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:杨晓燕 冯兴元[2] 李睿君 YANG Xiaoyan;FENG Xingyuan;LI Ruijun(School of Applied Economics,University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,Beijing 102488,China;Institute of Rural Development,Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,Beijing 100732,China;School of Economics,Yunnan University,Kunming 650091,China)
机构地区:[1]中国社会科学院大学应用经济学院,北京102488 [2]中国社会科学院农村发展研究所,北京100732 [3]云南大学经济学院,昆明650091
出 处:《云南财经大学学报》2024年第4期17-32,共16页Journal of Yunnan University of Finance and Economics
基 金:中国社会科学院农村发展研究所A类研究创新工程课题“农村金融服务体系建设及优化路径研究”(2023NFSA02)。
摘 要:促进农村家庭生计可持续是乡村振兴战略的重中之重。基于CFPS两期整合数据考察正规借贷对农村家庭生计脆弱性的影响。统计结果表明,农村家庭的生计脆弱性指数集中在-0.459~0.225之间,整体脆弱性水平较低。相较于非正规借贷家庭,正规借贷家庭的生计脆弱性水平更低。房屋正规借贷高额度家庭的生计脆弱性水平较高,而非房屋正规借贷高额度家庭的生计脆弱性水平较低,这两类农村家庭的低额度正规借贷组中有很大部分家庭的生计可持续能力很高。回归结果表明,正规借贷额度每提高1个单位,农村家庭的生计脆弱性指数降低12.1个百分点。相较于房屋正规借贷额度,非房屋正规借贷额度的提高对农村家庭生计脆弱性的降低效果更好。进一步研究发现,房屋正规借贷和非房屋正规借贷额度的提高均可通过促进农村家庭生计策略非农化的转型进而降低其生计脆弱性,但房屋正规借贷在该机制中所起的积极作用更大。据此提出引导农户合理使用正规借贷资金,开发“房贷+”金融产品,细化农村金融帮扶策略的对策建议。Promoting the sustainability of the vulnerability of livelihoods in rural families is the uppermost priority of rural revitalization strategy.Based on the data from CFPS,the paper investigates the impact of formal loan on the vulnerability of livelihoods in rural families.Statistical results show that the vulnerability indexes of livelihoods in rural families are concentrated during-0.459~0.225,which indicates that the vulnerability in general is low.Compared with families with informal loans,the livelihoods vulnerability of families with formal loans are lower.The livelihoods vulnerability level is higher in families with high formal house loans,while the level is lower in families with high non-house formal loans.Most families of the two types of rural families in the low formal loan group have strong livelihood vulnerability.Regression results show that every 1 unit improvement of formal loan limit leads to the decrease of 12.1 percentage points in the livelihood vulnerability index of rural families.Compared with formal house loan limit,the improvement of non-house formal loan limit has better effect in lowering the livelihood vulnerability of rural families.Further research finds that the increase of formal house loan limit and non-house formal loan limit can both lower the livelihood vulnerability of rural families by promoting the non-rural transformation of the livelihood strategies of the families.Formal house loan plays stronger positive role in the mechanism.Based on the results,the paper proposes countermeasure to guide rural households in fair use of formal loans,develop“house loan+”financial products,and refine the assistance strategy of rural finance.
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:216.73.216.49