Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering

ISSN 2095-7505

ISSN 2095-977X(Online)

CN 10-1204/S

Postal Subscription Code 80-906

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Agr. Sci. Eng.
RESEARCH ARTICLE
ENTREPRENEURIAL OPPORTUNITY, VALUE EVOLUTION, AND ORGANIZATIONAL INTEGRATION OF PROFESSIONAL FARMER ENTREPRENEURSHIP: A MULTI-CASE COMPARISON IN CHINA
Yifeng ZHANG1,2(), Chunfang YANG2(), Bright OBUOBI2, Martin Kobby GRANT2
1. College of Management, Shandong Vocational University of Foreign Affairs, Rushan 264504, China
2. College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
 Download: PDF(2965 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

● The choice of a modern agriculture project was found to be rational for professional farmers to reduce interference from non-market factors. The success of this project is due to its capacity to successfully fill the structural hole in the market transaction network.

● Professional farmers were shown to start their businesses by occupying the ‘self-benefit’ or ‘mutual-benefit’ structural hole of the market transaction network in economically developed areas.

● Professional farmers were found to occupy the organizational-governance structural hole of the rural social relationship network and the ‘mutual-benefit’ structural hole of the market network to start their businesses in traditional agricultural areas.

A comparative multi-case analysis of professional farmer entrepreneurship cases in China was performed by applying the structural hole theory. The results confirmed four views. (1) Choosing the modern agriculture project entrepreneurship is rational for professional farmers, who return from urban, to reduce the interference from non-market factors. The success of this project stems from its ability to successfully occupy the structural hole of the market trading network. (2) In economically developed areas, professional farmers start their businesses and reduce transaction costs with factors by occupying ‘self-benefit’ or ‘mutual-benefit’ structural holes in market networks. (3) In traditional agricultural areas, for reducing factor transaction costs, professional farmers occupy the organizational-governance structural hole of rural social relationship networks and the mutual-benefit structural hole of market networks to start their businesses. (4) The embedding order of these two structural holes will change depending on the differences in the local resource endowment. This article proposes some suggestions to encourage professional farmers to develop featured agricultural projects, build a close benefit-linked mechanism with smallholders through the provision of socialized services, and participate in the governance of rural communities.
Keywords Benefit-linked mechanism      featured agriculture      organizational integration      professional farmers      rural cooperative      structural hole theory     
Corresponding Author(s): Yifeng ZHANG,Chunfang YANG   
About author:

