Rural Settlement Development in Western China: Risk, Vulnerability, and Resilience

Abstract

Rural development is an essential link in the social governance system, and it is the key to market rural development and enhancing farmers’ living conditions. It is a critical starting point for changing the agricultural landscape and improving agricultural social governance capability. It is also the proper means of encouraging the balanced growth of urban and rural society, as well as traditional wealth. Farmers no longer have to worry about “short of food and clothing,” but “housing challenges” pose a threat to the soundness, harmony, and growth of rural areas, social hazards are increasing, and rural areas in distant western areas continue to create risk and vulnerability of living setting. Most previous studies have focused on economic and regulatory elements; however, this study focuses on the composition of home environment risk factors, as well as the influence of fabric vulnerability, trust vulnerability, and emotional vulnerability produced by risks. To successfully resist residential surroundings threats, improving the effectiveness of risk response and boosting farmers’ resilience are all critical strategies to reduce susceptibility. This study, which employs in-depth interview methodology, explains how the growth of a gorgeous new country must enhance and ensure the safety of farmers’ living surroundings to prevent risk impact, as well as how the country’s resilience should be improved. The findings indicate that, in the technique of rural government, the preservation of living environments is not only one of the primary desires of farmers, but, furthermore, the key to increasing farmers’ flexibility to combat hazards, and also the lone way to come through property rural development. In accordance with the specific situation, the associated countermeasures, square measure, imply: to begin, the highest body’s role placement is treated to weaken the fabric, this weakness caused by the unclear role positioning. Second, we should always encourage excellent communication among subjects about the concept of trust in order to reduce the vulnerability of trust produced by insufficient policy coverage and differences in policy interpretation and knowledge. Third, we should always perceive and satisfy the emotional needs of farmers’ families in order to reduce the emotional vulnerability caused by policies and procedures that neglect their true feelings.

1. Introduction

The actual term “sustainable development” originated out of the 1987 report, “Our Common Future”, created by the WCED [1]. The 17 objectives nemine contradicente were endorsed by all World Organization Member States in 2015, square measure, as part of the 2030 Agenda for Property Development. “No poverty” is one of the objectives [2]. In order to attain this goal, the international community has introduced several measures and plans that aim at eradicating economic condition worldwide. For example, the difficulties to rural demography and economic viability posed by depopulation, industrial restructuring, skill shortages, and service loss have been observed in Australia, as well as in some rural parts of other nations, and have been a focus of discussion for decades [3,4,5,6,7]. In the final decade of the 20th century, the term “sustainable development” became frequently used by governments, nongovernmental organizations, the commercial sector, and academics [8]. To ensure property development of the impoverished population, the Chinese government adopted a series of measures to stabilize economic condition alleviation and forestall this population from falling back to poverty; these measures additionally aimed to stop farmers from becoming impoverished [9]. In other words, China has put solving the problem of poverty-stricken people on the important agenda of economic and social development and included it within the goal of building a well-off society in an all-round way by 2020. This not only reflects the state’s emphasis on rural financial poverty alleviation, but also is a major event within the new era of socialism with Chinese characteristics and is a further improvement of the financial poverty alleviation and development strategy and policy system. It has become a significant and pressing issue nowadays. Through a series of effective poverty reduction policies, China has achieved the poverty reduction goals set by the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Ten years ahead of schedule, nearly 1.4 billion people in China have started a new journey of building a socialist modern country. This is a major change and event in the history of mankind [10].

According to General Secretary Xi Jinping, the concept of rural revitalization is to consolidate the achievements of poverty eradication and continue to strive for a better life for those who get rid of poverty [11]. Against the backdrop of China’s second century of struggle, rural poverty alleviation has achieved a watershed victory. To put it another way, adhering to socialist modernization must be based on the beneficial achievements and lessons of the human modernization process, with common prosperity as the primary goal, in order to overcome the roadblocks of capitalist modernization [12]. Rural development aims to address issues of sustainability and transformation in nonurban areas, while taking into account both the demographic and socio-cultural components of rurality [13]. With the advancement of agricultural technology and the support of the government and the market, the economy and farmers’ living standards have improved. Simultaneously, the urbanization process has accelerated and farmers are placing greater demands on their living environment, with housing safety becoming a priority at this stage.

However, due to the influence of numerous variables and unexpected occurrences, security issues in rural homes are common in China, severely limiting the stable development of rural areas. The geographical setting is one of them. Most farmers in the northwest and southwest like to build their homes near mountains and rivers. But housing bearing capacity is low, and landslides, floods, and other disasters have increased potential safety threats. Second, consider the traffic scenario. Due to inadequate traffic, it is difficult to deliver building supplies, such as bricks and tiles, to the construction site in remote rural areas, and transportation costs will rise, increasing the economic burden and failing to ensure the safety of dwellings. Third, at the policy level, it is critical to accelerate the solution to rural housing security in order to fulfill the goal of creating beautiful new countryside. On the one hand, the grass-roots government failed to thoroughly examine the farmers’ current living conditions and actual requirements, resulting in the relocation program being delayed. On the other side, in order to enforce the program, the government does not have the patience to provide farmers with detailed information regarding welfare protection, and forceful evictions are common. As a result, farmers’ attitudes have not evolved throughout time, and conflict may arise between the two parties. Therefore, one of the challenges that rural governance must address after winning the difficult war against poverty by 2020 is how to ensure the security of the rural living environment and support the stable growth of rural governance.

This paper’s basic principle is as follows: first, it is known from a review of the literature on rural housing environment, vulnerability, and resilience that the formulation and implementation of rural housing security policies is not only a livelihood policy to compensate for the current shortage of rural housing security, but also a basic condition for the construction of a beautiful new countryside. Second, it assesses the existing dangers associated with rural housing and the susceptibility of farmers. Third, it delves deeply into ways to reduce vulnerability in order to build resilience. Taking J village in L city as an example, this paper conducts in-depth interviews with resident cadres, village cadres, and farmers in this village and analyzes how rural resilience is achieved from three perspectives: role orientation, trust and communication, and emotional appeal. Finally, it consolidates the beneficial achievements of precise poverty alleviation by promoting rural economic growth and sustained income increases.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Rural Living Conditions

Many foreign communities, such as many villages in Iran, have many of the same hazards, including floods, landslides, and landslides, in addition to the regular seismic concerns [14]. And, in China, rural house construction has made significant progress since the reform and opening up [15]. Rural housing is not only an important asset, but also a significant source of rural finance [16]. Rural home security is a crucial foundation for implementing the rural rehabilitation strategy, and it is also a government priority. More and more rural houses are pursuing greater and broader aims in the process of rural governance. To carry out rural building under the shared development concept is to entirely change the appearance of the village, optimize farmers’ living environments, and fill their living environments with green [17]. Concurrently, in rural areas where the emphasis is on the utilization of local and authentic resources through agritourism activities, rural development is promised to be sustainable [18,19]. In other words, a number of initiatives aimed at improving the rural economy and increasing agricultural output, such as precise poverty alleviation and the construction of beautiful new villages, are all aimed at improving the appearance of villages and raising farmers’ living standards, allowing them to feel happier and more satisfied.

