The Impact Of Prohibition Policy Of Livestock And Poultry On Meat Consumption Of Rural Residents

With the development of economy and the improvement of living standards,the intake of meat in the diet of Chinese people has increased,ensuring the nutritional demands for a healthy and high-quality lifestyle.However,due to the current imbalances of development between regions and the difference of nutrition cognition level across China,there is a correlation between dietary meat consumption among rural residents and their family agricultural production,rasing concerns of regional,group and family production issues.In recent years,all kinds of agricultural environmental policies have introduced a series of policy instruments aimed at regulating agricultural production.Notably,these policies have focused on the development of the livestock and poultry industry,which is associated with significant non-point source pollution in agriculture.However,it remains uncertain whether or not the implementation of environmental policies has any impact on household consumption,specifically through the influence on household agricultural employment and income,that is,the spillover effect of these environmental policies on residents’ meat consumption still needs to be further explored.Given the aforementioned issues,this paper proposes a quasi-experimental study that examines typical policies implemented in livestock and poultry farming areas as a means of addressing environmental concerns within agriculture.Based on the nutritional data from CHNS database,the paper adopted the differences in differences analysis to evaluate the impact of the livestock and poultry farming policies on the meat consumption of rural residents,and explored and identified the action path of rural meat prices and industrial income under the policy.On this basis,The heterogeneity of policy effects,the crowding out effect on meat consumption deviation level,and the proximity effect on surrounding areas were further evaluated.The main results of this paper are as follows:(1)The policy of prohibiting livestock and poultry farming(PLPF)has had a significant negative impact on the meat consumption of rural residents,resulting in a decrease of 20.91g/day in their meat consumption.Notably,this policy has a higher impact on pork consumption compared to poultry.(2)In the context of academic discourse,it has been identified that there exist two distinct mechanisms through which livestock and poultry farming policies impact the consumption patterns of meat among rural populations.The initial mechanism relates to the pricing of meat,which demonstrates that a rise of 1 yuan in the cost of pork yields a decrease of 14.27g/day in the amount of meat consumed by individuals living in rural areas.The second mechanism pertains to the income levels of people who quit breeding industry,which serve as a proxy for the overall income of rural residents.The implementation of PLPF policy led to a decrease in farmers’ meat consumption through a reduction in their household income,which indicates an income effect.(3)Inter-group heterogeneity showed that the low income group,the youth group and the group with low dietary knowledge level were more negatively affected by the meat consumption.The policy of livestock and poultry farming areas had a crowding out effect of "decreasing high and increasing low" on the meat consumption deviating from the equilibrium level.The underconsumption level of meat in the elderly groups and the groups with low dietary knowledge is aggravated greater,and the excess level of meat consumption in the middle and high income groups,the youth groups and the groups with high dietary knowledge is reduced greater.(4)The prohibition policy of livestock and poultry has no significant influence on the meat consumption of residents in neighboring areas.Based on the above conclusions,this paper puts forward the following policy recommendations:(1)Popularize nutrition and health education in rural areas to improve the level of dietary nutrition cognition.(2)Improve the diversification of rural residents’ income and increase the risk bearing pressure of household food consumption.(3)Pay attention to the nutrition level of vulnerable groups and strengthen the food security of government transfer payments.(4)Balancing regional production capacity deployment to ensure regional supply of livestock and poultry products.(5)Strengthen the diversification assessment of environmental policy effects and take into account the diversity of rural residents’ welfare.