1.  Introduction

There was a widening gap in China between the urban and the rural; cities were better provided, had better services and more job opportunities. At the same time, the lack of development, low-income positions, and absence of education, healthcare facilities, and public services have plagued the rural territories. The Chinese government started advocating for urban-rural integration, which translates to assisting both cities and rural regions to expand in a more equitable way. In 2012, Central Document No.1 was brought out by the government which prioritized enhancing rural development through encouraging funding in farming technology; protecting work rights of farmers, and ensuring that public services become equal. Later policies continued this effort. Reforms in 2014 facilitated rural people to move to cities, and in 2016, land reforms enabled farmers to use their land at liberty. 2018 poverty relief plan and the 2022 Five-Year Plan targeted fighting rural poverty and agriculture modernisation. Taken together, these policies explain how China is trying to make life better for the rural population, reduce inequality, and bring a more balanced and equal society.

2.  The concept and evolution of urban-rural integration

Since the beginning of the new century, with the enhancement of China's comprehensive national strength and shifts in its development stage, the country has gradually begun to advance urban-rural integrated development and fusion. In October 2003, at the Third Plenary Session of the 16th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC), the central leadership proposed the requirement to "coordinate urban and rural development," listing it as the top priority among the "Five Overall Plans" and emphasizing the need to establish systems conducive to gradually transforming the dual urban-rural economic structure.

In November 2012, the 18th National Congress of the CPC explicitly proposed "promoting urban-rural integrated development," emphasizing the need to strengthen the coordination of urban and rural development and promote common prosperity. In October 2017, the 19th National Congress of the CPC further stressed the importance of "establishing and improving the institutional mechanisms and policy systems for integrated urban-rural development"—this was the first time that the term "urban-rural fusion development" appeared in a central policy document.

The evolution from "coordinated urban-rural development" to "urban-rural integrated development" and then to "urban-rural fusion development" reflects both the continuity of central policy and the alignment with the specific characteristics and requirements of the new era.

These three concepts—coordinated development, integrated development, and fusion development—are both distinct and interconnected. "Coordinated urban-rural development" emphasizes the coordinating role of government, with all levels of government responsible for rational allocation of urban and rural resources and coordinated advancement. "Urban-rural integrated development" focuses on the goal of integration, aiming to unify urban and rural planning, infrastructure, industrial development, public services, environmental protection, and social governance. In contrast, "urban-rural fusion development" highlights two-way interaction and joint construction and sharing between urban and rural areas. It inherits and elevates the concepts of coordination and integration, and serves as an important pathway to achieving common prosperity. Its formulation better reflects the current stage of development.

Urban-rural integration is not simply the elimination of differences, but a strategic initiative aimed at coordinated development through institutional innovation, industrial coordination, and service equalization. It reflects a policy trajectory that seeks to bridge systemic gaps between urban and rural areas by restructuring fundamental governance mechanisms. In 2012, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the State Council prioritized agricultural technology innovation, issuing a policy document that called for increased fiscal investment, improved subsidies, and better infrastructure to guarantee agricultural product supply. In 2013, a focus on modern agriculture was introduced, emphasizing family farms and moderate-scale operations to vitalize rural development. The reform of the household registration system in 2014 relaxed settlement restrictions in smaller cities and enabled more rural migrants to obtain urban citizenship. A landmark 2016 policy established the “three rights” system—separating rural land ownership, contract, and management rights—to invigorate land markets and clarify land-use relations. At the 19th CPC National Congress in 2017, the strategy of rural revitalization was elevated to a central component of national development, with Xi Jinping emphasizing its role in achieving socialism with Chinese characteristics in the new era. In 2018, China adopted a targeted three-year action plan to combat poverty, integrating social support with industrial development to ensure direct assistance to vulnerable farmers. The trend continued with the release of the 14th Five-Year Plan in 2022, which reinforced the goals of common prosperity, promoted county-level economic development, and supported digital agriculture, cold chain logistics, and rural e-commerce infrastructure. Over the decade, fiscal support for agriculture doubled—from 1.2 trillion yuan in 2012 to 2.5 trillion yuan in 2022—while technological contributions to productivity rose from 53.5% to 62%. Rather than seeking homogenization, the state’s approach to integration emphasizes complementary development, improved factor mobility, and service equity. These cumulative efforts lay the institutional and economic foundation for understanding how urban-rural integration policies have reshaped employment dynamics, industrial transitions, and rural livelihoods—offering crucial context for the labor and migration patterns explored in later sections.

3.  Effects of integration on rural labor and employment trends

Urban-rural integration can be defined as the process of fostering economic, social, spatial and other forms of connection between urban and rural areas with the aim of narrowing the urban-rural divide and advancing rural economic development and employment opportunities for farmers. Empirical research in this field has revealed a complex and multifaceted set of effects on farmers' employment.

3.1.  The impact of urban-rural integration on the employment of farmers

3.1.1.  Improve the structure of the labor market

The labour market integration policy has been successful in addressing the urban-rural divide, enabling migrant workers to access equal employment opportunities and labor rights protection. With government funding support, city and county governments allocate special funds derived from compensated land income, which are combined with employment promotion funds. This integrated approach finances a range of employment services, including job placement, training subsidies and social security benefits, with the objective of narrowing the disparity in social security and post-subsidy support between urban and rural areas, thereby promoting the integration of urban and rural employment systems.

Furthermore, the government has introduced a range of training programs for working-age farmers whose land has been expropriated. These programs provide training vouchers to help cover costs and enhance the farmers' competitiveness and entrepreneurial skills. The government has centralized the management of funds from initiatives such as "Sunshine Engineering" and "Rain and Dew Engineering" to enhance overall efficiency.[1]

3.1.2.  Variations in the direction of employment

The government's "Two Concentrations and One Transformation" model is a pivotal mechanism for facilitating the transfer of surplus rural labour. This model emphasizes the concentration of industries in designated industrial parks, large-scale land management, and the urbanization of farmers.

Consequently, there is a discernible trend of rural labour migration into non-agricultural sectors, particularly transportation and warehousing, postal services, manufacturing, and other service industries. Nevertheless, traditional agriculture maintains its preeminent position.

3.1.3.  Changes in the employment rate of farmers

The impact of the agglomeration of agricultural producer services on farmer employment growth is a crucial factor in enhancing the livelihoods of agricultural workers. However, it should be noted that the effects of this agglomeration are not uniform and can differ significantly from one region to another. In certain areas, the concentration of agricultural producer services and urbanization can foster greater employment opportunities for farmers, leading to improved economic outcomes and increased integration into the agricultural value chain.

Thus, in different contexts, the same agglomeration may yield adverse effects, resulting in job losses or reduced employment opportunities due to competition, dislocation, or other social-economic dynamics. It is therefore vital to understand these regional variations if we are to develop targeted strategies that maximize the positive impacts of agricultural service agglomeration while mitigating any adverse effects. This would promote sustainable employment growth among farmers across diverse agricultural landscapes.[2]

3.2.  Methodologies of empirical research

3.2.1.  Statistical analysis of data

In the article, a detailed analysis is conducted of the improvements in the labour structure, with a specific focus on rural labour resources. Utilizing data from the sixth national census conducted in 2010, we examine key indicators such as the employment rate and unemployment rate within rural areas.In order to assess the quality of employment, a range of statistics related to income across different industries were employed. The analysis revealed that the mean monthly income for migrant workers in 2012 was 2,290 yuan, while service workers received an average monthly income of 2,058 yuan.

Additionally, an analysis of data concerning the protection of workers' rights revealed that the proportion of wages in arrears stood at 0.5%. This multifaceted approach provides valuable insights into the employment landscape and the overall economic well-being of rural laborers, highlighting both progress and areas that require further attention.[1]

3.2.2.  Quasi-natural experiment

In the analysis of variations within the employment structure, this review adopts a quasi-natural experiment approach. By comparing regions designated as pilot areas for urban-rural integration policies with non-pilot regions that have not implemented such policies, the impact of these initiatives on farmers' employment opportunities is evaluated. For instance, an investigation is made into the correlation between leisure agriculture–a growing sector within rural development–and the overall employment landscape in rural areas.

Enabling to analyse such dynamics, strict selection has been made to pick the right variables. The dependent variable, rural employment growth (femp) is presented exponentionally to adequatly account for variations in the number of rural employees over time. On the same note, urbanization (expressed as urb) is captured through proxy variables such as population density, industrial agglomeration, which are indicators of the urban-rural transition and repercussions of the same for the employment trends in rural areas.

Such an all-embracing approach is carried out in order to establish a multi-faceted understanding of the ways urban-rural integration policies affect employment tendencies in farming which further contributes to larger debates on rural development and sustainability of the economy.[2]

3.2.3.  Panel vector autoregression model

In the empirical study, panel vector autoregression (PVAR) model was used to analyse the long term dynamic impacts of agricultural producer services agglomeration, farmer employment growth and urbanization. In order to increase the analysis, impulse response functions and variance decomposition methods were included.

This multi-faceted approach makes it possible to understand how the complex relationships and interactions between these variables change over the time and thus allows one to gain understanding of the effect exerted by the agglomeration of the agricultural services on the opportunities for employment for farmers, as well for the urbanization process on the whole. The exploration of these dynamics is supposed to support a deeper understanding of the linkage between the agricultural development and urban economic growth.[3]

3.3.  Main Findings of empirical research

3.3.1.  Low-end industry and low income

As was shown in extant works related to changes in structure of labour markets, migrant workers are mostly engaged in low-end industries. A significant share of those workers is involved in the construction industry (39.9%), followed by the transportation industry with 19.3%, manufacturing 11.9% and service industry 11.2%. This clustering in the low-ends industries highlights the limited opportunities of migrant workers and their challenges to secure high paying jobs.

Besides, the financial status of these employees is in a tight spot and their average monthly income balance is minus 1557 yuan following deductions of living costs. Such a situation is especially acute in the case of the migrant workers of the central and western territory of the country, where the balance of their income is usually even more modest.

These disparities underscore the necessity for targeted policies aimed at enhancing the economic stability and upward mobility of this vulnerable segment of the workforce.[1]

3.4.  Labor quality improvement and employment disadvantage

The combination of urban with rural areas has been ascertained to bring a variety of positive impacts such as the improvement of the quality of employment of the rural labour force. This is through the restructuring of the production factors, including the industrial concentration. The migration of the rural workforce has also been found to maximize utilization of human resources in the urban areas; stimulate consumer demand and ease new urbanization.

It is however important to appreciate the short comings linked to this phenomenon. The ability of cities and towns to absorb rural migrant workers is limited and the “demonstration effect” and “scale effect” due to the agglomeration of producer services can hinder more opportunities for that class of workers. Moreover, the difference in skill calibres across migrant workers, which is often the reason of poor educational achievement, hampers their vocational competitiveness. Therefore, it is vital for such individuals to work to eliminate these gaps by having target training programmes.[2]

3.5.  Different regions have different impacts on farmers' employment

The research indicates that the concentration of agricultural producer services exerts a differential influence on farmers' employment across regions. In northeastern Zhejiang Province, this concentration has been found to exert a positive influence on the growth of farmer employment; conversely, in the southwestern region, it has been observed to exert a constraining effect.

In addition, the impact of urbanization on farmer employment varies across different regions. Specifically, urbanization has been observed to impede employment growth among farmers in northeastern Zhejiang, while in southwestern Zhejiang, it has been shown to stimulate employment growth. A notable finding is the positive correlation between urbanization and the concentration of agricultural producer services, particularly evident in both north and south of Zhejiang.[3]

3.6.  The overall effect of policy on peasant employment

3.6.1.  Effective section

The training voucher system and resource integration have enhanced the efficiency of farmers' skill transformation and have partially alleviated structural unemployment. The "two concentrations and one transformation" model, which prioritizes industrial consolidation in industrial parks, large-scale land management, and the urbanization of farmers, has encouraged non-agricultural employment. In 2010, the rural workforce constituted 55% of the total employment. Legislation such as the Employment Promotion Law and the Labor Contract Law have been instrumental in establishing the principle of comprehensive employment across urban and rural areas, while advocating for the protection of migrant workers' rights. The "two concentrations and one transformation" approach has been found to significantly expedite labor transfer, reduce poverty, and increase farmers' incomes.[1]

Furthermore, the allocation of specific funds for vocational training and social security subsidies has been instrumental in mitigating the disparity in employment support between urban and rural regions. The migration of rural labour has been shown to optimize urban human resource allocation, stimulate consumer demand, and contribute to new urbanization.[2]

In specific regions, such as southwestern Zhejiang, the process of urbanization has led to an increase in employment opportunities for farmers, while the consolidation of agricultural producer services in northeastern Zhejiang has resulted in an uptick in farmers' employment in that area.[3]

3.6.2.  Invalid or insufficient section

The rate of labor contract signings has remained stagnant, social security coverage remains inadequate, and there has been minimal advancement in the equality of public services. The majority of migrant workers are employed in low-value-added industries, with earnings that amount to only 50% to 60% of the average income of urban workers.[1] Existing policies have not been effective in significantly enhancing employment levels. Indicators such as the social security coverage rate and labor contract signing rate are showing gradual improvement, but the process of integrating migrant workers into urban citizenship is lagging. The urban-rural divide persists, and equal access to public services, including housing, education, and healthcare, has yet to be achieved.[2]

Besides, the training system for migrant workers is inadequate, failing to meet the demands of industrial upgrading. In regions such as northeast Zhejiang, urbanization may impede employment opportunities for farmers, while the concentration of agricultural producer services in southwest Zhejiang could constrain farmers' job prospects. It is therefore vital to tailor policies to specific local circumstances to ensure their effectiveness.[3]

4.  Mechanisms and constraints in employment effects

Academic studies on urban-rural integration and farmers' employment are exhibiting a trend of diversification. Li Sha indicated that with the new normal of the economy, urban-rural integration development has a close relationship with the objectives of socialist modernization[4]. Li Fa, from a Marxist economics point of view, believed that coordinated urban and rural employment—a central piece of urban-rural integration—is essential for advancing the quality of employment as a whole[5]. Gu Shuang and Liu Jinjin, employing the method of entropy-TOPSIS and the model of PSM-DID, illustrated that urbanization reform driven by the government incredibly improves the degree of urban-rural integration at the level of a county[6]. Myung and Yu revealed that the effect of urban-rural integration on investment spending follows a clear time lag[7].

4.1.  Mechanisms

The mechanisms through which urban-rural integration has an effect on farmers' work are multi-sided. Shang Baixiao developed a multi-level optimization model by using the urban-rural development strategy framework, with an emphasis on the extended industrial chain, effective production factor allocation, and technological innovation[8]. Tang Zhonghui confirmed that inclusive digital finance indirectly facilitates urban-rural integration through quality rural development. Luthfiani et al[9]. highlighted that China's urban-rural integration has economic, social, spatial, and ecological aspects[10]. Wu Miao noted that small towns must implement models tailored according to their unique conditions[11].

4.2.  Constraints

Yet numerous constraints on the urban-rural integration progress restrict quality improvement in farmers' employment. Low education, poor pay, and absence of welfare benefits were determined by Zheng Menghua in 2022 as major constraining factors[12]. Jia Bing and Liu Yun, in their research of 2023, determined that individual employment attitudes, family education values, and community employment services condition the employability of rural youth with less education[13]. Ezeh et al. in 2019 placed special emphasis on the strategic necessity of structural policies in tackling rural employment challenges[14]. Additionally, the effect of urban-rural integration on employment varies greatly between different farmers. Qi, based on empirical evidence, demonstrated that industrial integration development will greatly enhance farmers' incomes and close the urban-rural income gap[15]. It was observed by Gao Linzhen that the rural rejuvenation strategy provides new chances for rural youths' development but that the entrepreneurial process still encounters numerous challenges[16]. Sanders et al., from research findings, established that legislative reforms may, through the acceleration of infrastructure development and the utilization of low-cost labor, further limit the development of youths in the agriculture sector[17]. Okoth et al. established that youths' involvement in agricultural entrepreneurship has a positive impact on poverty alleviation, rural employment enhancement, and improved food security[18].

5.  Research gap and proposal

5.1.  Research gap

Nevertheless, it is important to note that there are large gaps in the body of studies that exist, many of which remain insufficiently addressed.

5.1.1.  Research depth

In terms of depth of study, while there is existing literature on the overall profile of the employment of farmers, it is less in terms of the transformation of the perception of employment among the latter, which is a key dimension of the overall employment problem. The change in perception of employment is intrinsically complicated by the intersection of various rather than one factor. Yet, the underlying dynamics of the transformation remain poorly studied, making it challenging to articulate the essential logic of these changes. Elements of the pervasive impact of agrarian cultural heritage, cultural tension between the city and the village, and differential access to information remain poorly systematically or holistically analyzed. Perhaps more importantly, the interactive relationship between altered perception of employment, skill creation, and labor market flexibility has drawn less attention in prior studies. Those farmers carrying outdated perceptions of employment may be less likely to enroll in skills training, hence lessening their flexibility in the labor market and their income. Equally, favorable adaptation experience in the market may reinforce changes in perceptions of employment. Albeit critical, this interactive dynamic of adaptation remains poorly examined in existing studies.

