进城农民工家庭化迁移对城镇地区消费不平等的影响—

摘要相对于收入不平等,消费不平等可以更全面、更直观地反映个体或家庭的福利状态。在我国,随着劳动力在乡城间的流动,乡城居民的家庭结构逐渐发生变化,基于家庭同质性的消费不平等测算容易产生较大的误差。在进城农民工逐渐呈现家庭化迁移的背景下,利用2016年CFPS数据,对比分析城镇地区拥有不同数量、不同年龄孩子的城镇居民和农民工两类群体家庭间的消费成本,采用等价尺度对消费不平等的测算进行校正,并进一步对城镇地区的消费不平等进行分解测算。研究发现:忽略家庭成员数量、年龄结构的测算方法,容易低估当前的消费不平等状况。其中,对于农民工群体,基于完全需求系统测算的消费基尼系数高出未调整水平将近20%;群体分解的结果显示,农民工群体对城镇地区消费不平等的贡献大于城镇居民,且农民工群体内部的不平等大于农民工与城镇居民群体间的不平等;消费类别的分解结果显示,当前拉开城镇地区消费差距的主要是家庭设备、其他支出、文教娱乐、医疗保健等发展与享受型消费支出。

	Service

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	Email Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	罗丽
	李晓峰

关键词：进城农民工家庭化迁移等价尺度消费不平等

Abstract： Compared with income inequality, consumption inequality can reflect the welfare status of individuals or families more comprehensively and intuitively. In China, the family structure of rural and urban residents is changing gradually. Therefore, the measurement of consumption inequality based on family homogeneity is easy to produce a large measurement errors. Under the background of the gradual family migration of migrant workers in cities, this paper uses the 2016 CFPS data to compare and analyze the consumption costs of urban resident families and migrant worker families with different numbers and ages of children in urban areas. Then the consumption inequality of urban area is corrected by equivalent scales. And the consumption inequality in urban areas is further decomposed and calculated. The results show that the measurement method of ignoring the number of family members and age structure is easy to underestimate of current consumption inequality. For the group migrant workers, the consumption Gini coefficient based on on the full demand system is nearly 20% higher than that of the unadjusted level. According to the results of group decomposition, the contribution of migrant workers to the consumption inequality in urban areas is greater than that of urban residents. And the inequality within migrant workers is more than that between migrant workers and urban residents. The decomposition of consumer categories shows that the main factors that open the consumption in urban areas are household equipment, other expenditures, education and entertainment, medical care and other enjoyable consumer expenditure.

Keywords： Migrant Workers Family Migration Equivalence Scales Consumption Inequality

收稿日期 2020-09-16; 接受日期 ;

基金资助:中国科协创新战略研究院委托项目(202007211110317);农业农村部软科学项目(RKX202013B)

通讯作者 李晓峰(1978— ),男,天津人,博士,副教授,博士生导师,主要从事农业劳动力转移研究。

作者简介: 罗丽(1991— ),女,山西运城人,博士,主要从事农业劳动力转移、消费经济研究。

引用本文:

罗丽, 李晓峰.进城农民工家庭化迁移对城镇地区消费不平等的影响——基于家庭异质性的研究[J]. 经济经纬, 2021,3: 24-33

LUO Li, LI Xiaofeng.The Influence of Family Migration of Migrant Workers on the Consumption Inequality in Urban Areas —Based on the Study of Family Heterogeneity[J] Economic Survey, 2021,V38(3): 24-33

链接本文:

http://www.jjjw.org.cn/CN/ 或 http://www.jjjw.org.cn/CN/Y2021/V38/I3/24

方福前,俞剑.2014.居民消费理论的演进与经验事实[J].经济学动态(3):11-34.
付朝欢,袁琳.2019-06-05.城镇化加速农民工举家迁徙比例达60%[N].中国改革报.
曲兆鹏,赵忠.2008.老龄化对我国农村消费和收入不平等的影响[J].经济研究(12):85-99, 149.
宋泽,何阳.2019.中老年消费不平等的度量与分解:来自Charls的经验证据[J].财经理论与实践(3):107-112.
孙豪,胡志军,陈建东.2017a.中国消费基尼系数估算及社会福利分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究(12):41-57.
孙豪,毛中根.2017b.中国居民消费不平等的多维分解及成因分析[J].山西财经大学学报(11):1-14.
王子成,郭沐蓉.2016.农民工家庭收入和消费不平等:流动模式与代际差异[J].北京工商大学学报(社会科学版)(2):21-29.
解垩.2008.城乡居民健康消费差异与分解[J].农业技术经济(5):57-66.
余玲铮.2015.中国城镇家庭消费及不平等的动态演进:代际效应与年龄效应[J].中国人口科学(6):69-79.
张翼,林晓珊.2015. 消费不平等:资源支配逻辑和机会结构重塑[J].甘肃社会科学(4): 1-7.
赵达,谭之博,张军.2017.中国城镇地区消费不平等演变趋势:新视角与新证据[J].财贸经济(6):115-129.
赵广川,马超,郭俊峰.2015.中国农村居民医疗消费支出不平等及其演变[J].统计研究(10):65-73.
朱梦冰.2018.我国农村居民消费不平等的演变趋势[J].北京工商大学学报(社会科学版)(1):9-18.
邹红,李奥蕾,喻开志.2013a.消费不平等的度量、出生组分解和形成机制:兼与收入不平等比较[J].经济学(季刊)(3):1231-1254.
邹红,喻开志,李奥蕾.2013b.消费不平等问题研究进展[J].经济学动态(11): 118-126.
AGUIAR M,BILS M. 2015. Has consumption inequality mirrored income inequality?[J]. American Economic Review,105(9):2725-2756.
ATTANASIO O,PISTAFERRI L. 2014. Consumption inequality over the last half century: Some evidence using the new PSID consumption measure [J]. American Economic Review,104(5):122-126.
BANKS J, BLUNDELL R, LEWBEL A. 1997.Quadratic Engel curves and consumer demand[J]. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(4):527-539.
BARTEN A P. 1964. Family Composition, price and expenditure patterns[C]//HART P, MILLS G, WHITAKER J K. Econometric Analysis for National Economic Planning. London: Butterworth.
DEATON A, PAZSON C.1994.Intertemporal choice and inequality[J].Journal of Political Economy, 102(3):437-467.
FRIEDMAN M. 1957. The permanent income hypothesis[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
GORMAN W M.1976.Trick with utility functions[C]//ARTIS M, NOBAY A R. Economic Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
HAYASHI M,KATAOKA M,AKITA T. 2014. Expenditure inequality in Indonesia, 2008—2010: A spatial decomposition analysis and the role of education [J]. Asian Economic Journal,28(4):389-411.
LANCASTER G,RAY R,VALENZUELA M R. 1999. A Cross-country study of equivalence scales and expenditure inequality on unit record household budget data [J]. Review of Income and Wealth,45(4):455-482.
OHTAKE F, SAITO M.1998.Population aging and consumption inequality in Japan[J]. Review of Income and Wealth,44(3):361-381.
PIKETTY T,SAEZ E. 2003. Income inequality in the United States, 1913—1998[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,118(1):1-41.
SEN A K. 1997. From income inequality to economic inequality [J]. Southern Economic Journal,64(2):384-401.
VAN P B M, VAN D S.1988. Household cost functions and equvalence scales[J]. Journal of Human Resources,(4):193-210.