The majority of extant studies examine the problems and solutions to rural housing improvement from the standpoint of social capital or social resource endowment. Social capital is an endogenous resource that can be used to encourage rural community innovation, solve rural community governance quandaries, and realize political growth. Between social capital and community governance, an implicit virtuous circle of “mutual causality” exists [20]. However, there have been few studies on the characteristics or varieties of rural home environments. According to Xu Jiaming and Liu Haijian, there are three categories of rural housing based on their construction date: old houses (constructed before 1990), ordinary houses (built between 1990 and 2000), and modern houses (built after 2000) [21]. These ancient and outdated houses are in danger of falling into disrepair, adding to the economic pressures on rural people. According to Liu Lifeng, Feng Xingang, and others, some rural residents in need have subpar housing circumstances, few opportunities for employment, and unstable sources of income, which makes it impossible for them to rely on their own initiative to better their living situations [22]. China has a sizable rural region, dispersed residential areas, subpar construction of rural housing, and outdated technologies, all of which not only take a lot of energy, but also significantly harm the environment. Therefore, it is critical to resolve the issues affecting rural house construction quickly [23].

Other research has concentrated on the current housing issue. For example, experts highlight that, when contrasted with economically developed places in central and eastern China, rural households in western China have the following issues: (1) there are many Zhuang Ji and the ability to withstand disasters is poor; (2) poor natural conditions and insufficient infrastructure; (3) there is a widespread phenomenon of building before building, and arbitrary construction; and (4) follow-up maintenance is lagging and the hygiene condition is poor [24]. For example, with the expansion of the rural economy and the acceleration of rural urbanization, certain rural areas began to implement centralized housing to varied degrees in order to optimize resource allocation, rational use of land, and protection of cultivated land [25]. Although this initiative has improved the rural living environment and promoted urban–rural integration to some extent, it will also bring about a number of social problems, such as difficulties in demolition and relocation, as well as difficulties in securing pensions, medical care, and education, which will severely impede the smooth promotion of China’s new urbanization work in the new era.

In response to the present housing crisis, the government has implemented appropriate measures. Relocation is an effective rural dilapidated house renovation and housing security policy, which is, according to the principle of voluntariness under the unified organization of the government through planned development resettlement, reclamation of barren hills and wasteland suitable for agriculture and forest, relying on urban construction and industrial development, and so on, the poor people who live in areas with poor ecological environment, poor natural conditions and other living conditions, and high incidence of geological disasters being relocated to areas with good production and living conditions [26]. However, certain rural dwelling situations have been transformed as a result of the policy’s promotion and implementation, while other extremely poor places continue to have unstable variables compromising the safety of local farmers: (1) the difficulty of relocating some villages has increased; (2) the phenomenon of “hollow villages” generated by idle dwellings is remarkable; and (3) the expense of relocation and resettlement exceeds the cost borne by farmers. These volatile dynamics will stymie rural revitalization. These volatile elements will impede the seamless implementation of the rural regeneration strategy.

2.2. Vulnerability

Vulnerability is defined in the current disaster risk literature as “the traits and circumstances of a community, a system, or an asset that render it vulnerable to the destructive impacts of a disaster [27].” Poverty vulnerability is defined as “the risk that future welfare would drop due to shocks” by the World Bank [28]. Amartya Sen, a Nobel-Prize-winning economist, stated in 1998 that encouraging economic development necessitates not only eradicating poverty, but also addressing vulnerabilities that can unexpectedly plunge individuals into extreme poverty [29]. According to Amartya Sen, poverty and vulnerability are frequent occurrences in modern society, and vulnerability must be considered while discussing poverty-related issues. In other words, poverty vulnerability refers to the likelihood that a family or individual may fall into or remain in poverty as a result of the impact of uncertainty [30]. Relatively poor countries are the most vulnerable to disasters; for example, Ethiopian agriculture is badly impacted by recurring climate shocks, resulting in significant welfare losses for smallholder farmers, despite enormous efforts [31]. Cao Ping, Sheng Yexu, and colleagues noted that rural human settlements in China are vulnerable, as evidenced by serious hollowing out of rural dwellings, increased rural environmental pollution, and inadequate rural education, medical care, and social security, among other things [32], increasing the likelihood of rural families returning to poverty.

In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith, the father of economics, stated that “whether a man is rich or poor depends on the quantity and quality of requirements, conveniences, and entertainments he can enjoy [33].” One of the most basic needs of rural households is for living space. The initial living space and living quality cannot match the needs of people as the demand for living space grows. Many rural households prefer to find and build new houses on their farm, which has a significant impact on the rural spatial organization. Furthermore, a lot of wood is required for new dwellings, and farmers mostly obtain wood from local sources, causing their own woods to be severely harmed and the ecological environment to degrade [34]. Most rural groups (e.g., indigenous and other disadvantaged people) face significant social and cultural consequences due to their subsistence culture and strong attachments to the land, and the linkages between use and impacts are not linear, with changes occurring at even modest levels of use [35]. The loss or degradation of ecosystem services due to environmental causes, such as soil erosion, desertification, and sandy land, can be considered as a prevalent cause of ecological degradation in poor rural communities in alpine sandy land. The loss and degradation of ecological services make it difficult to repair buildings and exacerbate families’ already poor position. If the impact of agricultural techniques on the land and the environment is not reduced, we may pose a major threat to our living support system and the food security of a large portion of humanity in the long term [36]. In other words, the susceptibility to these risks will grow as a result of complex social, political, and economic processes, as well as natural calamities (including past disasters) [37]. Extreme poverty is defined as the destruction or collapse of an area’s economic and social structures as a result of many dangers.

