住房公积金缴存比例的调整对谁有利?——基于社会建构理论的分析  

Who Benefits from the Adjustment of Housing Provident Fund Contribution Rates:An Analysis based on the Social Construction Theory

作　　者：郭磊[1] 胡晓蒙 Lei Guo;Xiaomeng Hu

机构地区：[1]同济大学经济与管理学院公共管理系

出　　处：《公共行政评论》2020年第5期23-43,204,205,共23页Journal of Public Administration

基　　金：教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目“基本公共服务均等化实施效度和实现程度研究”(批准号:18JZD047)。

摘　　要：【问题】《关于规范和阶段性适当降低住房公积金缴存比例的通知》要求企业缴存比例不得超过12%,地方政府阶段性降低缴存比例,不同企业如何反应?由此带来何种分配后果?【方法】基于社会建构理论,预测政策对缴存比例超过12%的企业无效,对缴存比例接近下限的企业有效,并以2015—2017年A股上市公司为样本,采用双重差分倾向得分匹配法检验。【发现】各利益相关者存在差别化反馈:(1)隐蔽性获益者:事前缴存比例超过12%的企业维持违规超缴,事前缴存比例低于下限的企业或维持缴存不变而转化为合规或进一步违规降低缴存,二者作为竞争者藉由可预见的执行偏差隐蔽性获益。(2)实质性获益者:事前缴存比例介于下限和12%之间的企业保持合规,缴存或不变或降低,作为优势者实质性获益,且因政策模糊避免被负面建构。(3)利益受损者:职工失去企业配款才能提高现金收入,作为依赖者支付隐蔽性成本而收益减少。【贡献】不仅直接评估政策结果,还识别出三种确保利益分配模式实现的政策设计策略:政策模糊以避免优势者被负面建构;可预见的政策执行偏差(执行不足和过度执行)使竞争者隐蔽性获益;隐蔽性成本减少依赖者净收益。Motivation:The policy of the Standardization and Phased Reduction of the Housing Provident Fund Contribution Rates caps enterprise contribution rates at 12%.Local governments were required to reduce contribution rates.This paper explores the responses across enterprises and the allocation of benefits among stakeholders.Methodology:Using Social Construction Theory,this paper hypothesizes that the policy does not work for enterprises with a contribution rate above 12%.However,it does work for enterprises with a contribution rate approaching the bottom limit.By analyzing sample data from A-share listed companies for the period 2015 to 2017,this paper evaluates the policy impact using the PSM-DID method.Findings:The responses vary among the stakeholders.(1)The hidden beneficiaries:Enterprises with a contribution rate greater than 12%before the policy continued to make illegal overpayments.Those enterprises with a contribution rate below the bottom limit either become legal or violated the new regulations to reduce their contributions.Both types received hidden benefits as Contenders through the predictable implementation of deviation.(2)The real beneficiaries:Enterprises with a contribution rate between the bottom limit and 12%before the policy remained unchanged or decreased their contributions.They benefited as the Advantaged and avoided negative construction because of policy ambiguity.(3)The losers:Only by giving up enterprise matching contributions could employees increase their cash income.They received less benefits as the Dependents because of hidden costs.Contribution:This policy not only directly evaluates the policy impacts,but also identifies three policy design strategies to ensure the benefits allocation model:policy ambiguity to avoid the negative construction of the Advantaged,predictable policy implementation deviation(insufficient or excessive implementation)to benefit the Contenders,and hidden costs to reduce the net benefits of the Dependents.

关 键 词：目标群体 政策设计 社会建构 利益分配 

分 类 号：D63[政治法律—政治学]