Grassroots autonomous organizations embedding, non-agricultural employment and farmer homestead withdrawal behavior: Based on the research data of Qionglai City, Sichuan Province, China

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2217642/v2

In the context of the rapid rise of the village revitalization in China,the paper examines the impact of the embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations and farmer non-agriculture employment on the farmer homestead exit behavior. Based on the Embeddedness theory and 421 household survey in Qionglai, this study suggests that, (1) the embedding of grassroots autonomous organizations is beneficial for the farmer homestead exit behavior, but different embedding methods have different effects on farmers' homestead exit behavior. (2) The farmer non-agriculture employment can promote their homestead exit behavior, and the "U" -shaped influence relationship between the non-agricultural employment distance and the farmer homestead exit behavior appears. (3) this study confirms that the level of non-agricultural employment plays an inhibitory role in the positive influence of grassroots organizations to mobilize farmers to exit homestead. (4) Further mechanism analysis show that the moderating effect of farmer non-agriculture employment and the farmer homestead exit behavior. Therefore, it is suggested that when mobilizing farmers to voluntarily withdraw from the homestead, grass-roots organizations should actively improve their own embedding level, improve the construction of farmers 'social network and accelerate the accumulation of farmers' material capital.

the grassroots autonomous organizations embedded level

the farmer household non-agriculture employment

the farmer household homestead exit behavior

the Embeddedness theory

The Rural Revitalization Promotion Law of the People's Republic of China officially came into effect on June 1, 2021, marking the arrival of the era of comprehensively promoting rural revitalization in accordance with the law. In the 20-word rural revitalization policy, "ecological livable" and "effective governance" are important components. Under the new pattern of integrated urban-rural development, it is inevitable requirements for comprehensively promoting rural revitalization and achieving common prosperity to deepen the reform of rural homestead, optimize the allocation of urban and rural resources, make economical and intensive use of rural homestead, and stimulate the potential driving force of rural development (Li et al., 2021; Zhou et al., 2020; Luo,2021). At present, there are many problems in the process of rural homestead utilization, such as low utilization level, prominent vacancy phenomenon, "one household,multiple homesteads " and poor exit of farmers, which seriously restrict the development of rural economy and society and the growing needs of farmers for a better life (Su et al., 2019). In reality, grass-roots autonomous organizations are the most basic implementation subject of rural policy, which has a strong correlation with farmers and is one of the important forces to mobilize farmers to withdraw from homestead (Shi et al., 2022; Tang et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2021). The level of grassroots autonomous organizations embedded in farmers directly affects the decision of farmers' homestead withdrawal.Therefore, an important question is, what impact does the embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations have on farmers' homestead exit behavior? How can grassroots autonomous organizations embed farmers to better realize the goal of mobilizing farmers to withdraw from homestead? What is the mechanism of this pathway? At the same time, non-farm employment is an important driving force to promote the transfer of homestead resources, heterogeneous farmers with different levels of non-agriculture employment will have different choices for homestead exit.Then, will farmers' non-agricultural employment have an impact on the process of grassroots autonomous organizations mobilizing farmers to withdraw from homestead? The study of the above issues has important practical significance for improving the farmers’ homestead exit rate, perfecting the homestead exit action mechanism of grassroots autonomous organizations, improving the rural governance level of grassroots autonomous organizations, and driving farmers to achieve common prosperity in rural revitalization.

Perfecting the homestead system is an important way to realize rural revitalization in China (Luo,2021; Shi and Yu,2021; Wu et al,2021). At present, many scholars have done extensive research on the rural homestead exit, mainly focusing on three aspects. First, from the perspectives of individual characteristics of farmers, family endowment, property rights condition, perceived value, social capital, right protection, risk perception, and farmers differentiation, current scholars have studied the influence of farmers' homestead exit willingness and behavior, and discussed the contradiction between farmers' homestead exit willingness and behavior (Shi and Yu,2021; Sun et al,2019; Zhang and Xia,2021). Second, based on the perspective of rural land property right system reform, poverty alleviation relocation, farmer welfare and family life cycle, the existing literature respectively analyzes the impact mechanism and action mechanism of homestead withdrawal (Wu et al,2021; Gao et al,2021). Third, to study the impact of homestead exit on agricultural ecological efficiency, agricultural production efficiency and farmers' production and life style (Wang and Zhao,2021; Zhang and Xia,2021). Related studies on the farmers' homestead exit are abundant, but there are still few studies analyzing the farmers' homestead exit behavior from the embedded perspective of grassroots autonomous organizations (village committees and villagers' groups). Limited literature mainly focuses on theoretical analysis and lack of empirical tests (Wang and Lu,2021; Yang et al,2014).

The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations on the farmer homestead exit behavior.Given that the existing literature rarely discusses the relationship between the embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations and the farmers' non-farm employment, this paper also tries to verify whether farmers' non-farm employment has moderation effect between the embedding level of grass-roots autonomous organizations and the farmers' homestead exit behavior, and to further explore the mechanism of the above pathway. In terms of research objects, because Qionglai City is the first batch of pilot areas of homestead reform in China, local grassroots autonomous organizations have a high embedded level in farmers, and pay great attention to the production and life problems of farmers before and after the withdrawal of homesteading. Therefore, the 421 farmer household data obtained from the survey in Qionglai City in 2019 are the research object of this study.

The contributions of this study are threefold. First, this paper constructs the research framework of grassroots autonomous organizations embedding, non-agricultural employment and farmers' homestead exit behavior. Second, the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding is divided into three aspects: institutional embedding, organizational embedding and emotional embedding, and this paper empirical explores the influence of the grassroots autonomous organizations embedded level on the farmer homestead exit behavior according to embeddness theory. Thirdly, considering the important role of farmer income level (especially non-farm income) in homestead withdrawal, this paper examines the moderating role of non-farm employment in the grassroots organizations embedded level and the farmer homestead exit behavior. Moreover, by introducing instrumental variable as substitute variables, this paper effectively solves potential endogenous problems and increases the reliability of the conclusions.

