Exploring the Interplay of Social, Economic, and Environmental Factors on Livelihood Sustainability in Quang Tri’s Coastal Forest Areas

Abstract

This study investigates the sustainable livelihoods of households in the coastal forest regions of Quang Tri Province, Vietnam, focusing on identifying the key factors that shape household resilience in the face of socio-economic and environmental challenges. Although the sustainable livelihoods approach is widely established in research, this study differentiates itself by applying a multivariate analysis to explore the relative impacts of various livelihood capitals—human, physical, financial, social, and environmental—specifically within the context of coastal forest ecosystems, a relatively under-researched area in Vietnam. The research identifies both factors affecting livelihood outcomes, emphasizing the role of community resources, seasonal fluctuations, and adaptation strategies. Additionally, the study highlights how environmental changes and natural resource constraints are more detrimental to livelihoods in these regions compared to other rural settings. Through these insights, this paper contributes to the growing body of literature by offering a nuanced understanding of how coastal forest communities can navigate the pressures of climate change, market volatility, and limited resources. The findings underscore the importance of enhancing adaptive capacity and crafting targeted policy interventions to support vulnerable households in the region. This study also highlights the limitations of existing research, emphasizing the need for future studies to integrate the complex interplay of environmental, social, and economic factors in coastal ecosystems.

1. Introduction

Sustainable livelihood research has become an essential area of study, particularly in rural and coastal communities that face multiple socio-economic and environmental challenges. While there is an established body of literature on sustainable livelihoods in rural areas, most studies have primarily concentrated on inland agricultural settings or have focused on specific components of livelihoods, such as agricultural productivity, income diversification, or access to resources [1]. Few studies, however, have explored the interactions between multiple livelihood capitals—human, physical, financial, social, and environmental—within coastal forest ecosystems like Quang Tri in Vietnam. This gap is particularly critical given the vulnerability of coastal areas to the impacts of climate change, saltwater intrusion, natural disasters, and market fluctuations [2,3]. Previous research on sustainable livelihoods often overlooks the multidimensional and interdependent nature of the factors influencing household resilience in coastal regions [4]. In many studies, livelihoods have been analyzed in isolation, with a focus on specific environmental or socio-economic aspects, such as resource management or market dynamics, without considering the broader context in which households adapt to climate variability, policy changes, and social stressors [5]. Additionally, while some studies have addressed the impacts of climate change and resource degradation, the synergistic effects of these factors in coastal environments remain underexplored [6]. Furthermore, limited attention has been paid to how policy interventions, community resources, and social networks shape household strategies for sustainability in such regions [7].

Over the past two decades, Vietnam has implemented several key national-level policies aimed at promoting sustainable livelihoods and climate resilience in rural areas. The National Strategy for Climate Change of Vietnam in 2011 and the National Green Growth Strategy of Vietnam in 2012 emphasize the importance of integrating eco-friendly development with economic growth and natural resource management. These strategies aim to enhance climate resilience, mitigate environmental degradation, and encourage market-driven livelihoods through sustainable agricultural practices and eco-tourism. While these national policies provide a broad framework for sustainable development, their implementation often faces significant challenges at the local level, especially in coastal forest ecosystems where environmental and socio-economic conditions differ markedly from other rural regions.

In Quang Tri Province, national policy goals often clash with local realities. Coastal forest communities face numerous constraints that limit their ability to fully benefit from these national initiatives. Issues such as unclear land tenure, bureaucratic inefficiencies, limited financial support, and insufficient infrastructure create barriers to effective policy implementation. Despite national directives to promote agroforestry and climate-resilient practices, local governments in Quang Tri struggle with policy misalignments and a lack of resources, which hinders their ability to provide support to vulnerable households [8]. This disconnect between national policy objectives and local policy realities results in ineffective interventions that fail to address the specific needs of coastal forest communities.

In the context of Vietnam, particularly in Quang Tri Province, research on livelihood sustainability has predominantly concentrated on agriculture and fisheries, with little integration of the effects of social networks, financial capital, and institutional policies [9]. Coastal communities in Quang Tri are highly dependent on forestry, agriculture, and aquaculture, yet they are also vulnerable to environmental risks, including flooding, drought, and saltwater intrusion [10]. Existing literature has not sufficiently analyzed how the interplay of these factors influences livelihood sustainability, nor has it fully examined how these communities adapt to the combined effects of environmental shocks, market fluctuations, and policy reforms.

This study addresses these gaps by integrating a multivariate analysis that explores the relative impacts of different livelihood capitals—human, physical, financial, social, and environmental—on livelihood sustainability in the coastal forest areas of Quang Tri Province. While much of the research on sustainable livelihoods in Vietnam has focused on agriculture and fisheries, this study is novel in its approach by considering a comprehensive set of livelihood capitals and examining their interactions in a coastal forest context. It also integrates the impacts of socio-economic and policy changes on these livelihoods, a perspective that has been seldom explored in the literature on coastal areas [11].

By adopting this holistic approach, the study not only offers insights into the socio-economic dynamics of coastal forest households but also contributes to policy discussions regarding how to enhance resilience and sustainability in coastal communities affected by climate change, market volatility, and environmental degradation. This research, therefore, presents an important scientific contribution to the understanding of sustainable livelihoods in coastal regions, particularly within Vietnam’s central coast, and has potential applicability to other coastal communities facing similar challenges.

2. Theoretical Construct

Livelihood research has garnered considerable attention from social scientists seeking to understand its role in rural development, particularly within risk-prone contexts. According to Chambers and Conway [12], a livelihood encompasses the resources and capabilities individuals possess, combined with the decisions and actions they take to sustain themselves and achieve their goals. This concept includes all human activities aimed at meeting needs, drawing on available resources such as natural capital, financial capital, labor, and technological development. The definition of livelihood is often adapted based on the specific context in which it is applied [13].

The concept of sustainable livelihoods is fundamentally rooted in the broader framework of sustainable development. As defined by Bebbington [14], sustainable development refers to meeting current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own. This entails a balance between economic growth, social equity, and environmental protection. Karki [15] defined a sustainable livelihood as one that can withstand or recover from external shocks and stresses, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, and provide sustainable opportunities for future generations while also delivering net benefits to other livelihoods, both locally and globally, in the short and long term. Similarly, Su et al. [16] emphasize that a sustainable livelihood can cope with external pressures while preserving and enhancing its resource base. For the purposes of this research, a sustainable livelihood is understood as one that is resilient to environmental and market-related vulnerabilities while ensuring the maintenance and development of resources for both present and future use. It is sustainable when it can absorb short-term shocks, adapt to long-term changes, and enhance its capabilities without degrading natural resources [17,18,19].

Recent research has expanded the understanding of livelihood sustainability to encompass the unique challenges of coastal forest regions. Studies have shown that the resilience of mangrove-based livelihoods is shaped by a complex interplay of natural resources, social capital, and governance structures [20,21]. These studies underscore the importance of integrating ecosystem services, such as storm protection and fishery resources, with community-driven management practices to enhance the resilience of coastal livelihoods. Coastal communities are increasingly facing threats from climate change, including saltwater intrusion and coastal erosion, which directly affect their livelihoods [22]. This study contributes to the sustainable livelihoods literature by specifically examining the interaction of livelihood capitals—human, financial, social, and natural capital—in the context of coastal forest ecosystems in Quang Tri’s coastal regions. While previous studies have examined the economic and ecological aspects of coastal livelihoods, there remains a gap in research that applies the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) in a multivariate analysis context, particularly in areas like coastal forests and mangrove ecosystems [23]. This study highlights how these assets—both positive and negative—affect household sustainability and resilience.

A sustainable livelihood requires four essential characteristics: (i) resilience to both short-term and long-term external impacts; (ii) independence from ongoing external support; (iii) the ability to maintain the long-term productivity of natural resources; and (iv) the avoidance of undermining the livelihood opportunities of others [18,24]. Based on this conceptual foundation, the present study applies a theoretical model to examine the factors influencing sustainable livelihoods in the coastal forest areas of Quang Tri Province. This model incorporates a tailored set of indicators relevant to the coastal communities of Vietnam’s Central Coast. The framework includes several dimensions: (i) the household’s living context, including external economic, technological, and demographic trends; (ii) exposure to shocks (both natural and human-induced) and time-related dynamics; (iii) access to livelihood assets (human, physical, financial, natural, and social); (iv) the institutions, policies, and organizations that shape livelihood opportunities; and (v) the livelihood strategies employed to achieve household goals [9,17,25,26].

Recent research indicates that the sustainability of household livelihoods is influenced by a wide range of factors at different levels. These include the gender of the household head [18,27], number of dependents [28,29], age and production experience [19,29], land availability, and awareness of climate change. Other influential variables include income level [27] and educational attainment [10]. Furthermore, collaboration with enterprises, supportive agroforestry policies, and access to financial capital have also been found to positively impact the sustainability of farming livelihoods [2,7]. Livelihood strategies themselves are shaped by factors such as location, asset ownership, income opportunities, and social networks, leading to varied motivations and outcomes that differ across contexts.

This study introduces a new angle in the sustainable livelihoods literature by highlighting how livelihood assets—such as human, financial, social, and natural capital—have both positive and negative effects on household sustainability in Quang Tri’s coastal forest areas. The study not only investigates how these assets contribute to livelihood resilience but also explores how limited or unequal access to these resources can heighten vulnerability. Positive impacts of livelihood assets, such as strong social networks, access to financial capital, and improved education and health, can enhance households’ ability to diversify income sources, adopt sustainable practices, and adapt to external shocks [30]. For instance, social resources enable communities to access information and collective support during crises, thus improving their adaptive capacity. On the other hand, negative impacts arise when these resources are insufficient or unequally distributed. Lack of access to financial capital, for example, may limit households’ ability to invest in adaptive technologies or diversify their income sources, while inadequate natural resources—such as land or water—may restrict agricultural productivity and increase vulnerability to environmental stresses [31,32]. These imbalances in resource access can perpetuate cycles of poverty and limit the effectiveness of adaptation strategies, underscoring the importance of equitable resource distribution in policy interventions.

This approach brings a fresh perspective to sustainable livelihood research by focusing on how the interplay between various types of capital affects household resilience in coastal forest ecosystems. The study’s findings contribute to a better understanding of the specific challenges faced by coastal communities in Vietnam, offering actionable insights for policy-makers and development practitioners to design more effective interventions tailored to local contexts.

3. Methodology

3.1. The Study Sites

The research was conducted across 27 communes in four districts within the coastal forest area of Quang Tri province, Central Vietnam. These communes represent various types of coastal forests, including mangrove forests, sand forests, and soil–mountain forests. Within each commune or town, villages located in coastal forest areas were selected for the survey.

3.2. Sample Size and Sample Selection

The sampling strategy employed in this study was a stratified random sampling method, developed in consultation with officials from the Commune People’s Committees. The determination of the sample size was guided by both the research objectives and the statistical requirements of the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) method, which typically demands a relatively large dataset for valid results. According to Marie [28], a widely accepted rule of thumb for EFA is to have between 5 and 10 observations per parameter, with an absolute minimum of 100 observations. Given that the study’s theoretical framework included 58 observed independent variables influencing household livelihoods, a minimum of 290 observations was required to meet the lower threshold for statistical adequacy. To satisfy this requirement and ensure robust analytical outcomes, the researchers selected between 10 and 20 households from each commune, resulting in a total sample of 317 households. These households were distributed across the four districts as follows: Gio Linh (n = 89), Hai Lang (n = 67), Trieu Phong (n = 100), and Vinh Linh (n = 61). This sample size not only met the methodological criteria for EFA but also allowed for a comprehensive and representative analysis of the factors affecting sustainable livelihoods in the coastal forest areas of Quang Tri province.

While the sample size in this study is substantial, with a total of 317 households distributed across 27 communes in Quang Tri Province, it is important to acknowledge that the research data are confined to this specific region. As such, the findings may not fully capture the diversity of conditions or livelihoods in other coastal forest regions of Vietnam, which may vary due to differences in local environmental, socio-economic, and policy factors.

The study’s focus on Quang Tri, a region heavily affected by saltwater intrusion, climate variability, and market fluctuations, provides valuable insights into the resilience and sustainability of coastal forest households in this context. However, these conditions may not be entirely representative of other coastal areas in Vietnam, where factors such as geographical features, resource availability, and community structures may differ.

Acknowledging this limitation in the scope of the research, future studies could expand the sample size to include multiple coastal regions across Vietnam’s central and southern coastal zones. This would allow for a more comprehensive comparison of livelihood sustainability factors across diverse environmental and socio-economic settings, providing a more generalized understanding of the sustainability challenges faced by coastal forest communities nationwide. Such future research could also explore the interactions between local-level adaptations and national policy frameworks, providing a broader context for crafting effective interventions to support coastal livelihoods.

3.3. Data Collection Method

Secondary Data Collection

Secondary data were gathered from multiple administrative levels, including provincial, district, and commune authorities. This information was supplemented with data from official reports, academic books, and specialized journals addressing issues related to coastal households and forest ecosystems. Additional sources included published documents, government policies, and official decisions relevant to rural development and environmental management. The secondary data provided critical background information on the study area’s characteristics, including its geographical location, topography, climate and weather patterns, hydrological conditions, land use, population demographics, labor distribution, infrastructure, and socio-economic development trends.

Primary data were collected through structured interviews with 317 households distributed across 27 communes in four coastal districts of Quang Tri province. The interviews were conducted using a standardized questionnaire, which incorporated a 5-point Likert scale to assess household perceptions and experiences across a range of indicators. To gain deeper insights into household perspectives, the survey also included open-ended questions. The core focus areas of the questionnaire included household access to livelihood resources, the influence of institutional and policy environments, livelihood strategies adopted by households, and the outcomes of these strategies in terms of income, stability, quality of life, and adaptability to change and risk.

3.4. Data Analysis Method

To analyze the effects of factors on livelihood, the dependent variable (Y), representing livelihood outcomes, is influenced by two categories of independent variables (X): uncontrollable variables (X₁) and controllable variables (X₂), as expressed in the function Y = f(X₁, X₂) [3.1]. Uncontrollable variables—also referred to as objective or external variables—exert an indirect influence on Y at the macro level. These factors are difficult to modify or manage directly and, as such, their effects are considered random or background influences in most analyses. Consequently, research typically places less emphasis on manipulating these variables. Controllable variables, in contrast, are subjective or internal variables that directly influence Y and are largely shaped by human activities and decisions. The impact of X₂ on Y is more immediate and responsive to interventions, making these variables central to efforts aimed at improving sustainable livelihoods. Therefore, this study focuses primarily on analyzing controllable factors that directly affect the livelihoods of coastal forest households in Quang Tri province. In total, the research identifies 58 observed independent variables influencing household livelihoods. A detailed breakdown of the 58 independent variables is provided in Appendix A, which outlines the indicators used to assess the various factors influencing sustainable household livelihoods in the study area.

To analyze the factors affecting sustainable livelihoods, the study employed both descriptive statistics and correlation analysis. The correlation analysis was conducted to examine the relationships between different livelihood capitals (human, physical, financial, social, and environmental) and the livelihood outcomes of households in Quang Tri’s coastal forest regions. Specifically, Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to assess the strength and direction of the linear relationships between pairs of variables.

Pearson’s correlation is appropriate for this analysis as it measures the degree of association between continuous variables, providing insight into how different livelihood factors influence one another. A positive correlation indicates that as one variable increases, the other also tends to increase, while a negative correlation suggests an inverse relationship.

To identify and validate the factors influencing the sustainable livelihoods of households in the coastal forest areas of Quang Tri province, this study employed a two-stage analytical approach: a reliability assessment of the measurement scales followed by exploratory factor analysis (EFA) [33]. The reliability of the scales was evaluated using Cronbach’s Alpha, a widely accepted measure of internal consistency [34]. This metric assesses the extent to which the observed variables are interrelated and capable of capturing the underlying construct they intend to measure. A scale was considered reliable if it met two key criteria: the corrected item–total correlation for each item was greater than or equal to 0.3, and the overall Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient was 0.6 or higher. Observed variables that did not satisfy these conditions—specifically, those with a corrected item–total correlation below 0.3 and whose removal would increase the overall reliability—were excluded from further analysis.

Following the reliability assessment, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to uncover latent structures among the variables and to refine the model by identifying the factors that meaningfully contribute to the dependent variables. The appropriateness of EFA was first assessed through two statistical tests: the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity [35]. A KMO value between 0.5 and 1.0 indicates sufficient intercorrelation among variables for factor analysis to proceed, while a statistically significant Bartlett’s Test (p < 0.05) confirms that the correlation matrix is not an identity matrix and thus suitable for factor extraction.

