【作者】 陈杰；

【导师】 苏群；

【作者基本信息】 南京农业大学 ， 农业经济管理， 2015， 博士

【摘要】 中国在经过快速发展的三十多年后,一部分人先富起来,财富的差距,在事实上形成身份的差别、阶层的分化。恰逢代际更替,也就带来了许多"富二代"、"穷二代"(张铁,2010)。"二代"现象的本质就是代际收入流动性不足,所反映出的正是强者愈强、弱者愈弱的"马太效应"。代际收入流动性不足可能会使低收入阶层出生的子代产生"读书无用"、"努力无效"等消极情绪并放弃努力;同时,代际收入流动性不足也可能使高收入阶层出生的子代缺乏一种危机意识,从而减少努力。两方面的影响最终会导致人力资源的巨大浪费,进而引起经济效率的下降。此外,代际收入流动性不足可能还会引起高低收入阶层的对立,引起社会的不稳定。经济效率的下降和社会的不稳定很有可能将我国拖入"中等收入陷阱"。为此,深入研究代际收入流动性,寻找保持较高代际收入流动性的有效途径具有一定的现实意义。在Becker and Tomes(1979)的分析框架中,代际收入流动性度量的是家庭对孩子福利的影响,一般用代际收入弹性表示。代际收入弹性越大,子代对父代的依赖性越强,说明代际收入流动性越低;反之,代际收入弹性越小,子代对父代的依赖性越弱,说明代际收入流动性越高。那么,现阶段,我国代际收入流动性的整体情况究竟如何呢?"二代"现象能否代表我国代际收入弹性整体较高?此外,父代收入又是通过何种机制传递给子代?父代收入对子代最终的收入不平等又会产生怎样的影响?围绕这些问题,本文将从中国农村出发,对农村居民父代、子代收入之间的关系做全面的研究,主要包括以下三方面内容:研究内容一:本部分的研究目标是估计农村居民的代际收入弹性,以了解父代收入对子代收入的影响程度。研究结果表明:第一,1989-2011年间,农村居民代际收入弹性总体较高,表明代际收入流动性整体较低。尽管如此,低收入居民的子代仍然有机会脱离低收入阶层,而高收入居民的子代若过度依赖于父代,则完全有可能跌出高收入阶层;第二,从代际收入弹性这20多年的变化趋势看,1997年达到峰值后,代际收入弹性保持下降,然而在2011年时,代际收入弹性有所反弹。背后的原因可能是随着中国经济的发展,社会层次逐步形成,父代对子代收入的影响开始增强;第三,农村地区男性的代际收入弹性略高于女性;经济发展水平较高的东部地区代际收入弹性最高,中部地区次之,西部最低;中等收入样本的代际收入弹性最高,高收入样本次之,低收入样本最低;70后子代代际收入弹性最高,60后子代次之,80后子代最低。研究内容二:本部分的研究目标是基于经济因素的视角探讨代际收入传递机制,以了解父代收入通过何种途径传递给子代。研究结果表明:第一,以子代教育代表的人力资本投资的确是解释农村代际收入流动性的重要因素,其贡献率在8.13%-13.36%之间;而以子代职业代表的社会资本投资则在代际收入传递过程中扮演着更加重要的角色,贡献率达到16.1%-22.02%;第二,农村不同群体的代际收入传递机制有所区别:父代收入通过教育影响男性子代收入的贡献率远低于女性;父代收入通过教育影响子代收入的贡献率在中东部地区较高,而子代职业的贡献率在中西部地区较高;高收入的父代通过教育影响子代收入的贡献率最高,低收入的父代基本不可能通过职业影响子代收入;相对60后子代而言,70后、80后的父代通过教育影响子代收入的贡献率在提高,通过子代职业进行代际收入传递的程度并没有太大变化。研究内容三:本部分的研究目标是考察农村居民收入不平等状况,并探讨父代收入对子代收入不平等的影响。研究结果表明:第一,农村居民无论是是父代还是子代,其收入不平等程度均较高,而且父代收入不平等程度整体高于子代;第二,从时间序列角度对子代收入不平等的分解结果表明:在1989-2011年间,父代收入通过子代教育的平均贡献率为0.96%,通过子代职业的平均贡献率为4.42%。父代收入通过子代教育与职业对子代收入不平等的贡献在东部、中部地区相差不大,但是在西部地区较低,仅仅占父代收入总贡献率的13.8%;第三,从不同世代角度对子代收入不平等的分解结果表明:一方面,60后与70后较为相似,在较低的年龄段,父代收入主要是通过子代教育对子代收入不平等产生影响,而随着年龄的上升,父代收入通过子代职业的贡献率相对提高;另一方面,对于80后子代,在其较低的年龄段,其父代通过职业的贡献率就高于通过教育的贡献率;到了26-30年龄段时,两者之间差距得到进一步扩大。基于以上结论,本文认为:第一,政府首先需要进一步健全和完善劳动力市场,努力减少劳动力市场的分割程度及职业间不合理的收入差距;其次,政府还需不断提高劳动力就业市场的信息透明度,努力打破劳动力就业市场中的双轨制,从而使子代在就业时依赖父代社会资本的情况不断减少。第二,政府需要努力保证各个阶层子代拥有公平受教育的机会。这就需要政府一方面要进一步提高优质教育资源的供给,尤其是经济欠发达的落后地区,以降低私人投资教育的成本,另一方面还需要搭建较为完备的教育融资平台,以消除低收入群体在对子代进行教育投资时的信贷约束。第三,教育体系的完善需要与劳动力市场的完善相结合,因为只有有效的劳动力市场才能提供合理的教育回报率。倘若收入的高低与个人受教育程度毫无关系,那么低收入群体首先就会缺乏对子代进行教育投资的激励,其次即便进行了投资,低收入群体也可能因投资教育而致贫,在此情况下反倒会导致贫困者更加贫困。更多还原

【Abstract】 After more than 30 years rapid development in China,some people get rich first.The wealth gap in fact has been the sign of different identity and different class.Coincided with the generational shift,it also brought a lot of "rich second generation" and "poor second generation".The essence of the "second generation" phenomenon is the lack of intergenerational income mobility,which reflects the Matthew effect of the stronger the strong and the weak weaker.Low intergenerational income mobility may lead some negative emotions,such as "school useless" and "ineffective efforts",to low-income groups’offsprings.Then they will be slacking and giving up trying.At the same time,the high-income groups’ offsprings will be lack of crisis consciousness and reduce effort.All of these will eventually bring the huge waste of human resources and then lead to the decline of economic efficiency.In addition,low intergenerational income mobility may also cause the conflict between high and low income groups,and then bring about social instability.Economic efficiency decline and social instability will take our country into the "middle income trap".Therefore,further study of intergenerational income mobility and seek the