Faced with problems such as unordered expansion, inefficient utilization, and the decay of old cities in the current urban development process, many scholars have considered introducing land use mix as a coping strategy. However, due to a lack of understanding of the evolution process and the theoretical connotation of land use mix, it fails to guide its role in practice. Therefore, this study summarizes the theoretical evolution of land use mix from four levels: ideological evolution, conceptual model, quantitative measurements, and influential factors and effects. It is found that after decades of evolution, although the land use mix theory initially formed a certain theoretical and methodological system, there are still some gaps or deficiencies that need to be filled or improved: (1) the theoretical framework lags behind the needs of practice; (2) in the process of evolution, the idea of modern land use mix has been given a deeper meaning; (3) the conceptual model still needs to be further improved; (4) the influencing mechanism is still unclear.

Farmers’ protection behavior largely depends on their perceived value of cultivated land quality protection. However, existing research shows that the impact path of these perceived factors on farmers’ cultivated land protection behavior is not clear. Based on the survey data of 288 farmers in Ningbo City, this study empirically analyzed the impact of farmers’ perception on their cultivated land quality protection behavior through structural equation modeling (SEM). The results showed that farmers’ cultivated land quality protection behavior largely depended on perceived value, and they followed the logic paradigm of “perceived tradeoff→perceived value→behavioral intention→behavioral response”. Among them, farmers’ perceived value comes from farmers’ comprehensive tradeoff of benefits and risks in the process of cultivated land quality protection. In other words, improving farmers’ perceived benefits and reducing perceived risks is conducive to improving farmers’ perceived value of cultivated land quality protection. The above findings are helpful to improve farmers’ behavior of farmland land quality protection and provide new ideas and empirical basis for the design and improvement of cultivated land quality protection policies.

The modernization of agriculture within developing nations represents a complex challenge at the intersection of social and economic systems. Enhancing agricultural labor productivity (ALP) is the key to increasing farmers’ incomes and promoting rural economic development in low- and middle-income countries. To reveal the deep-seated factors that restrict the improvement of ALP, this study, based on the internal and external development constraints of farmers, uses the 2020 data from the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) database. It systematically analyzes the effects and internal logic of farmers’ livelihood capital and farmland transfer on ALP, employing both an endogenous switching regression model and a generalized structural equation model. The findings of this study are as follows: (1) Physical capital, financial capital and social capital can significantly increase the probability of farmers participating in the farmland transfer and transfer-in. Moreover, physical capital can significantly reduce the probability of farmers participating in the farmland transfer-out. (2) Physical capital is significantly and positively correlated with the ALP of both farmland transfer farmers and non-transfer farmers. Financial capital has a significant positive correlation with the ALP of transfer-in farmers. Social capital is significantly positively correlated with the ALP of non-transfer farmers. (3) Farmland transfer can significantly improve ALP, and the productivity-enhancing effect of farmland transferring-in is considerably more pronounced than that of transferring-out. (4) Mediation analysis reveals that physical and social capital enhance ALP by promoting farmer participation in the farmland transfer market. When classified by different transfer behaviors, physical capital enhances ALP by promoting both the transferring-in and transferring-out of land. Financial capital and social capital can promote farmers’ transfer-in of land to enhance ALP. (5) The heterogeneity analysis shows that, compared with the other two types of farmers, farmland transfer has the most significant effect on improving the ALP of livelihood capital-abundant farmers, while farmland transfer-in has the greatest efficiency improvement effect for capital-deficient farmers, and farmland transfer-out has the greatest efficiency improvement effect for capital-balanced farmers. By providing a detailed, evidence-based model of these complex interactions, this research contributes to the broader understanding of change management and innovation in the pursuit of sustainable and equitable rural futures.