Factors affecting adoption of forestry social services: Evidence from major forestry provinces in China
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15287/afr.2023.2427Keywords:
Forestry social service, Factor endowment, Willingness, Adoption behavior, Scale heterogeneityAbstract
Analyzing the influence mechanism of the transformation of demandwillingness and behavior of forestry social services (FSS) of farmers with differentoperation scales in the production process is crucial for promoting the modernizationof the collective FSS system. Based on the survey data of 800 farmers in 3 provincesof China, this study uses the multivariate (Mv-) probit model to quantitativelyanalyze the mechanism of factor endowments’ influence on farmers’ deviation ofdemand willingness and choice behavior on three FSSs in the different scales: fineseed and cultivation technology service (SCTS), forest insect pest prevention andtreatment service (IPTS), and timber collection and sale service (TCSS). Our resultsshow that the demand rates of IPTS, SCTS, and TCSS are 80.25%, 68.00%, and68.38%, respectively. Large-scale farmers are more willing to demand FSS thansmall and medium-scale farmers. However, their actual adoption behavior is low,and there are significant deviations in farmers’ demand willingness and adoptionbehavior for different types of FSS, i.e., 30.37%,12.62%, and 44.88% for SCTS,IPTS, and TCSS, respectively. Farmers’ transformation from demand willingnessto adoption behavior is significantly affected by farmers’ characteristics. Comparedwith the farmers’ demand willingness model, the inhibitory factors for thetransformation behavior for FSS increased significantly, including common factorssuch as the scale of the managed forest land, the difficulty in applying for loggingpermits, getting afforestation subsidies, and the proportion of forestry income. Incontrast, these factors had the opposite influence on the demand willingness model.The number and degree of positive significant influencing factors decreased, withonly the family labor force positively influencing farmers’ transformation behaviorfor SCTS. Based on the results, it is suggested to scientifically guide the orderlyflow of rural labor, promoting the moderate scale concentration of forest land flow,accelerating the speed and benefits of inclusiveness in rural finance, and resolvingissues related to farmers’ loans to improve the adoption behavior of FSS by farmers.References
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior.Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process., 50(2), 179-211.
Ajzen, I., Icek., 2001. Nature and operation of attitudes.Annu. Rev. Psychol, 52(1), 27-58.
Ashraf, N., Gine, X., Karlan, D., 2008. Finding Missing Markets (and a Disturbing Epilogue): Evidence from an Export Crop Adoption and Marketing Intervention in Kenya. Am. J. Agr. Econ. 91(4), 973-990.
Baldinger, A. L., Rubinson, J. R., 1996. Brand loyalty: the link between attitude and behavior.J. Advert. Res. 36(6), 22-34.
Bao Qingfeng, Wang Jian. 2010.Demands Investigation on Foresters to Forestry Social Service System -Bases on Foresters Investigation in Bayannaoer, Inner Mongolia.Forestry Economy, (5): 88-90. (In Chinese)
Bhatia, N. K., Yousuf, M., 2013. Forest insect industry in collaborative forest management: an overview. International Journal of Industrial Entomology, 27(27).
Boakye-Danquah, J., Reed, M. G., 2019. The participation of non-industrial private forest owners in forest certification programs: the role and effectiveness of intermediary organisations. Forest Policy Econ. 100, 154-163.
Brunette, M., Holecy, J., Sedliak, M., Tucek, J., Hanewinkel, M., 2015. An actuarial model of forest insurance against multiple natural hazards in fir (Abies Alba Mill.) stands in Slovakia. Forest Policy Econ., 55, 46–57.
Duflo, E., Kremer, M., Robinson, J., 2011. Nudging Farmers to Use Fertilizer: Theory and Experimental Evidence from Kenya. The American Economic Review, 101(6), 2350-2390.
Emerick, K., Janvry, A. D., Sadoulet, E., Dar, M. H., 2016. Technological innovations, downside risk, and the modernization of agriculture. Am. Econ. Rev., 106(6), 1537-1561.
FAOSTAT, 2021. SDG Indicators. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/SDGB
Gong, D.G., 2000. General Theories of Agricultural Socialization Services and Analysis of Their Application to Farmers’ Choice. China Rural Observation, 2000 (06): 25-34 + 78.
Greene, W. H., 2008, Econometric Analysis, Philadelphia, Granite Hill Publishers.
Hanna, R., Sendhil M., Joshua S., 2014. Learning through Noticing: Theory and Experimental Evidence from a Field Experiment. Q. J. Econ.129 (3): 1311–53.
