The influence of financial knowledge on the entrepreneurship behaviors of landless rural households: an empirical analysis based on IV-Heckman Model

SUN Guanglin1 LI Qinghai2 YANG Yumei3

(1.School of Finance, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics)
(2.School of Economics, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics)
(3.School of Economics & Management, Beijing Forestry University)
【Knowledge Link】financial knowledge

【Abstract】This paper used the survey data collected from landless rural households in Shandong and Jiangsu provinces in 2018 and designed a measurement system of financial knowledge of the landless rural households. By using the IV-Heckman model and an intermediary effect method, the study empirically examined the influence of financial knowledge on the entrepreneurial behaviors of landless rural households who had lost their land passively. The findings were as follows. (1) Financial knowledge had a significantly positive influence on the entrepreneurial decision-making and performance of the rural households who had lost their land. The improvement of financial knowledge level could promote their initiative to participate in entrepreneurial activities and improve their entrepreneurial performance. (2) Financial knowledge could promote the participation in entrepreneurial activities of landless rural households because of their improved access to financial channels and their increased ability to obtain financial capital. (3) Financial knowledge could improve the participation in entrepreneurial activities of landless rural households by increasing their risk preferences, but could not improve their entrepreneurial performance.

【Keywords】 landless rural household; financial knowledge; entrepreneurship; mediating effect;


【Funds】 Youth Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China (71503118) the Young Scientists Fund of Humanities and Social Science Research Projects of the Ministry of Education (14YJC790067)

Download this article


    [1]. ① Landless rural households refer to the agricultural population whose agricultural land (including cultivated land, forest land and garden land) that has been occupied due to the needs of urban construction and has lost their land management rights in the process of promoting urbanization. They included not only the rural households who have completely lost their land, but also the rural households whose per capita remaining actual cultivated land was less than 0.3 mu (Han, 2009). Whether the state expropriates land in accordance with relevant laws or the rural collective takes agricultural land as an asset to participate in the construction of industrialization and urbanization, it will make rural households lose land management rights or use rights, and rural households are often in a passive position in this process. Therefore, landless rural households are also called passive landless rural households. It is worth noting that the passive landless rural households mentioned in this paper do not include rural households who have moved out into cities and towns for a long time and have stable jobs and fixed residence, voluntarily giving up their land contracting management rights, but include those who have rural household registration before losing land but do not have rural household registration after losing land, and those who still have rural household registration after losing land. In addition, unless otherwise specified, the landless rural households mentioned below refer to passive landless rural households. [^Back]

    [2]. ① In this paper, financial capital refers to whether landless rural households can obtain loan support. For variable definitions, see Table 4. [^Back]

    [3]. ① The entrepreneurial atmosphere reflects the degree of respect for the entrepreneurial behaviors of the landless rural households in the external environment. The stronger the entrepreneurial atmosphere is, the more likely it will inspire the landless rural households to take the initiative to start a business, thereby affecting the entrepreneurial decision-making, but the entrepreneurial atmosphere has no direct impact on the entrepreneurial performance of the landless rural households. Therefore, the entrepreneurial atmosphere is only included in the entrepreneurial decision-making equation. [^Back]

    [4]. ① The general Heckman model can only consider the problem of sample selection, but cannot consider the endogenous problem of financial knowledge at the same time. [^Back]

    [5]. ② The processing process of endogenousness of financial knowledge in the IV-Heckman model is shown please refer to Equation (1) and Equation (2), which will not be repeated in order to save space. [^Back]

    [6]. ③ This paper uses the mediating effect test process proposed by Wen et al. (2004) to test the mediating effects of information channels, risk appetite, and financial capital. [^Back]

    [7]. ① For detailed inspection procedures and equations, see Wen et al. (2004). [^Back]

    [8]. ② Since the landless rural households are concentrated in villages around the city center or small towns, considering the availability of samples, the research team mainly randomly selected sample villages in the suburbs around towns. [^Back]

    [9]. ① Cronbach’s α value is always greater than 0.8; factor loadings are shown in Table 1, and they are all greater than 0.6; the KMO test value is 0.836, which is greater than 0.6. [^Back]

    [10]. ② Financial knowledge is also known as financial literacy in some literature. The concept of financial knowledge is used in this paper in accordance with most literature. [^Back]

    [11]. ① The variance inflation factor method is used to test the multicollinearity between variables. The results show that the maximum value of VIF is 4.36, which is less than the critical value of 10, indicating that there is no multicollinearity between variables. [^Back]

    [12]. ② The Durbin-Wu-Hausman (DWH) test value is significant at the statistical level of 1%, indicating that financial knowledge is an endogenous explanatory variable. The F value in the first stage regression is greater than 10, and the t value of the instrumental variable is significant at the statistical level of 1%, indicating that the estimation results of Regression 1 and Regression 2 are valid. [^Back]

    [13]. ③ The value mills ratio of the test on the sample selection deviation is significant at the statistical level of 1%, indicating that there is a sample selection bias in the entrepreneurial decision-making equation. [^Back]

    [14]. ④ The t value of the instrumental variable is significant at the statistical level of 1%, the F value in the first stage regression is significantly greater than 10, the value mills ratio of the test on the sample selection deviation is significant at the statistical level of 1%, and the identification variable of entrepreneurial atmosphere is significant at the statistical level of 1%, indicating that the estimated results of the IV-Heckman model are valid. [^Back]


    1 Bao, H. & Huang, H. Statistics & Decision (统计与决策), (16) (2010).

    2 Chen, H & Lyu, Y. Journal of Finance and Economics (财经研究), (10) (2017).

    3 Chen, Y. Sociological Studies (社会学研究), (6) (2012).

    4 Guo, C. & He, A. Journal of Shanghai University of Finance and Economics (上海财经大学学报), (2) (2017).

    5 Han, L., Bao, H. & Tang, Y. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University (Social Science Edition) (华中农业大学学报(社会科学版)), (5) (2017).

    6 Han, Z. doctoral thesis, Tianjin University, (2009).

    7 Jiang J., Qian, W. & Guo, H. Journal of Zhejiang University (Science Edition) (浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)), (1) (2013).

    8 Li, Q., Zhang, R. & Meng, F. Financial Economics Research (金融经济学研究), (3) (2018).

    9 Li, H. Chinese Journal of Population Science (中国人口科学), (2) (2016).

    10 Lian, Y., Li, W. & Huang, B. China Economic Quarterly (经济学(季刊)), (1) (2015).

    11 Ma, H. & Sun, H. Social Science Front (社会科学战线), (8) (2011).

    12 Ma, S. & Zhao, P. Review of Investment Studies (投资研究), (1) (2015).

    13. Ning, D. doctoral thesis, Jilin University, (2017).

    14 Su, L., He, X. & Kong, R. Chinese Rural Economy (中国农村经济), (11) (2017).

    15 Sun, G., Li, Q. & Li, C. China Rural Survey (中国农村观察), (4) (2017).

    16 Wen, X. & Cheng, C. Chinese Rural Economy (中国农村经济), (9) (2017).

    17 Wen, Z., Zhang, L., Hou, J., et al. Acta Psychologica Sinica (心理学报), (5) (2004).

    18 Yang, R., Chen, B. & Zhu, S. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (11) (2011).

    19 Yin, Z., Song, Q. & Wu, Y. Economic Research Journal (经济研究), (4) (2014).

    20 Yin, Z., Song, Q., Wu, Y., et al. Management World (管理世界), (1) (2015).

    21 Yu, S. Foreign Economics & Management (外国经济与管理), (2) (2013).

    22 Yi, X. Chinese Rural Economy (中国农村经济), (2) (2012).

    23 Zhang, H. & Xiong, X. China Rural Survey (中国农村观察), (3) (2017).

    24 Zhang, H., Wen, Z. & Li, F. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition) (南京农业大学学报(社会科学版), (1) (2012).

    25 Zhu, H. & Kang, L. China Rural Survey (中国农村观察), (5) (2013).

    26 Agarwal, S., G. Amromin, I. Ben-David, S. Chomsisengphet, and D. D. Evanoff, 2015, “Financial Literacy and Financial Planning: Evidence from India”, Journal of Housing Economics, 27(2): 4–21.