2.1 The impact of the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level on the farmer homestead exit behavior

Embeddedness theory is one of the core theories in the analytical framework of new economic sociology (Wang and Lu,2021), which was first proposed by Polanyi in 1944. The central idea is that individual economic behavior is closely linked to social relations, always embedded in non-economic factors such as customs (Granovetter M S，1984). Granovetter proposed the concept of "weak embeddedness". According to the new economic sociology, people's economic behavior is not only the pursuit of personal benefit maximization, but embedded in the social structure and affected by various social relations (Zhang et al,2020). Zukin and Dimaggio extended the connotation of embeddedness theory and divided embedding into political embedding, cultural embedding, cognitive embedding and structural embedding. At present, Chinese scholars' measurement index system division of embeddedness mostly follows this (Wang and Lu,2021). Embeddedness theory was initially applied to the analysis of business activities in China (Liang et al,2005), and was subsequently further used to analyze the interaction between economic entities. In combination with the practice of contemporary Chinese social transformation, many scholars have tried to establish an analytical framework of embedded governance in line with China's social reality (Jiang,2021; Yu et al,2021), and proposed that the realization of the expected goals of grassroots governments can be influenced by three embedding methods: system embedding, organizational embedding and interest embedding. Based on this, this paper defines the grass-roots autonomous organization as the grass-roots village committee and the villagers' groups. Combined with the actual research situation and the existing embedding index division system, the three factors obtained from the factor analysis are named as institutional embedding, organizational embedding and emotional embedding. Among them, the institutional embedding of grass-roots autonomous organizations refers to the standardization and legitimacy of grass-roots autonomous organizations in the process of promoting farmers to exit the homestead, as well as the guarantee of farmers' right to know (Shi et al., 2022; Tang et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2021). This paper adopts the structure, politics and other indicators to express. The organizational embedding of grassroots autonomous organizations means that in the process of promoting homestead withdrawal, grassroots autonomous organizations fully consider the reasonable demands of farmers, protect the legitimate interests of farmers, and respect the will of farmers (Shi et al., 2022; Tang et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2021). This paper uses benefit and cognitive indicators to express. The emotional embedding of grassroots autonomous organizations refers to the respect and protection of farmers' traditional culture, behavioral cognition and rural feelings when implementing homestead withdrawal policies (Shi et al., 2022; Tang et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2021).This paper adopts emotional and cultural indicators to express.

Grass-roots autonomous organizations are the intermediary of transmitting policy information and ensuring people's livelihood between the grass-roots government and the farmers (Liu and Li, 2017). It is not only the propagandist of the government homestead withdrawal policy, but also the implementer of the farmers' homestead withdrawal policy. The embedding of grassroots autonomous organization can make it better realize its function of transmitting information from above and uploading information from below (Yu et al,2021). Village collective organizations are embedded in the village acquaintance society to conduct homestead management, and their behaviors are affected by the rural governance system and tasks (Liu and He,2018). The function of village collective organization plays a direct role in the decision of homestead withdrawal of farmers, and then affect the farmers whether to homestead exit (Sun et al,2020). Generally speaking, the leaders of grassroots autonomous organizations are farmers themselves. To improve the embedded level of grassroots autonomous organizations can analyze and deal with various problems in the process of mobilizing farmer homestead withdrawal from the perspective of farmers, and it also conducive to dispel the stereotype of farmers that grassroots autonomous organizations are only agents of the government and developers, eliminate the potential friction between grass-roots autonomous organizations and farmers, thus, farmers’ homestead withdrawal decisions will be affected(Zhou et al., 2018). Different embedded level of grassroots autonomous organizations have different effects on farmers’ homestead withdrawal.

When the grass-roots autonomous organizations have a high embedding level in terms of system and interests, they can meet the requirements of farmers for the right to know the withdrawal policy and the right to participate in the withdrawal compensation standard formulation, thus to safeguard farmers’ legitimate interests in the process of homestead withdrawal from the multi-interest game, and to improve the prestige of grass-roots autonomous organizations, furthermore, farmers are more likely to accept the homestead withdrawal mobilization activities of grassroots autonomous organizations. When the grass-roots autonomous organizations have a high embedding level in terms of culture and emotion, they can maximize meet the psychological and emotional demands of farmers, so that farmers reluctant to leave the countryside and reluctant to homestead withdraw. In conclusion, the embedding of grassroots autonomous organizations has an impact on the farmers' homestead withdrawal behavior. The stronger the embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations in terms of system and interests, the more likely farmers are to exit homestead.The stronger the embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations in terms of emotion, the less likely farmers are to exit homestead. Based on the above analysis, this paper puts forward the research hypothesis H1.

H1: The system embedding level of grass-roots autonomous organization and the interests embedding level of grass-roots autonomous organization have a significant positive impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The emotion embedding level of grass-roots autonomous organizations has a significant negative impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The overall impact of the embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior is uncertain, which needs to be further tested empirically.

2.2 The impact of the non-agriculture employment on the farmer homestead exit behavior

Non-farm employment is a rational decision of farmers to maximize the household total welfare effect, and it is an important driving force to promote the homestead resources circulation. The farmer income level has a significant effect on the farmer's homestead withdrawal behavior (Sun et al,2020; Yan et al,2021; Xu and Xing,2021). At present, the farmers’ income structure shows a non-agricultural orientation, and the proportion of non-agricultural income in the total income is steadily increased (Cheng et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2021). It can be seen that the level of farmers’ non-agricultural employment has an important impact on their homestead withdrawal behavior. Therefore, this paper firstly chooses non-agricultural employment level index to study household non-agricultural employment. The difference of non-agricultural employment attribute will lead to the different direction and degree of non-agricultural employment level, while the non-farm employment distance can measure the stability of part-time employment and non-farm employment of farmers(Huang et al., 2022). Therefore, this paper further chooses the non-farm employment distance index to study the impact of non-farm employment on farmers' homestead exit behavior.

The impact of the non-agriculture employment level on farmers' homestead exit behavior. Learn from relevant research results (Zhou et al,2017; Xiang and Le,2021; Liu et al,2021; Xu et al,2022; Chang et al,2021; Liu and Zhang,2018). This paper selects the farmer household non-agricultural employment rate to measure the farmer household non-agricultural employment level (Chang et al,2021; Liu and Zhang,2018). Homestead withdrawal is a family choice behavior, which requires a unified opinion among family members on whether to withdraw (Sun et al,2020). When the household non-farm employment rate is low, more family members are engaged in agricultural production, and the household income is relatively low, so the ability to deal with potential risks after exit is lower, and the willingness to exit the homestead is lower. When the household non-farm employment rate is high, the household income is relatively higher, the ability to deal with potential risks is stronger, and the family members have higher requirements for convenient and comfortable living environment, which is conducive to the withdrawal of household homestead. Based on the above analysis, this paper puts forward the research hypothesis H2.

H2: The non-farm employment level has a positive effect on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior.

