Exploring the Influence of Land Titling on Farmland Transfer-Out Based on Land Parcel Data
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis
2.1. LTP, Farmland Value, and Farmland Transfer-Out
2.2. LTP, Transaction Costs, and Farmland Transfer-Out
3. Data and Methodology
3.1. Sampling and Data Collection
3.2. Empirical Model Specifications
4. Empirical Results and Discussions
4.1. Results of the Benchmark Regression
4.2. Approaches to Endogenous Problems
4.3. Robustness Test
4.3.1. Biprobit Model
4.3.2. Propensity Score Matching (PSM)
4.4. Heterogeneity Test
4.4.1. Economic Development
4.4.2. Type of Farmland Transfer-Out Deals: The Impact of Government Intervention
5. Mediation Mechanisms
5.1. Testing for the Mediation Mechanisms
5.2. The Test Result of the Mediation Effect
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Wang, Y.; Li, X.; Li, W.; Tan, M. Land titling program and farmland rental market participation in China: Evidence from pilot provinces. Land Use Policy 2018, 74, 281–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y. The Demsetz’s Evolutionary Theory of Property Rights as Applied to Rural Land of China: A Supplement. Land 2021, 10, 888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kung, J.K.S.; Bai, Y. Induced institutional change or transaction costs? the economic logic of land reallocations in Chinese agriculture. J. Dev. Stud. 2011, 47, 1510–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deininger, K.; Zegarra, E.; Lavadenz, I. Determinants and Impacts of Rural Land Market Activity: Evidence from Nicaragua. World Dev. 2003, 31, 1385–1404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holden, S.T.; Deininger, K.; Ghebru, H. Impacts of Low-Cost Land Certification on Investment and Productivity. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2009, 91, 359–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Besley, T.; Ghatak, M. Property Rights and Economic Development. In Handbook of Development Economics; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010; Volume 5. [Google Scholar]
- Galiani, S.; Schargrodsky, E. Property rights for the poor: Effects of land titling. J. Public Econ. 2010, 94, 700–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ma, X.L.; Qiu, T.W.; Qian, Z.H. The role of government in farmland transfer: Referee or player?—Empirical evidence from households’ satisfaction about farmland transfer in Jiangsu, Hubei, Guangxi and Hei Longjiang Provinces. Economist 2016, 11, 83–89. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Min, S.; Waibel, H.; Huang, J. Smallholder participation in the land rental market in a mountainous region of Southern China: Impact of population aging, land tenure security and ethnicity. Land Use Policy 2017, 68, 625–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, Y.; Bai, Y.; Zhang, L. The impact of farmland property rights security on the farmland investment in rural China. Land Use Policy 2020, 97, 104736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, S.; Deininger, K. Land rental markets in the process of rural structural transformation: Productivity and equity impacts from China. J. Comp. Econ. 2009, 37, 629–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhou, X.; Chen, W.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, D.; Wang, Q.; Zhao, M.; Xia, X. Suitability evaluation of large-scale farmland transfer on the Loess Plateau of Northern Shaanxi, China. Land Degrad. Dev. 2019, 30, 1258–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deininger, K.; Ali, D.A.; Alemu, T. Impacts of Land Certification on Tenure Security, Investment, and Land Market Participation: Evidence from Ethiopia. Land Econ. 2011, 87, 312–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, B.L. Rethinking and Extension of the Coase Theorem: Reform and Choice of Land Circulation Institutions in Rural China. Econ. Res. J. 2017, 52, 178–193. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, W.J.; Luo, B.L. Rural Land Price Illusion: Farmland Market Failure Triggered by Differences in Value Evaluation: An Analysis Based on Survey Data from 9 Provinces. China Rural Surv. 2018, 5, 67–81. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Yang, C.K. A Chinese Family in the Communist Revolution: The Chinese Family in the Communist Revolution; MIT Press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1959. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, L.; Jiao, Y.; Yue, D. Identifying the Turning Point of the Urban–Rural Relationship: Evidence from Macro Data. China World Econ. 2018, 26, 106–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, L.; Liu, S.; Wei, Z. New Trends in Internal Migration in China: Profiles of the New-generation Migrants. China World Econ. 2018, 26, 18–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elad, R.L.; Clifton, I.D.; Epperson, J.E. Hedonic Estimation Applied to the Farmland Market in Georgia. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 1994, 26, 351–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gao, L.; Huang, J.; Rozelle, S. Rental markets for cultivated land and agricultural investments in China. Agric. Econ. 2012, 43, 391–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menon, N.; van der meulen Rodgers, Y.; Kennedy, A.R. Land Reform and Welfare in Vietnam: Why Gender of the Land-Rights Holder Matters. J. Int. Dev. 2017, 29, 454–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zweig, D. Strategies of Policy Implementation: Policy “Winds” and Brigade Accounting in Rural China, 1968–1978. World Politics 2011, 37, 267–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yami, M.; Snyder, K.A. After all, land belongs to the state: Examining the benefits of land registration for smallholders in Ethiopia. Land Degrad. Dev. 2016, 27, 465–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demsetz, H. Toward a Theory of Property Rights. Am. Econ. Rev. 1967, 57, 163–177. [Google Scholar]
- Beekman, G.; Bulte, E.H. Social norms, tenure security and soil conservation: Evidence from Burundi. Agric. Syst. 2012, 108, 50–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Feng, S.Y.; Qu, F.T. Regional Differences of Farmland Transfer and Its Influencing Factors: A Case Study of Jiangsu Province. China Land Sci. 2014, 28, 73–80. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Hart, O.; Moore, J. Incomplete Contracts and Ownership: Some New Thoughts. Am. Econ. Rev. 2007, 97, 182–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hart, O. Economica Coase Lecture: Reference Points and the Theory of the Firm. Economica 2008, 75, 404–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hadlock, C.J.; Pierce, J.R. New Evidence on Measuring Financial Constraints: Moving Beyond the KZ Index. Rev. Financ. Stud. 2010, 23, 1909–1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Riedinger, J.; Jin, S. Land documents, tenure security and land rental development: Panel evidence from China. China Econ. Rev. 2015, 36, 220–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qin, M.; Lin, W.; Li, J.; Yu, Z.; Wachenheim, C. Impact of land registration and certification on land rental by Chinese farmers. Land Use Policy 2020, 99, 104875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chernina, E.; Castañeda Dower, P.; Markevich, A. Property rights, land liquidity, and internal migration. J. Dev. Econ. 2014, 110, 191–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, W.; Luo, B.; Hu, X. Land titling. land reallocation experience, and investment incentives: Evidence from rural China—ScienceDirect. Land Use Policy 2020, 90, 104271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alchian, A.A.; Woodward, S. Reflections on the Theory of the Firm. J. Inst. Theor. Econ. (JITE)/Z. Für Die Gesamte Staatswiss. 1987, 143, 110–136. [Google Scholar]
- Hornbeck, R. Barbed Wire: Property Rights and Agricultural Development. Q. J. Econ. 2010, 125, 767–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, S.H.; Wang, X.L. Does the Confirmation of Rural l and Contract Management Right Strengthen the Endowment Effect of Farmers: An Empirical Study Based on Questionnaire Survey of Rural Households in 17.117 Counties in Shandong Province. Issues Agric. Econ. 2018, 5, 92–102. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Kung, J.K.-S. Off-Farm Labor Markets and the Emergence of Land Rental Markets in Rural China. J. Comp. Econ. 2002, 30, 395–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, B.; Li, Y.; Li, L.; Wang, Y. How does nonfarm employment stability influence farmers’ farmland transfer decisions? Implications for China’s land use policy. Land Use Policy 2018, 74, 66–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Macours, K.; de Janvry, A.; Sadoulet, E. Insecurity of property rights and social matching in the tenancy market. Eur. Econ. Rev. 2010, 54, 880–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rothschild, M.; Stiglitz, J. Equilibrium in Competitive Insurance Markets: An Essay on the Economics of Imperfect Information. Q. J. Econ. 1976, 90, 257–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Levin, J. Information and the Market for Lemons. RAND J. Econ. 2001, 32, 657–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klein, B.; Crawford, R.G.; Alchian, A.A. Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process. J. Law Econ. 1978, 21, 297–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Q.; Liu, J.; Qian, Y.F. Labor mobility, farmland right confirmation and farmland transfer. J. Agrotech. Econ. 2017, 5, 4–16. [Google Scholar]