He, H. S., Shifley, S. R., Iii, F. R. T., 2011. Overview of contemporary issues of forest research and management in china. Environ. Manage. 48(6), p.1061-1065.
Hemsworth, P. H., Coleman, G. J., Barnett, J. L., Borg, S., Dowling, S., 2002. The effects of cognitive behavioral intervention on the attitude and behavior of stock persons and the behavior and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal ence(1), 68.
Herrink, O. K. Shields, P., 2016. Assessing municipal forestry activity: A survey of home-rule municipalities in Texas, U.S. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry,42 (4):267-280．
Huang, J. K., Hu, R. F., Sun, Z. Y., 2000. Let science and technology go into the rural households- establish a spreading and innovation system of new agricultural technology. Issues in Agricultural Economics, 21(4): 17-25. (In Chinese)
Hujala, T., Kurttila, M., Karppinen, H., 2013. Customer segments among family forest owners: combining ownership objectives and decision-making styles. Small-Scale For. 12(3), 335-351.
Hussain, T., Khan, G. S., Khan, S. A., Masood, N., Ashfaq, M., Sarwer, N., 2012. Farmers’ agroforestry in Pakistan, farmers’ role trends and attitudes. Current Research Journal of Social sciences, 4(1), 29-35.
Igata, M., Hendriksen, A., Heijman, W. J., 2008. Agricultural outsourcing: A comparison between the Netherlands and Japan. Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, 29-33.
Jumbe, C. B., Nyambose, W., 2016. Does Conservation Agriculture Enhance Household Food Security? Evidence from Smallholder Farmers in Nkhotakota in Malawi. Sustainable Agriculture Research, 5(1).
Ji, L., Wang, Z., Wang, X., An, L., 2011. Forest insect pest management and forest management in china: an overview. Environ. Manage.,48(6), 1107-1121.
Kienzle, J., Ashburner, J.E., Sims, B.G., 2013. Mechanization for Rural Development: a Review of Patterns and Progress from Around the World. Plant Production and Protection Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome.
Khan M, Mahmood H Z, Abbas G, et al.2017. Agroforestry systems as alternative land-use options in the arid zone of Thal, Pakistan Small-scale Forestry,16(4): 553-569.
Kong, F. B., Ruan H., Liao W. M., 2017. Building a new forestry social service system——Document review and research prospects. Issues of Forestry Economics, (06): 90-96. (In Chinses)
Liu, C., Wang, S., Liu, H., 2017. An Examination of the Effects of Recent Tenure Reforms in China’s Collective Forests on Farmers’ Forest Activities and their Income. Int. For. Rev. 19(1), 55-67.
Liu, C., Liu, H., & Wang, S. (2017). Has China’s new round of collective forest reforms caused an increase in the use of productive forest inputs?. Land Use Policy, 64(64), 492-510.
Manley, B., Watt, R., 2009. Forestry insurance, risk pooling and risk mitigation options. Report prepared for MAF Project CM-09 under MAF POL 0809–11194.
Martelldavid, L., 2016. Forest fire management expenditures in Canada: 1970–2013. For. Chron. 92(03), 298-306.
Martina Štěrbová, Jaroslav Šálka, Sarvasova, Z., 2018. How does the innovation system in the slovak forestry service sector work?. Allgemne Forst und Jagdztung, 189(1-2), 16-29.
Mattila, O., Roos, A., 2014. Service logics of providers in the forestry services sector: evidence from Finland and Sweden. Forest Policy Econ. 43, 10-17.
Mottaleb, K. A., Krupnik, T. J., Erenstein, O., 2016. Factors associated with small-scale agricultural machinery adoption in Bangladesh: census findings. J. Rural Stud., 46, 155-168.
Movuh, M. C. Y., 2013. Analyzing the establishment of community forestry (cf) and its processes examples from the southwest region of Cameroon. Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(No. 1), 76-89.
Munn, I. A., Rucker, R. R., 1994. The value of information services in a market for factors of production with multiple attributes: the role of consultants in private timber sales. Forest Science.,(3), 474-496.
Petrescu-Mag, R. M., Banatean-Dunea, I., Vesa, S. C., Copacinschi, S., Petrescu, D. C., 2019. What do Romanian farmers think about the effects of pesticides? Perceptions and willingness to pay for bio-pesticides. Sustainability, 11.
Picazotadeo, A. J., Reigmartinez, E., 2006. Outsourcing and efficiency: the case of Spanish citrus farming. Agric. Econ. 35(2), 213-222.
