An impact of contracts and their duration on household income of farmers involved in land transfer

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201908031

JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY ›› 2020, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (4): 205-214.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201908031

Previous Articles Next Articles

An impact of contracts and their duration on household income of farmers involved in land transfer

WANG Xiangyu¹(), ZHANG Hongxiao¹(), XU Jingwen¹, HE Wenjian²

^1.College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
^2.College of Business, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044, China

Received:2019-08-23 Revised:2020-01-02 Online:2020-07-22 Published:2021-07-09
Contact: ZHANG Hongxiao E-mail:linde0631@163.com;njhxzh@njfu.edu.cn

Abstract

Abstract: Objective

This study is focused on land contracts in rural China. Informal contracts and formal contracts are persistent in land use rights transactions. The formation of the contract and period of farmland transfer is a complex decision, and is affected by the imperfections of the land transfer market and the non-agricultural employment market in China. To determine an ideal land transfer contract model， to provide suggestions for orderly land transfer and to protect rights of farmers who participate in land transfer, this study examined the influence of different choices of contracts and contract duration on the household income of the participating farmers.

Method

Combining theory and simulation, this study employed the ordinary least squares (OLS) analysis and a 2-stage least squares (2SLS) model. As instrumental variables, we separately took the average value of the land transfer contracts and the contract durations for other farmers in the same village except the sample farmer. The sample, which comprises 161 households participating in rural land transfer, was selected from 12 villages of four counties in Jiangsu Province, China.

Result

The results of the OLS model reveal that the long-term formal contract does not induce the growth of non-agricultural income of participating farmers. In addition,the formal contract has a negative impact on the total income (reduces income by 0.34) and on non-agricultural income (reduces by 2.955), and the contract duration has a negative effect on farmers’ non-agricultural income (reduces by 0.106).After the instrumental variables are added, the results of the 2SLS model indicate that the contract duration has no significant effects on the household income while the formal contracts have a positive impact on farmers’ agricultural income. Specifically, a formal contract is conducive to the growth of agricultural income by 2.993 times, but has a negative impact on non-agricultural income by 5.319 times. In addition, increasing the operating land area has a significant role in improving farmers’ total and agricultural income.

Conclusion

Promoting the development of formal contracts has advantages in attracting large-scale operators to enter the field of agricultural operation and to promot farmers’ income. The impact of the contract period on farmers’ income is not significant, which may be due to the limitation of the crop growth cycle and the hidden effect of fixed investment. In the process of signing the land transfer contract, the subjects’ autonomy should be fully respected, and the long-term formal contracts should not implemented without careful consideration. To reduce the mismatch of resources, maximize the expected effect of property rights stability brought by the contract and the contract duration, and achieve the purpose of increasing farmers’ income, it is necessary to provide effective training on agricultural planting structure and non-agricultural employment for farmers who rent in or rent out land.

Key words: farmland transfer, contract form, contract duration, farmer income

CLC Number:

F320

WANG Xiangyu, ZHANG Hongxiao, XU Jingwen, HE Wenjian. An impact of contracts and their duration on household income of farmers involved in land transfer[J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(4): 205-214.

Figures/Tables 4

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

The OLS and 2SLS model estimation results of the impact of contract forms and contract duration on farmers’incomes"

