|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
110500
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This study examines the conventional wisdom that off-farm employment contributes to environmental pollution by increasing the use of agro-chemicals. In order to analyse the role of household decision making and village factor markets in more detail, we run simulations with a hybrid farm household/village computable general equilibrium model that is applied to a village in Northeast Jiangxi Province. We find that the negative lost-labour effect of off-farm employment on agricultural incomes is much stronger than the (small) positive income effect. As a result of reduced labour resources and increased leisure consumption, farm households reduce the intensity of rice cultivation as well as the production of (especially) cash crops. The shift in production activities is stronger for migration than for off-farm employment, because migrants cannot combine off-farm work with onfarm work, and because migration reduces the village market price of oxen services. The shift towards less intensive rice production means that off-farm employment (and migration in particular) reduces the levels of chemical inputs and manure used in agricultural production. The decline in fertilizer input is much larger than the decline in manure use, because manure is a nontradable commodity and is applied only once per year. We therefore conclude that migration and, to a lesser extent, local off-farm employment lead to lower incomes from agricultural production, but have benign effects on environmental quality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
089579
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Energy consumption in rural areas in China is characterized by high consumption of fuelwood, straw and other biomass. Off-farm employment can play an important role in the transition towards more sustainable sources of energy by increasing rural household incomes and reducing the amount of labor available for biomass collection. The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of off-farm employment on rural household energy consumption choices, and to disentangle the various causal relationships that play a role in this respect. To this end, a hybrid farm household/village computable general equilibrium (CGE) model is used that has been calibrated for a remote village in Northeast Jiangxi Province where fuelwood is the main source of energy. The model takes into account nonseparability of farm household production and consumption decisions as well as linkages within the village between households involved in off-farm employment and households with no members working off-farm. Contrary to previous research for a richer region in rural China, we find that fuelwood is not an inferior good. The positive impact of more food consumption on fuelwood collection more than compensates the higher leisure demand associated with higher incomes. Shifts in production activities and in prices on village factor markets caused by increased labour scarcity (the lost-labour effect of off-farm employment), on the other hand, cause a reduction in fuelwood collection and consumption. This lost-labour effect is much stronger for migration than for local off-farm employment, because the latter can more easily be combined with on-farm work and fuelwood collection. For local off-farm employment the income effect dominates the lost-labour effect, resulting in a positive overall impact of higher off-farm participation on fuelwood consumption. For migration, on the other hand, the income effect and the lost-labour effect are almost equal in size. Hence, the amount of fuelwood collected and consumed does not change much when households participate in migration. The final conclusion is therefore that increased off-farm employment opportunities do not promote the transition of rural energy use in the poorer regions of rural China.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
110494
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this paper we provide an overview of recent trends in the availability and quality of land and water resources in rural China, and examine the common presumption that rural resources are rapidly degrading in China. Data based on consistent definitions and measurement methods that have recently become available are used to that end. In addition, we analyse the impact of new policy initiatives to introduce market-based instruments and new institutions to address land degradation and water scarcity problems.
We find that the decline in cultivated area has accelerated in the beginning of the new century. Ecological recovery programs, not urbanization and industrialization, are the major factors causing this decline. Ecological recovery programs are also a major force behind the increase in forest land area and the reduction of water erosion. Modest successes can be observed in the protection of wetlands and (until the mid-1980s) for the average quality of cultivated land. On the other hand, degradation of natural grassland and wind erosion have become much more severe in recent decades.
In northern China, particularly in the 3-H (Hai and Luan, Huai and Huang) river basins, the availability of water has tightened. Groundwater tables have fallen considerably in the Hai river basin, because farmers increasingly rely on groundwater for irrigation. Evidence on other parts of northern China is mixed. Pollution of surface water is getting worse since the beginning of the 1990s in two major lakes in southern China and until recently in the rivers in northern China. Water quality problems in the larger rivers in southern China are less severe and getting less. These problems are to a large extent caused by agriculture-based non-point source pollution, especially in the major lakes and reservoirs.
The sloping land conversion program, water pricing, and the establishment of water user associations and payments for environmental service projects are used as cases to examine the introduction of market-based instruments and new institutions. We argue that less government interference in the implementation of these instruments and institutions is likely to enhance ecological as well the economic benefits. Moreover, supportive measures to improve the functioning of land and labor markets are usually needed to ensure the sustainability of the impact of interventions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|