Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Introduction: Efficient utilization of straw resources addresses both resource scarcity and environmental degradation while promoting green development. Despite China's abundant straw resources, uneven spatial distribution and practical challenges in collection, storage, and transportation (CS&T) limit large-scale utilization and pose rural public health risks due to improper disposal. Methods: This study integrates government, straw-specialized cooperatives, and farmers into a unified analytical framework and applies evolutionary game theory to examine strategic choices and dynamic interactions among stakeholders in the CS&T process. Key factors analyzed include government regulation costs, subsidy rewards, straw collection and transportation costs, and sales revenues. Results: The results indicate that subsidy rewards and sales revenues are the most significant drivers of stakeholder participation. Moderately increasing subsidies and rewards, while appropriately reducing fines, lowers participation costs for cooperatives and farmers, promoting active involvement and reducing open-air burning. Reducing government regulation costs, improving subsidy allocation accuracy, and moderately increasing fines enhance supervision efficiency. Stakeholder strategies are interconnected in a dynamic feedback system, forming a collaborative cycle of "field collection, centralized storage, standardized transportation, and resource recycling," which improves CS&T efficiency. Discussion: Long-term policy effectiveness requires a scientifically designed incentive mechanism, with subsidies increased but capped at no more than twice the current standard, balancing motivation, fiscal sustainability, and policy feasibility. This study clarifies multi-stakeholder interaction mechanisms and offers theoretical and practical guidance for optimizing straw resource utilization and strengthening rural public health governance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: