Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i5p450-d542123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transfer of Land Use Rights in Rural China and Farmers’ Utility: How to Select an Optimal Payment Mode of Land Increment Income

Author

Listed:
  • Lei Yan

    (School of Business, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China)

  • Kairong Hong

    (School of Business, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China)

  • Hui Li

    (School of Economics, Central South University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha 410083, China)

Abstract
Background: The distribution of farmers’ increment income is the key to the transfer of land use rights. This research aims to detect the optimal payment mode for the distribution of land increment income obtained by farmers in land rights transfer. Methods: The research relied on case analysis, mathematical analysis, and numerical simulation. Results: According to China’s existing payment modes for the increment income of rural collectively owned operating construction land (RCOCL), we summarized these payment modes into three: namely, lump-sum currency payment, a mixed payment of pension and lump-sum currency, and a mixed payment of dividend and lump-sum currency. If the land transfer price of RCOCL is lower than a specific value, the lump-sum currency payment will be optimal for farmers. Suppose the land transfer price is higher than this value. If the enterprise’s profit margin is higher than the pension rate of return, the mixed payment of dividend and lump-sum currency will be optimal; if not, the mixed payment of pension and lump-sum currency will be optimal. Conclusions: Differences in regions, enterprise attributes, and farmers’ characteristics will make the optimal proportion of pension or stock capital in land increment income (OPPSC) different. Generally, OPPSC is often between 40% and 60%.

