EEM/
Articles/
2510001975
  • Open Access
  • Article

Spatiotemporal Trends and Determinants of Cultivated Land Ecological Efficiency in China

  • Muchen Luo 1, *,   
  • Yulei Li 2,   
  • Fang Yao 2,   
  • Hong Chen 2,   
  • Zhirui Zhang 2,   
  • Chong Zhou 2

Received: 24 Sep 2025 | Revised: 28 Oct 2025 | Accepted: 29 Oct 2025 | Published: 10 Nov 2025

Abstract

As one of the most important developing countries, China faces the dual pressures of declining cultivated land area and deteriorating land quality. Under these conditions, improving cultivated land ecological efficiency (CLEE) has become essential for overcoming resource constraints and ensuring food security. This study utilizes panel data from 31 provinces in China covering the period from 2000 to 2022. CLEE is measured employing a global benchmark EBM-DEA model incorporating undesirable outputs (carbon emissions). Kernel density estimation and σ-convergence analysis are used to characterize the dynamic distribution features of CLEE, and a panel Tobit regression model is applied to identify its key influencing factors. The results show that the national CLEE exhibits a continuous upward trend, with an accelerated improvement stage after 2015. While regional disparities persist, a convergence trend is observed: the eastern region maintains a leading position, the central region demonstrates the highest growth rate, and the western and northeastern regions show steady yet relatively lagging improvements. Kernel density analysis reveals a transition of the efficiency distribution from bimodal to unimodal, with the main peak continuously shifting to the right. The Tobit regression results indicate that urbanization rate, per capita cultivated land resources, multiple cropping index, and rural electrification level have significant positive impacts on CLEE, whereas the proportion of dryland, agricultural cropping structure, and area of crops affected by disasters exert significant negative effects. Based on the research findings, this study proposes optimization strategies such as implementing differentiated regional development policies, strengthening agricultural infrastructure, and optimizing cultivated land utilization methods to promote green transformation. These strategies provide empirical evidence to support the formulation of targeted policies, the improvement of cultivated land use efficiency, and the promotion of sustainable agricultural development in China and other resource-constrained developing countries.

References 

  • 1.
    Song, M.; Xie, Q.; Shahbaz, M.; et al. Economic growth and security from the perspective of natural resource assets. Resour. Policy 2023, 80, 103153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103153.
  • 2.
    Searchinger, T.; Hanson, C.; Ranganathan, J.; et al. Creating a Sustainable Food Future: Interim Findings. Available online: https://www.wri.org/research/creating-sustainable-food-future-interim-findings (accessed on 10 June 2025).
  • 3.
    FAO. The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture—Systems at breaking point (SOLAW 2021). Available online: https://openknowledge.fao.org/handle/20.500.14283/cb7654en (accessed on 4 June 2025).
  • 4.
    Singh, J.S.; Kumar, A.; Rai, A.N.; et al. Cyanobacteria: A Precious Bio-resource in Agriculture, Ecosystem, and Environmental Sustainability. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 529. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.00529.
  • 5.
    United Nations. Water, Food and Energy. Available online: https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/water-food-and-energy (accessed on 4 June 2025).
  • 6.
    Linnér, H.; Messing, I. Agricultural land needs protection. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B Soil Plant Sci. 2012, 62, 706–710. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064710.2012.697574.
  • 7.
    Lu, X.; Huang, S. Barriers and solutions to China’s cultivated land protection. Int. J. Environ. Stud. 2010, 67, 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207231003696343.
  • 8.
    China Natural Resources Bulletin. Ministry of Natural Resources of the People’s Republic of China. Available online: https://gi.mnr.gov.cn/202503/t20250314_2881937.html (accessed on 20 September 2025).
  • 9.
    Guangming Online. Main Findings from China’s Third National Land Survey Released: Cultivated Land Decreased by 113 Million Mu Over a Decade. Available online: https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1709150929390828736&wfr=spider&for=pc (accessed on 20 September 2025).
  • 10.
    Han, H.; Zhang, X. Static and dynamic cultivated land use efficiency in China: A minimum distance to strong efficient frontier approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 246, 119002.
  • 11.
    Wan, X.; Lei, M.; Chen, T.; et al. Safe utilization of heavy-metal-contaminated farmland by mulberry tree cultivation and silk production. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 599–600, 1867–1873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.150.
  • 12.
    Ye, H.; Pu, L. Study on the cultivated land use efficiency between different regions of China and its convergence. J. Nat. Resour. 2011, 26, 1467–1474.
  • 13.
    Kuang, B.; Lu, X.; Zhou, M.; et al. Provincial cultivated land use efficiency in China: Empirical analysis based on the SBM-DEA model with carbon emissions considered. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 151, 119874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119874.
  • 14.
    Li, H.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, X.; et al. Utilization benefit of cultivated land and land institution reforms: Economy, society and ecology. Habitat Int. 2018, 77, 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.12.006.
  • 15.
    Li, Q.; Hu, S.; Du, G.; et al. Cultivated Land Use Benefits Under State and Collective Agrarian Property Regimes in China. Sustainability 2017, 10, 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010007.
  • 16.
    Zhou, Z.M. Study on Cultivated Land Resources Use Efficiency in Henan. AMR 2011, 356–360, 2921–2924. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.356-360.2921.
  • 17.
    YougbarÃ, J.W. Analysis of agricultural performance in burkina faso using data envelopment analysis. Eur. J. Pure Appl. Math. 2021, 14, 366–379.
  • 18.
    Singh, G.; Singh, P.; Sodhi, G.P.S.; et al. Energy auditing and data envelopment analysis (DEA) based optimization for increased energy use efficiency in wheat cultivation (Triticum aestium L.) in north-western India. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2021, 47, 101453.
  • 19.
    Tone, K. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2001, 130, 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00407-5.
  • 20.
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change and Land. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/chapter/chapter-2/ (accessed on 23 September 2025).
  • 21.
    Guo, L.; Guo, S.; Tang, M.; et al. Financial Support for Agriculture, Chemical Fertilizer Use, and Carbon Emissions from Agricultural Production in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7155. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127155.
  • 22.
    Tang, X.; Lu, C.; Meng, P.; et al. Spatiotemporal Evolution of the Environmental Adaptability Efficiency of the Agricultural System in China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3685. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063685.
  • 23.
    Dong, G.; Wang, Z.; Mao, X. Production efficiency and GHG emissions reduction potential evaluation in the crop production system based on emergy synthesis and nonseparable undesirable output DEA: A case study in zhejiang province, China. PLoS ONE. 2018, 13, e0206680.
  • 24.
    Tone, K.; Tsutsui, M. An epsilon-based measure of efficiency in DEA—A third pole of technical efficiency. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2010, 207, 1554–1563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2010.07.014.
  • 25.
    Pastor, J.T.; Lovell, C.A.K. A global Malmquist productivity index. Econ. Lett. 2005, 88, 266–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2005.02.013.
  • 26.
    Tobin, J. Estimation of Relationships for Limited Dependent Variables.Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 1958, 26, 24–36. https://doi.org/10.2307/1907382.
  • 27.