Furthermore, vulnerability and resilience are two characteristics that affect the long-term livelihoods of farmers and herders in impoverished areas [38]. The ability to handle stress without depleting the natural resource base, as well as the ability to recover, maintain, and increase capabilities and capital as a result of stress, is what defines sustainable lives [39]. Sustainability is increasingly being measured as a metric of resilience [40]. Vulnerability and resilience are inextricably intertwined, as are resilience and sustainable development. Vulnerability will be decreased with the inclusion of resilience, and resilience will take the lead.

2.3. Resist Adversity

There is no agreed-upon definition of “adaptability” in academic circles. In the 1950s, physiologists shifted their focus from investigating the causes of mental disease to how patients may better adapt to it. Researchers realized along the way that adaptation is the result of human interaction with the natural world. This adaptation encompasses both physiological and psychological adjustments (health). Psychologists began to investigate the adaptive adaptations that humans undergo when confronted with setbacks and hardships. The paradigm of “resilience” was established as understanding of the relationship between stress and health evolved, and this became an important focus of research in psychology. For example, it investigates customers’ internal potential from the standpoint of positive psychology, highlighting that human beings are motivated by pressure and dissatisfaction and exceed their potential [41]. Simultaneously, this positive force has been reintroduced into the realm of managing negative group emotions, so boosting relevant personnel’s mental health.

By the 1970s, research in the field of neurology had made headway on “resilience” and risks and vulnerabilities, but the emphasis was only on the psycho-social and genetic adaptability of individual creatures to their environment. Resilience is usually considered as an individual quality described by “the ability to grow, mature, and increase competence in the face of difficult circumstances or barriers [42].” In some ways, elasticity is similar to resilience. Resilience has been used for a broader number of disciplines, including sociology and anthropology, since the 1980s. In general, research has begun to focus on “resilience”, particularly the building and development of resilience amid risk crises. With the rapid expansion of the social economy, social hazards brought on by uncertainty frequently cause varying degrees of dissatisfaction and difficulty for organizations.

The focus of “resilience” research has switched from risk resistance to an understanding of the protective processes or mechanisms, or how these protection factors work. As previously said, as economies and civilizations develop, different people suffer various sorts of adversity. The essence of resilience is that people can overcome hardship and show constructive flexibility to the outcomes [43]. Individuals are organisms with high adaptability that overcome numerous obstacles or crises on their own. Family is commonly seen as an environmental component or a protective mechanism that aids in the development of individual resilience. Furthermore, family resilience is a process of repair, adjustment, and relationship reconstruction aimed at the healthy functioning of the family when coping with internal and external crises and stressors in order to assist the family to develop constantly and healthily [44]. Family resilience is established, for example, when family members adapt and change when faced with pressure, actively respond to crises in their own unique ways, integrate multiple risk and protective elements, reach a common vision, and form a development path [45]. For example, community resilience is an interactive approach that involves the interactions among people, resources, and the environment in dangerous situations, as well as the mechanisms for achieving and improving resilience through these interactions [46].

When a farmer’s living environment is endangered, his or her initial reaction must be to seek self-protection, followed by determining the best approach to adapt to the present environment, so building a dynamic resilience process. Farmers’ low ability to shift their mindset in time to react to changes in the external environment, along with greater susceptibility, reduces their ability to withstand risks, making it easy for them to return to poverty, and undermines the effectiveness of poverty alleviation initiatives. Ge Huaizhi, Zhang Jinlong, and colleagues feel that, in rural areas, including poor areas, home security should be closely followed by institutional system design in the study of relevant processes and operation modes in work organization and implementation [47].

The issue, however, is to ensure that farmers do not “return to poverty due to home security” after they are out of poverty. Farmers will be able to modify their thinking in time to adapt to the actual scenario if they have the ability to avert dangers and protect themselves and their families from harm. As a result, to implement the rural revitalization plan, it is necessary to build on earlier achievements in poverty reduction and set higher standards for rural modernization [48]. “If ‘resilience’ is combined with rural revitalization, the connotation and extension of rural revitalization can be expanded from multi-level risk management modes such as individual resilience, family resilience, community resilience and regional resilience, as well as systematicness, integrity, and comprehensiveness,” according to Luheng [49].

To summarize, a review of the relevant literature on rural living environment, vulnerability, and resilience reveals that, whether it is sustainable development of rural areas or poverty reduction governance, the research is primarily inclined to discuss how to provide food and clothing for rural households, improve economic income, and propose corresponding measures, with less comprehensive discussion of rural living environment risk development. Rural governance, as an important aspect of social government, is faced with the circumstance that the rural people lack their own ability and home security and are in urgent need of protection shortly after overcoming absolute poverty. When farmers face unexpected hazards or disputes, their true requirements are overlooked, and they become readily vulnerable. As a result, based on previous research, this study applies the rural resilience viewpoint to the construction process of attractive new countryside, concentrating on the generation of insecurity and vulnerability in rural living environments. It addresses how to improve rural resilience through the analysis path of “residential risk-vulnerability-resilience,” in order to maintain the safety of rural living environments and consolidate poverty alleviation achievements. In other words, rural society must make appropriate adjustments and innovate in order to reduce farmers’ susceptibility and assure farmers’ ability to protect themselves in the face of hazards. This is also an investigation into the process of innovation and development of the rural precise governance model.

2.4. Research Methods

This study’s primary research approach is an in-depth interview. The term “interview” refers to a type of research dialogue, which is a research method in which researchers gather (or “construct”) first-hand information from subjects via oral conversation. In addition, an interview has the following characteristics: first, there must be flexibility and room for meaning interpretation. Respondents in this research method utilize their own language and thoughts to discuss or convey their own opinions. The second role is flexibility, immediacy, and meaning interpretation. During the interview, the interviewer asks the interviewees questions in order to grasp the meaning of the items they create and to investigate the relationship between these objects and other events in their lives [50]. Semi-structured interviews are used in this study to collect data to assist the investigation. The interviewees are encouraged to express their views and opinions freely according to the study design by setting up some questions relating to the topic and developing the interview outline, although this is not limited to the questions stated in the interview outline. It is hoped that, through the in-depth interview of J Village, the research questions would be answered thoroughly. The following (

Table 1. Interviewee information (partial) *.

