NAMA : YOAN BERLIANA SIREGAR

NPM :D2D022037
MATA KULIAH : TEORI DAN ISU PEMBANGUNAN
JURNAL 1 : China’s poverty alleviation resettlement: Progress, problems and solutions
JURNAL 2: Targeted poverty alleviation and its practices in rural China: A case study of
Fuping county, Hebei Province

Kemiskinan merupakan masalah global yang sampai saat ini masih menjadi
permasalahan yang sulit untuk diatasi, terutama di Negara berkembang seperti Indonesia.
Isu kemiskinan termasuk dalam masalah kemanusiaan, dan dibutuhkan upaya yang sangat
terintegrasi untuk mengatasinya. Pengentasan kemiskinan adalah tujuan pertama dari
Tujuan Pembangunan Berkelanjutan (SDGs) yang ditetapkan PBB. Hal inilah yang membuat
saya tertarik untuk membaca kedua artikel tersebut. Anti-kemiskinan global menunjukkan
bahwa pembangunan merupakan cara mendasar untuk mengentaskan kemiskinan. Dari 2
jurnal yang telah dibaca, dapat dilihat bahwa China terus berupaya melawan kemiskinan
yang ada di negaranya dengan menerapkan berbagai program. Salah satu program yang
menjadi unggulan untuk mengatasi kemiskinan adalah , program “pemukiman kembali”.
Pemerintah membangun rumah yang layak huni ke sebuah lahan yang telah dipilih. Namun
program ini tidak hanya sebatas pembangunan rumah saja, program ini juga
memperhatikan bagaimana lingkungan yang menjadi tempat untuk “Poverty alleviation
resettlement”, program ini juga mengutamakan pembangunan dan relokasi sekolah, rumah
sakit dan fasilitas lainnya yang memiliki kaitan erat dengan kepentingan masyarakat miskin.

Melalui program pemukiman kembali, pemerintah bertujuan untuk meningkatkan

standar hidup dan akses ke infrastruktur dan layanan bagi pedesaan. Yang menjadi kekuatan
pada artikel ini adalah artikel yang dilengkapi dengan alternative kebijakan , menampilkan
masalah yang mungkin akan terjadi namun di lengkapi dengan stategi dan solusi yang efektif
untuk melaksanakan proyek pengelolaan pemukiman kembali pedesaan (PAR). Cara seperti
ini dapat diaplikasikan untuk pengembangan usaha pembangunan di Indonesia, hal ini
dikarenakan faktor yang menyebabkan Indonesia masih sulit mengentaskan kemiskinan
adalah banyaknya daerah tertinggal yang sulit di akses, baik dari pelayanan publik,
infrastuktur maupun keadaan jalan yang tidak memungkinkan, maka program “pemukiman
kembali” dapat dijadikan sebagai alternative untuk membantu mengatasi kemiskinan.
Namun dalam pengimplementasiannya harus memperhatikan beberapa hal penting, salah
satunya misalnya seperti, “ Memilih mode “pemukiman kembali” sesuai dengan kondisi
lokal, realitas rumah tangga dan kemampuan rumah tangga miskin untuk mencari nafkah”.
Hal ini untuk menghindari munculnya masalah baru saat proses pengentasan kemiskinan
dilakukan. Selain itu, menargetkan pengentasan kemiskinan (Targeted poverty alleviation)
atau yang biasa disebut TPA merupakan cara yang tepat dalam langkah pengentasan
kemiskinan dan langkah-langkah terpadu harus dilakukan untuk membangun mekanisme
pembangunan daerah yang fleksibel dan berjangka panjang dan mengatasi kemiskinan.
Kelemahan pada artikel ini adalah, tidak dijelaskan secara rinci dari aspek sosialnya,
bagaimana strategi yang bisa dilakukan untuk mengubah pola pikir masyarakat pada
pedessan tertinggal, agar mau mengikuti himbauan pemerintah untuk berpartisipasi dalam
program pemerintah seperti program “pemukiman kembali”, karena di khawatirkan jika
diterapkan di Indonesia tanpa persiapan dari aspek sosialnya, menyebabkan banyaknya
masyarakat yang tidak mau meninggalkan desa aslinya dan memilih untuk tetap bertahap
hidup ditengah kemiskinan yang dialami.
 Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Habitat International
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint

China’s poverty alleviation resettlement: Progress, problems and solutions

Yuanyuan Yang a, b, Alex de Sherbinin c, Yansui Liu a, b, *
a
Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China
b
Center for Assessment and Research on Targeted Poverty Alleviation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China
c
Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Earth Institute, Columbia University, Palisades, NY, 10964, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Poverty alleviation resettlement (PAR) is a national rural development policy which uses resettlement as a tool
Poverty alleviation resettlement for addressing environmental and poverty-related concerns in a rapidly changing world in China. It is regarded as
Targeted poverty alleviation strategy one of the effective ways for the poor shaking off poverty in the implementation process of targeted poverty
Poverty reduction
alleviation (TPA) strategy. Notable progress has been made in poverty alleviation for poverty-stricken people
Rural development
Well-off society
living in regions deemed unable to support sustainable livelihoods while problems have arisen during the process
China of its implementation. Based on literature review and a field survey, this paper attempts to conclude the
beneficial policy as well as typical modes, problems and suggestions which might provide successful experience
for regions to effectively implement the PAR projects and promote the management of rural resettlement. This
article will offer a holistic and systematic research about China’s PAR policy, which will make up for the lack of
PAR researches in the context of targeted poverty alleviation. It will offer international experience for ending
poverty by 2030 to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

1. Introduction areas is the vicious cycle of poverty and ecological environment

The largest scale of development-induced displacement and reset­
tlement (DIDR) is seen in the world’s most densely populated countries:
China and India (Stanley, 2004; Terminski, 2013; Xue, Wang, & Xue,
2013). It is estimated that more than 70 million people were displaced in
China by development projects during 1950–2008 (Maldonado, 2012);
1.3 million have been displaced and resettled by the Three Gorges Dam
alone (Tan, Hugo, & Potter, 2013). The development projects in China
during the nineties displaced approximately 10.3 million people (Rob­
inson, 2004). Most of these resettlement programs have been involun­
tary or forced (World Bank, 2004). Displacement and resettlement in
China has attracted a particularly large amount of research attention.
In recent years, resettlement has also been increasingly adopted as an
effective way for poverty alleviation (Merkle, 2003) or ecologica­
l/environmental restoration (Rogers & Wang, 2006). Poverty can be
connected closely to environmental and geographic conditions, partic­
ularly the “spatial poverty traps” of remote mountainous or arid and
semi-arid areas (Bird, Hulme, Moore, & Shepherd, 2002; Bird & Shep­
herd, 2003; Liu & Li, 2017; Pani & Carling, 2013; Ravallion & Wodon,
1999; Zhou, Li, & Liu, 2019). A major reason for the slow
socio-economic development of poverty-stricken and underdeveloped
degradation (Cavendish, 2000; Dasgupta, 2003; Dasgupta, Deichmann,
Meisner, & Wheeler, 2005; Liu, Wang, & Deng, 2008; Todaro, 1992).
Owing to harsh ecological conditions, development of production fac­
tors and construction of infrastructure are slow in these areas, so
implementing in-situ poverty alleviation in poverty-stricken areas can
be extremely difficult. In turn, poverty also contributes to ecological
degradation, like land degradation (de Sherbinin et al., 2008), due to the
use of low-input agriculture in environmental marginal areas. China’s
rural poverty, with a distinct spatial agglomeration feature, is mainly
concentrated in the remote deep rocky mountainous areas, border areas
and minority areas of central and western China and gradually gathers
towards the southwestern region (Liu, Liu, & Zhou, 2017). The distri­
bution of poverty in ecologically fragile areas in China presents a geo­
spatial coupling, and negative feedback loops not only jeopardize local
ecological protection but also restrain local economic development
(Tong & Long, 2003). Villages in mountainous areas or deep valleys with
atrocious natural conditions, like China’s Karst areas in the southwest
and Qinba Mountains in the northwest, are always economically fragile
(Liu & Li, 2017). By relocating people from ecological poverty-stricken
areas to places with better development conditions, ecological resettle­
ment can achieve several goals at the same time, such as the

* Corresponding author. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China.
E-mail addresses: yangyy@igsnrr.ac.cn (Y. Yang), adesherbinin@ciesin.columbia.edu (A. de Sherbinin), liuys@igsnrr.ac.cn (Y. Liu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102135
Received 30 March 2019; Received in revised form 4 February 2020; Accepted 10 February 2020
Available online 4 March 2020
0197-3975/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Yang et al.
improvement of production and living conditions, the alleviation of
poverty, the development and utilization of land resources and the
protection of ecological environment. In China, to prevent further
environmental degradation and reduce dust storms, many people in
northern and northwestern China have moved away from environmen­
tally fragile regions. These environmental resettlement programs in
China have a dual focus of environmental improvement and poverty
alleviation (Rogers & Wang, 2006). The focus on poverty alleviation is
closely related to the World Bank’s policy of resettlement with devel­
opment, which advocates regarding resettlement operations as oppor­
tunities for development. This approach, adopted by China into its own
resettlement framework, assumes that resettlement should be more
development-oriented, requiring an integrated approach to help reset­
tlers rebuild a self-sustainable production base and habitat (Cernea,
1997). Poverty alleviation resettlement (PAR) is one of China’s key
poverty reduction initiatives as one national rural development policy
which uses resettlement as a tool for addressing environmental and
poverty-related concerns in a rapidly changing world. Through this
state-led resettlement program, the government aims to improve the
living standards and access to infrastructure and services for the rural
poor.
Poverty eradication is the first goal of the UN-defined Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs). By the end of 2013, China has completed the
registration of the poor population nationwide and identified 128,000
impoverished villages, 30 million poor families and 70 million people
(Zhou, Guo, Liu, Wu, & Li, 2018; Liu et al., 2016). China takes the
elimination of poverty and the eradication of hunger as primary tasks,
while SDGs propose to eradicate poverty in all its forms around the
globe, eradicate hunger, realize food security, improve nutritional sta­
tus, and promote sustainable agriculture by 2030. China also proposes to
eliminate absolute poverty and to ensure the entry of all impoverished
areas into a well-off society by 2020. To achieve this ambitious goal,
China has implemented the Targeted Poverty Alleviation (TPA) strategy
and defined the most central poverty alleviation goals during the 13th
Five-year Plan (FYP) period as “two-worry-free & three-guarantee” (i.e.,
to ensure the basic needs of food and clothing for those living in poverty
and to guarantee that they have appropriate access to compulsory ed­
ucation, basic medical care, and safe housing). The specific measures of
TPA include five measures (the “Five Batches”) and one is relocating 10
million of the rural poor in remote areas with harsh living condition to
livable places (Wang, 2016; Zhou et al., 2018). As one of China’s flag­
ship programs in poverty alleviation (Lo & Wang, 2018), PAR projects
involve relocating the rural poor away from their original home to a
centralized resettlement site with better facilities and a more accessible
location (Liu, Xu, & Li, 2018). In the principle of voluntariness, PAR
could improve the living standards, incomes, and the access to infra­
structure and services by poor rural people living in areas deemed un­
able to support sustainable livelihoods (Lo & Wang, 2018).
Over the past years, extensive international researches have focused
on development-induced resettlement (Jackson & Sleigh, 2000; Wilm­
sen, Webber, & Yuefang, 2011; Tilt & Gerkey, 2016),
urbanization-driven resettlements (Liu, Zhang, & Lo, 2014; Qian & Xue,
2017) and ecological resettlements (Fan, Li, & Li, 2015; Schmidt–Soltau,
2003), little attention has been paid to the PAR policy in the context of
targeted poverty alleviation (Rogers, Li, Lo, Guo, & Li, 2019; Zhao & Li,
2018) and limited studies have focused on the PAR program. In partic­
ular, few are the English-language literature related with poverty
resettlement. So “poverty alleviation resettlement” was used to retrieve
all periodical literature by means of “theme”, “keyword” and “title”
based on relevant literature on China’s CNKI (http://www.cnki.net/),
respectively. Clearly corresponding to the national implementation of
PAR policy, relevant academic studies have been developing very slowly
after 2000. It was in the 2002 that the term “poverty alleviation reset­
tlement” first started to appear in scientific publications, the second year
after the PAR pilot program was launched. The number of relevant
studies did not increase substantially until 2016 (Fig. 1). On the whole
2
Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135
research of PAR started late and developed slowly in China. Extant
studies contributed to understanding the PAR’s concept definitions and
the implementation schemes (Zhao & Li, 2018), identification of poverty
alleviation relocation households (Yin, Wang, & Wang, 2017), influ­
encing factors of household participation (Guo, Yang, & Chi, 2017),
impact on rural livelihoods (Fan et al., 2015; Li et al., 2018; Liu et al.,
2018; Rogers & Xue, 2015), and residents’ voluntariness (Lo & Wang,
2018; Shi & Zhou, 2018; Wilmsen & Wang, 2015). Besides, most of the
existing studies are based on local practices and case studies and there is
a lack of holistic research about this special rural resettlement policy.
Currently, the country’s PAR programs have made remarkable
achievements, yet problems have been increasingly prominent that
hinder the effective implementation of the PAR and also affect resettlers’
sense of gain. This paper therefore means to make up for the insuffi­
ciency of systematic study on PAR’s entire progress. It sheds light on the
process of PAR policy implementation, attempts to investigate the
typical modes and main problems from the nationwide scale, and in
particular, puts forward corresponding solutions and suggestions by
integrating the data from literatures, online materials and field survey.
The second section proposes the method adopted in this article. The
third section summarizes the PAR’s research progress and evolution
stages, with emphasis on the PAR policy in the context of targeted
poverty alleviation. The fourth section proposes typical PAR models and
the fifth section analyzes the possible risks and existing problems of
PAR. This article will provide international experiences for ending
poverty by 2030 to achieve the SDGs.
2. Method
This article combines the methods of literature research and field
investigation to sum up the progress, typical modes, main problems and
corresponding solutions of China’s poverty alleviation resettlement. The
analysis of introducing China’s PAR policy is based on literature review
and a quantitative analysis of policy texts including government regu­
lations, national plans, regional programs and official statistics. Besides,
an intensive fieldwork was conducted in January 2017 to evaluate the
effectiveness of national targeted poverty alleviation work and part of
this investigation was to collect data for exploring the possible risks and
problems of PAR. It was a questionnaire-based survey about PAR based
on structured interviews with resettled households. Interviewees tended
to be the heads of household or family members who well master family
information. A total of 1,611 valid questionnaires related with PAR were
collected in 21 provinces in central and western China, including Anhui
(37), Gansu (59), Guangxi (139), Guizhou (73), Hainan (7), Hebei (2),
Henan (94), Hubei (240), Hunan (112), Jilin (55), Jiangxi (25), Nei­
menggu (56), Ningxia (10), Qinghai (49), Shanxi (13), Shaanxi (200),
Sichuan (220), Tibet (75), Xinjiang (1), Yunnan (57), and Chongqing
(87). The questionnaire related with PAR focused on the progress of this
policy implementation and consisted of two parts: (1) Family charac­
teristics, including household size, population structure, family income
and earnings structure (family business income, wage income, property
income and transferred income); (2) Resettlement situation, including
resettlement time, area of new resettlement housing, cost of the new
housing (government subsidy, self-collected money and loan), demoli­
tion of old houses, and follow-up support measures taken by the gov­
ernment after resettlement (i.e., education, health care and
employment). In addition, secondary data was collected from local of­
ficials and online (guidelines, media reports, etc.).
3. China’s poverty alleviation resettlement
3.1. The evolutionary characteristics of the PAR policy
PAR policy saw its earliest rudiment in local government practice at
the beginning of China’s reform and opening-up. The “Three-West (Hexi
and Dingxi in Gansu Province, Xiji-Haiyuan-Guyuan Area in Ningxia Hui
Y. Yang et al.
Fig. 1. The statistical charts about “poverty alleviation resettlement” in CNKI during 2002–2018.
Autonomous Region)” agricultural construction plan, introduced in the
early 1980s, was a preliminary exploration of PAR. In 1983, in view of
the severe drought, water shortage and survival difficulties in the
“Three-West” regions, the central government explored the imple­
mentation of the “Three-West Village-scale Resettlement” poverty alle­
viation plan to improve local productive and living conditions and
alleviate the degree of poverty; this plan achieved sound economic,
social and ecological benefits, and became the pioneer of PAR in Chinese
and even world history. In 1994, the government launched the “Seven-
Year Priority Poverty Alleviation Program”, aiming to solve the subsis­
tence problem faced at the time by 80 million poverty-stricken people in
China’s rural areas within seven years (1994–2000). During the imple­
mentation of this program, PAR became one of the basic ways of car­
rying out poverty alleviation development and solving the poverty
problem in rural China. By 2000, China had made some beneficial ex­
plorations of PAR but, on the whole, due to its narrow scope and low
national investment, the influence of the program remained very limited
(He & Zhang, 2017).
In 2001, the State Development Planning Commission (SDPC)
formally proposed the concept of “poverty alleviation resettlement”,
launched pilot poverty alleviation resettlement in four provinces
(autonomous regions)—Inner Mongolia, Guizhou, Yunnan and Ning­
xia—and later expanded it successively to 17 provinces (autonomous
regions/municipalities directly under the central government). In the
period of 2001–2010, PAR policy was gradually transformed into a
systemic program of overall planning and scheduled implementation.
The PAR policy clearly specified the dual goals: eliminating poverty and
improving ecology. PAR is both a basic strategy of carrying out targeted
poverty alleviation as well as a special support measure aimed at the
poverty relief of poverty-stricken people living in regions deemed un­
able to support sustainable livelihoods. In the 12th FYP period
(2011–2015), contiguous poor areas became a priority for poverty
alleviation and thus PAR policy was further strengthened. The new idea
of non-agricultural resettlement was presented in this period as well. At
the end of 2013, the state proposed the strategy of targeted poverty
alleviation. In this context, PAR gradually became important ways of
poverty governance in terms of realizing targeted poverty alleviation.
PAR constituted an important component of the “Five Batches” of TPA in
China in the 13th FYP period (2016–2020). To be specific, resettlement
attempts to eliminate the causes of poverty from the source, so that rural
inhabitants can eliminate poverty caused by the harsh natural condi­
tions in remote and isolated corners thoroughly. According to the na­
tional poverty line of 2,300 RMB (2011 constant prices), at the end of
2015, China still had 56.30 million recorded poverty-stricken people,
concentrated primarily in the mountainous, hilly and plateau areas of
Central China and West China. Their spatial distribution was largely
3
Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135
coupled with ecologically fragile areas. On account of historical, natural,
social and many other factors, these poverty-stricken areas have mostly
arduous survival conditions, seriously underdeveloped infrastructure
and sociocultural construction and low socio-economic development
levels on the whole. According to the archival information system of the
Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development (LGO­
PAD) of the State Council, the total number of recorded poverty-stricken
people to be resettled roughly amounts to 9.81 million. Based upon
previous research (Wang, Fu, & Zhang, 2017; Zou & Xiang, 2017), this
study has divided China’s poverty alleviation resettlement since its
implementation into four stages: the policy rudiment stage
(1983–2000), the pilot exploration stage (2001–2010), the compre­
hensive promotion stage (2011–2014) and the priority poverty relief
stage (2015-) (Fig. 2). Since the exploration of PAR was launched in the
early 1980s, China’s PAR policy has gone through an evolutionary
process from targeting only a few regions, through expanding to mul­
tiple regions and ultimately to conducting overall design and compre­
hensive promotion at the national level (Lu & Qin, 2015; Xu & Xiong,
2018).
Since 2001, the PAR-related population scale and investment scale
have both presented a trend of rapid expansion (Table 1, Fig. 3). In the
13th FYP period, the total number of recorded poverty-stricken people
to be resettled amounts roughly to 9.81 million, 1.44 times the total
number of people resettled in the 15 years prior. The investment scale of
PAR has experienced an annual average growth of 26%. The investment
amount in the 13th FYP period is about to reach five times of the total
investment in the 15 years prior (He & Zhang, 2017). From the 10th to
the 13th FYP period, central government investment has experienced an
annual average growth of 14.2%. Seen from per capita central govern­
ment investment, the per capita total investment in the 13th FYP period
has witnessed substantial growth. The 10th FYP period was the first
five-year plan period for PAR in China. In this period, all the PAR funds
came from central government investment. From the 11th FYP period
onwards, the investment from the central government budget continu­
ously drove more funds from different channels to support PAR con­
struction jointly. From the 10th to the 13th FYP period, the
amplification factor of the investment under the central government
budget (the ratio of total investment to the investment under central
government budget) has risen from 1 to 7.4 and the investment through
the central government budget is playing an increasingly significant role
in driving other central government funds, local government funds,
credit funds and self-raised public funds. After more than three decades
of practice, the connotation and extension of PAR has been constantly
innovated and PAR itself is playing an increasingly important part in
poverty alleviation in China.
Y. Yang et al. Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135

Fig. 2. A timeline of critical policy events in poverty alleviation resettlement.

Table 1
PAR-related people and investment in China since 2001a.
Period Years Number of resettled Central government Per capita central government Total investment (100 Per capita total
people (10,000 people) investment (100 million RMB) investment (RMB) million RMB) investment (RMB)

10th Five- 2001–2005 122 56 4590 56 4590

year Plan
11th Five- 2006–2010 163 76 4671 106 6515
year Plan
12th Five- 2011–2015 394 231 5863 1031 26168
year Plan
13th Five- 2016–2020 981 800 8155 5922 60367
year Plan

Note: In the 13th FYP period, the investment under central government budget only targets recorded poverty-stricken people, so the data in the table uses the number
of recorded poverty-stricken people and the corresponding total investment.
a
Data are from National Plan of Poverty Alleviation Resettlement in the 11th, 12th and 13th FYP period, respectively. The data in the 10th, 11th and 12th FYP
periods refer to the actual data while the data in the 13th FYP period refer to the planning data.

3.2. Poverty alleviation resettlement in the 13th FYP period
According to China’s current poverty standard, many recorded rural
poverty-stricken people live in relatively remote areas with relatively
underdeveloped infrastructure, a serious incongruity of land and water
resources, extremely fragile ecological environments and frequent nat­
ural disasters (such as flood, drought and debris flow). These are
exemplified by the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau region, the northwest Loess
Plateau region, the southwest rock desertification region, the east acid
soil region, the alpine cool region, etc. Conducting PAR to relieve a
group of people from poverty constitutes a critical measure in imple­
menting TPA. Accelerating the implementation of the PAR program can
fundamentally address the poverty relief and development problems
faced by poverty-stricken people.
In the 13th FYP period, a total of 9.81 million recorded resettled
people are distributed in about 1,400 counties (cities/districts) of 22
provinces (autonomous regions/municipalities directly under the cen­
tral government) nationwide (Fig. 4). The poverty-stricken people to be
resettled on record can be classified according to environmental con­
ditions as follows: (1) About 1/3 of them (3.16 million) live remote
mountains, rocky mountains, remote alpine regions, desertificated re­
gions, regions with serious soil erosion, regions without basic develop­
ment conditions and regions whose water and soil conditions or
photothermal conditions cannot meet the demands of agricultural pro­
duction; (2) roughly another 1/3 (3.4 million) live in regions lacking
transportation, water conservancy, electricity, communication or other
infrastructure, or regions with a serious shortage of basic public service
capacities (education, health care, hygiene, etc.); (3) about 1/6 (1.57
million) live in water source reserves, biodiversity reserves, wetland
reserves or other prohibited development areas or restricted develop­
ment areas specified in the National Principal Functional Region Plan;
(4) the remainder (1.14 million) live in regions with severe endemic
diseases or frequent geological disasters. Seen from the perspective of
regional distribution, 12 provinces (autonomous regions/municipal­
ities) in West China have about 6.64 million recorded resettled people,
accounting for 67.7%. Six provinces in Central China have about 2.96
million recorded resettled people, accounting for 30.2%. Four provinces
in East China (i.e., Hebei, Jilin, Shandong and Fujian) have about
210,000 recorded resettled people, accounting for 2.1%. Provincial key
counties in poverty alleviation development account for 12%. Counties
within contiguous poor areas and national key counties in poverty
alleviation development account for 72% and other counties account for
16%. Considering that the natural environment and development con­
ditions of various areas of origin are somewhat homogenous, the unre­
corded people living in the same area of origin need to be resettled at the
same time and various regions have arranged the simultaneous reset­
tlement of 6.47 million people according to their own actual plans. The
simultaneously resettled people are able to share infrastructure and
basic public service facilities in the area of destination with recorded
people but they are not entitled to related housing construction subsidies
provided by the central government. In the 13th FYP period, a total of
592.2 billion RMB is planned to be invested in the resettlement of

4
Y. Yang et al.
Fig. 3. PAR in various periods: a) population change; b) investment change.
recorded people. The PAR tasks, investment and construction in the 13th
FYP period are mainly concentrated within the period of 2016–2018
(Table 2 and Fig. 5) and the program investment completion rate in the
three years is 85% (He & Zhang, 2017).
The PAR program in the 13th FYP period, has presented some new
characteristics in comparison to previous programs: (1) a greater num­
ber of resettled people; the number of people scheduled to be resettled
for poverty alleviation in this new era has exceeded the total number of
people resettled since the launch of PAR in the early 1980s in China. The
aim is to ensure that all of the nearly ten million recorded people to be
resettled will have been included in the resettlement plans and actually
resettled by 2020. (2) Strict control of resettlement housing areas,
improvement of the subsidy standard and significant reduction in the
self-raising cost of resettled households; according to the policy, the per
capita housing construction area for recorded poverty-stricken house­
holds receiving central government subsidies may not exceed 25 m2. The
subsidy standard per household will be significantly elevated to lower
the self-financing per household below 10,000 RMB. (3) High fund input
and diversified fund channels; besides the funds under central govern­
ment budget, full consideration should also be given to the “joint
participation” of local finance, financial capitals and other funds in the
construction of the PAR program. In addition, the government has
expanded the scope of surplus index transactions for the link between
urban-land taking and rural-land giving at the provincial level. This
5
Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135
expansion of the urban-rural linkage surplus index provides important
support for the construction of the RAP program, providing loan
repayment channels to areas affected by poverty. (4) A wider and more
comprehensive input scope; different from previous PAR programs
(which focused mainly on housing construction), the PAR program in
the 13th FYP period not only takes resettlement housing construction
into account but also implements measures to build supporting infra­
structure for the area of destination (like water, electricity, road,
garbage treatment, sewage treatment and other facilities, example is
shown as Fig. 6), implements perfect public service facilities around the
resettlement site, consolidates, restores and reutilizes the land according
to consolidation in the area of destination and the housing plots aban­
doned in the area of origin, and provides ecological restoration for the
unavailable land in the area of origin (Zeng & Wang, 2017). Compared
to previous programs, the PAR program in the new era is characterized
by higher requirements for poverty alleviation, more burdensome
resettlement tasks, more poverty-stricken objects of resettlement and
more complicated contents. Through taking into account input in the
production and living conditions of resettled people and implementing a
series of follow-up assistance measures to help poverty-stricken house­
holds get rid of poverty, PAR has completed its transition from a “blood
transfusion type” to “blood production type” and implementing PAR has
become an important means of realizing targeted poverty alleviation.
Y. Yang et al. Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135

Fig. 4. Distribution of PAR tasks nationwide in the 13th FYP period (NDRC, 2016; Zhou et al., 2018).

resettlement. It is also encouraged that the centralized

Table 2
resettlement-based mode integrating centralized resettlement and
Recorded people and investment in the 13th FYP period.
dispersive resettlement be adopted to guide the nearby employment of
Index 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total resettled people in the area of destination. The selection of a resettle­
Recorded resettled people 249 340 280 100 12 981 ment mode reflects the willingness and preferences of the local gov­
(10,000 people) ernment, resettlers and other institutions, and is a result of mutual
Proportions of recorded 25% 35% 29% 10% 1% 100%
consultation among various parties concerned. According to the
resettled people by years
Total investment (100 million 1463 1939 1625 683 212 5922
geographical locations and resettlement characteristics of various areas
RMB) of destination, the PAR modes in China can be classified into the
Proportions of total 25% 33% 27% 12% 4% 100% following four types based on the typical modes in different regions.1
investment by years

4.1. The urbanization integration mode

4. Typical PAR modes
Relying on urbanization construction, this mode (Fig. 7) takes PAR as
The essence of PAR requires the provision of livelihood space
an opportunity for improving the local urbanization level and guides
reconstruction, land reallocation, industry reconstruction and spatial
resettled households to purchase commercial housing, seek convenient
capital remodeling for poverty-stricken people; the spatial reconstruc­
employment, improve their living conditions and realize household
tion of population-land-industry factors. Such reconstruction should
registration transfer in towns or urban areas with better infrastructure
include social, economic, ecological and many other factors (Xing,
and public services (Chen & Li, 2018). This mode applies mainly to re­
2016), which refers to the “three-dimensional” (rural
gions with a low urbanization rate, weak strength and insufficient in­
production-life-ecology) spatial reconstruction (Lo, Xue, & Wang,
vestment in public service construction. This mode is suitable for the
2016). As a basic link in poverty alleviation resettlement, resettlement
adaptable young and middle-aged people who have pressing needs for
relates to whether the peasant households to be resettled can move out
urbanization and are capable of quickly blending into city/town life and
and settle down. Ideally, PAR is supposed to help resettled
poverty-stricken people realize multi-aspect and multi-level trans­
formation and optimization of their livelihood (Xing, 2016). PAR has a 1
Materials are mainly collected from our field investigations. Websites with
diversified range of specific forms: the state requires that the site se­
important reference value are as follows. http://www.shiyan.gov.cn/ztzl/she
lection of the area of destination should be convenient for the produc­ ngeng/xp/201710/t20171018_1235534.shtml http://www.cnbz.gov.cn/xxgk/
tion, living and employment of resettled people, be close to a central 2/18/1/2017/08/150224715795328.shtml http://www.nmg.gov.cn/art/2
village, small town, industry park or scenic spot to avoid secondary 016/7/25/art_1570_177199.html.

6
Y. Yang et al. Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135

Fig. 5. The situation of poverty alleviation resettlement in the 13th FYP period: a) population change; b) investment change.

Fig. 6. The Phoenix Mountain relocation area in Zhongcun village, Fangxian County of Hubei province, China (Taken by the first author)
Note: The open space shown in the right picture is for resettlers to plant the vegetables based on the local rural residents’ living habits.

finding stable employment there. In this mode, peasant households enter
towns or industrial parks for employment and disperse house purchase
and, relying on a combination with the “accessorial system” of com­
mercial housing development in towns, this mode can effectively pro­
mote the “destocking” of real estate in towns. Considering that it costs
less to enter small towns than to enter small and medium-sized cities and
that there are more employment opportunities in small towns than in
rural areas, entering towns via household registration transfer has
become the choice for many resettled people. This mode generally
produces a relatively high resettlement cost, significantly changes the

7
Y. Yang et al. Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135

Fig. 7. The urbanization integration mode.

production mode and lifestyle of peasants, creates more non-agricultural

employment opportunities, and facilitates the shift of rural resettlers’
means of employment from primary industries to secondary and tertiary
industries. In this mode, the area of destination is usually located in the
proximity of a small town or industry park so as to quickly aggregate city
(or town) population via PAR, expand city (or town) scale, create an
agglomeration effect, enrich the contents of cities (or towns), increase
the utilization rate of public facilities and strengthen the self-service
connotation and self-growth potential of cities (or towns). In addition,
PAR also creates numerous opportunities for urbanization construction.
Relying on rational guidance, the government can promote the estab­
lishment of a market-oriented new urbanization construction mecha­
nism, enhance the commercial circulation capacity of towns, promote
economic development and ultimately accelerate the creation of new
urbanization growth poles.

4.2. The nearby resettlement mode relying on means of production and

Fig. 8. The nearby resettlement mode relying on means of production and
characteristic industries characteristic industries.

Focusing on industries and their development which help poor

primarily central villages or old villages with complete supporting
people to cast off poverty, this mode locates the resettlement site around
public service facilities (such as water, electricity, roads and networks),
an industrial base, so that the driving role of leading enterprises and
and fully utilizes the resource advantages of such central villages and old
specialized cooperatives can be developed. In addition, in this mode,
villages (old courtyards, old schoolhouses, etc). The aim is to avoid or
those living in resettled households can not only become shareholders
reduce the encroachment on basic farmland and cropland, on the one
through land circulation but can also obtain income as workers in the
hand, and to save the funds for supporting infrastructure construction
industrial base and thereby broaden their employment channels. Thus,
and address the needs of simultaneously resettled households on the
this mode is a centralized resettlement mode (Fig. 8). This applies to
other hand. This mode applies to people who are reluctant to part with
able-bodied laborers who have sufficient endogenous development
rural life or an agricultural mode of production. It produces a relatively
power and can improve their living conditions through employment.
low resettlement cost and changes the production mode and lifestyle of
Through coordinating PAR and industry development, this mode takes
peasants only in minor ways; after resettlement, agriculture still remains
industry development as the key to helping resettled households achieve
the primary source of resettlers’ livelihood. In addition, it guarantees
prosperity and strive to become affluent. It creates the development
that the infrastructure of the area of destination is more complete than
pattern of “cooperatives (companies) þ base þ resettled households”, so
that of the area of origin. However, in this mode, resettled households
that those resettled households can become shareholders through land
may often feel like “outsiders” and, besides the difficulty of blending
circulation, participate in industrial base construction and management
into local social life, it takes a long time for them to communicate and fit
and increase their employment opportunities and income. Thus, this
in with indigenous people. Thus, the integrative adjustment and cultural
mode enhances the “blood making function” of resettled peasants. In
adaptation of the relationship between resettled households and indig­
this mode, efforts should be made to improve the production technology
enous people pose one of the great challenges to resettlement work. In
and professional skills of peasants, enhance their enthusiasm for pro­
addition, this resettlement mode requires land readjustment which
duction and elevate their comprehensive quality.
might result in a shortage of land and other resources in the area of
destination. So it is very important to properly deal with related prob­
4.3. The resettlement mode of dismantling old households to make room lems after resettlement, such as neighborhood disputes, unclearly
defined property rights and violation of the interests of indigenous
This mode relies on the construction of a new type of rural com­ people by resettled poverty-stricken households in the area of
munity. In terms of resettlement site selection, the mode targets

8
Y. Yang et al. Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135

destination, etc. Table 3

Typical modes of poverty alleviation resettlement.
4.4. The resettlement mode of public rental and zero rental affordable Mode Main applicable Characteristics Challenges
housing groups

Urbanization Young and ① Enjoyment of ① High

This mode targets poor rural households and rural “households integration middle-aged complete resettlement
enjoying the five guarantees (the aged, the infirm, old widows and or­ mode people who infrastructure cost;
phans are taken care of by the people’s communes in five ways: food, have imperious and public ② Changes of the
demands for services; production
clothing, medical care, housing and burial expenses)”, which lack labor urbanization ② Increase of non- mode and
capacity and house-building capacity and have poor housing conditions and are capable agricultural lifestyle of
and a weak economic basis, as well as to rural elderly people who have of quickly employment peasants;
children but whose children are incapable of caring for them. Safe and blending into opportunities; ③ Shift in ways of
city life and ③ Promotion of employment
affordable houses owned by collective ownership are uniformly built.
finding stable industrial from primary
Then resettled households could relocate directly without self-financing employment agglomeration industries to
by adopting the centralized resettlement way. For instance, in Inner there. and population secondary and
Mongolia, PAR is combined with mutual-aid happy homes and nursing concentration tertiary
homes. However, in this mode, elderly people who have gotten used to industries
Nearby Able-bodied ① Broadening of Improvement of the
their long-term living habits may not be able to adapt effectively to the resettlement laborers who income sources production
new environment, not to mention the high cost of housing preservation mode relying have sufficient and channels; technology and
and other related problems. on means of endogenous ② Minor change of professional skills
Table 3 provides the characteristics of the four typical resettlement production development the resettlement of peasants
and power and can production mode
modes and existing challenges. As regards the selection of specific areas
characteristic improve their and lifestyle of
of destination, it is necessary to take into account resettler qualities, industries living peasants
group characteristics, resettlement costs, government administration conditions
costs, land resources, the natural environment, economy, transportation through
and many other factors (Zhang, Wang, Zhang, & Xue, 2014), thus employment
Resettlement People who are ① Low resettlement ① Integrative
guaranteeing that peasant households can realize livelihood optimiza­ mode of reluctant to cost; adjustment and
tion at economic, social and ecological aspects. In fact, resettlement has dismantling part with rural ② Full utilization of cultural
revitalized rural land, housing plots and other resources, accelerated old life or existing adaptation of
rural land circulation, catalyzed modern agriculture parks, family farms, households to agricultural resources, the relationship
make room production avoiding or with indigenous
large producer-households and other business patterns and has pro­
modes reducing the people;
moted the stable development of regional characteristic economies. encroachment on ② Land
With the further advance of PAR, numerous resettled people have basic farmland readjustment
migrated into urban communities and experienced substantial changes and cropland; and
in their residential manner, living costs, neighborhood relationships and ③ Saving of funds resettlement
for supporting and resources
so forth, so it is of vital importance to effectively safeguard the rights and infrastructure allocation
interests of resettled people and enhance their sense of belonging. construction;
④ Minor change to
5. The possible risks and problems of PAR the resettlement
production mode
and lifestyle of
Resettlement is not only the spatial relocation combined with ma­ peasants
terial transfers, but a complex process with major challenges emerging Resettlement Poor rural Centralized ① Inability of the
immediately after displacement (de Sherbinin et al., 2011). The World mode of households and resettlement and elderly people
Bank identified eight major social and economic risks and impoverish­ public rental rural provision (who have
and zero gotten used to
ment processes in displacement or resettlement by constructing the
“households
rental enjoying the their long-term
Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction (IRR) Model: loss of land, affordable five living habits) to
employment, shelter, and access to common property/services; housing guarantees,” adapt effec­
marginalization (reduced economic mobility); increased morbidity and which lack tively to the
labor capacity new
mortality; food insecurity; and community disarticulation (Cernea,
and house- environment;
2000). The evidence suggests that resettlers at different locations may building ② High cost of
experience some or all of the eight basic risks. There are ways to reduce capacity and housing
the hazards and socioeconomic adverse impacts of the involuntary have poor preservation
resettlement induced by development-related displacements. While housing
conditions and
there are clear distinctions between PAR and other types of resettlement
a weak
programs, the voluntary PAR also presents its risks and problems after economic basis
the resettlers’ relocation although the majority of resettled population and rural
has greatly benefited from this resettlement. elderly people
who have
children but
5.1. The deviation between the resettlement policy implementation and the whose children
poverty alleviation goals are incapable of
caring for them
Theoretically, PAR must adhere to the principle of “giving priority to
disaster avoidance and poverty alleviation”. However, in the course of
specific implementation, there are deviations from policy goals. On the
one hand, PAR requires peasant households to self-raise some funds,
who remain challenged by a weak economic basis. So the peasant

9
Y. Yang et al.
households are incapable of either bearing resettlement cost or
completing resettlement on their own due to a lack in fundraising
channels. As a result, peasant households that are truly poverty-stricken
usually choose to stay in their area of origin, while those with better
economic conditions choose to resettle and thus benefit most from such
resettlement (Tang, Lin, & Li, 2005). On the other hand, there is a
phenomenon called “elite capture” during the implementation of PAR
policy (Wu, Yang, & Wang, 2020). That is, elite peasant households
having close relationships with village cadres will get preferential
resettlement qualifications, while ordinary peasant households will be
marginalized, losing the opportunity for preferential resettlement and
will remain trapped in their poor and remote village life (He & Dang,
2015; Yao, 2019). Some studies show that there is an obvious phe­
nomenon of “elite capture” in the recording of people to be resettled in
Yunnan, Guizhou and Sichuan, and that, in some cases, the “elite cap­
ture” rate can reach as high as 25% (Hu & Wang, 2017). Due to re­
striction by all kinds of factors, the PAR program has effectually ruled
out the most poverty-stricken households, which have the weakest
affordability and most urgently need preferential resettlement (Lo et al.,
2016). In addition, the effects of administrative pressure and universal
policy have given rise to the misplacement of targeted identification in
PAR (Xu & Xiong, 2018). In this context, it is difficult for the subjects of
resettlement to enjoy fair policy treatment, which further obstructs the
balanced development of resettlement and eventually weakens policy
credibility (He & Dang, 2015).
5.2. The financial pressure imposed by high resettlement funding demand
on local governments and poverty-stricken households
According to current policy, PAR funds come from two sources: the
fiscal subsidies provided by the government and the funds self-raised by
poverty-stricken households. As far as poverty alleviation in China is
concerned, all the relocation areas are located in centralized contiguous
poor areas and are characterized by a low local finance self-sufficiency
rate, an insufficient contributive capacity and input, single source
funding and channels thereof and a weak absorptive capacity for
financial resources, which jointly restrict the advance rate of the
implementation of the PAR strategy (Liu, 2015). In addition,
poverty-stricken households in need of resettlement live mostly in
remote mountainous areas and depend on engagement in agriculture or
industry for their income. As a result, most of them have no capital
accumulation and they usually fall into debt to raise the resettlement
funds. Although the PAR project has reduced the financial burdens on
those resettled (Rogers et al., 2019), there is still much pressure on the
very poor. According to the field survey, 16.33% of peasant households
(263) had a debt of above 10,000 RMB as a result of the resettlement and
the main income sources of peasants were engagement with industry
and agriculture. The increase of income was relatively small, while the
pressure of debt repayment was high.
5.3. The influence on the sustainable livelihood of households after
poverty alleviation resettlement
After resettlement, peasants separate themselves from the natural
environment on which they used to depend for their survival and their
livelihood capitals experience significant changes, which unavoidably
exerts some influence on the sustainable livelihood of peasant house­
holds (Cernea, 1997). After resettling in an area of destination,
poverty-stricken people still enjoy the same systems, subsidies and
preferential policies. However, after resettlement, some previous live­
lihood activities have to halt for some resettlers, which means the
reduction of income channels and the increase of production and living
costs. For instance, in the area of origin, a courtyard economy can supply
their daily living needs for vegetables and firewood. However, in the
area of destination, the new courtyard, because of its limited area, can
no longer sustain a courtyard economy, which further increases their
10
Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135
daily living cost (Tian, 2017). After resettlement, only a few nearby
resettlers can carry on with their traditional agricultural production,
while most resettlers can hardly find a job that suits their employability,
mainly due to their low cultural quality, lack of non-agricultural voca­
tional skills and other adverse factors (Xu & Shen, 2018). As a result, it is
difficult to sustain the original production mode and the number of
unemployed people in villages is constantly on the rise (Jackson &
Sleigh, 2000). Of the 1,611 peasant households investigated in relation
to PAR (Fig. 9), 60.77% (979) had an annual per capita net income of
less than 3,000 RMB/person after poverty alleviation resettlement.
Those in the intervals of 3,000–5,000 RMB, 5,000–8,000 RMB and �8,
000 RMB accounted for 12.41% (200), 13.47% (217) and 13.35% (215),
respectively. Households relying on engagement in industry for their
primary income accounted for 60.46%. Those relying on planting and
animal husbandry for their primary income accounted for 21.54%.
Those relying on all kinds of subsidies (such as endowment insurance
and subsistence allowance) for their primary income accounted for
16.08%. Those relying on land circulation, interest and dividend, on
operating shops (supermarkets) and so forth for their primary income
accounted for 0.74%, 0.62% and 0.56%, respectively. As many as 595
households, accounting for 36.93%, reported the absence of supporting
measures after resettlement. Those reporting the development of agri­
culture and forestry and those reporting the arrangement of labor ser­
vice and employment accounted for 23.03% and 21.48%, respectively.
Those reporting minimum social security accounted for 12.54%. Those
reporting assets income and those reporting engagement in service in­
dustry only accounted for 3.97% and 1.30%, respectively. Large-scale
PAR has posed severe challenges to the resource environment carrying
capacity in areas of destination. In some areas of destination, in face of a
shortage of land resources, resettlers have begun excessive deforestation
to meet their survival needs, which causes ecological damage to areas of
destination, weakens the resource environment carrying capacity of
these areas and ultimately influences their own production and life by
making it impossible to sustain their livelihood (Zhu, 2016). Housing,
education, health care, employment and entrepreneurship should be
provided for the resettlers at the same time (Liu & Li, 2017).
5.4. Problems with the social integration and community management of
resettlers after resettlement in a new community
In poverty alleviation resettlement, settlers face the reality of leaving
their hometowns and the inevitable ending or the degradation of
traditional village communities. As a result, the original social network
and social structure of villages are broken and the original social capital
of resettlers experiences substantial change, which requires the con­
struction of new social networks, influencing both the adaptability of
resettlers to new communities and their future welfare therein (Mcmi­
chael & Manderson, 2004; Zhou & Mao, 2017). Existing resettlement
policy selectively resettles some poverty-stricken people from a village,
which damages their original residential manner. For this reason, PAR
should consider the opinions of poverty-stricken people and relocate
those living in the same village or having the same neighborhood rela­
tionship network into the same area of destination as far as possible (Yin,
2014). In addition, after PAR, some people are relocated into town
communities, which means substantial changes in production mode and
lifestyle, making it difficult for people (especially for the elderly) who
have gotten used to rural life to adapt and inevitably produces a sense of
alienation (Evrard & Goudineau, 2004). In some cases, people choose to
move back. In the case of centralized resettlement, a resettlement site
frequently comprises people from different natural villages. In this case,
the multiplied population density, relatively complex population
structure, habits and notions and increased community management
workload and work difficulties can very easily lead to poor social se­
curity status and new social problems (Baird & Shoemaker, 2007; Xu &
Shen, 2018). For some minority resettlers, there are also the pre­
dicaments of ethnic cultural differences, emotional self-isolation and so
Y. Yang et al.
Fig. 9. Types of household income after PAR (a), primary income source (b), and follow-up guarantee (c).
forth (Xu, 2011).
6. Suggestions for improving the implementation of PAR policy
The PAR program is a comprehensive poverty alleviation strategy
and a substantial challenge in priority poverty relief. The program plays
an essential role in promoting the poverty relief of all poverty-stricken
people and building a moderately well-off society in an all-round way
by 2020. In this course, the “Five Batches” serve as mutual support. In
the post-resettlement stage, focus should be placed on the employment
of the resettlers, industry development, skills training and other related
aspects. As an important measure and means of TPA, PAR faces great
pressure and challenges in the new context of poverty alleviation. For
the purpose of better-implementing PAR, this paper offers the following
suggestions.
6.1. Establishing follow-up and feedback mechanisms and the third-party
evaluation
Third-party evaluation is a major innovation for performance man­
agement introduced by the present government. As required by the
Criteria for Evaluating the Performance of Provincial Party Committees and
Governments in Poverty-reduction and Development issued by the General
Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State
Council, the performance of the party committees and governments of
22 provinces (autonomous regions/municipalities) in Central and West
China in poverty alleviation is evaluated annually from 2016 to 2020. By
means of conducting a sampling survey in the provinces, this evaluation
aims primarily to appraise the performance of the party committees and
governments according to the following criteria: the identification ac­
curacy rate of poverty-stricken people, the withdrawal accuracy rate of
poverty-stricken people, and the degree of public satisfaction with
assistance work provided according to village and household realities.
According to this evaluation, the identification accuracy rate of poverty-
stricken people continues to maintain a relatively high level, the phe­
nomena of mistaken identification of poverty-stricken households are
obviously reduced and poverty-stricken people have an elevated sense of
gain. Seen from the results of the sampling survey, during the imple­
mentation of the PAR program, local governments have achieved a high
11
Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135
identification accuracy rate of identifying poverty-stricken people and
the misplacement of targeted identification in PAR is rare. In this case,
establishing a third-party evaluation mechanism for the PAR process can
provide an important penetration point for supervising policy imple­
mentation and effectively avoid the disadvantages of top-down
bureaucratic policy implementation. In addition, constructing a policy
follow-up and feedback mechanism helps to implement PAR policy
smoothly and effectively analyze the PAR policy before and after
implementation in terms of its rationality, operability, adaptability,
stability, coordination and responsiveness (Chen, 2017). To enhance the
effect of targeted poverty alleviation in centralized contiguous poor
areas, it is necessary not only to closely follow up on the negative in­
fluences of the implementation deviation of resettlement policy but also
to consistently enhance policy implementability. In this case, third-party
evaluation can effectively promote policy implementation at the local
level.
6.2. Selecting resettlement modes according to local conditions, household
realities and poverty-stricken households’ ability to make a living
Considering the differences among resettled people in terms of
family structure, ability and other aspects, the mode of gradient reset­
tlement should be adopted according to local conditions and household
realities, so as to offer more available resources to resettled households.
The aforementioned four typical resettlement modes could be selected
and adopted in accordance with local conditions. Based on the actual
demands of poverty-stricken groups, resettlement should follow the
principle of voluntariness, analyzing the differences among different
subjects of PAR in family structure and economic ability, holding joint
discussions with poverty-stricken people in determining the resettle­
ment mode and strengthening their right to agency in their own reset­
tlement. Moreover, technical training, industry development and other
measures should be implemented to enhance the endogenous power of
poverty-stricken people. As regards poverty-stricken people who can
find stable employment in towns, they should be preferentially resettled
into towns and provided with necessary skill training and jobs. This, in
turn, is related to both the degree of local urbanization and employment
opportunities created by non-agricultural industry development. As
regards those lacking labor capacity and relying solely on agriculture for
Y. Yang et al.
their livelihood, the mode of nearby centralized resettlement should be
primarily adopted. In addition, agricultural and non-agricultural in­
dustry support, adaptable to local conditions, should be provided to
avoid simple urbanization resettlement that is based on a single reset­
tlement mode and that offers no employment security.
6.3. Promoting the integration of poverty alleviation resettlement and
rural revitalization
The Strategy Plan for Rural Vitalization (2018–2022) issued by the
CPC Central Committee and the State Council has been introduced in
case it is necessary to relocate villages with harsh survival conditions, a
fragile ecological environment, frequent natural disasters or villages
facing especially serious population loss. As per the plan, modes of
poverty alleviation resettlement, ecologically livable resettlement and
rural concentrated resettlement can be adopted to implement village
resettlement and merger, thereby solving the livelihood, ecological
protection and other problems faced by peasants comprehensively. In
the process of implementing the rural revitalization strategy, the central
government has deployed village resettlement and merger, and has
proposed to combine village resettlement and merger with new-types of
urbanization and agricultural modernization, relying on suitable regions
for resettlement and avoiding the creation of new isolated village-type
resettlement communities. The starting point and foothold of rural
revitalization lie in bringing industrial development to towns, creating a
prosperous and contented life for residents, building housing-industry
symbiosis and continuously meeting “the people’s ever-growing needs
for a better life” (Liu, 2018). In this case, solving the housing problem of
resettlers constitutes the primary task in implementing the PAR pro­
gram. To realize the sustainable development of peasant households in
poverty alleviation resettlement, great importance should be attached to
both comfortable housing and stable employment, as embodied mainly
in the following three aspects: a) Great efforts should be made to
improve the residential environment of the resettlement site, accelerate
the perfection of related supporting infrastructure and service functions
on site and preferentially build and relocate schools, hospitals and other
facilities that have a close bearing on the interests of poverty-stricken
people. In addition, it is also important to elevate the public service
supply capacity and level on site and to solve the education and health
care problems of resettled people timeously, to address the water and
electricity problems in the area of destination, etc. b) To promote
multi-channel employment and wage income increase and highlight the
poverty relief function of employment, suitable industries should be
selected for the resettlement site according to the individual situations of
resettled people, the demands of the market and the characteristics of
the poverty-stricken workers to be resettled and priority should be given
to the development of labor-intensive and environment-friendly in­
dustries. Financial support should be offered preferentially to agricul­
ture throughout the entire agricultural value chain, so as to solve the
financial and employment problems faced by resettled poverty-stricken
people. The measures that can be taken in this aspect include employ­
ment in industrial parks and scenic spots, service posts on resettlement
sites, engagement in service industry in towns, entrepreneurship and
employment subsidized by financial poverty alleviation, participation in
skills training, employment in labor service, etc. c) In on-site poverty
alleviation resettlement, local governments should promote traditional
ethnic and folk culture, skills and arts in areas of origin and ensure their
continuation, not only so as to protect cultural heritage but also to
provide an opportunity for resettled people to begin cultural entrepre­
neurship and find employment relying on their ethnic cultural resources.
7. Conclusion
Poverty alleviation resettlement (PAR) is a key element in China’s
poverty reduction initiatives. This article constructs and presents a
complete frame to introduce China’s PAR policy by summarizing its
12
Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135
research progress and evolution, proposing its typical models, analyzing
the possible risks and existing problems, and finally making practical
suggestions. Results show that: 1) China’s PAR policy since its imple­
mentation could be divided into four stages: the policy rudiment stage,
the pilot exploration stage, the comprehensive promotion stage and the
priority poverty relief stage; 2) Compared to previous programs, the PAR
program during the 13th FYP period is characterized by higher re­
quirements for poverty alleviation, greater resettlement levels, selection
of the poorest of the poor, higher fund input and diversified fund
channels; 3) Typical PAR modes include four types, i.e., the urbanization
integration mode, the nearby resettlement mode relying on means of
production and characteristic industries, the resettlement mode of
dismantling old households to make room, and the resettlement mode of
public rental and zero rental affordable housing. It is important to
rationally choose the suitable PAR mode based on local conditions after
deeply understanding the resettlers’ preference and respect their will­
ingness to relocate; 4) The possible risks of PAR include its deviations
from poverty alleviation goals, the financial pressure imposed by high
resettlement costs, the influence on the sustainable livelihood of
households after resettlement, and problems with the social integration
and community management of resettlers in a new community; 5) For
improving the implementation of the PAR policy, this paper argues that
it is necessary to establish follow-up and feedback mechanisms and
third-party evaluation, select suitable resettlement modes according to
local conditions, household realities and poverty-stricken households’
ability to make a living, and promote the integration of PAR and rural
revitalization.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Yuanyuan Yang: Investigation, Data curation, Writing - original
draft. Alex de Sherbinin: Writing - review & editing. Yansui Liu:
Conceptualization, Investigation, Supervision, Project administration.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the grants from the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (41931293, 41601173, 41731286) and the
Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China (2016M600954). We also
thank three anonymous reviewers and two editors for their detailed and
constructive feedback.
References
Baird, I. G., & Shoemaker, B. (2007). Unsettling experiences: Internal resettlement and
international aid agencies in Laos. Development and Change, 38(5), 865–888.
Bird, K., Hulme, D., Moore, K., & Shepherd, A. (2002). Chronic poverty in remote rural
areas. Chronic poverty research centre. Working Paper 13.
Bird, K., & Shepherd, A. (2003). Livelihoods and chronic poverty in semi-arid Zimbabwe.
World Development, 31(3), 591–610.
Cavendish, W. (2000). Empirical regularities in the poverty-environment relationship of
rural households: Evidence from Zimbabwe. World Development, 28(11), 1979–2003.
Cernea, M. (1997). The risks and reconstruction model for resettling displaced
populations. World Development, 25(10), 1569–1587.
Cernea, M. (2000). Risks, safeguards, and reconstruction: A model for population
displacement and resettlement. Economic and Political Weekly, 3659–3678.
Chen, J. (2017). Difficulties and countermeasures of poverty alleviation resettlement
policy implementation: Based on the perspective of policy implementation process.
Probe, (4), 153–158 (In Chinese).
Chen, L., & Li, Y. W. (2018). Research on urbanization resettlement risk of poverty
alleviation. In 1st international conference on contemporary education and economic
development (CEED 2018). Atlantis Press.
Dasgupta, P. (2003). Population, poverty, and the natural environment. In Handbook of
environmental economics (Vol. 1, pp. 191–247). Elsevier.
Dasgupta, S., Deichmann, U., Meisner, C., & Wheeler, D. (2005). Where is the
poverty–environment nexus? Evidence from Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam.
World Development, 33(4), 617–638.
de Sherbinin, A., Castro, M., Gemenne, F., et al. (2011). Preparing for resettlement
associated with climate change. Science, 334(6055), 456–457.
de Sherbinin, A., VanWey, L. K., McSweeney, K., et al. (2008). Rural household
demographics, livelihoods and the environment. Global Environmental Change, 18(1),
38–53.
Y. Yang et al.
Evrard, O., & Goudineau, Y. (2004). Planned resettlement, unexpected migrations and
cultural trauma in Laos. Development and Change, 35(5), 937–962.
Fan, M., Li, Y., & Li, W. (2015). Solving one problem by creating a bigger one: The
consequences of ecological resettlement for grassland restoration and poverty
alleviation in Northwestern China. Land Use Policy, 42, 124–130.
Guo, L., Yang, B., & Chi, Y. L. (2017). Influence factors of farmers’ willingness to poverty
alleviation relocation in south Shaanxi province. Asian Agricultural Research, 9(1812-
2018–2353), 17–22.
He, D. G., & Dang, G. Y. (2015). Study on the implementing deviation of the policy of
poverty alleviation resettlement in the western mountainous areas: Based on field
survey in southern Shaanxi. Journal of China National School of Administration, (6),
119–123 (In Chinese).
He, C., & Zhang, Z. (2017). Research on investment and financing modes for poverty
alleviation relocation in the 13th five-year period. Development Finance Research, 1,
59–67 (In Chinese).
Hu, L., & Wang, S. G. (2017). Do China’s recorded poor people face the challenges of elite
capture? Management World, (1), 89–98 (In Chinese).
Jackson, S., & Sleigh, A. (2000). Resettlement for China’s three Gorges Dam: Socio-
economic impact and institutional tensions. Communist and Post-Communist Studies,
33(2), 223–241.
Li, C., Li, S. Z., Feldman, M. W., Li, J., Zheng, H., & Daily, G. C. (2018). The impact on
rural livelihoods and ecosystem services of a major relocation and settlement
program: A case in Shaanxi, China. Ambio, 47(2), 245–259.
Liu, J. B. (2015). The financial dilemma and solution path of implementing the strategy
of poverty alleviation resettlement. Agricultural Development and Finance, (8), 30–32
(In Chinese).
Liu, Y. S. (2018). Research on the urban-rural integration and rural revitalization in the
new era in China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 73(4), 637–650 (In Chinese).
Liu, Y. S., & Li, Y. H. (2017). Revitalize the world’s countryside. Nature, 548(7667), 275.
Liu, Y. S., Liu, J. L., & Zhou, Y. (2017). Spatio-temporal patterns of rural poverty in China
and targeted poverty alleviation strategies. Journal of Rural Studies, 52, 66–75.
Liu, Y. S., Wang, J. W., & Deng, X. Z. (2008). Rocky land desertification and its driving
forces in the karst areas of rural Guangxi, Southwest China. Journal of Mountain
Science, 5(4), 350–357.
Liu, Y. S., Zhou, Y., & Liu, J. L. (2016). Regional differentiation characteristics of rural
poverty and its targeted poverty alleviation strategy in China. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci.,
31(3), 269–278 (In Chinese).
Liu, W., Xu, J., & Li, J. (2018). The influence of poverty alleviation resettlement on rural
household livelihood vulnerability in the western mountainous areas, China.
Sustainability, 10, 2793.
Liu, S., Zhang, P., & Lo, K. (2014). Urbanization in remote areas: A case study of the
Heilongjiang reclamation area, northeast China. Habitat International, 42, 103–110.
Lo, K., & Wang, M. (2018). How voluntary is poverty alleviation resettlement in China?
Habitat International, 73, 34–42.
Lo, K., Xue, L., & Wang, M. (2016). Spatial restructuring through poverty alleviation
resettlement in rural China. Journal of Rural Studies, 47, 496–505.
Lu, H. W., & Qin, Z. M. (2015). Evolution and development trend of China’s poverty
alleviation resettlement policy. Guizhou Social Sciences, (5), 164–168 (In Chinese).
Maldonado, J. K. (2012). A new path forward: Researching and reflecting on forced
displacement and resettlement: Report on the international resettlement conference:
Economics, social justice, and ethics in development-caused involuntary migration,
the Hague, 4–8 october 2010. Journal of Refugee Studies, 25(2), 193–220.
Mcmichael, C., & Manderson, L. (2004). Somali women and well-being: Social networks
and social capital among immigrant women in Australia. Human Organization, 63(1),
88–99.
Merkle, R. (2003). Ningxia’s third road to rural development: Resettlement schemes as a
last means to poverty reduction? Journal of Peasant Studies, 30(3–4), 160–191.
National Development and Reform Commission of China (NDRC). (2016). The 13th five-
year plan for the ex situ poverty alleviation relocation, 2016-09-20.
Pani, P., & Carling, P. (2013). Land degradation and spatial vulnerabilities: A study of
inter-village differences in Chambal valley, India. Asian Geographer, 30(1), 65–79.
Qian, Z., & Xue, J. (2017). Small town urbanization in Western China: Villager
resettlement and integration in Xi’an. Land Use Policy, 68, 152–159.
Ravallion, M., & Wodon, Q. (1999). Poor areas, or only poor people? Journal of Regional
Science, 39(4), 689–711.
Robinson, W. C. (2004). Minimizing development-induced displacement. Migration
Information Source, 1.
Rogers, S., Li, J., Lo, K., Guo, H., & Li, C. (2019). Moving millions to eliminate poverty:
China’s rapidly evolving practice of poverty resettlement. Development Policy Review.
https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12435.
Rogers, S., & Wang, M. (2006). Environmental resettlement and social dis/re-articulation
in Inner Mongolia, China. Population and Environment, 28(1), 41–68.
Rogers, S., & Xue, T. (2015). Resettlement and climate change vulnerability: Evidence
from rural China. Global Environmental Change, 35, 62–69.
Schmidt–Soltau, K. (2003). Conservation–related resettlement in central Africa:
Environmental and social risks. Development and Change, 34(3), 525–551.
Shi, G. Q., & Zhou, J. B. (2018). Factors of farmers’ relocation willingness of poverty
alleviation in western mountain areas. Journal of Hohai University (Philosophical and
Social Sciences Edition), 220(2), 23–31 (In Chinese).
13
Habitat International 98 (2020) 102135
Stanley, J. (2004). Development-induced displacement and resettlement. Forced migration
online.
Tang, L. X., Lin, Z. B., & Li, X. Y. (2005). Who relocate——analysis of the characteristics
and reasons of the relocation objects of voluntary migrants. Issues in Agricultural
Economy, (4), 38–43 (In Chinese).
Tan, Y., Hugo, G., & Potter, L. (2013). Government-organized distant resettlement and
the three Gorges project, China. Asia-Pacific Population Journal, 18(3), 5–26.
Terminski, B. (2013). Development-induced displacement and resettlement: Theoretical
frameworks and current challenges. Development, 10, 101.
Tian, L. Q. (2017). Practice and reflection on relocation for poverty relief in minority
areas: A case study of space displacement and livelihood rebuild in central and
southern regions of Ningxia. Journal of Zhejiang Shuren University, 17(4), 56–60 (In
Chinese).
Tilt, B., & Gerkey, D. (2016). Dams and population displacement on China’s Upper
Mekong River: Implications for social capital and social–ecological resilience. Global
Environmental Change, 36, 153–162.
Todaro, M. P. (1992). Economic development in the third world. Longman.
Tong, Y. Q., & Long, H. L. (2003). Study on sustainable development in the poor areas
coupled with vulnerable eco-environment. 2, 50–54 (In Chinese).
Wang, X. Y. (2016). The change and innovation of poverty alleviation resettlement.
Reform, (8), 71–73 (In Chinese).
Wang, H. X., Fu, T., & Zhang, W. J. (2017). The evolution characteristics of China’s
policy of poverty alleviation by relocation - based on quantitative analysis of policy
texts. Journal of the Party School of the Central Committee of the C.P.C, 3, 48–53 (In
Chinese).
Wilmsen, B., & Wang, M. (2015). Voluntary and involuntary resettlement in China: A
false dichotomy? Development in Practice, 25(5), 612–627.
Wilmsen, B., Webber, M., & Yuefang, D. (2011). Development for whom? Rural to urban
resettlement at the three Gorges Dam, China. Asian Studies Review, 35(1), 21–42.
World Bank. (2004). Involuntary resettlement Sourcebook: Planning and implication in
development projects. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Wu, Z. Q., Yang, Z. H., & Wang, Z. Z. (2020). Ecological compensation, elite capture and
income of rural residents—based on the micro data of 11 poor resident relocation
sites in Youyang of Chongqing. Journal of Southwest University (Social Sciences
Edition), 46(1), 69–78 (In Chinese).
Xing, C. J. (2016). Poverty alleviation by relocation and reconstruction of immigrant’s
livelihood: Evidence of Shaanxi province. Reform, 11, 65–73 (In Chinese).
Xu, J. (2011). A survey of the migrant villages of Tibet automatic region and other
Tibetan-inhabited areas. Journal of Tibet University, (4), 12–19 (In Chinese).
Xue, L., Wang, M. Y., & Xue, T. (2013). ‘Voluntary’ poverty alleviation resettlement in
China. Development and Change, 44(5), 1159–1180.
Xu, X. G., & Shen, P. (2018). Research on sustainable livelihoods of relocate migrants
based on poverty alleviation: Investigation and analyasis on the migrants of Guizhou
province. Journal of Guizhou University of Finance and Economics, 36(1), 103–110 (In
Chinese).
Xu, Y. Y., & Xiong, Y. (2018). Review on relocation aimed at poverty alleviation. Journal
of Northwest A&F University (Social Science Edition), 18(3), 107–114 (In Chinese).
Yao, W. L. (2019). Analysis on sustainable poverty alleviation in poverty-stricken ethnic
minority regions: A case study of the relocation model of poverty alleviation in
liangshan ethnic Yi region. Journal of Xichang University�Social Science Edition, 31(4),
39–43 (In Chinese).
Yin, Y. C. (2014). The research on poverty alleviation relocation of Laiyuan county. Baoding:
Agricultural University of Hebei.
Yin, H. D., Wang, Y., & Wang, S. G. (2017). Identification of poverty alleviation
relocation households: Multidimensional poverty measurement and its
decomposition. China Population, Resources and Environment, 27(11), 104–114 (In
Chinese).
Zeng, X. X., & Wang, S. G. (2017). An analysis of relocation people based on investigation
of 2019 households in 8 provinces in central and western regions. Journal of Hohai
University (Philosophical and Social Sciences Edition), (2), 60–66 (In Chinese).
Zhang, R., Wang, Y. L., Zhang, A. G., & Xue, L. Y. (2014). Analysis on poverty relief
resettlement mode of Dingbian County in Shaanxi province. China Population.
Resources and Environment, (S3), 315–318 (In Chinese).
Zhao, S., & Li, W. L. (2018). The dilemma and countermeasures of poverty alleviation by
relocation in China: A literature review. Social Security Studies, (2), 106–112 (In
Chinese).
Zhou, Y., Guo, Y. Z., Liu, Y. S., Wu, W. X., & Li, Y. R. (2018). Targeted poverty alleviation
and land policy innovation: Some practice and policy implications from China. Land
Use Policy, 74, 53–65.
Zhou, Y., Li, Y. R., & Liu, Y. S. (2019). The nexus between regional eco-environmental
degradation and rural impoverishment in China. Habitat International, 102086.
Zhou, E. Y., & Mao, D. (2017). The practice and its consequence of relocation of poverty
alleviation: An analysis of a social and cultural transformation. China Agricultural
University Journal of Social Sciences Edition, 34(2), 69–77 (In Chinese).
Zhu, F. R. (2016). A survey report on the follow-up problems of poverty alleviation
resettlement: A case study of Ningxia. Market Forum, (10), 6–11 (In Chinese).
Zou, Y., & Xiang, D. P. (2017). Difficulties in giving status of city-dwellers to
impoverished households in relocation poverty-alleviation program and its path
choice. Journal of Jiangsu Administration Institute, (2), 75–80 (In Chinese).
 Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Rural Studies

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrurstud

Targeted poverty alleviation and its practices in rural China: A case study of
Fuping county, Hebei Province
Yuanzhi Guoa,b, Yang Zhoua,b, Yansui Liua,b,∗
a
Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Center for Assessment and Research on Targeted Poverty Alleviation, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Beijing, 100101, China
b
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: After nearly seventy years of poverty alleviation, China has basically solved the problem of providing food and
Targeted poverty alleviation clothing to the rural poor. However, the islanding effect of the distribution of the poor and the marginal di-
Rural development minishing effect of the antipoverty resources, which restrict the effects of poverty-eliminating strategies, are
Rural revitalization increasingly obvious. In this context, targeted poverty alleviation is designed by the Chinese central government.
Fuping county
Therefore, it is necessary to systematically analyse targeted poverty alleviation and explore the mechanism of its
China
practices. In addition to reviewing the process of antipoverty in rural China, this study investigated the con-
notation of targeted poverty alleviation and considered the case of Fuping in Hebei Province to explore targeted
antipoverty practices. Results showed that poverty alleviation in rural China could be divided into six stages, and
the essence of targeted poverty alleviation lied in helping those who truly needed help and achieving genuine
outcomes by accurately identifying and assisting poverty-stricken households, accurately managing objects and
measures and accurately assessing antipoverty effectiveness. The practices of targeted poverty alleviation in
Fuping county mainly involved industrial development, resettlement assistance, financial and educational de-
velopment, together with medical security and land consolidation, all of which built an endogenous and sus-
tainable mechanism enabling regional development. This study suggests that targeted poverty alleviation is an
innovative strategy which is suitable for overcoming the islanding effect of poverty distribution and helping
policymakers formulate detailed and targeted measures to eliminate poverty.

1. Introduction
Poverty has long been a global problem (Haushofer and Fehr, 2014;
Liu et al., 2017), and eradicating poverty has become one of the se-
verest challenges faced by developing countries in achieving sustain-
able development (UN, 2015b). According to the Millennium Devel-
opment Goals Report 2015, despite significant progress in global
poverty reduction, over 836.0 million people continued to live in ex-
treme poverty in 2015, lacking access to adequate food, clean drinking
water and sanitation (UN, 2015a). Poverty used to be considered as an
economic phenomenon and referred to conditions under which in-
dividuals or households could not afford basic living necessities
(Hagenaars and van Praag, 1985; Liu et al., 2017). From a compre-
hensive perspective, poverty not only refers to the scarcity of material,
social and cultural resources, but also involves the lack of capabilities,
opportunities and access to social services (Sen, 1976; Alkire and
Foster, 2011; Guo et al., 2018). Scholars have developed a series of
methods for measuring poverty, including the income-consumption
standard (Ravallion et al., 1991), human development index (HDI)
(UNDP, 2010) and multidimensional poverty index (MPI) (Alkire, 2011;
Alkire and Foster, 2011). MPI, in particular, has been widely used to
reveal poverty in different regions (Ayala et al., 2011) and countries
(Alkire et al., 2014). These understandings and methods have guided
the formulation of public policies in poor areas to reduce poverty and
prevent deprivation.
China is the largest developing country in the world and once had
the largest rural poverty-stricken population (Liu et al., 2017, 2018),
which has hampered its social and economic development. Poverty thus
has attracted widespread attention from scholars in such disciplines as
sociology, geography, economics and development studies. These stu-
dies mainly focus on the delimitation of poverty lines (Tong and Lin,
1994; Liu, 2003; Zhang and Zhang, 2010), types of poverty (Liu and Xu,

∗
Corresponding author. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 11A Datun Road, Chaoyang District,
Beijing, 100101, China.
E-mail addresses: guoyz.16b@igsnrr.ac.cn (Y. Guo), liuys@igsnrr.ac.cn (Y. Liu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.01.007
Received 4 March 2018; Received in revised form 8 January 2019; Accepted 13 January 2019
0743-0167/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Please cite this article as: Yuanzhi Guo, Yang Zhou and Yansui Liu, Journal of Rural Studies, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.01.007
Y. Guo, et al.
2016; Wang and Wang, 2016; Chen et al., 2017; Wang and Chen, 2017),
regional differences of poverty (Yao et al., 2004; Ravallion and Chen,
2007a; Liu and Xu, 2016), the mechanism of poverty (Jalan and
Rarallion, 2002; Fan and Chan-Kang, 2008; Glauben et al., 2012; Chen
et al., 2016), antipoverty strategies (Rozelle et al., 1998; Park et al.,
2002; Ravallion and Chen, 2007a; Ravallion, 2009; Glauben et al.,
2012; Zhou et al., 2018a), multidimensional measurements of poverty
and the mapping of poverty (Olivia et al., 2011; Qi and Wu, 2014; Yu,
2013; Liu and Xu, 2016; Wang and Chen, 2017), antipoverty effect of
economic development (Rozelle et al., 1998; Yao, 2000; Meng et al.,
2005; Zhang and Wan, 2006; Montalvo and Ravallion, 2010), and in-
ternational comparisons (Luong and Unger, 1998; Ravallion, 2009,
2011).
Since the founding of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949,
the country has made great efforts to tackle the problems of poverty,
and successfully explored Chinese methods of poverty alleviation and
development (Du, 2012; Guo et al., 2018). These endeavours have
greatly alleviated poverty in rural China. From 1978 to 2012, the cu-
mulative number of people overcoming poverty in rural China exceeded
700.0 million (UN, 2015a; Liu et al., 2017; NBS, 2017), enabling China
to become the first country in the world which successfully achieved
the goal of halving the population living in extreme poverty (Guo et al.,
2018; Zhou et al., 2018a). However, the long-standing urban-rural
dualistic structure, together with the natural and social factors that
restrict rural development (Liu et al., 2017; Guo et al., 2018), left a total
of 43.4 million still living in poverty at the end of 2016 (NBS, 2017).
Most of them lived in densely mountainous, highly arid, ecologically
vulnerable, disaster-prone and habitat conservation areas, which were
mainly old revolutionary bases or places where minorities clustered
(Wang and Wang, 2015; Liu et al., 2017). In this context, the islanding
effect of the distribution of the impoverished population and marginal
diminishing effect of antipoverty resources pose great challenges to
poverty alleviation and development in China (Liu et al., 2016; Liu and
Cao, 2017), which cannot be effectively solved by existing strategies.
To overcome poverty and achieve the Well-off Society by 2020 as
scheduled1, the Chinese government implemented targeted poverty
alleviation (TPA) in 2013. As the main strategy for poverty alleviation
in China currently and in the near future, TPA changes the targeting of
antipoverty from regional and county levels to village and household
scales (Wang et al., 2007; Li et al., 2015; Guo et al., 2018; Liu et al.,
2018), introducing targeted measures that have greatly improve the
power of antipoverty resources. However, the way how these measures
work and their specific effects are little known. It is necessary to sys-
tematically analyse the TPA and explore the mechanisms underlying
targeted antipoverty practices. This study investigates the connotations
of TPA after reviewing the history of poverty alleviation in rural China
and takes the old revolutionary base of Fuping, a poverty-stricken
mountain county in Hebei province, as a case to investigate how pov-
erty was alleviated via localization approaches under the framework of
TPA. The findings of this study could provide valuable implications for
the local planning and implementation of TPA in China, thereby con-
tributing to global poverty alleviation and development.
2. Poverty alleviation in rural China
When the PRC was founded, the country was in a situation of uni-
versal poverty, and the central government adopted relief-type poverty
alleviation to meet the needs of the poor (Guo et al., 2018; Liu et al.,
2018). Subsequently, the practices of poverty alleviation in rural China
can be summarized as structural reform-promoted poverty relief,
1
The Well-off Society refers to a medium-term CPC national plan proposed by
Deng Xiaoping during the late 1970s and early 1980s. In 2015, Xi Jinping
further proposed the goal of eradicating poverty and building a moderately
prosperous society in all respects by the year 2020.
2
Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
development-oriented poverty relief drive, tackling key problems in
poverty relief, as well as consolidation-oriented comprehensive poverty
alleviation and targeted poverty alleviation (SCIO, 2001; Liu et al.,
2018; Zhou et al., 2018b). As a result of these efforts, the poor popu-
lation in rural China decreased from 250.0 million in 1978 to 43.4
million in 2016 (NBS, 2017) (Fig. 1), accounting for more than 70.0%
of all those who had overcome poverty around the world (UN, 2015a).
2.1. Relief-type poverty relief (1949–1977)
The founding of the PRC ended the prolonged state of war and
created fundamental conditions for development to improve people's
livelihood. At that time, due to the long war and exploitation, most
people in rural China lived in extreme poverty. The initial key was to let
farmers own their land to develop production and reverse this situation
through land reform in 1950 (Dixon, 1982). Subsequently, although the
Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution introduced great chal-
lenges, caused damages to rural development, and impeded the pro-
gress of poverty alleviation, the productivity of agriculture and the
living standard of rural residents still improved somewhat through
constant adjustments (Dixon, 1982). During this stage, because of the
ubiquitous poverty and the limited antipoverty resources, the primary
objective of poverty alleviation was to ensure basic survival of the
farmers (Piazza and Liang, 1998). The main antipoverty measures were
low-level social assistance together with mutual aid and cooperation
since the country paid more attention to the class struggle. Statistics
showed that the per capita net income of rural households was only
134.0 yuan in 1978 and the number of people living in extreme poverty
was 250.0 million, accounting for 30.7% of the total population in rural
China (NBS, 2017).
2.2. Structural reform promoted poverty relief (1978–1985)
The irrational institutional arrangements restricted poverty alle-
viation in the countryside. In this context, the household responsibility
system (HRS) originated in rural areas opened the curtain of China's
internal reform (Qu et al., 1995). This system gave farmers the con-
tractual rights of land, transforming them from simple workers to
producers and operators in collective economy (Lin, 1992; Lin et al.,
1998). Meanwhile, the establishment of a fair and market-oriented
agricultural trading system greatly stimulated farmers' enthusiasm for
production. In addition, the government encouraged farmers to engage
in non-agricultural industries and introduced policies to develop
township-village enterprises (Ho, 1995), diverting the surplus rural
labour force to non-agricultural industries. The central government
encouraged governments at all levels to focus on poverty problems in
old revolutionary base, minority autonomous, land border and less-
developed areas and carried out a planned poverty alleviation pro-
gramme in Xihaigu of Ningxia Province and Dingxi and Hexi of Gansu
Province. During this period, poverty alleviation was seen as a major
responsibility of governments (Yang and Wu, 2016). As a result, the
problems of providing adequate food and clothing to most rural
households had been basically solved, and the poor population de-
creased from 250.0 million in 1978 to 125.0 million in 1985, with the
incidence of poverty dropping from 30.7% to 14.8% (NBS, 2017).
2.3. Development-oriented poverty relief drive (1986–1993)
China's institutional reform had significantly relieved the poverty in
rural areas (World Bank, 2009; SCIO, 2016). In addition to the role
played by institutional reforms, location factors in regional develop-
ment became increasingly prominent. Thus, areas with obvious dis-
advantages in location, especially the rural areas in central and western
China, were slow in reducing the poor and remained ‘isolated island-
type poverty areas’ (Liu et al., 2017). To overcome this situation and
promote the development of poor areas around the country, a new
Y. Guo, et al.
Fig. 1. Changes of the poverty-stricken population in rural China from 1978 to 2016 (Source: NBS, 2017). Notes: a) 1978 Standard is considered the rural poverty
standard from 1978 to 1999 and the rural absolute poverty standard from 2000 to 2007; b) 2008 Standard is considered the rural low-income standard from 2000 to
2007 and the rural poverty standard from 2008 to 2010; c) 2010 Standard is considered the current rural poverty standard, which is 2300 yuan (in 2010 constant
prices) per person per year.
institution, the State Council Leading Group of Economic Development
in Impoverished Areas (renamed the State Council Leading Group Of-
fice of Poverty Alleviation and Development in 1993), was established
(Yang and Wu, 2016; Liu et al., 2018). Led by this institution, 331 state-
designated poor counties (SDPCs) were identified as antipoverty tar-
gets, and poverty alleviation and development were included in the
seventh and eighth Five-Year Plan. At the same time, growing social
forces, such as enterprises and NGOs, joined in the fight against pov-
erty. Due to these efforts, infrastructure and industry developed rapidly,
improving the self-development abilities of depressed areas (Démurger,
2001). According to NBS, the poverty-stricken population in rural
China dropped from 125.0 million in 1985 to 80.0 million in 1993, with
an average annual reduction of 5.6 million (NBS, 2017).
2.4. Tackling key problems in poverty relief (1994–2000)
With the development-oriented poverty relief drive, China had
achieved great progress in reducing impoverishment. However, the
poor were increasingly concentrated in old revolutionary base, minority
autonomous, land border and less-developed areas, where the popula-
tion was deprived, the infrastructure was poor, and the natural condi-
tions were adverse (Liu et al., 2017). Marked by the Seven-Year Priority
Poverty Alleviation Program (known as the 8–7 Plan), a programme
aiming to lift 80.0 million rural residents out of absolute poverty from
1994 to 2000, the development-oriented poverty relief in rural China
entered a crucial phase in tackling the key problems (Luo and Guo,
2013; Meng, 2013). In 1994, the number of SDPC was increased to 594,
and they became the main battlefields of poverty alleviation. Mean-
while, antipoverty measures in central and western China were in-
corporated into the national economic and social development plan.
During this period, more attention was paid to building a participatory
poverty alleviation system that encouraged the poor to join in the de-
cision-making. These measures greatly improved the endogenous de-
velopment momentum of the poor areas, such that the total who had
not solved the problem of food and clothing decreased to 32.0 million,
and the headcount ratio dropped to 3.5% (NBS, 2017).
3
Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
2.5. Consolidation-oriented comprehensive poverty alleviation
(2001–2012)
Entering the 21st century, poverty alleviation in rural China faced
new challenges and opportunities (Du and Cai, 2005). To further era-
dicate poverty, the Outline for Development-Oriented Poverty Allevia-
tion in Rural China was issued (Yang and Wu, 2016). 148 thousand
poor villages, covering 80% of the total poor population, were identi-
fied as objects of the antipoverty policies (Wang et al., 2007). Their
spatial distribution was characterized as dispersion at the national level
and agglomeration at the local level (Liu et al., 2016). Several adjust-
ments were also made in assessing the priorities and targets of poverty
alleviation to allow the low-income population to be well included in
antipoverty policies. Moreover, the agricultural tax was abolished in
2006, and the rural minimum living standard guarantee system
(RMLSGS) was established in 2007, both of which played important
roles in poverty reduction. In addition, the new rural cooperative
medical scheme (NRCMS) and new rural social pension insurance
(NRSPI) were launched to improve arrangements for the poor. Overall,
Entire Village Advancement, which took poor villages as the targets of
antipoverty, was the main practice of antipoverty during this stage, and
a development-oriented antipoverty mechanism was formed in rural
China through the collaboration among governments, markets and so-
ciety and the combination of poverty alleviation and socioeconomic
development (Liu et al., 2017). According to the 2010 standard, the
poor population in rural China decreased from 462.2 million in 2000 to
99.0 million in 2012, and the incidence of poverty decreased from
49.8% to 10.2% (NBS, 2017).
2.6. Targeted poverty alleviation (since 2013)
Progresses in industrialization, urbanization and rural reforms sig-
nificantly promoted rural development and laid a solid foundation for
poverty alleviation (Liu et al., 2017). However, the deep-rooted re-
strictions hindering economic and social development in poor areas still
remained, and some remote areas where poverty alleviation was suc-
cessful were in danger of returning to poverty. In the broader context of
Y. Guo, et al. Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

economic development, China had entered a stage of New Normal2, as existing in previous poverty alleviation systems (Liu et al., 2018), such as
designated by Xi Jinping (Hu, 2015). The traditional antipoverty the identification of those who should be assisted, the determination of
measures faced unprecedented challenges (Liu et al., 2016, 2017). In the best usage of antipoverty resources and the determination of the
this context, China initiated the strategy of TPA in 2013, which was effect of the assistance measures. Moreover, a series of flexible and tar-
important for innovating the mechanism of poverty alleviation and geted measures have been incorporated into practices in relation to local
development. Furthermore, in the Fifth Plenary Session of the 18th CPC conditions, transforming the traditional modes of combating poverty and
Central Committee, which was held in 2015, the CPC planned that all motivating endogenous development in poor areas.
poor residents living below the current poverty line should be lifted out
of poverty, thus eliminating it in all poor counties and regions by 2020. 4. Data and study area
TPA was carried out as a grasper for eliminating poverty. Following the
implementation of the TPA, the total rural population no longer in 4.1. Data sources
poverty had reached 39.1 million by the end of 2016, and the head-
count ratio decreased to 4.5% (NBS, 2017). The data used in this study are both national level and county level,
that of Fuping in Hebei Province. The former includes information
about the impoverished population and socioeconomic development of
3. Connotation of targeted poverty alleviation
China, which are derived from the China Statistical Yearbook (2017)
and the Yearbook of China's Poverty Alleviation and Development
After nearly 40 years of economic reform and opening-up, devel-
(2015). While the data of Fuping are obtained from the people's gov-
opment in China enters a period of transition (Long et al., 2010; Long
ernment of Fuping County.
and Liu, 2016; Liu and Li, 2017). The traditional modes of poverty al-
leviation and development cannot wholly eradicate poverty because of
4.2. Study area
the islanding effect of the distribution of the poor and the marginal
diminishing effect of antipoverty resources. Hence, TPA is proposed and
Fuping, a county in Hebei Province, is located in the south of the
the central government formulates a detailed top-level design to pro-
Yanshan-Taihang Mountain area, which is one of the fourteen con-
mote policy implementation. The TPA has become the guiding ideology
centrated poor areas with special difficulties (CPASDs) in China (Fig. 2).
of China's poverty alleviation and development in the current and near
With an area of 2496 km2, Fuping is divided into 13 townships, and
future period.
further subdivided into 209 administrative villages and 1208 smaller
TPA is a concept related to extensive poverty alleviation. It suggests
settlements; in 2015, 230.4 thousand people were living there. Fuping
that local governments should concentrate antipoverty resources to
is a typical densely mountainous county where the mountainous area
improve efficiency and implement targeted measures to ensure that
accounts for 87% of the total area and 146 km2 of the area is cultivated
assistance accurately reaches poverty-stricken villages and households;
land, meaning that the per capita level is only 640 m2. Fuping was the
thus, its essence is to help those who truly need it and deliver genuine
centre of the Shanxi-Chahar-Hebei border area during the Anti-Japa-
outcomes (Wang and Guo, 2015; Wang et al., 2016). Regarding its
nese War and the War of Liberation, which greatly contributed to the
contents, TPA emphasizes accuracy in identification, assistance, man-
founding of the PRC. Furthermore, Fuping has been SDPC since 1994,
agement and assessment. Specifically, accurate identification is the
and its social and economic development level has always been low.
premise of TPA, referring to the identification of poor households and
Statistics show that the gross domestic product (GDP) in Fuping was 3.1
individuals through the procedures of application, appraisal, publicity,
billion yuan in 2013, and the per capita GDP and net income of rural
etc., followed by the establishment of archives of the poor to determine
households were 14.4 thousand yuan and 4.5 thousand yuan, only
the causes of poverty and their demands. Accurate assistance, which is
34.4% and 50.3% of the national average, respectively.
key to TPA, aims at taking countermeasures for the poor in relation to
Despite great efforts have been exerted, Fuping remains in a state of
the causes of poverty. Accurate management is the guarantee for the
poverty due to the weak foundations for development, and the poverty
implementation of TPA and is designated to improve the efficiency of
there is large in amount, wide in distribution and deep in degree.
poverty alleviation resources via targeted and dynamic management of
According to the statistics of the county government, there were 164
projects, capital, measures and persons in charge. Accurate assessment
poor villages and 10.8 thousand poor individuals in 2014, accounting
is important for strengthening the effectiveness of policies through
for 48.0% of the total population and 54.0% of the rural population.
quantitative assessments of antipoverty work and establishing a dy-
Illness (28.9%) ranked first among the causes of poverty, followed by
namic mechanism of recognizing and tackling impoverished population
lack of skills (24.9%) and shortage of funds (19.5%), while shortage of
and poverty-stricken counties based on the effect of poverty relief.
labour and cultivated land accounted for a relatively small proportion.
These four components constitute the overall framework of TPA, which
In 2013, a new chapter of antipoverty in Fuping began when it was
shapes antipoverty policies in China.
identified as the pilot area for regional development and poverty alle-
To win the battle against poverty, the specific methods including six
viation in the Yanshan-Taihang Mountain area. Through a series of
accurate measures and five batches have been employed (Liu et al.,
targeted measures, the per capita net income of rural households in-
2018), all of which are the basic requirements and principal pathways of
creased to 6.5 thousand yuan by the end of 2016, leading to a decrease
TPA. The former emphasizes the accurate identification of objects, ac-
in the rural poor population to 28.8 thousand, and the headcount ratio
curate arrangement of projects, accurate use of funds, accurate im-
had decreased to 14.8%.
plementation of aiding measures, accurate dispatching of persons in
charge, and accurate effects of poverty reduction (Wang et al., 2016).
5. Main measures of targeted poverty alleviation in Fuping
The latter, which is also known as the five major approaches to poverty
alleviation, refers to eliminating poverty through industrial develop-
Under the guidance of TPA, poverty alleviation in Fuping was
ment, resettlement, ecological compensation, strengthened education
combined with county economic development by the government to
and social security (Wang et al., 2016). Briefly, TPA tackles the problems
stimulate the vitality of society and economy. Overall, the targeted
of poor people who need support by focusing on the unsolved issues
measures mainly involved industrial development, resettlement assis-
tance, financial development, education security, health safeguard and
2
According to Hu (2015), the New Normal refers to ‘a crucial rebalancing, land consolidation. As a result of these efforts, the poverty in Fuping has
one in which the country diversifies its economy, embraces a more sustainable been greatly alleviated, and the goal of poverty elimination will be
level of growth, and distributes benefits more evenly’. achieved as scheduled.

4
Y. Guo, et al.
Fig. 2. Location of Fuping county and its land use (Modified from Zhou et al., 2019).
5.1. Poverty alleviation through industrial development
Industrial development, especially agriculture, is an important
contributor to poverty reduction (Otsuka and Yamano, 2006;
Christiaensen et al., 2011). Regarding resource endowment, Fuping is a
typical mountainous agricultural county with great potential for the
forest and fruit industry. However, the structure of agricultural pro-
duction in Fuping is simple, and the rate of commercialization is low,
essentially belonging to small-scale family farming. Farmers’ incomes
increase slowly, and poverty remains a serious problem. To improve
this situation, Fuping has actively adjusted the structure of agricultural
production to promote the development of diverse industries in coun-
tryside and developed e-commerce to connect farmers with the market
since the implementation of TPA, thus improving the income of
farmers, especially those in poverty, on the basis of adequate employ-
ment.
The combination of local environment and market demands makes
the mushroom industry and its spin-offs become an important way to
eliminate poverty and enrich the poor. After a period of development
focusing on the cultivation of edible fungi, the division of labour in the
5
Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
mushroom industry has been constantly optimized, and upstream-
downstream cooperation has been continuously strengthened, forming
an industrial system of production, processing and sales and integrating
the development of primary, secondary and tertiary industry (Fig. 3).
Meanwhile, focusing on the foundations of industrial development,
Fuping, on the one hand, upgrades traditional local products, such as
jujube and walnut, on the other hand, develops new special products,
including apple and late-maturing peach. In addition, Fuping actively
establishes cooperation with Alibaba, JD.COM and other e-commerce
platforms to promote rural e-commerce development, and the county
has been promoted as the national comprehensive demonstration
county for e-commerce entering countryside.
To encourage the poor to participate in industrial development, the
county government does a good job in top-level design. Using the
mushroom industry as example, three patterns, i.e., cooperative op-
eration, independent operation and shared dividends, have been ex-
plored and promoted. Cooperative operation refers to households rent
greenhouses that are built by enterprises, and both parties share the
cost of the raw materials; the households receive a fixed revenue of 22.0
thousand yuan per greenhouse through hard work and another 50.0%
Y. Guo, et al.
Fig. 3. Comprehensive mushroom industrial system.
of any additional profits exceeding the predetermined value.
Independent operation is driven by enterprises that build standard
greenhouses, sell the greenhouses to households at cost-price and guide
the households in production. If the households wish to participate in
mushroom cultivation, they can obtain a loan up to 150.0 thousand
yuan under the guarantee from the county government. Shared divi-
dends mainly apply to households lacking labour force identified by the
county government. These households can directly and indirectly ob-
tain a loan up to 100.0 thousand yuan and are encouraged to become
shareholders of the enterprises. Thus, each poor household can obtain a
bonus of 5.0 thousand yuan per year, and the principal and interest are
returned by the enterprises. Statistics show that Fuping had built more
than 3.3 thousand greenhouses for planting mushrooms and developed
ten leading enterprises by the end of 2016. The total output value of the
county's mushroom industry in 2016 reached 113.0 million yuan, and
more than 3.3 thousand poor households were involved in the mush-
room industrial system via land circulation, self-management, labour
output or being shareholders. As a result, the average income per
household increased by more than 20.0 thousand yuan.
5.2. Poverty alleviation resettlement
China is still in the stage of industrialization and urbanization, and
many people are moving from rural to urban areas (Long et al., 2009).
This situation is also occurring in Fuping. In this process, most of those
with the will and abilities to change gradually leave, while those who
remain in the villages are probably old, weak, ill and/or disabled.
Meanwhile, the remaining poverty villages are mainly located in areas
with fragile environment, backward infrastructure and frequent dis-
asters, strengthening the islanding effect of the distribution of the poor
and posing great challenges to poverty alleviation and development in
Fuping. Data from the county government show that there were 435
settlements with a population less than 50 people, 161 of which by the
end of 2015 were uninhabited or virtually so. Most of these areas are far
from the towns and lack industries and infrastructures.
Targeting at these settlements, the county has implemented a
measure of village relocation and integration along with strategies for
rural revitalization and urban-rural integrated development.
Specifically, the county government adopts housing and monetary re-
settlement to solve the problems of living and development in reference
to fully respecting the wishes of rural households. The housing solution
is that the county government builds standardized housing for rural
households who have signed an agreement to relinquish their rural
homesteads. In general, simply equipped housing with a standard of
6
Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
25 m2 per person is provided, while five-guarantee households3 and old
persons living alone are mainly settled in nursing homes. If conditions
allow, a vegetable garden of 67 m2 per capita and unified planning
aquaculture areas are provided to the people who resettle in the rural
communities. With regard to the solution of monetary resettlement,
after their housing and land has been evaluated by professional in-
stitutions, rural households must provide proof of having purchased
housing in order to receive corresponding monetary compensation from
the county government. According to the housing usage, residential and
industrial buildings are compensated at a standard of 10 yuan/m2 and
15 yuan/m2, respectively. Those individuals who need temporary re-
sidences until their new houses are completed can obtain subsidies up
to 100 yuan per day. In addition, all relocated households can enjoy a
settling-in allowance of 8.0 thousand yuan per person and endowment
insurance allowance.
In 2016, Fuping carried out 53 construction projects of ‘beautiful
countryside’, involving 598 settlements and a population of 87.0
thousand, among which the number of rural relocation and integration
project was 33. Of these, 22 projects met the requirements for occu-
pancy by the end of 2016. As a result, the basic housing needs of the
poverty-stricken population had been effectively satisfied, improving
their living conditions. Furthermore, the population decline in the
ecologically vulnerable areas relieved the pressure on the environment,
which helped to restore the ecosystem and achieve the goal of poverty
alleviation.
5.3. Poverty alleviation through financial development
Generally, the essence of capital is profit-seeking; thus, the poor are
excluded from the credit market, forming a blank area of financial
development (Leyshon and Thrift, 1995). Fuping is a county of deep
poverty, the incidence of which in rural areas exceeded 18% in 2014;
the people's abilities to gain capital are weak. This makes capital be-
come an important factor restricting regional development and poverty
alleviation. Under the promotion of establishing a demonstration
county for poverty alleviation through financial development, a model,
involving the county government, insurances, banking, farmers and
enterprise, has been explored and promoted since the implementation
of TPA in 2013.
First, a three-level financial service network covering 209
3
Five-guarantee refers to a type of rural social welfare that covers eating,
clothing, medical, housing and burial needs.
Y. Guo, et al.
Fig. 4. Joint co-guarantee mechanism of agricultural insurance.
Fig. 5. Risk sharing mechanism of poverty alleviation loans.
administrative villages throughout the county has been set up to solve
the information asymmetry between financial institutions and rural
households and build bridges allowing financial capital to enter rural
areas. Then, two tailored mechanisms, i.e., joint co-guarantee of agri-
cultural insurance (Fig. 4) and risk sharing of poverty alleviation loans
(Fig. 5), were established to support industrial development in rural
areas and strengthen the poor against risks. The former realizes the full
coverage of main agricultural products by the insurances against nat-
ural disasters, sub-standard products and low prices, avoiding agri-
cultural risks and stimulating rural residents' enthusiasm for industrial
development; while the latter refers to the poor applying for loans with
joint mortgages of three households and guarantees provided by spe-
cialized guarantee corporations. Thus, the financing channel has been
expanded to support economic development in Fuping, further pro-
moting antipoverty in rural areas via the poverty-reduction effect of
economic development. In addition, to optimize the rural financial
environment, the county government has not only established farmers’
electronic credit information files, but also developed a mechanism
encouraging trustworthiness and punishing dishonesty.
Financial development has optimized conditions for rural develop-
ment, improving the accuracy of poverty alleviation through industrial
development. By August 2017, the poverty alleviation loans obtained
through guarantee in Fuping had reached 886 million yuan, of which a
total of 324.0 million yuan were allocated to 3870 poor households,
driving 12.7 thousand poor people out of poverty. Additionally, capital
flows to the countryside had promoted the development of modern
agriculture. According to the statistics from Fuping government, 82
7
Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
agricultural leading enterprises, including four provincial-level, had
started up in the county, forming a poverty alleviation model led by
enterprises.
5.4. Poverty alleviation through education
Education, which is mainly provided by the government, is funda-
mental in citizens' development (Schultz, 1961; Arnesen and Lundahl,
2006). Generally, education helps to promote the development of poor
areas and blocks the intergenerational transmission of poverty by im-
proving population quality (Bird et al., 2010). Studies performed by
UNESCO (2015) show that the labour productivity of people who have
completed university education is three times higher than that of those
who have completed secondary education and seven times greater than
that of those who have completed primary education. Another study
indicates that the correlation coefficient between per capita GDP and
educational attainment is 0.56 (UNESCO, 2015). The backward
economy and inadequate investment in education have aggravated the
vicious cycle of poverty in Fuping. Thus, the county government com-
bines poverty alleviation with educational development to protect the
right to education of children in poverty-stricken households. To
achieve this goal, 13 boarding schools have been built in rural areas to
solve children's difficulties in attending school, and cooperation with
high-quality schools in Hebei Province has also been promoted to im-
prove the teaching quality. Meanwhile, the county government estab-
lished an automobile training base with well-known automakers in
China to actively develop vocational education. By August 2017, 740
Y. Guo, et al.
indigent graduate trainees were employed by these automobile manu-
facturers at annual incomes between 30.0 thousand and 50.0 thousand
yuan. Moreover, aid policies for poor students have been issued, and a
special annual budget of 13.0 million is allocated as aid funds for poor
students since 2015, building a full-cover aid system from kindergarten
to university. By August 2017, the county government had cumula-
tively helped 6186 poor students and spent 18.6 million yuan, which
effectively solved poverty problems related to education.
5.5. Health poverty alleviation
Due to long-term unbalanced development strategies, there are
significant differences in social and economic development across
eastern, central and western China. Regarding health resources, there
are problems related to the insufficient quantity, low quality and un-
reasonable structure in central and western China, especially in rural
impoverished areas (Fang et al., 2010). Poor medical and health con-
ditions have caused many poor households to fall into a vicious circle of
poverty and disease. According to an investigation performed by the
State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Devel-
opment, poverty caused by disease accounted for 42.0% of the total
poverty-stricken population in 2015 (Editorial board, 2015).
Statistics show that illness is also a dominant factor causing poverty
in Fuping. The county has increased investment in health care and
improved the medical security level from health facilities, medical skills
and safeguard mechanisms. Regarding health facilities, the county
government has rebuilt traditional Chinese medical hospital, centres for
maternal and child care services and disease control and prevention,
and existing medical institutions have upgraded their hardwares.
Additionally, public hospitals in Fuping are collaborating in medical
training with famous hospitals in developed areas. Furthermore, as well
as basic medical insurance and critical illness insurance for urban-rural
residents, the county government also has established a special annual
budget of 18.0 million to build a re-compensation mechanism for rural
patients with critical diseases (CDs) and specific chronic diseases
(SCDs). Since its implementation in 2015, a total of 2474 people suf-
fering from CDs or SCDs have benefited, with a total re-compensation of
19.4 million yuan. Furthermore, the government has established a
special fund of 10.0 billion yuan to help the poor who are suffering
from CDs but unable to afford treatment. These measurements effec-
tively solved poverty related to diseases.
5.6. Poverty alleviation through land consolidation
Land is the material basis and spatial carrier for human activities
(Kupkanchanakul et al., 2015; Guo et al., 2018). However, cultivated
land in Fuping covers an area of only 146 km2. The limited farmland
has greatly restricted agricultural development (Zhou et al., 2018b).
Statistics show that Fuping has 1700 km2 of unused land, including
347 km2 of which with a slope less than 25°, and most unused land is
distributed in eight townships in central and eastern Fuping, involving
more than 70.0 thousand people.
To promote poverty alleviation and economic development, the
county has explored a comprehensive development and operation fra-
mework in mountainous areas that involves the government, en-
terprises, village committees and farmers. Under this framework, the
government's responsibilities mainly include planning-making, project
promotion and approval, investment promotion and business regula-
tion; enterprises are mainly responsible for marketing, land consolida-
tion, agricultural development and farmers' right protection; village
committees promote land transfer, coordinate mass work and dock
enterprises; and farmers increase their income by transferring the
management rights of barren mountains, becoming shareholders and
outputting labour. According to the plan proposed by Fuping County
government, the land consolidation of an area of the 347 km2 will be
completed in 2018, and the newly increased cultivated land is 133 km2,
8
Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
equalling the current total cultivated land area countywide. The in-
creased land is mainly used for the intensive agricultural production of
apples, pears and grapes (Fig. 6). As a result, the farmers are liberated
from inefficient land production, promoting the new-type urbanization.
Moreover, the forest coverage also increases by 5.3%, improving the
ecology and reducing people's risk exposure.
By August 2017, the county had completed 62 km2 of the total
newly additional cultivated land, 14 km2 of which were evaluated by
professional institutions, benefiting 26 administrative villages and more
than 15.0 thousand people. Meanwhile, these practices had paid divi-
dends of more than 80.0 million yuan altogether to the people in the
project areas, or more than 1.8 thousand yuan per person.
6. Discussion
Since the reform and opening-up, poverty in China has been greatly
alleviated due to the development-oriented policies (Yang and Wu,
2016; Liu et al., 2017), and has transformed from absolute to relative,
universal to local and persistent to transient (Jalan and Ravallion, 1998;
Ravallion and Chen, 2007a). Developed regions get rid of poverty
quickly, while remote regions still have a large number of people living
in poverty (Liu et al., 2016). In this context, the islanding and marginal
diminishing effects are increasingly prominent, and TPA, which em-
phasizes targeted measures according to the causes of poverty, has
become the guiding antipoverty strategy in rural China since 2013. Led
by TPA, the poverty situation in China's rural area has been further
ameliorated, and the goal of poverty reduction will be achieved by
2020 as scheduled, laying a solid foundation for the implementation of
rural revitalization and making a remarkable contribution to global
poverty reduction (Guo et al., 2018).
The case of Fuping shows that the ‘islanding effect’ is not only the
geographical characteristics of China's national rural poverty by county
(Liu et al., 2017), but also the spatial pattern of Fuping's rural poverty by
village. Poverty alleviation is a systematic project (Sadeq, 2002). The
measures implemented in Fuping promote poverty alleviation through
joint efforts by the government, society and individuals, achieving pro-
gress in county economic development. Land engineering provides fi-
nancial supports for the implementation of other measures through such
policies as linking the decrease in rural construction land with the in-
crease in urban construction land and cultivated land balance. However,
we should pay attention to disaster risks and its negative effects on eco-
system (Yu et al., 2010). Industrial development is the foundation for
poverty alleviation and rural sustainable development by enhancing the
endogenous power of the poor, while industries must be market-oriented
and avoid homogeneous competition. The construction of a financial
system satisfies the diversified fund demands of farmers and promotes
industrial development in rural areas. However, due to the vulnerability
of agriculture, financial risks and risk prevention mechanisms need to be
noted (von Braun, 2008). As for public service facilities, especially edu-
cation and medical treatment, adequate supply lays a foundation for
improving the rural population quality and providing qualified labour for
regional development. Nevertheless, more attention should be paid to
coordinate the problems of quantity and quality of public service facilities
since below-replacement fertility, population ageing and population de-