    Wu, Y.; Lu, Q. The impact of local government debt on poverty incidence: An analysis based on panel Tobit model and panel threshold model. Macroecon. Res. 2023, 63–77. https://doi.org/10.16304/j.cnki.11-3952/f.2023.08.008.
  • 28.
    Zhang, Y.; Cao, J.; Han, S. Provincial digital economy and new urbanization: Coupling coordination relationship and influencing factors. Stat. Decis. 2024, 40, 116–120. https://doi.org/10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2024.06.021.
  • 29.
    Zhang, Z.; Liao, X.; Li, C.; et al. Spatiotemporal characteristics and influencing factors of county-level agricultural ecological efficiency in Hunan Province. Econ. Geogr. 2022, 42, 181–189. https://doi.org/10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2022.02.020.
  • 30.
    Flegl, M.; Alberto Jimenez-Bandala, C.; Sanchez-Juarez, I.; et al. Analysis of production and investment efficiency in the Mexican food industry: Application of two-stage DEA. Czech J. Food Sci. 2022, 40, 109–117. https://doi.org/10.17221/172/2021-CJES.
  • 31.
    Long, X.; Luo, Y.; Sun, H.; et al. Fertilizer using intensity and environmental efficiency for China’s agriculture sector from 1997 to 2014. Nat. Hazards 2018, 92, 1573–1591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3265-4.
  • 32.
    Gu, H.-Y.; Hu, Q.-M.; Wang, T.-Q. Payment for Rice Growers to Reduce Using N Fertilizer in the GHG Mitigation Program Driven by the Government: Evidence from Shanghai. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1927. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11071927.
  • 33.
    Skevas, T.; Serra, T. Derivation of netput shadow prices under different levels of pest pressure. J. Prod. Anal. 2017, 48, 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-017-0507-5.
  • 34.
    Luo, M.; Liu, F.; Chen, J. Data-Driven Evaluation and Optimization of Agricultural Sustainable Development Capability: A Case Study of Northern Anhui. Processes 2021, 9, 2036. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9112036.
  • 35.
    Faere, R.; Grosskopf, S.; Lovell, C.A.K.; et al. Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs are Undesirable: A Nonparametric Approach. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1989, 71, 90–98. https://doi.org/10.2307/1928055.
  • 36.
    Knox Lovell, C.A.; Pastor, J.T.; Turner, J.A. Measuring macroeconomic performance in the OECD: A comparison of European and non-European countries. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1995, 87, 507–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00226-X.
  • 37.
    Kinzig, A.P.; Kammen, D.M. National trajectories of carbon emissions: Analysis of proposals to foster the transition to low-carbon economies. Glob Env. Change 1998, 8, 183–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-3780(98)00013-2.
  • 38.
    Tiefenbacher, A.; Sandén, T.; Haslmayr, H.-P.; et al. Optimizing Carbon Sequestration in Croplands: A Synthesis. Agronomy 2021, 11, 882. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11050882.
  • 39.
    Liu, M.; Yang, L. Spatial pattern of China’s agricultural carbon emission performance. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 133, 108345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108345.
  • 40.
    Yang, J.; Luo, P. Study on the spatial correlation network structure of agricultural carbon emission efficiency in China. Electron. Res. Arch. 2023, 31, 7256–7283. https://doi.org/10.3934/era.2023368.
  • 41.
    West, T.O.; Marland, G. A synthesis of carbon sequestration, carbon emissions, and net carbon flux in agriculture: Comparing tillage practices in the United States. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2002, 91, 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00233-X.
  • 42.
    Han, J.; Yang, Q.; Zhang, L. What are the priorities for improving the cleanliness of energy consumption in rural China? Urbanisation advancement or agriculture development? Energy Sustain. Dev. 2022, 70, 106–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2022.07.011.
  • 43.
    Loures, L.; Chamizo, A.; Ferreira, P.; et al. Assessing the Effectiveness of Precision Agriculture Management Systems in Mediterranean Small Farms. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3765. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093765.
  • 44.
    Fu, X.; Zhou, Y. Collaborative Optimization of PV Greenhouses and Clean Energy Systems in Rural Areas. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2023, 14, 642–656. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2022.3223684.
  • 45.
    Liang, L.; Qu, F.; Wang, C. Analysis of cultivated land use efficiency based on DEA method. Resour. Environ. Yangtze Basin 2008, 2, 242–246.
  • 46.
    Wilhelmi, O.V.; Wilhite, D.A. Assessing Vulnerability to Agricultural Drought: A Nebraska Case Study. Nat. Hazards 2002, 25, 37–58. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013388814894.
  • 47.
    Zhang, A.; Ma, X.; Yang, T.; et al. Drought and flood disasters in Anhui Province and their impact on crop yield. J. Appl. Meteorol. Sci. 2007, 18, 619–626.
  • 48.
    Zhang, R.; Jiao, H. Spatiotemporal pattern differentiation and mechanism analysis of provincial cultivated land use efficiency in China. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2015, 31, 277–287.
  • 49.
    Jiang, Y.; Ding, M.; Lin, F.; et al. Cost-benefit analysis of major grain crop production in Sichuan. J. Sichuan Agric. Univ. 2007, 357–361, 364.
  • 50.
    Zhang, J.; Mishra, A.K.; Hirsch, S. Market-oriented agriculture and farm performance: Evidence from rural China. Food Policy 2021, 100, 102023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102023.
Share this article:
Download PDF
Issue
Volume 1, Issue 1
How to Cite
Luo, M.; Li, Y.; Yao, F.; Chen, H.; Zhang, Z.; Zhou, C. Spatiotemporal Trends and Determinants of Cultivated Land Ecological Efficiency in China. Ecological Economics and Management 2025, 1 (1), 4.
RIS
BibTex
Copyright & License
article copyright Image
Copyright (c) 2025 by the authors.