The theory of bounded rationality posits that farmers’ decision-making processes are constrained by several factors, including limited information, cognitive limitations, and time pressure (Simon, 1955, 1957). Intermediary organizations, including crop advisors, cooperatives, and agricultural socialized services, help overcome these constraints by providing essential information, facilitating interactions, and offering support during land transactions (Spulber, 1996; Hu and Xu, 2016; Rogers et al., 2021). Intermediary organizations serve as conduits between two or more parties, facilitating communication, knowledge transfer, and resource sharing (Ramirez et al., 2018).

Specifically, crop advisors act as trusted information sources, improving farmers’ knowledge and confidence in their conservation efforts (Eanes et al., 2019). They may also influence government regulations or provide training programs to equip farmers with the skills required to adopt sustainable practices (Bessy and Chauvin, 2013). By mitigating the risks associated with agricultural practices, crop advisors can help increase farmers’ willingness to engage in sustainable management practices. Cooperatives help build social capital, foster collaboration, and increase efficiency in land use (Ran et al., 2023). By enhancing community collaboration and providing platforms for knowledge exchange, cooperatives can strengthen farmers’ understanding of land use and conservation, thereby supporting collective efficiency in conservation efforts. Socialized agricultural services promote specific conservation techniques, such as soil testing, that enhance land quality (Cheng et al., 2022). They also disseminate information on optimal practices, market trends, and crucial environmental regulations, promoting the adoption of conservation techniques (Coggan et al., 2013). By integrating these forms of support—trusted information, community collaboration, and technical assistance—intermediary organizations create an enabling environment for land transition and sustainable land management. Consequently, intermediary organizations effectively bridge information gaps, reduce cognitive limitations, and foster farmers’ confidence and willingness to engage in long-term conservation. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

Land tenure stability refers to the assurance of rights and the substance of rights related to land ownership and use (Arnot et al., 2011). In China, the current land transfer models often lack standardized contracts that adequately protect land recipients (Zhou, 2023). Intermediaries can improve formal land tenure security by helping farmers review and amend nonstandard contracts. Research indicates that land tenure conflicts in peri-urban areas stem primarily from conflicts of interest (55.3%), power struggles (23.8%), and legal framework issues (20.9%) (Dadashpoor and Ahani, 2019). Intermediaries, acting as liaisons between stakeholders, can help resolve disputes by providing clear information (Coggan et al., 2013), thus reducing land-use conflicts and stabilizing tenure by addressing power imbalances and conflicting interests.

Policymakers have long prioritized securing land tenure to ensure and develop more productive agriculture (Alban Singirankabo and Willem Ertsen, 2020). Research has shown that secure tenure encourages farmers to invest in conservation practices by providing long-term benefits (Tesfaye et al., 2023). In regions prone to land disputes, land tenure stability can reduce risks and motivate farmers to adopt sustainable practices (Liu and Luo, 2018). Studies indicate that China’s Land Transfer Service Center, as an intermediary organization, has helped market China’s land-leasing industry by enticing landowners to enter long-term contracts with major operators in exchange for monetary rent (Fan et al., 2024). This shows that land intermediaries can effectively protect the legitimate rights of land acquirers through legal contracts that specify the duration and usage of land. When land buyers clearly understand their land conservation rights, they can conserve their assets more effectively. This finding suggests that intermediaries’ involvement in land transfers can clarify land usage rights and improve land stability, potentially influencing buyers’ willingness to conserve land. Despite extensive research linking land tenure and conservation, the mediating role of land tenure in the relationship between intermediary organizational involvement and the willingness to conserve cultivated land has not been thoroughly examined. Thus, we posit:

