Where Is the Land? Spatial Matching of Replacement Land and the Risk of Impoverishment: Comparative Evidence from Four Hydropower and Water Conservancy Projects in China

Large-scale hydropower and water conservancy projects often rely on land-for-land resettlement to restore the livelihoods of displaced rural households, yet impoverishment risks may persist even when replacement land is formally provided. This study examines whether the location of replacement land constitutes a risk-transmission mechanism in land-for-land resettlement and develops a three-dimensional spatial-matching framework encompassing physical-geographical, socioeconomic, and sociocultural compatibility. A comparative case-study design is applied to four projects in China—Danjiangkou, Longtan, Yantan, and Lianghekou—using archival and planning documents, project evaluation materials, a household survey of 517 resettled households, and repeated fieldwork and semi-structured interviews. The results show that livelihood restoration depends not only on the provision of replacement land but also on the degree of spatial matching between origin and destination. Severe mismatch can reproduce impoverishment risks, whereas higher compatibility is associated with better livelihood recovery. When spatial matching is structurally infeasible, some projects shift from land substitution to long-term monetary compensation, thereby replacing spatial risk with institutional risk. The study concludes that replacement-land location should be treated as a substantive mechanism in resettlement planning and that alternative institutional arrangements should be considered where spatial compatibility cannot be achieved.