Reviving rural “dead capital” through transferable development rights

A spatial justice analysis of online citizen–government interactions in China

Bibliographic Data

ID7515030
AuthorsXiangyu Li (0009-0008-8214-4337, City University of Hong Kong), Xiangyu Li Xiangyu Li (0000-0001-8879-9475, City University of Hong Kong, corresponding author), Xin Li (0000-0002-3425-8566, City University of Hong Kong)
Year2026
Volume124
Pages104086
Publication date2026-05-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Rural Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0743-0167 • E-ISSN: 1873-1392
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.jrurstud.2026.104086
OpenAlexW7133500441
LanguageEN
References cited37

Remote rural communities often remain trapped in asset-based poverty because rural land functions as “dead capital” that cannot be easily monetized for more profitable uses. One potential solution is transferable development rights (TDR), a market-based redistribution instrument that monetizes rural development quotas and channels part of urban expansion gains to disadvantaged rural areas. Yet evidence on whether TDR alleviates poverty is mixed, and prior research has emphasized material outcomes while paying less attention to the social and political processes that generate unequal outcomes and to spatial heterogeneity within rural areas. We therefore apply a trivalent spatial justice framework—distributive, procedural, and recognitional justice—to assess China's TDR and explain why impacts differ between remote hinterland and peri-urban sending areas. By applying Latent Dirichlet Allocation topic modeling and spatial analysis to examine online citizen–government interactions from a Chinese participatory platform, we find that while TDR programs provide short-term economic gains for rural residents, these gains are frequently offset by longer-term livelihood losses. Procedural and recognitional injustices are central: a government-centered alliance marginalizes farmers' voices, while relocation reshapes landscapes, erodes rural culture, and reproduces discrimination. Moreover, these justice outcomes are spatially uneven—peri-urban areas exhibit stronger rights-claiming capacity and relatively better distributive outcomes, whereas remote areas face deeper constraints and greater livelihood risks. We conclude that poverty reduction cannot rely on land reform alone. The path to revitalizing the countryside lies in institutional reforms, particularly in rural political governance and the empowerment of rural communities. • This study uses a spatial justice framework to assess the effectiveness of transferable development rights on revitalizing rural land in Guangdong Province, China. • We apply a topic modeling algorithm to analyze citizen-government interactions on an online participation platform. • The transferable development rights program often delivers short-term monetary compensation, yet is frequently associated with under-cultivated/idle land and longer-term livelihood insecurity. • Rural land reform-oriented solutions to poverty alleviation must involve institutional reforms, particularly in rural political governance and the empowerment of local communities. • Justice outcomes are spatially uneven. Remote hinterlands face structural constraints and suffer from long-term livelihood losses, whereas peri-urban areas benefit from higher administrative capacity, thereby securing relatively better distributive outcomes

China · Economic Justice · Rural area · Rural development · China's Socioeconomic Reforms and Governance · Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management · Urban Planning and Valuation

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access