Forest Worker Households in the NFPP: Enhancing Sustainable Livelihoods through Capital and Transformation.

The persistent conflict between strict conservation and community welfare highlights the growing need to address sustainable livelihoods in forest protection programs. The Natural Forest Protection Program (NFPP) is a comprehensive forest protection program spearheaded by the Chinese government. It is designed to facilitate the conservation and restoration of forest ecosystems through a range of interventions, including logging ban, management, tending, and afforestation efforts. Drawing upon longitudinal micro-level household survey data spanning five consecutive years from 2017 to 2021, this research quantifies the sustainable livelihood levels of frontline participants in the NFPP by examining two dimensions: livelihood capital stock and livelihood transformation capacity. Additionally, it investigates the internal differentiation phenomenon within this cohort. The findings suggest that forest worker households engaged in tasks related to forest management, tending, and afforestation are the frontline participants in the NFPP, in contrast to management, technical, and service personnel. Moreover, these forest worker households exhibit a pattern characterized by a higher livelihood capital stock but a lower livelihood transformation capacity compared to non-forest worker households. Furthermore, within forest worker households, there is a significant group differentiation phenomenon, resulting in inter-group differentials in the sustainable livelihood levels based on geographical and seniority stratification criteria. The developers of the global forest protection program should prioritize addressing the sustainable livelihood issues of frontline participants in the program, especially the real problem of mismatches between livelihood capital stock and livelihood transformation capacity. This can be achieved through designing income incentives, stimulating consumption, and other means to enhance the relatively disadvantaged position of frontline participants while balancing the coordination and fairness of the protection program based on the aspects of both protection and development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]