Impacts of plot size on maize yields and farm profits: Implications for sustainable land use and food security

References

• Abegaz KH. 2017. Determinants of food security: evidence from Ethiopian Rural Household Survey (ERHS) using pooled cross-sectional study. Agric Food Secur. 6(1):70. doi:10.1186/s40066-017-0153-1
   Google Scholar
• Ali DA, Deininger K. 2015. Is there a farm size-productivity relationship in African agriculture? Evidence from Rwanda. Land Econ. 91(2):317–343. doi:10.3368/le.91.2.317
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aragón FM, Restuccia D, Rud JP. 2022. Are small farms really more productive than large farms? Food Policy. 106:102168. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assunção JJ, Braido LHB. 2007. Testing household-specific explanations for the inverse productivity relationship. Am J Agric Econ. 89(4):980–990. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2007.01032.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett CB, Bellemare MF, Hou JY. 2010. Reconsidering conventional explanations of the inverse productivity-size relationship. World Dev. 38(1):88–97. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bazzi S, Gaduh A, Rothenberg AD, Wong M. 2016. Skill transferability, migration, and development: evidence from population resettlement in Indonesia. Am Econ Rev. 106(9):2658–2698. doi:10.1257/aer.20141781
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjamin D. 1995. Can unobserved land quality explain the inverse productivity relationship? J Dev Econ. 46(1):51–84. doi:10.1016/0304-3878(94)00048-H
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bevis LE, Barrett CB. 2020. Close to the edge: high productivity at plot peripheries and the inverse size-productivity relationship. J Dev Econ. 143(June):102377. doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2019.102377
   Google Scholar
• Carletto C, Savastano S, Zezza A. 2013. Fact or artifact: the impact of measurement errors on the farm size-productivity relationship. J Dev Econ. 103(1):254–261. doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2013.03.004
   Google Scholar
• Chen Z, Huffman WE, Rozelle S. 2011. Inverse relationship between productivity and farm size: the case of China. Contemp Econ Policy. 29:580–592. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7287.2010.00236.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng LJ, Gang XZ, fen ZQ, Hua L. 2019. Is the feminization of labor harmful to agricultural production? The decision-making and production control perspective. J Integr Agric. 18(6):1392–1401. doi:10.1016/S2095-3119(19)62649-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheraghi M, Lorestani B, Merrikhpour H, Rouniasi N. 2013. Heavy metal risk assessment for potatoes grown in overused phosphate-fertilized soils. Environ Monit Assess. 185(2):1825–1831. doi:10.1007/s10661-012-2670-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CNCIDAP. 2019. Compilation of national cost and income data for agricultural production. Beijing: China Statistics Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deininger K, Jin S, Liu Y, Singh SK. 2018. Can labor-market imperfections explain changes in the inverse farm size-productivity relationship? Longitudinal evidence from rural India. Land Econ. 94(2):239–258. doi:10.3368/le.94.2.239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Desiere S, Jolliffe D. 2018. Land productivity and plot size: is measurement error driving the inverse relationship? J Dev Econ. 130(August):84–98. doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2017.10.002
   Google Scholar
• Fareed N, Swoboda CM, Jonnalagadda P, Walker DM, Huerta TR. 2021. Differences between races in health information seeking and trust over time: evidence from a cross-sectional, pooled analyses of HINTS data. Am J Heal Promot. 35(1):84–92. doi:10.1177/0890117120934609
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feder G, Murgai R, Quizon J, Hou LK, Huang JK, Wang XB, Hu RF, Xue CL, Cerroni S, Notaro S, et al. 2012. Assessing the impact of pesticides on the environment. Ecol Econ. 70(3):685–692.
   Google Scholar
• Foster AD, Rosenzweig MR. 2017. Are there too many farms in the world? labor-market transaction costs, machine capacities and optimal frame size. Work Pap. 1:1–476.
   Google Scholar
• Gautam M, Ahmed M. 2019. Too small to be beautiful? The farm size and productivity relationship in Bangladesh. Food Policy. 84:165–175. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.03.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Handley K, Limão N. 2017. Policy uncertainty, trade, and welfare: theory and evidence for China and the United States. Am Econ Rev. 107(9):2731–2783. doi:10.1257/aer.20141419
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardle W, Mammen E. 1993. Comparing nonparametric versus parametric regression fits. Ann Stat. 21(4):1926–1947. doi:10.1214/aos/1176349403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasan SA, Mozumder P. 2017. Income and energy use in Bangladesh: a household level analysis. Energy Econ. 65:115–126. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2017.05.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helfand SM, Taylor MPH. 2021. The inverse relationship between farm size and productivity: refocusing the debate. Food Policy. 99:101977. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huan M, Dong F, Chi L. 2022. Mechanization services, factor allocation, and farm efficiency: evidence from China†. Rev Dev Econ.(March. 2020:1618–1639. doi:10.1111/rode.12892.
