Objectives Community residents are among the key stakeholders in the establishment of national parks. A comprehensive understanding of the preferences of community residents with regard to ecological compensation policy is of significant importance for the mitigation of conflicts of interest between protection and community development.

Methods Based on the survey data of 601 households in the communities around the Giant Panda National Park, the choice experiment method was employed to analyze the farmers’ preferences for ecological compensation and their willingness to accept compensation.

Results The results showed that households had a relatively high willingness to accept ecological compensation, yet exhibited low overall enthusiasm for selecting ecological compensation schemes. Regarding the optimal combination of ecological compensation attributes, households did not highly prefer the duration of compensation implementation, but universally aspired for a higher proportion of compensated land and a greater reduction in pesticide usage. The optimal ecological compensation scheme was one with a duration of 1 year, a 100% proportion of compensated land, and a 40% reduction in pesticide usage.

Conclusions Due to the high cost of protection borne by the residents, there was a general negative attitude towards ecological compensation policies. The losses caused by protection were more pronounced in the initial stages of national park construction, which explained the residents’ low preference for compensation duration. The inadequate realization of the value of ecological products led to a lack of incentive for residents to transition to green production. Therefore, the establishment of a national park must consider the interests of the surrounding community residents. To improve the ecological compensation mechanism within the Giant Panda National Park, it is essential to scientifically measure the losses in interest, establish a dynamic adjustment mechanism for compensation standards, implement a comprehensive policy “combination” and accelerate the realization of the value of ecological products, among other measures.