The Impacts of Establishing Pilot National Parks on Local Residents’ Livelihoods and Their Coping Strategies in China: A Case Study of Qilianshan National Park

National Parks are a category of protected areas that emphasizes the sustainable use of park resources. China is a latecomer regarding the establishment of a national park system. In 2013, the Chinese administrative authorities announced the establishment of its own national park system to better protect the country’s natural heritage and the integrity of its large ecosystems. Since 2015, ten pilot national parks have been designated to explore a pathway to implement the national park system better. Local communities are among the most critical stakeholders in establishing and managing a national park. Park management wouldn’t be successful without the local residents’ support and active involvement. Since national parks are positioned in China as protected areas with the highest priority to nature protection, their impacts on the local people, either inhabiting the park or living nearby, are unprecedented in the country. The park–people relationship is not a new topic in national park research; however, in the context of China’s social, economic, and political framework, very little is known about the livelihood impacts of establishing a national park on the local residents and what strategies those residents should adapt to cope. In this study, the authors attempt to reveal the livelihood impacts of the national park creation in China on the local residents and their adaptation approaches by taking northwestern China’s Qilianshan National Park (QNP) as a case. The study results indicate that the establishment of QNP and its policies have significantly impacted the livelihoods of the local residents. The more they rely on the park resources, the greater the magnitude of the effect has been, whether they reside inside or outside the park. Overall, the negative livelihood impacts exceed the positive ones at present. Still, most of the local residents wish to sustain their current livelihoods if the park’s impacts can be made more manageable for them. Rarely do the local residents try to find alternative livelihoods unless they absolutely cannot overcome the negative impacts caused by the park’s policies.