Code	Gender	Age (years)	Others
C1	M	65	Poverty alleviation households/villagers
C2	F	63	Poverty alleviation households/villagers
C3	F	45	Poverty alleviation households/villagers
C4	M	54	Poverty alleviation households/villagers
C5	M	37	Poverty alleviation households/villagers
C6	M	58	Village community president
C7	M	37	Poverty alleviation officials stationed in villages
C8	F	48	Poverty alleviation households/villagers
C9	F	55	Poverty alleviation households/villagers
C10	M	49	Poverty alleviation households/villagers

* Note: due to space constraints, the above table also contains sample information from interviewees in the paper. All interviewees were separated into two groups: poverty alleviation policy implementers (ten village cadres and four “one-to-one support” cadres) and policy recipients (11 poor farmers). It is worth noting that six of the ten cadres are poor farmers, while the other four are not. To protect the respondents’ identities, all participants in this survey will be replaced with codes.

) is basic information about the interviewees.

3. The State of Rural Habitats: Risk and Vulnerabilities

3.1. The Living Environment

Many productive achievements have been realized in China since the deployment of poverty alleviation measures, including industrial poverty alleviation, financial poverty alleviation, education poverty alleviation, and so on. Farmers in resource-rich areas continue to meet housing security criteria and accomplish the objective of convenient housing with the help of the government and the market. In contrast, poverty in resource-poor places easily re-emerge, particularly because farmers are unlikely to have the financial resources or ability to restore their living conditions after suffering from natural disasters or emergencies. As Chambers [51] and Sen [52] point out, deprivation and poverty cannot be described solely in terms of a lack of money or wealth. These variables also manifest as social inferiority, physical weakness, disability and sickness, vulnerability, and physical and social isolation, all of which contribute to the poverty trap [53].

To begin with, most of the ancient buildings in the countryside were built in the 1970s and are highly vulnerable to risks, such as rain and wind, making it important for related policies to be rebuilt to lessen the risks. The government has established a number of housing security policies in order to improve farmers’ living conditions [54]. The Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Civil Affairs, and the National Rural Revitalization Bureau, for example, issued a joint statement titled “Implementation Opinions on Improving Housing Security for Rural Low-Income Groups and Other Key Targets,” which describes, during the “Fourteenth Five-Year Plan” period, in accordance with the principle of “safety-oriented, localized, the main body of farmers, improve quality,” the implementation of rural housing renovation and seismic retrofitting of agricultural buildings in seismically active areas, as well as gradually establishing and improving the long-term housing security mechanism for low-income groups in rural areas, to achieve the consolidation and expansion of poverty alleviation [55]. And Pan, Y. and Zhou, T. stated that, in the context of China’s fast urbanization and socioeconomic advancement, the architectural model must be adapted to fit the living conditions of poor rural inhabitants by reimagining the rural living environment [56].

This can be realized when the government and the villagers work together to actively promote the implementation of relevant policies, as in the case of Kemer village in Turkey, where locals and the local government worked together to ensure the hamlet’s integrity [57]. However, the policy’s execution is not without difficulties, with various flaws and conflicts exposed in some circumstances. To begin, the relocation policy requires families to choose whether or not to relocate voluntarily. If this policy is not adequately executed and no actual results are obtained, the government’s workload will be increased. On the one hand, the government must consider how to ensure the living environment safety of those families who choose not to relocate. On the other hand, for those families who choose to move and that want to relocate, if the subsidies are insufficient or the infrastructure in the new location is inadequate,, the government’s credibility will suffer, as will the family’s willingness to relocate. Relocation can expose farmers to a new living environment, but it also introduces uncertainty, making it difficult to develop a strong foundation and trusted connections. Second, if farmers’ interpretation and comprehension of the policy are skewed, the policy may be implemented ineffectively. On the one hand, this is due to the fact that farmers have varying levels of education and that some farmers are primarily concerned with whether the policy is mutually beneficial and self-centered [58], and that some policies are less profitable and economically inefficient in the eyes of the farmers, resulting in lower participation. Policy-making departments, on the other hand, prefer to organize policy implementation in a “top-down” way due to the lack of a complete policy interpretation system in rural areas. As a result, there are disparities in how farmers understand policies. If there is a lack of mutual trust among villagers, or a lack of deception and effective communication among the village’s various actors, this can lead to poor policy selection and execution outcomes.

Secondly, in some locations with well-developed ecological functions, villages should adapt to local conditions, fully utilizing ecological functions to obtain economic benefits, enhance economic income, and promote the process of human settlement improvement. According to the objective environment, for example, in most rural locations, farmers employ local resources to grow tourism or market distinctive products in order to raise their income, purchasing power, and house maintenance capacity.

“Although we dwell on the mountain’s south side, we have unique features such as houmou and cauliflower. There are also good agricultural policies currently, which I cannot say clearly, but at the village meeting, the secretary and other cadres told us in great detail that we have invested a little money ourselves now, and that when the policy is favorable in the future, we would offer significantly higher returns. Who wouldn’t want a good life for themselves?”

(C1,08–06)

The aim of a “good life” is a real depiction of every farming community, and it represents the only way for them to become prosperous and wealthy. There will surely be some uncertainties and hazards in this process, and a guaranteed home is a vital foundation for farmers to fight natural disasters or unexpected risks. However, natural disasters and unexpected dangers continue to damage the living environment in some rural areas, and a huge number of low-income families remain impoverished. Making a living is usual among them. To ensure “living and housing security” in rural areas, the construction of rural structures and rural housing projects must be accelerated. In that instance, during the development process, financing, construction quality, villagers’ burden, fairness, and other unique issues can all have an impact on housing security. The housing risk will worsen if reconstruction funding is insufficient, project quality is poor, and the villagers’ economic burden is too great. These issues, if properly implemented, will help to ensure housing security.

Finally, while various housing security regulations have improved the rural housing environment, it is easy to overlook the true emotional needs of farming households. “There are many old people and children left behind in the village, and most of them are pleased with the status quo and do not wish to repair and improve the adobe houses, let alone move”, some village cadres said in the interview. Farmers insist on “returning to the roots” and “roots” and “leaves” as the final emotional connection, a place where they can find emotional support. However, when housing regulations are implemented in contrast with these strong emotions, farmers’ behavior patterns and demand preferences are neglected. In other words, while relocating to cities and towns has eased the current housing crisis and reduced the risk of land tenure security, it has left farmers feeling like vagrants, unable to locate their familiar land and lacking a sense of belonging.