Factor extraction was guided by the eigenvalue criterion, where only factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were retained, in accordance with the threshold recommended by Gerbing and Anderson [36]. This approach ensures that retained factors explain more variance than a single observed variable. Additionally, a cumulative variance threshold of at least 50 percent was applied, indicating that the retained factors collectively account for a substantial proportion of the total variance in the dataset. Factor loadings, representing the degree of correlation between observed variables and underlying factors, were also assessed. Loadings greater than 0.3 were considered minimally acceptable, those exceeding 0.4 were regarded as significant, and values above 0.5 were deemed to have practical importance. Through this methodological process, the study ensured the robustness and validity of the variables used to evaluate the determinants of sustainable livelihoods in the study area.

4. Findings

4.1. Practical Model of Factors Affecting Sustainable Livelihoods of Households in the Coastal Forest Areas in Quang Tri

This section presents the practical model of factors influencing sustainable livelihoods, as derived from the survey data collected from 317 households across 27 communes in four districts of Quang Tri Province. The survey results were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to identify and group the factors that significantly affect household livelihood outcomes. The reliability of the measurement scales was confirmed, as all the variables showed satisfactory results, with Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients exceeding 0.7, indicating high internal consistency and the validity of the scales used in the study.

The findings of the EFA revealed 42 significant variables that directly affect the sustainability of livelihoods in the coastal forest areas (see

Table 1. Reliability analysis.

	Factors	Items	Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient	Total Variable Correlation Coefficient
A	Independent variables
A1	Natural resources	N	0.737
1	Water resources	N1		0.392
2	Aquaculture water surface area	N2		0.422
3	Forests and forest land	N3		0.547
4	Cultivation land	N4		0.594
5	Crop varieties and aquatic breeding	N5		0.556
A2	Human resources	H	0.887
6	Number of members in family	H1		0.528
7	Number of labors	H2		0.684
8	Age	H3		0.680
9	Percentage of men and women	H4		0.563
10	Health	H5		0.728
11	Production experiences	H6		0.673
12	Education	H7		0.623
13	Skills	H8		0.677
14	Labor division	H9		0.609
A3	Physical resources (public and private)	P	0.786
15	Infrastructure: Roads, electricity, healthcare, schools	P1		0.469
16	Housing	P2		0.489
17	Public transport	P3		0.586
18	Barns and processing plants	P4		0.540
19	Technology/engineering (Aquaculture, livestock, etc.)	P5		0.596
20	Tools, means of production (Boats, means of transport, processing equipment)	P6		0.549
A4	Financial Resources	F	0.825
21	Capacity to access finance	F1		0.511
22	Household assets	F2		0.612
23	Regular income	F3		0.655
24	Credit	F4		0.632
25	Supports from State	F5		0.602
26	Savings	F6		0.557
A5	Social resources and community	S	0.892
27	Customary law	S1		0.640
28	Social evils	S2		0.521
29	Kinship relations	S3		0.595
30	Power structures	S4		0.596
31	Community/professional organizations	S5		0.601
32	Religion/beliefs	S6		0.381
33	Training facilities	S7		0.614
34	Information systems	S8		0.635
35	Transportation systems	S9		0.637
36	Connecting communities, businesses, and the state	S10		0.632
37	Administrative procedures	S11		0.630
38	Laws	S12		0.658
39	Policies	S13		0.492
A6	Social and environmental trends	X	0.775
40	Coastal tourism development	X1		0.441
41	Migration due to industrial zones	X2		0.511
42	New rural construction	X3		0.531
43	Agricultural restructuring (job conversion, crop structure change, etc.)	X4		0.564
44	Production practices (cultivation/fishing/aquaculture/livestock)	X5		0.612
45	Vocational training for farmers	X6		0.473
A7	Seasonal fluctuations	D	0.779
46	Production seasons	D1		0.548
47	Seasonal changes in weather/climate	D2		0.728
48	Market fluctuations	D3		0.584
A8	Shocks	K	0.726
49	Depleted aquatic resources	K1		0.345
50	Increased marine pollution	K2		0.503
51	Land loss for urbanization projects	K3		0.355
52	Climate change	K4		0.592
53	Disputes in the East Sea	K5		0.435
54	Land use planning changes	K6		0.483
55	Market requirements for changes	K7		0.382
A9	Livelihood strategies	C	0.749
56	Choosing crops/products	C1		0.523
57	Participating in new activities/Changing activities	C2		0.608
58	Adjusting the scale of activities	C3		0.601
B	Dependent variables (Livelihood outcomes)	SK	0.853
1	Income level	SK1		0.731
2	Income stability	SK2		0.751
3	Quality of life	SK3		0.743
4	Adaptability Responding to Change/Risk	SK4		0.568

). These variables were categorized based on the type of influence they exert on households. Some of the variables demonstrated a strong positive influence on livelihood sustainability, while others presented negative impacts, reflecting the complex interplay between various social, economic, and environmental factors.

One of the most significant positive influences identified in the analysis was social resources and community ties. Factors such as kinship relations, community organizations, and social networks played a critical role in enhancing resilience. Strong community support systems were found to be essential in helping households adapt to economic shocks, natural disasters, and seasonal changes. Households with robust community ties were better able to access information, support, and resources, which helped them diversify their livelihoods and cope with external pressures. This finding highlights the importance of social capital in improving adaptive capacity and ensuring livelihood sustainability.

Another key positive factor was financial resources, including household assets, regular income, and access to credit. Households with better financial security had the means to invest in livelihood diversification and adaptive strategies. This underscores the importance of financial stability in ensuring resilience to environmental shocks and fluctuating market conditions. Additionally, human resources, such as the number of workers, education, and skills, were identified as crucial for improving household productivity and increasing the capacity to adapt to changes in the environment and market dynamics. Households with higher levels of education and diverse skills were better equipped to implement new livelihood strategies and adjust to changes in the socio-economic landscape.

