Evaluating the Sustainable Development Level of Local Communities Within Hunan Nanshan National Park, China

Abstract

National parks play a crucial role in promoting the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and have become one of the key topics of global concern and discussion. However, it is still unclear whether national park development can effectively enhance the level of sustainable development in local communities related to social and economic dimensions of SDGs. In this study, we constructed an evaluation system based on the SDG assessment indicator framework, to evaluate the sustainable development level of local communities within Hunan Nanshan National Park (NSNP), China. We assessed the development level of various SDG indicators through field visits and structured surveys of local communities inside and around HNNP. We used the entropy method to determine the weight of each indicator and calculated the integrated development index of different communities within and around NSNP. The results indicate the following: (1) The integrated development index of communities within NSNP is generally lower than that of the surrounding communities, but it scores higher in the dimensions of SDG1 and SDG10. (2) The integrated development index within NSNP shows the highest in communities within original natural park, but the lowest in communities within original nature reserve. (3) The structured questionnaire surveys reveal that the primary cause of income decline of residents within NSNP is the restriction on land-use and resource exploitation, while ecological compensation and employment opportunities related to national park management can help improve local livelihoods and thereby promote development level of local communities. This study provides a technical framework for assessing the sustainable development of local communities in Chinese national parks and supports regional planning. It also offers a scientific basis for balancing national park conservation with local community development.

1. Introduction

National parks play a crucial role in the conservation of biodiversity, the maintenance of ecosystem balance, the promotion of tourism, and the enhancement of human well-being [1]. Notably, approximately half of the world’s national parks and protected areas are situated on indigenous lands, where they are closely intertwined with the daily lives and livelihoods of local communities [2]. These areas serve vital functions including economic production, residential use, and recreational activities [3]. The establishment of national parks, while aimed at preserving biodiversity and maintaining ecosystem integrity, may impose constraints on the harvesting and management of forestry and fishery resources, as well as on the scope, methods, and intensity of agricultural and livestock activities. These constraints can result in livelihood challenges for local communities, including limitations on production and business operations, declines in income, and reductions in employment opportunities [4]. In China, most national parks located in remote rural regions face systemic challenges marked by geographically dispersed populations, low levels of educational attainment, limited diversification of livelihoods, high dependence on natural resources, and ongoing economic underdevelopment [5]. Consequently, addressing the trade-off between conservation and livelihoods represents a critical governance challenge faced by China and other countries in the establishment of national parks. Promoting the coordinated development of ecological conservation and community livelihoods in internal or peripheral communities of national parks has become a focus of global discourse requiring urgent solutions.

Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm, accessed on 30 July 2025). Internationally, research on the sustainable development of national parks has a long history. The practice and study of Western national parks began in the late 19th century, at the intersection of industrialization and the conservation movement [6]. The establishment of Yellowstone National Park in the United States marked the beginning of the modern national park system, with early studies primarily focusing on foundational theories of protected areas and resource management models [7]. Today, an internationally recognized theoretical framework has been developed, encompassing concepts such as adaptive management, social-ecological systems, and collaborative governance [8]. Research priorities include management strategies [9], ecotourism [10], community perception and participation [11], and ecosystem services [12], with an emphasis on harmonizing human activities and environmental protection as well as coordinating the interests of multiple stakeholders. In contrast, research in China is characterized by strong policy orientation. It has evolved through the adaptation of international theories to local contexts and integrates indigenous concepts such as the “community of life” and “realization of ecological product value,” with a focus on management strategies, ecosystem services, and community engagement and perception.

In recent years, scholars around the world have conducted relevant research on the assessment of national parks’ sustainable development [13,14,15]. They have primarily utilized evaluation methodologies such as coupling coordination degree models [16] and spatial suitability analysis [17], with a focus on key issues including ecological conservation, community involvement, and tourism management within national parks. For instance, New Zealand’s national parks incorporate the Sustainable Market Orientation (SMO) model into their management framework. Through long-term strategic planning and flexible adaptive management approaches, these parks effectively balance ecological conservation with economic development, thereby promoting the sustainable development of the national park system [18]. Zhang et al. targeted the potential construction area of the Selin Co-Puruogangri Glacier National Park, developing a tourism sustainability management assessment index system comprising 5 primary indicators and 15 secondary indicators across ecological, economic, social, and cultural dimensions [19]. Guo et al. developed an analytical framework integrating natural conditions, transportation accessibility, cultural factors, and national policies to examine the spatial coupling patterns between the construction of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau national park cluster and community sustainable development [20]. In September 2015, the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which encompasses 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 associated targets [21]. It has made substantial contributions to advancing balanced development across the dimensions of social inclusion, economic growth, and environmental health. Building upon this foundation, Chinese scholars have developed multi-scale sustainability assessment frameworks—encompassing regional, urban, and rural levels—that largely adapt the SDGs for localized implementation. Methodologically, commonly utilized techniques include the entropy weight method [22], Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) [23], and standard deviation classification [24]. However, studies assessing the sustainability levels of national park communities rarely adopt the SDGs as a guiding assessment framework. In particular, the design of specific evaluation index systems often lacks systematic integration and adaptation of SDG indicators, reflecting a notable gap in current research.

