4.7 Article

The effects of a subsidy for grassland protection on livestock numbers, grazing intensity, and herders' income in inner Mongolia

Journal

LAND USE POLICY
Volume 54, Issue -, Pages 302-312

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.02.016

Keywords

Grassland policy; Grazing intensity; Government subsidy; Inner Mongolia

Funding

  1. U.S. National Science Foundation-Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human Systems (NSF-CNH program) [1523628]
  2. Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA)
  3. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University
  4. Directorate For Geosciences
  5. ICER [1523628] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Primary data from 262 pastoral households in Inner Mongolia are analyzed to determine the effects of a subsidy for grassland protection on livestock numbers, grazing intensity, and herders' income. Econometric models are estimated to determine the effects of the subsidy on each component of the intensity ratio (sheep-equivalent livestock units and grassland). Results suggest the subsidy increased the quantity of grassland controlled by the household. However, the effects on livestock units are mixed, with two of the four studied prefectures (Ordos and Ulanqab) showing a positive response, and two (Hulunbuir and Xilingol) showing a negative response. Inserting the parameter estimates from the livestock, grassland, and income functions into a structural model of grazing intensity, results suggest each 1% increase in subsidy reduces grazing intensity by between 0.168% and 0.532% depending on the prefecture, and increases herders' income by between 0.144% and 0.670%. By way of comparison, each additional year of education increases herders' income by 8.7% and reduces grazing intensity by 3.6%. Thus, education is not to be overlooked as a policy tool for achieving conservation goals. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available