effective ways to keep high intergenerational income mobility have some practical significance.In the analysis framework of Becker and Tomes(1979),intergenerational income mobility measures the degree of one family influence on child welfare,which generally be expressed through intergenerational income elasticity.The greater the intergenerational income elasticity,the more dependent on the parent generation,which means the intergenerational income mobility,is low.On the other hand,the smaller the intergenerational income elasticity,the less dependent on the parent generation,which means the intergenerational income mobility,is high.At present,how is the overall situation of intergenerational income mobility in China?Can "Second generation"phenomenon represent the overall high intergenerational income elasticity?In addition,how can parent income pass to the offsprings?What kind of impact will parent income influence offsprings’ income inequality?Toward these problems,this paper will research the relationship of parent and offsprings’ income in rural China,mainly includes the following three aspects:Part 1:The goal of this section is to estimate the intergenerational income elasticity of rural residents in order to understand the influence of parent income toward the offsprings’income.The results show that:In the first part,we find that from 1989 to 2011,the intergenerational income elasticity of rural residents is generally high,which shows that intergenerational income mobility is low.Nevertheless,the offsprings of low-income residents still have a chance to get out of low-income groups;high-income residents’offsprings may be entirely possible to fall out of the high-income groups,if they totally denpendent on their parents.In the second part,through more than 20 years trend of intergenerational income elasticity,we find that intergenerational income elasticity keep falling after a peak in 1997,but in 2011,intergenerational income elasticity rebound.The reason may be with the development of economy,social hierarchy gradually formed,parent’s influence on the offsprings’ income started to increase.In the third part,we find that in rural China,the intergenerational income elasticity of men is slightly higher than women;the intergenerational income elasticity in high level of economic development of the eastern region is the highest and western region the lowest;the intergenerational income elasticity of middle-income groups is the highest and low-income groups the lowest;the intergenerational income elasticity of 70s’ offsprings is the highest and 80s’offsprings the lowest.Part 2:The goal of this section is to explore the intergenerational income transfer mechanism based on the perspective of economic factors,in order to understand what channels can father generation influence their offsprings’ income.The results show that:In the first part,we find that offsprings’ education is indeed important factor which can explain intergenerational income mobility in the countryside,its contribution rate between 8.13%and 13.36%.However,offsprings’ profession type plays a more important role in the intergenerational income transfer process,its contribution rate between 16.1%and 22.02%.In the second part,we find that different groups in rural China have different intergenerational income transfer mechanism:the contribution rate of male offsprings’income affected by parent’s income through education is far lower than the female;parent’s income affect offsprings in mid-eastern area is higher,but in mid-western area the contribution of offsprings’ profession is higher;parent in high income groups affects their offsprings’ income mostly through education,but parent in low income groups affects their offsprings’ income unlikely through profession;relative to the generation after 1960,the contribution rate of 70’s and 80’s offsprings’ income affected by parent’s income through education is rising,but the dgree of intergenerational income transfer through the offsprings’ profession is not much change.Part3:The goal of this section is to investigate the rural residents’ income inequality,and to explore how parent’s income affects offsprings’ income inequality.In the first part,we find that either parents or offsprings in rural China,their income inequality is high,and parents’ income inequality is overall higher than offsprings’.In the second part,from the perspective of time series,we find that during 1989 to 2011,the average contribution through offsprings’ education is 0.96%and through offsprings’ profession is 4.42%.The contribution through offsprings’ education and profession has no difference between eastern and middle regions.However,the contribution is lower in the western region,only 13.8%of the total contribution rate of offsprings’ income inequality affected by parent’s income.In the third part,from the perspective of different generations,we find that on the one hand,the 60’s and 70’s offsprings have a similar situation.When they are young,their parents affect their income inequality mainly through their education,and as the rise of the age,the contribution through offsprings’ profession has relatively increased.On the other hand,for the generation after 1980,the contribution through offsprings’ profession is higher than the contribution rate of education at their young age.In 26 to 30 ages,the gap of the contribution rate of offsprings’ profession and education has further expanded.Based on the above conclusions,we consider that firstly,the government needs to further improve and perfect the labor market,make efforts to reduce the degree of labor market segmentation and unreasonable income gap between the professions.Then,the government also needs to constantly improve the transparency of information;make efforts to break the double track of the employment market,in order to reduce the situation of offsprings depend on their parents’ social capital when they are searching jobs.Second,the government should make efforts to ensure that all the children have a fair chance to receive education.For this reason,the government should further increase the supply of high quality education resources,especially the economic underdeveloped backward area,in order to reduce the cost of private investment on education.On the other hand,the government also needs to set up a relatively complete education financing platform,which can eliminate the credit constraints of low income group when they want to invest on their offsprings’ education.Third,as only effective labor market can provide a reasonable return on education,the improvement of the education system needs to be combined with the improvement of the labor market.If there is no relationship between income level and the level of personal education,the low income groups firstly will lack incentives of investment on offsprings’ education,secondly even inveseted,the low income groups will become poverty becasuse of the investment on education.In this case,it will lead to the poor poorer.更多还原