变量类型

variable type

项目item

总收入

total income

农业收入

agricultural

income

非农收入

non-agricultural

income

财产性收入

rent income

OLS

2SLS

OLS

2SLS

OLS

2SLS

OLS

2SLS

自变量

independent variable

契约形式contract

-0. 340^*

0. 180

-0. 378

0. 321

0. 179

0. 518

2. 993^***

0. 993

-2. 955^***

0. 779

-5. 319^***

1. 528

-0. 335

0. 440

-1. 255

0. 984

契约期限period

-0. 009

0. 015

-0. 028

0. 064

-0. 040

0. 042

-0. 192

0. 190

-0. 106^*

0. 063

0. 382

0. 282

-0. 026

0. 035

-0. 126

0. 160

控制变量

control variable

年龄age

-0. 040^***

0. 009

-0. 042^***

0. 009

0. 032

0. 024

0. 037

0. 029

-0. 160^***

0. 037

-0. 137^***

0. 043

0. 015

0. 021

0. 002

0. 024

受教育程度education

0. 019

0. 025

0. 017

0. 022

-0. 030

0. 070

-0. 003

0. 062

0. 058

0. 107

0. 061

0. 123

-0. 101^*

0. 060

-0. 120

0. 075

健康状况health

0. 236

0. 159

0. 235^*

0. 128

-0. 524

0. 447

-0. 691

0. 441

2. 055^***

0. 671

2. 248^***

0. 615

-0. 309

0. 379

-0. 276

0. 439

劳动力人数labour

0. 436^***

0. 071

0. 440^***

0. 072

0. 132

0. 200

0. 192

0. 228

1. 735^***

0. 300

1. 599^***

0. 337

0. 054

0. 170

0. 071

0. 160

有无中共党员partymember

0. 249

0. 187

0. 295

0. 222

-0. 908^*

0. 527

-0. 601

0. 669

2. 139^***

0. 791

0. 998

1. 139

0. 462

0. 447

0. 730

0. 579

现经营土地面积inlandarea

0. 381^***

0. 082

0. 383^***

0. 088

1. 952^***

0. 180

1. 703^***

0. 294

0. 332

0. 347

0. 572

0. 399

-0. 553^***

0. 196

-0. 485^*

0. 249

土地质量

land quality

0. 151

0. 159

0. 129

0. 161

0. 447

0. 446

0. 535

0. 517

-0. 524

0. 670

-0. 238

0. 840

0. 643^*

0. 379

0. 464

0. 382

农地离县城距离

distance

0. 005

0. 006

0. 005

0. 020

0. 014

0. 027^*

0. 015

-0. 023

0. 021

-0. 048

0. 030

-0. 019

0. 012

-0. 025^**

0. 013

是否流入土地

inland

0. 091

0. 293

0. 038

0. 354

-0. 373

0. 824

-0. 651

0. 998

-2. 354^*

1. 237

-1. 114

1. 636

-0. 755

0. 699

-1. 084

0. 962

是否流出土地

outland

0. 227

0. 271

0. 224

0. 287

0. 098

0. 762

-0. 083

0. 892

-0. 669

1. 144

-0. 409

1. 393

4. 650^***

0. 647

4. 664^***

1. 048

常数项constant

10. 877^***

0. 709

11. 211^***

1. 251

3. 462^*

1. 993

4. 600

3. 910

13. 048^***

2. 993

5. 961

5. 614

2. 928^*

1. 692

5. 112

3. 310

调整后的R²

0. 523

0. 518

0. 479

0. 331

0. 180

0. 639

0. 608

15. 613

—

13. 257

—

7. 588

—

24. 581

—

Table 4

References 42

1	农业部新闻办公室. 农村承包地确权登记颁证试点工作进展顺利[DB/OL] 2017-11-29[2019-08-20]. .
2	李小云，左停，李鹤. 中国农民权益保护状况分析——《农业法》第九章“农民权益保护”实施情况调查[J]. 中国农村观察, 2007(1): 53-61.
3	刘一明，罗必良，郑燕丽. 产权认知、行为能力与农地流转签约行为：基于全国890个农户的抽样调查[J]. 华中农业大学学报(社会科学版)，2013(5)：23-28.
	LIU Y M，LUO B L，ZHENG Y L. Property rights cognition，action capacity and contract signing behavior of farmland transfer：based on survey of 890 household farmers in China[J]. J Huazhong Agric Univ Soc Sci Ed，2013(5)：23-28. DOI:10. 13300/j. cnki. hnwkxb. 2013. 05. 010.
4	国务院关于保持土地承包关系稳定并长久不变的意见[EB/OL]. (2019-01-27). [2019-12-01]. .
5	马贤磊，仇童伟，钱忠好. 农地产权安全性与农地流转市场的农户参与：基于江苏、湖北、广西、黑龙江四省(区)调查数据的实证分析[J]. 中国农村经济，2015(2)：22-37.
6	洪炜杰，罗必良. 地权稳定能激励农户对农地的长期投资吗[J]. 学术研究，2018(9)：78-86.
	HONG W J，LUO B L. Can-tenure security promote long⁃term investment in agricultural land [J]. Acad Res，2018(9)：78-86. DOI:10. 3969/j. issn. 1000-7326. 2018. 09. 013.
