Sensitivity of livelihood strategy to livestock production and marketization: An empirical analysis of grasslands in Inner Mongolia, China

doi:10.1016/j.regsus.2022.01.003

Abstract

Abstract:

Recent researches have primarily focused on the relationship between livelihood strategies and livelihood capital, with few empirical studies on the sensitivity of livelihood strategies to livestock production and marketization in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region of China. This study used an income distribution approach to categorize livelihood strategies of the respondents (n=394) into three types, i.e., herder livelihood strategy (LS1), petty-herder livelihood strategy (LS2), and non-herder livelihood strategy (LS3). Using the multinomial logistic regression model, we compared livestock production and marketization across the three livelihood strategies. Our findings showed that (1) livestock production and marketization tended to favor LS1; (2) an increase in the land asset (contracted and rented grassland) and off-take rate increased the probability of households choosing LS1; (3) stocking rate was higher for LS1; and (4) the higher critical market-related risks perceived by herders were animal price and hay and corn price. Moreover, higher livestock price acted as a deterrent to diversifying into other livelihood strategies (LS2 and LS3). Finally, this study advocates for policies that will promote the land transfer market, adopt modern techniques in animal husbandry, improve the medium for disseminating market information to herders, and provide incentives for long-term livelihood transformation.

Key words: Livelihood strategy, Livestock production, Marketization, Livelihood diversification, GrasslandInner Mongolia Autonomous Region

Saheed Olaide JIMOH, DING Wenqiang, DONG Haibin, BAI Haihua, YIN Yanting, LIU Huihui, HOU Xiangyang. Sensitivity of livelihood strategy to livestock production and marketization: An empirical analysis of grasslands in Inner Mongolia, China[J]. Regional Sustainability, 2021, 2(4): 363-374.

Figures/Tables 8

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Fig. 1.