Qin, P., Carlsson, F., Xu, J., 2011. Forest Tenure Reform in China: A Choice Experiment on Farmers’ Property Rights Preferences.Land Econ.,87(3), 473-487.
Rametsteiner, E., Weiss, G., 2005. The Role of Innovation Systems in Non-Timber Forest Products and Services Development in Central Europe. Economic Studies Journal, 23-36.
René H Germain and Donald W Floyd and Stephen V Stehman., 2001. Public perceptions of the USDA forest service public participation process. Forest Policy Econ. ,40(3): 474-496.
Rivera, W. M.,1996. Agricultural extension in transition worldwide: structural, financial and managerial strategies for improving agricultural extension. Public Adm. Dev. 16(2), 151-161.
Rubilar, R. A., Lee Allen, H., Fox, T. R., Cook, R. L., Albaugh, T. J., Campoe, Otávio C., 2018. Advances in silviculture of intensively managed plantations. Current Forestry Reports., 4(1): 23-34.
Salamon, L. M., 1981. Rethinking public management: 3rd-party government and the changing forms of government action. Public Policy, 29(3), 255-275.
Sunderlin, W. D., Angelsen, A., Belcher, B., Burgers, P., Nasi, R., Santoso, L., et al., 2005. Livelihoods, forests, and conservation in developing countries: an overview. World Dev. 33(9), 1383-1402.
Szulecka, J., Obidzinski, K., Dermawan, A., 2016. Corporate–society engagement in plantation forestry in Indonesia: Evolving approaches and their implications. Forest Policy Econ. 62: 19-29.
Tan, C. F. Li, S.K. Chen, Q.Q., 2010.Supply, Demand and Farmers’ Willingness of Agricultural Social Service in Under-Developed Areas-Based on the Analysis of Sample Farmer Households in Gansu.Journal of South China Agricultural University(Social Science Edition.9(03):1-8. (In Chinese)
Suri, T., 2011. Selection and Comparative Advantage in Technology Adoption. Econometrica, 79(1), 159-209.
Tokede, M.J. Wiliam, D. Gandhi. Y. Imburi, C. Marwa, J. Yufuai, M. C., 2005. Tokede M J. The Impact of Special Autonomy on Papua’s Forestry Sector: Empowering Customary Communities (Masyarakat Adat) in Decentralizated Forestry Development in Manokwari District. CIFOR,103-106.
Vega, D. C., Keenan, R. J., 2016. Transaction costs and the organization of CFEs: Experiences from ejidos in Quintana Roo, Mexico.Forest Policy Econ. 1-8.
Vermeir, I. Verbeke, W., 2006. Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “attitude–behavioral intention” gap. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics. 19, 169–194.
Weyerhaeuser H, Kahrl F, Yufang S, et al., 2006 Ensuring a future for collective forestry in China’s southwest: Adding human and social capital to policy reforms. Forest Policy Econ. 8(4): 375-385.
Yang, X., Zhao, Y., 2003. Endogenous Transaction Costs and Evolution of Division of Labor, in Ng, Y. et al.(eds.): The Economics of E-commerce and Networking Decisions, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Yin, R., Yao, S., Huo, X., 2013. China’s forest tenure reform and institutional change in the new century: What has been implemented and what remains to be pursued?. Land Use Pol. 30(1), 825-833.
Zhang, D., Mehmood, S. R., 2001. Predicting nonindustrial private forest landowners’ choices of a forester for harvesting and tree planting assistance in Alabama. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry,25(3): 101-107.
Zhang, D., 2019. China’s forest expansion in the last three-plus decades: Why and how?. Forest Policy Econ.75-81.
Zhang, X., Rashid, S., Ahmad, K., Ahmed, A., 2014. Escalation of real wages in Bangladesh: is it the beginning of structural transformation? World Dev. ,64, 273-285.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
All the papers published in Annals of Forest Research are available under an open access policy (Gratis Gold Open Access Licence), which guaranty the free (of taxes) and unlimited access, for anyone, to entire content of the all published articles. The users are free to “read, copy, distribute, print, search or refers to the full text of these articles”, as long they mention the source.
The other materials (texts, images, graphical elements presented on the Website) are protected by copyright.
The journal exerts a permanent quality check, based on an established protocol for publishing the manuscripts. The potential article to be published are evaluated (peer-review) by members of the Editorial Board or other collaborators with competences on the paper topics. The publishing of manuscript is free of charge, all the costs being supported by Forest Research and Management Institute.
More details about Open Access:
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_access
