Skip to Main Navigation

Impact of property rights reform to support China’s rural-urban integration : household-level evidence from the Chengdu national experiment (Inglês)

As part of a national experiment in 2008, Chengdu prefecture implemented ambitious property rights reforms, including complete registration of all land together with measures to ease transferability and eliminate migration restrictions. A triple difference approach using the Statistics Bureau’s regular household panel suggests that the reforms increased consumption and income, especially for less wealthy and less educated households, with estimated benefits well above the cost of implementation. Local labor supply increased, with the young shifting toward agriculture and the old toward off-farm employment. Agricultural yields, intensity of input use, and diversity of output also increased. Improving property rights in peri-urban China appears to have increased investment and diversification.


  • Autor

    Deininger,Klaus W., Jin,Songqing, Liu,Shouying, Xia,Fang

  • Data do documento


  • TIpo de documento

    Documento de trabalho sobre pesquisa de políticas

  • No. do relatório


  • Nº do volume


  • Total Volume(s)


  • País


  • Região

    Leste Asiático e Pacífico,

  • Data de divulgação


  • Disclosure Status


  • Nome do documento

    Impact of property rights reform to support China’s rural-urban integration : household-level evidence from the Chengdu national experiment

  • Palavras-chave

    labor market due;efficiency of land use;average level of education;share of income;labor supply;per capita consumption;number of adults;working age population;investments in agriculture;junior high school;composition of output;transfer of land;agricultural production;agricultural land use;consumption per capita;land tenure system;security of property;income and expenditure;amounts of revenue;rural-urban income inequality;implications for policy;high value crops;place of origin;sale of part;information on consumption;household fixed effect;labor market opportunities;parameter of interest;public sector intervention;terms of consumption;increase in labor;per capita income;income for household;aggregate labor supply;level of consumption;local government expenditure;decline in agriculture;increase in profit;reduction in time;formal labor market;availability of land;agricultural land base;conversion of land;tax on land;access to land;panel data set;reform household;data on consumption;tradable development rights;taxation of land;secure property right;data on income;urban land use;efficient land use;source of income;source income;development research group;household characteristic;farmer;indicator variable;input use;agricultural yield;agricultural subsidy;land market;rental market;village characteristic;descriptive statistic;residential land;Pension Income;rural land;land area;medical expense;oil crop;off-farm employment;land transfer;household head;initial education;certification process;household welfare;agricultural productivity;tenure security;forest land;reform implementation;reform impacts;physical asset;Job Creation;household survey;standard error;remote village;land reform;factor market;reform package;young male;land acquisition;crop choice;land rental;income share;urban village;increase productivity;estimate impact;rural resident;cultivated area;land conversion;female head;land transaction;household level;agricultural output;agricultural activity;land bank;transaction cost;analytical approach;point estimate;individual level;agricultural restrictions;village survey;income composition;administrative village;rural property;annual labor;Land Registration;positive impact;adult equivalent;secure tenure;supply increase;legal dispute;vocational school;land security;arable land;econometric challenge;competitive bidding;welfare impact;econometric result;urban residence;price discovery;transparent mechanism;survey data;certification program;econometric analysis;migration restrictions;urban fringe;off-farm income;systematic evaluation;income gain;agricultural input;DEC Policy Review;household outcomes;household size;human capital;registration system;pension scheme;analytical methodology;consumption growth;annual consumption;funding support;household-level effect;research assistance;job opportunity;rural enterprise;rural community;future research;satellite imagery;area expansion;sustainable way;job opportunities;Land Ownership;public health;education facility;sample household;productive activity;rural construction;open access;land asset;old-age pension;high wage;local economy;anecdotal evidence;household plot;legal standard;development policy;implicit subsidy;Financial Sector;fair compensation;windfall gain;land supply;land price;land lease;budgetary revenue;alternative revenue;land development;efficiency loss;industrial land;real value;fiscal decentralization;industrial investment;negative externality;residency permit;allocative efficiency;public program;quantitative assessment;household consumption;industrial activity;negotiated prices;rural area;development zone;rural collectives;capital gain;fertile land;agricultural asset;gender composition;tenure insecurity;small area;agricultural sector;earning opportunity;standard deviation;administrative institution;educational level;



Versão oficial do documento (pode conter assinaturas, etc.)

  • PDF oficial
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *A versão do texto é um OCR incorreto e está incluído unicamente em benefício de usuários com conectividade lenta.