浙江大学学报:人文社会科学版
浙江大學學報:人文社會科學版
절강대학학보:인문사회과학판
Journal of Zhejiang University(Humanities and Social Sciences)
2012年
6期
27~35
,共null页
农民收入 教育收益率 教育外溢性 教育投入
農民收入 教育收益率 教育外溢性 教育投入
농민수입 교육수익솔 교육외일성 교육투입
farmers' income; rate of return to education; spillover effect of education; investment in education
教育不仅影响农民的个人收入,还对农民所在群体的收入产生影响。利用中国十省百村的一手调研数据,可以从教育收益率和教育外溢性两个维度探讨农村教育与农民收入之间的关系。实证分析发现:(1)教育对提高农民非农收入的作用大于对农业收入的作用。保持其他因素不变,农民受教育时间每增加1年,农业收入将提高4.28%,非农收入将提高5.61%。(2)无论是农业收入还是非农收入,男性的教育回报率均要高于女性。男性受教育时间每增加1年,农业收入将增加4.85%,非农收入将增加7.18%;受教育时间对女性收入的影响并不显著。(3)农村地区教育存在显著的外溢效应。同村邻居平均受教育时间每增加1年,农民收入将增加6.21%;同行业的农民平均受教育时间增加1年,农民收入将增加8.13%。
教育不僅影響農民的箇人收入,還對農民所在群體的收入產生影響。利用中國十省百村的一手調研數據,可以從教育收益率和教育外溢性兩箇維度探討農村教育與農民收入之間的關繫。實證分析髮現:(1)教育對提高農民非農收入的作用大于對農業收入的作用。保持其他因素不變,農民受教育時間每增加1年,農業收入將提高4.28%,非農收入將提高5.61%。(2)無論是農業收入還是非農收入,男性的教育迴報率均要高于女性。男性受教育時間每增加1年,農業收入將增加4.85%,非農收入將增加7.18%;受教育時間對女性收入的影響併不顯著。(3)農村地區教育存在顯著的外溢效應。同村鄰居平均受教育時間每增加1年,農民收入將增加6.21%;同行業的農民平均受教育時間增加1年,農民收入將增加8.13%。
교육불부영향농민적개인수입,환대농민소재군체적수입산생영향。이용중국십성백촌적일수조연수거,가이종교육수익솔화교육외일성량개유도탐토농촌교육여농민수입지간적관계。실증분석발현:(1)교육대제고농민비농수입적작용대우대농업수입적작용。보지기타인소불변,농민수교육시간매증가1년,농업수입장제고4.28%,비농수입장제고5.61%。(2)무론시농업수입환시비농수입,남성적교육회보솔균요고우녀성。남성수교육시간매증가1년,농업수입장증가4.85%,비농수입장증가7.18%;수교육시간대녀성수입적영향병불현저。(3)농촌지구교육존재현저적외일효응。동촌린거평균수교육시간매증가1년,농민수입장증가6.21%;동행업적농민평균수교육시간증가1년,농민수입장증가8.13%。
In China rural areas,education can effectively improve farmers' overall personal qualities and help them promote their productivity and income level as well.Besides,education has strong spillover effect because the education that a farmer gets has a positive impact on other people around him/her.Despite a wide range of existing researches,few empirical analyses in recent years have been made of the rate of return to education from the perspectives of industry or gender with first-hand data.In calculating educational spillover effect,there are two difficulties,one of which is that it is hard to set up an analytical framework of spillover effect of education in rural areas,and the other one is that it is hard to collect data related to the spillover effect of rural education.Based on the latest data from 100 villages of 10 provinces across China,this paper attempts to evaluate the educational returns of agriculture and non-agricultural industry and of male and female residents by applying the Mincer Earnings Function.In addition,it tries to define and analyze the spillover effects from the perspectives of the same village and the same industry via Lucas Model of Human Capital Spillover.The results show that education has great effect not only on farmers' income,but also on the income of other groups related to farmers.(1) Education has greater impact on their non-agricultural income than agricultural income.Ceteris paribus,a farmer will increase his non-agricultural income by 5.61% compared to 4.28% increment in his agricultural income if he receives one more year of education.(2) Men will gain higher rate of return to education than that of women in rural areas,whether it be agricultural or non-agricultural income.To a man,each one-year further education received will increase his agricultural income and non-agricultural income by about 4.85% and 7.18% respectively.As far as a woman is concerned,the effect of education on her income is not significant.(3) There are significant spillover effects of education in rural areas.That one year of education added to all the farmers in the village will increase the average farmer's income by 6.21%.When added to all the farmers in this profession,the average farmer's income will increase by 8.13%.The research highlights of this paper are the analysis of the return rate of education from the micro perspective by using first-hand data from July,2010 to July,2011 of rural household surveys in one hundred villages in ten provinces across China,i.e.Heilongjiang,Shandong,Anhui,Shanxi,Sichuan,Inner Mongolia,Hainan,Jiangxi,Zhejiang and Guizhou.This paper also tries to obtain external evidence of education from different perspectives,i.e.from the redefinition of rural groups and from the analysis of the effect of education levels of rural groups on their income,in order to minimize wrong conclusions caused by inaccurate definitions of rural groups.