Bai Xiang

Achieving common prosperity is the essential requirement of Chinese modernization, and the integration of culture and tourism is of great significance as an important path to narrow the regional gap, and effectively “improve quality” and “increase income”. This study used the panel data of 30 provinces in China from 2010 to 2019, and conducted empirical tests by using the panel fixed effects model and the mediation effects model. The results indicated that the integration of culture and tourism can significantly promote the realization of common prosperity. This integration can promote common prosperity by increasing the income and consumption level of urban and rural residents, the degree of equalization of basic public services and the capacity for sustainable development. Spatial analysis shows that there are regional differences in the promotion of common prosperity by cultural and tourism integration, which is particularly obvious in ethnic and non-ethnic areas. Finally, in response to the existing problems identified in the above analyses, countermeasure recommendations that align with the actual development are put forward.

The analysis of the realization path of the value of ecotourism products in agro-cultural heritage sites from the perspective of farmers’ behaviors can not only provide decision-making references for improving the well-being of farmers and alleviating poverty but also help to provide a scientific basis for the sustainable development of ecosystems in agro-cultural heritage sites. Based on the field research data of the Qitai dry farming system in Xinjiang in 2023, this study establishes an evaluation index system for livelihood capital transformed by tourism value, and it analyzes whether there is a significant difference between the livelihood capital held by different types of farmers by using the entropy method and non-parametric tests. This study found that (1) farmers who participated in tourism in alpine grassland pastoral areas possessed advantageous financial, social and cultural capital; those who participated in tourism in rain-fed agricultural areas possessed advantageous human capital; and those who participated in tourism in irrigated agricultural areas possessed advantageous financial and human capital. (2) There are significant differences in the natural, physical and financial capital between farmers in alpine grassland pastoral, rain-fed and irrigated agricultural areas. (3) The different types of farm households are categorized into three representative livelihood types in dryland agricultural and cultural heritage sites: strong financial capital-strong, socio-cultural capital sites, strong human capital-weak natural capital sites, and strong human capital-weak physical capital sites. Depending on the composition of the livelihood capital, different types of farmers in heritage sites can realize the tourism value of ecological products, thus helping them to ameliorate their combined benefits.