Objectives This study systematically reviews domestic and international research trajectories and hotspots concerning the impacts of rural community activities on ecological conservation in national parks. It comprehensively analyzes the interactions and impact pathways of three major types of activities—production, residential, and cultural activities—and identifies key indicators of their ecological impacts, and preliminarily constructs an indicator framework integrating monitoring and evaluation functions, with the aim of bridging the gap in existing studies in systematic integration and indicator-based application.

Methods Relevant literature published between 1993 and 2023 and retrieved from the Web of Science and CNKI databases was analyzed using a literature review approach combined with bibliometric analysis and qualitative content analysis. From an integrated perspective of human activity–ecosystem interactions, the impact pathways and key indicators associated with rural community production, residential, and cultural activities were identified, and their mechanisms of influence on ecological conservation in national parks were systematically examined.

Results The three types of activities exhibited differentiated ecological characteristics. First, production activities showed a “double-edged sword” effect. Irrational production practices can substantially increase land-use intensity and pollution loads, thereby posing direct threats to wildlife habitats and water quality within national parks. By contrast, production practices rooted in traditional ecological knowledge can support local livelihoods while contributing to the maintenance and enhancement of regional biodiversity. Second, the ecological disturbances caused by residential activities are primarily manifested in spatial dimensions. Excessive building density, disorderly infrastructure development, and construction practices heavily dependent on natural resources can undermine ecosystem integrity, intensify habitat fragmentation, and increase pressure on natural resource consumption within national parks. Third, the impacts of cultural activities are complex and dual in nature. On the one hand, certain traditional customs and folk activities may cause localized ecological disturbances; on the other hand, the diversity of traditional community cultures is positively associated with biodiversity in national parks, while ecological conservation concepts embedded in valuable traditional cultures can support the sustainable maintenance of ecosystems. Together, the three types of activities form a nonlinear interactive network, whose combined effects extend far beyond the simple accumulation of individual impacts.

Conclusions Future research should further investigate the interactions among rural community production, residential, and cultural activities and clarify their combined mechanisms of influence on ecological conservation. On this basis, greater emphasis should be placed on the quantitative assessment of relevant influencing factors and key indicators, so as to provide more targeted solutions for the scientific and refined governance of rural communities in national parks.