7	钱龙，洪名勇. 为何选择口头式、短期类和无偿型的农地流转契约：转出户控制权偏好视角下的实证分析[J]. 财贸研究，2018，29(12)：48-59.
	QIAN L，HONG M Y. Why does farmland transfer contract trend to be verbal，short-term and unpaid? Empirical evidence from perspective of control right preference[J]. Finance Trade Res，2018，29(12)：48-59. DOI:10. 19337/j. cnki. 34-1093/f. 2018. 12. 005.
8	何欣，蒋涛，郭良燕，等. 中国农地流转市场的发展与农户流转农地行为研究：基于2013—2015年29省的农户调查数据[J]. 管理世界，2016(6)：79-89.
	HE X，JIANG T，GUO L Y，et al. Research on the development of China's farmland transfer market and farmers farmland transfer behavior： based on the farmer survey data of 29 provinces from 2013 to 2015 [J]. Manag World，2016(6)：79-89. DOI:10. 19744/j. cnki. 11-1235/f. 2016. 06. 007.
9	徐珍源，孔祥智. 转出土地流转期限影响因素实证分析：基于转出农户收益与风险视角[J]. 农业技术经济，2010(7)：30-40.
	XU Z Y，KONG X Z. Empirical analysis on the impact factor for the time limit of loan in land transfer：based on the perspective of rural land loaner's income and risk [J]. J Agrotech Econ，2010(7)：30-40. DOI:10. 13246/j. cnki. jae. 2010. 07. 011.
10	钟文晶，罗必良. 契约期限是怎样确定的?：基于资产专用性维度的实证分析[J]. 中国农村观察，2014(4)：42-51，95-96.
	ZHONG W J，LUO B L. How contract duration be determined?：based on empirical analysis from dimensions of asset specificity[J]. China Rural Surv，2014(4)：42-51，95-96.
11	洪名勇，龚丽娟. 农地流转口头契约自我履约机制的实证研究[J]. 农业经济问题，2015，36(8)：13-20，110.
	HONG M Y，GONG L J. Empirical research on the rural land transfer oral contracts self enforcing mechanism[J]. Issues Agric Econ，2015，36(8)：13-20，110.
12	罗必良. 合约短期化与空合约假说：基于农地租约的经验证据[J]. 财经问题研究，2017(1)：10-21.
	LUO B L. Hypothesis of short contract and empty contract : based on empirical evidence of farmland lease[J]. Res Financial Econ Issues，2017(1)：10-21. DOI:10. 3969/j. issn. 1000-176X. 2017. 01. 002.
13	邹宝玲，罗必良. 农地流转的差序格局及其决定：基于农地转出契约特征的考察[J]. 财经问题研究，2016(11)：97-105.
	ZOU B L，LUO B L. The differential pattern of farmland transfer and its decision :based on the characteristics of farmland transfer contract [J]. Res Financial Econ Issues，2016(11)：97-105. DOI:10. 3969/j. issn. 1000-176X. 2016. 11. 014.
14	HART O，MOORE J H. Contracts as reference points[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics，2008，123(1)：1-48. DOI:10. 2139/ssrn. 956999.
15	CHEUNG E C O. An investigation of yield hinges occurring in diametrically loaded rings[J]. University of Manchester Institute of Science & Technology, 1970.
16	冒佩华，徐骥. 农地制度、土地经营权流转与农民收入增长[J]. 管理世界，2015(5)：63-74，88.
	MAO P H，XU J. Farmland system, transfer of land management right and increase of farmer income [J]. Manag World，2015(5)：63-74，88. DOI:10. 19744/j. cnki. 11-1235/f. 2015. 05. 007.
17	钱忠好，王兴稳. 农地流转何以促进农户收入增加：基于苏、桂、鄂、黑四省(区)农户调查数据的实证分析[J]. 中国农村经济，2016(10)：39-50.
	QIAN Z H，WANG X W. How farmland transfer can promote the increase of peasant household income : an empirical analysis based on the data of peasant household survey in Jiangsu, Guangxi, Hubei and Heilongjiang Provinces [J]. Chin Rural Econ，2016(10)：39-50.
18	高名姿. 非正式制度和资产专用性约束下的农地流转契约选择：来自农地流出户的初步证据[J]. 农村经济，2018(6)：32-37.
	GAO M Z. Selection of farmland transfer contract under the constraint of informal system and asset specificity :preliminary evidence from farmland outflow households [J]. Rural Econ，2018(6)：32-37.
19	洪炜杰，胡新艳. 非正式、短期化农地流转契约与自我执行：基于关联博弈强度的分析[J]. 农业技术经济，2018(11)：4-19.
	HONG W J，HU X Y. Informal，short⁃term farmland transfer contract and its self⁃execution：perspective of associated game analyzing framework[J]. J Agrotech Econ，2018(11)：4-19. DOI:10. 13246/j. cnki. jae. 2018. 11. 001.
20	WILLIAMSON O E. The vertical integration of production：market failure considerations[J]. American Economic Review，1971，61(2)：112-23. DOI:10. 1179/102452907X166845.
21	王小章. “乡土中国”及其终结：费孝通“乡土中国”理论再认识：兼谈整体社会形态视野下的新型城镇化[J]. 山东社会科学，2015(2)：5-12.
	WANG X Z. “Rural China” and its end: the re-understanding of Fei Xiaotong's “rural China” theory and the new urbanization from the perspective of the overall social form [J]. Shandong Soc Sci，2015(2)：5-12. DOI:10. 3969/j. issn. 1003-4145. 2015. 02. 001.
22	刘守英，王一鸽. 从乡土中国到城乡中国：中国转型的乡村变迁视角[J]. 管理世界，2018(10)：128-146，232.
	LIU S Y，WANG Y G. From native rural China to urban⁃rural China：the rural transition perspective of China transformation[J]. Manag World，2018(10)：128-146，232. DOI:10. 19744/j. cnki. 11-1235/f. 2018. 10. 012.
23	刘同山. 农地流转不畅对粮食产量有何影响?：以黄淮海农区小麦生产为例[J]. 中国农村经济，2018(12)：103-116.
	LIU T S. The impact of inadequate farmland transfer on grain yield：evidence from wheat production in Huang⁃Huai⁃Hai district in China[J]. Chin Rural Econ，2018(12)：103-116.
24	陈奕山，钟甫宁，纪月清. 为什么土地流转中存在零租金?：人情租视角的实证分析[J]. 中国农村观察，2017(4)：43-56.
	CHEN Y S，ZHONG F N，JI Y Q. Why does “zero rent” exist in farmland transfer：an empirical analysis from the perspective of rent type[J]. China Rural Surv，2017(4)：43-56.
25	郜亮亮，冀县卿，黄季焜. 中国农户农地使用权预期对农地长期投资的影响分析[J]. 中国农村经济，2013(11)：24-33.
	GAO L L，JI X Q，HUANG J K. An analysis of the impact of the expectation of the right to use agricultural land on the long-term investment of agricultural land in China [J]. Chin Rural Econ，2013(11)：24-33.
26	李星光，刘军弟，霍学喜. 农地流转中的正式、非正式契约选择：基于苹果种植户的实证分析[J]. 干旱区资源与环境，2018，32(1)：8-13.
	LI X G，LIU J D，HUO X X. Formal or informal contract selection in farmland transfer：empirical study on apple farmers[J]. J Arid Land Resour Environ，2018，32(1)：8-13. DOI:10. 13448/j. cnki. jalre. 2018. 002.
27	罗必良，汪沙，李尚蒲. 交易费用、农户认知与农地流转：来自广东省的农户问卷调查[J]. 农业技术经济, 2012(1): 11-21. DOI：10. 13246/j. cnki. jae. 2012. 01. 003,
	LUO B L, WANG S, LI S P. Transaction cost, farmer cognition and farmland transfer：a questionnaire survey of farmers from Guangdong province[J]. J Agrotech Econ,2012(1): 11-21.
28	徐静文，何文剑，张红霄，等. 信贷约束与农户收入关系文献综述：以林权抵押贷款为例[J]. 世界林业研究，2018，31(5)：13-18.
	XU J W，HE W J，ZHANG H X，et al. Literature review on the relationship between credit constraint and farmers income：a case study of forest right mortgage system[J]. World For Res，2018，31(5)：13-18. DOI:10. 13348/j. cnki. sjlyyj. 2018. 0071. y.
29	WILLIAMSON O E. Transaction⁃cost economics: the governance of contractual relations[J]. Journal of Law & Economics, 1979, 22(2): 233-261. DOI：10. 2307/725118.
30	刘文勇，孟庆国，张悦. 农地流转租约形式影响因素的实证研究[J]. 农业经济问题，2013，34(8)：43-48，111.
	LIU W Y，MENG Q G，ZHANG Y. An empirical study on influencing factors of the contract form of farmland transfer[J]. Issues Agric Econ，2013，34(8)：43-48，111. DOI:10. 13246/j. cnki. iae. 2013. 08. 009.
31	姚洋. 农地制度与农业绩效的实证研究[J]. 中国农村观察，1998(6):3-12.
