Randomized trial reveals the U-shaped impact of digital infrastructure on rural household livelihood resilience, indicating significant benefits for specific groups.
Introduction Driven by the digital rural strategy, the construction of digital infrastructure has become a critical technological foundation for advancing agricultural and rural modernization, as well as enhancing the rural household livelihood resilience. Methods Drawing on micro-level survey data from rural areas in Jiangsu Province and a county-level digital infrastructure index, this study constructs a “buffering capacity–self-organisation capacity–learning capacity–psychological adaptation capacity” framework for measuring livelihood resilience. Using Ordinary Least Squares models, U-shaped regression models, Hierarchical Linear Model (HLM) and mediation effect models, it empirically analyses the impact of digital infrastructure on rural household livelihood resilience and its underlying mechanisms. The study further employs instrumental variables (IV) and double/debiased machine learning (DDML) models to address endogeneity issues. Results The findings suggest that digital infrastructure in rural areas remarkably enhances rural household livelihood resilience overall, though the impact follows a U-shaped nonlinear pattern. Mediation analysis indicates that digital infrastructure significantly enhances farmers’ participation in digital information and digital finance, which indirectly strengthens their livelihood resilience. Heterogeneity analysis reveals that higher-income households, full-time and part-time farming households, and non-economically disadvantaged villages exhibit a significant U-shaped empowerment effect from digital infrastructure. Among them, full-time farming households are more sensitive to digital infrastructure transformation, showing a steeper U-shaped curve. Discussion This research increases the comprehension of the connection between digital rural development and livelihood resilience at a micro level, offering empirical evidence and policy recommendations for the integrated advancement of rural revitalization and digital rural construction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: