Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38265990›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Agriculture land use transformation: A threat to sustainable food production systems, rural food security, and farmer well-being?

Meiyi Li, Junrong Li, Shamsheer Ul Haq, Muhammad Nadeem

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Meiyi LiSchool of Business, Tianshui Normal University, Tianshui, Gansu, China.
Junrong LiSchool of Public Administration, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Shamsheer Ul HaqDepartment of Economics, Division of Management and Administrative Science, University of Education, Lahore, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0002-7258-5525
Muhammad NadeemCollege of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, PR China.
Tianshui Normal University · CNUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNUniversity of Okara · PKVirtual University of Pakistan · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The acquisition of agricultural land is a crucial aspect of survival for numerous rural communities, serving as a fundamental tool for combating poverty and food insecurity and promoting equitable sustainable economic progress. The expropriation of land offers a promising prospect for remedying past inequities and promoting both economic progress and food sufficiency. Limited research has examined the association between land expropriation and food security, livelihood shocks, and the well-being of rural households worldwide. Therefore, this research explores the implications of land expropriation on food security, livelihood shocks, and well-being of land lost rural communities. The data were collected from 384 farmers selected through stratified sampling techniques using face-to-face surveys in rural China. The data were analyzed using descriptive and logit regression models. The descriptive findings showed that land expropriation has detrimental effects on the livelihood, food security, and well-being of the farmers. Furthermore, these impacts are more harmful among land-expropriated households with a lower educational level, a large family size, and women farmers in less developed rural communities. The econometric results evinced that gender, age, education level, marital status, family size, and negative changes in income all significantly affect the impact of land expropriation on the food security of farmers. Similarly, the findings revealed that farmers with lower education levels were more likely to be affected by land loss as compared to farmers with medium and high education levels. Farmers with complete land loss were 1.70 times more likely to suffer livelihood shocks than those with partial land loss. The results also evinced that the well-being of all farmers was not affected equally, and some farmers' well-being was affected more than others due to various socioeconomic backgrounds. Therefore, this study suggests the implementation of public policies that provide support to farmers who have been marginalized due to land acquisition.

Indexed as

FarmersRural PopulationAgricultureChinaEducational StatusFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID38265990
PMCPMC10807767
OpenAlexW4391164776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.