Therefore, this study establishes an evaluation framework for community sustainable development in the Hunan Nanshan National Park (NSNP), China, based on the SDG indicator repository. Through field investigations and structured questionnaire surveys, a comparative analysis is performed to assess the sustainable development levels of communities within the national park and those in adjacent peripheral areas, with the objective of examining the relationship between national park construction and local community sustainability. This approach ultimately seeks to provide evidence-based recommendations for achieving a balanced integration of ecological conservation and socio-economic development within China’s national park.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The Hunan Nanshan National Park (NSNP) is located within Chengbu Miao Autonomous County, which is among China’s first 10 national park pilot areas and represents the first such pilot area established in Hunan Province. In July 2016, the National Development and Reform Commission approved the implementation plan for the Nanshan National Park System Pilot Area. The plan stipulated the integration of the following protected areas within Chengbu Miao Autonomous County into the NSNP: Jintongshan National Nature Reserve, Baiyunhu National Wetland Park, Liangjiangxiagu National Forest Park, and Nanshan National Scenic Area [25]. In addition, the park encompasses previously unprotected lands that have been newly designated as integral parts of the national park. This particular region constitutes the longest-established pilot zone within the NSNP. Notable management achievements have been realized here, including the successful implementation of conservation easement transfers. Furthermore, compensation standards for collective public welfare forests and Natural Forest Protection Program forests have been substantially increased—raised from 15.5 yuan/mu/year and 13.5 yuan/mu/year, respectively, to a unified rate of 50 yuan/mu/year [26]. The study area (Figure 1) comprises 39 administrative villages, encompassing a total of 4640 registered households. The local population is primarily engaged in traditional agroforestry, animal husbandry, and crop cultivation, with livelihoods constrained by limited production resources and scarce economic opportunities. In 2017, the per capita disposable income of rural residents in this region was approximately 4000 CNY (557.20 USD)—significantly below the county-level rural average and equivalent to only one-third of the rural average in Hunan Province [27]. The permanent population is primarily composed of the Miao, Dong, and Yao ethnic groups, demonstrating a continuous year-on-year decline and characterized by a pronounced aging demographic structure [28].

2.2. Community Sustainable Development Evaluation Index System of NSNP

To assess the level of sustainable development within local communities in the NSNP, we developed an evaluation framework grounded in the 17 SDGs established by the United Nations [29]. We specifically screened SDG sub-targets closely relevant to community development in the park context. Existing research, both domestically and internationally, on SDG-based sustainable development evaluation systems frequently focuses on multiple goals including SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 4 (Quality Education), and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) [30,31]. Given China’s well-established and distinctive ecological compensation mechanisms within national parks, we incorporated SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) to more comprehensively reflect the critical balance that local communities seek to achieve between conservation and development within the national park [32].

Adhering to the principles of scientific rigor, systematic comprehensiveness, representativeness, and operational feasibility, we developed a localized evaluation framework that integrates China’s national conditions and the policy requirements of national parks. Drawing upon domestic localized SDG indicator sets [33] and synthesizing insights from existing sustainable development research, we identified contextually relevant indicators from the UN SDG Global Indicator Framework [34,35,36,37]. This process resulted in a foundational socio-economic indicator database covering key dimensions such as employment, income, education, healthcare, and social security. The initial database was subsequently refined through integration with both the overarching SDG assessment indicator framework and the domestically localized SDG indicator sets [38].