The impact of the non-agriculture employment distance on the farmer homestead exit behavior. The part-time employment conditions in different employment places are different, which will lead to different support and limiting factors for the career development of rural labor force, and then affect farmers' choice of rural homestead withdrawal (Xu et al,2022). Referring to the existing literature, the distance judgment standard of non-agricultural employment is within and outside the county (Xu et al,2022). In this paper, the non-agricultural employment distance of rural household migrant laborers is divided into three types: near distance (in the local county), a little long distance (within the province) and remote distance non-farm employment (outside the province). For near distance non-agricultural employment farmers, their social networks such as clan blood and human relations serve as a link to drive farmers to help each other and disperse the non-agricultural employment risks they faced, seeking more opportunities for their non-agricultural employment (Zhang et al,2022), and taking more measures to deal with potential risks, therefore, farmers are more likely to exit homestead (Wang and Zhao,2021). For a little long distance non-agricultural employment farmers, their social networks and professional skills are weaker, material base is poorer, job and livelihood stability are less stable, and they face more potential risks, therefore, rural homestead as their final foothold and reserve assets, they choose to withdraw from the probability of homestead is small (Zhang and Xia,2021). For a remote distance non-agricultural employment farmers, long-term employment experience maintains a stable employment relationship, with relatively higher professional skills, higher career salary and higher non-farm employment income, the accumulated material capital makes them pay more attention to the time and energy cost of dealing with the withdrawal of homestead, and do not pay much attention to the reserve assets value of the homestead, and their connection with the countryside is relatively low, the emotional connection is shallow (Sun et al,2020). Therefore, farmers are more likely to exit homestead. Based on the above analysis, there may be a "U" -shaped trend between farmers' non-farm employment distance and their homestead withdrawal decision behavior when other conditions are unchanged. So, this paper puts forward the research hypothesis H3.

H3: The non-farm employment distance has a U-shaped impact on the farmer homestead exit behavior.

2.3 The moderating effect analysis of non-farm employment on the embedded level of grass-roots autonomous organizations and the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior.

According to the above analysis, we shows that the embedding level of grass-roots autonomous organizations has a significant impact on the farmer homestead exit behavior. In the Chinese homestead withdrawal pilot practice, due to the limited amount of withdrawal compensation, farmers need to pay certain extra costs in the process of homestead withdrawal(such as the decoration of new housing, the purchase of furniture, etc., which requires farmers to consider their payment capacity (Wang et al., 2021). With the improvement of urban economic development level and the household registration system reform, farmers will consider more expected returns and risk expectations when making decisions on whether to exit homestead (Su et al,2020).. Farmers with different degree of occupational structure differentiation and non-farm employment stability have different expected returns and ability to cope with risks, trust radius and trust level also differ (Liu et al,2020), so that they have different acceptance degrees of the credibility and authority of grassroots autonomous organizations.

In terms of non-farm employment levels, when the farmer’s non-farm employment level is low, the relationship between the farmer and the countryside is relatively close. at this time, the farmer’s income level is relatively low and the trust radius is small, there is a high relationship and closeness between grassroots autonomous organizations and the low non-agricultural employment level farmer, the farmer have a strong trust and dependence on the grass-roots autonomous organizations. therefore, when considering whether to withdraw from homestead, they will be affected by grassroots autonomous organizations. When the farmer’s non-farm employment level is high, the farmer’s income level is high and the trust radius is expanded, the farmers have low trust in the grassroots government. Therefore, the authority of grassroots autonomous organizations for farmers with high non-agricultural employment rate declined, whether the homestead exits or not more reflects the independent decision of the farmers. In terms of non-farm employment distance, the longer the non-farm employment distance, the weaker the social network between the farmer and rural areas, and the smaller the dependence and trust of the farmer on grassroots autonomous organizations. Therefore, grassroots autonomous organizations have less impact on farmer's decision to exit homestead. Based on the above analysis, this paper puts forward the research hypothesis H4.

H4: Non-agricultural employment plays a moderating role in the embedded level of grass-roots autonomous organizations and the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. With the increase of the farmer non-farm employment level, the effect of grassroots autonomous organization embedded level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior will be weakened. With the longer of the farmer non-farm employment distance, the effect of grassroots autonomous organization embedded level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior will be weakened.

3.1 Study area and data collection

The study selects Qionglai City, Sichuan Province as study area to analyze the effect of different grassroots autonomous organizations embedded modes on farmer’s homestead withdrawal decision. The selection of study area follows the principles of random sampling and representative sampling. The reasons for choosing the survey area are as follows: (1) Since 2008, Chengdu has been one of the pioneer demonstration points in the reform of homestead property right system. In 2013, Qionglai city issued the voluntary and compensated policy of withdrawal homestead, and in 2016, it became one of the pilot reforms of withdrawal homestead in Chengdu. By the end of 2018, 3,520 people from 1,189 Qionglai households had voluntarily withdrawn from their rural homestead, covering an area of 67hm². Qionglai City homestead withdrawal has achieved remarkable results, forming a set of experience that can be generalized; (2) Qionglai city is located in the southwest of Chengdu city, covering 1,377 square kilometers. The municipal government is located in Linqiong Town, 65 kilometers away from the main urban area of Chengdu, the economic level is higher, and farmers non-farm employment level is higher, so, it is suitable to study the level and distance of farm households' non-farm employment; (3) Qionglai City is the first batch of pilot areas of homestead reform in China, local grassroots autonomous organizations have a high embedded level in farmers, and pay great attention to the production and life problems of farmers before and after the withdrawal of homesteading, so, it is suitable to study the grassroots autonomous organizations embeddedness. The selection process of the sample farmers is as follows: (1) The research data are derived from field survey data in Qionglai City, Sichuan Province, from September to October 2019. Combined with the theoretical framework and the actual situation of Qionglai City, the research group first designed the survey questionnaire, carried out a pre-survey, and modified and improved the questionnaire for a formal survey; (2) The contents of the questionnaire included basic information of household farmers, household farmland and housing status, non-farm employment and social security status, homestead withdrawal, etc. According to the location conditions, homestead withdrawal implementation and economic development status, Qionglai City Sangyuan Town, Wolong Town, Linqiong Town, Qianjin Town, Baolin Town, Daozuo Township and Tea Garden Township were selected as the investigation areas; (3) Exited and unexited farmers households are selected from the above areas by a random sampling method. Of 450 collected questionnaires, after processing the incomplete value, 421 questionnaires are valid with an effective rate of 93.55%, respectively, including a total of 248 exited households and 173 unexited households; (4) The data were collected through face-to-face interviews to ensure the data quality. The questionnaire was filled out by the investigators according to the results of interviewee answers, and a centralized test was conducted after the survey.

3.2 Variable setting and descriptive statistics

Farmers' homestead withdrawal behavior is the explained variable in this paper, which is measured by the question "whether farmers exit homestead" in the questionnaire. It is a binary variable, "0" means that the farmer has not exit the homestead, "1" means that the farmer has exit the homestead.

The embedded level of grassroots autonomous organizations is core explanatory variable in this study. When measuring the embedded level of grassroots autonomous organizations according to the Embeddedness theory, it must be comprehensively analyzed from three aspects: institutional embedding, organizational embedding and emotional embedding. With reference to existing studies (Zukin and Dimaggio,1990; Wang and Lu,2021; Jiang,2021; Yu et al,2021),, this study selects 8 indicators from the above three aspects, then the core explanatory variables are obtained by factor analysis. The 8 indicators and factor analysis results are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Index description and factor analysis results.

Factor	Index	Assignment rules	Mean	S.D.	Factor analysis results of the grassroots autonomous organizations embedded level
Factor	Index	Assignment rules	Mean	S.D.	factor1	factor2	factor3
Institutional embedding level	Farmers' trust degree in the cadres of grass-roots autonomous organizations	assignment 1-5	3.14	1.259	0.888
	Whether the grass-roots autonomous organizations hold democratic meetings related to homestead withdrawal	0 = no; 1 = yes	0.52	0.500	0.805
	The grassroots autonomous organizations standardization degree in the process of implementing homestead withdrawal policy	assignment 1-5	3.30	1.199	0.847
	Whether the grass-roots autonomous organization will supervise the homestead withdrawal compensation	0 = no; 1 = yes	0.52	0.500	0.831
Organizational embedding level	Whether farmers can participate in village collective democratic decision-making	0 = no; 1 = yes	0.26	0.437		0.757
Organizational embedding level	Whether grassroots autonomous organizations respect the principle of voluntary withdrawal	0 = no; 1 = yes	0.63	0.483		0.748
Emotional embedding level	Whether grassroots autonomous organizations respect the traditional cognition of farmers	0 = no; 1 = yes	0.87	0.340			0.804
Emotional embedding level	Whether the grass-roots autonomous organizations retain the characteristics of village collective in the process of homestead withdrawal	0 = no; 1 = yes	0.46	0.499			0.680

Note: The assignment 1-5 indicate the five-level Likert scale method, with the self-evaluated from low to high. For example, in the assignment rules of farmers' trust degree in the cadres of grassroots autonomous organizations, 1= very distrust;2= less trust;3 = in general;4= more trusting;5= a lot of trust. The same below.

The non-farm employment level and the non-farm employment distance the household head are moderating variable in this study. With reference to existing studies (Zhou et al,2017; Xiang and Le,2021; Liu et al,2021; Xu et al,2021; Wang and Zhao,2022; Chang et al,2021; Liu and Zhang,2018), this study uses “the farmers household non-farm employment rate” to measure the non-farm employment level. The farmers household non-farm employment rate is the ratio of household non-farm employment number to the total household population. With reference to existing studies (Xu et al,2021; Chang et al,2021), this study divides the non-agricultural employment distance into three types:near distance (in the local county), a little long distance (within the Sichuan province) and remote distance non-farm employment (outside the Sichuan province).

The township size in which the investigate village is located is instrumental variable in this study. This study may have omitted variables and reverse causality, resulting in data imbalance. To solve the endogenicity problem of the model, with reference to existing studies (Su et al,2020), “ the township size in which the investigate village is located” is taken as the instrumental variable of the core explanatory variable. The reasons are as follows: (1) The township size in which the investigate village is exogenous to the embedded game between grassroots autonomous organizations and farmers; (2) Grassroots autonomous organizations have the dual status of village leaders and grass-roots government agents, village homestead withdrawal is related to township regional development planning, therefore, the level of grass-roots autonomous organizations embedded in household homestead withdrawal will be affected by the township government and township development level. Township size is one of the important indicators to measure the township development level, so it is related to the grassroots autonomous organizations embedded level; (3) This paper uses the population number of the surveyed towns in the seventh National census data to measure their size.

Following previous studies(Chen et al., 2017), this paper mainly includes the interviewees characteristics, family characteristics and homestead features, and policy features as the control variables.

The definitions of all variables introduced in this paper and the corresponding descriptive analysis are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Variable definitions and descriptive analysis.

	Variable	Definition	Mean	S.D.
Explained variable	Whether farmer exit homestead	0 = no; 1 = yes	0.24	0.488
Core explanatory variable	Institutional embedding level	factor analysis results
	Organizational embedding level	factor analysis results
	Emotional embedding level	factor analysis results
	The embedded level of grassroots autonomous organizations	factor analysis results
Moderating Variable	The non-farm employment level (The farmer non-farm employment rate)	<25%=1；25%-50%=2；50%-75%=3；>75%=4	2.29	0.907
Moderating Variable	The non-agricultural employment distance	near distance (local township enterprises =1, local county seat =2); a little long distance (within the Qionglai city =3, within the Sichuan province=4); long distance (outside the Sichuan province =5)	3.19	1.429
Instrumental variable	The township size in which the investigate village	<ten thousand people=1; ten thousand people-One hundred thousand people=2; >One hundred thousand people=3	2.15	0.600
Control variables	Educational level	primary school and below=1; junior middle school=2; junior high school=; college degree or above=4	2.48	1.470
	Health condition	assignment 1-5	3.64	0.928
	The difficulty for families to get credit from friends and family	assignment 1-5	3.47	1.116
	Whether there are members of grassroots self-governing organizations in the family	0 = no; 1 = yes	0.63	0.483
	The distance of the homestead from the central town	actual survey value	3.77	4.029
	Understanding degree of homestead exit policy	assignment 1-5	3.14	1.259

3.3 Empirical models

Since the explained variables in this paper, whether farmer exit homestead, are both binary dummy variables. Therefore, the Probit model is a suitable choice for the following analysis, and IV-Probit model is a suitable choice for the endogeneity test. We set the benchmark model as follows:

where Y_i represent the homestead withdrawal behavior of household i. X_i represents the institutional embedding level, organizational embedding level and emotional embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level evaluated by the household i. U_iindicates the farmers household non-farm employment rate and the non-farm employment distance of household i. Z_i represents a series of control variables, including the interviewees characteristics, family characteristics and homestead features, and policy features. ζ_iis random errors. α_0,β_i,γ_i,η_iare the parameter of the model to be estimated.

In order to further verify whether non-farm employment has a moderating effect on the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, the interaction item between non-farm employment and grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level is introduced in the model. The construction model is as follows:

where X represents the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level evaluated by the household i evaluated by the household i. XU_i represents the interaction item between the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level evaluated by the household i and the farmers household non-farm employment rate of household i, and between the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level evaluated by the household i and the non-farm employment distance of household i, respectively. Other letters have the same meaning as in the (1).

4.1 The analysis of the grass-roots autonomous organizations embedding level

The KMO statistic was 0.803;The χ2 statistic of Bartlett's sphericity test was 853.137, indicating that there was correlation along the 8 indicators, which was suitable for factor analysis. After factor rotation using the maximum variance method, three common factors were obtained from 8 indicators, the cumulative explained variance after rotation was 64.893%. According to each factor score and variance contribution rate, The comprehensive index of is calculated as follows:

It can be seen from the above equation, the system embedding of grassroots self-governing organizations has the greatest influence on the grass-roots self-governing organizations embedding level. Therefore, measures such as standardizing homestead exit policy and establishing prestige can significantly affect the embedment level. Based on this, the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and grouping statistics in the research area are calculated(Table 3).

Table 3. Analysis of the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level.

Factor	Min	Max	Embedding level grouping
Factor	Min	Max	<0	=0	>0
Institutional embedding level	-1.735	1.490	188	0	233
Organizational embedding level	-1.732	1.873	185	0	236
Emotional embedding level	-2.559	1.145	245	0	176
The grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level	-1.600	1.200	201	2	217

As shown in Table 3, based on the perspective of farmers in the research area, the comprehensive index of the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level is located between-1.6 and 1.2, 201 households thought the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level was less than average, while 217 households thought it was higher than average. This shows, there is a big difference in the evaluation of the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level among different farmers, and the maximum and minimum values are located in the organizational embedding level and the emotional embedding level, respectively. It shows that farmers pay more attention to the organizational embedding level of grass-roots autonomous organizations, and pay less attention to the system embedding and emotional embedding. It is analyzed from three embedding methods, in the institutional embedding level of grass-roots autonomous organizations, there were 188 households (44.7%) of farmers believing that the system embedding level was lower than average, and 233 households (55.3%) thought that they were higher than average. In the organizational embedding level of grass-roots autonomous organizations, there were 185 households (43.9%) of farmers believing that the organizational embedding level was lower than average, and 236 households (56.1%) thought that they were higher than average. In the emotional embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations, there were 245 households (58.2%) of farmers believing that the organizational embedding level was lower than average, and176 households (41.8%) thought that they were higher than average.

4.2 Benchmark regression

The results from estimating Eq. (1) and Eq. (2), the benchmark regression, are shown in Table 4. VIF values were all less than 10, indicating no collinearity problem. The LR test shows that the fitting equation is highly significant overall. Model 1 takes the grassroots autonomous organizations as an explanatory variable.Model 2 includes non-farm employment as explanatory variables. Model 3 also included 3 kinds of grassroots autonomous organizations embedding levels and non-farm employment as explanatory variables. The three regressions included whether the farmer exit the homestead as the explained variable.

The impact of grassroots autonomous organization embedding level on farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The results show that when controlling for other variables(Table 4), when the impact of the non-farm employment variable is not considered, the institutional embedding level and the organizational embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations have a significant positive impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, while the emotional embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations has a significant negative impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The positive effect of institutional embedding and organizational embedding is much greater than the negative effect of the grassroots autonomous organizations emotional embedding, therefore, the stronger the level of grassroots autonomous organizations embedded in farmers' groups, the more likely they are to carry out homestead planning for farmers' rights and interests and get the support and trust of farmers, and the more likely they are to mobilize farmers to exit homestead. It can be seen that the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level has a positive and significant impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, that is, hypothesis H1 is valid.

When the impact of the non-farm employment variable is not considered, the institutional embedding level of grassroots autonomous organization has a significant impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, and conforms to the expected hypothesis, the impact direction of grassroots autonomous organizations organizational embedding level and emotional embedding level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior conforms to the expected hypothesis but fails the significance test. The possible reason is that, the higher the non-agricultural employment rate of farmer, the higher the non-agricultural employment income of farmer, farmer will more consider the time cost and salary loss in the process of negotiating the compensation plan of homestead withdrawal. therefore, the farmer non-farm employment level of will offset the impact of the grassroots autonomous organizations organizational embedding level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The farther the non-agricultural employment distance, the weaker the connection between farmer and villages, and the smaller the influence of rural feelings and clan affection on farmer. therefore, the farmer non-farm employment distance will offset the impact of the grassroots autonomous organizations emotional level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior.

Table 4. Benchmark regression results.

Variable	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3
Variable	Marginal effect	Standard errors	Marginal effect	Standard errors	Marginal effect	Standard errors
Institutional embedding level	0.224***	0.025			0.131***	0.020
Organizational embedding level	0.023*	0.012			0.008	0.007
Emotional embedding level	-0.017**	0.007			-0.004	0.006
The non-agricultural employment level (The farmer non-agricultural employment rate)			0.050***	0.014	0.013**	0.006
The non-agricultural employment distance			-0.215***	0.054	-0.059**	0.026
The quadratic term of the non-farm employment distance			0.022***	0.007	0.005	0.004
Educational level	0.010*	0.005	-0.006	0.006	0.002	0.003
Health condition	-0.040***	0.013	-0.006	0.009	-0.016**	0.006
The difficulty for families to get credit from friends and family	-0.008	0.006	-0.001	0.007	-0.001	0.003
Whether there are members of grassroots self-governing organizations in the family	-0.024	0.022	0.028	0.020	0.003	0.017
The distance of the homestead from the central town	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.002	0.001	0.001
Understanding degree of homestead exit policy	-0.032**	0.014	0.118***	0.007	-0.009	0.012
Pseudo R²	0.8444		0.8021		0.9139
LR chi²	152.68***		79.88***		82.18***
Log likelihood value	-43.718		-55.609		-24.205

Note: 1. Probit Model reports marginal effects, and standard errors are calculated by the Delta method. The same below.
2.***, **, and * indicate significance levels of 1%, 5% and 10%, respectively. The same below.

The impact of non-agricultural employment on farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The results show that when controlling for other variables(Table 4), the non-agricultural employment level has a significant positive impact on the farmer homestead exit behavior. Homestead withdrawal behavior is a collective choice behavior of family members. The more members engaged in non-agricultural employment, the more likely farmers are to pursue their own development needs under the impact of the market economy, and the weaker their emotional connection to the countryside, so they are more likely to exit the homestead, that is, hypothesis H2 is valid. The coefficient of the first term of non-agricultural employment distance is negative, which is consistent with the research conclusion of other scholars (Su et al,2017). In order to further study the effect of non-agricultural employment distance on farmers' homestead withdrawal behavior, a quadratic term of non-agricultural employment distance was added to the model. The quadratic coefficient of non-agricultural employment distance is positive, and the non-agricultural employment distance has a "U-shaped" impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. Near distance non-agricultural employment farmers have better social capital, A little long-distance employment farmers have better material capital, and they have more possible opportunities and measures to deal with risks. Therefore, they are more likely to exit the homestead than remote distance non-agricultural employment farmers with weak social relations and low skills, that is, hypothesis H3 is valid.

4.3 Endogeneity test

The instrumental variable method is based on the premise that not all explanatory variables in the model are exogenous, therefore, Wald test was performed on the model first. The Wald test value was 3.70, P=0.0543, which was significant at 1% statistical level. Therefore, there are endogenous problems in the model, and it is reasonable to use the instrumental variable method. According to the above analysis, the township size township size in which the investigate village is selected as the instrumental variable to meet the requirements of exogeneity and correlation. In the first stage regression results, the instrumental variable is significantly correlated with the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level, and the F-statistic is greater than 10, indicating that there is no weak instrumental variable problem. The regression results of the second stage are shown in Table 5. The marginal effect of grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level in the Probit model results is 0.129, while the marginal effect of grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level in the IV-probit model results is 7.417. This indicates that if the endogeneity problem is not dealt with, the impact of the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level on farmer homestead withdrawal behavior will be underestimated. Similarly, the estimation results of the impact of the non-agricultural employment level and the non-agricultural employment distance on farmer homestead withdrawal behavior will also be underestimated. Therefore, the following articles are all the results estimated using the instrumental variable method.

Table 5. Endogeneity test results.

Variable	Model 4( Probit )		Model 5( IV-Probit )
Variable	Marginal effect	Standard errors	Marginal effect	Standard errors
The grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level	0.129***	0.021	7.417**	3.008
The non-agricultural employment level (The farmer non-agricultural employment rate)	0.036***	0.011	0.526**	0.225
The non-agricultural employment distance	-0.136***	0.041	-2.625***	0.855
The quadratic term of the non-farm employment distance	0.013**	0.006	0.309**	0.127
Educational level	-0.002	0.005	0.051	0.140
Health condition	-0.009	0.008	-0.184	0.200
The difficulty for families to get credit from friends and family	-0.001	0.005	-0.189	0.192
Whether there are members of grassroots self-governing organizations in the family	-0.032**	0.015	-2.229**	1.057
The distance of the homestead from the central town	-0.001	0.001	-0.006	0.049
Understanding degree of homestead exit policy	0.050***	0.009	-0.677	0.979
Pseudo R²	0.8608
LR chi²	65.55***
Log likelihood value	-39.102

4.4 The moderating effect of village the farmer non-agricultural employment

In order to verify whether there is a moderating effect of non-agricultural employment on the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmer homestead behavior, the interaction item between the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmer non-farm employment index was constructed, and IV-probit model was used for regression. The second-stage regression results are shown in Table 6. The results indicate that both variables passed the significance test when the grassroots autonomy organization embedding level and the farmer non-farm employment level were simultaneously put into the model, then, the interaction item between the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmers off-farm employment level was put into the model, and the interaction item had a significant negative impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. This indicates that the farmer non-farm employment level plays a restraining role in the positive effect of grassroots autonomous organization embedding level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The larger the non-farm employment population in the family, the more affected the family is by the market economy and rationalism, and the more likely it is to have a lot of interference and dissatisfaction with the withdrawal and mobilization of grassroots autonomous organizations striving to maximize collective interests. Therefore, it will play an restraining role in the positive impact of grass-roots autonomous organizations embedding level on the farmer exit behavior. The interaction item between the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmer off-farm employment distance was put into the model, and the interaction item had no significant effect on the farmer homestead exit behavior. Therefore, the off-farm employment distance did not have a moderating effect between the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmers homestead exit behavior. In conclusion, hypothesis H4 is partially confirmed.

Table 6. The moderating effect of village the farmer non-agricultural employment.

Variable	Model 6	Model 7	Model 8	Model 9
The grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level	6.932*** (2.242)	9.501** （3.860）	6.976*** （2.580）	40.805（54.320）
The non-agricultural employment level (The farmer non-agricultural employment rate)	0.697*** (0.221）	1.128*** （0.260）
The non-agricultural employment distance			-0.676*** （0.205）	0.018 （1.195）
The grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level*The non-agricultural employment level		-2.132* （1.278）
The grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level*The non-agricultural employment distance				-7.955 （11.567）
Control variables	Control	Control	Control	Control
Wald test value	5.77	5.71	3.83	4.40
Prob>χ2	0.0163	0.0169	0.0503	0.0360

4.5 Robust analysis

Considering that the selected model will have an impact on the regression results, the Tobit model is further selected for robustness test in this paper(Table 7). According to the micro-data obtained from the survey, using the isometric grouping method, the farmer non-agricultural employment level between 0-25% is considered as low non-agricultural employment rate, 25%-50% is considered as a little low non-agricultural employment rate, 50%-75% is considered as a little high non-agricultural employment rate, and 75%-100% is considered as high non-agricultural employment rate. Specific practices: First, only the impact of the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level on the farmer homestead exit behavior was studied (Model 10). Secondly, according to the non-agricultural employment level of farmers, farmers are divided into four groups: low non-agricultural employment rate (Model 11), a little low non-agricultural employment rate (Model 12), a little high non-agricultural employment rate (Model 13) and high non-agricultural employment rate (Model 14), then, comparing analyzes the moderating effect of non-agricultural employment level in the grass-roots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmer withdrawal behavior.

The results are shown in Table 7. Without adding the farmer non-agricultural employment level, the institutional embedding level, organizational embedding level and emotional embedding level of grassroots autonomous organizations all have significant effects on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior at the 10% statistical level. When the non-agricultural employment level of farmers is added, only the grassroots autonomous organization institutional embedding level significantly affects the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior at different non-agricultural employment levels. It verifies the hypothesis that the farmer non-agricultural employment level has a moderating effect on the grass-roots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. Grouping analysis found that under the different farmer non-agricultural employment rate, the indirect effect of the grassroots autonomous organization institutional embedding level on the farmer withdrawal homestead behavior is less than the direct positive effect, and the impact of high non-agricultural employment rate is less than the impact of low non-farm employment rate. This indicates that the farmer non-agricultural employment rate plays an restraining role in the positive impact of the grassroots autonomous organization embedding level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, and the restraining effect is strengthened with the increase of the farmer non-agricultural employment rate. It can be seen that the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level has a positive impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior on the whole, and the farmer non-agricultural employment rate plays a moderating role between the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior.This is basically consistent with the analysis results above, so the analysis results of this paper are robust.

Table 7. Robust analysis results.

变量名称	Model 10	Model 11	Model 12	Model 13	Model 14
Institutional embedding level	0.472*** （0.024）	0.416*** （0.063）	0.521*** （0.036）	0.170*** （0.034）	0.356*** （0.061）
Organizational embedding level	0.041** （0.016）	0.040 （0.035）	0.022 （0.023）	0.034 （0.023）	0.073* （0.042）
Emotional embedding level	-0.033*** （0.011）	-0.008 （-0.023）	-0.021 （0.017）	-0.031** （0.014）	0.012 （0.029）
Control variables	Control	Control	Control	Control	Control
Pseudo R²	1.0883	1.2431	1.1485	-0.5698	2.1938
LR chi²	641.14***	112.83***	313.41***	42.72***	48.14***
Log likelihood	26.0123	11.0325	20.2661	58.8395	13.0996
Observations	421	81	188	103	49

Note: 1. Tobit Model reports marginal effects, and standard errors are calculated by the Delta method.

2.***, **, and * indicate significance levels of 1%, 5% and 10%, respectively.

To deepen the homestead system reform and promote the farmers voluntary and orderly withdrawal homestead is an inevitable requirement for the Chinese government to stimulate the potential driving force of rural development and achieve common prosperity. This study adopts the Embeddedness theory to analyze the mechanisms by which the effect of grassroots organization embedding level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior.Based on 421 questionnaire data from households in Qionglai city, Sichuan Province. the Probit model and IV-Probit model applied to examine the effect of grassroots organization embedding level on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, and to examine the moderating of the farmer non-agricultural employment rate and the farmer non-agricultural employment distance.The main conclusions are as follows:

First, the village committee and villager group strengthening the connection with farmers can promote the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The village committee and the villagers group in the process of implementing the farmers homestead exit policy, guaranteeing farmers' right to know has a positive impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, fully considering the reasonable demands of farmers has a positive impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, respecting and protecting village traditional culture has a negative effect on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, and guaranteeing farmers' right to know has the greatest influence on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. Second, the farmer non-agricultural employment has a significant impact on the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. The farmer non-agricultural employment rate can promote the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior. There is a U-shaped relationship between the quadratic term of the farmer non-farm employment distance and the farmer exit behavior. Third, the farmer non-farm employment rate has a moderating effect on the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level and the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior, which hinders the mobilization of grassroots autonomous organizations to persuade the farmer exit homestead. Under the moderating effect of the farmer non-farm employment rate, the grassroots autonomous organizations embedding level has different effects on the farmers exit behavior with different non-farm employment rate, in addition, different embedding methods of grassroots autonomous organizations have different effects on different the farmer non-agricultural employment rates. Finally, the hypothesis that the farmer non-farm employment distance plays a moderating role on the grassroots autonomous organization embedding level and the farmer homestead withdrawal behavior has not been confirmed, which needs further analysis and test.

Based on the above conclusions, in order to improve the ability of grassroots autonomous organizations to embed farmers, and promote farmers to voluntarily and orderly exit homestead. This paper puts forward the following suggestions: First, strengthen the relationship between grassroots autonomous organizations and farmers. Grass-roots autonomous organizations should formulate specific action plans for the farmer homestead exit from the perspective of farmers, constantly reflect the voice of farmers, and improve the standardization and legitimacy of the institutional decisions in the process of withdrawing homestead. Second, continue to strengthen the development of grass-roots autonomous organizations. Grass-roots autonomous organizations should give full consideration to the reasonable demands of farmers, make them open to public plans and financial affairs, protect farmers' right to know about collective actions, and create a good rural social atmosphere. In the context of rural revitalization strategy. Grass-roots autonomous organizations should actively develop and strengthen the collective economy, promote the village economic development, encourage farmer households to obtain non-farm employment nearby, accelerate rural urbanization, promote the citizenization process of farmer households. Third, strengthen skills training for farmers. To improve the ability of farmers to adapt to market competition, enhance the stability of farmers’ jobs, and improve the level of farmers household income. Finally, grass-roots autonomous organizations should strengthen publicity of homestead reform policies, improve farmers' awareness of homestead reform policies, ensure the orderly implementation of homestead reform.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Xinyi LIU and YingXin Xu; methodology, Xinyi LIU and YingXin Xu; validation, Xinyi LIU and YingXin Xu; formal analysis, Xinyi LIU and YingXin Xu; investigation, Xinyi LIU and YingXin Xu; resources, Xinyi LIU and Yuan GAO; data curation, Xinyi LIU and Yuan GAO; writing—original draft preparation, Xinyi LIU and YingXin Xu; writing—review and editing, Xinyi LIU, YingXin Xu and Yuan GAO; project administration, Xinyi LIU; funding acquisition, Kai ZHAO. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research was financially supported by The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs project "rural homestead system reform pilot management and evaluation"（10200071）, and Soft science project of Shaanxi Provincial Innovation Capacity Support Plan "Research on Shaanxi Rural Public Service Facilities Supply Mode under the Background of Rural Revitalization"（2021KRM178）.

Data availability Available upon request.

Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable.

Consent for publication Not applicable.

Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.