The government should adopt various measures during the rural governance process to assist farmers’ families in coping with risk pressures and maintaining a stable mental condition. Instead of certain village cadres seeking personal gain in order to win future elections, especially when implementing policies, they focus on who the powerful farmers are, while ignoring those who are the most needy and in desperate need of assistance [59]. When basic housing needs are not satisfied, ineffective policies or an unequal distribution of interests result in emotional deprivation and loss of security.

3.2. The Formation of Fragility

According to the Human Development Report 2007/2008, vulnerability differs from risk, which refers to external hazards over which people have limited exposure and control, and the former measures people’s ability to cope with these hazards without causing long-term, potentially irreversible damage to future well-being. More broadly, there is a need to be aware of dangers and potential hazards, as well as the additional negative consequences they may create [60]. As previously said, the data reveal that rural communities grow, decrease, or even perish as a result of interactions between rural regions and the external environment [61], which also results in a variety of shortcomings and hazards that are common in rural residential contexts. Rural vulnerability can, thus, be described as the probability of farmers suffering from natural disasters or abrupt danger throughout the rural governance process. These unpredictable risks have an impact on rural industries, the economy, and farmers’ livelihood security, resulting in a drop in farmers’ living standards or ability to resist hazards, and maybe a return to poverty. In addition, other economic incomes and medical risks contribute to rural vulnerability. For example, metropolitan areas often have better access to health facilities and higher quality of care than rural places [62,63].

Vulnerability is frequently predicated on a sequence of uncertainties that organizations encounter. Regardless of location, the response to crises, such as natural disasters, can disrupt personal, interpersonal, and environmental relationships [64]. This may not be achievable in rural areas due to a lack of adequate market potential, both on the demand and supply sides [65]. The process of rural government is typically constrained by environmental conditions, economic development levels, cultural and folk norms, and other variables. Farmers have the power to adapt to their current environment, which will stabilize and mature with time, forming an internal model. Simultaneously, there are numerous and interconnected players in the village (including the state, the market, and society) who impact farmer behavior, and their risk-taking capability and vulnerability may fluctuate.

3.2.1. Vulnerability of Materials

Vulnerability is defined as being exposed to environmental and social change forces and being vulnerable due to a lack of flexibility [66]. Understanding the true situation of rural housing revealed that, in some locations, agricultural families’ residences are largely adobe buildings. They can collapse when subjected to strong weights. In other words, houses in these places are still exposed to earthquakes, landslides, and debris flows, making them even more vulnerable.

“The community appears nicer now that the road has been rebuilt. The journey has taken much too long. It was a mountain road one day and had to climb by itself the next. Fortunately, it is not safe for cars, let alone humans, to stroll on the road in the summer or winter.”

(C2,08–06)

Rural communities are frequently poor and socially isolated [67]. “Build roads first if you want to grow affluent.” Rural highway construction is critical for agricultural development and raising farmers’ living standards. However, the threats that rural residents confront differ depending on the geography. In mountain communities, residences are erected on the mountains, widely distributed and separated, with steep roads, insufficient housing infrastructure, and exceedingly difficult access.

“J village was at the bottom of the poverty alleviation achievements when I arrived. When I arrived, I saw that this hamlet had been developed around a mountain with inadequate resource usage, and the roads around the mountain were already difficult to navigate. The village had little infrastructure, and even the village committee borrows the bungalows that had been abandoned by the previous school. The community has many issues, but I am not scared to work hard with everyone to bring the village out of poverty.”

(C7,08–11)

Although some distant parts of China continue to have road problems of varying severity that severely limit local economic growth, governments and village cadres are aggressively creating and reforming rural road networks in the hope that these problems can be remedied. Furthermore, agricultural development in rural communities located on desert plains is vulnerable to climate disasters, and sufficient institutional safeguards are lacking. Villages are in a vulnerable position regardless of geographical location, since the quality of their houses has not been checked, and the farmers’ own economic conditions are constrained.

Farmers are frequently exposed to the risks associated with housing security. Some families have recently emerged from poverty, while others have lived in other developed neighborhoods for a long time, struggling to make ends meet. The low level of household income and inability to afford the repair costs of the houses in question lead to their deterioration, which not only increases the risk of housing security, but also adds to the economic pressure on rural households, even to the point where some of them suffer from a lack of adaptability and fall into material vulnerability, making realization of an “endogenous” model of poverty alleviation difficult. To some extent, the endogenous model of poverty reduction does not provide households with the necessary level of risk resilience. Farmers’ ability to adapt to their original livelihood methods is heavily reliant on the quality of their human capital investment and social relationships. Their vulnerability was exacerbated by the ineffectiveness of poverty reduction efforts.

“Our village’s roads have been rebuilt, we now have flowing water, and it is clean. The entire village has a new appearance.”

(C3,08–07)

Road construction and drinking water initiatives will improve the quality of life. Farmers in rural locations with easy access to transportation can maximize their advantages, improve their adaptability, and reduce their susceptibility, resulting in sustainable rural development. In other words, the safety of the rural living environment influences farmers’ economic income and living standard to some extent, and the economic level influences their living circumstances and living environment as well.

3.2.2. Fragile Trust

Trust serves as a link between the government and farmers, and it is one of the most important components in the sustainable development of rural life. In recent years, China’s economy has grown swiftly, and people’s living standards have risen steadily, promoting the continued prosperity and advancement of the rural economy and society. However, while people enjoy the material convenience provided by cities, many new problems have emerged, such as a widening gap between the rich and the poor in urban and rural areas, resource waste, environmental pollution, and so on, which have severely hampered the sustainable development of China’s rural economy. The growing disparity between rich and poor has hampered farmers’ access to public services and, surely, weakened mutual trust between the government and farmers, particularly among those farmers who have been brought out of poverty.

“When I initially arrived in the community, I noticed that the residents lived in adobe huts and had to go more than 5 km through the mountains to purchase a basic item.”

(C7,08–11)

The inability or a lack of effective communication between policy implementers and farmers exacerbates trust vulnerability, resulting in poor information transmission channels and farmers’ inability to obtain real market information to gain economic benefits, resulting in “information failure” and lagging rural economy development. In other words, due to their limited ability, single information source, and lack of accurate judgment on housing policy and measures, farmers are prone to negative psychological reactions when confronted with external shocks and risks, and they are unwilling to actively co-operate with policy implementation, resulting in the erosion of trust between the government and farmers, loss of cohesion, and, ultimately, affecting the harmonious development of villages.

