[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"topic-TOPSIS":3},{"name":4,"kind":5,"tokens":6,"total":7,"page":7,"page_size":8,"items":9},"TOPSIS","tag",[4],1,100,[10],{"id":11,"title":12,"url":13,"summary":14,"summary_zh":15,"content":16,"source_name":17,"source_url":13,"published_at":18,"category":19,"cover_url":16,"hotness":20,"is_selected":21,"score":22,"score_detail":23,"sources":30,"tags":32,"search_phrases":37,"slug":40,"view_count":41,"doi":42,"paper":43,"created_at":60},3149,"Measurement of interest linkage level between land trusteeship enterprises and farmers in China: based on TOPSIS method with comprehensive weighting","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1931691","The cooperative outcomes between land trusteeship enterprises and farmers have fallen substantially short of expectations due to trust deficits, factor mismatches, and imbalances in benefit distribution. The root cause of this paradox lies in the absence or weakness of interest linkage mechanisms. Measuring the interest linkage level and optimizing the interest linkage mechanism are therefore key to resolving this issue, yet existing research has paid insufficient attention to this problem. Accordingly, first, this study innovatively constructs an indicator system for measuring the interest linkage level in land trusteeship based on the interest linkage theory. Second, the AHP and Entropy method was used to determine the subjective and objective weights. Finally, we use the TOPSIS method to measure the interest linkage level, analyze its spatio-temporal characteristics and heterogeneity. The results show that: (1) Overall, the interest linkage level between land trusteeship enterprises and farmers stands at 0.516, representing a moderate level. Among the three sub-dimensions, resource sharing is relatively high, mutual benefit is moderate, and cooperative trust is comparatively low, indicating that weak trust constitutes the most prominent shortcoming of the current interest linkage mechanism. (2) In terms of temporal changes, between 2021 and 2022, the levels of interest linkage, cooperative trust, resource sharing, and mutual benefit all exhibited an upward trend, with resource sharing recording the fastest rate of increase. In terms of regional disparities, Jining city of China exhibits the highest level of interest linkage, whereas Weifang city records the lowest. (3) Regarding heterogeneity, the interest linkage level is highest for small-scale pure farmers, followed in descending order by part-time farmers and large-scale specialized farmers. The interest linkage level increases as the number of trusteeship service links expands. Among the three principal trusteeship models, differences in interest linkage levels exist but are not pronounced. The findings contribute to the theoretical development of interest linkage mechanisms and offer actionable policy implications for improving enterprise–farmer cooperative arrangements.","土地托管企业与农户的合作成效因信任缺失、要素错配与利益分配失衡而显著低于预期，这一悖论的根源在于利益联结机制的缺位或薄弱。因此，测度利益联结水平并优化利益联结机制是破解该问题的关键，但现有研究对此关注不足。据此，本研究首先基于利益联结理论，创新性地构建了土地托管利益联结水平测度指标体系；其次，采用层次分析法与熵权法确定主客观权重；最后，运用TOPSIS法测度利益联结水平，并分析其时空特征与异质性。结果表明：（1）总体而言，土地托管企业与农户的利益联结水平为0.516，处于中等水平。在三个子维度中，资源共享水平相对较高，互利共赢处于中等水平，合作信任水平相对较低，表明信任薄弱是当前利益联结机制最为突出的短板。（2）从时间变化来看，2021—2022年间，利益联结水平、合作信任、资源共享与互利共赢均呈上升趋势，其中资源共享增速最快。从区域差异来看，中国济宁市的利益联结水平最高，潍坊市最低。（3）从异质性来看，小规模纯农户的利益联结水平最高，其次依次为兼业农户和大规模专业农户。利益联结水平随托管服务环节数量的增加而提高。在三种主要托管模式中，利益联结水平存在差异但并不显著。研究结论有助于推动利益联结机制的理论发展，并为完善企业与农户合作安排提供可操作的政策启示。",null,"Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","2026-09-21T00:00:00Z","论文",10,false,72,{"impact":24,"substance":25,"depth":26,"authority":27,"freshness":28,"relevant":7,"comment":29},12,21,17,13,9,"基于AHP-熵权TOPSIS构建土地托管利益联结测度体系，方法有新意、结论具体，但属区域实证研究，公共影响有限。",[31],{"name":17,"url":13},[33,34,35,36,4],"农业社会化服务","土地托管","利益联结","农户合作",[38,39],"土地托管 利益联结 农户","济宁 潍坊 土地托管","土地托管利益联结农户-3149",0,"10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1931691",{"doi":42,"openalex_id":44,"authors":45,"venue":17,"cited_by_count":41,"oa_url":13,"card":53,"direction":57,"ingested_from":59},"W7213937854",[46,48,51],{"name":47,"orcid":16},"Shan Zheng",{"name":49,"orcid":50},"Guoqing Liu","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0009-0007-6629-846X",{"name":52,"orcid":16},"Yu Lianghong",{"tldr":54,"method":55,"finding":56,"direction":57,"opportunity":58},"构建指标体系并用组合赋权TOPSIS测度中国土地托管企业与农户的利益联结水平。","基于利益联结理论构建指标体系，AHP与熵权法组合赋权，TOPSIS测度。","利益联结整体处中等水平，合作信任最弱；小规模纯农户联结水平最高，托管环节越多水平越高。","数字乡村与农业信息化","可将信任缺失作为切入点，探索数字平台与契约治理如何提升托管利益联结的信任维度。","openalex","2026-09-22T23:30:08.537335Z"]