Rural household livelihood resilience under digital transformation: evidence from participation pathways and U-shaped effects

Abstract

Introduction:

Driven by the digital rural strategy, the construction of digital infrastructure has become a critical technological foundation for advancing agricultural and rural modernization, as well as enhancing the rural household livelihood resilience.

Methods:

Drawing on micro-level survey data from rural areas in Jiangsu Province and a county-level digital infrastructure index, this study constructs a “buffering capacity–self-organisation capacity–learning capacity–psychological adaptation capacity” framework for measuring livelihood resilience. Using Ordinary Least Squares models, U-shaped regression models, Hierarchical Linear Model (HLM) and mediation effect models, it empirically analyses the impact of digital infrastructure on rural household livelihood resilience and its underlying mechanisms. The study further employs instrumental variables (IV) and double/debiased machine learning (DDML) models to address endogeneity issues.

Results:

The findings suggest that digital infrastructure in rural areas remarkably enhances rural household livelihood resilience overall, though the impact follows a U-shaped nonlinear pattern. Mediation analysis indicates that digital infrastructure significantly enhances farmers’ participation in digital information and digital finance, which indirectly strengthens their livelihood resilience. Heterogeneity analysis reveals that higher-income households, full-time and part-time farming households, and non-economically disadvantaged villages exhibit a significant U-shaped empowerment effect from digital infrastructure. Among them, full-time farming households are more sensitive to digital infrastructure transformation, showing a steeper U-shaped curve.

Discussion:

This research increases the comprehension of the connection between digital rural development and livelihood resilience at a micro level, offering empirical evidence and policy recommendations for the integrated advancement of rural revitalization and digital rural construction.

1 Introduction

In the midst of rapid global digital transformation, digital technologies have become a key driver of national development and socio-economic change. However, this process has also intensified the urban–rural divide. Due to limited access to relevant technologies, rural areas lag behind in digitalization, restricting their economic growth and integration into broader economic systems (Xia and Kong, 2024). Promoting digital transformation in rural areas is therefore crucial, not only to narrow this gap, but also to achieve long-term rural revitalization goals. Globally, developed countries recognize the role of digital technologies in rural revitalization and have implemented related policies. For example, both the European Commission (2026) call to further advance “Smart Villages” under the frameworks of “the Long-Term Vision for Rural Areas” and “the Strategy on Generational Renewal in Agriculture” and the fifth round of “the USDA’s ReConnect Program” (Rupasingha et al., 2026), highlight the empowering effects of digital rural development by seeking to expand internet access to stimulate economic vitality in rural areas. Similarly, developing countries like China are actively advancing rural digital infrastructure. For instance, the “China-FAO Phase III South-South Cooperation Trust Fund” project supports the digital transformation of food systems in the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), aiming to enhance the resilience of rural household livelihoods through information technology (Dong, 2023). In addition, “the Key Tasks for Digital Rural Development in 2025”, jointly issued by four departments of the Chinese government, explicitly calls for consolidating the foundations of digital rural development and implementing targeted initiatives to strengthen agriculture, benefit farmers, and increase rural incomes through digitalization (Dong, 2023). A recent FAO report (2025) further emphasizes that digital tools can help bridge gaps, improve transparency, and enhance resilience. It positions digital agriculture as a key pathway for strengthening smallholders’ livelihood resilience, safeguarding food security, and responding to risk.

Digital infrastructure helps bridge capital endowment gaps among income groups and overcomes resource and geographic constraints that limit opportunities for the poor (Chen et al., 2022). In this context, digital infrastructure is increasingly vital for rural households to withstand risk shocks and enhance livelihood security. At the same time, however, as a new technological factor, the spread of digital infrastructure in rural areas does not occur overnight. According to the technology adoption life cycle, the diffusion of new technologies in rural areas is typically characterized by staged frictions and time lags. The development of digital technologies creates phased thresholds for rural households. Yet, constraints in human capital may hinder the effective realization of digital dividends.

In the post-pandemic era, poverty in rural China has been addressed systematically, and the nation’s development focus is gradually shifting toward managing diverse risk shocks and achieving sustainable rural development. Sustainable development implies the capacity for long-term growth, which depends not only on the resource base supporting development but also on resilience in the face of risks (Li et al., 2022). Within the framework of sustainable development goals, livelihood resilience is defined as the ability to maintain and expand livelihood opportunities and well-being amid economic, social, environmental, and political instability (Tang et al., 2023). Historically, rural China has been widely regarded as a “society of personal relations” and “relationship-based society,” with a long history of smallholder farming, where farmers generally exhibit characteristics of “resilient households” (Chen, 2019). However, with the interplay of climate change, economic fluctuations, and social structural adjustments, systemic risks facing rural livelihood systems have intensified, posing severe challenges to overall rural livelihood resilience (Quandt, 2018; Roberts et al., 2019). Arguably, enhancing livelihood resilience is crucial for increasing rural household incomes and stabilizing poverty alleviation outcomes, and it also directly affects the inclusiveness and resilience of the rural revitalization strategy (Li et al., 2021).

To date, research on livelihood resilience has primarily focused on three areas: conceptual definition, measurement framework development, and analysis of influencing factors. The concept of resilience was introduced by the ecologist Holling (1973). Later, Adger (2000) extended it to social systems, examining the link between ecological and social resilience in rural communities. More recently, Lade et al. (2017) introduced resilience thinking into poverty governance. Regarding measurement frameworks, no consensus has been reached. The most widely applied framework is that of Speranza et al. (2014), which assesses livelihood resilience through three dimensions: buffering capacity, self-organization, and learning capacity. The RIMA-II (2016) developed a multi-level evaluation system based on policy needs, encompassing livelihood assets, agricultural exchange and learning, adaptive capacity, social safety nets, and access to basic services. Additionally, Quandt (2018) developed a household livelihood resilience framework by incorporating cultural capital into the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA) proposed by the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID). However, traditional research frameworks have not placed psychological resilience at the center of analysis. Only a few scholars have incorporated it into evaluation systems, emphasizing the role of psychological capital in enhancing resilience and promoting sustainable development (Cheng and Sun, 2025). Empirically, researchers often use weighted composite methods. For example, entropy weighting (Xu et al., 2025) and principal component analysis (Su et al., 2022) are used to determine the indicator weights, while composite index methods (Dong and Qiu, 2024) and the TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) model (Ma et al., 2024a) calculate resilience indices. In the same vein, Cissé and Barrett (2018) proposed a novel econometric approach measuring livelihood resilience by the conditional probability of households achieving a specific welfare threshold. In terms of influencing factors, existing studies have mainly analyzed the effects of livelihood capital (Ma et al., 2024b), livelihood strategies (Luo et al., 2022), risk shocks (Gao et al., 2024), agricultural management models (Lin and Du, 2023), and the digital economy (Xu et al., 2024b) on livelihood resilience improvement from perspectives such as sustainable policy effects, regional characteristic resilience development, and external risk shocks.

Against this backdrop of advancing digital transformation strategies, research on how digital development drives farmers’ livelihood resilience remains limited. Existing empirical studies primarily center on the empowering effects of digital technology adoption and economic digitization. For example, Lyu et al. (2025) analyzed the impact of digital adoption on livelihood resilience within a sustainable livelihoods framework across the dimensions of production, sales, and financial services, capturing the synergistic effects of comprehensive digital participation. Shahzad et al. (2025) investigated the digitalization of flood resilience strategies in marginalized rural communities in Pakistan. Their study notes that one-third of surveyed households were unable to establish adequate early warning mechanisms due to limited digital communication, thereby hindering the development of livelihood resilience in the area. Zhu et al. (2025) examined the mechanisms through which farmers’ participation in the digital economy improves their livelihood resilience, focusing on three channels: strengthened production capacity, stimulated entrepreneurial vitality, and enhanced effectiveness of financial asset portfolios.

However, as one of the two foundational pillars of the “Digital China” strategy, the potential role of digital infrastructure in enhancing rural livelihood resilience has yet to be systematically researched. Most existing literature remains at the level of theoretical deduction regarding digital empowerment and risk response. Only a few scholars have used township 4G base stations as proxies for digital infrastructure to explore its U-shaped impact on household development resilience (Zhang et al., 2025). There is still a lack of in-depth empirical investigation into both the linear and nonlinear relationships between comprehensive regional digital infrastructure and livelihood resilience. In particular, whether these relationships vary across different population groups requires in-depth scrutiny. Furthermore, existing research has predominantly focused on the mechanisms through which digital participation influences livelihood resilience. As a foundational prerequisite for digital transformation, digital infrastructure lacks rigorous empirical exploration regarding its specific impact on farmers’ livelihood resilience. The interrelations among digital infrastructure, digital participation behaviors, and livelihood resilience also remain insufficiently addressed. There is an urgent need to refine the relevant empirical research.

Consequently, this study approaches the issue from the perspective of digital rural construction, analyzing the impact and mechanisms of digital infrastructure development on household livelihood resilience in rural China. Building on current literature, this article may offer the following marginal contributions. First, it establishes a theoretical framework defining “Digital Infrastructure – Digital Participation – Resilience Enhancement.” This study incorporates county-level digital infrastructure as a core driving factor into the analysis of livelihood resilience. It also examines the mechanisms through which digital infrastructure enhances the livelihood resilience of rural households, from the perspectives of information and financial digital participation. It enriches micro-level empirical research on how digital rural construction influences resilience. Second, it comprehensively tests both the linear and nonlinear effects of digital infrastructure. Beyond examining linear impacts, this research introduces a squared term for digital infrastructure to identify potential nonlinearities. This provides empirical support for a comprehensive understanding of the dynamic process of digital infrastructure development and for identifying its stage threshold effects. Third, it reveals the heterogeneity of the U-shaped relationship at the micro level of households and the meso level of villages. It conducts U-shaped heterogeneity tests across household income, livelihood strategy, and village economic conditions. This provides empirical evidence to reveal structural differences in the empowering effects of digital infrastructure and informs targeted policy measures. In summary, this research aims to provide empirical evidence on how digital infrastructure can effectively enhance rural household livelihood resilience, and to offer policy insights for the in-depth integration of digital rural development with rural revitalization strategies.

2 Theoretical analysis and research hypotheses

2.1 Digital infrastructure and rural household livelihood resilience

In recent years, technologies such as the internet, big data, and cloud computing have advanced rapidly, making digital technology and the digital economy key areas of international competition (Fu, 2024; Wang et al., 2024). It is against this backdrop that the development of digital infrastructure has become a cornerstone for rural digital transformation. By popularizing information technology, the socio-economic structure of rural areas is undergoing profound digital restructuring. Rural digital infrastructure comprises not only network facilities, such as mobile and broadband networks, but also information service platforms, including big data centers, e-commerce, along with the digital modernization of traditional agriculture and transportation infrastructure, among others. According to the China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC, 2025), the number of rural internet users in China reached 313 million by December 2024, with continuous improvements in rural digital service systems and digital production models. This process not only provides technical support to rural areas, but also serves as a crucial driver of rural economic growth and the improvement of farmers’ well-being.

Livelihood resilience extends the concept of “resilience” into the socio-economic domain. It emphasizes how farmers respond to risks and pressures through resource transformation and strategic adjustments (Tanner et al., 2015). This ability helps them maintain normal livelihoods and avoid falling back into poverty (Zheng et al., 2023). The capability connotation is the intrinsic foundation of livelihood resilience. It highlights the comprehensive measurement of resilience through buffering capacity, self-organization capacity, learning capacity and psychological adaptation (Gao et al., 2024). Buffering capacity refers to farmers’ ability to use their livelihood capital and resour