As the central dimension of the evaluation framework for community sustainable development in NSNP, the social dimension was structured around the core principles of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs 1, 3, 4, and 10). For SDG 1, the global indicator “Proportion of population below the international poverty line” was substituted with “Proportion of population receiving Minimum Living Guarantee”. This adjustment more accurately reflects China’s social security policies and provides a direct measure of the effectiveness of the social safety net coverage. To assess SDG 3, the indicators “Self-rated health status of residents” and “Resident satisfaction with medical services” were selected. These capture community health from two complementary perspectives—actual health conditions and perceived service quality—thus enabling an evaluation of the equity and accessibility of health resource distribution within park communities. This approach effectively circumvents the use of indicators such as “Maternal mortality ratio”, which are constrained by significant data availability challenges in this context. In evaluating SDG 8, a more contextually relevant indicator—“Household Migrant Labor Ratio”—was chosen in place of macro-level metrics such as “Youth unemployment rate” or “Annual growth rate of GDP per capita”. This indicator better reflects the socioeconomic realities of local community livelihoods. In the evaluation of SDG 10, drawing upon the methodology employed by Wang et al. [39] to assess regional disparities in sustainable development in Anhui Province, the “Gini coefficient” was adopted as an indicator to measure income equity within the national park.

The design of the economic dimension indicators is based on the core objectives of SDG 2 and SDG 8. Centered on income growth, livelihood resilience, and economic structure, we selected three final indicators—Household Annual Income, Livelihood Types, and Non-farm Income Share—by excluding those with limited operational feasibility or challenges in data accessibility [4]. Household Annual Income serves as a fundamental economic indicator for assessing progress toward SDG 2. It provides a direct quantitative measure of the reduction in absolute poverty within the community. The Livelihood Types indicator, calculated based on the diversity of household income sources, facilitates the evaluation of the transition from traditional agriculture and animal husbandry to green industries such as ecotourism and non-timber forest product processing. The Non-farm Income Share offers an industrial structure-based perspective, reflecting the degree to which the community’s economy relies on natural resources.

We ultimately established a sustainable development evaluation system for NSNP communities, based on six key SDGs: SDG 1, SDG 2, SDG 3, SDG 4, SDG 8, and SDG 10. The system consists of three hierarchical levels: 1 Goal Level, 2 Criteria Levels, and 12 Evaluation Indicators, as shown in

Table 1. Evaluation System for Sustainable Development of National Park Communities. (SDGs: Sustainable Development Goals; SDG 1: No Poverty; SDG 2: Zero Hunger; SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being; SDG 4: Quality Education; SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth; SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities).

Goal Layer	Criterion Layer	Index Layer	Assignment Criteria	Properties	SDGs
Evaluation System for Sustainable Development of National Park Communities	Social layer	Minimum living allowance rate	The proportion of residents receiving minimum living allowance to the total population	−	1
		Insurance participation rate for commercial insurance	The proportion of people who have purchased commercial insurance to the total population of the region	+	1
		Residents’ physical health conditions	Unable to work = 0; Chronic illness = 0.25; Frequently ill = 0.5; Occasionally ill = 0.75; Very good health = 1	+	3
		The percentage of residents who are satisfied with the village medical services	The proportion of surveyed residents who are satisfied with the village medical services in the total number of surveyed individuals	+	3
		The level of happiness of residents compared to before the establishment of the NSNP	Significantly reduced = 0; Modestly declined = 0.25; Remained stable = 0.5; Modestly improved = 0.75; Significantly increased = 1	+	3
		Educational Attainment	Illiterate = 0; Primary school/Junior high school = 0.25; High school/Vocational school = 0.5; Bachelor’s degree = 0.75; Graduate degree or above = 1	+	4
		Household Migrant Labor Ratio	The proportion of family members working outside the home to the total number of family laborers	−	8
		Ecological Compensation	The proportion of families that received ecological compensation from the government among the total residents of the national park	+	10
		Gini coefficient	The percentage of the total residents’ income that is used for unequal distribution in the total income.	−	10
	Economic layer	Annual family income	Less than 5000 yuan = 0; 5000–10,000 yuan = 0.25; 10,000–20,000 yuan = 0.5 20,000–30,000 yuan = 0.75; More than 30,000 yuan = 1.	+	2
		Livelihood types	None or one type = 0.2; two types = 0.4; three types = 0.6; four types = 0.8; five or more types = 1	+	8
		Non-farm Income Share	The proportion of non-agricultural income from household activities in the total income	+	8

“ + ” denotes positive indicators, and “ − ” denotes negative indicators.

.