Human capital refers to the specific knowledge, skills, and abilities possessed by individuals (Hoang-Khac et al., 2022). It results from investments in education, health, and vocational training, affecting how farmers perceive and interact with external entities, such as intermediary organizations, and influencing their willingness to conserve cultivated land (Kan et al., 2022). Existing research has found that farmers with better education and training are more likely to appreciate the role of these organizations in supporting conservation efforts (Wang et al., 2020; Hoang-Khac et al., 2022; Kan et al., 2022). Farmers with higher human capital process and apply information from intermediary organizations more effectively, leading to improved land conservation outcomes (Liu and Luo, 2018). Additionally, family capital, which includes human capital, has been found to significantly affect farmers’ participation in land transfer and conservation initiatives (Xu et al., 2021). However, the relationship between human capital and the impact of intermediary organizations may be more complex than initially thought. Although farmers with higher levels of human capital might be more capable of understanding and implementing conservation practices, they may be less dependent on external support. Their increased ability to access and process information independently could reduce the relative impact of intermediary organizations on their decision-making processes. By contrast, farmers with lower levels of human capital may benefit more from the support and guidance provided by intermediary organizations. Such farmers may have a greater need for external assistance to understand complex land management practices and evaluate the long-term benefits of conservation efforts. Therefore, we propose:

In agriculture, social capital, including farmers’ social networks, trust, and participation (Guo et al., 2023), is crucial for knowledge exchange and innovation diffusion (Hansen and Greve, 2015). Research highlights its importance in land protection and food security (Morrison et al., 2011; Cheevapattananuwong et al., 2020), with strong social networks facilitating access to information and resources that motivate land conservation (Liu et al., 2020; Ren et al., 2022; Chen et al., 2023). In this context, the involvement of intermediary organizations could stimulate farmers’ enthusiasm for conservation through mechanisms such as ecological compensation (Wang et al., 2020). The effectiveness of socialized agricultural services provided by these organizations is closely tied to farmers’ social capital (Cheng et al., 2022). Specifically, groups with higher social capital, such as village cadres, possess significant advantages in terms of resources and social networks compared with ordinary villagers. With enhanced access to information and stronger relational ties, these individuals are likely to have accumulated more experience and judgment in agricultural production and management. Consequently, they may demonstrate stronger decision-making abilities regarding land conservation. Unlike farmers with lower levels of social capital, these individuals may be less dependent on intermediary organizations’ involvement when making informed decisions about land conservation.

Considering the above, we propose the following hypothesis:

The conservation of cultivated land quality is closely linked to farmers’ input decisions. In extensive management modes, the excessive use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides often leads to the depletion of soil fertility and the degradation of soil structure. By reducing the use of these chemicals, farmers can contribute to the conservation and preservation of cultivated land, promoting sustainable agricultural practices (Shang et al., 2021). Therefore, we used the transferees’ willingness to reduce the use of these three inputs as a proxy for their intentions to conserve cultivated land. Specifically, we used three 0–1 dummy variables to ask respondents whether they would be willing to reduce the input of nitrogen fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, where 1 indicated “yes” and 0 indicated “no”. We then constructed a multi-categorical variable for cultivated land conservation intention (ranging from 1 = very unwilling to 4 = very willing) based on the sum of the values of the three dummy variables.

This study uses intermediary organizations’ involvement in cultivated land transfer as the independent variable, denoted by 1 for participation and 0 for non-participation. According to previous research by Ramirez et al. (2018), an intermediary is an individual or entity that connects land transferors and transferees. This intermediary can be a village collective, village sage, or intermediary company that facilitates organization, coordination, and communication during cultivated land transfer. If any of these parties participated in the transfer, an intermediary was assumed to be involved. Conversely, if the land transferor and the transferee negotiate directly, we assumed that no intermediary was involved.

This study examines how the involvement of intermediary organizations in cultivated land transfers affects the willingness to conserve land by promoting land tenure stability. Previous research suggests that the duration of cultivated land transfers serves as an indicator of land tenure stability. It has been reported that rational agricultural operators consider both the transfer duration and payback period when determining the necessary measures to conserve cultivated land (Brinkley, 2012). Consequently, we selected the duration of cultivated land transfer as a continuous variable reflecting the stability of land tenure as the mediating variable.

In general, a contract with an undefined or uncertain duration implies a greater expectation of instability than a short-term contract with a clearly defined term. If the contract term is not specified or uncertain, it may be considered to have a duration of zero (Brousseau et al., 2002). Consequently, we set the variable to zero for plots without a predetermined transfer duration, as these plots can presumably be retained at any time, indicating a lack of stability in land tenure and a high level of uncertainty regarding the transfer duration. For plots with an established transfer period, the duration was measured in years for the lease term.

Considering that intermediary organizations’ involvement in land transfer may have varying degrees of influence on land conservation willingness for farmers with different levels of human and social capital, it is necessary to further analyze whether human capital and social capital play a moderating role in the influence path. Education enhances farmers’ human capital (Luh and Wei, 2019). Regarding social capital, rural elites—particularly those with higher relational and resource advantages than ordinary villagers—often include village cadres with political identities, who are a significant segment of these elites (Feng et al., 2023). The role of village cadres is twofold: they reflect personal abilities and often constitute a form of social capital within economic activity. Family members’ roles can also indicate farmers’ social capital, with village cadres being among the most influential figures in rural society. This dual aspect of their identity—personal competency and social leverage—positions them as vital elements of the rural structure, transcending personal capabilities to embody a broader spectrum of social capital. Therefore, this study selects the number of years of schooling of the householder and whether there are village cadres in the family as moderating variables to test whether the effect of intermediary involvement in land transfer on the conservation intention of transferred land varies with differences in human and social capital.

To ensure that the impact of various factors on the intention to conserve cultivated land was accurately assessed, we selected control variables from four perspectives, as previously identified in research conducted by Potts et al. (2006) and Yin et al. (2022). To control for the influence of farmers’ levels of cognition regarding production inputs on their willingness to reduce output, we included their understanding of the effects of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. Age was selected as an individual characteristic for inclusion in the analysis. In addition, we included family characteristics, such as the working experience of family members and the number of agricultural laborers. Furthermore, we considered plot characteristics, such as plot size, type, soil quality, traffic conditions, and whether the plot was contiguous or cold-waterlogged.

Since the mediated variable was set to 0 for plots without a predetermined transfer duration, there was a possibility of bias in the regression analysis due to omitted variables and inaccurate value assignments. To mitigate this issue, we included duration as a control variable. Plots with a predefined transfer duration were assigned a value of 1, whereas those without a predefined duration were assigned a value of 0. Additionally, we incorporated a province dummy variable into the regression model to account for variability across provinces. Details of the variables and descriptive statistical analyses are presented in Table 1.

The statistical results concerning the factors influencing cultivated land conservation intentions, including those obtained from the ordered logit and OLS models, are displayed in Table 3. To evaluate the mediation effect of transfer duration, we first investigated the relationship between intermediary participation and cultivated land conservation intentions in Model 1. Subsequently, we regressed the independent variable on the mediator in Model 2. Finally, we included intermediary participation, transfer duration, and cultivated land conservation intention in Model 3 to test the mediation effect.

The coefficients demonstrating the effect of intermediary participation on conservation intentions were significant and positive in both Models 1 b = 2.883 , p < 0.01 and 3 b = 2.938 , p < 0.01 . This indicates that intermediary participation has a direct and positive impact on conservation intentions, thus supporting H1. These results support the notion that intermediaries increase transferees’ confidence in obtaining long-term returns, thereby motivating farmers to conserve their cultivated land. Additionally, we examined the average marginal effect in Table 4 and observed a 36.51% reduction in the likelihood of being “very unwilling” and a 39.21% increase in the probability of being “very willing” with the involvement of intermediaries. Similar results are demonstrated for the average marginal impact of intermediary participation and transfer duration in Model 3.

Table 3 also reveals that the relationship between intermediary participation and conservation intention was mediated by the influence of transfer duration. In Model 2, the coefficient demonstrating the effect of intermediary participation on transfer duration was significant and positive b = 5.269 , p < 0.01 , as was the coefficient of the effect of transfer duration on cultivated land conservation intention b = 0.092 , p < 0.01 . These results suggest that intermediary participation helps address the issues of high unpredictability and short transfer duration, thereby increasing the stability of land tenure.

It should be emphasized that the inclusion of the duration definition in Model 2 can obscure the effect of intermediary participation on transfer duration, as it significantly impacts transfer duration. Therefore, the duration definitions were excluded from Model 2 as control variables. The selected control variables may differ theoretically because the dependent variable in Model 2 differs from those in Models 1 and 3. Furthermore, if there is a strong connection between the independent and mediating variables, multicollinearity problems could occur when they are concurrently included in the model using a stepwise regression strategy. Therefore, the variance inflation factor (VIF) was used to identify the multicollinearity of the variables. Table 5 demonstrates that each variable’s variance expansion factor is less than 3, suggesting that multicollinearity has no effect on the regression results in Table 3.

The specific test findings for the mediation effect are presented in Table 6, where the standardization of all coefficients and accompanying standard errors and statistics are produced (MacKinnon and Dwyer, 1993; MacKinnon, 2012). The standardization methods are as follows:

a s t d = a ⋅ S D X S D X , b s t d = b ⋅ S D M S D Y ' '

The Sobel test statistic Z = ab S E a b s t d < 1.96 , with a 95% confidence interval of (0.016, 0.083), supports Hypothesis 2 by demonstrating that the association between intermediate organizational involvement and farmers’ motivation to protect cultivated land is mediated by land tenure stability. In other words, by extending transfer tenure, the intermediary organizations can assist the transferees in obtaining more precise estimates of their future earnings and securing land rights, which will encourage them to take better care of the cultivated land and use fewer pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides. The proportion of the mediation effect to the total effect was 14.1%.

To examine the robustness of our results, we conducted a sensitivity analysis to assess the impact of using an alternative dependent variable and a mediation test method. First, we constructed an alternative dependent variable by including farmers’ willingness to apply pesticides with low residues and toxicity, in addition to their intention to reduce the use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. This new variable was transformed into an ordered dummy variable with five categories (1 = very unwilling, 2 = relatively unwilling, 3 = general, 4 = relatively willing, and 5 = very willing) to better represent the dependent variable and maintain accuracy. Table 1 presents the regression results obtained by using the new dependent variable. We used the Sobel test to assess the mediation effect and found it significant, accounting for 11.4% of the total effect.

Second, scholars have suggested using ordered logistic regression instead of common linear regression to test the mediating effect of categorical variables (Iacobucci, 2012). However, the test statistics and approaches used to unify the coefficient scales differ. To ensure the validity of our test for the mediation effect and to verify whether our hypothesis holds true, we used the Iacobucci (2012) method as a replacement for our original approach. We transformed regression coefficients a and b into Z a and Z b with the same scales. We then employed the Sobel test to assess the significance of Z a × Z b , resulting in a mediation effect size of Z a × Z b = 17.57 and a test statistic Z = Z a × b S E Z a × b = Z a × Z b Z a 2 + Z b 2 + 1 = 2.87 > 1.96 . Therefore, the mediation effect was significant.

Third, to assess the impact of different estimation models and dependent variables on our results, we further estimated and adjusted the baseline regressions using OLS and the ordered probit model with different dependent variable measurements (Tables 7–9). Table 8 presents the baseline regressions estimated using the ordered probit model. We used an ordered probit model with the dependent variable replaced by a five-level variable representing cultivated land conservation intentions (see Appendix 1). Our study estimates the baseline regressions using OLS (see Appendix 2). Finally, we used ordinary least squares (OLS), with the dependent variable replaced by a new five-level variable. Overall, the results of our robustness checks were consistent with our main findings (see Appendix 3).

As can be seen from the regression results in Table 9, the interaction term coefficient between intermediary participation and years of education is negative at the 5% significance level, indicating that with an increase in farmers’ years of education, the positive promoting effect of intermediary participation in land transfer on the willingness to conserve land weakens, supporting H3. In addition, the interaction coefficient between intermediary participation and village cadre status was also significantly negative at the 5% level; that is, the positive impact of intermediary participation on the willingness of farming households with village cadres to conserve land was less than that of farming households without village cadres, supporting H4.

The model results were consistent with these expectations. To some extent, both human and social capital weakened the positive impact of intermediary participation on the willingness to conserve land. Rural households with fewer years of education and no village cadres in their families were more seriously affected by information asymmetry and lacked the ability to evaluate the stability and security of the plots. In this case, intermediary organizations have more obvious functional advantages in providing information and improving supervision, which can help enhance farmers’ long-term operational expectations of plots and encourage them to take conservation measures. However, farmers with higher human or social capital, due to their strong information-searching ability, transaction negotiation ability, and awareness of property rights, can more effectively safeguard their own interests in land transfer and form future investment return expectations; thus, the comparative advantages of intermediary organizations are not as apparent.