Table 4

Table S1

Table S2

Table S3

References 77

[1]	Achiba, G.A., 2018. Managing livelihood risks: income diversification and the livelihood strategies of households in pastoral settlements in Isiolo County, Kenya. Pastoralism. 8, 20, doi: 10.1186/s13570-018-0120-x. doi: 10.1186/s13570-018-0120-x
[2]	Adepoju, A.O., Obayelu, O.A., 2013. Livelihood diversification and welfare of rural households in Ondo State, Nigeria. J.Dev. Agric. Econ. 5(12), 482-489.
[3]	Adriansen, H.K., 2006. Continuity and change in pastoral livelihoods of Senegalese Fulani. Agric. Hum. Values. 23(2), 215-229. doi: 10.1007/s10460-005-6108-3
[4]	Amadi, L., Anokwuru, G., 2017. Sustainable rural livelihoods: elusive post-colonial development project in Nigeria? Int. J.Political Sci. 3(4), 28-42.
[5]	Bishu, K.G., O’Reilly, S., Lahiff, E., et al., 2018. Cattle farmers’ perceptions of risk and risk management strategies: evidence from Northern Ethiopia. J.Risk Res. 21(5), 579-598.
[6]	Boughton, D., Mather, D., Barrett, C., et al., 2007. Market participation by rural households in a low-income country: an asset-based approach applied to Mozambique. Faith Econ. 50, 64-101.
[7]	Briske, D.D., Zhao, M.L., Han, G.D., et al., 2015. Strategies to alleviate poverty and grassland degradation in Inner Mongolia: Intensification vs production efficiency of livestock systems. J.Environ. Manag. 152, 177-182.
[8]	Brown, C., Waldron, S., Liu, Y.M., et al., 2009. Forage-livestock policies designed to improve livelihoods in Western China: A critical review. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 1(4), 367-381.
[9]	Byne, A.T., 2016. Grazing management in Inner Mongolia China. PhD Dissertation. Fort Collins: Colorado State University.
[10]	Ding, W.Q., Jimoh, S., Hou, Y.L., et al., 2018. Influence of livelihood capitals on livelihood strategies of herdsmen in inner Mongolia, China. Sustainability. 10(9), 3325, doi: 10.3390/su10093325. doi: 10.3390/su10093325
[11]	Du, F.L., Liu, Z.J., Oniki, S., 2017. Factors affecting herdsmen’s grassland transfer in Inner Mongolia, China. Jarq-Jpn. Agric. Res. Q. 51(3), 259-269.
[12]	Ellis, F., 1998. Household strategies and rural livelihood diversification. J.Dev. Stud. 35, 1-38.
[13]	Ellis, F., 1999. Rural Livelihood Diversity in Developing Countries: Evidence and Policy Implications. London: Overseas Development Institute.
[14]	Ellis, F., 2000. The determinants of rural livelihood diversification in developing countries. J.Agric. Econ. 51(2), 289-302.
[15]	Fang, Y.P., Fan, J., Shen, M.Y., et al., 2014. Sensitivity of livelihood strategy to livelihood capital in mountain areas: Empirical analysis based on different settlements in the upper reaches of the Minjiang River, China. Ecol. Indic. 38, 225-235. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.11.007
[16]	Field, A., 2009. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (3^rd edition). London: Sage.
[17]	Flaten, O., Lien, G., Koesling, M., et al., 2005. Comparing risk perceptions and risk management in organic and conventional dairy farming: empirical results from Norway. Livest. Prod. Sci. 95(1-2), 11-25. doi: 10.1016/j.livprodsci.2004.10.014
[18]	Gebru, G.W., Ichoku, H.E., Phil-Eze, P.O., et al., 2018. Determinants of livelihood diversification strategies in Eastern Tigray Region of Ethiopia. Agric. Food Secur. 7, 62, doi: 10.1186/s40066-018-0214-0. doi: 10.1186/s40066-018-0214-0
[19]	Hou, X.Y., Han, Y., Li, F.Y., 2012. The perception and adaptation of herdsmen to climate change and climate variability in the desert steppe region of Northern China. Rangel. J. 34(4), 349-357. doi: 10.1071/RJ12013
[20]	Hou, X.Y., Yin, Y., Michalk, D., et al., 2014. Herders’ opinions about desirable stocking rates and overstocking in the rangelands of Northern China. Rangel. J. 36(6), 601-610. doi: 10.1071/RJ13040
[21]	Hu, Y.N., Huang, J.K., Hou, L.L., 2019. Impacts of the grassland ecological compensation policy on household livestock production in China: an empirical study in Inner Mongolia. Ecol. Econ. 161, 248-256. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.03.014
[22]	Hua, X.B., 2014. The coupling between livelihood of farmers and herders and land use—Case studies of three Agro-ecological zones in Tibetan Plateau. MSc Thesis. Chongqing: Southwest University (in Chinese).
[23]	Hua, X.B., Yan, J.Z., Zhang, Y.L., 2017. Evaluating the role of livelihood assets in suitable livelihood strategies: protocol for anti-poverty policy in the Eastern Tibetan Plateau, China. Ecol. Indic. 78, 62-74. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.03.009
[24]	Huntsinger, L., Oviedo, J.L., 2014. Ecosystem services are social-ecological services in a traditional pastoral system: The case of California’s Mediterranean rangelands. Ecol. Soc. 19, 8, doi: 10.5751/ES-06143-190108. doi: 10.5751/ES-06143-190108
[25]	Huong, N.T., Nanseki, T., 2015. Households’ risk perception of pig farming in Vietnam: A case study in Quynh Phu District, Thai Binh Province . Jpn. J. Rural. Econ. 17, 58-63. doi: 10.18480/jjre.17.58
[26]	Huq, N., Pedroso, R., Bruns, A., et al., 2020. Changing dynamics of livelihood dependence on ecosystem services at temporal and spatial scales: an assessment in the southern wetland areas of Bangladesh. Ecol. Indic. 110, 105855, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105855. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105855