	YAO Y. An empirical study on farmland system and agricultural performance [J]. China Rural Surv，1998(6):3-12.
32	田传浩，李明坤. 土地市场发育对劳动力非农就业的影响：基于浙、鄂、陕的经验[J]. 农业技术经济，2014(8)：11-24.
	TIAN C H, LI M K. The impact of land market development on non⁃agricultural employment of labor force: based on the experience of Zhejiang, Hubei and Shannxi [J]. J Agrotech Econ，2014(8)：11-24. DOI:10. 13246/j. cnki. jae. 2014. 08. 002.
33	诸培新，张建，张志林. 农地流转对农户收入影响研究：对政府主导与农户主导型农地流转的比较分析[J]. 中国土地科学，2015，29(11)：70-77.
	ZHU P X，ZHANG J，ZHANG Z L. Research on the impact of farmland transfer on household income：a comparative analysis between farmland transfer controlled by government and farmers[J]. China Land Sci，2015，29(11)：70-77.
34	张兰，冯淑怡，陆华良，等. 农地不同流转去向对转出户收入的影响：来自江苏省的证据[J]. 中国农村观察，2017(5)：116-129.
	ZHANG L，FENG S Y，LU H L，et al. The impacts of farmland lease to tenants of different types on lessor household income：evidence from Jiangsu Province[J]. China Rural Surv，2017(5)：116-129.
35	许庆，田士超，徐志刚，等. 农地制度、土地细碎化与农民收入不平等[J]. 经济研究，2008，43(2)：83-92，105.
	XU Q，TIAN S C，XU Z G，et al. Rural land system，land fragmentation and farmer's income inequality[J]. Econ Res J，2008，43(2)：83-92，105.
36	程名望，史清华，JIN Yanhong. 农户收入水平、结构及其影响因素：基于全国农村固定观察点微观数据的实证分析[J]. 数量经济技术经济研究，2014，31(5)：3-19.
	CHENG M W，SHI Q H，JIN Y H. Incomes level，structure and its causes[J]. J Quant Tech Econ，2014，31(5)：3-19. DOI:10. 13653/j. cnki. jqte. 2014. 05. 001.
37	汪海燕. 农地股份合作社生成机理实证研究：基于交易成本理论[J]. 经济研究导刊，2018(31)：12-13.
	WANG H Y. An empirical study on the formation mechanism of agricultural land stock cooperative: based on the theory of transaction cost [J]. Econ Res Guid，2018(31)：12-13. DOI:10. 3969/j. issn. 1673-291X. 2018. 31. 006.
38	何文剑，徐静文，张红霄. 森林采伐限额管理制度能否起到保护森林资源的作用[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境，2016，26(7)：128-136.
	HE W J，XU J W，ZHANG H X. Can the forest logging quota management system protect forest resources?[J]. China Popul Resour Environ，2016，26(7)：128-136. DOI:10. 3969/j. issn. 1002-2104. 2016. 07. 016.
39	丰雷，蒋妍，叶剑平. 诱致性制度变迁还是强制性制度变迁?：中国农村土地调整的制度演进及地区差异研究[J]. 经济研究，2013，48(6)：4-18，57.
	FENG L，JIANG Y，YE J P. Induced institutional change or imposed institutional change?：institutio⁃nal change and regional difference of land reallocations in rural China[J]. Econ Res J，2013，48(6)：4-18，57.
40	刘同山，吴刚. 农地资源错配的收益损失：基于农户农地经营规模调整意愿的计量分析[J]. 南京农业大学学报(社会科学版)，2019，19(6)：107-118，159.
	LIU T S，WU G. Benefit loss of farmland resource misallocation：an empirical analysis based on farmers' willingness to transfer farmland[J]. J Nanjing Agric Univ (Soc Sci Ed)，2019，19(6)：107-118，159. DOI:10. 19714/j. cnki. 1671-7465. 2019. 0091.
41	高强. 乡村善治的基本特征、实现路径与政策支撑[J]. 环境保护，2019，47(2)：19-22.
	GAO Q. The basic feature，realization route and policy support of good governance in rural areas[J]. Environ Prot，2019，47(2)：19-22. DOI:10. 14026/j. cnki. 0253-9705. 2019. 02. 005.
42	张建，诸培新，王敏. 政府干预农地流转：农户收入及资源配置效率[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境，2016，26(6)：75-83.
	ZHANG J，ZHU P X，WANG M. Farmland transfer under government intervention：household income and resources allocative efficiencies[J]. China Popul Resour Environ，2016，26(6)：75-83. DOI:0. 3969/j. issn. 1002-2104. 2016. 06. 010.