   Google Scholar
• Jiang Y, Tang YT, Long H, Deng W. 2022. Land consolidation: a comparative research between Europe and China. Land Use Policy. 112(September 2021):105790. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105790
   Google Scholar
• Ju X, Gu B, Wu Y, Galloway JN. 2016. Reducing China’s fertilizer use by increasing farm size. Glob Environ Chang. 41:26–32. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.08.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Julien JC, Bravo-Ureta BE, Rada NE. 2019. Assessing farm performance by size in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda. Food Policy. 84:153–164. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.03.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Key N. 2019. Farm size and productivity growth in the United States Corn Belt. Food Policy. 84:186–195. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.03.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khataza RRB, Hailu A, Doole GJ, Kragt ME, Alene AD. 2019. Examining the relationship between farm size and productive efficiency: a Bayesian directional distance function approach. Agric Econ. 50(2):237–246. doi:10.1111/agec.12480
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamb RL. 2003. Inverse productivity: land quality, labor markets, and measurement error. J Dev Econ. 71(1):71–95. doi:10.1016/S0304-3878(02)00134-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Looga J, Jürgenson E, Sikk K, Matveev E, Maasikamäe S. 2018. Land fragmentation and other determinants of agricultural farm productivity: the case of Estonia. Land Use Policy. 79(March):285–292. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.08.021
   Google Scholar
• Lu H, Xie H, He Y, Wu Z, Zhang X. 2018. Assessing the impacts of land fragmentation and plot size on yields and costs: a translog production model and cost function approach. Agric Syst. 161(December 2017):81–88. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.001
   Google Scholar
• Lu H, Xie H, Yao G. 2019. Impact of land fragmentation on marginal productivity of agricultural labor and non-agricultural labor supply: a case study of Jiangsu, China. Habitat Int. 83(November 2018):65–72. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2018.11.004
   Google Scholar
• Ma W, Abdulai A. 2016. Does cooperative membership improve household welfare? Evidence from apple farmers in China. Food Policy. 58:94–102. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma W, Abdulai A. 2019. IPM adoption, cooperative membership and farm economic performance: insight from apple farmers in China. China Agric Econ Rev. 11(2):218–236. doi:10.1108/CAER-12-2017-0251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma J, Maystadt JF. 2017. The impact of weather variations on maize yields and household income: income diversification as adaptation in rural China. Glob Environ Chang. 42:93–106. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.12.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma W, Renwick A, Grafton Q. 2018. Farm machinery use, off-farm employment and farm performance in China. Aust J Agric Resour Econ. 62(2):279–298. doi:10.1111/1467-8489.12249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma W, Zhu Z, Zhou X. 2022. Agricultural mechanization and cropland abandonment in rural China. Appl Econ Lett. 29(6):526–533. doi:10.1080/13504851.2021.1875113
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muyanga M, Jayne TS. 2019. Revisiting the farm size-productivity relationship based on a relatively wide range of farm sizes: evidence from Kenya. Am J Agric Econ. 101(4):1140–1163. doi:10.1093/ajae/aaz003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NBSC. 2020. National Bureau of Statistics of China. [30 April 2020]. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/202004/t20200430_1742724.html
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen HR, Ngo QT, Nguyen ND. 2018. Effects of natural disaster on rice production at farm level: new evidence from Vietnam. MPRA X. 1: 37–49.
   Google Scholar
• Omotilewa OJ, Jayne TS, Muyanga M, Aromolaran AB, Liverpool-Tasie LSO, Awokuse T. 2021. A revisit of farm size and productivity: empirical evidence from a wide range of farm sizes in Nigeria. World Dev. 146:105592. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105592
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Otsuka K, Liu Y, Yamauchi F. 2016. Growing advantage of large farms in Asia and its implications for global food security. Glob Food Sec. 11:5–10. doi:10.1016/j.gfs.2016.03.001.
   Google Scholar
• Paudel GP, DB KC, Rahut DB, Justice SE, McDonald AJ. 2019. Scale-appropriate mechanization impacts on productivity among smallholders: evidence from rice systems in the mid-hills of Nepal. Land Use Policy. 85(October 2018):104–113. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.030
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peng K, Yang C, Chen Y. 2020. Land transfer in rural China: incentives, influencing factors and income effects. Appl Econ:1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qian L, Hua L, Gao Q, Hualiang L. 2022. Household-owned farm machinery vs. outsourced machinery services: the impact of agricultural mechanization on the land leasing behavior of relatively large-scale farmers in China. Land Use Policy. 115(9):106008. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106008
   Google Scholar
• Qiu T, Choy STB, Li Y, Luo B, Li J. 2021. Farmers’ Exit from Land Operation in Rural China: does the Price of Agricultural Mechanization Services Matter? China World Econ. 29(2):99–122. doi:10.1111/cwe.12372
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rada NE, Fuglie KO. 2019. New perspectives on farm size and productivity. Food Policy. 84:147–152. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.03.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rada N, Helfand S, Magalhães M. 2019. Agricultural productivity growth in Brazil: large and small farms excel. Food Policy. 84:176–185. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.03.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson PM. 1988. Root-N-Consistent Semiparametric Regression. Econometrica. 56(4):931–954. doi:10.2307/1912705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sager L. 2019. Income inequality and carbon consumption: evidence from environmental Engel curves. Energy Econ. 84:104507. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104507.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savastano S, Scandizzo PL. 2017. Farm size and productivity in Pakistan. Word Bank. 7(2):42–52.