[27]	Ibrahim, S.B., Ayinde, I.A., Arowolo, A.O., 2015. Analysis of arable crop farmers’ awareness to causes and effects of climate change in south western Nigeria . Int. J.Soc. Econ. 42(7), 614-628.
[28]	Kassie, G.W., Kim, S., Fellizar Jr, F.P., 2017. Determinant factors of livelihood diversification: Evidence from Ethiopia. Cogent Soc. Sci. 3, 1369490, doi: 10.1080/23311886.2017.1369490. doi: 10.1080/23311886.2017.1369490
[29]	Komarek, A.M., Waldron, S.A., Brown, C.G., 2012. An exploration of livestock-development policies in Western China. Food Policy. 37, 12-20. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.10.001
[30]	Korir, L.K., 2011. Risk management among agricultural households and the role of off-farm investment in Uasin Gishu County, Kenya. MSc Thesis. Kenya: Egerton University.
[31]	Landau, S., Everitt, B.S., 2004. A Handbook of Statistical Analyses Using SPSS. London: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press LLC.
[32]	Legesse, B., Drake, L., 2005. Determinants of smallholder farmers’ perceptions of risk in the Eastern Highlands of Ethiopia. J.Risk Res. 8(5), 383-416.
[33]	Li, W.J., Huntsinger, L., 2011. China’s grassland contract policy and its impacts on herder ability to benefit in Inner Mongolia: tragic feedbacks. Ecol. Soc. 16(2), 1, doi: 10.5751/ES-03969-160201. doi: 10.5751/ES-03969-160201
[34]	Li, X.L., Yuan, Q.H., Wan, L.Q., et al., 2008. Perspectives on livestock production systems in China. Rangel. J. 30(2), 211-220. doi: 10.1071/RJ08011
[35]	Li, X.L., Ding, Y., Yin, Y.T., et al., 2017. Patterns of herders’ adaptation to changes in social - ecological systems across northern China’s grasslands over the past three decades. Rangel. J. 39(4), 317-328. doi: 10.1071/RJ16070
[36]	Liu, M., 2017. China’s grassland policies and the inner mongolian grassland system. PhD Dissertation. Wageningen: Wageningen University.
[37]	Liu, M., Huang, J.K., Dries, L., et al., 2017. How does land tenure reform impact upon pastoral livestock production? An empirical study for Inner Mongolia, China. China Econ. Rev. 60, 101110, doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2017.09.009. doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2017.09.009
[38]	Liu, Z.F., Chen, Q.R., Xie, H.L., 2018. Influence of the farmer’s livelihood assets on livelihood strategies in the western Mountainous area, China. Sustainability. 10(3), 875, doi: 10.3390/su10030875. doi: 10.3390/su10030875
[39]	Lohmar, B., Gale, F., Tuan, F., et al., 2009. China’s Ongoing Agricultural Modernization Challenges Remain after 30 Years of Reform. Washington DC: United States Department of Agriculture.
[40]	Majekodunmi, A.O., Dongkum, C., Langs, T., et al., 2016. Improved productivity and sustainable pastoral systems in an era of insecurity—Fulani herds of the southern Jos Plateau, North-Central Nigeria. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 48(8), 1719-1728. pmid: 27637593
[41]	Majekodunmi, A.O., Dongkum, C., Langs, T., et al., 2017. Shifting livelihood strategies in northern Nigeria-extensified production and livelihood diversification amongst Fulani pastoralists. Pastoralism. 7, 19, doi: 10.1186/s13570-017-0091-3. doi: 10.1186/s13570-017-0091-3 pmid: 28736609
[42]	Miao, L.J., Sun, Z.L., Cui, X.F., et al., 2018. Wake up “boiling frogs”: A study on animal husbandry under climate change in Northern China. Environ. Earth Sci. 77(12), 1-8. doi: 10.1007/s12665-017-7169-5
[43]	National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2011. China Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press (in Chinese).
[44]	Nielsen, Ø.J., Rayamajhi, S., Uberhuaga, P., et al., 2013. Quantifying rural livelihood strategies in developing countries using an activity choice approach. Agric. Econ. 44(1), 57-71. doi: 10.1111/agec.2013.44.issue-1
[45]	Ojima, D.S., Chuluun, T., Galvin, K.A., 2013. Social-ecological vulnerability of grassland ecosystems. Climate Vulnerability. 4, 151-162.
[46]	Onyango, O.D., 2017. Assessing the factors influencing food and livelihood security among pastoral communities in Turkana County, Kenya. MSc Thesis. Kenya: University of Nairobi.
[47]	Oyinbo, O., Olaleye, K.T., 2016. Farm households livelihood diversification and poverty alleviation in Giwa local government area of Kaduna State, Nigeria. Consilience: The Journal of Sustainable Development. 15, 219-232.
[48]	Peng, W.J., Zheng, H., Robinson, B.E., et al., 2017. Household livelihood strategy choices, impact factors, and environmental consequences in Miyun Reservoir Watershed, China. Sustainability. 9(2), 175, doi: 10.3390/su9020175. doi: 10.3390/su9020175
[49]	Pennings, J.M.E., Wansink, B., Meulenberg, M.T.G., 2002. A note on modeling consumer reactions to a crisis: The case of the mad cow disease. Int. J.Res. Mark. 19(1), 91-100.
[50]	Piao, S.L., Ciais, P., Huang, Y., et al., 2010. The impacts of climate change on water resources and agriculture in China. Nature. 467, 43-51. doi: 10.1038/nature09364
[51]	Rakodi, C., 1999. A capital assets framework for analysing household livelihood strategies: Implications for policy. Dev. Policy Rev. 17(3), 315-342. doi: 10.1111/dpr.1999.17.issue-3
[52]	Roessali, W., Masyhuri, S.N., Darwanto, D.H., 2011. Factors influencing farmers’ decision to increase beef cattle business scale in central Java province. J.Indones. Trop. Anim. Agric. 36(1), 27-35.
[53]	Scoones, I., 1998. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis. [2019-10-11]. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/20.500.12413/3390/Wp72.pdf?sequence=1.
