Institutional Economics Analsis On Household’s Cultivated Land Protection Behaviors

Cultivated land is the basic means of production in agriculture, which is the materialbasis of human survival and development. Cultivated land protection is not only related tothe protection of the national food security and the livelihoods of hundreds of millions offarmers, but also has an important role in promoting stability, sustainable economicdevelopment and protection of the ecological environment for rural areas and even thewhole society. Household is the most direct users and managers of cultivated land, theirday-to-day behavior of cultivated land use will directly have an important impact oncultivated land protection, therefore, the role of cultivated land protection played by farmeris very important, especially in the quality of cultivated land protection. The rules of thesystem as the constraints to human behavior have a profound impact on farmer’s cultivatedland protection behavior, by limiting choice of farmer’s behavior and providing effectiveincentives for farmer’s cultivated land protection behavior, thus affecting theimplementation effect of cultivated land protection. Therefore, any institution that hasimpact on farmer’s cultivated land protection behavior may have a positive or negativeimpact on the protection of cultivated land. To strengthen the study of the behavior offarmer’s cultivated land protection behavior from the point of view of institutionaleconomics has important theoretical and practical significance in promoting cultivated landprotection strategic objectives.This paper uses farmers act theory and principles of institutional economics to analyzefarmer’s cultivated land protection behavior, assessing the impact of the current policy onthe behavior of household’s cultivated land protection, and special investigations and theuse of agricultural subsidies policy and cultivated land protection effect household sampledata related impact empirical verification, and then puts forward perfection of cultivatedland protection system, policy recommendations.The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:(1) Institution that has influence on household’s cultivated land protection behavior,include the formal institutions (land property rights system, laws and regulations related tocultivated land protection, agricultural subsidies, rural credit system and rural socialsecurity system) and informal institutions (Average ideology, land complex, socialnetworks in rural areas, utilitarianism, and "safety first" Code of Conduct). Land propertyrights institution which determines the various interests owned by the household ofcultivated land assets, has impact on farmer’s cultivated land protection behavior throughaffecting farmer’s expected return on protective investment in cultivated land; cultivatedland protection laws and regulations such as "Land Management Law" limited theboundary of farmer’s behavior is actually explicitly tell household what can be done, what cannot be done, so as to constrain the behavior of farmer’s cultivated land protectionreverse; policy of agricultural subsidies could improve the income level of household,motivate household to actively involved in the protection of cultivated land by reducing thecost of agricultural production of household; rural social security system could resolveworries for household so as to guide the household to invest more funds in agriculturalproduction, and it could also promotes cultivated land circulation that will enhance capitalfunctions of cultivated land, and then promote the economical and intensive use ofcultivated land; rural financial and credit system provide credit support to household interms of cultivated land infrastructure construction and advanced agricultural productiontechnology, which requires a large investment, so as to encourage and guide household toincrease investment in these areas, thus contributing to the enhancement of the quality ofcultivated land. The informal institutionaffects the farmer’s value of target selection, ideas,and thus directly affects the behavior of the household’s cultivated land protection. Inaddition, when informal institution and the formal institution are inconsistent, this willincrease the cost of the formal institution, thereby reducing the performance of the formalinstitution.(2) According to thematic research data of agricultural subsidies policy and cultivatedland protection effect, analyze household’s cultivated land protection behavior from2003to2011in Jiangxi Province, including manure fertilizer and pesticide use, planting greenmanure, labor input, cultivated land infrastructure construction, combatting violations ofcultivated land. The results show that: the enthusiasm of household cultivated landprotection is generally not high, household prefer the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticidesand other short-term quick investment, and there is excessive application of fertilizer andthe pesticide; Long-term investment, such as manure fertilizer use,green manure planting,cultivated land infrastructure construction which can contribute to the maintenance ofcultivated land fertility, improve the quality o f cultivated land, promote sustainable use ofcultivated land, show a downward trend; for illegal conversion, land acquisition ofcultivated land and other behavior violating cultivated land protection laws and regulations,household rarely positive initiative to be blocked.(3) Respectively, analyze impact of the informal institutions and the existing formalinstitutions on household’s cultivated land protection behavior, which shows that: theexisting institutions have insufficient incentives and ineffective constraints on the behaviorof household’s cultivated land protection. Informal institutions in rural areas, such asegalitarianism, utilitarianism, the ideas of "safety first", in some extent, will reduce theefficiency of the formal system, and have a negative impact on the protection of cultivatedland. Land property is unclear and land acquisition is incomplete, which would lead toinstability of land use rights, and then affect the household long-term investment incultivated land; The incentive efforts of agricultural subsidies on household’s cultivated land protection behavior are not obvious, as the way of agricultural subsidies is unscientificand subsidies are small; For household’s cultivated land protection behaviors,―Regulationson the Protection of Basic Farmland”,“land management Law”and other laws andregulations are limited to verbal persuasion, and no substantial rewards,for the reversebehaviors, supervision and punishment is not in place; types of financial products andservices for household, provided by financial institutions in rural areas, as well as the harshconditions of credit, higher threshold, it is very difficult for household to obtain creditsupport; the level of protection of the rural social security system, the minimum livingstandard, and the level of rural endowment insurance coverage is too low to meet thedemand for social security in rural areas.Finally, to motivate household’s cultivated land protection behavior-based policyrecommendations, including:(1) increase advocacy of cultivated land protection law,policy, to enhance household’s concept of cultivated land protection;(2) improve the ruralland property rights system to ensure the legitimate rights and interests of household;(3)establish and perfect the social security system in rural areas, promote the transformationof the land functions;(4) establish and complete the system of subsidies for household’scultivated land protection;(5) establish and complete incentives, supervision andpunishment mechanism of household’s cultivated land protection...