检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:杨人懿 钟昌标 杨子生[1] 杨诗琴 Yang Renyi;Zhong Changbiao;Yang Zisheng;Yang Shiqin(School of Economics,Yunnan University of Finance and Economics,Kunming 650221,China;Institute of Targeted Poverty Alleviation and Development,Yunnan University of Finance and Economics,Kunming 650221,China)
机构地区:[1]云南财经大学精准扶贫与发展研究院,650221 [2]云南财经大学经济学院,650221
出 处:《南开经济研究》2023年第3期131-150,共20页Nankai Economic Studies
基 金:国家自然科学基金项目(41261018,71673182);国家社会科学基金重大项目(18VSJ023);云南财经大学研究生创新基金项目(2023YUFEYC002)资助。
摘 要:举世瞩目的全国脱贫攻坚战取得全面胜利之后,我国的精准扶贫政策是否促进了农民增收,其具体效应如何,已成为国内外高度关注的重要问题,需要对其进行精准的科学评估。针对目前采用宏观数据的研究较少、农村居民收入水平前后统计口径不一致、单纯将贫困县作为试验组而非贫困县作为对照组的做法无法通过平行趋势检验等问题和不足,本文选取全国贫困县最多的云南省开展实证研究。参考前期研究成果,本文将全省129个县按照贫困程度分为5个级别:Ⅰ级、Ⅱ级非贫困县和Ⅰ级、Ⅱ级、Ⅲ级贫困县,选用2011—2020年各县农村居民人均可支配收入进行双重差分模型(DID)分析。结果表明:(1)精准扶贫政策使贫困地区的农村居民收入增长速度明显加快,并且精准扶贫政策对各等级贫困县的作用效果大致相同。(2)然而,精准扶贫政策仅提升了农村居民收入的相对增量,即农村居民的增收速度得到了一定提升,但并没有完全改变贫困程度较深的地区农村居民收入增收的绝对数额显著低于贫困程度较浅地区的这个事实,各等级贫困县绝对收入差距仍存在进一步被拉大的趋势,消除相对贫困、推进乡村振兴和实现共同富裕仍然任重而道远。本文的研究结果可为促进脱贫成果巩固、拓展与乡村振兴战略有效衔接以及科学实施提供参考和借鉴。After the comprehensive victory of the nationwide anti-poverty campaign that has attracted worldwide attention,whether China's targeted poverty alleviation policy(TPAP)has promoted the increase of farmers’income and what are the specific effects of them have become the extremely important issues of great attention at homeland and abroad,which requires an accurate scientific assessment.In view of the problems and shortcomings such as the few cases using macro data,the inconsistent statistical caliber on the income level of rural residents,and the practice of simply using poverty-stricken counties as treatment group and non-poverty-stricken counties as control groups cannot pass parallel trend test,this pa-per selects Yunnan Province,which has the largest number of poverty counties in China,to conduct an empirical study,and divides the province's 129 counties into five categories:non-poverty counties of levelⅠand levelⅡ,poverty counties of levelⅠ,ⅡandⅢ.The per capita disposable income of rural residents in each county from 2011 to 2020 is se-lected for Difference-in-Differences(DID)model analysis.The results show that:the income growth rate of rural residents in the poverty areas is obviously accelerated by the TPAP,and the effect of the policy on the poverty counties at all levels is almost the same.However,the policy only increases the relative increment of rural residents'income,that is,the rate of income increase of rural residents has been raised to a certain extent,but it has not completely changed the fact that the absolute amount of income increase of rural residents in areas with deeper poverty levels is significantly lower than that in areas with lower poverty levels,and there is still a tendency for the absolute income gap of the poverty counties at all levels to be widened.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.222