What is it about?

This study examines whether and how land transfer (TF) enhances food security (FS) in China, and through which mechanisms. Using balanced panel data for 30 provinces during 2010–2022, the authors estimate a two-way fixed-effects model to identify the TF–FS relationship, augment it with quantile regression to reveal heterogeneity across the FS distribution, and employ a Spatial Durbin Model to test for interprovincial spillovers. The empirical evidence indicates that TF significantly promotes FS. The study then opens the “black box” by verifying two mediating channels: environmental regulation (ER) and green technology innovation (GTI). In provinces where ER and GTI are stronger, the TF-driven improvement in FS is more pronounced. Heterogeneity analyses show that the TF–FS linkage is not uniform—its magnitude varies across the FS distribution—while spatial tests confirm that TF’s positive impacts can extend beyond local boundaries, exerting beneficial spillovers on neighboring provinces’ FS. Together, these results provide internally consistent evidence: TF is a statistically significant driver of higher FS; ER and GTI are important transmission mechanisms; distributional differences and spatial interactions matter for policy design. The paper closes by discussing policy implications aligned with China’s goals to deepen the land transfer system, optimize the allocation of land resources, strengthen environmental governance, and foster green innovation so that agriculture can be productive, resilient, and sustainable.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Ensuring FS is foundational to national security and social stability. China’s ongoing transition toward market-oriented land factor flows makes TF a central lever for improving agricultural efficiency without expanding scarce cultivated land. By demonstrating that TF significantly raises FS—and that ER and GTI mediate this effect—the study underscores how institutional quality and green innovation amplify the benefits of TF. The evidence that effects are heterogeneous and spatially interlinked matters for policy: one-size-fits-all interventions may underperform, and ignoring spillovers can misstate true gains. Methodologically, combining two-way fixed effects, quantile regression, and a Spatial Durbin Model provides a coherent, policy-relevant picture that is robust to distributional differences and spatial dependencies. Practically, the findings support deepening TF to channel land toward capable producers, pairing TF reforms with enforceable ER and targeted support for GTI, and coordinating across provinces to internalize cross-border benefits. In short, the research adds credible evidence that well-designed TF, embedded in an environmental and innovation-supporting framework, can help safeguard grain supply while advancing greener agricultural development. The results also speak to risk management: stronger FS reduces exposure to price spikes and shocks, supporting social stability and the grain industry’s safety objectives.

Perspectives

Building on the results, future work can extend along three paths while remaining consistent with the study’s conclusions. First, on identification depth, richer administrative data—e.g., parcel-level TF records and policy timing—could sharpen causal estimates within the same two-way fixed-effects and spatial frameworks used here. Second, on mechanisms, measuring ER and GTI with alternative indicators (such as enforcement intensity, compliance costs, green patents, or adoption of clean machinery) would help map where mediating effects are strongest, informing precise policy mixes without altering the core finding that ER and GTI transmit TF’s benefits to FS. Third, on policy design, evaluating coordinated interventions—deeper TF markets, improved land-use rights services, ER implementation capacity, and GTI incentives—could quantify complementarities highlighted by this paper. Given the confirmed heterogeneity and spatial spillovers, piloting regionally tailored bundles and tracking outcomes along the FS distribution can guide scalable rollouts. Finally, to sustain gains in FS while limiting environmental pressures, practical toolkits (land transaction platforms, extension for green practices, credit lines for clean technology) can be tested within existing institutions. Equity checks can shield vulnerable areas.

Professor ZHAOYANG LU
Southwest University of Political Science and Law

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: The impact of land transfer on food security: the mediating role of environmental regulation and green technology innovation, Frontiers in Environmental Science, February 2025, Frontiers,
DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2025.1538589.
You can read the full text:

Read

Resources

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page