The government places far too much emphasis on infrastructure programs, such as education and health in rural areas, particularly in impoverished areas, and frequently ignores coverage and execution of essential policies, such as housing for rural populations. Even while attempting to improve the rural biological environment, only the public portions of the village are renovated and reinforced or the external walls are painted, while the actual living conditions of farmers are ignored. “Self-cleaning the snow in front of the door”, says the majority of them. Some farmers have less economic pressure and can improve their living conditions on their own, but others are materially weak, making it impossible to ensure their dwelling safety.

“Now that the policy is sound, we can see that life is not as difficult as it formerly was. However, because we live on a mountainside, I am concerned that if the mountain floods, there would be no place to live.”

(C9,08–12)

In this respect, in the face of external shocks or hazards and in the absence of a faultless insurance system, the rural population can only rely on its own resource endowment, in addition to timely and effective remedies, to keep it from falling into poverty [68]. If the welfare security imposed by the government deviates from reality or does not conform to the actual circumstances in rural areas, it may result in a breakdown of trust between subjects, leading to “adverse selection” and other difficulties. For example, throughout the relocation process, farmers tend to reject policies due to a lack of trust in the main body, resulting in a return to poverty. As a result, in order to fulfill the goal of rural housing security, it is required to develop a stable social environment and a solid foundation of trust during the rural revitalization process.

3.2.3. Emotional Vulnerability

In recent years, as national investment in agricultural output has increased and the level of exact poverty alleviation has increased, more channels and ways of raising income have been offered for the majority of farmers, considerably improving the quality of their life. China has intensively pursued rural housing security over the last decade in order to achieve rural housing safety and improve rural dwelling conditions and the environment. Rural areas, on the other hand, frequently have strong regional cultural traits that represent the particular feelings of local farmers about their living environment and quality of life, as well as their quest for a better existence.

“Thanks to Secretary Zhang, this is the hope of several generations in the community.”

(C4,08–08)

“When it snowed, the local roads were muddy, making it impossible to walk. The government now prioritizes the village environment, such as sanitation, roads, and houses, and repairs to improve them.”

(C10,08–13)

The village has gradually improved the villagers’ sense of well-being through projects and programs also, including “Six Changes and Three Clearings”, “village appearance transformation”, “dangerous house transformation”, and “relocation” under the joint leadership of the village task force and the village party branch [69]. Farmers may be happy and express their demands more forcefully because of the trust relationship that exists between them and the local cadres.

However, insufficient coverage and inadequate execution of welfare measures, as well as inability to handle the village’s practical problems and meet the emotional needs of the agricultural community, can aggravate emotional vulnerability, which leads to poverty. In other ways, vulnerability is determined more by an individual’s or group’s psychological state. Emotional vulnerability can dramatically diminish the subject’s risk tolerance and raise the likelihood of sliding into poverty. When policy measures fail to provide farmers’ housing security, applicable laws, rules, and policies must be amended, and the security system is not yet sound. All of this will exacerbate farmers’ housing troubles and expose them to more volatile circumstances, and farmers will not obtain quick and effective feedback when expressing their emotional demands, resulting in a profound sense of discomfort.

Furthermore, because of the constraints of traditional thinking, some farmers’ housing choices are mostly arbitrary and blind, that is, “I’ll do whatever others do” or “I don’t have much opportunity to change, so I might as well submit to reality and live one day at a time.” As a result, their housing decisions have become unclear and insecure. Many farming households’ emotional desires become more complex and diverse in this situation.

Some farmers with ample funds will pursue higher economic income goals and can raise their standards of living and housing conditions with the assistance of government and market policy and measures, whereas those with insufficient resources will be in a difficult situation due to ineffective policy and measure implementation, resulting in emotional cognitive imbalance, and fearing that the related housing policies and benefits will not change the housing situation. Emotional vulnerability has been exacerbated repeatedly due to a lack of enhanced housing security methods and mechanisms in rural areas to help farmers’ housing security. Farmers’ adaptation to dangers will improve if their emotional fragility is decreased. In contrast, increased emotional sensitivity diminishes farmers’ ability to reject risks, making it difficult to fix the housing crisis, even if their incomes rise.

4. Constraints to Vulnerability: The Development of Rural Resilience

The “active resistance” to adversity, which shows the subject’s resilience to risks and the dynamic aspect of the process, is at the heart of “resilience” thought [70]. Risk is a dynamic development process, with varying degrees of vulnerability and resilience at different nodal points [71]. When faced with high unemployment, poor educational attainment, shortages of sustainable goods and services, and poverty, rural communities display resilience [72]. The higher a village’s resilience, the greater its resilience to natural calamities and the less vulnerable it is. The lower a village’s resilience, the weaker and more vulnerable it is to natural calamities within its borders. Rural vulnerability is a concept of relative “affordability” that refers to the scenario in which farmers encounter risks and their own safety protection is insufficient when confronted with changes in the external environment or internal situations. It originates mostly from the family’s sense of impotence in the face of risk, the frustration of failing to achieve the desired results despite government and market support, and the family’s unsatisfied emotional needs. As a result, developing risk resistance is one of the most effective ways to minimize rural households’ susceptibility.

4.1. Clarify the Roles

Rural governance is a multi-subject co-operative and shared governance network that achieves the harmonious coexistence and growth of grass-roots state power and rural society [73]. Each subject’s tasks, functions, and placement are distinct, particularly in the process of achieving housing security, in which the government, the market, and social groups all play vital roles. In reality, some village cadres are unsure of their roles and responsibilities. They follow the notion of “peace is precious” amid conflicts and frictions, avoiding conflicts through compromise and repression. When confronted with farmers’ repeated doubts, authorities may take a negative stance and defend the status quo.

Faced with this quandary, the government, the market, and farmers must develop an effective communication and co-operation mechanism, clarify the roles and functions of the various actors, co-ordinate the interests of all parties, and keep increasing farmers’ active awareness of participating in and resisting risks, rather than “waiting for support from external forces”, which will eventually lead them to change from passive response to active prevention and to decrease inter-subject role frictions and reduce rural vulnerability.

