Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T08:22:16.486Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Economic changes and afforestation incentives in rural China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2006

SYLVIE DÉMURGER
Affiliation:
HK Institute of Economics & Business Strategy (HIEBS), and GATE-CNRS (France), K. K. Leung Building, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong. Tel: (852) 2241-5067. Fax: (852) 2548 1152. Email: [email protected]
WEIYONG YANG
Affiliation:
University of International Business and Economics (Beijing). Email: [email protected]

Abstract

This paper uses provincial macro-data from the mid 1980s onwards to investigate the determinants of land-use choice in rural China, by paying particular attention to the decision to plant trees as competing with agriculture. The evidence supports the importance of economic motivations in the afforestation decision. A profit-seeking behavior is found to be at stake in the decision to plant trees, which is made according to both the relative profitability of forestry against agriculture, and their relative risks. Afforestation is also found to strongly depend on the pressure upon land as well as on household wealth.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This paper is drawn from a research program on ‘Economic Growth and Sustainable Forest Management in China’ funded by the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS, France). The authors wish to express their gratitude to Li Junqing, Pascal Marty, and Jean-Luc Peyron for their precious collaboration in undertaking the whole research program and to Belton Fleisher, Martin Fournier, Mbolatiana Rambonilaza, and Xu Jintao for useful comments on earlier versions of the paper. We are also grateful to two anonymous referees for valuable comments and suggestions. We remain solely responsible for errors and omissions.