Has farmer welfare improved after rural residential land circulation?

被引:37
作者
Li, Huan [1 ]
Zhang, Xiaoling [2 ]
Li, Heng [3 ]
机构
[1] Zhejiang Gongshang Univ, Dept Land Resources Management, Hangzhou, Peoples R China
[2] City Univ Hong Kong, Dept Publ Policy, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[3] Hong Kong Polytech Univ, Dept Bldg & Real Estate, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
关键词
Welfare; Welfare gap; Farmer; Rural residential land circulation; CHINA; MODEL; UNCERTAINTY; RENEWAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.10.036
中图分类号
P9 [自然地理学]; K9 [地理];
学科分类号
0705 ; 070501 ;
摘要
The uneven distribution of welfare not only hinders social fairness but also affects the optimal allocation of resources for rural residential land. Recourse to traditional welfare theory or Amartya Sen's function and ability welfare theory is inappropriate in this situation as neither is focused on the influence of welfare differences. Therefore, this study aims to provide a new focus for welfare economics in integrating the concept of the internal group welfare gap into overall welfare evaluation. Fuzzy mathematics is applied to calculate welfare and the concept of the Gini coefficient is used to evaluate the welfare gap. The resulting model is applied to the cities of Guangzhou, Chongqing, and Wuxi before and after rural residential land circulation (RRLC) to determine their resulting changes in welfare and welfare gap. From this, it is found that, after RRLC, the farmers' overall welfare increased by 17.5%, 15.1%, and 23.5% respectively, while the welfare gap of Guangzhou and Wuxi was improved, and Chongqing was decreased. This means the welfare gap widened in Guangzhou and Wuxi, while narrowed in Chongqing. Concluding remarks call for increased government attention to the fair distribution of welfare between different groups of farmers by increased social security and a more detailed consideration of the groups involved.
引用
收藏
页码:479 / 486
页数:8
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
Ai X., 2015, CHINA POPULAR RESOUR, V25, P74
[2]   New ambitions for a new paradigm: Putting the psychology of reasoning at the service of humanity [J].
Bonnefon, Jean-Francois .
THINKING & REASONING, 2013, 19 (3-4) :381-398
[3]   Comprehensive evaluation of environ-economic benefits of anaerobic digestion technology in an integrated food waste-based methane plant using a fuzzy mathematical model [J].
Chen, Ting ;
Shen, Dongsheng ;
Jin, Yiying ;
Li, Hailong ;
Yu, Zhixin ;
Feng, Huajun ;
Long, Yuyang ;
Yin, Jun .
APPLIED ENERGY, 2017, 208 :666-677
[4]   Adoption of modern varieties, farmers' welfare and crop biodiversity: Evidence from Uganda [J].
Coromaldi, Manuela ;
Pallante, Giacomo ;
Savastano, Sara .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2015, 119 :346-358
[5]  
Du Zhe, 2009, Journal of System Simulation, V21, P1901
[6]   Investment under uncertainty and option value in environmental economics [J].
Fisher, AC .
RESOURCE AND ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2000, 22 (03) :197-204
[7]   A welfare evaluation of tying strategies [J].
Gayer, Amit ;
Shy, Oz .
RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS, 2016, 70 (04) :623-637
[8]   Who sees what? Demographics and the visibility of consumer expenditures [J].
Heffetz, Ori .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PSYCHOLOGY, 2012, 33 (04) :801-818
[9]   UNCERTAINTY, IRREVERSIBILITY AND THE LOSS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND [J].
HODGE, I .
JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1984, 35 (02) :191-202
[10]   A decision support model for improving a multi-family housing complex based on CO2 emission from electricity consumption [J].
Hong, Taehoon ;
Koo, Choongwan ;
Kim, Hyunjoong .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2012, 112 :67-78