    27 Agbim, K. C., Z. B. Owutuamor, and G. O. Oriarewo, 2013, “Entrepreneurship Development and Tacit Knowledge: Exploring the Link between Entrepreneurial Learning and Individual Know-how”, Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(2): 112–129.

    28 Alhenawi, Y., and K. Elkhal, 2013, “Financial Literacy of U.S. Households: Knowledge vs. Long-term Financial Planning”, Financial Services Review, 22(3): 211–244.

    29 Buera, F., 2009, “A Dynamic Model of Entrepreneurship with Borrowing Constraints: Theory and Evidence”, Annals of Finance, 5(3): 443–464.

    30 Baron, R. A., 2004, “The Cognitive Perspective: A Valuable Tool for Answering Entrepreneurship’s Basic ’Why’ Questions”, Journal of Business Venturing, 19(2): 221–239.

    31 Bracci, E., and E. Vagnoni, 2011, “Understanding Small Family Business Succession in a Knowledge Management Perspective”, The IUP Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(1): 7–37.

    32 Dohmen, T., A. Falk, D. Huffman, and U. Sunde, 2010, “Are Risk Aversion and Impatience Related to Cognitive Ability?”, American Economic Review, 100(3): 1238–1260.

    33 Evans, D. S., and B. Jovanovic, 1989, “Some Empirical Aspects of Entrepreneurship”, American Economic Review, 79(3): 367–397.

    34 Gathergood, J., 2012, “Self-control, Financial Literacy and Consumer Over-indebtedness”, Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(3): 590–602.

    35 Hung, A. A., A. M. Parker, and J. K. Yoong, 2009, “Defining and Measuring Financial Literacy”, RAND Labor and Population Working Paper Series WR-708,

    36 Huston, S. J., 2010, “Measuring Financial Literacy”, Journal of Consumer Affairs, 44(2): 296–316.

    37 Lusardi, A., O. S. Mitchell, and V. Curto, 2010, “Financial Literacy among the Young: Evidence and Implications for Consumer Policy”, Journal of Consumer Affairs, 44(2): 358–380.

    38 Lusardi, A., and O. S. Mitchell, 2007, “Baby Boomer Retirement Security: The Roles of Planning, Financial Literacy and Housing Wealth”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 54(1): 205–224.

    39 Lundstrom, A., and L. Stevenson, 2005, Entrepreneurship Policy: Theory and Practice, New York: Springer Science Business Media.

    40 Mackinnon, D. P., C. M. Lockwood, and J. M. Hoffman, 2002, “A Comparison of Methods to Test Mediation and Other Intervening Variable Effects”, Psychological Methods, 7(1): 83–104.

    41 Rugimbana, R., and, E. O. Kojo, 2010, “Financial Literacy and Youth Entrepreneurship in South Africa”, African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 1(2): 164–182.

    42 Rooij, M. V., A. Lusardi, and R. Alessie, 2011, “Financial Literacy and Stock Market Participation”, Journal of Financial Economics, 101(2): 449–472.

    43 Say, J. B., 1971, A Treatise on Political Economy; or the Production, Distribution, and Consumption of Wealth, New York: Augustus M. Kelley Publishers.

    44 Sevim, N., F. Temizel, and S. Özlem, 2012, “The Effects of Financial Literacy on the Borrowing Behaviour of Turkish Financial Consumers”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36(5): 573–579.

    45 Stango, V., and J. Zinman, 2009, “Exponential Growth Bias and Household Finance”, The Journal of Finance, 64(6): 2807–2849.

    46 Wooldridge, J. M., 2010, Econometric Analysis of Cross-section and Panel Data, Massachusetts: MIT Press Books.

This Article


CN: 11-3586/F

Vol , No. 03, Pages 124-144

May 2019


Article Outline



  • 1 Introduction
  • 2 Literature review
  • 3 Theoretical framework and research hypotheses
  • 4 Model construction
  • 5 Data sources and variable setting
  • 6 Empirical result analysis
  • 7 Conclusions and policy implications
  • Footnote