Journal of Geographical Sciences >
An explanation of labor migration and grain
output growth:
Findings of a case study in eastern Tibetan Plateau
Author: Yan Jianzhong (1972-), PhD and Professor, specialized in land use/cover change, climate change and regional adaptation. E-mail: yanjzswu@126.com
Received date: 2015-07-01
Accepted date: 2015-09-24
Online published: 2016-04-25
Supported by
National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.41071066, No.41571093 Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, No XDB03030500
Copyright
Although there has been rapid rural-urban migration in rural China since the 1980s, the total grain production of China saw a continuous increase. As of today, the relationship between labor migration and grain output growth remains partial and contradictory. The main aim of this empirical study is to examine some specific measures adopted by peasants to deal with labor shortage and maintain grain output growth. Using tracking survey, participatory rural appraisal methods, and land plot investigation, we investigate 274 households and 1405 arable land plots in four villages in two stages in Jinchuan county, southwestern China. The results show that continuous emigration of labor from the four villages caused the abandonment of a small amount of land, decreased labor intensity, and reduced multiple cropping index, shifting from “corn-wheat” multiple cropping pattern to the “corn” cropping pattern, which means labor shortage in some households. At the same time, owing to surplus labor in the villages, the peasants utilize a series of means to offset the negative impacts of labor migration on grain output, such as cropland transfer, labor exchange in the busy seasons, and the substitution of capital and technology for labor. The econometric analysis also shows that labor migration boosts grain production. This study provides a reasonable explanation of grain output growth under rural-urban migration.
Key words: labor migration; land use change; labor intensity; capital intensity; grain output
YAN Jianzhong
,
ZHANG Yili
,
HUA Xiaobo
,
YANG Liang
. An explanation of labor migration and grain
output growth:
Findings of a case study in eastern Tibetan Plateau[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2016
, 26(4)
: 484
-500
.
DOI: 10.1007/s11442-016-1281-4
Figure 1 Location of the four villages at Sha’er Township, Jinchuan county |
Table 1 Variables and description of the econometric model |
Variable | Description | Unit | Mean | Standard deviation |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. Household characteristics | ||||
Age of household head (2005) | Age of household head in 2005 | _ | 52.06 | 11.48 |
Education level of household head (2005) | Illiterate, elementary, middle, high school, college and above, assigned 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, separately | _ | 2.23 | 0.79 |
2. Changes in livelihood assets | ||||
Change of labor migration | Labor migration number of 2010-labor migration number of 2005 | Individual | 0.22 | 1.05 |
Change of total income | Total income of 2010-total income of 2005 | 10 thousand | 2.16 | 2.79 |
Change of income from animal husbandry | Income from animal husbandry of 2010-income from animal husbandry of 2005 | 10 thousand | 0.18 | 0.46 |
Change of seeded area | Seeded area of 2010-seeded area of 2005 | 1/15 ha | -0.14 | 3.27 |
3. Change in production materials | ||||
Change of fertilizer input | Fertilizer input of 2010-fertilizer input of 2005 | kg | 223.88 | 220.5 |
Number of plot in 2005 | Number of plots in 2005 | _ | 3.50 | 1.88 |
4. Regional variables | ||||
Sha’erni | Assigned 1, others 0 | _ | 0.19 | 0.40 |
Kerma | Assigned 1, others 0 | _ | 0.20 | 0.40 |
Shidaan | Assigned 1, others 0 | _ | 0.27 | 0.44 |
Table 2 Family characteristics of the sample households of the four villages in 2005 and 2010 |
2010 | 2005 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Average population per household | 4.40 | 4.43 | |
Average labor per household | 2.84 | 3.04 | |
Average non-agricultural labor per household | 1.39 | 1.18 | |
Average agricultural labor per household | 1.45 | 1.86 | |
Education level (%) | Preschool | 5.16 | 5.12 |
Illiteracy | 14.10 | 14.64 | |
Primary school | 35.79 | 39.85 | |
Junior high school | 28.84 | 27.93 | |
High school | 9.58 | 9.52 | |
College | 6.53 | 2.93 | |
Income (CNY) | Total income | 33338.43 | 11751.55 |
Non-agricultural income | 27140.09 | 8800.05 | |
Animal husbandry income | 3500.93 | 1746.48 | |
Farming income | 1976.2 | 1067.16 | |
Other income | 721.21 | 137.86 | |
Per capita income | 7487.42 | 2791.45 |
Figure 2 Age structure of labors of the sample households of the four villages in 2005 and 2010 |
Table 3 Land transfer and land abandonment of the sample households of the four villages in 2005 and 2010 |
2005 | 2010 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Households | Percentage (%) | Area (ha) | Area per household (ha) | Households | Percentage (%) | Area (ha) | Area per household (ha) | |
Farming | 212 | 98.15 | 58.65 | 0.28 | 201 | 93.06 | 63.02 | 0.31 |
Rent out | 16 | 7.41 | 1.71 | 0.11 | 41 | 18.98 | 4.06 | 0.10 |
Rent in | 18 | 8.33 | 2.56 | 0.14 | 53 | 24.54 | 7.73 | 0.15 |
Abandonment | 11 | 5.09 | 0.60 | 0.05 | 31 | 14.35 | 2.36 | 0.08 |
Reclamation | 7 | 3.24 | 0.88 | 0.13 | 15 | 6.94 | 2.68 | 0.18 |
Table 4 Land-use intensity of the sample plots of the four villages in 2005 and 2010 (ha, %) |
Intensity of land use | Crop arrangement | 2005 | 2010 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Area | Percentage | Area | Percentage | ||
Zero intensity | Land abandonment | 0.6 | 1.01 | 2.36 | 3.61 |
Extensive use | Corn | 29.49 | 49.78 | 36.8 | 56.29 |
Potato | 0.38 | 0.64 | 0.75 | 1.15 | |
wheat | 0.45 | 0.76 | 0.01 | 0.02 | |
Beans | 0.35 | 0.59 | 1.86 | 2.85 | |
Pepper | 0.19 | 0.32 | 0.59 | 0.90 | |
Fruit tree | 0.78 | 1.32 | 1.59 | 2.43 | |
Grass | 0.27 | 0.46 | 0.30 | 0.46 | |
Corn intercrop potato | 1.92 | 3.24 | 7.22 | 11.04 | |
Corn intercrop potato and beans | 0.49 | 0.83 | 0.90 | 1.38 | |
Corn intercrop beans | 2.55 | 4.30 | 1.53 | 2.34 | |
Potato intercrop beans | 0.19 | 0.32 | 0.71 | 1.09 | |
Others | 0.57 | 0.96 | 0.92 | 1.41 | |
Intensive | Vegetable (two harvests a year) | 0.58 | 0.98 | 0.37 | 0.57 |
Corn + wheat + potato (beans) | 0.18 | 0.30 | 0.46 | 0.70 | |
Corn + wheat | 20.25 | 34.18 | 9.00 | 13.77 | |
In total | 59.24 | 100 | 65.37 | 100 |
Table 5 Estimated results of influencing factors on grain production of the sample households of the four villages |
Variable | B | Standard errors | t | Sig. |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. Household characteristics | ||||
Age of household head (2005) | -8.021 | 5.209 | -1.540 | 0.125 |
Education level of household head (2005) | 177.571** | 78.646 | 2.258 | 0.025 |
2. Changes in livelihood assets | ||||
Change of labor migration | 101.559* | 55.502 | 1.830 | 0.069 |
Change of income | -7.981 | 20.930 | -0.381 | 0.703 |
Change of income from animal husbandry | 242.039** | 125.014 | 1.936 | 0.054 |
Change of seeded area | 324.905*** | 18.837 | 17.248 | 0.000 |
3. Change in production materials | ||||
Change of fertilizer input | 1.110*** | 0.329 | 3.376 | 0.001 |
Number of plot in 2005 | -69.936** | 35.091 | -1.993 | 0.048 |
4. Regional variables | ||||
Sha’erni | 97.211 | 156.235 | 0.622 | 0.535 |
Kerma | 118.992 | 177.006 | 0.672 | 0.502 |
Shidaan | 706.751*** | 172.829 | 4.089 | 0.000 |
Intercept | -68.296 | 403.663 | -0.169 | 0.866 |
R2 | 0.877 | |||
Adjust R2 | 0.769 |
Note: ***, ** and * represent significant level at 1%, 5% and 10%, respectively. |
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
5 |
|
6 |
|
7 |
|
8 |
|
9 |
|
10 |
|
11 |
|
12 |
|
13 |
|
14 |
|
15 |
|
16 |
Editorial Committee of Chorography of Jinchuan County (ECCJC), 2011. Jinchuan Yearbook. Beijing: China Minzu University Press. (in Chinese)
|
17 |
|
18 |
|
19 |
|
20 |
|
21 |
|
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
|
25 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
|
31 |
|
32 |
|
33 |
|
34 |
|
35 |
|
36 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
|
40 |
|
41 |
|
42 |
|
43 |
|
44 |
|
45 |
|
46 |
|
47 |
|
48 |
|
49 |
|
50 |
|
51 |
|
52 |
|
53 |
|
54 |
|
55 |
|
56 |
|
57 |
|
58 |
|
59 |
|
/
〈 | 〉 |