cline in rural areas are becoming increasingly serious (Cai, 2010; Harrell
et al., 2011; Feng et al., 2012). Resettlement solves the islanding effect
through the concentration of the population in remote areas and helps
remarkably in eliminate poverty, but more attention should be paid to the
sustainable livelihoods of the relocated population (McDowell and de
Haan, 1997). Obviously, to promote poverty alleviation and develop-
ment, Fuping has invested a variety of resources, both physical and in-
tangible. Due to regional differences, these practices are not suitable for
other poverty-stricken areas, but policymakers and poverty-stricken areas
can make full use of the TPA policy by applying targeted measures and
building a localized industrial system to promote poverty alleviation and
development.
Y. Guo, et al.
Fig. 6. Comparison before and after the land consolidation (Modified from Zhou et al., 2019).
The global antipoverty shows that development is a fundamental
way to alleviate poverty (Hayami and Godo, 2005). Undoubtedly,
poverty in rural China will be eradicated as scheduled under the gui-
dance of development-oriented poverty alleviation. However, it is the
absolute poverty that will be eliminated in 2020, relative poverty,
which is mainly characterized by inequality in access to public services
and regional/urban-rural income disparities, will continue to exist for a
long time (Guo et al., 2018; Ravallion and Chen, 2007b). Compared
with previous antipoverty strategies, TPA aims to implement targeted
measures according to the differences among the poor (Liu et al., 2017)
and will remain the guiding strategy for poverty alleviation in the stage
of relative poverty. Therefore, further attention needs to be paid to TPA.
In addition, the impoverished population is found not only in poor
areas, but also in relatively developed areas (Liu et al., 2017). This
study focused on the practices of the TPA in a typical poverty-stricken
county rather than a developed area. And we discussed the effects of
TPA practices shortly after the start of this strategy rather than the long-
term overall effects. In future studies, the effectiveness of TPA practices
in different areas should be compared, and the final results of the
strategy should be investigated. The participation mechanism of the
poor also deserves further attention.
7. Conclusions
Poverty is an inevitable phenomenon of imbalanced regional de-
velopment (Fan, 1995). To achieve sustainable development, eradi-
cating poverty in all forms is a formidable task faced by developing
countries worldwide. After nearly seventy years of poverty alleviation
and development, China is currently at the decisive stage of antipoverty
(Wang and Guo, 2015; Liu et al., 2017). In this study, we reviewed the
history of poverty alleviation in rural China, discussed the connotation
of TPA, and investigated the mechanisms and outcomes of TPA prac-
tices in Fuping county of Hebei Province. Results indicate that the six-
stage poverty alleviation, i.e., relief-type poverty relief, structural re-
form-promoted poverty relief, development-oriented poverty relief
drive, tacking key problems in poverty relief, consolidation-oriented
comprehensive poverty alleviation and targeted poverty alleviation,
have led to substantial progress in rural China. TPA, which is the cur-
rent and future guiding antipoverty strategy, aims to apply targeted
measures tailored to local conditions to help those who truly need help.
Guided by TPA, the current poverty alleviation in Fuping was mainly
promoted through industrial development, resettlement, financial
system construction, together with public services and land en-
gineering. Poverty is a comprehensive phenomenon caused by several
factors (Alkire, 2011; Guo et al., 2018; Panagariya and Mukim, 2014;
Ravallion, 2011), thus integrated measures should be employed to build
a long-term and flexible mechanism for regional development and
overcome poverty. Fuping's practices suggest that antipoverty strategies
should focus on poor people and households and that the key to success
is encouraging the people to move out of poverty by providing a series
of training, work opportunities, financial aids, and social welfares in
line with their actual differences and causes of poverty.
To some degrees, the history of human development is a process of
9
Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
antipoverty (Wang, 2017). Development-oriented poverty alleviation
pays more attention to regional social and economic development than
the differences in poverty, while individual-oriented approaches fail to
construct a policy environment for promoting regional development.
TPA has overcome these disadvantages, which not only promotes eco-
nomic development in poverty-stricken areas but also emphasizes dif-
ferences in the poor. Measures and strategies are carried out under its
overall framework rather than individually. TPA practices in Fuping
suggest that TPA is an innovative strategy that successfully forms a
framework of government guidance, society promotion and farmer
participation and effectively uses social investment and industrial, fi-
nancial, housing and public policies in long-term planning. Interna-
tional experiences show that antipoverty will enter an extremely diffi-
cult stage once the incidence of poverty in a region is below 10% (Zeng,
2017). It is necessary to learn from the history of poverty alleviation
and continue to take TPA as the guiding strategy for antipoverty be-
cause TPA calls for adjustments based on the changes in poverty.
Therefore, a deep understanding of the connotations of TPA strategy
and the mechanism behind its practices could help achieve China's goal
of eliminating poverty by 2020 and promote rural revitalization.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the National Key Research and
Development Program of China (Grant 2017YFC0504700), the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants 41601172, 41871183),
the Certificate of China Postdoctoral Science Foundation Grant (Grant
No. 2016M591105), and the Global Rural Project-China Rural
Revitalization.
References
Alkire, S., 2011. Multidimensional Poverty and its Discontents. OPHI Working Paper,
pp. 46.
Alkire, S., Chatterje, M., Conconi, S., Seth, S., Vaz, A., 2014. Global Multidimensional
Poverty Index 2014. OPHI Briefing 21. University of Oxford, Oxford.
Alkire, S., Foster, J., 2011. Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. J. Publ.
Econ. 95 (7–8), 476–487.
Arnesen, A.L., Lundahl, L., 2006. Still social and democratic? Inclusive education policies
in the nordic welfare states. Scand. J. Educ. Res. 50 (3), 285–300.
Ayala, L., Jurado, A., Pérez-Mayo, J., 2011. Income poverty and multidimensional de-
privation: lessons from cross-regional analysis. Rev. Income Wealth 57 (1), 40–60.
Bird, K., Higgins, K., McKay, A., 2010. Conflict, education and the intergenerational
transmission of poverty in Northern Uganda. J. Int. Dev. 22 (8), 1183–1196.
Cai, F., 2010. Demographic transition, demographic dividend, and Lewis turning point in
China. China Econ. J. 3 (2), 107–119.
Chen, J., Wang, Y., Wen, J., Fang, F., Song, M., 2016. The influences of aging population
and economic growth on Chinese rural poverty. J. Rural Stud. 47 (B), 665–676.
Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Zhao, W., Hu, Z., Duan, F., 2017. Contributing factors and classifi-
cation of poor villages in China. Acta Geograph. Sin. 72 (10), 1827–1844.
Christiaensen, L., Demery, L., Kuhl, J., 2011. The (evolving) role of agriculture in poverty
reduction-An empirical perspective. J. Dev. Econ. 96 (2), 239–254.
Démurger, S., 2001. Infrastructure development and economic growth: an explanation for
regional disparities in China? J. Comp. Econ. 29 (1), 95–117.
Dixon, J., 1982. The community-based rural welfare system in the people's Republic of
China: 1949-1979. Community Dev. J. 17 (1), 2–12.
Du, Y., 2012. Taking the road of poverty alleviation and development with Chinese
characteristics. China Venture Capital 17, 5–6.
Du, Y., Cai, F., 2005. The transition of the stages of poverty reduction in rural China.
Y. Guo, et al.
China Rural Survey 5, 2–9.
Editorial board, 2015. Yearbook of China's Poverty Alleviation and Alleviation. Unity
Press (China), Beijing.
Fan, C.C., 1995. Of belts and ladders: state policy and uneven regional development in
Post-Mao China. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 85 (3), 421–449.
Fan, S., Chan-Kang, C., 2008. Regional road development, rural and urban poverty:
evidence from China. Transport Pol. 15 (5), 305–314.
Fang, P., Dong, S., Xiao, J., Liu, C., Feng, X., Wang, Y., 2010. Regional inequality in health
and its determinants: evidence from China. Health Policy 94 (1), 14–25.
Feng, Z., Liu, C., Guan, X., Mor, V., 2012. China's rapidly aging population creates policy
challenges in shaping a viable long-term care system. Health Aff. 31 (12), 2764–2773.
Glauben, T., Herzfeld, T., Rozelle, S., Wang, X., 2012. Persistent poverty in rural China:
where, why, and how to escape? World Dev. 40 (4), 784–795.
Guo, Y., Zhou, Y., Cao, Z., 2018. Geographical patterns and anti-poverty targeting post-
2020 in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 28 (12), 1810–1824.
Hagenaars, A.J.M., van Praag, B.M.S., 1985. A synthesis of poverty line definitions. Rev.
Income Wealth 31 (2), 139–154.
Harrell, S., Wang, Y., Han, H., Santos, G.D., Zhou, Y., 2011. Fertility decline in rural
China: a comparative analysis. J. Fam. Hist. 36 (1), 15–36.
Haushofer, J., Fehr, E., 2014. On the psychology of poverty. Science 344 (6186),
862–867.
Hayami, Y., Godo, Y., 2005. Development Economics: from the Poverty to the Wealth of
Nations. Oxford University Press.
Ho, S.P.S., 1995. Rural non-agricultural development in post-reform China: growth, de-
velopment patterns, and issues. Pac. Aff. 68 (3), 360–391.
Hu, A., 2015. Embracing China's new normal. Foreign Aff. 94 (3), 8–12.
Jalan, J., Ravallion, M., 1998. Determinants of Transient and Chronic Poverty: Evidence
from Rural china. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No.1936.
Jalan, J., Ravallion, M., 2002. Geographic poverty traps? a micro model of consumption
growth in rural China. J. Appl. Econom. 17 (4), 329–346.
Kupkanchanakul, W., Kwonpongsagoon, S., Bader, H.P., Scheidegger, R., 2015.
Integrating spatial land use analysis and mathematical material flow analysis for
nutrient management: a case study of the Bang Pakong River Basin in Thailand.
Environ. Manag. 55 (5), 1022–1035.
Leyshon, A., Thrift, N., 1995. Geographies of financial exclusion: financial abandonment
in Britain and the United States. T. I. Brit. Geogr 20 (3), 312–341.
Li, X., Tang, L., Xu, H., 2015. Poverty alleviation and governance in China: analysis of
targeting and transfer of anti-poverty resources. Jilin Univ. J. Soc. Sci. Ed. 55 (4),
90–98.
Lin, J.Y., 1992. Rural reforms and agricultural growth in China. Am. Econ. Rev. 82 (1),
34–51.
Lin, J.Y., Cai, F., Li, Z., 1998. Competition, policy burdens, and state-owned enterprise
reform. Am. Econ. Rev. 88 (2), 422–427.
Liu, J., 2003. A study of the method for determining poverty line. J. Shanxi Financ. Econ.
Univ. 25 (4), 60–62.
Liu, Y., Cao, Z., 2017. Supply-side structural reform and its strategy for targeted poverty
alleviation in China. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci. 32 (10), 1066–1073.
Liu, Y., Guo, Y., Zhou, Y., 2018. Poverty alleviation in rural China: policy changes, future
challenges and policy implications. China Agr. Econ. Rev. 10 (2), 241–259.
Liu, Y., Li, Y., 2017. Revitalize the world's countryside. Nature 548 (7667), 275–277.
Liu, Y., Liu, J., Zhou, Y., 2017. Spatio-temporal patterns of rural poverty in China and
targeted poverty alleviation strategies. J. Rural Stud. 52, 66–75.
Liu, Y., Xu, Y., 2016. A geographic identification of multidimensional poverty in rural
China under the framework of sustainable livelihoods analysis. Appl. Geogr. 73,
62–76.
Liu, Y., Zhou, Y., Liu, J., 2016. Regional differentiation characteristics of rural poverty
and targeted poverty alleviation strategy in China. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci. 31 (3),
269–278.
Long, H., Liu, Y., 2016. Rural restructuring in China. J. Rural Stud. 47, 387–391.
Long, H., Liu, Y., Li, X., Chen, Y., 2010. Building new countryside in China: a geographical
perspective. Land Use Pol. 27 (2), 457–470.
Long, H., Zou, J., Liu, Y., 2009. Differentiation of rural development driven by in-
dustrialization and urbanization in eastern coastal China. Habitat Int. 33 (4),
454–462.
Luo, G., Guo, Y., 2013. Rural electrification in China: a policy and institutional analysis.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 23, 320–329.
Luong, H.V., Unger, J., 1998. Wealth, power, and poverty in the transition to market
economies: the process of socio-economic differentiation in rural China and northern
Vietnam. China J. 40, 61–93.
McDowell, C., de Haan, A., 1997. Migration and Sustainable Livelihoods: A Critical
Review of the Literature. Institute of Development Studies, Brighton IDS Working
Paper 65.
Meng, L., 2013. Evaluating China's poverty alleviation program: a regression dis-
continuity approach. J. Publ. Econ. 101, 1–11.
Meng, X., Gregory, R., Wang, Y., 2005. Poverty, inequality, and growth in urban China,
1986-2000. J. Comp. Econ. 33 (4), 710–729.
Montalvo, J.G., Ravallion, M., 2010. The pattern of growth and poverty reduction in
China. J. Comp. Econ. 38 (1), 2–16.
National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), 2017. China Statistical Yearbook 2017. China
Statistics Press, Beijing.
Olivia, S., Gibson, J., Rozelle, S., Huang, J.K., Deng, X.Z., 2011. Mapping poverty in rural
China: how much does the environment matter? Environ. Dev. Econ. 16 (2),
129–153.
Otsuka, K., Yamano, T., 2006. Introduction to the special issue on the role of nonfarm
income in poverty reduction: evidence from Asia and East Africa. Agr. Econ-Blackwell
35 (s3), 393–397.
10
Journal of Rural Studies xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Panagariya, A., Mukim, M., 2014. A comprehensive analysis of poverty in India. Asian
Dev. Rev. 31 (1), 1–52.
Park, A., Wang, S., Wu, G., 2002. Regional poverty targeting in China. J. Publ. Econ. 86
(1), 123–153.
Piazza, A., Liang, E.H., 1998. Reducing absolute poverty in China: current status and
issues. J. Int. Aff. 52 (1), 253–273.
Qi, D., Wu, Y., 2014. Child poverty in China-a multidimensional deprivation approach.
Child Indic. Res. 7, 89–118.
Qu, F., Heerink, N., Wang, W., 1995. Land administration reform in China: its impact on
land allocation and economic development. Land Use Pol. 12 (3), 193–203.
Ravallion, M., 2009. Are there lessons for Africa from China's success against poverty?
World Dev. 37 (2), 303–313.
Ravallion, M., 2011. A Comparative Perspective on Poverty Reduction in Brazil, China
and India. Policy Research Working Paper 5080.
Ravallion, M., Chen, S., 2007a. China's (uneven) progress against poverty. J. Dev. Econ.
82 (1), 1–42.
Ravallion, M., Chen, S., 2007b. Weakly relative poverty. Rev. Econ. Stat. 93 (4),
1251–1261.
Ravallion, M., Datt, G., van de Walle, D., 1991. Quantifying absolute poverty in the de-
veloping world. Rev. Income Wealth 37 (4), 345–361.
Rozelle, S., Park, A., Benziger, V., Ren, C., 1998. Targeted poverty investments and
economic growth in China. World Dev. 26 (12), 2137–2151.
Sadeq, A.H.M., 2002. Waqf, perpetual charity and poverty alleviation. Int. J. Soc. Econ.
29 (1/2), 135–151.
Schultz, T.W., 1961. Investment in human capital. Econ. J. 51 (1), 1–17.
State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China (SCIO), 2001. The
development-oriented poverty reduction program for rural China. 2001. http://
www.gov.cn/english/official/2005-07/27/content_17712.htm.
State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China (SCIO), 2016. China's
Progress in Poverty Reduction and Human Rights. http://english.gov.cn/policies/
latest_releases/2016/10/17/content_281475468533275.htm.
Sen, A., 1976. Poverty: an ordinal approach to measurement. Econometrica 44 (2),
219–231.
Tong, X., Lin, M., 1994. Study on the standard line of rural poverty in China. Soc. Sci.
China 3, 86–98.
UNESCO, 2015. UNESCO Science Report: towards 2030. . https://en.unesco.org/unesco_
science_report.
United Nations (UN), 2015a. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015. (New
York).
United Nations (UN), 2015b. Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development. (Working Papers).
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2010. Human development Report
2010. Palgrave Macmillan 25 (5), 631–638.
von Braun, J., 2008. Food and Financial Crises: Implications for Agriculture and the Poor.
IFPRI, Food Policy Report No. 20. (Washington, DC).
Wang, J., Chen, Y., Yan, M., 2016. Research on the targeted measures of poverty alle-
viation and its innovative ways in China. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci. 31 (3), 289–295.
Wang, S., Guo, Z., 2015. Comment on China's targeted poverty alleviation. Guizhou Soc.
Sci. 5, 147–150.
Wang, S., Park, A., Chaudhuri, S., Datt, G., 2007. Rural poverty alleviation and village
poverty targeting in the new period of China. Manag. World 1, 56–64.
Wang, X., 2017. The Measurement of Poverty: Theories and Methods, second ed. Social
Sciences Academic Press (China), Beijing.
Wang, Y., Chen, Y., 2017. Using VPI to measure poverty-stricken villages in China. Soc.
Indicat. Res. 133, 1–25.
Wang, Y., Wang, B., 2016. Multidimensional poverty measure and analysis: a case study
from Hechi City, China. SpringerPlus 5, 642.
Wang, Y., Wang, S., 2015. Clustering analysis of the rural poverty population and poverty
reduction strategies. China Agr. Univ. J. Soc. Sci. Edit. 32 (2), 98–109.
World Bank, 2009. China-from Poor Areas to Poor People: China's Evolving Poverty
Reduction Agenda-An Assessment of Poverty and Inequality in china. Report No.
47349-CN.
Yang, Y., Wu, X., 2016. The past, present and future of China's poverty alleviation. Chin.
J. Popul. Sci. 5, 2–12.
Yao, S., Zhang, Z., Hanmer, L., 2004. Growing inequality and poverty in China. China
Econ. Rev. 15 (2), 145–163.
Yao, S.J., 2000. Economic development and poverty reduction in China over 20 years of
reforms. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 48 (3), 447–474.
Yu, G., Feng, J., Che, Y., Lin, X., Hu, L., Yang, S., 2010. The identification and assessment
of ecological risks for land consolidation based on the anticipation of ecosystem
stabilization: a case study in Hubei Province, China. Land Use Pol. 27 (2), 293–303.
Yu, J., 2013. Multidimensional poverty in China: findings based on the CHNS. Soc.
Indicat. Res. 112 (2), 315–336.
Zeng, X., 2017. The Way of Poverty Alleviation after the Half. People's Daily. 2017-11-03.
Zhang, Q., Zhang, J., 2010. The dynamics of China's rural poverty:1981-2005-Based on
alternative poverty lines and indices. Stat. Res. 27 (2), 28–35.
Zhang, Y., Wan, G., 2006. The impact of growth and inequality on rural poverty in China.
J. Comp. Econ. 34 (4), 694–712.
Zhou, Y., Guo, Y., Liu, Y., 2018a. Comprehensive measurement of county poverty and
anti-poverty targeting after 2020 in China. Acta Geograph. Sin. 73 (8), 1478–1493.
Zhou, Y., Guo, Y., Liu, Y., Li, Y., 2018b. Targeted poverty alleviation and land policy
innovation: some practice and policy implications from China. Land Use Pol. 74,
53–65.
Zhou, Y., Guo, L., Liu, Y., 2019. Land consolidation boosting poverty alleviation in China:
theory and practice. Land Use Pol 82, 339–348.