Heterogeneous choice in the demand for agriculture credit in China: results from an in-the-field choice experiment

Rong Kong, Yanling Peng, Nan Meng, Hong Fu, Li Zhou, Yuehua Zhang and Calum Greig Turvey

China Agricultural Economic Review, 2020, vol. 13, issue 2, 456-474

Abstract: Purpose - In this study, the authors examined demand-side credit in rural China with the aims of understanding attribute preferences and the willingness of farmers to pay for credit. Design/methodology/approach - The authors implemented an in-the-field discrete choice experiment (DCE) using a D-optimal block (6 × 9 × 3) design applied to 420 farm households across five Chinese provinces (Shandong, Sichuan, Shaanxi, Jiangsu and Henan) in the summer and fall of 2018. The DCE included six attributes including the interest rate, term of loan, type of loan, type of repayment, type of institution and mobile banking services. Findings - Conditional and mixed logit results indicated a downward sloping credit demand curve with variable elasticity across regions. Provincial willingness-to-pay (WTP) indicators suggested that farmers were willing to pay a premium for long-term ( 0.03–0.687%) and low collateral credit loans ( 0.79–2.93%). Also, four of five provinces indicated a preference for loan amortization rather than lump-sum payment. Interestingly, in comparison to the Agricultural Bank of China (ABC), only farmers in Shandong, Sichuan and Shaanxi indicated a preference for rural credit cooperatives (RCCs)/banks and the Postal Savings Bank of China (PSBC). Another quite surprising result was bank services, in our case, access to mobile banking did not appear to induce WTP for agricultural credit. While conditional and mixed logit regression coefficients were similar (and therefore robust), the authors found that there was substantial heterogeneity across attribute preferences on term of loan, type of loan and amortization. Preferences for type of lender and mobile banking were generally homogenous. This result alone suggested that lenders should consider offering a suite of credit products with different attributes in order to maximize the potential pool of borrowers. While there were some differences across provinces, farmers appeared to be indifferent to lenders, and it did not appear that offering banking services such as mobile banking had any bearing on credit decisions. Research limitations/implications - This paper presents a first step in using in-the-field choice experiments to better understand rural finance in China. Although the sample size satisfies conventional levels of significance and rank conditions, the authors caution against attributing results to China as a whole. Different provinces have different institutional structures and agricultural growing conditions and economies and these effects may differentially affect WTP for credit. Although by all indications farmers were aware of credit, not all farmers, in fact a minority, actually borrowed from a financial institution. This is not unusual in China, but for these farmers, the DCE was posed as hypothetical. Likewise, the study’s design was based on a generic credit product typical of rural China, and the authors caution against making inferences about other products with different attributes and risk structures. Social implications - This study is motivated by the rapidly changing dynamic in China's agricultural economy. With specific reference to new laws and regulations about the transfer of land use rights (LURs), China's agricultural economy is undergoing significant and rapid change which will require better understanding by policy makers, lenders and practitioners of the changing credit needs of farmers, including the new and emerging class of commercial farmers. Originality/value - To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the authors believe that the result provided in this paper present the first use of in-the-field DCE and are the first to be reported in either the English or Chinese literature on rural credit product design.

Keywords: China; Rural finance; Agricultural credit; Discrete choice experiment; WTP; Demand-side (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:caerpp:caer-06-2020-0151

DOI: 10.1108/CAER-06-2020-0151

Access Statistics for this article

China Agricultural Economic Review is currently edited by Dr Fu Qin, Dr Jikun Huang, Dr Kevin Z Chen, Dr Weiming Tian, Prof Daniel Sumner, Prof Xian Xin and Prof Holly Wang

More articles in China Agricultural Economic Review from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().