2.3. Questionnaire Design and Collection

Building upon the sustainable development evaluation indicator system for NSNP communities developed in this study, and guided by consultations with experts and scholars in sustainable ecology, as well as field visits to relevant NSNP management departments, we designed the “NSNP Community Sustainable Development Level Survey Questionnaire”. Following a pilot survey conducted in July–August 2024, the final questionnaire was completed. The questionnaire consists of four sections comprising a total of 23 questions. Section 1 collects basic information about the respondent and their family members. Section 2 focuses on the household’s economic status, including income and expenditure, primary income sources, and commercial insurance coverage. Section 3 addresses health and medical care status, covering the respondent’s self-rated health status and satisfaction with village-level medical services. Section 4 assesses the respondent’s perception of NSNP, including awareness of the park, support for its establishment, willingness to participate in its construction and management, and subjective well-being. (See Supplementary Material File S1 for complete questionnaire). On 14 October 2024, we applied a random sampling method to select 39 administrative villages across four core zones of NSNP and its surrounding gateway communities, where a 15-day formal survey was carried out. A total of 410 questionnaires were distributed. Valid responses were screened based on response time and completeness of completion, resulting in the successful retrieval of 403 valid questionnaires, yielding a validity rate of 98.3%. All respondents were informed that the survey was anonymous, and that the collected data would be used solely for research purposes. Statistical analysis of the survey sample data was conducted using SPSS V29.0 software.

2.4. Determination of the Indicator Weight

The entropy weight method was employed to determine the weights of indicators within the evaluation system. A higher entropy value signifies greater data dispersion or uncertainty, which corresponds to a lower utility value and, therefore, a smaller assigned weight [26]. This quantitative approach effectively mitigates the subjective arbitrariness inherent in assigning indicator weights during traditional evaluation analyses.

2.4.1. Data Normalization

To eliminate the influence of differing indicator dimensions and attributes, this study applied the deviation standardization method (min-max normalization) to standardize the original data for both positive and negative indicators.

Favorable Indicator:

$$y_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{x_{ij}-\mathrm{m}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}\left(x_{ij}\right)}{\max \left(x_{ij}\right)-\mathrm{m}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}\left(x_{ij}\right)}}$$

(1)

(i = 1, 2……, m; j = 1, 2……, n)

Unfavorable Indicator:

$$y_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{\max \left(x_{ij}\right)-x_{ij}}{\max \left(x_{ij}\right)-\mathrm{m}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}\left(x_{ij}\right)}}$$

(2)

(i = 1, 2……, m; j = 1, 2……, n)

2.4.2. Entropy-Weighting Method

$$e_j=-{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\ln m}}{\sum }_{i=1}^m{\displaystyle \frac{y_{ij}}{\sum _{i=1}^m{y}_{ij}}}\ln {\displaystyle \frac{y_{ij}}{\sum _{i=1}^m{y}_{ij}}}$$

(3)

(i = 1, 2……, m; j = 1, 2……, n)

e_j denotes the entropy value of the j-th indicator.

The entropy calculation enables the determination of the weight assigned to each indicator within the evaluation system.

$$w_j={\displaystyle \frac{1-e_j}{\sum _{j=1}^n(1-e_j)}}$$

(4)

(j = 1, 2……, n)

w_j denotes the weight for the indicator j.

The community sustainable development index for NSNP was derived through weighted aggregation of indicator weights:

$$s_i={\sum }_{j=1}^n{w}_j{p}_{ij}$$

(5)

(i = 1, 2……, m; j = 1, 2……, n)

2.5. Comparison in Different Areas of National Parks

By substituting the relevant data into Formula (5), the Community Sustainable Development Index for different zones within the NSNP boundary was calculated. Based on the weighted composite scores derived from each SDG, a comparative analysis of the Community Sustainable Development Index was conducted across various internal zones of the national park and its surrounding peripheral areas.

Additionally, a statistical analysis was carried out on the responses to household economic questions in Section 2 of the survey questionnaire. This analysis quantified the proportion of residents in both the internal zones of the park and the surrounding peripheral areas who perceived their income to have increased or decreased. Specifically, the responses to the question “What do you perceive as the reasons for your diminished/enhanced household income”? (under the main question: “What impact has the establishment of NSNP [since 2016] had on your household economic income?”) were analyzed statistically. The analysis identifies the primary reasons cited by residents in both the internal and peripheral zones for perceived changes in income (increase or decrease) and the corresponding proportions. Consequently, this enables a systematic examination of the factors influencing sustainable development within national park communities.

3. Results

3.1. Statistics of Survey Questionnaire Data

A statistical analysis of the basic information from the collected questionnaires was conducted. The results indicate the following: (1) Male respondents were more numerous than female respondents. (2) The respondents represented multiple ethnic groups, including Han, Miao, Yao, and Dong, with the Yao ethnic group constituting the majority. (3) The age distribution was concentrated among the 31–50 and 51–60 age groups. (4) Educational attainment was predominantly at the junior high school and primary school levels. (5) The distribution of respondents residing within the national park and those living in the surrounding peripheral areas was relatively balanced. See Supplementary Material File S2 for comprehensive data on the fundamental characteristics of the questionnaire.

Based on the statistical analysis of 403 valid questionnaires, residents within the NSNP demonstrate the following characteristics in terms of household economic structure, participation in ecological conservation, livelihood transformation, and life well-being:

With respect to household economic structure, residents exhibit distinct characteristics. Migrant labor is widespread, with 65.76% of households having members engaged in migrant work, of which 92.83% are employed away from home throughout the year. An analysis of annual household income shows that a cumulative 71.72% fall within the CNY 10,000–40,000 (1402-5608 USD) range. Primary income sources include crop cultivation (70.72%), eco-compensation payments (68.98%), livestock and poultry breeding (48.64%), and sideline occupations (51.61%). Tourism contributes only 3.72%, indicating that the community economy within the park remains highly dependent on traditional agriculture and policy-based compensation.

The establishment of the national park has generated differential impacts on community household income. While 54.84% of respondents reported an increase in household income attributed to the park’s creation, primarily driven by eco-compensation payments (56.56%) and employment opportunities within the park (34.39%), 19.85% indicated a decline. This decrease was primarily attributed to restricted access to natural resources (51.25%) and limitations on land-use (37.5%). With regard to pathways for income growth, contributions from eco-friendly industries (23.08%), tourism services (11.76%), and specialty product development (10.86%) remain relatively modest. This underscores the inadequacy of alternative livelihood development within the NSNP. Meanwhile, 17.65% of households that experienced income growth identified migrant labor as a significant supplementary income source. Commonly reported concerns during interviews included “poor crop yields,” “inadequate transportation infrastructure,” and “disruptions to daily life caused by increasing wildlife presence.”

In terms of ecological conservation awareness and participation, 91.81% of respondents support the establishment of the national park, and 76.67% agree that ecological conservation and community development should be given equal priority. This demonstrates a high level of recognition and support for conservation initiatives among residents. However, although 68.98% reside within the park boundaries, only 44.67% have a basic understanding of the national park, and 11.66% are unable to clearly articulate the spatial relationship between their residence and the park. This suggests a lack of comprehensive understanding among a portion of the resident population. With regard to actual participation in park-related activities, 34.24% are involved in ecological protection or park construction, while 51.86% do not participate in any related activities. Nonetheless, 71.96% express willingness to engage in conservation management activities, and 62.53% support participation in decision-making through community representative mechanisms. This highlights a significant discrepancy between potential willingness to participate and actual involvement.

In the valuation of ecosystem services, residents demonstrated the highest recognition for Provisioning Services (income from agriculture/forestry: 81.89%) and Regulating Services (eco-compensation payments: 81.14%). In contrast, awareness of Cultural Services (tourism-related: 44.42%) and Supporting Services (ecological improvement: 22.08%) remains relatively low. Survey respondents expressed diverse perceptions regarding changes in tourism volume: 43.92% indicated an increase in tourist numbers (including both significant and slight increases), whereas 45.41% perceived no significant change. This suggests that the economic driving effects of tourism have not yet been widely recognized, indicating considerable potential for further development and utilization of tourism resources. Additionally, 74.93% of residents reported an improvement in their quality of life since the park’s establishment, 18.36% observed no change, and 6.7% perceived a decline.

3.2. Community Sustainable Development Index Comprehensive Assessment

The calculated indicator weights enable an assessment of their relative influence on the overall sustainable development of the region, thereby facilitating the identification of key factors that impact regional sustainability. The computed weights for each criterion level and individual indicator are summarized in

Table 2. Evaluation system and index weight for sustainable development of the NSNP communities.