Chen, H., Zhao, L., Zhao, Z., 2017, Influencing factors of farmers’ willingness to withdraw from rural homesteads: A survey in zhejiang, China. LAND USE POLICY 68, 524-530.
Cheng, X., Chen, J., Jiang, S., Dai, Y., Shuai, C., Li, W., Liu, Y., Wang, C., Zhou, M., Zou, L., Zhang, P., Kang, X., 2021, The impact of rural land consolidation on household poverty alleviation: The moderating effects of human capital endowment. LAND USE POLICY 109, 105692.
Chang, Q., Zhang, C.Y., Wang, L.W., Jin, B.Y., Zhao, M.J., 2021, The influence of non-agricultural employment on the planting structure of farmers in the middle and upper reaches of the Yellow River Basin. Chinese Rural Economy, 89-106.
Gao, Y., Sun, P.F., Zhao, K., 2021, The influence path of farmers’homestead withdrawal behavior in poor areas: From the family life cycle perspective. Resources Science 43, 1403-1418.
Huang, Q., Zheng, X., Wang, R., 2022, The Impact of the Accessibility of Transportation Infrastructure on the Non-Farm Employment Choices of Rural Laborers: Empirical Analysis Based on China’s Micro Data. Land 11, 896.
Jiang, Y.F., 2021, The Path of Realizing the Positive Interaction between Government Predominance and Farmers’Participation in Rural Environmental Governance: Based on Action in the Perspective of‘Embeddedness Theory’. Journal of Yunnan University (Social Sciences Edition) 20, 117-124.
Li, J., Lo, K., Zhang, P., Guo, M., 2021, Reclaiming small to fill large: A novel approach to rural residential land consolidation in China. LAND USE POLICY 109, 105706.
Li, S., Chen, G., 2012, Can a "relationship" bring about happiness? Empirical evidence of —— derived from rural China. Chinese Rural Economy , 66-78.
Liu, W., Zhang, Y.L., 2018, Study on Off-farm Employment and Income Cap of Farmers ——Based on Heterogeneity Analysis of Local Off-farm Employment and Out-of-village Employment. Journal of Huazhong Agricultureal University (Social Sciences Edition), 56-64.
Liu,T., Zhuo, Y.X., 2021, Wang, J.J. Village Environment, Off-farm Employment and Land Transfer in Rural China: Evidence from A Nationwide Household Survey. Areal Research And Development 40, 141-146.
Liu, Y., He, X.F., 2018, From Embedded Governance to Classified Management —The Past and Future of the Homestead System. Journal of Sichuan University ( Philosophy and Social Science Edition) , 47-56.
Liang, X.W., Liao, J.Q., 2005, Zeng, Q.H. Expansion and testing of voluntary resignation research model based on work embedding of core employee organizational performance. Management World, 106-115.
Liu, Y., Li, Y., 2017, Revitalize the world's countryside. NATURE 548, 275-277.
Luo, B.L., 2021, Rural homestead system reform: separate, open and revitalize. Journal of Huazhong Agricultureal University (Social Sciences Edition), 1-3.
Shi, P., Vanclay, F., Yu, J., 2022, Post-Resettlement Support Policies, Psychological Factors, and Farmers’ Homestead Exit Intention and Behavior. Land 11, 237.
S, G.M., 1984, Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly 19, 481-510.
Sun, P.F., Gao, Y., Zhao, K., 2020, The impact of homestead withdrawal on farmer income —— is based on counterfactual estimates of propensity score matching (PSM). Journal of Northwest A & F University (Social Sciences Edition) 20, 69-78.
Sun, P.F., Zhao, K., 2020, The influence of social capital on farmers' homestead withdrawal behavior —— based on the research data from Jinzhai County, Anhui Province. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition) 20, 128-141.
Su, K., Hu, B., Shi, K., Zhang, Z., Yang, Q., 2019, The structural and functional evolution of rural homesteads in mountainous areas: A case study of Sujiaying village in Yunnan province, China. LAND USE POLICY 88, 104100.
Su, Y.Q., Qin, M., Wang, Y.H., 2020, The influence of land transfer on the level of rural collective action in the context of labor outflow ——based on the social ecosystem (SES) framework. Management World 7, 185-198.
Shi, P., Yu, J., 2021, The impact of risk expectation, citizenization perception and farmers' cognition on the withdrawal of homestead of farmers relocated from inhospitable areas. Resources Science 43, 1387-1402.
Sun, P.F., Zhao, K., He, J., 2019, The Rural Population Aging, Social Trust and Farmers' Behavior of Quitting Rural Residential Land (FBQRRL): 614 Farmers' Samples in JinZhai County, Anhui Province. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition), 137-145.
Tang, P., Chen, J., Gao, J., Li, M., Wang, J., 2020, What Role(s) Do Village Committees Play in the Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads? Evidence from Sichuan Province in Western China. Land 9, 477.
Wang, W., Lan, Y., Wang, X., 2021, Impact of livelihood capital endowment on poverty alleviation of households under rural land consolidation. LAND USE POLICY 109, 105608.
Wu, Y.L., Yu, Y.Y., 2021, Wang, M. Study on Farmers’ Demand for Welfare Enhancement of Rural Residential LandWithdrawal: Based on the Rural Household Survey in Yujiang, Jinzhai and Yicheng. China Land Science 35, 61-70.
Wang, J., Zhao, K., 2021, The impact of homestead withdrawal on farmers' agricultural production efficiency —— based on a sample of 473 farmers in Jinzhai County, Anhui Province. China Land Science 35, 71-80.
Wang,Y.P., Lu, W.D., 2021, Study on the influencing factors of rural labor force transfer under the perspective of embedding. Northwest Population 42, 57-70.
Xu, H.Z., Jing, X.Z., 2021, The impact of non-farm employment and basic social insurance selection on homestead transfer —— An empirical study based on the 2017 CRHPS tracking survey data. Journal of China Agricultural University 26, 250-263.
Xiang, N., Le, Z., 2021, Non-agricultural employment and the social trust of rural residents: an empirical investigation based on the Fushan proposition. Journal of Xi'an Jiaotong University (Social Sciences Edition) 41, 85-93.
Xu, C.H., Dang, H.M., YU, J. 2022, Effect of Generationl Division of Farmers' Non-agricultural Employment on the Behavior of Farmer and Transfer——based on the Intermediary Effect of Agricultural Production Service Outsourcing. Journal of Northwest A & F University (Social Sciences Edition) 22, 141-150.
Yang, Y.B., Li, B.Y., 2014, Li, S.W. Review of embedding theory research: based on the perspective of universal connection. Shandong Social Science, 172-176.
Yan, X., Li, L.T., 2021, Niu, R. Evaluation of the influencing factors of farmer homestead withdrawal. Journal of Northwest A & F University (Social Sciences Edition) 21, 72-84.
Yu, Y., Liu, X.H., Song, Y., 2021, Wu, Y.P. Government regulation, dual embedded governance and green and healthy breeding behavior —— taking Henan Province as an example. Agricultural Technology Economy, 66-83.
Zhang, Y., Torre, A., Ehrlich, M., 2021, Governance Structure of Rural Homestead Transfer in China: Government and/or Market? Land 10, 745.
Zhang, Y.W., Wu, J., Zhang, X.Y., 2020, Village doctor and the state: from deep embedding to deviation embedding. Hubei Social Science, 44-54.
Zhang, T., Zhang, A.L., 2016, Deng, S.L. Expected income, risk expectation and farmer homestead withdrawal behavior —— based on the empirical analysis of farmers in Songjiang district and Jinshan District of Shanghai. Resource Science 38, 1503-1514.
Zhang, H.L., Xia, X.L., 2021a, Study on the influence of homestead withdrawal on the household labor productivity of farmers. Commercial Research, 80-87.
Zhang, H.L., Xia, X.L., 2021b, Risk perception, institutional trust and farmers' homestead withdrawal behavior. Journal of Northwest A & F University (Social Sciences Edition) 21, 145-154.
Zhou, L.Y., Rao, F.P., Ma, X.L., Shi, X.P., 2017, The influence of non-farm employment type in hilly areas on farmland transfer —— based on the survey data of farmers in northeastern Jiangxi Province. Resources Science 39, 209-219.
Zhou, Y., Guo, Y., Liu, Y., Wu, W., Li, Y., 2018, Targeted poverty alleviation and land policy innovation: Some practice and policy implications from China. LAND USE POLICY 74, 53-65.
Zhou, Y., Li, X., Liu, Y., 2020, Rural land system reforms in China: History, issues, measures and prospects. LAND USE POLICY 91, 104330.

Grassroots autonomous organizations embedding, non-agricultural employment and farmer homestead withdrawal behavior: Based on the research data of Qionglai City, Sichuan Province, China

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 2

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

2. Theoretical Analysis

3. Materials And Methods

4. Results

5. Conclusions And Policy Recommendations

Declarations

References

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 2