To put it another way, the government, as the dominant institution, is responsible for guiding and implementing poverty and welfare programs. For example, over 2021, the Dwelling and Construction Department of G Province effectively played a pioneering role, successfully explored the path of earthquake-resistant restoration of rural housing, and made a tremendous change from “worried living” to “beautiful life”. The department achieved seamless policy convergence and orderly progress by adjusting and optimizing policies, strengthening financial security, strengthening process control, and consolidating and expanding achievements, steadily promoting the consolidation and expansion of housing safety and security achievements in the fight against poverty and rural revitalization [74]. Rural cadres in any levels should enact relevant laws, regulations, and measures to ensure rural housing security, making it an important method of constructing a wonderful new countryside, while also satisfying farmers’ spiritual culture.

Second, the market promotes economic development in the countryside and aids in the establishment of the rural governance system, establishing various forms of collaborations with the village to improve agricultural product quality, raise matching added value, and boost agricultural product sales. For example, internet platforms actively co-operate with villages (through live broadcast, e-commerce, and so on) to promote internet technology’s best interests in agricultural products sales. Farmers’ economic income has increased as a result of the market, which has also encouraged the growth of rural real estate and changes in farmers’ lives. Previously, rural houses were largely fixed residences for farmers but, nowadays, rural houses are also diversified according to market need, boosting rural economic growth. Ecotourism is gaining appeal both globally and in China as an effective technique for ensuring local sustainability [75]. For example, with today’s brisk expansion of the tourism business, many farmhouses infused with local rural culture have evolved as the times demand. The rural living environment is improving as a result of market forces.

Third, the duty of supporters of social organizations is to improve public services in rural areas. The “Notice on Mobilizing and Guiding Social Organizations to Participate in Rural Revitalization During the 14th Five-Year Plan” stated that, on the one hand, rural revitalization departments should adhere to the principles of orderly adjustment and smooth transition and incorporate social organizations’ participation in helping the rural revitalization into the overall planning and deployment; on the other hand, it is also necessary to focus on the reality, introduce new policies, and introduce new technologies, as well as change the characteristics of social organization participation, launch and optimize service guarantee measures, further stimulate and support social organizations in monitoring and assisting in the prevention of poverty return, and strengthen follow-up assistance to relocation from poverty-stricken areas [76]. We should strengthen the cultivation of public welfare and service-oriented rural social organizations, with the support of social organizations, so that they can become a third-party force outside the government and the market to ensure the safety of rural housing and avoid the phenomenon that the lack of comprehension and management of rural social organizations would affect their supporting role in rural construction.

To summarize, rural locations, with their small compact groups, provide an ideal setting for socially innovative governance [77]. Each subject has a distinct role and performs its responsibilities. The government, the market, the organization, and the farmers are linked to each other in order to address real-life rural challenges and establish a benign interaction mechanism of many parties, forming an organic whole together, that is, a “pluralistic and integrated” rural governance model. Only in this manner will rural families have the will and strength to be more risk-resistant when confronted with dangers during the rural governance process. They will be able to lessen their susceptibility through the operation of this positive interaction mechanism in order to ensure their own house security.

4.2. Trust and Interaction

A clear role based on successful interaction among diverse players will ensure that housing policies are comprehensively covered and precisely implemented.

“The village has changed since the resident team arrived, and we are extremely relieved because we can trust our Chairman Zhang, who has said which policies are best for our village right now, and we are eager to participate.”

(C5,08–08)

The major approach to achieve an unfettered flow of information is through effective interaction, and the smooth exchange and sharing of information is an essential strategy to overcome the “last mile” problem. Information on policies or markets, in particular, can provide a more convenient and effective service to all actors, thereby accelerating the growth of the rural economy and supporting the improvement of the living environment.

As previously said, poor contact leads to farmers’ prejudice towards policies, and new situations and obstacles emerge in the rural government process. In other words, when communication between the information transmitter and receiver is inadequate during the policy implementation and information-sharing process, it is difficult to develop a bridge of trust, and farmers are more likely to doubt the policy’s effectiveness. The lack of effective farmer feedback will also have an impact on the execution of follow-up policies and procedures, making it more difficult to address the fundamental causes of the problem.

“As group leaders, we must always consider what the villagers require right now. We are not as good as village cadres, but we are working hard for the people of the village. Our families are already impoverished, so we all want to change the current quo. The policy was preached by the first secretary, and as representatives, our village cadres must contact with the secretary.”

(C6,08–08)

On the one hand, a good communication mechanism between the government and the farmers will boost the process of housing security, giving the farmers a sense of security and happiness. On the other hand, if the farmers and government cadres tasked to assist them at the grassroots fail to accomplish effective communication, the appropriate renovation policies will not be implemented. As can be observed, inadequate co-ordination among many themes has substantially slowed the pace of constructing a new socialist countryside.

Thus, strengthening smooth interaction among multiple subjects, realizing open and transparent information, and establishing a solid trust foundation among government, market, and farmers is one of the main ways to solve the problems of poor implementation of rural housing welfare policies, poor implementation of government policies, and the backward and conservative concept of farmers in China.

4.3. Fulfillment of Emotional Appeals

Vulnerability is a sign of vulnerable subjects’ stress following a danger, which impacts farmers’ confidence in dealing with risk and villagers’ motivation to recover after a tragedy, among other things. Basic material wants are almost met and, notably, during the process of developing a beautiful new countryside, farmers’ desires for spiritual life are increasing and their readiness to articulate their emotional demands is increasing. To some extent, gorgeous new countryside construction in the new era must consider farmers’ emotional requirements in order to better promote the steady growth of rural areas. But there is a gap between the emotional needs of farming families and their true interests, as well as a conflict between relevant housing policies and the subjective emotional needs of farming families, which makes it difficult for the government, market, and social organizations to achieve their objectives through effective means. To ensure the rural living environment’s safety.

In the traditional culture of China, “home” and “hometown” are the key influencing components of China’s rural governance. Western countries have a varied perspective of rural governance methods due to disparities in government system, national conditions, economic performance, and social development level. Fei Xiaotong once said [78]:

“A rural culture depends on intimate and long-lasting common life to match the mutual conduct of each individual, and social links are long-established and familiar, to the extent that they feel automatic. This form of intimate groupings can only be cultivated in one group. This group is born and dies as one. Individuals in this group exhibit a high level of comprehension.”