[54]	Scoones, I., 2009. Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. J.Peasant Stud. 36(1), 171-196.
[55]	Squires, V.R., Lu, X.S., Lu, Q., et al., 2009. Rangeland Degradation and Recovery in China’s Pastoral Lands. Wallingford: International Center for Applied Bioscience.
[56]	Su, F., Pu, X.D., Xu, Z.M., et al., 2009. Analysis about the relationship between livelihood capital and livelihood strategies: Take Ganzhou in Zhangye City as an example. China Population, Resources and Environment. 19(6), 119-125. (in Chinese).
[57]	Su, F., Saikia, U., Hay, I., 2018. Relationships between livelihood risks and livelihood capitals: A case study in Shiyang River Basin, China. Sustainability. 10(2), 509, doi: 10.3390/su10020509. doi: 10.3390/su10020509
[58]	Sun, R., Mi, J.N., Cao, S., et al., 2019. Classifying livelihood strategies adopting the activity choice approach in rural China. Sustainability. 11(11), 3019, doi: 10.3390/su11113019. doi: 10.3390/su11113019
[59]	The Department for International Development (DFID), 1999. Sustainable Livelihood Guidance Sheets. [2019-11-25]. https://www.livelihoodscentre.org/documents/114097690/114438878/Sustainable+livelihoods+guidance+sheets.pdf/594e5ea6-99a9-2a4e-f288-cbb4ae4bea8b?t=1569512091877.
[60]	The World, Bank, 2016. Agricultural Sector Risk Assessment: Methodological Guidance for Practitioners (No.100320-GLB). [2019-12-09]. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/23778.
[61]	van den, Berg, M., 2010. Household income strategies and natural disasters: Dynamic livelihoods in rural Nicaragua. Ecol. Econ. 69(3), 592-602. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.09.006
[62]	Waldron, S., Brown, C., Longworth, J., 2010. Grassland degradation and livelihoods in China’s western pastoral region: A framework for understanding and refining China’s recent policy responses. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 2(3), 298-320.
[63]	Walelign, S.Z., 2016. Livelihood strategies, environmental dependency and rural poverty: the case of two villages in rural Mozambique. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 18(2), 593-613. doi: 10.1007/s10668-015-9658-6
[64]	Wang, G., 2007. Analysis of the main reasons for grassland degradation. Review of Economic Research. 44, 40-48 (in Chinese).
[65]	Wang, J., Brown, D.G., Riolo, R.L., et al., 2013. Exploratory analyses of local institutions for climate change adaptation in the Mongolian grasslands: An agent-based modeling approach. Glob. Environ. Chang. 23(5), 1266-1276. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.017
[66]	Wang, X.L., Wu, X., Yan, P., et al., 2016. Integrated analysis on economic and environmental consequences of livestock husbandry on different scale in China. J.Clean. Prod. 119, 1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.084
[67]	Xu, L., Nie, Y., Chen, B., et al., 2020. Effects of fence enclosure on vegetation community characteristics and productivity of a degraded temperate meadow steppe in northern China. Appl. Sci. 10(8), 2952, doi: 10.3390/app10082952. doi: 10.3390/app10082952
[68]	Yang, L., Liu, M.C., Lun, F., et al., 2018. Livelihood assets and strategies among rural households: comparative analysis of rice and dryland terrace systems in China. Sustainability. 10(7), 2525, doi: 10.3390/su10072525. doi: 10.3390/su10072525
[69]	Yin, Y., Wang, Z., Li, X.L., et al., 2018. Factors affecting herder adoption of winter lambing practices in the desert steppe region of Inner Mongolia, China. Rangel. J. 40(1), 65-75. doi: 10.1071/RJ17068
[70]	Yin, Y., Hou, Y.L., Langford, C., et al., 2019. Herder stocking rate and household income under the Grassland Ecological Protection Award Policy in northern China. Land Use Policy. 82, 120-129. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.11.037
[71]	Zhang, H.Y., Yao, J., Ma, J., 2013. Livelihood capital and participation in the tourism industry herdsmen and the livelihood of relation strategy—A case of Kanas ecological tourism scenic area in Xinjiang. Tourism Forum. 6(4), 40-44 (in Chinese).
[72]	Zhang, J., Brown, C., 2018. Spatial variation and factors impacting grassland circulation price in Inner Mongolia, China. Sustainability. 10(12), 4381, doi: 10.3390/su10124381. doi: 10.3390/su10124381
[73]	Zhang, L.P., Zhang, Y.L., Yan, J.Z., et al., 2008. Livelihood diversification and cropland use pattern in agro-pastoral mountainous region of eastern Tibetan Plateau. J.Geogr. Sci. 18(4), 499-509.
[74]	Zhang, Q., Zhao, Y.Y., Li, F.Y., 2019. Optimal herdsmen household management modes in a typical steppe region of Inner Mongolia, China. J.Clean. Prod. 231, 1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.205
[75]	Zhang, Q., Buyantuev, A., Fang, X.N., et al., 2020. Ecology and sustainability of the Inner Mongolian grassland: looking back and moving forward. Landsc. Ecol. 35(11), 2413-2432. doi: 10.1007/s10980-020-01083-9
[76]	Zhou, S.Q., Zhao, K., 2020. How do the suspending grazing policy and capital endowments affect farmers and herdsmen’s willingness of continuing to engage in livestock production? Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment. 34(1), 42-48 (in Chinese).
[77]	Zhu, L.K., Meng, J.J., Mao, X.Y., 2013. Analyzing land-use change in farming-pastoral transitional region using autologistic model and household survey approach. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 23(6), 716-728. doi: 10.1007/s11769-013-0642-5

