Does ecological zoning spur household welfare and resilience? A quasi-natural experiment in China

Ecological zoning has been widely implemented to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services, with its environmental effects well-documented. Yet, less is known about their social implications, particularly at the household level. To narrow the gap, this paper employs a difference-in-difference approach to examine the long-term social impacts and underlying mechanisms of ecological zoning on household welfare and resilience based on nationwide ecological zoning designations and large-scale biennial panel data (2011–2019) from China. We find that ecological zoning generally had positive effects on household income and resilience. Ecological zoning introduced industry and land-use regulations that limited local agricultural and economic activities. In response, households adapted by pursuing non-agricultural occupations and migrating to areas outside the ecological zones. These changes in occupation and migration patterns enabled households to diversify their income sources and build greater economic resilience. However, heterogeneity analysis further suggests that ecological zoning accelerated group differentiation. Compared to non-poor and livelihood-diversified households, poverty-stricken and purely agricultural households, constrained by their limited adaptive capacity and livelihood options, remained trapped and experienced negative impacts on their welfare and resilience. Overall, our findings indicate that while ecological zoning can enhance household income and resilience, it may also exacerbate existing inequalities. To ensure more inclusive social outcomes, conservation policies should incorporate measures that support sustainable livelihood transitions of disadvantaged households. Highlights • We provide the first nationwide household-level assessment of China's ecological zoning policy on household welfare and resilience. • Ecological zoning increases household income and improves poverty resilience on average. • Household livelihood shifts from agriculture to non-agriculture drive welfare gains under ecological zoning. • Ecological zoning promotes permanent migration and household livelihood diversification. • Policy benefits are uneven—poor and full-time farming households face adaptation challenges.