On the other hand, several negative factors were identified that hindered the sustainability of livelihoods. Among these, natural resource degradation and climate-related shocks had the most detrimental impacts. Depleted aquatic resources, marine pollution, and saltwater intrusion were significant challenges, especially for households that relied on aquaculture and fishing. These environmental stressors limited the availability of key resources, undermining livelihoods and making it difficult for households to sustain their income sources.

Social and environmental trends such as coastal tourism development and migration to industrial zones also emerged as negative factors. While tourism brought economic opportunities in some areas, it also led to increased migration, particularly of younger populations seeking better opportunities in urban areas. This migration reduced the available labor force in the agricultural and forestry sectors, weakening the stability of these livelihoods. Similarly, land-use changes and market fluctuations created additional uncertainties for households dependent on agriculture, making it difficult for them to plan for the long term.

4.2. The Factors Affecting the Sustainable Livelihood of Households in Coastal Forest Areas in Quang Tri

Based on the practical model of factors affecting the sustainable livelihood of households in Quang Tri province’s coastal forest areas, the study conducted an EFA to identify the key factors that significantly impact household sustainability. The EFA suitability test was performed three times, ultimately identifying 42 variables that directly affect the sustainable livelihoods of households in these areas.

The first analysis eliminated 12 variables (N1, X4, X5, S2, S5, S7, S9, S13, H9, P3, K3, and F1) because they did not meet the EFA criteria (criteria in the rotation matrix). The second analysis eliminated four variables (S8, H7, H8, and P2) because they did not meet the EFA criteria (criteria in the rotation matrix). The third analysis using KMO and Bartlett’s tests gave the results in

Table 2. The results of KMO and Bartlett’s tests.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.		0.871
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square	5528.845
	df	861
	Sig.	0.000

.

The results of Table 2 show that KMO = 0.871 is suitable for the condition 0.5 < KMO < 1, therefore, EFA is suitable for the current data. It means that the observed variables are related to each other. Bartlett’s test has a significant level of Sig. < 0.05. Thus, the observed variables are linearly correlated with the representative variable. Results show that there are 42 variables that really affect the sustainable livelihoods of the coastal forest households of Quang Tri (satisfying the conditions for EFA).

Among the most significant positive factors contributing to livelihood sustainability, social resources stood out as the most impactful. These resources included kinship ties, community organizations, and social networks. Households with strong social capital were more resilient to external shocks such as climate events, economic downturns, and market changes. This aligns with existing literature that highlights the role of social capital in enabling communities to adapt to adversity [6]. For example, households that had access to community support were better equipped to cope with financial difficulties or recover from disasters. Social networks provide not only emotional support but also access to valuable information and resources that help communities diversify their livelihoods and reduce vulnerability.

Another significant positive influence on livelihood sustainability was financial resources. Households with access to credit, savings, and state financial support had greater flexibility to invest in adaptive strategies and diversify their income sources. These households were also better able to withstand the impacts of market fluctuations, such as price volatility in agricultural products or changes in the demand for aquaculture. Financial stability has long been recognized as essential for resilience in vulnerable regions, as it allows households to invest in risk-reducing strategies (Chambers & Conway, 1992 [12]). The ability to access credit and financial support enabled many households to make improvements in agricultural practices or invest in small businesses, thus improving their long-term livelihood prospects.

Additionally, human resources, including education, labor capacity, and health, were found to have a positive impact on sustainable livelihoods. Households with better access to education and skills training were more likely to engage in diversified and sustainable livelihood activities. Moreover, better health outcomes were associated with increased labor productivity, which is critical in an area where livelihoods are heavily dependent on physical labor. This finding emphasizes the importance of investing in human capital as a key factor in improving livelihood outcomes, especially in rural and coastal areas where opportunities for income diversification may be limited.

On the flip side, the study identified several negative factors that constrain the sustainability of livelihoods in these coastal areas. Among these, natural resource constraints were particularly detrimental. Water scarcity, soil degradation, and limited access to forest resources were reported as significant barriers to maintaining agricultural and aquaculture activities. For instance, saltwater intrusion and water scarcity have severely affected agricultural productivity in the region, making it difficult for households to rely on traditional farming practices. This aligns with findings from other studies that have shown how climate change and environmental degradation undermine agricultural productivity, particularly in coastal areas [37]. As natural resources become increasingly scarce or degraded, households face mounting challenges in sustaining their livelihoods, leading to higher levels of poverty and vulnerability.

Environmental stressors also played a negative role, with climate change, market fluctuations, and land-use changes exacerbating the difficulties faced by households. For example, erratic rainfall patterns, increased flooding, and droughts have made agricultural production less predictable, thereby reducing household income stability. Coastal tourism development and migration, which are often associated with industrialization, also emerged as disruptive factors. While tourism provided some economic opportunities, it also led to the migration of younger people to urban areas in search of better job prospects, leaving behind a labor shortage in the rural communities that depend on agriculture and forestry for their livelihoods. This migration trend reduced the available workforce for traditional livelihood activities, further weakening the resilience of these households.

Finally, shocks such as climate-related events and market price fluctuations were found to have a significant negative impact on livelihood sustainability. For example, the depletion of aquatic resources due to overfishing and pollution has severely affected households reliant on aquaculture and fishing. Climate-related shocks, such as flooding and saltwater intrusion, further exacerbate these challenges, creating a cycle of vulnerability that is difficult for many households to escape.

4.3. Analysis of Factors Affecting Sustainable Livelihoods of Coastal Forest Households in Quang Tri

The general equation of factors affecting sustainable livelihoods of coastal forest households in Quang Tri is as follows: SK = f (N, H, P, F, S, X, D, K, C) [3.4], in which:

(i)

SK: Sustainable livelihoods of coastal forest residents in Quang Tri.

(ii)

N, H, P, F, S, X, D, K, C: Factors affecting sustainable livelihoods of coastal forest households in Quang Tri (see

Table 3. Coefficient values.

Coefficients a
Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	0.611	0.275		2.217	0.027
	N	−0.057	0.047	–0.060	−1.200	0.231
	H	0.196	0.054	0.209	3.668	0.000
	P	0.089	0.055	0.097	1.615	0.107
	F	0.206	0.053	0.210	3.891	0.000
	S	0.255	0.063	0.241	4.080	0.000
	X	–0.089	0.060	–0.089	−1.480	0.140
	D	0.244	0.046	0.280	5.352	0.000
	K	–0.027	0.055	–0.021	–0.486	0.627
	C	0.030	0.043	0.029	0.694	0.488

^a. Dependent Variable: SK.

for details).

We assume that the relationship SK = f (N, H, P, F, S, X, D, K, C) is a linear correlation according to the equation: SK = β₀ + β₁N + β₂H + β₃P + β₄F + β₅S + β₆X + β₇D + β₈K + β₉C.

The expectation of the signs of the coefficients: (i) β₀ ≤ 0: When the input factors are 0, the livelihood results of the household cannot be ≤0, so the intercept coefficient must take values ≥ 0; (ii) ${\mathsf{\beta }}_2,{\mathsf{\beta }}_3,{\mathsf{\beta }}_4>0$: When this resource increases, the livelihood results increase and vice versa, with conditions of factors unchanged (positive relationship); (iii) ${\mathsf{\beta }}_8>0$: When shocks and crises occur, the livelihood results will decrease and vice versa with conditions of other factors unchanged (negative relationship); and (iv) ${\mathsf{\beta }}_1,{\mathsf{\beta }}_5,{\mathsf{\beta }}_6$, ${\mathsf{\beta }}_7,{\mathsf{\beta }}_9$: Undetermined because it depends on the values of the variables N, S, X, D, and C.

The results of the analysis of variance show that (i) the correlation coefficient R² = 0.484, which means that 48.4% of the change in the livelihoods of the coastal forest households of Quang Tri is explained by the independent variables of the equation; (ii) VIF < 10, so the equation does not have multicollinearity; (iii) the Durbin Watson coefficient (1 < d = 1.596 < 3) shows that the equation does not have multicollinearity (see Table 3). Thus, the correlation equation between the influencing factors and sustainable livelihoods of the coastal forest households of Quang Tri has the following form:

SK = 0.611 − 0.057N + 0.196H + 0.089P + 0.206F + 0.255S − 0.089X + 0.244D − 0.027K + 0.030C

The natural resources variable, with a negative coefficient of −0.057, reveals that resource depletion and over-reliance on natural resources pose significant challenges for households. While natural capital is crucial for livelihoods in rural areas, the degradation of natural resources—such as the depletion of soil quality, water resources, and aquatic stocks—adversely impacts productivity and sustainability. The negative relationship suggests that households in the coastal forest areas of Quang Tri are particularly vulnerable to environmental degradation. The findings align with prior research that suggests natural resource constraints limit long-term livelihood options, especially in regions dependent on agriculture, aquaculture, and forestry [37]. Saltwater intrusion, often caused by climate change, has a direct impact on agricultural productivity, as it reduces soil fertility and makes freshwater access more difficult. These results underscore the sustainability challenges associated with resource depletion, making sustainable resource management critical for ensuring long-term livelihood stability [12].

In contrast, human resources (such as education, labor capacity, and skills) have a positive coefficient (0.196), meaning that increasing human capital leads to an improvement in livelihood outcomes. Households with better access to education, a skilled labor force, and improved health conditions tend to have higher adaptive capacity and resilience. This suggests that investment in human resources, through education and healthcare, plays a significant role in improving productivity, diversifying income sources, and enhancing long-term sustainability. It aligns with the finding that human capital is crucial for adapting to both environmental changes and market fluctuations, allowing households to innovate and improve efficiency in their livelihood strategies.

Physical resources, including infrastructure such as roads, electricity, healthcare, and schools, have a positive coefficient (0.089), indicating that better access to infrastructure significantly contributes to livelihood sustainability. Households with access to improved infrastructure can access markets more easily, reduce transportation costs, and obtain better services, which in turn enhances productivity and stability. However, infrastructure development in rural areas often lags behind, and the lack of access to such resources can limit households’ ability to adapt and thrive, underscoring the need for targeted investments in infrastructure to support rural economies.

Financial resources show a notably strong positive impact with a coefficient of 0.206. This indicates that households with better access to financial resources—such as credit, savings, and income security—are better able to improve their livelihoods. Financial stability enables households to invest in more productive livelihood activities, diversify income sources, and buffer against external shocks, such as price fluctuations or natural disasters. Access to microcredit or financial support from the state is particularly important for households with limited savings or asset bases, as it allows them to make investments that enhance resilience.

Social and community resources (represented by the coefficient 0.255) have the most significant positive impact on livelihood sustainability. Strong social networks, kinship ties, and community organizations play a vital role in enhancing the resilience of households. Communities with strong social cohesion are better equipped to share resources, knowledge, and information, especially during times of crisis. This is critical in rural areas, where households often face collective challenges, such as natural disasters, that require cooperation and mutual support. The findings suggest that social capital is crucial for coping with the challenges of climate change, resource scarcity, and market volatility, providing a foundation for households to build adaptive strategies together.

The social and environmental trends factor, with a negative coefficient of −0.089, reveals that coastal tourism development, migration, and agricultural restructuring are significant disruptors of livelihood sustainability. While tourism may provide short-term economic gains, it also leads to social displacement and migration, particularly of youth, seeking opportunities in urban centers. This migration trend weakens the local labor force and reduces a household’s capacity to maintain traditional livelihoods such as agriculture and forestry [13]. The conversion of agricultural lands to urban or industrial use further exacerbates the land-use changes, limiting the resources available for farming and forestry activities. These environmental trends, such as coastal development, are detrimental because they undermine the traditional basis of rural livelihoods, as evidenced by the negative impacts on land-based activities in other coastal regions [6]. The findings of this study are consistent with the literature, which suggests that structural changes in rural areas, such as industrialization and tourism, can displace local populations and erode the natural resource base, reducing household income stability [4].

Interestingly, seasonal fluctuations have a positive coefficient (0.244), suggesting that certain seasonal patterns, such as favorable weather or market conditions, can present economic opportunities. For example, the cyclical nature of agricultural production, where certain crops thrive in specific seasons, can increase household income. However, these benefits are contingent on the ability of households to plan and adapt to seasonal changes. The positive effect of seasonal fluctuations highlights the importance of understanding and anticipating seasonal patterns, allowing households to optimize their livelihood activities.

The variable shocks—with a negative coefficient of −0.027—captures the vulnerability of households to climate-related events and economic disruptions. While the coefficient suggests that the impact of shocks is relatively minor in comparison to other factors, it still highlights a significant vulnerability in these coastal communities. Households in Quang Tri’s coastal areas are exposed to flooding, droughts, and saltwater intrusion, which undermine agricultural productivity and fishing activities, making it difficult for households to maintain stable livelihoods [38]. Additionally, market price volatility and economic crises can result in income instability, as households in rural areas often lack alternative sources of income to buffer against such disruptions [39]. This is particularly concerning given that the livelihoods in these areas are primarily dependent on natural resources that are prone to the adverse effects of climate variability. The negative effect of shocks suggests a need for adaptation strategies and resilience building to mitigate the effects of external disruptions.

Lastly, livelihood strategies (with a coefficient of 0.030) have a small but positive effect on livelihoods. This suggests that households that are flexible in adapting their livelihood strategies—whether by diversifying income sources or adjusting the scale of activities—are better able to sustain their livelihoods. Diversification is key to reducing dependency on a single resource or activity, allowing households to better withstand environmental shocks, market volatility, and other challenges. This finding emphasizes the importance of fostering adaptive capacity and supporting households in diversifying their livelihood portfolios.

4.4. Impact Levels of Factors on the Sustainable Livelihoods of Coastal Forest Households in Quang Tri

The findings of this study indicate that various factors influence the sustainable livelihoods of coastal forest households in Quang Tri at different impact levels. These factors are categorized into positive and negative impact groups, ranked across six levels, with Level 1 representing the highest impact (corresponding to the largest coefficient) and Level 6 representing the lowest impact (corresponding to the smallest coefficient) (

Table 4. Impact levels of factors on sustainable livelihoods of coastal forest households in Quang Tri.

Factors	Items	Coefficient Value	Impact Level (Highest: 1 and Lowest Is 6)
POSSITIVE IMPACT
Social resources and community (S)	S	0.255	1
Seasonal fluctuations	D	0.244	2
Financial resources	F	0.206	3
Human resources	H	0.196	4
Physical resources (public and private)	P	0.089	5
Livelihood strategies		0.030	6
NEGATIVE IMPACTS
Social and environmental trends		–0.089	1
Natural resources	N	–0.057	2
Shocks	K	–0.027	3

). This ranking helps elucidate the relative significance of each factor in shaping household livelihoods and offers a framework for understanding how different livelihood assets interact within this context.

Among the positive factors, social and community resources have the most significant influence, emphasizing the importance of strong community ties, kinship relationships, and local networks for enhancing household resilience. These ties foster solidarity and ensure access to information, which is critical during times of crisis.

However, climate change and land use change have emerged as major negative factors affecting the sustainability of livelihoods in Quang Tri’s coastal forest areas. These environmental challenges threaten the resilience of households, particularly those dependent on the ecosystem services provided by coastal forests. The degradation of soil conservation and water regulation services due to land use changes, such as deforestation, urbanization, and agricultural expansion, significantly impacts resource supply capacity. Coastal forests play a crucial role in protecting soil from erosion, improving water retention, and preventing flooding. However, deforestation and land conversion reduce these ecosystem services, making coastal areas more vulnerable to soil degradation, water scarcity, and increased flooding. These changes directly affect agricultural productivity and aquaculture on which many households in these regions depend.

Moreover, climate change compounds these challenges by altering precipitation patterns, leading to more extreme weather events such as droughts, storms, and flooding. These events weaken the ability of coastal ecosystems to regulate water flow and retain soil, further reducing the productivity of agricultural and aquaculture activities. Additionally, saltwater intrusion exacerbates the loss of arable land, particularly in areas where groundwater is used for irrigation, diminishing crop yields and household income stability.

The impacts of land use change and climate change on ecosystem services are especially detrimental to households whose livelihoods are rooted in the sustainable management of natural resources. As these ecosystem services are weakened, households face increased risks to food security, income, and overall well-being. This underscores the need for targeted interventions aimed at restoring and protecting ecosystem services, promoting climate resilience, and mitigating the impacts of land degradation and climate-induced changes.

To mitigate these risks, policies should be designed to promote sustainable land-use practices, enhance ecosystem restoration efforts, and strengthen the adaptive capacities of coastal forest communities. Integrated approaches that protect both natural resources and livelihoods are essential to ensure long-term sustainability and resilience in these vulnerable areas.

