Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Heterogeneous effects of rural land property mortgage loan program on income

Heterogeneous effects of rural land property mortgage loan program on income The innovative rural land property right mortgage loan program (RLPRMLP) provides a new channel for farmers to secure borrowing from microfinance institutions. Farmers’ land property right could be used as collateral to deal with moral hazard and adverse selection issues. The purpose of this paper is to document the effects of the RLPRMLP on households’ income using a unique data set from 1,279 households’ survey in Western China during 2012–2014.Design/methodology/approachAt the first stage, the authors evaluate the impacts of RLPRMLP on households’ income to get the benchmark results when the authors control household’s observed and unobserved characteristics. To address the potential endogeneity issue resulting from the self-selection of farmers into the rural financial market, the authors apply the treatment effect model to identify the csusal effects of the innovative loan approach on a household’s income.FindingsThe empirical results favor the belief that participating in the RLPRMLP helps the households improve their total income (at least by 20.2 percent) and income per capita. This income-improving channel is only through agricultural sector, rather than through non-agricultural sector which potentially helps to deal with the inequality issue within poor regions. The results are robust when the authors control households’ characteristics, including observed and unobserved, and solve the endogeneity issue. Participating in the RLPRMLP could encourage farmers to invest more in the agricultural sector and increase agricultural productivity, which is the main mechanism of the income-improving effect of the RLPRMLP.Originality/valueThe innovative mortgage loan program provides a new channel for farmers to get loan. Land property right reform is being currently applied in rural China. Testing the effectiveness of combining land property right and microfinance loan method is necessary for the government policy making and development of rural areas. The findings are striking. The income improvement mechanism mainly works through agricultural sector, potentially because of the reform of land property, contributing to the increase of marginal product of land, i.e., the increase of agricultural productivity. These could help the development of microfinance theory, and the innovative loan method could be applied to other developing countries. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png China Agricultural Economic Review Emerald Publishing

Heterogeneous effects of rural land property mortgage loan program on income

Download PDF
17 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/heterogeneous-effects-of-rural-land-property-mortgage-loan-program-on-i3MxLkZRNv
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
1756-137X
DOI
10.1108/caer-12-2015-0179
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The innovative rural land property right mortgage loan program (RLPRMLP) provides a new channel for farmers to secure borrowing from microfinance institutions. Farmers’ land property right could be used as collateral to deal with moral hazard and adverse selection issues. The purpose of this paper is to document the effects of the RLPRMLP on households’ income using a unique data set from 1,279 households’ survey in Western China during 2012–2014.Design/methodology/approachAt the first stage, the authors evaluate the impacts of RLPRMLP on households’ income to get the benchmark results when the authors control household’s observed and unobserved characteristics. To address the potential endogeneity issue resulting from the self-selection of farmers into the rural financial market, the authors apply the treatment effect model to identify the csusal effects of the innovative loan approach on a household’s income.FindingsThe empirical results favor the belief that participating in the RLPRMLP helps the households improve their total income (at least by 20.2 percent) and income per capita. This income-improving channel is only through agricultural sector, rather than through non-agricultural sector which potentially helps to deal with the inequality issue within poor regions. The results are robust when the authors control households’ characteristics, including observed and unobserved, and solve the endogeneity issue. Participating in the RLPRMLP could encourage farmers to invest more in the agricultural sector and increase agricultural productivity, which is the main mechanism of the income-improving effect of the RLPRMLP.Originality/valueThe innovative mortgage loan program provides a new channel for farmers to get loan. Land property right reform is being currently applied in rural China. Testing the effectiveness of combining land property right and microfinance loan method is necessary for the government policy making and development of rural areas. The findings are striking. The income improvement mechanism mainly works through agricultural sector, potentially because of the reform of land property, contributing to the increase of marginal product of land, i.e., the increase of agricultural productivity. These could help the development of microfinance theory, and the innovative loan method could be applied to other developing countries.

Journal

China Agricultural Economic Review – Emerald Publishing

Published: Oct 17, 2018

Keywords: China; Treatment effect model; Mechanism analysis; Rural financial market; Rural land property mortgage loan program

References

  • The impacts of microfinance: evidence from joint-liability lending in Mongolia
    Attanasio, O.; Augsburg, B.; Haas, R.D.
  • The impacts of microcredit: evidence from Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Augsburg, B.; Harmgart, H.
  • Do NGOs and development agencies contribute to sustainability of smallholder soybean farmers in Northern Ghana—a stochastic production frontier approach
    Avea, A.D.; Zhu, J.; Tian, X.; Baležentis, T.; Li, T.; Rickaille, M.
  • Impact of microfinance on poverty alleviation: a case study of NRSP in Bahawalpur of Pakistan
    Ayuub, S.
  • Repayment incentives and the distribution of gains from group lending
    Baland, J.M.; Somanathan, R.; Wahhaj, Z.
  • The role of microfinance in contemporary rural development finance policy and practice: imposing neoliberalism as ‘best practice’
    Bateman, M.
  • Self-selection into credit markets evidence from agriculture in Mali
    Beaman, L.; Karlan, D.; Thuysbaert, B.; Udry, C.
  • Microfinance as a poverty reduction tool—a critical assessment
    Chowdhury, A.
  • Estimating the impact of microcredit on those who take it up: evidence from a randomized experiment in Morocco
    Crepon, B.; Devoto, F.; Duflo, E.; Pariente, W.
  • The miracle of microfinance? Evidence from a randomized evaluation
    Duflo, E.; Banerjee, A.; Glennerster, R.; Kinnan, C.G.
  • Do property titles increase credit access among the urban poor? Evidence from Peru
    Field, E.; Torero, M.
  • The economics of lending with joint liability: theory and practice
    Ghatak, K.; Guinnane, T.W.
  • The origins and influence of land property rights in Vietnam
    Hare, D.
  • Sample selection bias as a specification error
    Heckman, J.
  • Microfinance: its impact, outreach, and sustainability
    Hermes, N.; Lensink, R.
  • Microfinance and household poverty reduction: new evidence from India
    Imai, K.S.; Arun, T.; Annim, S.K.
  • Microfinance and poverty–A macro perspective
    Imai, K.S.; Gaiha, R.; Thapa, G.; Annim, S.K.
  • Econometric analysis of profitability of microfinance institutions in selected Asian countries
    Janda, K.; Turbat, B.
  • Microfinance and inequality
    Kai, H.; Hamori, S.
  • Property rights and consumption volatility: evidence from a land reform in Vietnam
    Kemper, N.; Ha, L.V.; Klump, R.
  • Subsidies and technical efficiency in agriculture: evidence from European dairy farms
    Latruffe, L.; Bravoureta, B.E.; Carpentier, A.; Desjeux, Y.; Moreira, V.H.
  • The welfare impact of microcredit on rural households in China
    Li, X.; Gan, C.; Hu, B.
  • Research on the property right mortgage model of rural land: based on Ningxia Pingluo of China
    Li, Y.
  • Can microfinance reach the poorest: evidence from a community-managed microfinance intervention
    Lønborg, J.H.; Rasmussen, O.D.
  • Joint liability versus individual liability in credit contracts
    Madajewicz, M.
  • Collateral and its substitutes in emerging markets lending
    Menkhoff, L.; Neuberger, D.; Rungruxsirivom, O.
  • Does microfinance really help the poor? New evidence from flagship programs in Bangladesh
    Morduch, J.
  • Microfinance with Chinese characteristics
    Park, A.; Ren, C.
  • The impact of group-based credit programs on poor households in Bangladesh: does the gender of participants matter?
    Pitt, M.; Khandker, S.
  • Collective organizations versus relative performance contracts: inequality, risk sharing, and moral hazard
    Prescott, E.S.; Townsend, R.M.
  • The impact of microfinance in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review of the evidence
    Rooyen, C.V.; Stewart, R.; Wet, T.D.
  • Is small still beautiful? A comparative study of rice farm size and productivity in China and India
    Wang, J.; Chen, K.Z.; Gupta, S.D.; Huang, Z.
  • Do rural banks matter? Evidence from the Indian social banking experiment
    Burgess, R.; Pande, R.