Research Articles

Impact of farmer households’livelihood assets on their options of economic compensation patterns for cultivated land protection

  • 1. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China;
    2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
    3. School of Geographical Sciences, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China;
    4. Collage of Public Administration, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310029, China
Li Guangdong, PhD Candidate, specialized land use/cover change, urban and regional development, and urban geography.

Received date: 2013-04-23

  Revised date: 2013-08-20

  Online published: 2014-03-24

Supported by

National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.41371177


With rapid urbanization and the socio-economic transformation,cultivated land protection has gradually become a major concern in China. The economic compensation plays a crucial role in promoting cultivated land protection and improving the utilization ratio of cultivated land. Farmer household's satisfaction has a great influence on the effectiveness of compensation. Therefore,households' willingness to select the economic compensation pattern for cultivated land protection has been considered and re-examined. By employing Participatory Rural Appraisal method (PRA),3 villages and 392 households were investigated and sampled in mesa and hilly areas of Chongqing. Then a quantitative analysis framework of household livelihood hexagon has been developed to quantify the livelihood assets of different farmer households. Finally,the Gray Relation Model and Probit Regression Model have been employed to explore the coupling relationship between the household livelihood assets and their compensation pattern options. The results show that there are both qualitative and spatial heterogeneity in household livelihood assets. We found that the inequality of livelihood assets is evident for five household types. There is a spatial trend that the higher the elevation,the less livelihood assets are. In addition,their options of economic compensation pattern vary from Chengdu Pattern to Foshan Pattern due to their difference in livelihood assets and difference in location. In detail,there is a coupling relationship between household livelihood assets and their compensation pattern;negative correlation is observed between natural assets value and household pattern options,while the other livelihood assets have positive impacts on compensation pattern in varying degrees,which from the top are psychological assets,human assets,physical assets,financial assets,and social assets respectively. A conceptual compensation pattern system has been designed to meet the demands for farmer households mainly according to their shortage in livelihood assets. In addition,compensation method,compensation standard,the basis of compensation and the source of compensation funds have been proposed accordingly.

Cite this article

LI Guangdong, FANG Chuanglin, QIU Daochi, WANG Liping . Impact of farmer households’livelihood assets on their options of economic compensation patterns for cultivated land protection[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2014 , 24(2) : 331 -348 . DOI: 10.1007/s11442-014-1091-5


Bebbington A, 1999. Capitals and capabilities: A framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Development, 27(12): 2021-2044.
Block S, Webb P, 2001. The dynamics of livelihood diversification in post-famine Ethiopia. Food Policy, 26(4): 333-350.
Carney D, 1998. Implementing the sustainable livelihoods approach in sustainable rural livelihoods: What contribution can we make? London: Department for International Development (DFID), 3-26.
Chambers R, 2006. Vulnerability, coping and policy (editorial introduction). IDS Bulletin, 33-40.
Chen C, Fang X, 1999. An analysis of households' operation behavior differentiation in Jiangsu Province. Chinese Rural Economy, (4): 46-50. (in Chinese)
Chen H Y, Zhu T, Krott M et al., 2013. Measurement and evaluation of livelihood assets in sustainable forest commons governance. Land Use Policy, 30(1): 908-914.
Chen X, Wang Z, 2007. An analysis of the causal factors to farmer households' behaviors of part-time farming in Suzhou Prefecture of Jiangsu Province. Chinese Rural Economy, (4): 25-31. (in Chinese)
Chen Y, Liu Y, Li Y, 2010. Calculation on economic compensation standard for cultivated land from the perspective of peasant households' production decision. China Land Science, 24(4): 4-8, 31. (in Chinese)
Cinner J E, Bodin O, 2010. Livelihood diversification in tropical coastal communities: A network-based approach to analyzing 'Livelihood Landscapes'. Plos One, 5(8): e11999.
Cramb R A, Purcell T, Ho T C S, 2004. Participatory assessment of rural livelihoods in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. Agricultural Systems, 81(3): 255-272.
DFID, 2000. Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. London: Department for International Development.
Ellis F, 2000. Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Foster W, Valdes A, Davis B et al., 2011. The constraints to escaping rural poverty: An analysis of the complementarities of assets in developing countries. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 33(4): 528-565.
Frankenberger T R, Drinkwater M, Maxwell D, 2000. Operationalising household livelihood security: A holistic approach for addressing poverty and vulnerability, CARE.
Giddens A, 1979. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis. Berkeley, Los Angeles, California: University of California Press.
Habermas J, 1971. Knowledge and Human Interests. Boston: Beacon Press.
Islam G M N, Yew T S, Abdullah N M R et al., 2011. Social capital, community based management, and fishers' livelihood in Bangladesh. Ocean & Coastal Management, 54(2): 173-180.
Kangalawe R Y M, Liwenga E T, 2005. Livelihoods in the wetlands of Kilombero Valley in Tanzania: Opportunities and challenges to integrated water resource management. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 30(11-16): 968-975.
Krantz L, 2001. The Sustainable Livelihood Approach to Poverty Reduction. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency.
Kristjanson P, Radeny M, Baltenweck I et al., 2005. Livelihood mapping and poverty correlates at a meso-level in Kenya. Food Policy, 30(5/6): 568-583.
Li X, Dong Q, Rao X, 2007. Methods of assessing vulnerability of farmers and local use. Chinese Rural Economy, (4): 32-39. (in Chinese)
McCusker B, Carr E R, 2006. The co-production of livelihoods and land use change: Case studies from South Africa and Ghana. Geoforum, 37(5): 790-804.
McLennan B, Garvin T, 2012. Intra-regional variation in land use and livelihood change during a forest transition in Costa Rica's dry North West. Land Use Policy, 29(1): 119-130.
Mwakubo S M, Obare G A, 2009. Vulnerability, livelihood assets and institutional dynamics in the management of wetlands in Lake Victoria watershed basin. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 17(6): 613-626.
Nawrotzki R, Hunter L M, Dickinson T W, 2012. Natural resources and rural livelihoods. Demographic Research, 26: 661-700.
Niu H, Zhang A, 2009. Externality and its calculation of cultivated land protection: A case study of Jiaozuo City. Resources Science, 31(8): 1400-1408. (in Chinese)
Ouyang J, Song C, Yu Z et al., 2004. The farm household's choice of land use type and its effectiveness on land quality and environment in Huang-Huai-Hai Plain. Journal of Natural Resources, 19(1): 1-11. (in Chinese)
Qu F, Zhu X, 2008. A study of the conversion of cultivated land in various grain areas and regional difference. China Land Science, 22(3): 34-40. (in Chinese)
Sharp K, 2003. Measuring destitution: Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches in the analysis of survey data. In: IDS Working Paper, 217.
Soini E, 2005. Land use change patterns and livelihood dynamics on the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Agricultural Systems, 85(3): 306-323.
Sun H, Zhang A, 2006. Rural land external benefit internalization and rural-urban land conversion control. China Population, Resources and Environment, 16(1): 83-87. (in Chinese)
Ulrich A, Ifejika Speranza, C, Roden P et al., 2012. Small-scale farming in semi-arid areas: Livelihood dynamics between 1997 and 2010 in Laikipia, Kenya. Journal of Rural Studies, 28(3): 241-251.
Vista B M, Nel E, Binns T, 2012. Land, landlords and sustainable livelihoods: The impact of agrarian reform on a coconut hacienda in the Philippines. Land Use Policy, 29(1): 154-164.
Wang Y, 2007. Externality analysis on arable land utilization and benefit compensation. Issues in Agricultural Economy, (3): 52-57. (in Chinese)
Wang Y, Zhang A, Huang Z, 2009. Analysis on the multi-objective policy structure of agricultural land compensation in the context of land use control. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, (4): 62-69. (in Chinese)
World Bank, 1985. Tanzania: A poverty profile. Report No.12298-TA, Washington DC.
Wu Z, Liu W, 2009. Assessment on compensation for external benefit in cultivated land protection from the consideration of regional grain security. Journal of Natural Resources, 24(12): 2076-2086. (in Chinese)
Yan J, Wu Y, Zhang Y et al., 2010. Livelihood diversification of peasants and nomads of eastern transect in Tibetan Plateau. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 20(5): 757-770.
Zhang L, Zhang Y, Yan J et al., 2009. Livelihood diversification and cropland use pattern in agro-pastoral mountainous region of the eastern Tibetan Plateau. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 18(4): 499-509.
Zhang X, Ou M, Gao Y, 2007. Study on the regional compensation mechanism for cultivated land preservation. China Soft Science Magazine, 12: 47-55. (in Chinese)
Zhang X, Ou M, Gao Y, 2008. Value standard of regional compensation mechanism of cultivated land preservation. China Population, Resources and Environment, 18(5): 154-160. (in Chinese)
Zhu X, Qu F, 2008. Mechanism research on cultivated land preservation exterior between different sub-grain areas. China Population, Resources and Environment, 18(5): 148-153. (in Chinese)