
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Environ. Sci.
Sec. Environmental Economics and Management
Volume 13 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2025.1573754
This article is part of the Research TopicEnvironmental Resilience and Sustainable Agri-food System ManagementView all 15 articles
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Global crop straw production has increased sharply, leading to serious challenges in straw burning and disposal. The unsustainable practice of open burning wastes valuable renewable resources and poses significant environmental threats, such as air pollution and soil degradation, that undermine global agricultural sustainability. Despite extensive efforts by the Chinese government to promote crop straw resource utilization (CSRU), low farmer participation and the reliance on a singular technological structure remain persistent issues. Drawing on prospect theory, this study integrates behavioral economics and policy analysis to examine how farmers' risk preferences, including risk aversion, loss aversion, and probability weightingnonlinear probability weighting, interact with heterogeneous government regulations, such as incentives, restrictions, and guidance, to shape CSRU behavior. Using micro-survey data from 440 rural households in Liaoning Province, China, we apply a logit model to quantify these relationships and analyze the moderating role of specific government policy measures. The empirical results show that farmers generally exhibit strong risk aversion, which increases the average probability of CSRU adoption by 2710.56%, whilemeanwhile an excessive focus on lowprobability risks significantly promotesuppresses adoption willingness. Furthermore, fiscal incentives such as direct subsidies effectively amplify the positive effect of risk aversion, increasing its marginal impact by 18.223.7%. In contrast, relying solely on regulatory measures tends to weaken this positive effect by increasing compliance costs, thereby reducing the adoption probability by 9.65.22%. Additional analysis reveals heterogeneity in responses based on income structures and business models: high-level of part-time farmers exhibit a much stronger response to government regulations, with their risk aversion effect being approximately 3.5 times that of low-level of part-time farmers.part-time farmers display significantly higher policy sensitivity up to 34% than full-time farmers. By synthesizing insights from behavioral and environmental economics, this study elucidates the mechanism through which economic risks are balanced in the CSRU adoption process and highlights the critical regulatory role of government policy tools. The findings provide empirical evidence and policy insights for optimizing resource management, formulating more cost-effective environmental policies, and promoting the green transformation of agriculture.
Keywords: crop straw resource utilization, Farmers' behavior, Risk preference, Prospect Theory, Government Regulation
Received: 09 Feb 2025; Accepted: 14 Apr 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Huang, Guo, Zhou and Xiu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Liqun Xiu, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary Material
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.