It is quite easy to form trusted and close relationships in the countryside, where everyone knows everyone. Some farmers, however, are unable to realize their emotional objectives and live a truly good life due to conventional cultural and economic restraints. Especially in the current rural governance structure, the interaction between the government, village-level organizations, and villagers is very loose, making it difficult to build a joint force to advance the rural development process. Therefore, in the new era background, the lack of farmers’ emotional expectations has become the bottleneck of the smooth progress of beautiful rural construction.

“The leaders of these teams in the community have no prejudice at all, and even organize people to shoot family portraits at their homes around the holidays. When it was chilly, they even provided gloves to the old people. These gloves may be nothing to you, but they felt warm inside.”

(C8,08–07)

Rural governance must prioritize the role of informal support in promoting resilience, recognizing that emotional support is linked to farmers’ housing stability. It is vital to boost emotional support, comprehend farmers’ true thinking, address their emotional demands, improve housing circumstances according to local conditions, and assure housing safety. Housing policies should not be established independently of the environment in order to maximize economic gains or political achievements while ignoring farmers’ true emotional goals.

5. Conclusions and Suggestions

5.1. Conclusions

The actual situation faced by the village in the construction and development process was learned through face-to-face interaction with the resident cadres of J village, the village head, and the inhabitants. The findings revealed that (Figure 1) the safety of rural farmers’ living environment is crucial to rural development, which has an impact on the new period’s goal of creating common wealth. Farming households are materially susceptible due to their poor economic status and the high cost of repairs required for the dwellings in which they live, which have been neglected for many years and have deteriorated in quality. In addition, insufficient coverage of policy benefits, ineffective execution of key measures, and inconsistency with local reality have weakened trust and increased the risk of relapse into poverty. Finally, when policy is not properly implemented or when farmers’ perspectives on policy are prejudiced and their emotional interests are not met, farmers will have a high sense of discomfort, leading to emotional vulnerability. These vulnerabilities not only have a direct influence on rural households’ quality of life, but also have an indirect impact on their livelihood. Furthermore, it demonstrates that, when the living environment is exposed to a certain level of risk and is influenced by a variety of subjective and objective factors, villagers are predisposed to material fragility, trust fragility, and emotional fragility, all of which have a negative impact on the village and its inhabitants.

As a result, these environmentally destructive activities, in both the developed and developing worlds, are putting increasing strain on society’s weakest individuals, the resource base, and the ecosphere’s assimilation capacities [79]. It is critical to investigate how to accomplish sustainable growth of rural populations by enhancing their ability to overcome setbacks. The foregoing vulnerability becomes especially apparent when natural disasters and market hazards occur on a regular basis. Therefore, in order to maintain the sustainable and steady growth of rural areas in western China, it is vital to increase the ability of farmers to cope with hazards, specifically, the resilience. As a special group, when rural families have the ability to reduce vulnerability, the possibility of resisting risks will be strengthened; in contrast, the possibility of resisting risks of rural households will decline and it is difficult to assure the safety of the living environment. They will fall into the dilemma of returning to poverty, therefore, harming the stable development of rural areas and hampering the accomplishment of the onerous job of common prosperity.

Furthermore, with the acceleration of urbanization and rapid economic development, there are still certain differences between rural communities in western China and those in other developed areas. As noted above, the western region is affected by a variety of problems, and the living environment still has to be secured. The improvement of the rural economic level, the effective contact between the government and villages, and the expression of the villagers’ emotional appeals are still worth focusing on. Accordingly, under the background of the new period, we should always speed up the integration and optimization of the living environment resources in the western rural areas, and we need to pay high attention to the construction of the spiritual civilization of the farmers, so that we can continuously improve the living standard and quality of the farmers, in order to promote the sustainable development of the countryside as a whole. Sustainable development is a way of looking forward that balances environmental, social, and economic factors in order to improve people’s quality of life [80].

Our findings, however, have certain drawbacks. Limited by field research, it is impossible to make a complete and particular analysis of the actual situation of rural areas in other areas of China and is limited by the number of interviews. Therefore, this research has difficulty portraying the disparities of living conditions of rural people in different locations of China and the economic income disparity between households. These issues must be addressed further in our future study.

5.2. Suggestions

Based on the above observations, this study begins with three components of risk, vulnerability, and resilience development in a rural living environment and concludes with the following specific suggestions:

Clear the location of each subject to avoid the government’s dominating authority being overly concentrated, resulting in out-of-control rural management. If the government fails to control the actual situation in rural areas in the face of a series of uncertain risks (including natural disasters, public health emergencies, and so on), it will adopt policies and behaviors that will exacerbate the above social risks, as well as the vulnerability of material, trust, and emotion. Accordingly, in the process of rural governance, we will make appropriate and accurate implementation according to local conditions. This is the foundation for the government to be effective. On this premise, as the guide of rural government, the auxiliary supporting function of market and social organizations will improve the quality of rural living environment and develop rural housing infrastructure and public services.

We will improve subject trust and communication, while also ensuring smooth information interaction channels. In an era of information explosion, distant rural areas, which are naturally disadvantaged, have a low degree of information development compared to rural areas with high economic and cultural levels, and farmers’ options of expression are relatively limited. Farmers face challenges in quickly adapting to the fast and efficient modern media landscape. As a result, the government and the market must work together to actively create public infrastructure and public service facilities for farmers in these remote places in order to improve their quality of life. Additionally, new forms of communication can be developed, new media can be efficiently employed to obtain the necessary data, and the range of ways in which people can express their needs for production and quality of life can be increased. The government and market also acquire the trust of farmers to a certain extent and actively work with the implementation of necessary policies, so that farmers can adapt their mentality in time in the face of risk crises.

It is important to meet the emotional demands of farmers and develop the good co-operative attitude of farmers. Indeed, much rural governance activity is centered on material input and light spiritual support, with emphasis on project development and light supporting services; as a result, a significant proportion of vulnerable peasant families do not receive adequate aid. Furthermore, their emotional pleadings are ignored, causing them to whine frequently. “Agriculture must not be abandoned, farmers forgotten, or the countryside indifferent at any time”, said General Secretary Xi Jinping [81]. “We need struggle from generation to generation to eliminate poverty and wealth while also promoting the full regeneration and modernisation of the rural.” As a result, we must pay attention to farmers’ emotional needs, ease their vulnerability caused by material, trust, and emotion, and strengthen their resilience in order to create a beautiful new countryside.