Tongcan Cui and Yizhe Hou contributed equally to this work.
Just Accepted Date: 03 August 2022   Online First Date: 16 September 2022   
 Cite this article:   
Yifeng ZHANG,Chunfang YANG,Bright OBUOBI, et al. ENTREPRENEURIAL OPPORTUNITY, VALUE EVOLUTION, AND ORGANIZATIONAL INTEGRATION OF PROFESSIONAL FARMER ENTREPRENEURSHIP: A MULTI-CASE COMPARISON IN CHINA[J]. Front. Agr. Sci. Eng. , 16 September 2022. [Epub ahead of print] doi: 10.15302/J-FASE-2022464.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fase/EN/10.15302/J-FASE-2022464
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fase/EN/Y/V/I/0
Fig.1  Maximize the output of professional farmers under specified cost conditions.
Fig.2  Embedded dynamic evolution map of structural holes.
Item Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4
SF family farm WLB cooperative LK cooperative JF cooperative
Established time 2014 2007 July 2014 June 2018
Professional farmer status Pre-entrepreneurship Undergraduate student International students in the UK Chairman of LK Fruit and Vegetable Co., Ltd. General Manager of Cosmetics Sales Company
Current Owner of larger-scale farm Leader of cooperative Leader of cooperative; rural community leader Leader of cooperative; rural community leader
Industry Sales of selenium carrot Whole industry chain of citrus Apple’s entire industrial chain Whole industry chain of millet
Effectiveness Moderate scale planting The cooperative operates on a large scale, and the operating income increases significantly Cooperatives grow on a moderate scale and improve their profitability Form the characteristic industry chain of millet
Production depends on sales The average annual income of cooperative members is 23,000 CNY The average annual income of each cooperative member exceeds 13,000 CNY; cooperatives invest more than 500,000 CNY annually to build village collectives and transform public service facilities Standardized operation of cooperatives
Characteristics Self-development family farm Realize the common improvement of the income of entrepreneurs, cooperatives, and ordinary members Form the characteristic industry chain of millet; standardized operation of cooperatives Establish an integrated community co-op and obtain mutual benefits for the co-op leader, ordinary co-op members, the co-op, and the community through economic incentives
Tab.1  Case introduction and characteristics summary
No. Year Net income of professional farmers (CNY) Net income of cooperatives (CNY) Net income of enterprise (CNY) Net income of rural community organization (CNY) Benefits for cooperative members (CNY)
Case 1 2018 7,000,000 – – – –
Case 2 2018 1,270,000 4,230,000 – – 22,200
2019 1,290,000 4,300,000 – – 23,800
Case 3 2019 – 32,700,000 21,200,000 11,300,000 12,000
2020 – 33,050,000 24,520,000 11,500,000 14,000
Case 4 2018 – 32,000 – ?120,000 –
2019 – 340,000 – 200,000 14,000
2020 – 470,000 – 254,000 16,500
Tab.2  Benefits for participants in cases
Fig.3  Evolutionary path map from economic cooperation to organizational governance.
Fig.4  Evolutionary path from organizational governance to economic cooperation.
1 K, Kan X Chen . Tilling another’s land: migrant farming under rural industrialization and urbanization in China. Journal of Agrarian Change, 2022, 22( 2): 299– 316
https://doi.org/10.1111/joac.12464
2 H, Chen X Wang . Exploring the relationship between rural village characteristics and Chinese return migrants’ participation in farming: path dependence in rural employment. Cities, 2019, 88 : 136– 143
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.01.016
3 L Sutherland . Return of the gentleman farmer? Conceptualising gentrification in UK agriculture.. Journal of Rural Studies, 2012, 28( 4): 568– 576
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.05.001
4 J M, Alston P G Pardey . Agriculture in the Global Economy. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2014, 28( 1): 121– 146
https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.28.1.121
5 P C C Huang . China’s hidden agricultural revolution, 1980–2010, in historical and comparative perspective. Modern China, 2016, 42( 4): 339– 376
https://doi.org/10.1177/0097700415626137
6 S, Piras S, Botnarenco M, Masotti M Vittuari . Post-Soviet smallholders between entrepreneurial farming and diversification. Livelihood pathways in rural Moldova. Journal of Rural Studies, 2021, 82 : 315– 327
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.006
7 D P, Moyes P, Ferri F, Henderson G Whittam . The stairway to Heaven? The effective use of social capital in new venture creation for a rural business.. Journal of Rural Studies, 2015, 39 : 11– 21
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.02.004
8 B Horwith . A role for intercropping in modern agriculture. Bioscience, 1985, 35( 5): 286– 291
https://doi.org/10.2307/1309927
9 P, Jansuwan K K Zander . What to do with the farmland? Coping with ageing in rural Thailand.. Journal of Rural Studies, 2021, 81 : 37– 46
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.12.003
10 S K Wegren . The “left behind”: Smallholders in contemporary Russian agriculture. Journal of Agrarian Change, 2018, 18( 4): 913– 925
https://doi.org/10.1111/joac.12279
11 E, Duflo M, Kremer J Robinson . How high are rates of return to fertilizer? Evidence from field experiments in Kenya.. American Economic Review, 2008, 98( 2): 482– 488
https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.98.2.482
12 J, Hao J, Bijman C, Gardebroek N, Heerink W, Heijman X Huo . Cooperative membership and farmers’ choice of marketing channels—Evidence from apple farmers in Shaanxi and Shandong Provinces, China. Food Policy, 2018, 74 : 53– 64
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.11.004
13 W, Ma A, Abdulai R Goetz . Agricultural cooperatives and investment in organic soil amendments and chemical fertilizer in China. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2018, 100( 2): 502– 520
https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aax079