Goal Layer	Criterion Layer	Index Layer	Entropy	Utility Degree	Weight of Criterion Layer (%)	Weight of Criterion (%)	SDGs
Evaluation system and index weight for sustainable development of Nanshan National Park Communities	Social layer	Minimum living allowance rate (S1)	0.764	0.236	74.032	9.679	1
		Insurance participation rate for commercial insurance (S2)	0.773	0.227		9.326	1
		Residents’ physical health conditions (S3)	0.737	0.263		10.791	3
		The percentage of residents who are satisfied with the village medical services (S4)	0.83	0.17		6.983	3
		The level of happiness of residents compared to before the establishment of the NSNP (S5)	0.698	0.302		12.372	3
		Educational Attainment (S6)	0.803	0.197		8.103	4
		Household Migrant Labor Ratio (S7)	0.893	0.107		4.387	8
		Ecological Compensation (S8)	0.851	0.149		6.102	10
		Gini coefficient (S9)	0.847	0.153		6.289	10
	Economic layer	Annual family income (E1)	0.642	0.358	25.968	14.695	2
		Livelihood types (E2)	0.893	0.107		4.380	8
		Non-farm Income Share (E3)	0.832	0.168		6.893	8

.

The calculation results indicate a Community Sustainable Development Index of 45.33 for areas within the NSNP boundary and 60.34 for the surrounding peripheral areas. The Sustainable Development Index for communities located outside the park exceeds that of communities situated inside the park. An analysis of the scores for individual SDGs reveals disparities between the internal and peripheral zones in relation to SDG1, SDG 2, SDG 3, SDG 8, and SDG 10. Specifically, SDG 1 and SDG 10 scores were higher for communities inside the national park compared to those in the surrounding peripheral areas. In contrast, scores for SDG 2, SDG 3, and SDG 8 were lower in the internal zones than in the peripheral areas (as illustrated in Figure 2).

3.3. Comparison of Community Sustainable Development Index in Different Regions

The Community Sustainable Development Index calculations for different zones within the NSNP yielded the following results: NSNP-np scored 53.93, NSNP-nr scored 28.62, and NSNP-new scored 41.21. Compared to the Community Sustainable Development Index of 60.34 for the NSNP-out, the overall index ranking across the four zones is NSNP-out > NSNP-np > NSNP-new > NSNP-nr.

An analysis of individual SDG scores across the internal NSNP zones (Figure 3) reveals varied performance outcomes. NSNP-np exhibited relatively higher scores in SDG 1, SDG 4, and SDG 10. In comparison, NSNP-new attained relatively higher scores in SDG 3, SDG 8, and SDG 10. By contrast, NSNP-nr consistently demonstrated lower performance across all assessed SDGs.

Based on the analysis of survey questionnaires (

Table 3. Influence on local residents’ income before and after the establishment of the Hunan Nanshan National Park (The table above shows the percentage of the samples in the surveyed population under three different income scenarios).

Income Change		Revenue Improvement	No Change	Income Reduction
NSNP-out		58.29%	32.62%	9.09%
NSNP-inside	Total	51.85%	18.98%	29.17%
	NSNP-np	42.39%	22.83%	34.78%
	NSNP-nr	51.06%	19.15%	29.79%
	NSNP-new	63.64%	14.29%	22.08%

), a higher proportion of residents in communities surrounding the national park reported an increase in income (58.29%) compared to those residing within the park boundary (51.85%). However, among internal park communities, NSNP-new recorded the highest proportion of residents perceiving income increases (63.64%), surpassing even the surrounding area. A greater percentage of residents in the surrounding communities indicated no change in income compared to those living within the park. In contrast, the proportion of residents perceiving a decrease in income was higher within the park (29.17%) than in the surrounding areas (9.09%), with NSNP-np reporting the highest rate of perceived income decline (34.78%).

Survey findings indicate that park residents who attributed income increases primarily cited eco-compensation payments (64.29%) and employment related to park operations (35.71%). Within this group, residents of NSNP-nr reported the highest dependence on eco-compensation (48.62%). Residents of surrounding communities cited these same factors but also identified migrant labor and the development of eco-friendly industries as significant contributors to income growth (Figure 4 and Figure 5). In contrast, park residents who perceived income decreases predominantly cited land-use restrictions (46.03%) and restrictions on resource extraction or utilization (53.97%). This perception was most pronounced among residents in NSNP-new, with 64.71% citing land-use restrictions and 52.94% citing resource-related restrictions. Surrounding communities reported minimal impact from restrictions on resource extraction; their perceptions of income decline were primarily attributed to land-use constraints, reduced employment opportunities, and declining personal labor capacity, indicating a relatively lower direct negative impact from the establishment of the park.

4. Discussion

We developed a Community Sustainable Development Index evaluation framework based on six socioeconomic dimensions of the SDGs. By employing a combination of semi-structured and structured questionnaire interviews, a quantitative assessment was conducted to evaluate the levels of sustainable development within the park’s communities. The findings revealed that the levels of community sustainable development in areas surrounding the NSNP exceed those within the park’s core boundaries. This disparity is likely attributable to the fewer development restrictions imposed by national park regulations on peripheral communities. This result is consistent with the research of Chen et al., who also identified national parks not only as critical areas for ecological conservation and primary providers of ecosystem services, but also as regions that often experience lagging economic development [40,41]. An analysis of individual SDGs reveals distinct patterns. Communities within the NSNP achieved higher scores than surrounding peripheral communities in SDG 1 and SDG 10. This outcome is closely linked to the enhanced eco-compensation standards implemented within the park. Specifically, the NSNP increased compensation rates for collective public welfare forests and Natural Forest Protection Program forests from the original rates of USD 2.16/mu/year and USD 1.88/mu/year, respectively, to a unified rate of USD 6.96/mu/year. This policy intervention increased household income, improved social welfare provisions, and moderately narrowed the wealth gap among residents within the park. In contrast, the majority of residents in surrounding peripheral areas did not benefit from the park’s eco-compensation policy, resulting in a relatively wider wealth gap. However, communities within the NSNP scored lower than those in surrounding areas on SDG 2, SDG 3, and SDG 8. This indicates that while the establishment of the national park has contributed to certain aspects of socio-economic development within its boundaries, internal communities still face relative disadvantages compared to peripheral areas. These disadvantages include weaker infrastructure, less developed economies, a less diversified industrial structure, and, consequently, a lower overall quality of life for residents [42]. This finding is consistent with similar research conducted in other national parks in China. For example, studies have shown that forestry worker households within the boundary of the Northeast China Tiger and Leopard National Park have lower total income, wage income, transfer income, and property income compared to those residing outside the park boundary [43]. Consequently, in the future development and management of national parks, priority should be given to advancing infrastructure construction—such as transportation networks and healthcare facilities—while ensuring the preservation of ecosystem integrity. At the same time, effective pathways for increasing resident incomes, expanding employment opportunities, and promoting local cultural and economic development should be actively pursued [44].

A comparative analysis of communities across different zones within the national park reveals that NSNP-nr has the lowest Sustainable Development Index. This is primarily due to the more stringent conservation measures and regulatory controls typically implemented in nature reserve areas [45]. Characterized by a higher proportion of migrant laborers, a predominantly aging resident population, and limited livelihood diversification, this zone demonstrates lower levels of sustainable development. Similar studies corroborate that nature reserves often face challenges including simplified industrial structures, lower levels of economic development, and constraints such as inadequate transportation infrastructure, harsh natural environments, and stringent management regulations [46,47,48]. Therefore, promoting alternative livelihood strategies, such as the development of eco-industries, can help reduce reliance on the direct exploitation of traditional natural resources within these reserves, thereby enhancing their potential for sustainable development [49]. In contrast, NSNP-np achieved a relatively higher Community Sustainable Development Index, reflecting superior performance in economic development, social security, public well-being, and education. This advantage is largely attributable to its more favorable geographical location and greater accessibility, which facilitate the development of ecotourism. Supporting research indicates that natural parks, benefiting from abundant natural endowments and enhanced social resources, can enhance their sustainability levels through the development of eco-industries such as ecotourism, eco-agriculture, and nature-based education [50]. Consequently, national parks should improve institutional mechanisms and ensure long-term financial support to promote the development of eco-industries, such as ecotourism, nature-based education, and forest therapy.

