Socioecological Trade-offs of Conservation on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau

Regional ecological protection and restoration are vital for enhancing environmental quality and supporting sustainable development. However, large-scale conservation initiatives often overlook associated socioeconomic trade-offs, intensifying conflicts between protection and local development. Existing research focuses predominantly on ecosystem indicators, leaving a gap in understanding the livelihood impacts of such interventions. Analyzing the trade-offs between ecological restoration and socioeconomic factors, especially livelihoods, is therefore critical for refining ecosystem services, improving conservation policies, and fostering sustainable resident livelihoods. This study examines the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau to assess the human-nature relationship following large-scale ecological protection and restoration. Using departmental surveys, we evaluated socio-ecological satisfaction, while household questionnaires analyzed local perceptions and livelihood outcomes related to protected areas (PAs). These were integrated with an ecosystem service trade-off analysis to inform optimized conservation policy and livelihood strategies. Key findings include: First, PAs mainly influenced local subsidy income, farmer livelihoods, and tourist numbers, significantly affecting participation in conservation. Impact on livelihoods exhibited a threshold effect, with income spillover observed within 10–20 km from PAs. Resident engagement in protection was significant within 10 km, whereas ecological indicators (e.g., vegetation, biodiversity) showed no clear threshold. Livelihood and health indicators consistently reflected conservation effects across zones, suggesting their utility as key metrics for evaluating ecological initiatives. Nonetheless, livelihood outcomes remain constrained by local ecological conditions and land resources. Second, clear disparities emerged inside versus outside PAs regarding livelihood improvement, ecological change, policy compliance, and human-environment relations. Livelihood and income growth were lower inside PAs (by 4.5% and 7.6%, respectively), while policy participation and compliance were higher (by 8.2% and 7.4%). However, protection-development conflicts intensified inside PAs (12.4% higher than outside). To harmonize human-nature relations, PA management should integrate ecosystem service trade-offs, enhance total service supply, and align goals with local functional contexts. Engaging farmers and herders in conservation, upgrading tourism and rural infrastructure, and increasing access to ecosystem services can raise tourism-linked income and improve livelihood sustainability.