|
|
Impact of Rural-household Differentiation on Poverty Alleviation Effect of Farmer Cooperatives and Its Policy Implications |
Peng Wenhuan1, Huang Zuhui2, Fu Linlin3 |
1.Business School, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China 2.China Academy for Rural Development, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China 3.Institute of Rural Development, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou 310021, China |
|
|
Abstract By the end of October 2019, there were more than 2.2 million registered farmer cooperatives in China. An objective evaluation of their contribution to targeted poverty alleviation in rural China is of great necessity, as it provides important references for how cooperatives can help alleviate poverty and promote farmers’ income in the “post poverty alleviation era”. Against China’s background of rural-household differentiation, this paper examines the barriers faced by cooperatives to participate in rural poverty governance from the perspective of organizational service availability. The result of our equilibrium analysis shows that the transition of farmers’ professional identity, and hence the differentiation of their factor endowment, not only discourages vulnerable farmers from seeking organizational service but also encourages cooperatives to adopt the “cream-skimming” strategy. As a result, the service availability for vulnerable rural households is compromised, eventually leading to cooperatives’ failure in poverty governance.This paper uses the three-phase farmer panel tracking data from 2015 to 2019 of the China Rural Household Panel Survey (CRHPS) and adopts the time-varying DID model to evaluate cooperatives’ contribution to and the effect of rural-household differentiation on poverty alleviation. The following findings are reported: (1) the poverty alleviation effect of cooperatives is not significant overall, which is supported by a series of robustness checks; (2) there is a great disparity in cooperatives’ poverty alleviation effect across farmers and villages. Specifically, the poverty alleviation effect is significant for full-time farmers, which is more the case for villages with a low concentration of farmland and a more equal distribution of factor endowment, while the effect is compromised in villages where farmland is highly concentrated. The above empirical findings corroborate the result of the equilibrium analysis, i.e. the rapid transition of farmers’ professional identity and the differentiation of their factor endowment are major causes of cooperatives’ failure in poverty governance.This paper has the following improvements compared to previous studies. First, unlike existing studies that judged whether farmers were “treated” based on “whether they joined a cooperative”, this paper takes organizational service availability as the criterion for the judgment. It not only factors in both the direct effect on cooperative members and the spill-over effect on non-members but also overcomes the interference of cooperatives’ selective membership in the result. Moreover, this paper adopts “whether a village has cooperatives” as the proxy variable for organizational service availability, which provides methodological references for future empirical studies. Second, previous studies interpreted the reasons behind cooperatives’ failure in poverty governance only from the perspective of cooperatives, while this paper adds the new perspective of farmers by incorporating the background of rural-household differentiation.
|
Received: 13 January 2022
|
|
|
|
1 徐旭初、吴彬: 《减贫视域中农村合作组织发展的益贫价值》,《农业经济与管理》2012年第5期,第18-24页。 2 徐旭初、吴彬: 《合作社是小农户和现代农业发展有机衔接的理想载体吗?》,《中国农村经济》2018年第11期,第80-95页。 3 苑鹏: 《中国农村市场化进程中的农民合作组织研究》,《中国社会科学》2001年第6期,第63-73,205-206页。 4 张琛、彭超、孔祥智: 《农户分化的演化逻辑、历史演变与未来展望》,《改革》2019年第2期,第5-16页。 5 潘劲: 《中国农民专业合作社:数据背后的解读》,《中国农村观察》2011年第6期,第2-11,94页。 6 罗干: 《决胜攻坚阶段农民合作社精准扶贫的困境和出路》,《农业经济问题》2020年第11期,第55-64页。 7 Bernard T. & Spielman D. J., “Reaching the rural poor through rural producer organizations? a study of agricultural marketing cooperatives in Ethiopia,” Food Policy, Vol. 34, No. 1 (2009), pp. 60-69. 8 朋文欢、黄祖辉: 《农民专业合作社有助于提高农户收入吗?——基于内生转换模型和合作社服务功能的考察》,《西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版)》2017年第4期,第57-66页。 9 廖小静、应瑞瑶、邓衡山等: 《收入效应与利益分配:农民合作效果研究——基于农民专业合作社不同角色农户受益差异的实证研究》,《中国软科学》2016年第5期,第30-42页。 10 Mujawamariya G., D’ Haese M. & Speelman S., “Exploring double side-selling in cooperatives, case study of four coffee cooperatives in Rwanda,” Food Policy, Vol. 39 (2013), pp. 72-83. 11 Bellemare M. F., “Agricultural extension and imperfect supervision in contract farming: evidence from Madagascar,” Agricultural Economics, Vol. 41 (2010), pp. 507-517. 12 杨丹、刘自敏: 《农户专用性投资、农社关系与合作社增收效应》,《中国农村经济》2017年第5期,第45-57页。 13 谭智心、孔祥智: 《不完全契约、内部监督与合作社中小社员激励——合作社内部“搭便车”行为分析及其政策含义》,《中国农村经济》2012年第7期,第17-28页。 14 黄宗智: 《中国农业发展三大模式:行政、放任与合作的利与弊》,《开放时代》2017年第1期,第7,128-153页。 15 黄祖辉、朋文欢: 《农民合作社的生产技术效率评析及其相关讨论——来自安徽砀山县5镇(乡)果农的证据》,《农业技术经济》2016年第8期,第4-14页。 16 温铁军: 《农民专业合作社发展的困境与出路》,《湖南农业大学学报(社会科学版)》2013年第4期,第4-6页。 17 邓衡山、徐志刚: 《〈农民专业合作社法〉需要大改吗?——兼论名实之辨的意义与是否需要发展中国特色合作社理论》,《农业经济问题》2016年第11期,第78-85,111-112页。 18 周应恒、胡凌啸: 《中国农民专业合作社还能否实现“弱者的联合”?——基于中日实践的对比分析》,《中国农村经济》2016年第6期,第30-38页。 19 朋文欢、傅琳琳: 《贫困地区农户参与合作社的行为机理分析——来自广西富川县的经验》,《农业经济问题》2018年第11期,第134-144页。 20 Thorp R., Stewart F. & Heyer A., “When and how far is group formation a route out of chronic poverty?” World Development, Vol. 33, No. 6 (2005), pp. 907-920. 21 李宪宝、高强: 《行为逻辑、分化结果与发展前景——对1978年以来我国农户分化行为的考察》,《农业经济问题》2013年第2期,第56-65,111页。 22 温涛、王小华、杨丹等: 《新形势下农户参与合作经济组织的行为特征、利益机制及决策效果》,《管理世界》2015年第7期,第82-97页。 23 赵晓峰、何慧丽: 《农村社会阶层分化对农民专业合作社发展的影响机制分析》,《农业经济问题》2012年第12期,第38-43,110页。 24 张晓山: 《农民专业合作社的发展趋势探析》,《管理世界》2009年第5期,第89-96页。 25 杨子砚、文峰: 《从务工到创业——农地流转与农村劳动力转移形式升级》,《管理世界》2020年第7期,第171-185页。 26 李文杰、胡霞: 《为何农民合作社未成为“弱者联合”而由“强者主导”——基于农民合作社组建模式的实现条件分析》,《中国经济问题》2021年第2期,第59-67页。 27 苑鹏: 《中国特色的农民合作社制度的变异现象研究》,《中国农村观察》2013年第3期,第40-46,91-92页。 28 Lele U., “Cooperatives and the poor: a comparative perspective,” World Development, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1981), pp. 55-72. 29 张晓山: 《促进以农产品生产专业户为主体的合作社的发展——以浙江省农民专业合作社的发展为例》,《中国农村经济》2004年第11期,第4-10,23页。 30 刘同山、苑鹏: 《农民合作社是有效的益贫组织吗?》,《中国农村经济》2020年第5期,第39-54页。 31 刘俊文: 《农民专业合作社对贫困农户收入及其稳定性的影响——以山东、贵州两省为例》,《中国农村经济》2017年第2期,第44-55页。 32 Zhang Y, Zhou X. & Lei W., “Social capital and its contingent value in poverty reduction: evidence from Western China,” World Development, Vol. 93 (2017), pp. 350-361. 33 张同龙、张林秀: 《我国农地不平等的演进:事实和动力——基于全国代表性农户调查数据的初步结果》,《农业经济问题》2019年第11期,第15-24页。 34 周晔馨: 《社会资本是穷人的资本吗?——基于中国农户收入的经验证据》,《管理世界》2012年第7期,第83-95页。 35 黄祖辉、徐旭初、冯冠胜: 《农民专业合作组织发展的影响因素分析——对浙江省农民专业合作组织发展现状的探讨》,《中国农村经济》2002年第3期,第13-21页。 36 李江一、秦范: 《如何破解农地流转的需求困境?——以发展新型农业经营主体为例》,《管理世界》2022年第2期,第6,84-99页。 37 刘成良: 《2020年后国家贫困瞄准能力建设研究》,《农业经济问题》2021年第6期,第132-144页。 38 Chaudhuri S., Jalan J. & Suryahadi A., “Assessing household vulnerability to poverty from cross-sectional data: a methodology and estimates from Indonesia,” https://doi.org/10.7916/D85149GF, 2022-01-13. 39 樊丽明、解垩: 《公共转移支付减少了贫困脆弱性吗?》,《经济研究》2014年第8期,第67-78页。 40 章元、许庆、邬璟璟: 《一个农业人口大国的工业化之路:中国降低农村贫困的经验》,《经济研究》2012年第11期,第76-87页。 |
|
|
|