   Google Scholar
• Sheng Y, Chancellor W. 2019. Exploring the relationship between farm size and productivity: evidence from the Australian grains industry. Food Policy. 84:196–204. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.03.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheng Y, Ding J, Huang J. 2019. The relationship between farm size and productivity in agriculture: evidence from maize production in northern China. Am J Agric Econ. 101(3):790–806. doi:10.1093/ajae/aay104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun S, Zhang C, Hu R. 2020. Determinants and overuse of pesticides in grain production. China Agric Econ Rev. 12(2):367–379. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/CAER-07-2018-0152/full/html
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang L, Ma X, Zhou Y, Shi X, Ma J. 2019. Social relations, public interventions and land rent deviation: evidence from Jiangsu Province in China. Land Use Policy. 86(September 2018):406–420. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.05.025
   Google Scholar
• Tran D, Vu HT, Goto D. 2022. Agricultural land consolidation, labor allocation and land productivity: a case study of plot exchange policy in Vietnam. Econ Anal Policy. 73:455–473. doi:10.1016/j.eap.2021.11.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verschelde M, D’Haese M, Rayp G, Vandamme E. 2013. Challenging small-scale farming: a non-parametric analysis of the (inverse) relationship between farm productivity and farm size in Burundi. J Agric Econ. 64(2):319–342. doi:10.1111/j.1477-9552.2012.00373.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J, Chen KZ, Gupta SD, Huang Z. 2015. Is small still beautiful? A comparative study of rice farm size and productivity in China and India. China Agric Econ Rev. 7(3):448–466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Yamauchi F, Huang J, Rozelle S. 2018. What constrains mechanization in Chinese agriculture? Role of farm size and fragmentation. China Econ Rev.(October. 2017:1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Wojewodzic T, Janus J, Dacko M, Pijanowski J, Taszakowski J. 2021. Measuring the effectiveness of land consolidation: an economic approach based on selected case studies from Poland. Land Use Policy. 100(February 2020):104888. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104888
   Google Scholar
• Wu Y, Xi X, Tang X, Luo D, Gu B, Lam SK, Vitousek PM, Chen D. 2018. Policy distortions, farm size, and the overuse of agricultural chemicals in China. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 115(27):7010–7015. doi:10.1073/pnas.1806645115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamauchi F. 2016. Rising real wages, mechanization and growing advantage of large farms: evidence from Indonesia. Food Policy. 58:62–69. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.11.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang W, Qian C, Carlson KM, Ge X, Wang X, Chen X. 2021. Increasing farm size to improve energy use efficiency and sustainability in maize production. Food Energy Secur. 10(1):1–12. doi:10.1002/fes3.271
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang M, Tan S, Zhang Y, He J, Ni Q. 2022. Does land transfer promote the development of new-type urbanization? New evidence from urban agglomerations in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River. Ecol Indic. 136. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng H, Ma W, Guo Y, Zhou X. 2022. Interactive relationship between non-farm employment and mechanization service expenditure in rural China. China Agric Econ Rev. 14(1):84–105. doi:10.1108/CAER-10-2020-0251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng H, Ma W, Zhou X. 2021. Renting-in cropland, machinery use intensity, and land productivity in rural China. Appl Econ. 53(47):5503–5517. doi:10.1080/00036846.2021.1923642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou X, Ma W. 2022. Agricultural mechanization and land productivity in China. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol. 29(6):530–542. doi:10.1080/13504509.2022.2051638
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou X, Ma W, Li G, Qiu H. 2020. Farm machinery use and maize yields in China: an analysis accounting for selection bias and heterogeneity. Aust J Agric Resour Econ. 64(4):1282–1307. doi:10.1111/1467-8489.12395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zou L, Liu Y, Wang Y, Hu X. 2020. Assessment and analysis of agricultural non-point source pollution loads in China: 1978–2017. J Environ Manage. 263(March):110400. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110400
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zou B, Mishra AK, Luo B. 2019. Grain subsidy, off-farm labor supply and farmland leasing: evidence from China. China Econ Rev.(May. 2018:1–16. doi:10.1016/j.chieco.2019.04.001
   Google Scholar