5.1.2.  Research scope

Regarding the scope of studies, there are few studies that focus on specific micro-regions, especially those that are mountainous and border regions. Mountain regions tend to be subject to geographic isolation, underdeveloped infrastructure, and slow industrial development, all of which uniquely complicate employment in these regions. Border regions also face further complications of ethnic heterogeneity and geopolitical realities. These regions present unique employment dynamics and problems that were poorly represented in previous studies, resulting in a lack of employment solutions attuned to and specific to a given region.

Existing studies on agricultural topics have significant limitations. Farming communities are diverse, as farmers of various ages show differences in physical strength, innovativeness, and professional goals. Gender also affects job opportunities and occupational choice, while educational levels greatly influence the availability of skill-upgrading opportunities and career prospects in the labor market. However, current studies often fail to break farm populations into subgroups, based on these factors. If the farm population is not categorized, it becomes difficult to precisely identify the workplace demands of individual segments of the population, thus hindering the creation of differential and specific employment policies. As a result, many policies find it challenging to meet the demands of various groups of farmers in their lifecycle.

5.1.3.  Methodological limitations

Besides these shortcomings in the type of content, this subject is also constrained by various methodological shortcomings. Current studies often lack empirical analysis and consistent results and tend to be built on small samples, which reduces the level of generality of the outcomes. Apart from this, there is a significant lack of measures that are aimed at determining employment quality, hence there is limited potential in determining outcomes beyond employment levels. Moreover, the majority of studies address the impact of urban-rural coordination, which precedes urban-rural integration. Consequently, the employment patterns of farmers over the long term have had insufficient tracking, leading to a lack of comprehension of how these dynamics change over time. Nevertheless, interdisciplinary studies are limited. Few studies have brought together economics, sociology, anthropology, and public policy in a way that would bring a better comprehension of the employment problems and opportunities of farmers in the face of growing urban-rural interaction.

5.1.4.  Further research suggestions

Future research should enhance comparative studies on a regional basis, further extend segmentation analysis of the farmer population, strengthen the combination of theory and practice, and build up a systematic framework of policy support, institutional mechanisms, and talent cultivation. All these are intended to facilitate high-quality employment among farmers and give employment problems in the context of urban-rural integration of more systematic and comprehensive solutions.

5.2.  Research proposal

5.2.1.  Original study

In response to the identified gaps in existing literature, we suggest a replication and extension of the study by Xiabo and Chen Zhengwei to test the effects of urban-rural integration policies on employment outcomes[19]. They used the 2000 to 2009 Chongqing and Chengdu statistical yearbook data, and the difference-in-difference (DID) model reported that this impact was zero. The limited effects on employment may be due to internal structural factors, e.g., GDP-led growth dominating employment creation and population growth in the lack of corresponding employment opportunities, and external shocks, e.g., the 2008 financial crisis. Policy lag effects and limited data availability over the short term also preclude the observation of longer-term effects.

5.2.2.  Replication

This paper seeks to replicate and extend the original difference-in-differences (DID) estimation of urban-rural integration policy impacts by tailoring the model to fit rural contexts. It will be done through use of the China Labor-Force Dynamics Survey (CLDS) for 2014-2018. Lack of consistent results of empirical analysis, outdated data, narrow samples, insufficient qualitative measurement of employment effects, and lack of long-term impact analysis of the evolution of policy from urban-rural coordination to urban-rural integration policy on rural employment outcomes are the gaps that this study fills. Chongqing and Chengdu will remain as the treatment group, which were the national urban-rural pilot zones, while Fujian, Hainan, Henan, Tianjin, Shaanxi, Tibet, and Jilin are kept as the control group. The sampling focuses on the data of households in the rural and urban areas. In addition, the outcome variable will be shifted from quantity of urban employment at the macro level to quality of income of the rural households at the micro level. It will be assessed using a composite index based on CLDS microdata that targets the missing qualitative examination of living standards in the literature, particularly in the case of income diversity (total income per household, CLDS variable F4_1). Moreover, this study investigates varying effects of urban and rural households' incomes to increase the size of the samples.

