户籍、房产与生活质量——基于城—城流动人口与本地城市居民的比较  

Hukou,House and Quality of Life Inequality:Comparison between Urban-Urban Immigrants and Local Residents

作　　者：卢楠[1] 王毅杰[1] LU Nan;WANG Yijie(Department of Sociology, Hohai University, Nanjing 211100, China)

机构地区：[1]河海大学社会学系,江苏南京211100

出　　处：《人口与经济》2018年第3期37-46,共10页Population & Economics

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目"新型城镇化进程中不同社会群体间社会距离及其弥合机制研究"(15CSH006);江苏省高校哲学社会科学基金项目"新型城镇化进程中农民工随迁子女教育公平及保障机制研究"(2016SJB840011);江苏高校哲学社会科学研究重大项目"社会治理中的心态问题研究"(2017ZDAXM004);中央高校基本科研业务费项目(2017B3314;2017B42614)

摘　　要：利用2014年流动人口动态监测调查数据,对本地城市居民和城—城流动人口的生活质量进行比较分析。研究发现,由于移民的选择效应,城—城流动人口的收入高于本地城市居民,但生活质量并不高于本地城市居民;是否拥有房产对两类群体生活质量均有重要影响,而"本地—外地"的户籍制度排斥的作用并不明显。进一步回归分解发现,制度排斥作用之所以不显著是因为被流动人口正向选择性的效应所抵消。换言之,户籍制度排斥和房产分层的力量仍倾向于扩大二者生活质量的差异,且此效应很强;但移民的选择性效应使得城—城流动人口比本地城市居民拥有更多的人力资本和心理资本以提高生活质量,如此才使得二者最终相差不大。要改善流动人口的城市生活水平,在改革户籍制度以提供平等资源的同时,还要考虑实施专项政策,满足流动人口基本的住房需求。Based on the dynamic monitoring survey data of the floating population in 2014,this study made a comparative analysis of the quality of life between the local residents and the urbanurban immigrants. And,it found that the income of urban-urban migrants was higher than that of the local residents because of the choice effect of immigrants,while the quality of life was lower than that of the local residents. Whether to own a house is an important reason for the difference in quality of life between the two groups,and the role of system exclusion is not obvious. By further regression decomposition,it demonstrated the effect of institutional exclusion was not significant because of positive selectivity. In other words,institutional exclusion is still the main reason for the life quality difference between the two groups,the secondary reason is the house. Thus,to improve the urban living standard of the immigrants, the government not only reform the household registration system to provide equal resources,but also consider the implementation of special policies to satisfy immigrants＇ housing demand.

关 键 词：生活质量 户籍制度排斥 房产 流动人口 

分 类 号：C922[社会学—人口学] F291.1