Impact of the Grain for Green Project on the well-being of farm households: A case study of the mountainous areas of northern Hebei Province, China

There are close dynamic relationships among the livelihood, well-being, and ecological environment of farm households. It is of great significance to scientifically clarify the impact of the grain for green policy on the livelihoods and well-being of farm households in mountainous areas. Based on data from a survey of 392 farm households in Zhangbei County, a system of indicators for farm household livelihood assets and farm household well-being was constructed, drawing on a sustainable livelihood framework (SLF). The livelihood assets and well-being levels of different types of farm households were measured, and a multiple linear regression model was used to analyze the impact of the grain for green policy implementation on the well-being levels of farm households. The three main results are as follows: (1) The level of natural assets among the total average livelihood assets of farm households in Zhangbei County is the highest at 0.374, while the level of physical assets is the lowest at 0.018. The level of livelihood assets of returned farmland households (0.948) is lower than that of nonreturned farmland households (1.117). (2) The level of well-being of all farm households in Zhangbei County is 0.517, with the level of wealth contributing the most to the well-being of farm households at 40.20% and the quality of the ecological environment contributing the least at 11.99%. The level of well-being of returned farmland households (0.518) was slightly higher than that of nonreturned farmland households (0.514). (3) The degree of influence of each influence factor on the level of well-being of farm households varies significantly. Household size was the strongest driver, at 0.366, while educational attainment of household members, household labor capacity, annual household expenditure, livelihood diversity, number of large production tools, and total value of livestock were also important drivers of household well-being, and area of arable land is negatively associated with household well-being. There are also differences in the factors influencing the level of well-being of different types of farming households.