Search results

This study aims to analyze the influence of farmers’ degree of participation in collective action on their adoption decisions and waiting time regarding soil and water conservation (SWC) measures.

The Probit model and Generalized Propensity Score Match method are used to assess the effect of the degree of participation in collective action on farmers’ adoption decisions and waiting time for implementing SWC measures.

The findings reveal that farmers’ engagement in collective action positively influences the decision-making process regarding terrace construction, water-saving irrigation and afforestation measures. However, it does not significantly impact the decision-making process for plastic film and ridge-furrow tillage practices. Notably, collective action has the strongest influence on farmers’ adoption decisions regarding water-saving irrigation technology, with a relatively smaller influence on the adoption of afforestation and terrace measures. Moreover, the results suggest that participating in collective action effectively reduces the waiting time for terrace construction and expedites the adoption of afforestation and water-saving irrigation technology. Specifically, collective action has a significantly negative effect on the waiting time for terrace construction, followed by water-saving irrigation technology and afforestation measures.

The results of this study underscore the significance of fostering mutual assistance and cooperation mechanisms among farmers, as they can pave the way for raising funds and labor, cultivating elite farmers, attracting skilled labor to rural areas, enhancing the adoption rate and expediting the implementation of terraces, water-saving irrigation technology and afforestation measures.

Drawing on an evaluation of farmers’ degree of participation in collective action, this paper investigates the effect of participation on their SWC adoption decisions and waiting times, thereby offering theoretical and practical insights into soil erosion control in the Loess Plateau.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between formal environmental regulation (FER) and informal environmental regulation (IER), technological innovation and employment.

This paper uses data from the 30 provinces of China during 2003–2015. The impacts of formal and IER and technological innovation on employment are estimated by generalized least squares, and the eastern region of China is analyzed separately.

First, both formal and IERs have different degrees of significant impact on employment, and the relationship is not a simple linear. FER has an inverted U-shaped relationship with employment, but IER has a U-shaped relationship. However, in the test including technological innovation, the results of the national sample and the eastern sample are different. In the eastern sample, the relationship between informal regulation and employment has an inverted U-shaped curve. Second, the results of model 3 and model 6 show that technological innovation has a significant negative effect on employment both in the national and the eastern region sample.

This paper puts forward corresponding policy implications: first, in designing environmental regulations, it is necessary to consider not only the stringency but also the type of regulation. Second, environmental regulations need to be differentiated by region. Finally, when designing environmental regulations, it is necessary to consider more flexible employment policies that are contingent on the stringency of regulations, in order to prevent employment decline due to technological innovations.

The conclusions about the influence of environmental regulation on employment reached are not consistent in China. Most existing research studies seldom consider environmental regulations into categories and focus only on the whole environmental regulation. This paper pays attention to the influences of different types of environmental regulations on employment. It analyzes the eastern region separately to explore whether there is a difference in the effects of environmental regulations. Furthermore, this considers the effect of technological innovation as a mediator.