huanxian4034.25—4034.25336.73
Huojia4590.78—4590.78383.18
Mengjin4166.934689.364271.41356.52
Suiyang4338.66—4338.66362.13
Xixian3533.315115.033849.65321.32
Yuangyang2906.894548.263235.17270.03
Average3928.464784.224099.61342.18
Table
Table 5. Income from migrant workers in selected counties (unit: USD).
Table 5. Income from migrant workers in selected counties (unit: USD).
IncomeHuaxianHuojiaMengjinSuiyang XixianYuanyangAverage
Daily18.7517.9717.4515.6317.1918.1317.52
Monthly562.50539.06523.59468.75515.63543.75525.56
Yearly5625.005390.635235.944687.505156.255437.505255.63
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bi, Q.; Chen, W.; Li, L.; Wang, X.; Cai, E. Agricultural Population Supported in Rural Areas under Traditional Planting Mode Based on Opportunity Cost Analysis. Land 2022, 11, 1340. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081340

AMA Style

Bi Q, Chen W, Li L, Wang X, Cai E. Agricultural Population Supported in Rural Areas under Traditional Planting Mode Based on Opportunity Cost Analysis. Land. 2022; 11(8):1340. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081340

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bi, Qingsheng, Weiqiang Chen, Ling Li, Xiuli Wang, and Enxiang Cai. 2022. "Agricultural Population Supported in Rural Areas under Traditional Planting Mode Based on Opportunity Cost Analysis" Land 11, no. 8: 1340. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081340

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop