Households' Decisions to Participate in China's Sloping Land Conversion Program and Reallocate Their Labour Times: Is There Endogeneity Bias?

Runsheng Yin, Hao Liu, Can Liu, Gang Lu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Past impact evaluations of China's largest ecological restoration program have assumed the absence of self-selection (endogeneity) in the likelihood and extent of participation. Using appropriate testing procedures and a panel dataset of > 1000 households over 11 years in two primary provinces, we found evidence of self-selection in household behavior of generating off-farm income. But the hypothesis was rejected that there was a significant self-selection component in households' decision to participate in the program and generate farming income. Evaluations ignoring the self-section for off-farm labor were found to be biased and overly positive on program income impact. Self-selection should thus be explicitly included, unless there is counter evidence, in any study of this kind.

LanguageEnglish (US)
Pages380-390
Number of pages11
JournalEcological Economics
Volume145
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2018

Profile

labor
income
farm
household
land
decision
programme
China
Household
Self-selection
Labor
Endogeneity bias
evaluation
Income

Keywords

  • Ecological restoration
  • Endogenous selection
  • Fixed effects
  • Instrumental variable method
  • Labour reallocation
  • Panel data
  • Payments for ecosystem services

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Science(all)
  • Economics and Econometrics

Cite this

Households' Decisions to Participate in China's Sloping Land Conversion Program and Reallocate Their Labour Times : Is There Endogeneity Bias? / Yin, Runsheng; Liu, Hao; Liu, Can; Lu, Gang.

In: Ecological Economics, Vol. 145, 01.03.2018, p. 380-390.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a0cb069b20e347bb9c217df55d9ce90c,
title = "Households\{textquoteleft} Decisions to Participate in China\{textquoteleft}s Sloping Land Conversion Program and Reallocate Their Labour Times: Is There Endogeneity Bias?",
abstract = "Past impact evaluations of China\{textquoteleft}s largest ecological restoration program have assumed the absence of self-selection (endogeneity) in the likelihood and extent of participation. Using appropriate testing procedures and a panel dataset of > 1000 households over 11 years in two primary provinces, we found evidence of self-selection in household behavior of generating off-farm income. But the hypothesis was rejected that there was a significant self-selection component in households\{textquoteleft} decision to participate in the program and generate farming income. Evaluations ignoring the self-section for off-farm labor were found to be biased and overly positive on program income impact. Self-selection should thus be explicitly included, unless there is counter evidence, in any study of this kind.",
keywords = "Ecological restoration, Endogenous selection, Fixed effects, Instrumental variable method, Labour reallocation, Panel data, Payments for ecosystem services",
author = "Runsheng Yin and Hao Liu and Can Liu and Gang Lu",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.11.020",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "145",
pages = "380--390",
journal = "Ecological Economics",
issn = "0921-8009",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Households' Decisions to Participate in China's Sloping Land Conversion Program and Reallocate Their Labour Times

T2 - Ecological Economics

AU - Yin,Runsheng

AU - Liu,Hao

AU - Liu,Can

AU - Lu,Gang

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - Past impact evaluations of China's largest ecological restoration program have assumed the absence of self-selection (endogeneity) in the likelihood and extent of participation. Using appropriate testing procedures and a panel dataset of > 1000 households over 11 years in two primary provinces, we found evidence of self-selection in household behavior of generating off-farm income. But the hypothesis was rejected that there was a significant self-selection component in households' decision to participate in the program and generate farming income. Evaluations ignoring the self-section for off-farm labor were found to be biased and overly positive on program income impact. Self-selection should thus be explicitly included, unless there is counter evidence, in any study of this kind.

AB - Past impact evaluations of China's largest ecological restoration program have assumed the absence of self-selection (endogeneity) in the likelihood and extent of participation. Using appropriate testing procedures and a panel dataset of > 1000 households over 11 years in two primary provinces, we found evidence of self-selection in household behavior of generating off-farm income. But the hypothesis was rejected that there was a significant self-selection component in households' decision to participate in the program and generate farming income. Evaluations ignoring the self-section for off-farm labor were found to be biased and overly positive on program income impact. Self-selection should thus be explicitly included, unless there is counter evidence, in any study of this kind.

KW - Ecological restoration

KW - Endogenous selection

KW - Fixed effects

KW - Instrumental variable method

KW - Labour reallocation

KW - Panel data

KW - Payments for ecosystem services

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85034957471&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85034957471&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.11.020

DO - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.11.020

M3 - Article

VL - 145

SP - 380

EP - 390

JO - Ecological Economics

JF - Ecological Economics

SN - 0921-8009

ER -