14 C, Li Y, Jiao T, Sun A Liu . Alleviating multi-dimensional poverty through land transfer: evidence from poverty-stricken villages in China. China Economic Review, 2021, 69 : 101670
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2021.101670
15 J Luo . Particularistic trust and general trust: a network analysis in Chinese organizations. Management and Organization Review, 2005, 1( 3): 437– 458
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2005.00022.x
16 M Granovetter . The impact of social structure on economic outcomes. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2005, 19( 1): 33– 50
https://doi.org/10.1257/0895330053147958
17 M Granovetter . Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 1985, 91( 3): 481– 510
https://doi.org/10.1086/228311
18 M S Granovetter . The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 1973, 78( 6): 1360– 1380
https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
19 R S Burt. Structural Holes: the Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995
20 N Lin. Social Capital: a Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001
21 X, Wei H Zhu . Return migrants’ entrepreneurial decisions in rural China. Asian Population Studies, 2020, 16( 1): 61– 81
https://doi.org/10.1080/17441730.2020.1718358
22 E, Hudcová T, Chovanec J Moudrý . Social entrepreneurship in agriculture, a sustainable practice for social and economic cohesion in rural areas: the case of the Czech Republic. European Countryside, 2018, 10( 3): 377– 397
https://doi.org/10.2478/euco-2018-0022
23 W, Morris A, Henley D Dowell . Farm diversification, entrepreneurship and technology adoption: analysis of upland farmers in Wales. Journal of Rural Studies, 2017, 53 : 132– 143
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.05.014
24 C H, Gladwin B F, Long E M, Babb L J, Beaulieu A, Moseley D, Mulkey D J Zimet . Rural entrepreneurship: one key to rural revitalization. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1989, 71( 5): 1305– 1314
https://doi.org/10.2307/1243127
25 E, Petridou N Glaveli . Rural women entrepreneurship within co-operatives: training support. Gender in Management, 2008, 23( 4): 262– 277
https://doi.org/10.1108/17542410810878077
26 Q Pan . Dilemma and path selection of the integration development of small farmers and modern agriculture in China. Financial Engineering and Risk Management, 2020, 3( 1): 66– 70
27 L F Bergquist. Pass-through, competition, and entry in agricultural markets: Experimental evidence from Kenya. USA: Department of Economics, UC Berkeley, 2016
28 M H, Mobarok T, Skevas W Thompson . Women’s empowerment in agriculture and productivity change: the case of Bangladesh rice farms. PLoS One, 2021, 16( 8): e0255589
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255589 pmid: 34347833
29 G M, Diiro G, Seymour M, Kassie G, Muricho B W Muriithi . Women’s empowerment in agriculture and agricultural productivity: evidence from rural maize farmer households in western Kenya. PLoS One, 2018, 13( 5): e0197995
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197995 pmid: 29852008
30 A, Ebata M A Hernandez . Linking smallholder farmers to markets on extensive and intensive margins: evidence from Nicaragua. Food Policy, 2017, 73 : 34– 44
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.09.003
31 S F, Ahmad A H Dar. Precision farming for resource use efficiency. In: Kumar S, Meena R S, Jhariya M K, eds. Resources Use Efficiency in Agriculture. Singapore: Springer, 2020, 109– 135
32 R, Akrong S G, Mbogoh P Irungu . Youth agripreneurship in the horticultural value-chain: the case of small-scale mango farmers in Southern Ghana. African Development Review, 2020, 32( S1): S68– S77
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8268.12483
33 F, Muataffa F A, Ismail S Goh . The Malaysian famers and agricultural entrepreneurship development. Journal of Global Business and Social Entrepreneurship, 2020, 6( 19): 52– 57
34 D A, Tefera J, Bijman M, Slingerland der Velde G, van O Omta . Quality improvement in African food supply chains: determinants of farmer performance. European Journal of Development Research, 2020, 32( 1): 152– 175
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-019-00224-4
35 H, Wang A, Sarkar L Qian . Evaluations of the roles of organizational support, organizational norms and organizational learning for adopting environmentally friendly technologies: a case of kiwifruit farmers’ cooperatives of Meixian, China. Land, 2021, 10( 3): 284
https://doi.org/10.3390/land10030284
36 M Ruef . Strong ties, weak ties and islands: structural and cultural predictors of organizational innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2002, 11( 3): 427– 449
https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/11.3.427
37 M, Gargiulo M Benassi . Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organization Science, 2000, 11( 2): 183– 196
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.2.183.12514
38 V M, Oriana D P H, Carmen B, Cecilio R, Jaime G Antón . The importance of network position in the diffusion of agricultural innovations in smallholders of dual-purpose cattle in Mexico. Land, 2021, 10( 4): 401
https://doi.org/10.3390/land10040401
39 H, Jia H, Zhang Y, Yu D, Xu H Wang . The influencing mechanism of social capital on the identification of entrepreneurial opportunities for new farmers. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 2020, 10( 12): 1839– 1852
https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2020.1012114
40 R J, Mamiit S, Gray J Yanagida . Characterizing farm-level social relations’ influence on sustainable food production. Journal of Rural Studies, 2021, 86 : 566– 577
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.07.014
41 K, Onitsuka S Hoshino . Inter-community networks of rural leaders and key people: case study on a rural revitalization program in Kyoto Prefecture, Japan. Journal of Rural Studies, 2018, 61 : 123– 136
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.04.008
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed