STUDY ON THE CHANGE OF LIVELIHOOD CAPITAL OF POVERTY ALLEVIATION FARMERS IN HILLY AND MOUNTAINOUS AREAS OF SOUTHWEST CHINA AND ITS REGULATION ON PEOPLE'S ANXIETY

Abstract

BackgroundPoverty alleviation groups in Hilly and mountainous areas of Southwest China generally have the problems of insufficient anti risk ability and high return to poverty rate. This has brought greater life anxiety to the poor, and their worries about their future livelihood are mainly manifested in symptoms such as insomnia, dreaminess, chest tightness and shortness of breath. Based on this, it is of great significance to study the impact of group livelihood capital on their livelihood strategies and emotional improvement.Research Objects and MethodsThis study takes 281 people in Hilly and mountainous areas of Southwest China as sample data, and uses logistic regression model to study the impact of livelihood capital on their livelihood strategies. At the same time, in order to analyze the impact of the strategy on the change of livelihood capital on the level of anxiety, and provide effective measures and basis for alleviating psychological pressure. (1) The positive emotion subscale was prepared by Watson et al. (1988) and revised by Huang Li, Yang TingZhong and Ji Zhongmin (2003). The scale uses five points to evaluate the consistency between self-emotional state and 10 positive emotional words. The higher the score, the more energetic, happy experience, positive emotional experience and internal consistency α the coefficient is 0 89. The expression inhibition subscale adopts the expression inhibition subscale of the emotional regulation strategy scale compiled by gross and John and revised by Wang Li et al. (2007), with a total of 4 items, which is scored by seven points. The higher the score, the higher the frequency of the regulation strategy of expression inhibition and the internal consistency α the coefficient is 0 80. The emotional regulation difficulty scale is compiled by Gratz and Roemer (2004) and revised by Feng Yu (2008). The scale includes 5 factors and 31 items. Five points scoring is adopted, from “1” (completely inconsistent) to “5” (fully consistent). The higher the score, the higher the difficulty of emotion regulation. The results of confirmatory factor analysis are: χ 2 /df = 6.098, RM- SEA = 0.066, CFI = 0.900, TLI = 0.875, indicating that the questionnaire has good structural validity in this study. Internal consistency coefficient of the scale α the coefficient is 0 87, of the above five factors α the coefficients are 0 78, 0.56, 0.65, 0.66 and 0.80.ResultsThe biggest change is financial capital, followed by material capital and social capital, and the relatively small change is human capital and natural capital. There are significant differences between the two livelihood strategies before and after poverty alleviation. Therefore, after poverty alleviation, agricultural part-time and non-agricultural employment have become the main types of livelihood strategies in the sample areas. Human capital, natural capital, social capital, material capital and financial capital have a positive impact on the choice of pure agricultural livelihood strategy. Human capital, natural capital and material capital have a positive impact on the choice of agricultural part-time livelihood strategy. Financial capital and social capital have a negative impact on their choice; Human capital, financial capital and social capital have a positive impact on the choice of non-agricultural part-time livelihood strategies, while natural capital and material capital have a negative impact on the choice of non-agricultural part-time livelihood strategies. Human capital, financial capital, social capital and material capital have a positive impact on the choice of non-agricultural livelihood strategies, while natural capital has a negative impact on the choice of non-agricultural livelihood strategies.ConclusionLocal governments should optimize the spatial allocation of plots through land transfer and revitalize agricultural land resources. Strengthen the commitment to the development of local education and the improvement of the livelihood capacity of groups, and give corresponding policy and financial support to create a good external infrastructure environment and supporting facilities for agricultural production; Expand group social relations and guide groups to seek industrial development models suitable for their own resources.AcknowledgementsSupported by a project grant from National Social Science General (Grant No. 20BJY166).