Suggested Citation

  • Lei Yan & Kairong Hong & Hui Li, 2021. "Transfer of Land Use Rights in Rural China and Farmers’ Utility: How to Select an Optimal Payment Mode of Land Increment Income," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:5:p:450-:d:542123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/5/450/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/5/450/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niemann, Paul & Shapiro, Perry, 2008. "Efficiency and fairness: Compensation for takings," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 157-165, September.
    2. Han Huang & Yang Zhou & Mingjie Qian & Zhaoqi Zeng, 2021. "Land Use Transition and Driving Forces in Chinese Loess Plateau: A Case Study from Pu County, Shanxi Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, January.
    3. Hongbin Liu & Yuepeng Zhou, 2020. "The Marketization of Rural Collective Construction Land in Northeastern China: The Mechanism Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Gary S. Hansen & Birger Wernerfelt, 1989. "Determinants of firm performance: The relative importance of economic and organizational factors," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(5), pages 399-411, September.
    5. Daquan Huang & Yue Lang & Tao Liu, 2021. "The Evolving Structure of Rural Construction Land in Urbanizing China: Case Study of Tai’an Prefecture," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    6. Chengri Ding & Erik Lichtenberg, 2011. "Land And Urban Economic Growth In China," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 299-317, May.
    7. Lichtenberg, Erik & Ding, Chengri, 2009. "Local officials as land developers: Urban spatial expansion in China," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 57-64, July.
    8. Patil, Vikram & Ghosh, Ranjan & Kathuria, Vinish & Farrell, Katharine N., 2020. "Money, Land or self-employment? Understanding preference heterogeneity in landowners’ choices for compensation under land acquisition in India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    9. Yu, Ning & Shi, Qinghua & Jin, Hongtao, 2010. "Permanent land-use rights and endowment insurance: Chinese evidence of the substitution effect," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 272-281, June.
    10. Cao, Yingui & Dallimer, Martin & Stringer, Lindsay C. & Bai, Zhongke & Siu, Yim Ling, 2018. "Land expropriation compensation among multiple stakeholders in a mining area: Explaining “skeleton house” compensation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 97-110.
    11. Layard, R. & Mayraz, G. & Nickell, S., 2008. "The marginal utility of income," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1846-1857, August.
    12. David J. Evans, 2005. "The elasticity of marginal utility of consumption: estimates for 20 OECD countries," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 26(2), pages 197-224, June.
    13. Wen, Lan-jiao & Butsic, Van & Stapp, Jared R. & Zhang, An-lu, 2020. "What happens to land price when a rural construction land market legally opens in China? A spatiotemporal analysis of Nanhai district from 2010 to 2015," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    14. Aryeetey, E. & Baah-Nuakoh, A. & Duggleby, T. & Hettige, H. & Steel, W.F., 1994. "Supply and Demand for Finance of Small Entreprises in Ghana," World Bank - Discussion Papers 251, World Bank.
    15. Xuesong Zhang & Zijin Xu, 2021. "Functional Coupling Degree and Human Activity Intensity of Production–Living–Ecological Space in Underdeveloped Regions in China: Case Study of Guizhou Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, January.
    16. Lans Bovenberg, A. & Smulders, Sjak, 1995. "Environmental quality and pollution-augmenting technological change in a two-sector endogenous growth model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 369-391, July.
    17. Krishna, Vijesh V. & Drucker, Adam G. & Pascual, Unai & Raghu, Prabhakaran T. & King, E.D. Israel Oliver, 2013. "Estimating compensation payments for on-farm conservation of agricultural biodiversity in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 110-123.
    18. Hansen, Kristiana & Duke, Esther & Bond, Craig & Purcell, Melanie & Paige, Ginger, 2018. "Rancher Preferences for a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program in Southwestern Wyoming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 240-249.
    19. Suranga Wadduwage & Andrew Millington & Neville D. Crossman & Harpinder Sandhu, 2017. "Agricultural Land Fragmentation at Urban Fringes: An Application of Urban-To-Rural Gradient Analysis in Adelaide," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-18, April.
    20. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    21. Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-154, Summer.
    22. Zhou, Yang & Li, Xunhuan & Liu, Yansui, 2020. "Rural land system reforms in China: History, issues, measures and prospects," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    23. Hayakawa, Hiroaki, 1992. "The non-neutrality of money and the optimal monetary growth rule when preferences are recursive: Cash-in-advance vs. money in the utility function," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 233-266.
    24. Kairong Hong & Yucheng Zou & Mingyuan Zhu & Yanwei Zhang, 2021. "A Game Analysis of Farmland Expropriation Conflict in China under Multi-Dimensional Preference: Cooperation or Resistance?," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-29, January.
    25. Irawan, Silvia & Tacconi, Luca & Ring, Irene, 2013. "Stakeholders' incentives for land-use change and REDD+: The case of Indonesia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 75-83.
    26. Chao Zhou & Yunjuan Liang & Anthony Fuller, 2021. "Tracing Agricultural Land Transfer in China: Some Legal and Policy Issues," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, January.
    27. Chen, Kunqiu & Long, Hualou & Liao, Liuwen & Tu, Shuangshuang & Li, Tingting, 2020. "Land use transitions and urban-rural integrated development: Theoretical framework and China’s evidence," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    28. Quiroga, Sonia & Suárez, Cristina & Fernández-Haddad, Zaira & Philippidis, George, 2017. "Levelling the playing field for European Union agriculture: Does the Common Agricultural Policy impact homogeneously on farm productivity and efficiency?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 179-188.
    29. Prasenjit Banerjee & Rupayan Pal & Ada Wossink & James Asher, 2021. "Heterogeneity in Farmers’ Social Preferences and the Design of Green Payment Schemes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(2), pages 201-226, February.
    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. Hui Li & Kunqiu Chen & Lei Yan & Yulin Zhu & Liuwen Liao & Yangle Chen, 2021. "Urban Land Use Transitions and the Economic Spatial Spillovers of Central Cities in China’s Urban Agglomerations," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, June.
    2. Lei Yan & Xubin Lei & Kairong Hong & Hui Li & Mengyuan Chen, 2022. "Improving Farmer Willingness to Participate in the Transfer of Land Rights in Rural China: A Preference-Based Income Distribution Scheme," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, March.

    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. Lei Yan & Xubin Lei & Kairong Hong & Hui Li & Mengyuan Chen, 2022. "Improving Farmer Willingness to Participate in the Transfer of Land Rights in Rural China: A Preference-Based Income Distribution Scheme," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Zou, Yucheng & Yan, Lei & Zhang, Yanwei, 2023. "Game analysis of incremental income allocation in the marketization of rural collectively-owned commercial construction land under fairness preference," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-14.
    3. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    4. Man Jiao & Hengzhou Xu, 2022. "Does Rural Construction Land Marketization Inhibit State-Owned Industrial Land Transactions? Evidence from Huzhou City, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    5. Dongshui Xie & Caiquan Bai & Huimin Wang & Qihang Xue, 2022. "The Land System and the Rise and Fall of China’s Rural Industrialization: Based on the Perspective of Institutional Change of Rural Collective Construction Land," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-22, June.
    6. Tang, Peng & Feng, Yue & Li, Min & Zhang, Yanyan, 2021. "Can the performance evaluation change from central government suppress illegal land use in local governments? A new interpretation of Chinese decentralisation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    7. Zhonghua Huang & Xuejun Du, 2017. "Strategic interaction in local governments’ industrial land supply: Evidence from China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(6), pages 1328-1346, May.
    8. Xinyao Li & Lingzhi Wang & Bryan Pijanowski & Lingpeng Pan & Hichem Omrani & Anqi Liang & Yi Qu, 2022. "The Spatio-Temporal Pattern and Transition Mode of Recessive Cultivated Land Use Morphology in the Huaibei Region of the Jiangsu Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, November.
    9. Ryo Arawatari & Tetsuo Ono, 2017. "Inequality and public debt: A positive analysis," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 1155-1173, November.
    10. Habtamu Tilahun Kassahun & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen & Joffre Swait & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, 2020. "Social Cooperation in the Context of Integrated Private and Common Land Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(1), pages 105-136, January.
    11. Tao Xia & Elias G. Carayannis & Stavros Sindakis & Saloome Showkat & Nikos Kanellos, 2024. "Technology transfer for sustainable rural development: evidence from homestead withdrawal with compensation in Chengdu–Chongqing," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 303-333, February.
    12. Dirk Van de gaer & Flaviana Palmisano, 2018. "Growth, Mobility and Social Welfare," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 988, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    13. López, Ramón & Galinato, Gregmar I. & Islam, Asif, 2011. "Fiscal spending and the environment: Theory and empirics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 180-198, September.
    14. Li, Shi & Vendryes, Thomas, 2018. "Real estate activity, democracy and land rights in rural China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 54-79.
    15. Paul Dolan & Tessa Peasgood, 2008. "Measuring Well-Being for Public Policy: Preferences or Experiences?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(S2), pages 5-31, June.
    16. Worku Nega & Mulugeta Tenaw & Yeneneh Hunie & Sayeh Kassaw Agegnehu & Reinfried Mansberger, 2021. "Evaluating Institutional Dichotomy between Urban and Rural Land Administration in Amhara Region, Ethiopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    17. Fei, Rilong & Lin, Ziyi & Chunga, Joseph, 2021. "How land transfer affects agricultural land use efficiency: Evidence from China’s agricultural sector," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    18. Lu Cai & Chaoqing Chai & Bangbang Zhang & Feng Yang & Wei Wang & Chengdong Zhang, 2022. "The Theoretical Approach and Practice of Farmland Rights System Reform from Decentralization to Centralization Promoting Agricultural Modernization: Evidence from Yuyang District in Shaanxi, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Vito Frontuto & Silvana Dalmazzone & Francesco Salcuni & Alessandro Pezzoli, 2020. "Risk Aversion, Inequality and Economic Evaluation of Flood Damages: A Case Study in Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, December.
    20. Yang, Chen & Qian, Zhu, 2022. "The complexity of property rights embedded in the rural-to-urban resettlement of China: A case of Hangzhou," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).

    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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:5:p:450-:d:542123. 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.