An assessment of farmers’ satisfaction with land consolidation performance in China

Rural land consolidation has been a very important and efficient development tool all over the world for a century and is now an indispensable instrument for rural sustainable development in China. The Chinese central government has devoted large sums of money to rural consolidation projects each year in an effort to help protect cultivated land, to improve agricultural production, to enhance the socio-economic development of rural communities, and to help build rural landscapes. However, little attention has been paid to evaluating the performance of land consolidation projects from the view of community members, which is sorely needed. Household satisfaction with land consolidation projects is a key indicator of consolidation performance. Understanding the factors that influence household satisfaction is an effective way of dealing with problems in the interactions between land restructuring and human behaviors in rural areas and can help improve project performance. This paper examines the performance of land consolidation in terms of rural households’ levels of satisfaction in rural China and analyses the most influential factors of satisfaction. Data were gathered via questionnaires and analyzed with a probit model. Results indicated three significant points. First, overall satisfaction rate was 76.5%, meaning that most rural households in the regions of Hangzhou, Changsha, and Guiyang were satisfied with land consolidation projects. Second, 11 factors significantly affected rural residents’ satisfaction with consolidation. These factors included farmers’ level of education, employment characteristics, family size, input level of agricultural production, agricultural produce transportation methods, level of agricultural mechanization, the characteristics of land transfer in the village and within their own families, the perceived importance of land consolidation, their level of social insurance support, and their participation in rural production cooperatives. Third, six of these factors had positive effects on performance; four had negative effects, and one (employment characteristics) demonstrated a significant influence.