How resilience capacity and multiple shocks affect rural households’ subjective well-being: A comparative study of the Yangtze and Yellow River Basins in China

Enhancing resilience capacity and well-being of rural households are of great significance for achieving the Sustainable Development Goal 1.5, which seeks to establish resilience by mitigating exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events, as well as other economic, social, and environmental shocks. Despite the growing literature on resilience capacity and subjective well-being, there is a lack of studies that examine how the resilience capacity and multiple shocks affect subjective well-being of rural households in river basins from a comparative perspective. This study developed a conceptual framework linking multiple shocks and resilience capacity to household subjective well-being and quantified their relationship empirically in two of the largest river basins in China and worldwide, i.e., the Yangtze and Yellow River Basins. Specifically, the adverse impact of external (natural disasters, and agroforestry pests and diseases) and internal (family illness) shocks and the positive role of three resilience pillars (absorption, adaptation, and transformation) and the overall resilience are examined. The results show that (1) There is a higher subjective well-being among rural households in the Yangtze River Basin than in the Yellow River Basin (69.46 vs. 67.93). (2) Rural households in the Yellow River Basin exhibit greater exposure to all three shock types, but the adverse effect of agroforestry pests and diseases on subjective well-being is more pronounced in the Yangtze River Basin (β=−1.592, P<0.05) than the Yellow River Basin (β=−1.196, P>0.10). (3) Households in the Yellow River Basin have a marginally higher resilience capacity than those in the Yangtze River Basin, with scores of 21.67 and 21.34, respectively. Both absorptive and transformative capacities positively influence subjective well-being. In the Yellow River Basin, absorptive capacity plays a more crucial role (β=0.504, P<0.05), while in the Yangtze River Basin, transformative capacity is more influential (β=0.742, P<0.01). (4) Participation in Payment for Ecosystem Services programs has a significant positive impact on subjective well-being of rural households in the Yangtze River Basin (β=1.478, P<0.10). The findings have crucial practical values for enhancing resilience and subjective well-being of rural households in river basins and other vulnerable areas worldwide.