To evaluate the effect of China’s anti-poverty relocation and settlement program (ARSP) on both human well-being and ecosystem conservation, we divide the relationship between household well-being and ecosystem dependence into four modes and examine the impact of ARSP on these modes by using household survey data. It finds that relocated households and those under centralized resettlement, voluntary relocation, and new stage relocation fall closer to the “high well-being, low dependence” mode. However, our results also show some concerns. The sampled households are generally at low levels of well-being in absolute terms, and their dependence on provision services is much higher than other ecosystem services. Additionally, households participating in the ARSP are also likely to fall into the “high well-being, high dependence” mode. More targeted measures should be taken to address these issues, especially sustainable livelihoods for relocated households should be promoted.

Household livelihood strategies are embedded in the natural and socioeconomic contexts in which people live. Analyzing the factors that influence household livelihood choice and defining their consequences can be beneficial for informing rural household policies. In turn, this has great significance for fostering sustainable livelihood strategies. We grouped household livelihood strategies based on the income distribution of 756 households and analyzed their influencing factors and possible livelihood consequences in the watershed of Miyun Reservoir, the only source of surface water currently available for domestic use in Beijing, China. Local farmers’ livelihood strategies can be grouped into three types: farming, local off-farm, and labor-migrant. Farming households have the lowest livelihood capitals, other than natural capital, compared with labor-migrant households and off-farm households, the latter having better livelihood capital status. Geographical location, natural capital, household structure, labor quality, and ecological policies are the main factors affecting farmers’ choice of livelihood strategy. Local off-farm households have a significantly lower dependency on firewood, land resources, and investment than that of farming and labor-migrant households, and have the highest reliance on fossil fuel. This household classification can help us understand the livelihood characteristics, impact factors, and consequences of different types of household strategies, which also suggest tailored policy and management options to promote sustainable livelihoods based on different household types.

Household welfare is inseparable from the environment because of its dependence on ecosystems and their services. However, linking household welfare and ecosystems in order to inform differentiated household livelihood development in spatially heterogeneous regions is still a great challenge. Based on a field survey of 1754 households, we grouped the relationships between household welfare (defined by total income) and ecosystem reliance (expressed by an index of dependence on ecosystem services) in the Watershed of Miyun Reservoir, the only source of surface water for domestic use in Beijing, China. The relationships can be grouped into four types: high welfare and high dependency; low welfare and low dependency; high welfare and low dependence; and low welfare and high dependency. Family structure, households’ education and skill level, and the proximity to Beijing have significant impacts on household welfare, while the quantity of natural capital and eco-compensation fund significantly contribute to the ecosystem dependence. Maintaining suitable family size and age structure, improving education and skill levels, and strengthening payment for ecosystem services within low welfare households would be effective approaches to their welfare improvement. The above classification can help design tailored policy and management options to promote sustainable livelihoods based on different household subgroups.

To assess whether and to what extent the anti-poverty relocation and settlement program (APRSP) in China will be able to resolve the development dilemma of ecosystem conservation and human wellbeing, it is important to study the effects of policy on rural households in terms of the income generation from ecosystem services (ES). We constructed an index of dependence on ecosystem services (IDES) to evaluate the dependence of households’ net income generation on ecosystem services. Using data collected from South Shaanxi Province, we examined the effects of the relocation program on rural households’ IDES. We find that this relocation may benefit the ecosystem by significantly decreasing participants’ IDES. Relocation households have higher net incomes than non-relocation households from total ecosystem services, provisioning services, regulating services, and cultural services as well as socio-economic activities. There are significant differences in IDES between groups with different relocation and resettlement characteristics. The anti-poverty relocation program optimized the rural households’ income structure by increasing the proportion of income from socio-economic activities while reducing the proportion of income from ecosystem services. This study provides new evidence for evaluating eco-conservation and development policies by linking ecosystem services and human well-being at a micro scale. We also address the policy implications of our analysis for anti-poverty relocation programs.

Poverty is increasingly stressed in Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes, from targeting to outcomes. As the world’s largest PES scheme of its kind, the Sloping Land Conversion Program in China started its new stage (NSLCP), aiming to convert another 2.9 million ha sloping croplands into forest or grasslands. This paper examines whether and to what extent different dimensions of poverty impact households’ participation in the NSLCP. By using the data collected from a key demonstration area, Wuqi County in 2015, based on Sen’s capability theory, we measure the multidimensional poverty of the households, like poverty in education, physical health, food security, rights, assets and living standards. Then, we evaluate the effects of different poverty dimensions on households’ participation in the NSLCP and their efforts to comply with the policy. We find that different dimensions of poverty had very different impacts, as revealed in the participating rate and the intensity of efforts to manage the enrolled lands through different methods. The households with poverty in education, food security, or rights were less likely to be enrolled in the NSLCP. Dimensions like income, health and assets were significant contributions to fulfill the practices required by the NSLCP. Besides, the degree of multidimensional poverty further weakened households’ efforts to manage and protect the trees on enrolled lands.