摘要
本文利用8省份16县1144户易地扶贫搬迁户的三期平衡面板数据,采用随机效应模型实证检验安置区位对搬迁户收入和收入质量的影响。研究发现:与农村安置相比,城镇安置带来的增收效应和提质效应分别提高了14.6%和2.6%,这一结论在重新测量被解释变量和克服内生性后依然成立。从收入结构看,与农村安置相比,城镇安置带来的工资性收入、财产性收入和转移性收入增加效应更强;从收入质量不同维度看,与农村安置相比,城镇安置更有利于提升搬迁户收入的充足性、优化其收入的结构性、降低其收入的成本性。进一步分析发现,上述效应具有一定异质性。从不同搬迁时间看,短期内,城镇安置的增收效应与农村安置相比更强;从长期看,城镇安置的增收效应和提质效应与农村安置相比均更强。从不同收入水平看,城镇安置较农村安置的增收优势突出表现为“益贫不益富”的特点,而提质优势则具有“益富不益贫”的特点。鉴于以上发现,乡村振兴阶段的搬迁要充分考量迁入地的区位选择,采用城镇安置优先的原则;长期动态关注农村搬迁户的收入和收入质量状况,防止出现规模性返贫;提高农村安置低收入群体的收入水平,缩小农村安置户内部收入差距。
This paper uses three-stage balanced panel data from 1144 households participating poverty alleviation resettlement in 16counties of 8 provinces to empirically test the impact of resettlement destination on the income and income quality of relocated households using a random effects model.We find that compared to resettlement to rural areas,resettlement to urban areas has 14.6%and 2.6% higher income and quality improvement effects for relocated farmers,respectively.This conclusion remains valid after remeasuring the explained variable and addressing endogeneity.From the perspective of income structure,farmers resettled to urban areas have higher wage income,property income,and transfer income than those resettled to rural areas.From different dimensions of income quality,compared with rural resettlement,urban resettlement is more conducive to improving the adequacy of income,optimizing the structure of income,and reducing the cost of income.Further analysis reveals that the above effects exhibit certain heterogeneity.From the perspective of different relocation time,in the short term,the income increase effect of urban resettlement is stronger than that of rural resettlement;in the long term,the income increase and quality improvement effects of urban resettlement are both stronger.From the perspective of different income levels of relocated farmers,the prominent advantage of urban resettlement over rural resettlement in increasing income is characterized by “benefiting the poor but not the rich”,while the advantage of improving quality has the characteristic of “benefiting the rich but not the poor”.In view of the above findings,the resettlement during the rural revitalization stage should fully consider the selection of destination and prioritize urban resettlement;long-term dynamic monitoring of the income statuses of relocated households to prevent large-scale return to poverty is highly required;improving the income level of low-income groups resettled to rural areas and narrowing the income gap amon
作者
汪三贵
马兰
孙俊娜
WANG Sangui;MA Lan;SUN Junna
出处
《中国农村经济》
北大核心
2023年第10期67-85,共19页
Chinese Rural Economy
基金
中国人民大学科学研究基金项目“中华人民共和国脱贫攻坚史研究——解析脱贫攻坚的历史演进与成效”(编号:22XNLG07)的资助。
关键词
易地扶贫搬迁
安置区位
收入
收入质量
Poverty Alleviation Resettlement
Resettlement Destination
Income
Income Quality
