How Do Livelihood Assets Affect Subjective Well-Being Under Different Livelihood Strategies? Evidence from Tibetan Rural Households in China

Evaluating rural households’ subjective well-being (SWB) and identifying its determinants is crucial for rural sustainable development. This study takes Diqing Prefecture in the Tibetan region of China as a case, aiming to address two key research questions: (1) How do livelihood assets affect subjective well-being (SWB)—directly or indirectly—through the mediating role of the agricultural-income proportion? (2) Do these effects vary across different livelihood strategies? A questionnaire survey was administered to 489 randomly selected rural households in mid-2022. Two index systems were constructed: one for livelihood assets based on the Sustainable Livelihood Framework and another for SWB based on the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. A subgroup Tobit regression model was utilized to analyze the heterogeneous effects. The results revealed deficiencies in SWB regarding basic material for a good life and health. Human, financial, and social assets are positively associated with SWB. However, natural assets directly negatively impact SWB across dimensions of basic material, security, and freedom, although the negative effect is masked by the mediating effect of farming livelihood strategies. Notably, human assets’ positive influence significantly strengthens with the agricultural income proportion rising. Whether physical, financial, and social assets positively affect SWB depends on farm work participation. These evidence-based findings contribute to a better understanding of the heterogeneous role of sustainable livelihoods in affecting rural households’ subjective well-being and highlight the need for policymakers to design diverse, targeted policies to support rural development.