Statistic		Meadow steppe	Typical steppe	Desert steppe
Household characteristics	Male household heads (%)	80.0	73.7	76.1
	Average age (years)	46.0	46.0	47.0
	Households’ distance to the road (m)	14.2	25.6	20.2
	Households’ distance to the city (km)	40.7	48.1	48.0
	Households worked in villages (%)	20.0	35.8	14.1
Ethnicity	The Mongolian ethnic group (%)	88.0	78.8	85.9
Ethnicity	The Han ethnic group (%)	12.0	21.2	14.1
Education level	Illiterate (%)	13.6	16.8	8.5
	Elementary school (%)	14.4	25.3	12.7
	Middle school (%)	40.8	17.5	36.6
	High school (%)	21.6	40.1	40.1
	College and above (%)	9.6	10.2	2.1

Independent variable	Petty-herder livelihood strategy (LS2)		Non-herder livelihood strategy (LS3)
Independent variable	Regression coefficient	Exp (B)	Regression coefficient	Exp (B)
Lambing rate	1.392^*	4.023	0.073	1.076
Calving rate	-0.551	0.577	-0.990	0.372
Contracted grassland area	-0.628	0.534	-3.750^*	0.024
Rented grassland rent-in area	-2.413^**	0.090	-5.361^*	0.005
Stocking rate	-2.728^***	0.065	-7.650^***	<0.001
Constant	0.984		2.233^*

