Analysis of Factors Influencing the Protection, Inheritance, and Utilization of Traditional Villages in the Context of Rural Revitalization ----Based on Survey Data from 1,000 Villagers in 176 Traditional Villages

Analysis of Factors Influencing the Protection, Inheritance, and Utilization of Traditional Villages in the Context of Rural Revitalization ----Based on Survey Data from 1,000 Villagers in 176 Traditional Villages | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Analysis of Factors Influencing the Protection, Inheritance, and Utilization of Traditional Villages in the Context of Rural Revitalization ----Based on Survey Data from 1,000 Villagers in 176 Traditional Villages Zheng Guo, Shuhua Zhang This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3890553/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The contradiction between coordinating the preservation and inheritance of traditional villages has recently garnered considerable attention in academic circles and government departments. The present study is based on data obtained from 1,000 villagers in 176 traditional villages who were surveyed in 2020. Using the Logit multiple regression method, the study quantitatively analyzed five closely related core explanatory variables of villagers in traditional villages and six factors that significantly influence the survival and development of these villages. The analysis was conducted before (2011) and after (2021) the preservation of traditional villages. Research indicates that (1) the economic income of farmers has rapidly increased and their sources of income have shifted from primarily farming to tourism development and breeding. The proportion of respondents expressing "satisfaction” and “very satisfaction" with both traditional village preservation and development was only 26.6%. (2) Among the core explanatory variables influencing farmers' willingness for preservation and inheritance, in terms of the impact mode, natural capital and human capital exhibited a significant negative effect, whereas material capital, financial subcapital, and social capital exhibited a significant positive effect. Material capital and financial capital positively influenced farmers' satisfaction at 1% significance level, whereas natural capital negatively affected their satisfaction at 5% significance level, and social capital positively influenced their satisfaction at 5% significance level. Regarding impact intensity, financial capital made the largest positive contribution (β = 18.323), followed by material capital (β = 15.597). By contrast, natural capital made the largest negative contribution (β = −7.012). Additionally, social capital, which reflects the development potential of villagers, exhibited a significant contribution value (β = 8.374, P > 0.05). Human capital had a negative impact, whereas social capital had a positive impact, with the effects of both being nonsignificant. (3) Among the six main control variables influencing traditional village preservation and inheritance, those with significant influences were economic factors and cultural and artistic factors (P 0.05). Regarding the impact mode, all factors exhibited a positive and significant effect on farmers' willingness for preservation and inheritance. Regarding impact intensity, cultural and artistic factors exhibited the largest contribution (β = 26.112), followed by economic factors (β = 25.173) and political factors (β = 8.374). Moreover, ecological environmental factors, reflecting the livable environment for villagers, also made significant contributions (β = 5.213). Social factors and geographical transportation factors exerted positive effects, but their impact was not prominent. Accordingly, the paper proposes two insights: First, a reflection on the implementation of traditional village preservation policies—correctly managing the relationship between proactive and passive protection. The pros and cons of China's traditional village preservation policies must be re-examined, and a practical and effective mechanism for coordinating the interests of traditional village preservation must be established. Second, the preservation model for traditional villages in China needs to be re-evaluated. Exploring a model where the government leads, with farmers at the center, and various sectors of society actively participate is essential. Clarifying the relationship between the preservation and development of traditional villages is crucial, recognizing that preservation is the objective and economic development is the fundamental guarantee. (1) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; (2) Methods: briefly describe the main methods or treatments applied; (3) Results: summarize the article’s main findings; (4) Conclusions: indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. The abstract should be an objective representation of the article and it must not contain results that are not presented and substantiated in the main text and should not exaggerate the main conclusions. Traditional villages Cultural heritage Preservation and inheritance Satisfaction 1. Introduction With the change of dynasties; the passage of time; and the shift in societal, economic, political, cultural, military, and other focal points, the number of traditional villages continues to decline, with some villages even disappearing. Because of the gradual decline of traditional villages and their immense historical and cultural value, countries worldwide are increasingly realizing the significance of preserving traditional villages. Western countries had initiated emergency protection measures for historical buildings in the mid-19th century. In 1930, France promulgated the “Law on the Protection of Scenic Sites,” and under this law, traditional villages were incorporated into the realm of cultural heritage preservation. In 1933, the International Congress on Modern Architecture adopted the "Athens Charter," which introduced the concept of "integral protection" and highlighted the need to comprehensively protect by considering "internal and external factors." This charter elevated the preservation of traditional villages to a theoretical research level (Gu Jun, Yuan Li, 2005). Subsequently, efforts for protecting historical and cultural heritage were accelerated. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and various international organizations have successively recommended legal documents such as the "Recommendations for the Protection of Cultural Landscapes and Sites," "Venice Charter," "Recommendations for the Protection of Cultural and Natural Heritage at the National Level," "Nairobi Recommendation," "Machu Picchu Charter," and "Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage" [ 2 – 7 ]. They have integrated the protection of historical sites and monuments with cultural heritage preservation [ 8 ], combined the protection of historical landscape garden architecture with the overall conservation of natural ecological environments and economic and societal development [ 9 – 10 ], and aligned land development and utilization policies and cultural and environmental education policies with the policies for archaeological heritage protection [ 11 ]. The conservation of cultural heritage in Western countries has evolved from "integral protection" to "legal regulations," thereby reaching a higher categorization level from "practical protection" to "theoretical research." China, with its long history, has the most extensive traditional cultural heritage. This rich, profound, intangible cultural heritage and its unique historical and cultural value have resulted in the strong cohesive force and creativity of the Chinese nation. However, this country also faces the problem of disappearance of its intangible cultural heritage. China has recently undergone administrative adjustments, transitioning from people's communes to townships and then the consolidation of these townships. Simultaneously, China is experiencing an accelerated pace of urbanization, which has led to the gradual disappearance of many traditional villages. These villages have carried the historical and cultural legacy for several hundreds or even thousands of years, and their disappearance has resulted in the loss of their heritage. The preservation of the historical and cultural heritage of traditional villages is an urgent issue that needs to be addressed. In 2001, the UNESCO included China’s Kunqu opera in the list of intangible cultural heritage. Since then, China has intensified its efforts in protecting its intangible cultural heritage (Liu Fei, 2014). Currently, 42 projects from China have been listed in UNESCO's Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. Additionally, in agreement with the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development's issuance of the "Evaluation and Recognition Index System for Traditional Villages (Trial)" in 2012, China conducted a nationwide survey of traditional villages, and six consecutive batches were included in the "List of Chinese Traditional Villages" for protection. Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, the country has been firmly instituting cultural self-confidence and observing to the path of becoming a culturally strong nation (Bao Xinjian, 2016). Unprecedented breakthroughs have been made in the protection of intangible cultural heritage. In December 2016, the State Council issued the "Notice on the Development Plan of the Tourism Industry in the 13th Five-Year Plan," which integrated intangible heritage protection with the thriving cultural tourism industry (Gao Jing, Gao Yu, 2020). In February 2018, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council allotted the "Strategic Plan for Rural Revitalization (2018–2022)," thereby integrating intangible heritage protection with rural revitalization and targeting poverty alleviation so as to prosper and advance rural culture (Lu Shiju, Bai Guixi, 2017; Chen Bo, Lin Qing, 2019). The protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage have entered a new stage, especially since the development strategy for rural revitalization was proposed by the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. This offers an exceptional opportunity for addressing historical and cultural continuity challenges encountered during the development of traditional villages. How to toughen the protection of traditional villages, overcome the challenges of their decline, and completely unleash the historical and cultural role of these villages are critical concerns for advancing the preservation of these villages in China. These concerns are also pressing research topics related to rural revitalization efforts made in Jiangxi Province. To address these concerns, this study, in unification with the implementation of the rural revitalization strategy, uses the satisfaction survey data on traditional village protection from 1,000 families in 176 traditional villages of Jiangxi Province. The study determined the reasons for the decline of these investigated villages, the current position of protection and inheritance, and the associated existing problems. The study also analyzed the inherent dynamics and pressures of traditional village protection and inheritance, thereby intending to reveal, from a micro perspective, the attitudes of villagers toward the idea of protection and inheritance of their villages. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Survey Method The study examined the impact of traditional village residents on village preservation and inheritance. Therefore, this study is based on a sustainable livelihood analysis framework closely related to the long-term development of traditional villages. Furthermore, the study investigates the issues involved in traditional village preservation and inheritance (Wang Changhai, 2017). The sustainability of farmers' livelihoods reflects a household's capability to cope with the impacts and pressures of the natural and social environment (Chambers and Conway, 1992). Because of the influence of internal and external living conditions, households strive to find survival opportunities by using their own conditions, substantial assets, and potential strategies (Carney, 1998). Traditional villages are declining because of changes in internal factors such as family situations and development, and external factors including political, economic, social, cultural, and transportation environments. Some changes are caused by significant events in the lives of family members, while other changes are a result of the impact of national policies and systems at the time, which threaten the livelihoods of villagers and prompt them to seek alternative means of survival (Tang Qing et al., 2013). Focusing on the actual situation, basic characteristics, and livelihood conditions of traditional village residents (Li Xiaoyun et al., 2007), we built upon the findings of numerous researchers (Mahdi et al., 2009). This study combined the six major external factors affecting traditional villages: political, economic, social, cultural and artistic, ecological environmental, and geographical transportation factors. The study designs a set of quantitative indicators for the sustainable livelihoods of traditional village residents (Zhao Xueyan, 2011) and analyzed the impact of changes in these livelihoods on the villages. 2.2. Model Selection and Descriptive Statistics To test theoretical propositions, a method of individual judgment and expert consultation was combined to determine the weights of indicators influencing traditional village preservation and inheritance. To analyze the satisfaction of residents with protection and inheritance, the survey data were first quantitatively processed. Because of variations in the range of changes, the following formula was employed: $${P}_{k}=\frac{{I}_{k}}{{S}_{k}},$$ 1 The formula reflects the degree of proximity between the actual value (Ik) and the standard value (Sk). In the formula, Pk represents the indicator evaluation value. This formula is used to quantify the indicator. A multinomial Logit regression model was adopted for analyzing the satisfaction of village residents with the protection and inheritance concerning the five sustainable livelihood capitals of households. During the analysis, we assumed that the random variable follows a logistic probability distribution. We employed the data analysis method of the Logit regression model: In the model, P represents the probability of the event occurring, acting as the constant term, with parameters denoting regression coefficients. In the Logit model, the Nagelkerke pseudo R-squared reflects the proportion of dependent variable's variance explained by the independent variables, and the Wald test assesses the significance of β values. To further elucidate factors affecting traditional village protection under external environmental conditions, this study, based on the above discussion, established the foundational variable model as follows: In the model, Probit (i) is the quantified indicator measuring the satisfaction with traditional village protection, serving as the constant term, and parameters represent regression coefficients. While constructing indicators for factors influencing traditional village protection, an ordered Probit model was established since the influencing factors were ordered discrete variables. That is, P(Y = 1) = F(X), where F(X) follows a standard normal distribution, and the dependent variable is a (0,1) variable. Representing the livelihood capital variables, it acts as the core explanatory variable for villagers' satisfaction with traditional village protection. Considering that external environmental factors also influence traditional village protection and inheritance, other potential influencing factors were included in the econometric model. These factors encompass political, social, economic, historical and cultural, ecological environmental, geographical transportation factors, etc. (Table 1 ). 3. Problem Analysis 3.1. Analysis of Traditional Village Farmers' Sources of Income The sources of income for farmers can reflect changes in traditional village preservation and inheritance. Before the traditional villages were declared as intangible cultural heritage, the main income sources for villagers were typically farming and animal husbandry, with a substantial portion of the income for households with abundant labor coming from off-farm employment. Once the villages were declared as provincial- or national-level intangible cultural heritage, the income sources changed, with a considerable portion coming from tourism resource development. The shift in income sources led to changes in the costs and strategies of farmers' livelihood (Bulte and Rondeau, 2007; Karki, 2013). The present study is based on the data processing methods commonly used by scholars (Mahdi et al., 2009; Vedeld et al., 2012). On comparing the satisfaction of traditional village protection and inheritance by analyzing the income sources of farmers (Xu Jianying et al., 2017), 1,000 observation values were divided into two categories: high- and low-income groups, with the average value serving as the dividing standard. The study analyzed changes in farmers' income sources in 2011 and 2022. In terms of income, the low-income group decreased and the high-income group increased in 2021 compared with 2011, with a change of 21.9% (Table 1 ). In 2011, the income difference between the high- and low-income groups was 1414 yuan, whereas in 2022, the difference increased to 2548 yuan. Thus, the income difference expanded by 1134 yuan from 2011 to 2022. Compared with 2011, a decrease in income was noted in 2021 in households primarily engaged in farming and off-farm work, whereas households mainly involved in business and animal husbandry gradually. However, with changes in the livelihood strategies of farmers, the number of households primarily engaged in farming and off-farm work significantly decreased (from 94.07–80.50%). On the other hand, a growing trend in employment dominated by business (tourism resources) and animal husbandry (from 5.93–19.5%) has been observed, possibly because as the traditional village tourism market developed, some people have shifted their occupation from primarily farming to engaging in tourism-related activities, such as selling tourism products and operating restaurants. This development has also enthused and increased the demand for animal products and the growth of the animal husbandry industry. Additionally, with the implementation of the national rural revitalization strategy, the rural economy has developed further, thereby leading to the return of migrant workers to their hometowns. These returning workers, being beneficiaries of the aforementioned rural revitalization strategy, exhibit a higher satisfaction with traditional village tourism development. We here referred to the livelihood strategies of households. Based on the crucial indicator of the income proportion between farming and non-farming activities, the household income sources were categorized into four types: primarily engaged in farming (income mainly from farming); primarily engaged in business (income mainly from operating tourism products or restaurants); primarily engaged in animal husbandry (income mainly from animal husbandry); and primarily engaged in off-farm work (income mainly from working outside the farm) (Table 1 ). Table 1 Statistics of Income Sources for Traditional Village Households Income Group Low-Income Group Average Annual Net Income High-Income Group Average Annual Net Income Observations 2011 83.32% 5821 16.68% 7235 1000 2021 61.42% 16735 38.58% 19283 1000 Income Sources Farming Mainly Business Mainly Breeding Mainly Working Mainly Observations 2011 75.38% 2.69% 3.24% 18.69% 1000 2021 68.33% 11.83% 7.67% 12.17% 1000 3.2. Survey Questionnaire Analysis of Farmers' Satisfaction with Traditional Village Protection and Inheritance Farmers' satisfaction reflects their support level for traditional village protection and inheritance. To comprehensively understand the implementation of traditional village protection and inheritance, we conducted a questionnaire survey of 1,000 households in 176 traditional villages across 11 cities in Jiangxi Province. The farmer satisfaction levels were categorized into five levels, and their responses to the questionnaire were quantified as follows: 1 = Very Dissatisfied, 2 = Dissatisfied, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Satisfied, 5 = Very Satisfied. Table 3 A present the statistical results. Of the total 1,000 households sampled, 78 were "Very Satisfied" with traditional village protection and development, accounting for the smallest proportion (7.8%). A total of 266 households were either "Satisfied" or "Very Satisfied," together representing 26.6% of the total respondents. On the other hand, 198 households were "Very Dissatisfied" and constituted a relatively large proportion of respondents (19.8%). Furthermore, 509 households were "Very Dissatisfied" or "Dissatisfied," accounting for a substantial proportion (50.9%) of the respondents, surpassing half of the total surveyed households. A reasonable explanation for these results is that new contradictions have arisen in traditional village protection and development. After the inclusion of the investigated villages in the protection list, many villages embarked on tourism development to ensure profit maximization. Entrepreneurs and village committees visualized business opportunities; however, villagers’ mindset also changed subtly. In terms of benefit distribution, conflicts were noted between the government and villagers, tourism companies and villagers, as well as among villagers themselves. Although tourism companies shared profits with farmers, the farmers remained dissatisfied. On the other hand, owing to variations in the house location of farmers, the income varied. Farmers in better locations earned more, whereas those in less favorable locations earned less. The widening income gap resulted in a psychological imbalance among farmers. Consequently, the low satisfaction of traditional village farmers with traditional village protection and inheritance is an inevitable contradiction arising in the course of rural economic development. Table 2 Survey Results on Villagers' Satisfaction with the Conservation and Inheritance of Traditional Villages 3A Farmers' Satisfaction Distribution Survey on the Conservation and Development of Traditional Villages Satisfaction Level Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very Satisfied Observations Total Sample 198(19.8%) 311(31.1%) 225(22.5%) 188(18.8%) 78(7.8%) 1000 Quantified Index(Ranked 1,2,3,4,5) 1 = Very Dissatisfied 2 = Dissatisfied 3 = Neutral 4 = Satisfied 5 = Very Satisfied 1000 3.3. Regression Analysis of Five Core Explanatory Variables and Six Key Control Variables To achieve a deeper understanding of the impact of farmers' livelihood capital on their satisfaction with traditional village protection and inheritance, we employed a multinomial logistic regression model. This model incorporates five livelihood capitals comprehensively reflecting villagers' willingness for protection and inheritance as explanatory variables, and regression analysis was performed on farmers' satisfaction. The regression results (Table 3 ) indicated a maximum likelihood estimate of 65.764, with a Nagelkerke pseudo R-squared of 0.832 and an accuracy prediction rate of 93.1%. These findings suggested that the entire model has a good reference value. Among the five livelihood capitals analyzed, natural capital and human capital exhibited a significantly negative impact, whereas physical capital, financial subcapital, and social capital exhibited a positive and significant influence. Physical capital and financial capital positively affected farmers' satisfaction at 1% significance level, whereas natural capital negatively impacted the satisfaction at 5% significance level. Social capital positively affected farmers' satisfaction at 5% significance level. Regarding impact strength, financial capital made the largest positive contribution (β = 18.323), followed by physical capital (β = 15.597), whereas natural capital made the largest negative contribution (β = −7.012). Moreover, social capital, which reflects the development potential of villagers, also made a noticeable contribution (β = 8.374, P > 0.05). Higher social capital levels indicate that the villagers had a stronger willingness for the protection and inheritance of traditional villages. Human capital negatively affected, whereas social capital positively affected, but the effect of none was significant. Among the six main factors influencing traditional village protection and inheritance, economic factors and cultural and artistic factors had a significant influence (P 0.05). All influencing factors exerted a positive and significant effect on farmers' willingness for protection and inheritance. Regarding impact strength, cultural and artistic factors made the highest contribution (β = 26.112), followed by economic factors (β = 25.173) and political factors (β = 8.374). Ecological environmental factors, which reflect a livable environment for villagers, also made significant contributions (β = 5.213). Social factors and geographical transportation factors had a positive impact, but their effects were nonsignificant (Table 3 B). Table 3 Regression Analysis Results of Villagers' Satisfaction with Conservation and Inheritance of Traditional 3A Core Explanatory Variable Characteristics Regression Analysis for Traditional Village Farmers Variable Regression Coefficient (β) Standard Deviation Wald Value Significance (P) (1) Natural Capital (B1) -7.012 3.822 2.014 0.045 (2) Human Capital (B2) -4.522 0.837 1.863 0.312 (3) Material Capital (B3) 15.597 2.745 0.658 0.002 (4) Financial Capital (B4) 18.323 3.453 16.231 0.000 (5) Social Capital (B5) 8.374 4.543 5.791 0.058 3B Characteristics Regression Analysis of Main Control Variables for Traditional Village Farmers (1) Political Factors (B6) -8.374 8.142 4.324 0.045 (2) Economic Factors (B7) 25.173 8.984 7.391 0.000 (3) Social Factors (B8) 2.224 0.212 1.231 0.256 (4) Cultural and Artistic Factors (B9) 26.112 16.231 8.768 0.000 (5) Ecological Environmental Factors (B10) 5.213 4.248 3.759 0.114 (6) Geographic and Transportation Factors (B11) 4.122 0.235 0.127 0.198 Note: ***, **, * respectively represent significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, and the values in parentheses are robust standard errors. 3.4. Regression Analysis of Third-Level Dependent Variables To further analyze the satisfaction level of farmers with traditional village protection and inheritance in relation to livelihood capitals, 15 third-level core explanatory variables and 18 third-level main control variables reflecting the protection and inheritance of traditional villages were selected for the Logit regression analysis. According to the regression results of the 15 third-level core explanatory variables (Table 4 ), the entire model had a good fit and reference value. The maximum likelihood estimate was 76.389, Nagelkerke R 2 was 0.787, and the model's accuracy prediction rate reached 92.9%. Within the livelihood capitals of farmers, the per capita arable land area in natural capital (β = −5.181, P < 0.05) and the health level of labor in human capital (β = 8.351, P < 0.05) exhibited a significant and positive effect on farmers' willingness to protect and inherit traditional villages. The inclusion of houses, including shops (β = 17.301, P < 0.05) in material capital, tourism resources (β = 8.022, P < 0.05) in financial capital, and social positions (β = 15.002, P < 0.05) in social capital all had substantial positive effects on the protection and inheritance of traditional villages. The magnitude of impact was the highest for tourism resources, followed by family net income, social positions, tourism income, and inclusion of houses including shops. On considering tourism resources in financial capital as an example, we noted that for every one-unit increase in tourism resources, the corresponding logitP increases by 8.022. Table 4 Regression Analysis of 15 Level-3 Core Explanatory Variables for Traditional Village Farmers Secondary Indicator System Variable Regression Coefficient (β) Standard Deviation Wald Value Significance (P) Natural Capital (B1) Per Capita Land Area (B11) -4.245 3.213 2.231 0.524 Per Capita Cultivated Land Area (B12) -5.181 2.725 3.565 0.043 Human Capital (B2) Total Family Population (B21) 7.532 3.635 4.411 0.064 Adult Labor Force in the Family (B22) 3.012 1.312 3.256 0.301 Education Level of the Labor Force (B23) 2.812 2.132 3.465 0.173 Health Status of the Labor Force (B24) 8.351 3.243 6.452 0.014 Material Capital (B3) Housing (including shops) (B31) 17.301 2.312 12.354 0.013 Livestock (B32) -3.261 2.012 2.112 0.664 Production and Living Equipment (B33) 3.203 2.034 5.653 0.353 Financial Capital (B4) Family Net Income (B41) 21.202 8.112 7.115 0.312 Savings (B42) 1.423 0.182 0.253 0.288 Tourism Resources (B43) 8.022 2.678 11.157 0.000 Social Capital (B5) Social Positions (B51) 15.002 5.345 4.135 0.011 Social Resources (B52) 5.221 2.442 3.772 0.181 Social Activities (B53) 4.433 1.654 2.673 0.453 In order to thoroughly analyze the extent of the impact of external environmental conditions on the conservation and inheritance of traditional villages, this study further conducts a Logit regression analysis on 18 Level-3 indicators reflecting the external environmental characteristics of traditional villages as dependent variables (see Table 5 ). Table 5 Regression Analysis of 18 Level-3 Main Control Variables for Traditional Village Farmers Secondary Indicator System Variable Regression Coefficient (β) Standard Deviation Wald Value Significance (P) Political Factors (B6) Policy Influence (B61) 3.112 1.123 3.236 0.051 Political Influence (B62) 2.122 1.012 2.324 0.812 Government Management (B63) 13.212 3.123 7.098 0.000 Economic Factors (B7) Rural Industry (B71) 20.342 8.235 5.522 0.023 Technological Development Level (B72) 4.215 3.024 4.323 0.687 Material Living Standard (B83) 5.433 2.482 8.203 0.512 Social Factors (B8) Social Environment (B101) 1.355 0.235 0.223 0.287 Population Factors (B82) 2.124 0.044 1.143 0.016 Social Activities (B83) 1.127 0.523 2.679 0.481 Cultural and Artistic Factors (B9) Scientific, Cultural, and Artistic Values (B91) 15.234 8.414 11.663 0.004 Historical Cultural Values (B92) 13.215 6.043 6.341 0.006 Archaeological Values (B93) 5.738 3.238 3.823 0.583 Ecological Environmental Factors (B10) Natural Environment (B101) 8.323 2.144 8.355 0.044 Village Location (B102) 13.233 7.133 5.089 0.006 Ecological Protection (B103) 3.222 0.776 1.488 0.663 Geographic and Transportation Factors (B11) Geographical Location (B111) 3.215 1.232 0.234 0.281 Traffic Conditions (B112) 12.153 5.045 5.911 0.035 Infrastructure (B113) 8.422 3.243 3.138 0.033 Note: ***, **, * respectively represent significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, and the values in parentheses are robust standard errors. The regression results indicate that within the political factors, government management (P < 0.05); within cultural and artistic factors, scientific, cultural, and artistic values (P < 0.05) and historical cultural values (P < 0.05); and within ecological environmental factors, village location (P < 0.05) exhibit significant positive effects. In terms of impact strength, the sequence is as follows: scientific, cultural, and artistic values (β = 15.234), historical cultural values (β = 15.234), and government management (β = 15.234). Although rural industry is not significant, it has the highest contribution value (β = 20.342). This implies that for every one-unit increase in rural industry, the corresponding logitP will increase by 20.342 units. Additionally, the contribution values of transportation conditions and infrastructure in geographic and transportation factors are also substantial, with β = 12.153 and β = 8.422, respectively. 3.5. Analysis of Factors Influencing Farmers' Perception of the Protection and Inheritance of Traditional Villages To test the theoretical propositions, we used the Probit regression model for an analysis, assuming that random variables follow a normal distribution. The five livelihood capitals of farmers merely reflect their internal factors, that is, the core explanatory variables. To comprehensively analyze farmers' satisfaction with traditional village protection and inheritance, this study, based on the five livelihood capitals, six major external factors closely related to the protection and inheritance were introduced (political factors, economic factors, social factors, cultural and artistic factors, ecological environmental factors, geographical transportation factors) as main control variables. An ordered Probit model econometric equation was used to comprehensively examine the issues related to the protection and inheritance of traditional villages (Table 6 ). Table 6 Ordered Probit Model Regression Results of Livelihood Capital on Satisfaction with the Conservation and Inheritance of Traditional Villages Explanatory Variables Ordered Probit Model Ordinary Least Squares Regression Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Natural Capital (B1) -3.857*** (0.0906) -3.743*** (0.0912) -3.633*** (0.0916) -3.587*** (0.0924) -7.0122***(0.0454) Human Capital (B2) -2༎4871*** (0.6246) -2.4703*** (0.6462) -2.4698***(0.6684) -2.4436*** (0.7042) -4.5224***(0.3121) Material Capital (B3) 8.5783*** (0.0046) 8.5628*** (0.0066) 8.5489***(0.0076) 8.4878*** (0.0078) 15.5973***(0.0023) Financial Capital (B4) 10.0776*** (0.0246) 10.0664*** (0.0264) 10.0534*** (0.2688) 10.0269*** (0.2802) 18.3234***(0.0024) Social Capital (B5) 4.6075*** (0.1164) 4.5978*** (0.1226) 4.5746*** (0.1244) 6.5589*** (0.1430) 8.3744***(0.0582) Political Factors (B6) -4.6057*** (0.0926) -4.5851*** (0.0913) -4.5624*** (0.0900) 8.3743***(0.0453) Economic Factors (B7) 13.8452*** (0.0642) 13.8322*** (0.0694) 13.8029*** (0.0700) 25.1732***(0.0003) Social Factors (B8) 1.2232*** (0.5122) 1.2158***(0.5146) 2.2241***(0.2564) Cultural and Artistic Factors (B9) 14.3616*** (0.0048) 14.1052*** (0.0064) 26.1223***(0.0035) Ecological Environmental Factors (B10) 2.8672*** (0.2294) 5.2133***(0.1142) Geographic and Transportation Factors (B11) 2.2671*** (0.3966) 4.1224***(0.1982) Observations 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Probit(P)>chi2 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Prob>F = 0.0000 LR chi2 LR chi2(18)=1354.11 LR chi2(20)=1564.72 LR chi2(26)=1676.35 LR chi2(29)=1934.78 R-squared = 0.7332 Pseudo R2 0.2845 0.2988 0.3256 0.3542 AdjR -squared = 0.3632 Note: ***, **, * respectively represent significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, and the values in parentheses are robust standard errors. 3.5.1. Core Explanatory Variables (Characteristics of Livelihood Capital) Traditional villages are vital carriers of both tangible and intangible cultural heritage. From the model’s regression results, we observed that changes in farmers' natural capital negatively impacted their satisfaction with the protection and inheritance (P < 0.05). This can be easily explained—the inclusion of traditional villages in the protection list has opened up new business opportunities to farmers. Farmers do not rely solely on land for their livelihoods, and indicators, such as per capita land area and per capita cultivated land area, no longer appear crucial. The changes are accompanied by tourism resource development and the alteration in livelihood strategies. This shift directly influences tourism resource-related upstream industries, such as animal husbandry and services. The success or failure of tourism resource development significantly influenced traditional village protection and inheritance. Changes in human capital significantly and negatively affected farmers' satisfaction at 1% significance level ( P < 0.01). This is because the protection and inheritance of traditional villages directly affect farmers by altering their family's income sources or, in other words, their means of employment (Karki, 2013). Before tourism resources were developed in traditional villages, farmers primarily relied on agriculture. However, after tourism resources were developed, the increase in tourism income prompted farmers to choose income from managing tourism products to sustain their livelihoods. The regression results of the present study revealed that the total family population, adult labor force in the family, and the educational level of the labor force exerted relatively nonsignificant effects on farmers' satisfaction. This is because of the sluggish population growth, aging of the labor force, and education-related problems in rural areas, which are significantly different from those reported in previous studies (Wang Changhai, 2017). The health status of the workforce was significantly associated with higher satisfaction with traditional village protection and management, which is consistent with the results of the existing literature (Blore et al., 2013). Material capital is a crucial factor for maintaining farmers' livelihoods. In this study, the value of houses (including shops) positively affected farmers' satisfaction at 1% significance level. This value of houses (including shops) directly reflects the success of a farmer's family in production and living. Families with successful management are more likely to positively accept policy changes for protecting traditional villages. Livestock and production and living equipment, which were earlier essential for farmers' survival, became less significant and, therefore, were not statistically significant. Financial capital exerted a positive and significant impact on villagers' satisfaction (P < 0.05) and exhibited the highest contribution value (β = 18.323). In financial capital, the contribution value of family net income (β = 21.202) was substantial. The indicators of family net income and savings did not change significantly with economic development, which indicates that the income and consumption of villagers in traditional villages have synchronized to a certain extent. According to the regression results, the increase in tourism resources (β = 8.022, P < 0.05) significantly and positively influenced villagers' satisfaction with the protection and inheritance of traditional villages. Social capital exhibited a positive and significant effect, with a substantial contribution value (β = 8.374, P > 0.05). This indicated that higher social capital reflects stronger willingness among villagers to protect and inherit traditional villages. Within social capital, holding social positions (β = 15.002, P < 0.05) had a significant positive impact on traditional village protection and inheritance, and its contribution was the greatest. Social resources and social activities were of positive significance but were not very pronounced. We reasonably interpreted that villagers' lifestyles have undergone significant changes after the traditional villages were included in the protection list. The protection of villages is inseparable from various aspects of society. Social capital, especially social positions, thus becomes particularly important. Holding village positions significantly affects village protection. Tourism development in traditional villages requires villagers to expand social resources and actively participate in social activities to efficiently increase villagers' income. Overall, the results indicate that traditional villages have experienced substantial changes in livelihood strategies and lifestyles for over more than a decade of development (from 2011 to 2021), and satisfaction of villagers is gradually increasing. The economic effect of cultivated land in natural capital, which reflects the production mode, is decreasing. Human capital, which reflects population quantity and quality, has become insufficient. The demand for material capital, which reflects production resources, is impending saturation, with slow growth. Financial capital reflects villagers' economic income and increased significantly. Social capital, which replicates the development potential of villagers, is continuously increasing. 3.5.2. Main Control Variables (Primary Influencing Factors) Traditional villages bear the development history of China's agrarian civilization and represent historical changes that have occurred in China's politics, economy, society, historical culture, ecological environment, and geographical transportation. They are carriers of various material and non-material cultures. Therefore, the main factors affecting traditional villages were designated as main control variables while establishing the model. Based on the regression results of the model, we observed that the impact of political factors on villagers' satisfaction about village protection and inheritance was significantly negative. This may be explained by the crucial role that the government played in protecting traditional villages. Despite the policies implemented in China to strengthen cultural heritage preservation, inevitable issues arose during the protection process. First, after the villages were listed for protection, the property rights of those traditional villages shifted from the villagers to the state, managed by cultural relic protection units. Second, extensive demolition and reconstruction occurred in traditional villages because of new rural construction, which led to the destruction of traditional villages with a significant historical and cultural value. Third, to maximize interests during protection and development, original residents often relocated elsewhere, which resulted in the marginalization of those residents during the protection of traditional villages. Economic factors significantly and positively influenced the farmers’ satisfaction levels. Farmers were generally satisfied with the overall economic development in the local area. Tourism resources brought tangible income to villagers, created employment opportunities, and allowed villagers to earn through activities such as running inns and restaurants and selling souvenirs. The higher the income, the more satisfied the farmers are with the protection and inheritance of traditional villages. This largely alleviates the inconsistency between preservation and development. Social factors significantly affected farmer’s satisfaction at 1% significance level and can be rationally explained by the increased awareness and efforts in protecting traditional villages at various society levels. This is in line with the growing attention of the government to the preservation of traditional villages. Historical, cultural, scientific, and artistic factors significantly and positively influenced the villagers’ satisfaction levels at 1% significance level. Traditional villages are the main transporters connecting family lineage, inheriting ethnic culture, consolidating national strength, and bonding family sentiments. This is because the historical and cultural aspects of traditional villages encompass material culture such as houses and ancestral halls and include family education, family culture, and family history created by ancestors. These villages create and form intangible cultural heritage resources such as historical, cultural, scientific, and artistic values. These elements represent crucial aspects influencing the satisfaction of villagers, and with the disappearance of historical and cultural aspects, villagers may lose their spiritual foundation. Ecological factors significantly and positively influenced villagers' satisfaction levels at 1% significance level. Villagers exhibited higher satisfaction levels with the natural environment and village’s location. However, a drawback was observed in terms of ecological protection. The development and utilization of traditional villages must consider the environmental carrying capacity of these villages. A well-constructed ecological environment generates higher satisfaction among villagers. The influx of tourists during tourism development causes environmental pollution and ecological damage, which have become prominent issues. During tourism development, when rural environmental sanitation was neglected, villagers exhibited low satisfaction regarding ecological protection. Geographical and transportation factors are also crucial indicators with positive and significant effect on villagers' satisfaction levels in the model. According to traditional Feng Shui principles, the selection and architectural structure of traditional villages have to present a perfect integration of human and nature. If the roads constructed and transportation infrastructure are better, the satisfaction level of the farmers are higher. Other control variables had no stable and significant effects on farmers’ satisfaction. 4. Policy Recommendations This study on the satisfaction of villagers in traditional villages provides insights for the government to formulate policies by understanding the villagers’ livelihoods and the external factors affecting the protection and inheritance of these villages. This paper recommends focusing on two aspects for policy considerations. (1) Reflection on the Implementation of Traditional Village Protection Policies—The Relationship between Active and Passive Protection. This involves a reconsideration of the interests of the government, developers, and villagers. The relationship between the protection and development of traditional villages must be clarified, where protection is the goal, and economic development is the fundamental guarantee. Therefore, the responsibilities for the protection of traditional villages must be clearly defined, and rural economies must be revitalized. One contentious issue is ancient buildings in traditional villages, which, before being designated as cultural heritage units, were of individual villagers who maintained them. Once these ancient buildings are officially recognized as cultural relics and placed under protection, they become the state’s property, with cultural heritage units being legally responsible for the preservation of these properties. Currently, China has implemented a four-tier system, involving the national, provincial, municipal, and county levels, to protect its traditional villages. An increase in the number of successful applications for traditional village protection has posed challenges in terms of personnel and funding for effective implementation. Notably, effective protection is often provided at the national level, while protection efforts at the provincial and county levels face implementation-related difficulties. Second, the issue of property rights for the residents of traditional villages needs to be resolved. According to the "Land Management Law" of China, rural villagers are only allowed to have one homestead per household. Villagers residing in ancient buildings that lie within the protection scope of traditional villages are in a state of dilemma—they can neither obtain funds for protecting and restoring their old homes from the government nor build new houses on additional homestead land. Thus, they cannot protect their existing homes or construct new ones. In some traditional villages, original residents are forcibly relocated elsewhere, contributing to the development of tourism resources. This results in the loss of their rights to protect traditional old houses and forms the major reason for dissatisfaction among farmers regarding the protection of traditional villages. Finally, the issue of property rights exists for developers. From the tourism perspective, the development and utilization of traditional villages hold significant value. The government, developers, and villagers all want to gain benefits from tourism development-presented opportunities, thereby earning money through ventures such as guesthouses, restaurants, and selling souvenirs. The government acts as the manager who is involved in both protecting economic development and traditional villages. Developers are investors pursuing to maximize profits through projects in traditional villages, while villagers are both owners and collaborators, as traditional village protection is dependent on their involvement. Effective protection of traditional villages can be realized only by achieving a win-win situation among the government, developers, and villagers. The second reflection is on the aspects of protection and inheritance. Although traditional villages have received considerable attention as intangible cultural heritage, protecting and inheriting these villages is a long-term and sustainable process. Achieving this goal should be a priority for scholars. First, the government's management goals must be clarified. The government's goal is to improve policy execution efficiency, clearly defining that traditional villages are the objects of protection and inheritance, the main actors in this task are villagers, and the protection goal is not to pursue maximized benefits. The highest management level is to "organize and mobilize" the masses to actively participate in protecting and inheriting traditional villages. While protecting traditional villages, the dialectical relationship between active and passive protection needs to be addressed. Villagers must be actively guided from passive participation to active protection in terms of responsibilities, rights, and benefits. Second, how to coordinate the interests of the government, developers, and farmers—the three main participants—to achieve the ultimate goal of protecting traditional villages is another question that needs to be addressed. Undeniably, villagers are the primary inheritors of the historical and cultural heritage of traditional villages. Whether traditional villages can be effectively protected and historical culture can be systematically inherited depend on resolving the living and development conditions of villagers. Protecting villages is a long-term and sustainable process. In the end, the protection and economic development issues of local villagers must be fundamentally addressed. Developers play a vital role in the development of traditional villages. However, they only address immediate needs and are not a sustainable solution in the long run. Second, a government-led protection model with active participation from various sectors of society is required. Moreover, a practical and feasible mechanism for coordinating the interests of all parties in the protection of traditional villages needs to be established. Since the end of the 20th century, many experts and scholars in China, such as Hu Binbin, Feng Jicai, Wu Bing'an, and Pan Lusheng, have called for adopting various effective methods to protect Chinese traditional villages. Some scholars have actively explored these effective approaches. Since the official implementation of the protection of traditional villages in China in 2011, a situation has emerged where the government leads and the society participates, thereby creating a scenario of "top-down decree, joint protection." This study reveals that villagers play an indispensable role in the protection of traditional villages, and urbanization construction has, in turn, weakened this protection. The relationship between the government and villagers, as well as the balance between protection and development, must be addressed under the backdrop of urbanization construction. This plays a crucial role in improving the awareness of traditional village protection at all government levels and among the public. Third, establishing a rating system for protecting traditional villages and an effective management and evaluation system is beneficial. This helps clarify the key protection areas for traditional villages, which can make protection more targeted and improve the overall effectiveness of traditional village protection. Over time, traditional villages have undergone decline and extinction for various reasons. Traditional villages must be urgently protected. When implementing national projects for protecting traditional villages, actively exploring and practicing a protection model led by the government is essential, and this should involve the active participation from various sectors of society. This approach should focus on protecting traditional villages and consider the development of rural economies, interests of developers, and survival and development of villagers. To simultaneously consider protection and economic development, the mutual interests of the government, developers, and villagers must be coordinated. Tasks such as propaganda mobilization, organizational implementation, execution, inspection, and evaluation must be carried out effectively. In the future, the country should focus on constructing an effective mechanism for coordinating interests and the development of a scientifically rational management and evaluation system. The study has some limitations. Because of constraints in research conditions, we investigated only a few typical traditional villages and did not cover other regions. Additionally, the analysis of villagers' satisfaction regarding the protection and inheritance of traditional villages involved a long time span, which made data collection and surveying challenging. This study represents preliminary research, warranting further refinement of both the conclusions and research methods. Declarations Author Contributio ns: Conceptualization, Zheng Guo.; methodology, Shuhua Zhang.; software, Shuhua Zhang; writing—original draft preparation, Zheng Guo. Shuhua Zhang.; writing—review and editing, ShuhuaZhang; Funding : This research was funded by Project Funding: Jiangxi Province Social Science "14th Five-Year Plan" (2021): Fund Project (Grant Number: 21YJ20) Investigation and Research on the Revitalization of Traditional Villages in Jiangxi Province from the Perspective of Rural Revitalization Strategy. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: The data in this paper were collected from publicly available sources. Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments, which greatly contributed to improving the final version of the manuscript. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest References Gu Jun, Yuan Li. Cultural Heritage Report: Theory and Practice of the World Cultural Heritage Protection Movement [M]. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2005:71 Athens Charter [EB/OL]. (2011-10-23) [2021-07-05]. Recommendations on the Style and Characteristics of Protecting Landscapes and Sites [EB/OL]. (2017-04-02) [2021-07-05]. International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments [N/OL]. Guangming Daily, (2005-12-09) [2021-07-05]. Recommendations on the Protection of Cultural Property Damaged by Public or Private Projects [EB/OL]. (1968-11-19) [2021-07-05]. Recommendations on the Protection of National Level Cultural and Natural Heritage [EB/OL]. (1972-12-21) [2021-07-05]. Nairobi Recommendations [DB/OL]. (2011-08-29) [2021-07-05]. Machu Picchu Charter [EB/OL]. (2020-05-22) [2021-07-05]. Li Xiaodong. Introduction to "Florence Charter" (Charter for the Protection of Historic Gardens) [N]. China Cultural Heritage News, 1993-06-13(2). Charter for the Protection of Historic Towns and Urban Areas (Washington Charter) [EB/OL]. (2010-06-25) [2021-07-05]. Charter for the Protection and Management of Archaeological Heritage [EB/OL]. (2011-03-14) [2021-07-05]. Liu Fei. Research on Cultural Symbols and the Transmission of Intangible Cultural Heritage [J]. Dongyue Tribune, 2014(7):147～150. Bao Xinjian. On the Basis of Grasping Substance and Laws, Consciously Uphold the "Three Confidences" -- Review of "Upholding the 'Three Confidences,' Achieving the Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation" [J]. Scientific Socialism, 2016(1):161. Gao Jing, Gao Yu. The Localization Trend of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Cultural Tourism Industry -- Perspective of Industry Upgrading Forced by the Epidemic [J]. Journal of Nanjing University of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition), 2020(3):26～32. Lu Shiju, Bai Guixi. Research on the Coordinated Development of Tourism Poverty Alleviation and the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Ethnic Areas [J]. Journal of South-Central University for Nationalities (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), 2017(2):74～79. Chen Bo, Lin Qing. Exploration of the Development Path of Intangible Cultural Heritage Towns under the Perspective of Rural Revitalization Strategy [J]. Journal of Nanjing University of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition), 2019(5):24～29. Wang Changhai. What Did Chinese Nature Reserves Offer to Surrounding Communities? -- Based on Surveys of Farmers in Shaanxi, Sichuan, and Gansu Provinces from 1998 to 2014 [J]. Management World, 2017, 3:63～75. Chambers，R. and G. R. Conway，1992，“Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for 21st Century. IDS Dis⁃cussion Paper 296”，London: Department for International Development（DFID）. Carney，D.，1998，“Implementing a Sustainable Liveli⁃hood Approach”，London: Department for International Development. Tang Qing, Xu Yong, Li Yang. Assessment of Sustainable Livelihoods of Farmers in the Loess Plateau and Future Livelihood Strategies—Based on a Survey of 1076 Households in Yan'an, Shaanxi, and Guyuan, Ningxia [J]. Progress in Geography, 2013, 32(2):161～169. Li Xiaoyun, Dong Qiang, Rao Xiaolong, et al. Analysis Methods and Localized Applications of Farmer Vulnerability[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2007, 4:32～39. Singh，P. K. and B. N. Hiremath，2010，“Sustainable Livelihood Security Index in a Developing Country: A Tool for Development Planning”，Ecological Indicators，Vol.10，pp. 442～451. Mahdi，G. P. Shivakoti and D. Schmidt- Vogt，2009，“Livelihood Change and Livelihood Sustainability in the Uplands of Lembang Subwatershed，West Sumatra，Indonesia，in a Chang⁃ing Natural Resource Management Context”，Environmental Man⁃agement，Vol.43，pp. 84～99. Zhao Xueyan. The Impact of Livelihood Capital on the Life Satisfaction of Farmers and Herders: A Case Study of the Gannan Plateau [J]. Geographical Research, 2011, 4:687～698. Bulte，E. and D. Rondeau，2007，“Compensation for Wildlife Damages: Habitat Conversion，Species Preservation and Local Welfare”，Journal of Environmental Economics and Man⁃agement，Vol.54，pp.311～322. [26] Karki，S. T.，2013，“Do Prot Ected a Reas and Conser⁃vation Incentives Contrib Ute to Sustainable Livelihoods ? A Case Study of Bardia National Park，Nepal”，Journal of Environ⁃mental Management，Vol.128，pp. 988～999. Mahdi，G. P. Shivakoti and D. Schmidt- Vogt，2009， “Livelihood Change and Livelihood Sustainability in the Uplands of Lembang Subwatershed，West Sumatra，Indonesia，in a Changing Natural Resource Management Context”，Environmental Man⁃agement，Vol.43，pp. 84～99. Vedeld，P.，A. Jumane and G. Wapalila et al.，2012，“Protected Areas，Poverty and Conflicts A livelihood Case Study of Mikumi National Park，Tanzania”，Forest Policy and Econom⁃ics，Vol.21，pp.20～31. Xu Jianying, Kong Ming, Liu Xinxin, Wang Qing. The Impact of Livelihood Capital on Farmers' Willingness to Re-Participate in Grain-to-Green Program: A Case Study of Wolong Nature Reserve. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(18): 6205～6215. Bergquist，D. A.，2007，“Sustainability and Local People's Participation in Coastal Aquaculture: Regional Differences and Historical Experiences in Sri Lanka and the Philippines”， Environmental Management，Vol.40，pp.787～802 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-3890553","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":269643519,"identity":"31a9b865-e853-4de0-bdda-614ba44adae6","order_by":0,"name":"Zheng Guo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Yuzhang Normal University Nanchang city Jiangxi","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Zheng","middleName":"","lastName":"Guo","suffix":""},{"id":269643520,"identity":"52193666-b6e7-4e7a-ac05-8ac7df3c63b6","order_by":1,"name":"Shuhua Zhang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Ocean University of China","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shuhua","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhang","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-01-23 09:05:32","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3890553/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3890553/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":50525624,"identity":"ab8586f8-aada-4920-9561-5533ab561d4c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-01 22:22:27","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":583980,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3890553/v1/d97bd5ad-385e-418e-8453-88485f4ba0ef.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Analysis of Factors Influencing the Protection, Inheritance, and Utilization of Traditional Villages in the Context of Rural Revitalization ----Based on Survey Data from 1,000 Villagers in 176 Traditional Villages","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWith the change of dynasties; the passage of time; and the shift in societal, economic, political, cultural, military, and other focal points, the number of traditional villages continues to decline, with some villages even disappearing. Because of the gradual decline of traditional villages and their immense historical and cultural value, countries worldwide are increasingly realizing the significance of preserving traditional villages. Western countries had initiated emergency protection measures for historical buildings in the mid-19th century. In 1930, France promulgated the \u0026ldquo;Law on the Protection of Scenic Sites,\u0026rdquo; and under this law, traditional villages were incorporated into the realm of cultural heritage preservation. In 1933, the International Congress on Modern Architecture adopted the \"Athens Charter,\" which introduced the concept of \"integral protection\" and highlighted the need to comprehensively protect by considering \"internal and external factors.\" This charter elevated the preservation of traditional villages to a theoretical research level (Gu Jun, Yuan Li, 2005). Subsequently, efforts for protecting historical and cultural heritage were accelerated. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and various international organizations have successively recommended legal documents such as the \"Recommendations for the Protection of Cultural Landscapes and Sites,\" \"Venice Charter,\" \"Recommendations for the Protection of Cultural and Natural Heritage at the National Level,\" \"Nairobi Recommendation,\" \"Machu Picchu Charter,\" and \"Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage\" [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR3 CR4 CR5 CR6\" citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]. They have integrated the protection of historical sites and monuments with cultural heritage preservation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e], combined the protection of historical landscape garden architecture with the overall conservation of natural ecological environments and economic and societal development [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e], and aligned land development and utilization policies and cultural and environmental education policies with the policies for archaeological heritage protection [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e]. The conservation of cultural heritage in Western countries has evolved from \"integral protection\" to \"legal regulations,\" thereby reaching a higher categorization level from \"practical protection\" to \"theoretical research.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChina, with its long history, has the most extensive traditional cultural heritage. This rich, profound, intangible cultural heritage and its unique historical and cultural value have resulted in the strong cohesive force and creativity of the Chinese nation. However, this country also faces the problem of disappearance of its intangible cultural heritage. China has recently undergone administrative adjustments, transitioning from people's communes to townships and then the consolidation of these townships. Simultaneously, China is experiencing an accelerated pace of urbanization, which has led to the gradual disappearance of many traditional villages. These villages have carried the historical and cultural legacy for several hundreds or even thousands of years, and their disappearance has resulted in the loss of their heritage. The preservation of the historical and cultural heritage of traditional villages is an urgent issue that needs to be addressed. In 2001, the UNESCO included China\u0026rsquo;s Kunqu opera in the list of intangible cultural heritage. Since then, China has intensified its efforts in protecting its intangible cultural heritage (Liu Fei, 2014). Currently, 42 projects from China have been listed in UNESCO's Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. Additionally, in agreement with the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development's issuance of the \"Evaluation and Recognition Index System for Traditional Villages (Trial)\" in 2012, China conducted a nationwide survey of traditional villages, and six consecutive batches were included in the \"List of Chinese Traditional Villages\" for protection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, the country has been firmly instituting cultural self-confidence and observing to the path of becoming a culturally strong nation (Bao Xinjian, 2016). Unprecedented breakthroughs have been made in the protection of intangible cultural heritage. In December 2016, the State Council issued the \"Notice on the Development Plan of the Tourism Industry in the 13th Five-Year Plan,\" which integrated intangible heritage protection with the thriving cultural tourism industry (Gao Jing, Gao Yu, 2020). In February 2018, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council allotted the \"Strategic Plan for Rural Revitalization (2018\u0026ndash;2022),\" thereby integrating intangible heritage protection with rural revitalization and targeting poverty alleviation so as to prosper and advance rural culture (Lu Shiju, Bai Guixi, 2017; Chen Bo, Lin Qing, 2019). The protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage have entered a new stage, especially since the development strategy for rural revitalization was proposed by the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. This offers an exceptional opportunity for addressing historical and cultural continuity challenges encountered during the development of traditional villages.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHow to toughen the protection of traditional villages, overcome the challenges of their decline, and completely unleash the historical and cultural role of these villages are critical concerns for advancing the preservation of these villages in China. These concerns are also pressing research topics related to rural revitalization efforts made in Jiangxi Province. To address these concerns, this study, in unification with the implementation of the rural revitalization strategy, uses the satisfaction survey data on traditional village protection from 1,000 families in 176 traditional villages of Jiangxi Province. The study determined the reasons for the decline of these investigated villages, the current position of protection and inheritance, and the associated existing problems. The study also analyzed the inherent dynamics and pressures of traditional village protection and inheritance, thereby intending to reveal, from a micro perspective, the attitudes of villagers toward the idea of protection and inheritance of their villages.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Survey Method\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study examined the impact of traditional village residents on village preservation and inheritance. Therefore, this study is based on a sustainable livelihood analysis framework closely related to the long-term development of traditional villages. Furthermore, the study investigates the issues involved in traditional village preservation and inheritance (Wang Changhai, 2017). The sustainability of farmers\u0026apos; livelihoods reflects a household\u0026apos;s capability to cope with the impacts and pressures of the natural and social environment (Chambers and Conway, 1992). Because of the influence of internal and external living conditions, households strive to find survival opportunities by using their own conditions, substantial assets, and potential strategies (Carney, 1998). Traditional villages are declining because of changes in internal factors such as family situations and development, and external factors including political, economic, social, cultural, and transportation environments. Some changes are caused by significant events in the lives of family members, while other changes are a result of the impact of national policies and systems at the time, which threaten the livelihoods of villagers and prompt them to seek alternative means of survival (Tang Qing et al., 2013). Focusing on the actual situation, basic characteristics, and livelihood conditions of traditional village residents (Li Xiaoyun et al., 2007), we built upon the findings of numerous researchers (Mahdi et al., 2009). This study combined the six major external factors affecting traditional villages: political, economic, social, cultural and artistic, ecological environmental, and geographical transportation factors. The study designs a set of quantitative indicators for the sustainable livelihoods of traditional village residents (Zhao Xueyan, 2011) and analyzed the impact of changes in these livelihoods on the villages.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Model Selection and Descriptive Statistics\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo test theoretical propositions, a method of individual judgment and expert consultation was combined to determine the weights of indicators influencing traditional village preservation and inheritance. To analyze the satisfaction of residents with protection and inheritance, the survey data were first quantitatively processed. Because of variations in the range of changes, the following formula was employed:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Equ1\" class=\"Equation\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"mathdisplay\" id=\"FileID_Equ1\" name=\"EquationSource\"\u003e$${P}_{k}=\\frac{{I}_{k}}{{S}_{k}},$$\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"EquationNumber\"\u003e1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe formula reflects the degree of proximity between the actual value (Ik) and the standard value (Sk). In the formula, Pk represents the indicator evaluation value. This formula is used to quantify the indicator.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA multinomial Logit regression model was adopted for analyzing the satisfaction of village residents with the protection and inheritance concerning the five sustainable livelihood capitals of households. During the analysis, we assumed that the random variable follows a logistic probability distribution. We employed the data analysis method of the Logit regression model:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\" width=\"597\" height=\"62\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the model, P represents the probability of the event occurring, acting as the constant term, with parameters denoting regression coefficients. In the Logit model, the Nagelkerke pseudo R-squared reflects the proportion of dependent variable\u0026apos;s variance explained by the independent variables, and the Wald test assesses the significance of \u0026beta; values.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo further elucidate factors affecting traditional village protection under external environmental conditions, this study, based on the above discussion, established the foundational variable model as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\" height=\"54\" width=\"574\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the model, \u003cem\u003eProbit (i)\u003c/em\u003e is the quantified indicator measuring the satisfaction with traditional village protection, serving as the constant term, and parameters represent regression coefficients. While constructing indicators for factors influencing traditional village protection, an ordered Probit model was established since the influencing factors were ordered discrete variables. That is, P(Y\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;F(X), where F(X) follows a standard normal distribution, and the dependent variable is a (0,1) variable.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRepresenting the livelihood capital variables, it acts as the core explanatory variable for villagers\u0026apos; satisfaction with traditional village protection.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConsidering that external environmental factors also influence traditional village protection and inheritance, other potential influencing factors were included in the econometric model. These factors encompass political, social, economic, historical and cultural, ecological environmental, geographical transportation factors, etc. (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Problem Analysis","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Analysis of Traditional Village Farmers' Sources of Income\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sources of income for farmers can reflect changes in traditional village preservation and inheritance. Before the traditional villages were declared as intangible cultural heritage, the main income sources for villagers were typically farming and animal husbandry, with a substantial portion of the income for households with abundant labor coming from off-farm employment. Once the villages were declared as provincial- or national-level intangible cultural heritage, the income sources changed, with a considerable portion coming from tourism resource development. The shift in income sources led to changes in the costs and strategies of farmers' livelihood (Bulte and Rondeau, 2007; Karki, 2013). The present study is based on the data processing methods commonly used by scholars (Mahdi et al., 2009; Vedeld et al., 2012). On comparing the satisfaction of traditional village protection and inheritance by analyzing the income sources of farmers (Xu Jianying et al., 2017), 1,000 observation values were divided into two categories: high- and low-income groups, with the average value serving as the dividing standard. The study analyzed changes in farmers' income sources in 2011 and 2022.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn terms of income, the low-income group decreased and the high-income group increased in 2021 compared with 2011, with a change of 21.9% (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). In 2011, the income difference between the high- and low-income groups was 1414 yuan, whereas in 2022, the difference increased to 2548 yuan. Thus, the income difference expanded by 1134 yuan from 2011 to 2022. Compared with 2011, a decrease in income was noted in 2021 in households primarily engaged in farming and off-farm work, whereas households mainly involved in business and animal husbandry gradually. However, with changes in the livelihood strategies of farmers, the number of households primarily engaged in farming and off-farm work significantly decreased (from 94.07\u0026ndash;80.50%). On the other hand, a growing trend in employment dominated by business (tourism resources) and animal husbandry (from 5.93\u0026ndash;19.5%) has been observed, possibly because as the traditional village tourism market developed, some people have shifted their occupation from primarily farming to engaging in tourism-related activities, such as selling tourism products and operating restaurants. This development has also enthused and increased the demand for animal products and the growth of the animal husbandry industry. Additionally, with the implementation of the national rural revitalization strategy, the rural economy has developed further, thereby leading to the return of migrant workers to their hometowns. These returning workers, being beneficiaries of the aforementioned rural revitalization strategy, exhibit a higher satisfaction with traditional village tourism development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe here referred to the livelihood strategies of households. Based on the crucial indicator of the income proportion between farming and non-farming activities, the household income sources were categorized into four types: primarily engaged in farming (income mainly from farming); primarily engaged in business (income mainly from operating tourism products or restaurants); primarily engaged in animal husbandry (income mainly from animal husbandry); and primarily engaged in off-farm work (income mainly from working outside the farm) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatistics of Income Sources for Traditional Village Households\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIncome Group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLow-Income Group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAverage Annual Net Income\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh-Income Group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAverage Annual Net Income\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83.32%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5821\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.68%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7235\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2021\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e61.42%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16735\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38.58%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19283\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIncome Sources\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFarming Mainly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBusiness Mainly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBreeding Mainly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorking Mainly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75.38%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.69%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.24%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.69%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2021\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e68.33%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.83%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.67%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.17%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Survey Questionnaire Analysis of Farmers' Satisfaction with Traditional Village Protection and Inheritance\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFarmers' satisfaction reflects their support level for traditional village protection and inheritance. To comprehensively understand the implementation of traditional village protection and inheritance, we conducted a questionnaire survey of 1,000 households in 176 traditional villages across 11 cities in Jiangxi Province. The farmer satisfaction levels were categorized into five levels, and their responses to the questionnaire were quantified as follows: 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Very Dissatisfied, 2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dissatisfied, 3\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Neutral, 4\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Satisfied, 5\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Very Satisfied. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eA present the statistical results. Of the total 1,000 households sampled, 78 were \"Very Satisfied\" with traditional village protection and development, accounting for the smallest proportion (7.8%). A total of 266 households were either \"Satisfied\" or \"Very Satisfied,\" together representing 26.6% of the total respondents. On the other hand, 198 households were \"Very Dissatisfied\" and constituted a relatively large proportion of respondents (19.8%). Furthermore, 509 households were \"Very Dissatisfied\" or \"Dissatisfied,\" accounting for a substantial proportion (50.9%) of the respondents, surpassing half of the total surveyed households. A reasonable explanation for these results is that new contradictions have arisen in traditional village protection and development. After the inclusion of the investigated villages in the protection list, many villages embarked on tourism development to ensure profit maximization. Entrepreneurs and village committees visualized business opportunities; however, villagers\u0026rsquo; mindset also changed subtly. In terms of benefit distribution, conflicts were noted between the government and villagers, tourism companies and villagers, as well as among villagers themselves. Although tourism companies shared profits with farmers, the farmers remained dissatisfied. On the other hand, owing to variations in the house location of farmers, the income varied. Farmers in better locations earned more, whereas those in less favorable locations earned less. The widening income gap resulted in a psychological imbalance among farmers. Consequently, the low satisfaction of traditional village farmers with traditional village protection and inheritance is an inevitable contradiction arising in the course of rural economic development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSurvey Results on Villagers' Satisfaction with the Conservation and Inheritance of Traditional Villages\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"7\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3A Farmers' Satisfaction Distribution Survey on the Conservation and Development of Traditional Villages\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSatisfaction Level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVery Dissatisfied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDissatisfied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeutral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSatisfied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVery Satisfied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Sample\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e198(19.8%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e311(31.1%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e225(22.5%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e188(18.8%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e78(7.8%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuantified Index(Ranked 1,2,3,4,5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Very Dissatisfied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Dissatisfied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Neutral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Satisfied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Very Satisfied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Regression Analysis of Five Core Explanatory Variables and Six Key Control Variables\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo achieve a deeper understanding of the impact of farmers' livelihood capital on their satisfaction with traditional village protection and inheritance, we employed a multinomial logistic regression model. This model incorporates five livelihood capitals comprehensively reflecting villagers' willingness for protection and inheritance as explanatory variables, and regression analysis was performed on farmers' satisfaction. The regression results (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) indicated a maximum likelihood estimate of 65.764, with a Nagelkerke pseudo R-squared of 0.832 and an accuracy prediction rate of 93.1%. These findings suggested that the entire model has a good reference value. Among the five livelihood capitals analyzed, natural capital and human capital exhibited a significantly negative impact, whereas physical capital, financial subcapital, and social capital exhibited a positive and significant influence. Physical capital and financial capital positively affected farmers' satisfaction at 1% significance level, whereas natural capital negatively impacted the satisfaction at 5% significance level. Social capital positively affected farmers' satisfaction at 5% significance level. Regarding impact strength, financial capital made the largest positive contribution (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18.323), followed by physical capital (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.597), whereas natural capital made the largest negative contribution (β = \u0026minus;7.012). Moreover, social capital, which reflects the development potential of villagers, also made a noticeable contribution (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.374, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Higher social capital levels indicate that the villagers had a stronger willingness for the protection and inheritance of traditional villages. Human capital negatively affected, whereas social capital positively affected, but the effect of none was significant.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the six main factors influencing traditional village protection and inheritance, economic factors and cultural and artistic factors had a significant influence (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), whereas political factors, social factors, ecological environmental factors, and geographical transportation factors had a nonsignificant influence (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). All influencing factors exerted a positive and significant effect on farmers' willingness for protection and inheritance. Regarding impact strength, cultural and artistic factors made the highest contribution (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;26.112), followed by economic factors (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;25.173) and political factors (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.374). Ecological environmental factors, which reflect a livable environment for villagers, also made significant contributions (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.213). Social factors and geographical transportation factors had a positive impact, but their effects were nonsignificant (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eB).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Analysis Results of Villagers' Satisfaction with Conservation and Inheritance of Traditional\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3A Core Explanatory Variable Characteristics Regression Analysis for Traditional Village Farmers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Coefficient (β)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStandard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWald Value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSignificance (P)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1) Natural Capital (B1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-7.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.822\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.014\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.045\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(2) Human Capital (B2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-4.522\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.837\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.863\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.312\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(3) Material Capital (B3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.597\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.745\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.658\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(4) Financial Capital (B4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.323\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.453\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.231\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(5) Social Capital (B5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.374\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.543\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.791\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.058\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3B Characteristics Regression Analysis of Main Control Variables for Traditional Village Farmers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1) Political Factors (B6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-8.374\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.142\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.324\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.045\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(2) Economic Factors (B7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.173\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.984\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.391\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(3) Social Factors (B8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.224\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.212\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.231\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.256\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(4) Cultural and Artistic Factors (B9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.112\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.231\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.768\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(5) Ecological Environmental Factors (B10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.213\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.248\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.759\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.114\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(6) Geographic and Transportation Factors (B11)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.122\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.235\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.127\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.198\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNote: ***, **, * respectively represent significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, and the values in parentheses are robust standard errors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Regression Analysis of Third-Level Dependent Variables\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo further analyze the satisfaction level of farmers with traditional village protection and inheritance in relation to livelihood capitals, 15 third-level core explanatory variables and 18 third-level main control variables reflecting the protection and inheritance of traditional villages were selected for the Logit regression analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to the regression results of the 15 third-level core explanatory variables (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e), the entire model had a good fit and reference value. The maximum likelihood estimate was 76.389, Nagelkerke R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e was 0.787, and the model's accuracy prediction rate reached 92.9%. Within the livelihood capitals of farmers, the per capita arable land area in natural capital (β = \u0026minus;5.181, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and the health level of labor in human capital (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.351, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) exhibited a significant and positive effect on farmers' willingness to protect and inherit traditional villages. The inclusion of houses, including shops (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;17.301, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) in material capital, tourism resources (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.022, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) in financial capital, and social positions (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.002, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) in social capital all had substantial positive effects on the protection and inheritance of traditional villages. The magnitude of impact was the highest for tourism resources, followed by family net income, social positions, tourism income, and inclusion of houses including shops. On considering tourism resources in financial capital as an example, we noted that for every one-unit increase in tourism resources, the corresponding logitP increases by 8.022.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Analysis of 15 Level-3 Core Explanatory Variables for Traditional Village Farmers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondary Indicator System\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Coefficient (β)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStandard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWald Value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSignificance (P)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNatural Capital (B1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePer Capita Land Area (B11)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-4.245\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.213\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.231\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.524\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePer Capita Cultivated Land Area (B12)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-5.181\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.725\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.565\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.043\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHuman Capital (B2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Family Population (B21)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.532\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.635\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.411\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.064\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdult Labor Force in the Family (B22)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.312\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.256\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.301\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation Level of the Labor Force (B23)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.812\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.132\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.465\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.173\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHealth Status of the Labor Force (B24)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.351\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.243\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.452\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.014\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaterial Capital (B3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHousing (including shops) (B31)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.301\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.312\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.354\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLivestock (B32)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-3.261\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.112\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.664\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProduction and Living Equipment (B33)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.203\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.034\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.653\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.353\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinancial Capital (B4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFamily Net Income (B41)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.202\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.112\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.115\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.312\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSavings (B42)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.423\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.182\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.253\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.288\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTourism Resources (B43)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.022\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.678\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.157\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Capital (B5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Positions (B51)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.345\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.135\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.011\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Resources (B52)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.221\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.442\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.772\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.181\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Activities (B53)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.433\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.654\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.673\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.453\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn order to thoroughly analyze the extent of the impact of external environmental conditions on the conservation and inheritance of traditional villages, this study further conducts a Logit regression analysis on 18 Level-3 indicators reflecting the external environmental characteristics of traditional villages as dependent variables (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Analysis of 18 Level-3 Main Control Variables for Traditional Village Farmers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondary Indicator System\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegression Coefficient (β)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStandard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWald Value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSignificance (P)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolitical Factors (B6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolicy Influence (B61)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.112\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.123\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.236\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.051\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolitical Influence (B62)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.122\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.324\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.812\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGovernment Management (B63)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.212\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.123\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.098\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEconomic Factors (B7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRural Industry (B71)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.342\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.235\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.522\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.023\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTechnological Development Level (B72)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.215\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.323\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.687\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaterial Living Standard (B83)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.433\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.482\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.203\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.512\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Factors (B8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Environment (B101)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.355\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.235\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.223\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.287\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePopulation Factors (B82)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.124\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.044\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.143\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Activities (B83)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.127\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.523\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.679\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.481\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCultural and Artistic Factors (B9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScientific, Cultural, and Artistic Values (B91)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.234\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.414\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.663\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHistorical Cultural Values (B92)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.215\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.043\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.341\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArchaeological Values (B93)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.738\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.238\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.823\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.583\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEcological Environmental Factors (B10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNatural Environment (B101)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.323\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.144\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.355\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.044\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVillage Location (B102)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.233\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.133\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.089\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEcological Protection (B103)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.222\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.776\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.488\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.663\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeographic and Transportation Factors (B11)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeographical Location (B111)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.215\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.232\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.234\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.281\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTraffic Conditions (B112)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.153\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.045\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.911\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.035\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInfrastructure (B113)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.422\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.243\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.138\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.033\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eNote: ***, **, * respectively represent significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, and the values in parentheses are robust standard errors.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe regression results indicate that within the political factors, government management (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05); within cultural and artistic factors, scientific, cultural, and artistic values (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and historical cultural values (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05); and within ecological environmental factors, village location (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) exhibit significant positive effects. In terms of impact strength, the sequence is as follows: scientific, cultural, and artistic values (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.234), historical cultural values (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.234), and government management (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.234). Although rural industry is not significant, it has the highest contribution value (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20.342). This implies that for every one-unit increase in rural industry, the corresponding logitP will increase by 20.342 units. Additionally, the contribution values of transportation conditions and infrastructure in geographic and transportation factors are also substantial, with β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12.153 and β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.422, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5. Analysis of Factors Influencing Farmers' Perception of the Protection and Inheritance of Traditional Villages\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo test the theoretical propositions, we used the Probit regression model for an analysis, assuming that random variables follow a normal distribution. The five livelihood capitals of farmers merely reflect their internal factors, that is, the core explanatory variables. To comprehensively analyze farmers' satisfaction with traditional village protection and inheritance, this study, based on the five livelihood capitals, six major external factors closely related to the protection and inheritance were introduced (political factors, economic factors, social factors, cultural and artistic factors, ecological environmental factors, geographical transportation factors) as main control variables. An ordered Probit model econometric equation was used to comprehensively examine the issues related to the protection and inheritance of traditional villages (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrdered Probit Model Regression Results of Livelihood Capital on Satisfaction with the Conservation and Inheritance of Traditional Villages\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExplanatory Variables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrdered Probit Model\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrdinary Least Squares Regression\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNatural Capital (B1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-3.857***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0906)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-3.743***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0912)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-3.633***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0916)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-3.587***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0924)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-7.0122***(0.0454)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHuman Capital (B2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2༎4871***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.6246)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.4703***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.6462)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.4698***(0.6684)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-2.4436***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.7042)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-4.5224***(0.3121)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaterial Capital (B3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.5783***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0046)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.5628***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0066)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.5489***(0.0076)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.4878***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0078)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.5973***(0.0023)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinancial Capital (B4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.0776***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0246)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.0664***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0264)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.0534***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.2688)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.0269***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.2802)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.3234***(0.0024)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Capital (B5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.6075***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.1164)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.5978***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.1226)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.5746***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.1244)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.5589***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.1430)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.3744***(0.0582)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolitical Factors (B6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-4.6057***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0926)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-4.5851***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0913)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-4.5624***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0900)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.3743***(0.0453)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEconomic Factors (B7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.8452***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0642)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.8322***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0694)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.8029***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0700)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.1732***(0.0003)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Factors (B8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.2232***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.5122)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.2158***(0.5146)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.2241***(0.2564)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCultural and Artistic Factors (B9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.3616***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0048)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.1052***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.0064)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.1223***(0.0035)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEcological Environmental Factors (B10)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.8672***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.2294)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.2133***(0.1142)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeographic and Transportation Factors (B11)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.2671***\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.3966)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.1224***(0.1982)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eObservations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProbit(P)\u0026gt;chi2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProb\u0026gt;F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLR chi2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLR chi2(18)=1354.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLR chi2(20)=1564.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLR chi2(26)=1676.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLR chi2(29)=1934.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eR-squared\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.7332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePseudo R2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2845\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2988\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.3256\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.3542\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdjR -squared\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.3632\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eNote: ***, **, * respectively represent significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, and the values in parentheses are robust standard errors.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5.1. Core Explanatory Variables (Characteristics of Livelihood Capital)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTraditional villages are vital carriers of both tangible and intangible cultural heritage. From the model\u0026rsquo;s regression results, we observed that changes in farmers' natural capital negatively impacted their satisfaction with the protection and inheritance (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). This can be easily explained\u0026mdash;the inclusion of traditional villages in the protection list has opened up new business opportunities to farmers. Farmers do not rely solely on land for their livelihoods, and indicators, such as per capita land area and per capita cultivated land area, no longer appear crucial. The changes are accompanied by tourism resource development and the alteration in livelihood strategies. This shift directly influences tourism resource-related upstream industries, such as animal husbandry and services. The success or failure of tourism resource development significantly influenced traditional village protection and inheritance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChanges in human capital significantly and negatively affected farmers' satisfaction at 1% significance level (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). This is because the protection and inheritance of traditional villages directly affect farmers by altering their family's income sources or, in other words, their means of employment (Karki, 2013). Before tourism resources were developed in traditional villages, farmers primarily relied on agriculture. However, after tourism resources were developed, the increase in tourism income prompted farmers to choose income from managing tourism products to sustain their livelihoods. The regression results of the present study revealed that the total family population, adult labor force in the family, and the educational level of the labor force exerted relatively nonsignificant effects on farmers' satisfaction. This is because of the sluggish population growth, aging of the labor force, and education-related problems in rural areas, which are significantly different from those reported in previous studies (Wang Changhai, 2017). The health status of the workforce was significantly associated with higher satisfaction with traditional village protection and management, which is consistent with the results of the existing literature (Blore et al., 2013). Material capital is a crucial factor for maintaining farmers' livelihoods. In this study, the value of houses (including shops) positively affected farmers' satisfaction at 1% significance level. This value of houses (including shops) directly reflects the success of a farmer's family in production and living. Families with successful management are more likely to positively accept policy changes for protecting traditional villages. Livestock and production and living equipment, which were earlier essential for farmers' survival, became less significant and, therefore, were not statistically significant. Financial capital exerted a positive and significant impact on villagers' satisfaction (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and exhibited the highest contribution value (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18.323). In financial capital, the contribution value of family net income (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;21.202) was substantial. The indicators of family net income and savings did not change significantly with economic development, which indicates that the income and consumption of villagers in traditional villages have synchronized to a certain extent. According to the regression results, the increase in tourism resources (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.022, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) significantly and positively influenced villagers' satisfaction with the protection and inheritance of traditional villages. Social capital exhibited a positive and significant effect, with a substantial contribution value (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.374, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). This indicated that higher social capital reflects stronger willingness among villagers to protect and inherit traditional villages. Within social capital, holding social positions (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.002, \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) had a significant positive impact on traditional village protection and inheritance, and its contribution was the greatest. Social resources and social activities were of positive significance but were not very pronounced. We reasonably interpreted that villagers' lifestyles have undergone significant changes after the traditional villages were included in the protection list. The protection of villages is inseparable from various aspects of society. Social capital, especially social positions, thus becomes particularly important. Holding village positions significantly affects village protection. Tourism development in traditional villages requires villagers to expand social resources and actively participate in social activities to efficiently increase villagers' income.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, the results indicate that traditional villages have experienced substantial changes in livelihood strategies and lifestyles for over more than a decade of development (from 2011 to 2021), and satisfaction of villagers is gradually increasing. The economic effect of cultivated land in natural capital, which reflects the production mode, is decreasing. Human capital, which reflects population quantity and quality, has become insufficient. The demand for material capital, which reflects production resources, is impending saturation, with slow growth. Financial capital reflects villagers' economic income and increased significantly. Social capital, which replicates the development potential of villagers, is continuously increasing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5.2. Main Control Variables (Primary Influencing Factors)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTraditional villages bear the development history of China's agrarian civilization and represent historical changes that have occurred in China's politics, economy, society, historical culture, ecological environment, and geographical transportation. They are carriers of various material and non-material cultures. Therefore, the main factors affecting traditional villages were designated as main control variables while establishing the model. Based on the regression results of the model, we observed that the impact of political factors on villagers' satisfaction about village protection and inheritance was significantly negative. This may be explained by the crucial role that the government played in protecting traditional villages. Despite the policies implemented in China to strengthen cultural heritage preservation, inevitable issues arose during the protection process. First, after the villages were listed for protection, the property rights of those traditional villages shifted from the villagers to the state, managed by cultural relic protection units. Second, extensive demolition and reconstruction occurred in traditional villages because of new rural construction, which led to the destruction of traditional villages with a significant historical and cultural value. Third, to maximize interests during protection and development, original residents often relocated elsewhere, which resulted in the marginalization of those residents during the protection of traditional villages.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEconomic factors significantly and positively influenced the farmers\u0026rsquo; satisfaction levels. Farmers were generally satisfied with the overall economic development in the local area. Tourism resources brought tangible income to villagers, created employment opportunities, and allowed villagers to earn through activities such as running inns and restaurants and selling souvenirs. The higher the income, the more satisfied the farmers are with the protection and inheritance of traditional villages. This largely alleviates the inconsistency between preservation and development. Social factors significantly affected farmer\u0026rsquo;s satisfaction at 1% significance level and can be rationally explained by the increased awareness and efforts in protecting traditional villages at various society levels. This is in line with the growing attention of the government to the preservation of traditional villages. Historical, cultural, scientific, and artistic factors significantly and positively influenced the villagers\u0026rsquo; satisfaction levels at 1% significance level. Traditional villages are the main transporters connecting family lineage, inheriting ethnic culture, consolidating national strength, and bonding family sentiments. This is because the historical and cultural aspects of traditional villages encompass material culture such as houses and ancestral halls and include family education, family culture, and family history created by ancestors. These villages create and form intangible cultural heritage resources such as historical, cultural, scientific, and artistic values. These elements represent crucial aspects influencing the satisfaction of villagers, and with the disappearance of historical and cultural aspects, villagers may lose their spiritual foundation. Ecological factors significantly and positively influenced villagers' satisfaction levels at 1% significance level. Villagers exhibited higher satisfaction levels with the natural environment and village\u0026rsquo;s location. However, a drawback was observed in terms of ecological protection. The development and utilization of traditional villages must consider the environmental carrying capacity of these villages. A well-constructed ecological environment generates higher satisfaction among villagers. The influx of tourists during tourism development causes environmental pollution and ecological damage, which have become prominent issues. During tourism development, when rural environmental sanitation was neglected, villagers exhibited low satisfaction regarding ecological protection. Geographical and transportation factors are also crucial indicators with positive and significant effect on villagers' satisfaction levels in the model. According to traditional Feng Shui principles, the selection and architectural structure of traditional villages have to present a perfect integration of human and nature. If the roads constructed and transportation infrastructure are better, the satisfaction level of the farmers are higher. Other control variables had no stable and significant effects on farmers\u0026rsquo; satisfaction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Policy Recommendations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study on the satisfaction of villagers in traditional villages provides insights for the government to formulate policies by understanding the villagers\u0026rsquo; livelihoods and the external factors affecting the protection and inheritance of these villages. This paper recommends focusing on two aspects for policy considerations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1) Reflection on the Implementation of Traditional Village Protection Policies\u0026mdash;The Relationship between Active and Passive Protection. This involves a reconsideration of the interests of the government, developers, and villagers. The relationship between the protection and development of traditional villages must be clarified, where protection is the goal, and economic development is the fundamental guarantee. Therefore, the responsibilities for the protection of traditional villages must be clearly defined, and rural economies must be revitalized. One contentious issue is ancient buildings in traditional villages, which, before being designated as cultural heritage units, were of individual villagers who maintained them. Once these ancient buildings are officially recognized as cultural relics and placed under protection, they become the state\u0026rsquo;s property, with cultural heritage units being legally responsible for the preservation of these properties. Currently, China has implemented a four-tier system, involving the national, provincial, municipal, and county levels, to protect its traditional villages. An increase in the number of successful applications for traditional village protection has posed challenges in terms of personnel and funding for effective implementation. Notably, effective protection is often provided at the national level, while protection efforts at the provincial and county levels face implementation-related difficulties. Second, the issue of property rights for the residents of traditional villages needs to be resolved. According to the \"Land Management Law\" of China, rural villagers are only allowed to have one homestead per household. Villagers residing in ancient buildings that lie within the protection scope of traditional villages are in a state of dilemma\u0026mdash;they can neither obtain funds for protecting and restoring their old homes from the government nor build new houses on additional homestead land. Thus, they cannot protect their existing homes or construct new ones. In some traditional villages, original residents are forcibly relocated elsewhere, contributing to the development of tourism resources. This results in the loss of their rights to protect traditional old houses and forms the major reason for dissatisfaction among farmers regarding the protection of traditional villages. Finally, the issue of property rights exists for developers. From the tourism perspective, the development and utilization of traditional villages hold significant value. The government, developers, and villagers all want to gain benefits from tourism development-presented opportunities, thereby earning money through ventures such as guesthouses, restaurants, and selling souvenirs. The government acts as the manager who is involved in both protecting economic development and traditional villages. Developers are investors pursuing to maximize profits through projects in traditional villages, while villagers are both owners and collaborators, as traditional village protection is dependent on their involvement. Effective protection of traditional villages can be realized only by achieving a win-win situation among the government, developers, and villagers. The second reflection is on the aspects of protection and inheritance. Although traditional villages have received considerable attention as intangible cultural heritage, protecting and inheriting these villages is a long-term and sustainable process. Achieving this goal should be a priority for scholars. First, the government's management goals must be clarified. The government's goal is to improve policy execution efficiency, clearly defining that traditional villages are the objects of protection and inheritance, the main actors in this task are villagers, and the protection goal is not to pursue maximized benefits. The highest management level is to \"organize and mobilize\" the masses to actively participate in protecting and inheriting traditional villages. While protecting traditional villages, the dialectical relationship between active and passive protection needs to be addressed. Villagers must be actively guided from passive participation to active protection in terms of responsibilities, rights, and benefits. Second, how to coordinate the interests of the government, developers, and farmers\u0026mdash;the three main participants\u0026mdash;to achieve the ultimate goal of protecting traditional villages is another question that needs to be addressed. Undeniably, villagers are the primary inheritors of the historical and cultural heritage of traditional villages. Whether traditional villages can be effectively protected and historical culture can be systematically inherited depend on resolving the living and development conditions of villagers. Protecting villages is a long-term and sustainable process. In the end, the protection and economic development issues of local villagers must be fundamentally addressed. Developers play a vital role in the development of traditional villages. However, they only address immediate needs and are not a sustainable solution in the long run.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond, a government-led protection model with active participation from various sectors of society is required. Moreover, a practical and feasible mechanism for coordinating the interests of all parties in the protection of traditional villages needs to be established. Since the end of the 20th century, many experts and scholars in China, such as Hu Binbin, Feng Jicai, Wu Bing'an, and Pan Lusheng, have called for adopting various effective methods to protect Chinese traditional villages. Some scholars have actively explored these effective approaches. Since the official implementation of the protection of traditional villages in China in 2011, a situation has emerged where the government leads and the society participates, thereby creating a scenario of \"top-down decree, joint protection.\" This study reveals that villagers play an indispensable role in the protection of traditional villages, and urbanization construction has, in turn, weakened this protection. The relationship between the government and villagers, as well as the balance between protection and development, must be addressed under the backdrop of urbanization construction. This plays a crucial role in improving the awareness of traditional village protection at all government levels and among the public. Third, establishing a rating system for protecting traditional villages and an effective management and evaluation system is beneficial. This helps clarify the key protection areas for traditional villages, which can make protection more targeted and improve the overall effectiveness of traditional village protection. Over time, traditional villages have undergone decline and extinction for various reasons. Traditional villages must be urgently protected. When implementing national projects for protecting traditional villages, actively exploring and practicing a protection model led by the government is essential, and this should involve the active participation from various sectors of society. This approach should focus on protecting traditional villages and consider the development of rural economies, interests of developers, and survival and development of villagers. To simultaneously consider protection and economic development, the mutual interests of the government, developers, and villagers must be coordinated. Tasks such as propaganda mobilization, organizational implementation, execution, inspection, and evaluation must be carried out effectively. In the future, the country should focus on constructing an effective mechanism for coordinating interests and the development of a scientifically rational management and evaluation system.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study has some limitations. Because of constraints in research conditions, we investigated only a few typical traditional villages and did not cover other regions. Additionally, the analysis of villagers' satisfaction regarding the protection and inheritance of traditional villages involved a long time span, which made data collection and surveying challenging. This study represents preliminary research, warranting further refinement of both the conclusions and research methods.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contributio\u003c/strong\u003ens: Conceptualization,\u0026nbsp;Zheng Guo.; methodology,\u0026nbsp;Shuhua Zhang.; software,\u0026nbsp;Shuhua Zhang; writing\u0026mdash;original draft preparation,\u0026nbsp;Zheng Guo. Shuhua Zhang.; writing\u0026mdash;review and editing,\u0026nbsp;ShuhuaZhang;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e:\u0026nbsp;This research was funded by Project Funding: Jiangxi Province Social Science \u0026quot;14th Five-Year Plan\u0026quot; (2021): Fund Project (Grant Number: 21YJ20) Investigation and Research on the Revitalization of Traditional Villages in Jiangxi Province from the Perspective of Rural Revitalization Strategy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInstitutional Review Board Statement:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNot applicable.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInformed Consent Statement:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNot applicable.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability Statement:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe data in this paper were collected from publicly available sources.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments, which greatly contributed to improving the final version of the manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflicts of Interest:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe authors declare no conflict of interest\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGu Jun, Yuan Li. Cultural Heritage Report: Theory and Practice of the World Cultural Heritage Protection Movement [M]. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2005:71\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAthens Charter [EB/OL]. (2011-10-23) [2021-07-05].\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRecommendations on the Style and Characteristics of Protecting Landscapes and Sites [EB/OL]. (2017-04-02) [2021-07-05].\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eInternational Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments [N/OL]. Guangming Daily, (2005-12-09) [2021-07-05].\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRecommendations on the Protection of Cultural Property Damaged by Public or Private Projects [EB/OL]. (1968-11-19) [2021-07-05].\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRecommendations on the Protection of National Level Cultural and Natural Heritage [EB/OL]. (1972-12-21) [2021-07-05]. Nairobi Recommendations [DB/OL]. (2011-08-29) [2021-07-05].\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMachu Picchu Charter [EB/OL]. (2020-05-22) [2021-07-05].\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLi Xiaodong. Introduction to \u0026quot;Florence Charter\u0026quot; (Charter for the Protection of Historic Gardens) [N]. China Cultural Heritage News, 1993-06-13(2).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCharter for the Protection of Historic Towns and Urban Areas (Washington Charter) [EB/OL]. (2010-06-25) [2021-07-05].\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCharter for the Protection and Management of Archaeological Heritage [EB/OL]. (2011-03-14) [2021-07-05].\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLiu Fei. Research on Cultural Symbols and the Transmission of Intangible Cultural Heritage [J]. Dongyue Tribune, 2014(7):147～150.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBao Xinjian. On the Basis of Grasping Substance and Laws, Consciously Uphold the \u0026quot;Three Confidences\u0026quot; -- Review of \u0026quot;Upholding the \u0026apos;Three Confidences,\u0026apos; Achieving the Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation\u0026quot; [J]. Scientific Socialism, 2016(1):161.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGao Jing, Gao Yu. The Localization Trend of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Cultural Tourism Industry -- Perspective of Industry Upgrading Forced by the Epidemic [J]. Journal of Nanjing University of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition), 2020(3):26～32.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLu Shiju, Bai Guixi. Research on the Coordinated Development of Tourism Poverty Alleviation and the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Ethnic Areas [J]. Journal of South-Central University for Nationalities (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), 2017(2):74～79.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChen Bo, Lin Qing. Exploration of the Development Path of Intangible Cultural Heritage Towns under the Perspective of Rural Revitalization Strategy [J]. Journal of Nanjing University of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition), 2019(5):24～29.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWang Changhai. What Did Chinese Nature Reserves Offer to Surrounding Communities? -- Based on Surveys of Farmers in Shaanxi, Sichuan, and Gansu Provinces from 1998 to 2014 [J]. Management World, 2017, 3:63～75. Chambers，R. and G. R. Conway，1992，\u0026ldquo;Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for 21st Century. IDS Dis⁃cussion Paper 296\u0026rdquo;，London: Department for International Development（DFID）.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCarney，D.，1998，\u0026ldquo;Implementing a Sustainable Liveli⁃hood Approach\u0026rdquo;，London: Department for International Development.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTang Qing, Xu Yong, Li Yang. Assessment of Sustainable Livelihoods of Farmers in the Loess Plateau and Future Livelihood Strategies\u0026mdash;Based on a Survey of 1076 Households in Yan\u0026apos;an, Shaanxi, and Guyuan, Ningxia [J]. Progress in Geography, 2013, 32(2):161～169.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLi Xiaoyun, Dong Qiang, Rao Xiaolong, et al. Analysis Methods and Localized Applications of Farmer Vulnerability[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2007, 4:32～39.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSingh，P. K. and B. N. Hiremath，2010，\u0026ldquo;Sustainable Livelihood Security Index in a Developing Country: A Tool for Development Planning\u0026rdquo;，Ecological Indicators，Vol.10，pp. 442～451.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMahdi，G. P. Shivakoti and D. Schmidt- Vogt，2009，\u0026ldquo;Livelihood Change and Livelihood Sustainability in the Uplands of Lembang Subwatershed，West Sumatra，Indonesia，in a Chang⁃ing Natural Resource Management Context\u0026rdquo;，Environmental Man⁃agement，Vol.43，pp. 84～99.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZhao Xueyan. The Impact of Livelihood Capital on the Life Satisfaction of Farmers and Herders: A Case Study of the Gannan Plateau [J]. Geographical Research, 2011, 4:687～698.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBulte，E. and D. Rondeau，2007，\u0026ldquo;Compensation for Wildlife Damages: Habitat Conversion，Species Preservation and Local Welfare\u0026rdquo;，Journal of Environmental Economics and Man⁃agement，Vol.54，pp.311～322.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e[26] Karki，S. T.，2013，\u0026ldquo;Do Prot Ected a Reas and Conser⁃vation Incentives Contrib Ute to Sustainable Livelihoods ? A Case Study of Bardia National Park，Nepal\u0026rdquo;，Journal of Environ⁃mental Management，Vol.128，pp. 988～999.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMahdi，G. P. Shivakoti and D. Schmidt- Vogt，2009，\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026ldquo;Livelihood Change and Livelihood Sustainability in the Uplands\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eof Lembang Subwatershed，West Sumatra，Indonesia，in a Changing Natural Resource Management Context\u0026rdquo;，Environmental Man⁃agement，Vol.43，pp. 84～99.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVedeld，P.，A. Jumane and G. Wapalila et al.，2012，\u0026ldquo;Protected Areas，Poverty and Conflicts A livelihood Case Study of Mikumi National Park，Tanzania\u0026rdquo;，Forest Policy and Econom⁃ics，Vol.21，pp.20～31.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eXu Jianying, Kong Ming, Liu Xinxin, Wang Qing. The Impact of Livelihood Capital on Farmers\u0026apos; Willingness to Re-Participate in Grain-to-Green Program: A Case Study of Wolong Nature Reserve. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(18): 6205～6215.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBergquist，D. A.，2007，\u0026ldquo;Sustainability and Local People\u0026apos;s Participation in Coastal Aquaculture: Regional Differences and Historical Experiences in Sri Lanka and the Philippines\u0026rdquo;， Environmental Management，Vol.40，pp.787～802\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Traditional villages, Cultural heritage, Preservation and inheritance, Satisfaction","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3890553/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3890553/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe contradiction between coordinating the preservation and inheritance of traditional villages has recently garnered considerable attention in academic circles and government departments. The present study is based on data obtained from 1,000 villagers in 176 traditional villages who were surveyed in 2020. Using the Logit multiple regression method, the study quantitatively analyzed five closely related core explanatory variables of villagers in traditional villages and six factors that significantly influence the survival and development of these villages. The analysis was conducted before (2011) and after (2021) the preservation of traditional villages. Research indicates that (1) the economic income of farmers has rapidly increased and their sources of income have shifted from primarily farming to tourism development and breeding. The proportion of respondents expressing \"satisfaction” and “very satisfaction\" with both traditional village preservation and development was only 26.6%. (2) Among the core explanatory variables influencing farmers' willingness for preservation and inheritance, in terms of the impact mode, natural capital and human capital exhibited a significant negative effect, whereas material capital, financial subcapital, and social capital exhibited a significant positive effect. Material capital and financial capital positively influenced farmers' satisfaction at 1% significance level, whereas natural capital negatively affected their satisfaction at 5% significance level, and social capital positively influenced their satisfaction at 5% significance level. Regarding impact intensity, financial capital made the largest positive contribution (β = 18.323), followed by material capital (β = 15.597). By contrast, natural capital made the largest negative contribution (β = −7.012). Additionally, social capital, which reflects the development potential of villagers, exhibited a significant contribution value (β = 8.374, P \u0026gt; 0.05). Human capital had a negative impact, whereas social capital had a positive impact, with the effects of both being nonsignificant. (3) Among the six main control variables influencing traditional village preservation and inheritance, those with significant influences were economic factors and cultural and artistic factors (P \u0026lt; 0.05), whereas those with nonsignificant influences were political factors, social factors, ecological environmental factors, and geographical transportation factors (P \u0026gt; 0.05). Regarding the impact mode, all factors exhibited a positive and significant effect on farmers' willingness for preservation and inheritance. Regarding impact intensity, cultural and artistic factors exhibited the largest contribution (β = 26.112), followed by economic factors (β = 25.173) and political factors (β = 8.374). Moreover, ecological environmental factors, reflecting the livable environment for villagers, also made significant contributions (β = 5.213). Social factors and geographical transportation factors exerted positive effects, but their impact was not prominent. Accordingly, the paper proposes two insights: First, a reflection on the implementation of traditional village preservation policies—correctly managing the relationship between proactive and passive protection. The pros and cons of China's traditional village preservation policies must be re-examined, and a practical and effective mechanism for coordinating the interests of traditional village preservation must be established. Second, the preservation model for traditional villages in China needs to be re-evaluated. Exploring a model where the government leads, with farmers at the center, and various sectors of society actively participate is essential. Clarifying the relationship between the preservation and development of traditional villages is crucial, recognizing that preservation is the objective and economic development is the fundamental guarantee. (1) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; (2) Methods: briefly describe the main methods or treatments applied; (3) Results: summarize the article’s main findings; (4) Conclusions: indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. The abstract should be an objective representation of the article and it must not contain results that are not presented and substantiated in the main text and should not exaggerate the main conclusions.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Analysis of Factors Influencing the Protection, Inheritance, and Utilization of Traditional Villages in the Context of Rural Revitalization ----Based on Survey Data from 1,000 Villagers in 176 Traditional Villages","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-01-30 11:04:38","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3890553/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"737897db-d684-4805-9dd0-a656baa96aed","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 30th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-02-01T22:14:19+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-01-30 11:04:38","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-3890553","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-3890553","identity":"rs-3890553","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}