Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Impact of agricultural production outsourcing services on carbon emissions in China

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Increasing food output while reducing agricultural carbon emissions (ACE) is a major challenge to achieving green agriculture in China. Previously unexplored research regarding the relationship between agricultural production outsourcing services (APOS) and ACE is investigated using household microsurvey data in China and econometric methods, and the influencing mechanism is also tested empirically. The results reveal that APOS increases the total ACE and reduces ACE per unit area. The mechanism test shows that APOS are beneficial to the expansion of rice planting areas and farmers’ adoption of agricultural green production techniques. The increasing effect of rice planting area on ACE was greater than the decreasing effect of green production techniques. In the future, China should accelerate the selection and breeding of rice varieties with low carbon emissions to reduce the increase of ACE caused by large-scale land management in the process of APOS development. Policy support and subsidies should be strengthened for APOS organizations to purchase green production techniques, so as to further drive farmers to adopt green production techniques and reduce ACE. It is also necessary for China to encourage small-scale farmers to outsource their agricultural production activities to APOS organizations. The role of collective action consciousness of agricultural production in increasing the supply capacity of APOS organizations should be enhanced.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • Ali B, Ullah A, Klan D (2021) Does the prevailing Indian agricultural ecosystem cause carbon dioxide emission? A consent towards risk reduction. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28(4):4691–4703

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Baiyegunhi LJS, Majokweni ZP, Ferrer SRD (2019) Impact of outsourced agricultural extension program on smallholder farmers’ net farm income in Msinga, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Technol Soc 57:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bangkim B, Mallick B, Roy A, Sultana Z (2021) Impact of agriculture extension services on technical efficiency of rural paddy farmers in southwest Bangladesh. Environ Challenges 5:100261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen S, Hu H (2016) Study on spatial-temporal changes and influence factors of greenhouse gases emission from livestock and poultry in China. China Popul Resour Environ 7:93–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Dong HM, Li XE, Tao XP, Peng XP, Li N, Zhu ZP (2008) China greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural activities and its mitigation strategy. Trans Chinese Soc Agric Eng 24:269–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Gooroochurn N, Hanley A (2007) A tale of two literatures: transaction costs and property rights in innovation outsourcing. Res Policy 36(10):1495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebregziabher (2015) The impact of agricultural extension on households’ welfare in Ethiopia. Int J Soc Stud Econ 42(8):733–748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han J (2018) Take ceneral secretary Xi Jinping’s “Three Rural” thoughts as the foundation to follow and implement the strategy of rural revitalization. Manage World 8:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang X, Xu X, Wang Q, Zhang L, Gao X, Chen L (2019) Assessment of agricultural carbon emissions and their spatiotemporal changes in China, 1997–2016. Int J Environ Res Public Health 16(17):3105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ji MF (2018) Agricultural production outsourcing services: the third kinetic energy in the history of China’s agricultural modernization. Issues Agric Econ 3:9–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin SQ, Lin Y, Niu KY (2021) Driving green transformation of agriculture with low carbon: characteristics of agricultural carbon emissions and its emission reduction path in China. Reform 5:29–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang C, Liu JC, Xu ZG (2020) Impact of agricultural production outsourcing service on rural land rent transfer. Chinese Rural Econ 9:105–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Li B, Zhang JB, Li HP (2011) Study on spatial-temporal characteristics and affecting factors decomposition of agricultural carbon emission in China. China Popul Resour Environ 8:80–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Li CL, Zhou H (2020) Relationship between agricultural techniques progress and carbon emission intensity: an empirical analysis under different influence paths. J China Agric Univ 25(11):162–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Q, Xiao HF (2020) The impact of farmland management scale and fiscal policy for supporting agriculture on agricultural carbon emission. Resour Sci 42(6):1063–1073

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu H, Chen YJ, Hu H, Geng XH (2021) Can agricultural production outsourcing services promote the adoption of environmentally friendly agricultural techniques by farmers. J Agro-Technical Econ 3:36–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu H, Chen YJ, Zhang PW, Huan HT, Xie HL, Hu H (2022) Impacts of farmland size and benefit expectations on the utilization of straw resources: Evidence from crop straw incorporation in China. Soil Use Manag 38:929–939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mi Q, Li XD, Gao JZ (2020) How to improve the welfare of smallholders through agricultural production outsourcing: evidence from cotton farmers in Xinjiang, Northwest China. J Clean Prod 256:120636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massayo I, Hendriksen A, Heijman WJM (2008) Agricultural outsourcing: a comparison between The Netherlands and Japan. Appl Stud Agribus Commerce 2:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Materia VC, Pascucci S, Dries L (2017) Are in-house and outsourcing innovation strategies correlated? Evidence from the European agri-food sector. J Agric Econ 68(1):249–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Bureau of Statistics of China (2015) China statistical yearbook. China Statistics Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun DD, Misgina A, Lu YT, Liu MX (2019) The relationship between job quality supervision, risk preference and farmers’ demand for outsourcing services. J Agro-Technical Econ 4:4–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun Y, Meng L, Tian L, Li GL, Sun OJX (2016) Assessing current stocks and future sequestration potential of forest biomass carbon in Daqing Mountain Nature Reserve of Inner Mongolia, China. J Forest Stud 27(4):931–938

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shao GL, Kong HZ, Yu JK, Li C (2015) Decomposition of driving factors of carbon emissions from marine fisheries in China based on LMDI method. J Agrotech Econ 6:119–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Song B, Mu YY, Hou LL (2016) Study on the effect of farm households’ specialization on low-carbon agriculture: evidence from vegetable growers in Beijing, China. J Nat Resour 3:468–474

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian XH, Li W, Li R (2021) Environmental effects of agricultural mechanization: evidence from agricultural machinery purchase subsidy policy. Chinese Rural Econ 9:95–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian Y, Qi MH (2022) Re-evaluation of China’s agricultural carbon emissions: basic status, dynamic evolution and spatial spillover effects. Chinese Rural Econ 3:104–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu XR, Zhang JB, Zhang Y, Li ZL, Liu N (2020) Effects of farmers’ low-carbon behaviors on production performance: based on the household survey data in Hubei province. Ecol Econ 9:107–115+128

  • West TO, Marland G (2002) A synthesis of carbon sequestration, carbon emissions and net carbon flux in agricultural: comparing tillage practices in the United States. Agric Ecosyst Environ 91:217–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ying RY, Xu B (2017) Effects of specialized pest control services on pesticide application intensity. China Popul Resour Environ 8:90–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L, Luo BL (2020) Agricultural reduction: scale logic of farmer’s management and its evidence. Chinese Rural Econ 2:81–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao YH, Qian ZL, Xu X (2022) Study on the impact of industrial structure upgrading on carbon emissions in China in the context of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality. Inquiry into Econ Issues 3:87–105

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71803071 & 72273061 & 42261050). Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program of Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics (No.202310421009)..

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

HL had the original idea and data collecting, ND and QC carried out the analyses for the study, and the authors drafted the manuscript and the approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hua Lu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: V.V.S.S. Sarma

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lu, H., Duan, N. & Chen, Q. Impact of agricultural production outsourcing services on carbon emissions in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30, 35985–35995 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24771-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24771-2

Keywords

Navigation