Household Groups’ Land Use Decisions Investigation Based on Perspective of Livelihood Heterogeneity in Sichuan Province, China

Land use decision-making is a vital livelihood strategy associated with the rational collocation of livelihood asset endowments by rural households. Based on the perspective of livelihood heterogeneity, this paper collected the data from 540 farm households in 27 villages in three Sichuan Province counties to identify the land use decision-making characteristics of the household groups. A land use decision-making framework (LUDF) based on the sustainable livelihood framework (SLF) was established and dynamic and dual indicators were developed to divide the sample into six household groups. The household livelihood capital, livelihood strategies, and livelihood diversity were then analyzed at the regional and household group level, and the land use decisions of these household groups were explored, from which the following was found. (1) Overall livelihood capital in the study area was low, and except for human assets, there were few other assets, with households in the survey areas being more inclined to engage in non-farming livelihood activities; however, households in Nanjiang and Qionglai had greater livelihood activities choices than Luxian. (2) The LL-type household was the chief household group; the household group distribution in Qionglai was well-proportioned but uneven in Nanjiang and Luxian; and the HL-type, ML-type, and LL-type household livelihood strategy choices were polarized. (3) Most households were involved in land self-cultivation, followed by land transfer-in, land transfer-out, and land abandonment households. Specifically, there were more households that cultivated fragmented landholdings than specialized households with large-scale landholdings, the land transfer rate was relatively low, the transfer-in land area was far greater than the transfer-out land areas, and a small number of households that had abandoned their land were still involved in agricultural production. (4) There were obvious discordant human–land relationships and inefficient land uses in the study area. Based on these findings, relevant policy recommendations are given to improve farm household livelihood capital, optimize livelihood strategies, and assist in land use decision-making.