Family capital provides diverse and effective resources for production and livelihood of farmers, and thus profoundly determines farmers’ behavior in the decision-making process, yet the specific impact of family capital on farmers’ participation in farmland transfer has not been adequately examined. Based on a theoretical analysis, this paper divides family capital into four dimensions: human capital, economic capital, social capital, and cultural capital, and empirically analyzes the impact of different types of family capital on farmers’ participation in farmland transfer by using data on farmers in the 2018 China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) database. The results show that human capital, economic capital, and cultural capital all have significant impacts on both farmland transfer-out and transfer-in behavior, while social capital only plays a significant role in farmland transfer in. In order to accelerate the development process of farmland transfer in China, it is necessary to actively guide surplus rural labor towards non-agricultural employment, improve the farmland system and build a land transfer trading platform to promote the transfer of farmland to households with a good agricultural base, and strengthen social security construction to reinforce the enthusiasm of farmers engaging in land transfer.

The sustainable development goals (SDGs) reflect the pursuit of achieving spatial justice. Both SDG 1.4 and SDG 11.1 reflect a concern for urban services. Life service resources, which are the new concept proposed by the Chinese government, also call for sustainable development path. However, few studies have focused on the realization of spatial justice in life service resources. This paper proposes a two-level, four-step analysis framework composed of quantity, structure, pattern, and coupling coordination to perceive the spatial justice of life service resources. Based on remote sensing technology and geographic information science, this paper acquires and analyses multi-source data including population density, building outlines, point of interests, subway lines, etc. Furthermore, the case study in downtown Beijing found the following: (1) The total life service resources are extensive and varying in type; (2) regional differences are evident and low-level equilibrium and high-level priority development coexist; (3) life service resources are concentrated in contiguous and multi-centre clusters with a greater north–south than east–west difference; (4) the overall level of life service resources is low, specifically for “high in the centre and low in the periphery” and “high in the east and low in the west”. Future management should consider narrowing the development gap and formulating industry development plans to improve spatial justice. Finally, the comparison between Beijing and London and more cities in the future needs to consider the urban development stage, population density, and other aspects.