We found that residents within the NSNP primarily attribute perceived income increases to eco-compensation payments and employment opportunities associated with park operations. Moreover, the high recognition of Regulating Services (eco-compensation) and Provisioning Services (agricultural and forestry income) is closely related to local livelihood patterns. This highlights the essential role of the eco-compensation policy in supporting community well-being and indicates that the establishment of national parks, by encouraging resident participation in park management, enhances employment opportunities and social welfare benefits. Other national parks in China, such as Wuyishan [51], Giant Panda [52], Qianjiangyuan [53], and Hainan Tropical Rainforest [54], have similarly promoted local community sustainability through establishing diversified eco-compensation mechanisms. However, NSNP-nr, which is predominantly situated within the park’s strictly protected core zones, faces challenges related to underdeveloped transportation and infrastructure. These limitations impose significant constraints on the development of tourism services and the production and marketing of specialty eco-products. Notably, interview data revealed a relatively low proportion of residents in this zone participating in park-related employment. For residents in NSNP-out, perceived income increases are commonly attributed to eco-compensation, park-related employment, migrant labor opportunities, and the development of eco-friendly industries. This indicates that, despite residing outside the formal park boundary, NSNP-out residents derive direct or indirect benefits from park welfare policies, gaining access to greater employment opportunities and more favorable development conditions. Nevertheless, residents across both internal NSNP zones and surrounding peripheral areas reported experiencing restrictions on land-use and resource extraction or utilization. This perception was particularly pronounced among residents in NSNP-new. Consequently, for NSNP-new communities, the park administration should prioritize proactive communication and outreach initiatives. Timely engagement and dialog with local residents are essential to address and mitigate potential resistance arising from the park’s boundary designation.

The findings of this study indicate that the establishment of the NSNP has achieved preliminary coordination between ecological conservation and community economic development. However, significant challenges remain in terms of the depth of community participation, diversification of alternative livelihood strategies, and equitable distribution of public services. To address issues such as high resident dependence on eco-compensation policies, limited economic stimulation from tourism, and the gap between conservation awareness and actual behavior, it is essential to establish a more inclusive and sustainable community co-management framework to support the park’s long-term sustainability. Based on these findings, the following recommendations are proposed to enhance community sustainable development within the NSNP: (1) While safeguarding the integrity of the park’s ecosystems, strengthen infrastructure development within NSNP. Optimize the industrial structure of resident communities and explore opportunities for expanded employment. (2) Prioritize targeted support for residents within the NSNP-nr zone. Enhance their participation in park-related activities by creating additional public welfare conservation positions. In areas requiring stricter protection, implement ecological resettlement programs. (3) Actively monitor and respond to changes in conservation attitudes and awareness among residents in the NSNP-new zone. Implement targeted outreach and guidance initiatives. Leverage the zone’s relatively better transportation access to pilot and develop models of eco-industry development. (4) The current eco-compensation standard (USD 6.96/mu/year) is currently implemented only within the Chengbu County sector. Following the NSNP’s official designation, it is crucial to uniformly expand this policy across the entire national park to eliminate disparities and perceptions of inequity among residents in different sectors.

5. Conclusions

Based on the United Nations SDGs framework, we developed a community sustainable development evaluation system covering six key SDGs. Using the NSNP as a case study, an empirical analysis was conducted through the entropy weight method, structured questionnaire surveys, and regional comparative research. The key findings are summarized as follows:

A significant disparity exists in development levels between communities inside and outside the national park. The CSDI for NSNP-out communities was notably higher than that of internal communities. While internal communities scored higher on SDG 1 and SDG 10, their performance on SDG 2, SDG 3, and SDG 8 was lower compared to peripheral communities.

There is considerable variation among internal zones based on historical conservation intensity. The CSDI ranking was as follows: NSNP-out > NSNP-np > NSNP-new > NSNP-nr. NSNP-nr exhibited the lowest level of sustainable development, which can be attributed to stricter conservation measures, a severely aging population structure, and limited livelihood diversification. In contrast, NSNP-np achieved a relatively higher CSDI, demonstrating better performance in economic development, social security, public well-being, and education.

Within NSNP, 54.84% of internal residents attributed perceived income increases primarily to eco-compensation payments and employment related to park operations. Conversely, 29.17% of internal residents reported perceived income decreases, mainly due to restrictions on resource extraction and utilization and land-use constraints, with residents in NSNP-new experiencing the most pronounced negative impact.

This study provides a technical framework for assessing the sustainable development levels of local communities within China’s national parks, offering a scientific basis for exploring the balance between effective conservation and local community development. However, during the evaluation of the SDGs, this study faced limitations due to the scarcity of localized data, particularly the limited availability of quantitative indicators at the national park scale. The existing assessment framework does not adequately integrate a comprehensive and systematic set of indicators, which may potentially compromise the rigor and reliability of the SDG evaluation. Accordingly, future research should prioritize the development of an SDG indicator database tailored to the unique characteristics of Chinese national parks, in order to enhance both the scientific validity and practical applicability of the assessment process.