The control variables were identified by drawing on diverse regional statistical yearbooks and included economic (county GDP), demographic (total population of the county), financial (county-level RMB deposits), investment (county fixed-asset investment), consumption (county level of retail sales), and export (county level of total exports) controlling factors. Policy years were based on 2016, corresponding to the original study's 2007 policy.

The estimates come from a panel data set covering the period 2014–2018. Heteroscedasticity, autocorrelation, and serial correlation problems are taken care of by including an AR(1) term and using robust standard errors by means of 1,000 bootstrap replications. All the analyses were carried out in Stata 16 to maintain consistency of methods and comparability of results with the original study design.

5.2.3.  Hypothesis

The expected outcomes are predicted to reflect significant implications on the income levels of both urban and rural households resulting from urban-rural integration policies. The objective of this study is to verify whether the employment implications of the policy between 2014 and 2018 remain statistically insignificant following the transition into the urban-rural integration stage, as was proposed in the initial study.

6.  Policy implication

To sort out and summarize the relevant achievements in this field, Zhao argues that urban-rural integration drives the transformation of rural industrial structures, promoting a shift in farmers' employment from traditional agriculture to diversified non-agricultural sectors[20]. During this transition, changes in employment perceptions, improvements in farmers' personal capabilities, and the establishment of a sound rural labor market and employment service system are critical. Zhu points out that land-lost farmers face narrow employment channels and low job stability under urban-rural integration[21]. The lack of non-agricultural skills forces them into high-intensity, low-income jobs, which are often coupled with social discrimination. Key solutions include enhancing vocational training, broadening employment channels, and eliminating social bias. Chen Xiaoyan suggests that the employment of land-lost farmers is crucial not only to their livelihood, but also to the overall success of urban-rural integration and social stability[22]. She advocated for increased government investment in rural infrastructure and improvements in the social security system to create jobs and reduce farmers’ future uncertainty. Wang Chao emphasizes the importance of protecting the legal rights and interests of land-lost farmers, such as land and employment rights, during the urban-rural integration process[23]. This includes establishing fair land compensation standards and ensuring equal access to employment opportunities and training programmes to support integration.

In summary, existing research suggests that farmers' employment during the urban-rural integration process is influenced by multiple factors, with land-lost farmers facing numerous employment challenges. Addressing these issues requires a multifaceted approach, including improving farmers’ skills, optimizing the industrial structure, enhancing policy support, and safeguarding farmers’ legal rights and interests. 

7.  Conclusion

The current paper discusses the crucial topic of urban-rural integration and rural employment in China with the specific focus of investigating the real influence of the policy on the employment of farmers as well as the problems that have arisen in its implementation. The 2012 Central Document No. 1 has brought tremendous changes in the dynamics of rural employment; yet it is also facing immense challenges and restrictions. Although efforts towards the improvement of vocational training, labor mobility, and the incorporation of services have brought measurable advantages for certain rural groups, long-term regional disparities and structural hindrances persist as the key hindrances in general development.

The evidence shows that even with the potential of urban-rural convergence in opening up improved job prospects for farmers and restructuring the labour market, numerous challenges continue to persist. Much of the rural labor force is engaged in low-end industries with the consequence of having low-income levels that curtail the potential for farmers' financial growth. In addition, regional differences play a role in affecting the impact of policies with some regions enjoying agglomeration of services and increased job opportunities and others facing negative consequences.

To optimize the beneficial impact of urban-rural integration on rural employment, policies must adopt a more localized and inclusive framework. This necessitates addressing the immediate needs of landless farmers and migrant workers, whilst concurrently promoting broader economic participation through enhanced access to training, resources, and social protections. Key strategies must include enhancing skills training for farmers, optimizing industrial structures, and bolstering policy support, while ensuring the protection of land property rights. The establishment of fair land compensation standards and the fostering of equitable employment opportunities are crucial steps toward facilitating urban-rural integration and ensuring social stability. It is imperative to address the challenges related to rural employment with utmost efficacy, as this is not only instrumental in actualizing sustainable development in rural areas but also in attaining balanced economic growth across the country.

In conclusion, it is vital to facilitate urban-rural integration and enhance rural employment, as these represent vital components of economic development, as well as foundational elements of social justice and stability. In this regard, it is incumbent upon the relevant authorities to prioritize ongoing policy reform and refine implementation strategies to promote coordinated development and shared prosperity between urban and rural areas. Through concerted efforts, it is possible to foster a more equitable, inclusive, and sustainable future for all segments of the population.