Global ecosystem degradation has emerged as a critical challenge confronting humanity in the 21st century. Designated by the United Nations Environment Programme (2022) as the “cornerstone of Earth’s life-support systems,” national park systems play an irreplaceable strategic role in global ecological security, particularly tropical rainforest parks that harbor 40% of global biodiversity (Noulèkoun et al., 2024) and serve as crucial carbon sinks. China’s 2019 launch of the Hainan Tropical Rainforest National Park initiative represents a pivotal practice in protecting global biodiversity hotspots. To achieve “strictest protection” objectives, the Hainan Provincial Government implemented comprehensive ecological relocation in core protected areas through its 2020 Ecological Relocation Plan. However, international experience reveals a persistent dual paradox between conservation and development in relocation policies. The World Bank’s assessment indicates that approximately 30% of relocation projects risk “secondary poverty” due to inadequate community capacity building (Albu, 2023). Compulsory relocation may deprive indigenous communities of traditional livelihood assets, thereby weakening socio-ecological resilience (Brockington and Igoe, 2006). Resettled households must navigate complex livelihood transitions from rainforest-dependent to urban employment-based systems, requiring rapid reconstruction of social networks and human capital—a multidimensional challenge to Sen’s (1999) conceptualization of “substantive freedoms for valued functioning.”

Existing scholarship primarily examines three dimensions of ecological migration policies (eco-migration): (1) determinants of relocation willingness and behavior, including household characteristics (Nguyen et al., 2015), risk allocation (Morten, 2019), and contextual factors (Li et al., 2015; Salgado, 2022); (2) post-relocation adaptation and satisfaction, analyzed through environmental (Barcus, 2004), individual (Melzer, 2011), climatic (Vinke et al., 2022), health (Mazhin et al., 2020), spatial (Yang et al., 2020), and community perspectives (Zhu et al., 2021); (3) policy outcomes, in terms of environmental impacts, studies have shown that the ecological migration policy effectively alleviates resource pressure (Call et al., 2017), curbs grassland degradation (Sun et al., 2009), enhances resilience to climate change (Entzinger and Scholten, 2022), and offers advantages in regional land use cover and ecological risk mitigation (Zhang et al., 2021). However, it also exerts negative effects on the ecological environment of resettlement areas, such as increased per capita ecological footprint and reduced per capita biological capacity (BC) (Hu et al., 2018). On the economic front, studies confirm that the ecological migration policy can lead to the loss of income sources for farmers (Kothari et al., 2002), reduce the asset holdings of migrants (Kinnan et al., 2018), damage natural capital, and trigger adjustments in agricultural industrial structure (De Brauw, 2020). However, some scholars hold opposing views, arguing that ecological migration supports and diversifies the livelihood strategies of resettled households (Gemenne and Blocher, 2016), increases the livelihood capital stock of impoverished farmers (Bilsborrow and Ogendo, 1992; Bower et al., 2023), helps address agricultural dilemmas (Vinke et al., 2022), and exhibits poverty reduction effects (Loc et al., 2017). From a social perspective, research indicates that farmer resettlement not only enhances life satisfaction (Hu et al., 2023) and improves living conditions (Wang et al., 2018), but also alleviates regional poverty (Loc et al., 2015) and plays a significant role in rural transformation (Chamberlin et al., 2020). Nevertheless, challenges persist, including a lack of psychological support for migrants, limited employment opportunities (Doğan and Buz, 2025), potential threats to the livelihoods of local residents and community stability (Foggin, 2011), as well as risks to the sustainability of water transfer projects (Li et al., 2021). Research on the sustainable development of farmers is crucial for poverty reduction and the promotion of social equity, representing a key focus in this field (Deng et al., 2020).

While existing studies have extensively analyzed policy impacts, significant gaps remain in understanding how eco-migration affects resettlers’ capabilities. First, current research predominantly focuses on income and livelihood capital, lacking large-scale empirical analysis on sustainable capability development. Second, the mechanisms through which relocation policies enhance capabilities require deeper investigation. Existing research has primarily explored pathways and measures to enhance farmers’ capabilities from perspectives such as income (Clark D. A., 2005; Clark D., 2005), perceived ability (Wang et al., 2024), social incentives (Alkire, 2005), policy interventions (Mann and Rödiger, 2025), and communication technologies (Hoque, 2020). As a collective management organization characterized by “benefit sharing and risk pooling,” farmers’ professional cooperatives are closely linked to the enhancement of farmers’ capabilities. Participation in cooperatives not only helps farmers overcome individual developmental constraints and market risks but also promotes scaled operations through optimized factor allocation (Chen and Li, 2025). However, existing studies have not yet revealed the underlying mechanism through which the ecological migration policy enhances the capabilities of relocated households from the perspective of farmers’ professional cooperatives.

To address these research gaps, this study employs propensity score matching (PSM) to investigate the micro-level impacts of Hainan’s ecological relocation policy on farmers’ capabilities, with particular focus on agricultural cooperative participation as a mediating mechanism. Our findings contribute to both theoretical understanding and practical implementation of sustainable relocation policies that balance ecological protection with socioeconomic development.

Grounded in Sen’s (1999) capability approach framework, individual well-being should be assessed through two distinct dimensions: functionings and capacities (Kaushik and López-Calva, 2011). Functionings represent achieved living conditions, the essential prerequisites for human development. Capacities denote the substantive freedoms individuals possess in pursuing valued life goals, reflecting their potential for development (Sen, 1999).

In terms of functional improvements, eco-migration policies have substantially elevated the basic living standards of rural households through systematic interventions. Empirical studies demonstrate that resettlement programs have provided farmers with safer housing, better sanitation facilities, and more accessible transportation networks (De Brauw and Harigaya, 2007; Liu et al., 2023), while simultaneously improving social security accessibility through complementary public services (Su et al., 2022). This qualitative leap in material conditions has enabled farmers to meet basic societal standards in nutrition and disease prevention (Guo et al., 2023), thereby establishing the foundation for advanced development.

Regarding capacities expansion, migration policies have transformed farmers’ developmental potential through three primary mechanisms: First, livelihood transitions have shifted households from subsistence farming to commercial agriculture or non-farm employment (Nguyen et al., 2019), with income diversification significantly enhancing economic autonomy (Loc et al., 2017). Second, concentrated resettlement communities have reduced information acquisition costs while providing platforms for skills training and entrepreneurial activities (Zhao et al., 2024). Third, spatial reorganization has facilitated the de-localization of social networks, enabling farmers to acquire richer social capital through new occupational and geographical ties (Massey and Aysa-Lastra, 2011; Feng et al., 2024). These structural transformations have expanded development opportunities in occupational choices and social participation. Based on the above analysis, we formulate Hypothesis 1:

The eco-migration initiative has fundamentally restructured the livelihood capital structure of rural households (Bilsborrow and Ogendo, 1992; Yan et al., 2019), with this mandatory transition typically entailing substantial uncertainties and adaptive risks. Within this context, farmer cooperatives serve as institutionalized collective action organizations that function as crucial governance instruments for migrant households to manage uncertainties through risk-sharing and resource integration mechanisms (Zhong et al., 2022).

Theoretically, cooperatives enhance farmers’ capabilities through dual synergistic mechanisms: the economic empowerment mechanism—cooperatives not only reduce transaction costs for purchasing production materials and selling agricultural products (Hernández-Espallardo et al., 2013), but also expand market channels through scaling operations, thereby breaking the “price taker” predicament of smallholder farmers (Habiyaremye et al., 2023), and improve yields by adopting modern agricultural production techniques (Akinola et al., 2023), ultimately leading to significant income growth for farmers (Verhofstadt and Maertens, 2015). Simultaneously, the collective credit guarantee mechanism facilitates access to microcredit for farmers (Ingutia and Sumelius, 2024), alleviating financial constraints. The social empowerment mechanism: cooperatives provide an important social platform for farmers, not only enhancing their collaboration and social skills (Sun et al., 2024), but also expanding members’ social networks (Majee and Hoyt, 2011), and influencing farmers’ modern business perceptions and cultural literacy through training and cultural exchange activities (Rostami and Salehi, 2024). This dual economic-social empowerment model enables ecological migrant households to achieve more substantial capability advancement compared to traditional smallholders. Based on this analysis, we formulate Hypothesis 2:

Based on Hypotheses 1 and 2, this study constructs a mechanistic framework diagram depicting the effects of the ecological migration policy on farmers’ capabilities (see Figure 1).

Adopting a micro-level perspective, this study evaluates the impacts of ecological relocation policies on household capabilities using PSM and mediation effect models with household-level data from Hainan’s eco-migration project. The empirical results demonstrate a statistically significant enhancement of resettled households’ capabilities through ecological relocation policies, consistent with prior findings (Yang et al., 2015; Bower et al., 2023). Unlike previous qualitative investigations, our quantitative approach precisely delineates the policy-capability relationship through rigorous econometric analysis.

This enhancement may be attributed to three mechanisms: (1) improved social security through economic compensation, housing relocation, and infrastructure upgrades (Su et al., 2022); (2) optimized resource allocation coupled with skills training that enhances productive capacities (Loc et al., 2017); and (3) expanded social networks facilitating information exchange and mutual support (Massey and Aysa-Lastra, 2011). Consequently, policymakers should prioritize developing comprehensive social security packages, allocate resources to vocational training programs, and establish institutional platforms for social network development.

This study confirms that the ecological migration policy enhances farmers’ capabilities through the mediating pathway of their participation in farmers’ professional cooperatives. Specifically, cooperatives function via a dual empowerment mechanism: economically, they reduce transaction costs through unified procurement and sales and expand financing channels by providing credit guarantees (Hernández-Espallardo et al., 2013; Ingutia and Sumelius, 2024), directly improving economic status and risk resilience; socially, they serve as platforms for interaction and learning, enlarging social networks through organized activities and disseminating knowledge and skills via training (Majee and Hoyt, 2011; Rostami and Salehi, 2024), thereby enhancing social relations and health awareness. These mechanisms work synergistically to help migrants cope with uncertainties after livelihood reconstruction, leading to multidimensional improvement in their capabilities. However, due to data limitations, this study did not further categorize types of farmer cooperatives, resulting in a constrained exploration of the heterogeneity in cooperative empowerment. Future research could strengthen this aspect of investigation. Additionally, disparities emerge between cadre and ordinary households in capability improvement, potentially linked to differential resource endowments (Ezra, 2001) that also influence relocation decisions. This finding underscores the necessity for differentiated policy interventions. Furthermore, the impact of the ecological migration policy on farmers’ capabilities varies across villages with different levels of cadre competence. This may be attributed to differences in the efficiency of policy implementation by local cadres, which is a key factor influencing households’ livelihood transition. Therefore, it is recommended that the government integrate capacities for industrial planning, market linkage, and resource integration into the selection and training of village cadres, with a focus on enhancing their ability to leverage policy opportunities to develop rural industries and increase farmers’ income. It should be noted that while this study examined three types of heterogeneity, other dimensions with policy relevance may exist and warrant further analysis.

This study confirms that the ecological migration policy may enhance farmers’ overall capabilities by improving social security, living conditions, social relations restructuring, and economic empowerment. However, potential negative effects must also be acknowledged, primarily manifesting as a structural reshaping of specific capability dimensions. While establishing a new social security system, the policy may simultaneously weaken and displace farmers’ traditional social networks based on their original communities (Yang, 2023), leading to the loss of important informal support. Additionally, new risks such as inferior production resources and higher living costs after relocation may persistently challenge economic stability (Wang et al., 2022). Furthermore, if internal governance issues arise within cooperatives (Candemir et al., 2021)—the key mediating institution—their social empowerment effects may be constrained, affecting the quality and inclusiveness of new social networks. Therefore, the policy’s net effect represents a complex balance between multidimensional enhancement and the disruption of specific social capital.

It should also be noted that the actual impact of the ecological migration policy on farmers’ capabilities is subject to its systemic effects at the macro level. Economically, insufficient industrial support in resettlement areas or a mismatch between migrants’ skills and labor market demands may hinder livelihood recovery and the sustained improvement of capabilities (Wang et al., 2010). Environmentally, resource consumption and ecological pressure in resettlement areas may indirectly affect the long-term livelihood foundation of households (Liu et al., 2018). Socially, difficulties in integration between migrants and original residents may impede the development of their social capital and capabilities (Xu et al., 2024). Therefore, the ecological migration policy is not an unequivocal benefit (Foggin, 2011). The realization of its micro-level outcomes still relies on coordinated support from economic, social, and environmental systems at the macro level, which demands more integrated planning in policy formulation and implementation.

This study has two primary limitations: (1) constrained temporal scope limiting observation of long-term effects, necessitating future longitudinal data collection; and (2) geographic specificity potentially affecting generalizability, requiring expanded multi-regional analyses across provinces and urban–rural gradients to examine policy heterogeneity. Improving sample representativeness through stratified sampling should enhance findings’ robustness.

This study examines the eco-migration policy of Hainan Tropical Rainforest National Park as a case study, utilizing field survey data from 861 households across one city and three counties in Hainan Province. The PSM method is employed to empirically analyze the impact of the eco-migration policy on farmers’ capabilities and to further investigate its mechanisms and heterogeneity. The study reveals that, first, the eco-migration policy significantly enhances farmers’ capabilities. Second, cooperatives serve as a crucial platform for enhancing farmers’ capabilities, and participation in cooperatives represents an effective mechanism through which the eco-migration policy improves farmers’ capabilities. Third, heterogeneity analysis indicates no significant difference in the improvement of farmers’ capabilities across different generational groups under the eco-migration policy. However, compared to farmers from official households, ordinary farmers derive greater benefits from the eco-migration policy. Additionally, in villages with higher levels of cadre competence, the ecological migration policy demonstrates a more pronounced effect on enhancing farmers’ capabilities compared to villages with lower cadre competence.

Based on the above findings, this study yields the following policy implications. Firstly, the ecological migration policy should be refined. The government should establish and improve relevant laws and regulations to clarify the rights and obligations of relocated households, thereby safeguarding their legitimate interests. Concurrently, a robust monitoring and evaluation mechanism should be instituted to regularly assess policy implementation, ensuring its effectiveness and sustainability. For example, the evaluation mechanism could incorporate differentiated performance monitoring based on households’ livelihood capabilities, analyzing gaps in economic or social security scores among different groups. This would serve as a key metric for assessing the precision and fairness of local governments’ resettlement work, steering support towards the most vulnerable groups.

Secondly, continuous support and guidance should be provided to households. Governmental and non-governmental organizations should not only offer sustained support and resources—such as skills training and entrepreneurship guidance covering agricultural techniques, non-farm employment skills, and health knowledge—to help migrants adapt and secure stable livelihoods, but also strengthen infrastructure and public services in transportation, education, and healthcare to enhance their quality of life. For targeted assistance, tailored enhancement strategies should be implemented based on variations in farmers’ capability components. Specifically, households with limited economic means should receive credit support and skills training to alleviate livelihood pressures. For those with insufficient social integration, regular collective cultural activities can foster deeper community ties. Health screenings and education should be conducted to improve health awareness. Regarding housing and social security, coordinated measures such as subsidies, resettlement, and infrastructure improvements should provide stable support for livelihood transition. Additionally, differentiated development of characteristic industries—such as agricultural e-commerce or agritourism—based on village resource endowments can systematically enhance farmers’ capabilities at the meso level.

Thirdly, farmers should be actively guided to join specialized cooperatives. As platforms that mitigate risks and enhance sustainable development, cooperatives can significantly improve farmers’ capabilities. The government should promote awareness of their benefits and relevant policies through training sessions and workshops. To address potential governance formalism and strengthen institutional effectiveness, policies should establish incentive-compatible mechanisms for deeper engagement. For example, a cumulative service points system could be implemented, allowing farmers to earn points through cooperative activities redeemable for enhanced technical guidance, profit shares, or credit guarantees (Wan and Zhu, 2025). Simultaneously, government subsidies and ratings for cooperatives should be directly linked to their demonstrated effectiveness in improving members’ capabilities, as verified through impact evaluations. This institutional design aims to incentivize both substantive cooperative operations and active farmer participation, ensuring the efficacy of this critical linkage channel.