- Brasselle, A.S.; Gaspart, F.; Platteau, J.P. Land tenure security and investment incentives: Puzzling evidence from Burkina Faso. J. Dev. Econ. 2002, 67, 373–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Cao, Y.; Bai, Y. The impact of the land certificated program on the farmland rental market in rural China. J. Rural Stud. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, N.; He, W.J.; Qiu, T.W.; Chen, L.G. Farmland property right structure, factor efficiency and agricultural performance. Manag. World 2017, 3, 44–62. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Ye, J.P.; Feng, L.; Jiang, Y.; Lang, Y.; Prosterman, R. A Survey Study on Rural Land Use Rights In China In 2016—Survey Results in 17 Provinces and Policy Recommendations. Manag. World 2018, 34, 98–108. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Arnot, C.D.; Luckert, M.K.; Boxall, P.C. What Is Tenure Security? Conceptual Implications for Empirical Analysis. Land Econ. 2011, 87, 297–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, X.Y.; Yang, X.Y.; Luo, J.T. Confirmation and Circulation of Rural Land: Theoretical Divergences and Research Revelation. Financ. Trade Res. 2016, 27, 67–74. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.; Xiubin, L.I.; Xin, L.; Tan, M.; Jiang, M. Spatiotemporal changes in Chinese land circulation between 2003 and 2013. J. Geogr. Sci. 2018, 28, 707–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Qian, C.; Li, F.; Antonides, G.; Heerink, N.; Li, X. Effect of personality traits on smallholders’ land renting behavior: Theory and evidence from the North China Plain. China Econ. Rev. 2020, 62, 101510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, H.; Miller, G.Y.; Sherrick, B.J.; Gómez, M.I. Factors Influencing Illinois Farmland Values. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2006, 88, 458–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, X.Y.; Luo, B.L. Farmland Rights Confirmation and Farmland Transfer: Evidence from Guangdong and Jiangxi Province. Reform. 2016, 4, 85–94. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Holden, S.T.; Deininger, K.; Ghebru, H. Tenure Insecurity, Gender, Low-cost Land Certification and Land Rental Market Participation in Ethiopia. J. Dev. Stud. 2011, 47, 31–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, L.; Li, Y.X.; Jiang, Y.; Hu, Y.J. Land Certificate, Heterogeneity and Land Transfer—An Empirical Study Based on 2018 “Thousand Students, Hundred Villages” Rural Survey. J. Public Manag. 2021, 18, 151–164. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Fang, Y.; Zhao, Y. Looking for Instruments for Institutions: Estimating the Impact of Property Rights Protection on Chinese Economic Performance. Econ. Res. J. 2011, 46, 138–148. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Roodman, D.M. Fitting Fully Observed Recursive Mixed-Process Models with CMP. Stata J. 2011, 11, 159–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, L. Land Titling in China: Chengdu Experiment and Its Consequences. China Econ. J. 2012, 5, 47–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, L.G.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Z.B. Does land ownership confirmation promote the circulation of rural land in China? Manag. World 2016, 1, 88–98. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Lin, W.S.; Qin, M.; Su, Y.Q.; Wang, Z.G. How Can Farmland Registration and Certification Affect Farmland Transfer: An EmpiricalAnalysis Using the CHARLS Date. Chin. Rural Econ. 2017, 7, 29–43. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Feng, H.C.; Zhong, Z.B. Does the New Round of Farmland Rights Confirmation Promote Farmland to Roll out. Econ. Rev. 2019, 2, 48–59. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, L.G.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Z.B. Does Farmland Registration and Certification Promote Farmland Transfer. Manag. World 2016, 1, 88–98. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Qiu, T.W.; Luo, B.L.; He, Q.Y. Land Tenure Stability and Transition of Land Rental Market: Evidence from China Household Finance Survey. J. Zhongnan Univ. Econ. Law 2020, 2, 133–145. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Burns, T.; Haile, S.; Cheehai, T. Costing and Financing of Land Administration Services(CoFLAS) in Developing Countries; Land Equity International: Wollongong, Australia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Demir, O.; Oruhlu, Y.E. Determining the property ownership on cadastral works in turkey. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, 112–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Region | Number of Transactions | Region | Amount of Transaction (Ten Thousand RMB) |
---|---|---|---|
Suzhou | 2850 | Huai’an | 69,748 |
Taizhou | 2486 | Suzhou | 54,292 |
Yancheng | 2467 | Yancheng | 50,171 |
Yangzhou | 1750 | Xuzhou | 45,809 |
Wuxi | 1577 | Taizhou | 40,811 |
Variables | Definitions | Mean (LTP) | Mean (Non-LTP) | LTP–Non-LTP |
---|---|---|---|---|
Transfer-out intention | Yes = 1, No = 0 | 0.356 | 0.037 | 0.320 *** |
Transfer-out behavior | Yes = 1, No = 0 | 0.277 | 0.037 | 0.240 *** |
Area | Ln (farmland plot area) | 2.029 | 0.995 | 1.033 *** |
Soil fertility | Good = 3, Ordinary = 2, Bad = 1 | 2.367 | 2.222 | 0.145 *** |
Irrigation conditions | Good = 3, Ordinary = 2, Bad = 1 | 2.043 | 1.908 | 0.135 * |
Terrain | Flat (slope < 25°) = 1, otherwise = 0 | 0.951 | 0.936 | 0.015 |
Distance to town | Ln (Distance from plot to town) | 2.788 | 2.933 | −0.145 ** |
Distance to home | Ln (Distance from plot to home) | 1.656 | 2.857 | −1.201 *** |
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | |||||
LTP | 1.320 *** (0.213) | 1.487 *** (0.267) | 1.910 *** (0.371) | 1.097 *** (0.213) | 0.814 *** (0.235) | 1.118 *** (0.312) |
Farmland plot features | NO | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES |
Household individual characteristics | NO | YES | YES | NO | YES | YES |
Dummy variable of village level | NO | NO | YES | NO | NO | YES |
Number of observations | 968 | 968 | 968 | 968 | 968 | 968 |
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Exogeneity Test | Results | |||||
Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | |||
Ivprobit | CMP | Ivprobit | CMP | |||
IV | 1.145 (0.800) | 1.095 (0.880) | ||||
LTP | 1.479 *** (0.268) | 0.804 *** (0.236) | 4.068 ** (1.682) | 3.312 *** (0.666) | 3.280 * (1.694) | 2.710 *** (0.824) |
Farmland plot features | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Household individual characteristics | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Dummy variable of village level | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Number of observations | 968 | 968 | 968 | 968 | 968 | 968 |
Variables | 1 | 2 |
---|---|---|
Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | |
LTP | 1.483 *** (0.269) | 0.960 *** (0.260) |
Farmland plot features | YES | YES |
Household individual characteristics | YES | YES |
Dummy variable of village level | YES | YES |
Number of observations | 968 | 968 |
Variables | Matching Method | ATT | Standard Deviation | T Value |
---|---|---|---|---|
Intention of transfer-out | Radius | 0.275 | 0.039 | 7.00 *** |
Kernel | 0.291 | 0.040 | 7.22 *** | |
Behavior of transfer-out | Radius | 0.185 | 0.039 | 4.79 *** |
Kernel | 0.202 | 0.040 | 5.07 *** |
Variables | Regions with a Higher Economic Development Level | Regions with a Lower Economic Development Level | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | |
LTP | 0.511 *** (0.122) | 0.264 *** (0.097) | 0.455 *** (0.113) | 0.255 ** (0.103) |
Farmland plot features | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Household individual characteristics | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Dummy variable of village level | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Number of observations | 481 | 481 | 487 | 487 |
Variables | Spontaneous | Government Intervention | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | |
LTP | 0.443 *** (0.088) | 0.167 ** (0.066) | 0.491 *** (0.157) | 0.272 ** (0.127) |
Farmland plot features | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Household individual characteristics | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Dummy variable of village level | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Number of observations | 443 | 443 | 525 | 525 |
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mediation Mechanism of Farmland Value | Mediation Mechanism of Transaction Cost | |||||
Farmland Value | Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | Transaction Cost | Intention of Transfer-Out | Behavior of Transfer-Out | |
LTP | 0.269 *** (0.014) | 1.444 *** (0.288) | 0.662 *** (0.253) | −0.160 *** (0.051) | 2.094 *** (0.409) | 1.289 *** (0.346) |
Farmland value | 0.804 *** (0.218) | 1.079 *** (0.204) | ||||
Transaction cost | −2.160 ** (0.911) | −2.526 *** (0.916) | ||||
Control variables | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Dummy variable of village level | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ye, T.; He, W.; Liu, Z. Exploring the Influence of Land Titling on Farmland Transfer-Out Based on Land Parcel Data. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2633. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052633
Ye T, He W, Liu Z. Exploring the Influence of Land Titling on Farmland Transfer-Out Based on Land Parcel Data. Sustainability. 2022; 14(5):2633. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052633
Chicago/Turabian StyleYe, Ting, Wenjian He, and Zhiyong Liu. 2022. "Exploring the Influence of Land Titling on Farmland Transfer-Out Based on Land Parcel Data" Sustainability 14, no. 5: 2633. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052633