Metrics

Comments

www.nldxb.njfu.edu.cn

Edited ＆ Published by Editorial Department of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Sciences Edition)
Address： No.159 Longpan Road,Nanjing 210037 Jiangsu,P.R.China
E-mail ：xuebao@njfu.edu.cn , xuebao@njfu.com.cn
Telephone +86-25-85428247,85427076
Distributed by China International Book Trading Corporation P.O. Box 399, Beijing ,P.R. China

类别 type		变量名称 variable	定义 description	平均值 mean	标准差 SD	最小值 min	最大值 max
因变量 dependent variable		ln V_income	家庭总收入对数值	10. 950	1. 413	6. 415	14. 254
		ln V_agrincome	农业收入对数值	8. 430	3. 799	0	14. 180
		ln V_nonagrincome	非农业收入对数值	7. 690	5. 037	0	13. 337
		ln V_rent	财产性收入对数值	4. 888	3. 882	0	9. 832
自变量 independent variable		契约方式contract	正式契约（书面）=1，非正式契约（口头）=0	0. 256	0. 438	0	1
自变量 independent variable		契约期限period	流转契约期限/a	12. 219	5. 531	0	30
控制变量 control variable	户主特征	年龄age	户主的实际年龄/岁	60. 056	11. 254	28	84
		教育情况education	户主受正规教育年限	7. 844	3. 522	0	19
		健康情况health	健康=1，其余=0	0. 770	0. 422	0	1
	资源禀赋特征	劳动力情况labour	家庭劳动力数	2. 370	1. 246	0	6
		有无党员 party member	有=1，否=0	0. 304	0. 462	0	1
		ln V_landarea	现经营土地面积对数值	1. 953	1. 397	0	5. 994
		土地质量land quality	好=1，其他=0	0. 466	0. 500	0	1
		距县城距离distance	农地距县城距离/km	21. 185	16. 915	0. 1	65. 700
		D_in	是否流入土地	0. 338	0. 474	0	1
		D_out	是否流出土地	0. 534	0. 500	0	1

收入类型 income types	流入土地方收入 income of farmers flowing into land		流出土地方收入 income of farmers flowing out land
收入类型 income types	均值mean	中位数median	均值mean	中位数median
总收入total income	234 914. 20	143 100. 0	102 403. 60	47 868. 5
农业收入agricultural income	162 581. 00	59 148. 5	40 896. 38	5 000. 0
非农收入non?agricultural income	71 198. 55	48 000. 0	58 347. 01	36 000. 0
工资性收入wage income	41 560. 87	21 600. 0	37 090. 13	10 000. 0
经营性收入business income	29 637. 68	0	21 256. 88	0
财产性收入rent income	1 134. 70	0	3 160. 19	2 480. 0

类型 type	项目item	参与流转农户(占比/%) farmers participating in circulation（ratio）	流入土地户（占比/%） land transferees (ratio)	流出土地户 (占比/%) land transferors (ratio)
契约形式 contract forms	正式契约formal contract	42(26. 09)	22（31. 88）	25（22. 94）
契约形式 contract forms	非正式契约informal contract	119(73. 91)	47（68. 12）	84（77. 06）
契约期限 contract duration	平均年限average period	12. 219	11. 101	12. 578
	长期契约，年限≥13 a long-term contracts （≥ 13 a）	85	34	59
	短期契约，年限<13 a short-term contracts （< 13 a）	76	35	50

[1]	FU Tianqin, JI Xing, ZHANG Hongxiao. Income effect and heterogeneity analysis of industrial and commercial capital flowing into rural households’ land [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(6): 272-280.
[2]	ZHOU Lixia, CAI Zhijian, WANG Jie, QIN Xi. Impacts of risk aversion and social networks on the contract period of land transfer [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2021, 45(3): 217-223.

An impact of contracts and their duration on household income of farmers involved in land transfer

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 4

References 42

Related Articles 2

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

Author

Reader

Reviewer