Independent variable	LS2		LS3
Independent variable	Regression coefficient	Exp (B)	Regression coefficient	Exp (B)
Sheep selling rate	0.517	1.676	-6.125^***	0.002
Sheep retention rate	0.557	1.746	-2.380	0.093
Cattle selling rate	-0.119	0.888	-13.582^**	<0.001
Cattle retention rate	0.516	1.676	-0.324	0.723
Sheep price	-0.277	0.758	-2.997^*	0.050
Cattle price	-2.934^*	0.053	-1.092	0.336
Household distance to the road	9.961	21,181.780	1.233	3.430
Household distance to the city	0.152	1.164	0.154	1.166
Not to sell livestock when price increase	-0.043	0.958	0.486	1.626
Not to sell livestock when price decrease	0.119	1.126	0.096	1.101
Constant	0.111		3.795

Market-related risk	Risk rank	Grassland type
Market-related risk	Risk rank	Meadow steppe	Typical steppe	Desert steppe
Animal price	1	76 (60.8%)	125 (91.2%)	131 (92.3%)
	2	22 (17.6%)	7 (5.1%)	10 (7.0%)
	3	3 (2.4%)
	4
	5
	Total	101 (80.8%)	132 (96.3%)	141 (99.3%)
Hay and corn price	1	12 (9.5%)	6 (4.4%)	9 (6.3%)
	2	41 (32.8%)	79 (57.7%)	120 (84.5%)
	3	11 (8.8%)	8 (5.8%)	10 (7.0%)
	4
	5
	Total	64 (51.1%)	93 (67.9%)	139 (97.8%)
Information on animal price	1	3 (2.4%)	2 (1.5%)	1 (0.7%)
	2	5 (4.0%)	8 (1.8%)	3 (2.1%)
	3	3 (2.4%)	8 (5.8%)	12 (8.5%)
	4		8 (5.8%)
	5		2 (1.5%)
	Total	11 (8.8%)	20 (14.6%)	16 (11.3%)
No precise information on animal price	1	1 (0.8%)
	2	2 (1.6%)	1 (0.7%)	6 (4.2%)
	3		4 (2.9%)	1 (0.7%)
	4		1 (0.7%)
	5		1 (1.7%)
	Total	3 (2.4%)	7 (5.0%)	7 (4.9%)
Other living costs	1	27 (21.6%)	2 (2.2%)	1 (0.7%)
	2	14 (11.2%)	16 (11.7%)	9 (6.3%)
	3	21 (16.8%)	20 (14.6%)	64 (45.1%)
	4		3 (2.2%)	11 (7.7%)
	5			1 (0.7%)
	Total	62 (49.6%)	41 (30.7%)	86 (60.9%)

Variable		Definition	Type
Livestock production	Lambing rate	Ratio of newborn (lambs) to ewes in the herd	Continuous
	Calving rate	Ratio of newborn (calves) to cows in the herd	Continuous
	Contracted grassland area	Grassland contracted form the government	Continuous
	Rented grassland area	Grassland rented from other households	Continuous
	Stocking rate	Sheep unit/hectare of grassland	Continuous
Livestock marketization	Sheep selling rate	Ratio of sheep sold to total sheep in the herd	Continuous
	Sheep retention rate	Ratio of sheep retained to total sheep in the herd	Continuous
	Cattle selling rate	Ratio of cattle sold to total sheep in the herd	Continuous
	Cattle retention rate	Ratio of cattle retained to total cattle in the herd	Continuous
	Sheep price	Selling price of sheep	Continuous
	Cattle price	Selling price of cattle	Continuous
	Households’ distance to the road	Distance is measured in meters	Continuous
	Households’ distance to the city	Distance is measured in kilometers	Continuous
	Not to sell livestock when price increases	1, household decision to sell livestock when price increase; 0, otherwise	Binary
	Not to sell livestock when price decreases	1, household decision to sell livestock when price decrease; 0, otherwise	Binary