5. Discussion

The regression analysis revealed that natural capital—specifically, variables such as soil fertility and the protection status of coastal forests—has a negative coefficient in relation to livelihood sustainability in the coastal forest areas of Quang Tri Province. While this may initially seem counterintuitive, it can be understood through theoretical frameworks that explain the complex dynamics between natural resources and livelihoods in coastal ecosystems.

First, the resource curse theory [40,41] provides a compelling explanation for this negative relationship. According to this theory, the presence of abundant natural resources, such as fertile soils and extensive forests, does not always equate to improved welfare or sustainable livelihoods. Instead, communities that are overly dependent on natural resources may face increased vulnerability when those resources are mismanaged or subject to environmental stress. In the case of Quang Tri, poor soil quality and saltwater intrusion in certain coastal forest areas reduce agricultural productivity, diminishing the value of natural capital as a long-term livelihood support system. This over-reliance on a resource base that is susceptible to external shocks, like climate variability and environmental degradation, can impede economic diversification, leaving households more vulnerable to livelihood failure during adverse conditions. Therefore, while the abundance of natural resources might offer short-term benefits, it can limit long-term resilience and hinder households from exploring alternative and more sustainable livelihood strategies.

Second, the conservation–livelihood conflict framework [42,43] provides another lens through which to interpret the negative effect of natural capital on livelihood outcomes. Coastal areas such as Quang Tri are often subject to conservation policies aimed at protecting mangrove ecosystems and forests, which are vital for biodiversity and climate resilience. However, these conservation efforts often come at the cost of restricting access to natural resources, such as timber, non-timber forest products, and fishing areas. The designation of coastal forests as protected zones limits the ability of local communities to exploit these resources for livelihood purposes, exacerbating poverty and reducing income-generating opportunities. While conservation is crucial for long-term environmental health, these policies can create tensions by restricting local households from accessing resources they depend on for survival. This trade-off between environmental protection and livelihood needs is particularly pronounced in areas where households rely heavily on natural capital for their livelihoods. As a result, the relationship between natural capital and livelihood sustainability in Quang Tri’s coastal areas is complex, with the benefits of natural resources often undermined by the constraints imposed by conservation efforts and environmental degradation.

Furthermore, these findings highlight the importance of understanding how resource management policies can have uneven impacts on different social groups. While some households may have alternative income sources and can adapt to changes in resource availability, others may be marginalized due to unequal access to natural capital or the ability to engage in alternative livelihoods. This disparity can lead to a widening gap in livelihood outcomes across communities, reinforcing cycles of poverty in areas with limited policy interventions or inequitable distribution of resources.

This study contributes significantly to understanding the role of various livelihood capitals in ensuring the sustainability of coastal communities in Quang Tri Province. However, while a comprehensive set of influencing factors was considered, there are certain cultural factors and historical background elements that were not explicitly addressed in the analysis. These factors could play a significant role in shaping how communities adapt to environmental changes and socio-economic stressors. For example, traditional resource management practices, local governance structures, and community norms may influence resilience strategies that go beyond the immediate environmental or economic capitals examined in this study [44].

Given the emphasis of this study on livelihood capitals—human, physical, financial, social, and environmental—the influence of these cultural and historical dimensions was not included in the current scope. However, it is acknowledged that these factors likely contribute to the sustainability of livelihoods in coastal regions, particularly in Vietnam, where local traditions and historical land use patterns still shape many aspects of rural life [6].

Therefore, future research should seek to integrate these cultural and historical factors to gain a more holistic understanding of livelihood sustainability. Investigating how community-level governance, traditional knowledge, and historical resource management practices intersect with socio-economic and environmental factors would provide deeper insights into the resilience of coastal communities.

6. Conclusions

This study has examined the factors influencing livelihood sustainability in the coastal forest areas of Quang Tri Province, Vietnam. The findings underscore the complex interplay between natural capital, social capital, human capital, and policy frameworks in shaping the resilience of coastal communities. Key findings reveal that human capital (education and skills) and social capital (community networks) have a positive impact on livelihood sustainability, while natural capital, particularly poor soils and high forest protection status, can act as constraints to sustainable livelihoods. The study also highlights the critical role of policies that aim to balance resource conservation and livelihood needs, especially in areas where coastal forest ecosystems are under pressure from both environmental degradation and restrictive conservation policies.

The contributions of this study are particularly significant in the context of coastal resilience and sustainable livelihoods, providing valuable insights into the role of capital in ensuring livelihood sustainability in vulnerable areas. The findings emphasize the need for integrated policies that support both environmental conservation and livelihood improvement. Specifically, policymakers should focus on providing alternative livelihood options, improving access to financial capital, and supporting community-based resource management models that encourage sustainable practices while enhancing adaptive capacity.

This study also presents practical implications for future policy development in coastal regions. Government initiatives aimed at promoting coastal resilience must incorporate the socio-economic realities of local communities, particularly in areas with high forest protection policies. Future policies should seek to reduce the trade-offs between environmental conservation and livelihood sustainability, ensuring that protected areas do not inadvertently undermine local livelihoods. Additionally, there is a need to expand financial inclusion and improve education systems to empower coastal communities to adapt to changing environmental and market conditions.

In terms of future research, there is a need to explore the long-term impacts of coastal conservation policies on livelihood sustainability and community resilience. Longitudinal studies could provide further insights into how these policies affect livelihood diversification and resource management practices over time. Moreover, cross-regional comparisons of coastal forest ecosystems could offer a broader understanding of how local, national, and global factors interact to shape livelihood outcomes in different coastal settings.