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:张锦华 龚钰涵 陈博欧 Zhang Jinhua;Gong Yuhan;Chen Boou(Institute of Finance and Economics,Shanghai University of Finance and Economics;School of Economics,Nanjing University of Finance and Economics)
机构地区:[1]上海财经大学财经研究所 [2]南京财经大学经济学院
出 处:《管理世界》2024年第10期36-50,共15页Journal of Management World
基 金:国家自然科学基金面上项目“教育准入、职业选址与农民工市民化”(基金号:72173080);国家自然科学基金青年项目“教育准入政策对农民工随迁子女人力资本投资行为的影响评估及政策优化路径研究”(基金号:72303090);上海市教育委员会科研创新重大项目“解决相对贫困问题的长效机制研究”(基金号:2023SKZD13);国家社会科学基金重大项目“新发展格局下我国粮食安全风险防范研究”(基金号:23&ZD118);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金上海财经大学研究生创新基金项目(基金号:CXJJ-2023-437)的资助。
摘 要:随着流动人口从“个人迁移”向“举家迁移”模式的转变,城市教育准入政策不仅直接影响了随迁子女教育公平,也成为影响流动人口市民化的重要因素。本文通过匹配2011~2018年全国流动人口动态监测调查数据和地级市宏观统计数据,系统考察教育准入政策如何影响流动人口的市民化意愿。研究发现,城市教育准入门槛通过限制家庭迁移模式、改变父母职业倾向、减缓主观社会融合3个渠道,显著抑制了流动人口的“长期留城”意愿。该政策效应在不同规模的城市中呈现异质性:超大城市中,尽管教育准入门槛高,但流动人口出于职业发展动机依然选择留城“长期务工”,而购房“定居扎根”的能力相对较弱;特大城市中,较高的教育准入门槛会产生显著的“教育控人”效应,流动人口考虑到子女教育,更可能采取“短暂停留”策略;在城区人口500万以下的城市,教育准入门槛并未成为流动人口市民化的障碍,反而可通过改善教育质量实现教育“留人”和“引才”目标。据此,本研究以调整多层级教育准入门槛为突破口,为保障流动子女教育公平、有序推动流动人口市民化、实现城乡融合发展提供经验证据。As the migration pattern of the migrants gradually changes from "individual migration" to "family migration", urban education access policies not only have a direct impact on the educational equity of migrant children, but also become an important driver affecting the citizenization of migrants. By matching the micro data of China Migrants Dynamic Survey from 2011 to 2018 and macro-statistical data of prefecture-level cities, we examine the impact of education access policies on the citizenization of migrants and explore the mechanisms involved.The study finds that: in order to maximize family intertemporal utility, the higher thresholds for education access inhibit the citizenization willingness of migrants through three channels: restricting family migration patterns, changing parents' occupation preferences, and slowing down subjective social integration. However, the policy effects are heterogeneous across different cities: most of the migrants in super large-sized cities have the relatively weak ability to purchase a home and "settle in the city", and choose to stay in the city for long-term work based on career development. The policy effects are particularly pronounced in very large-sized cities, where high barriers of education access policies can force migrants to "stay for a short time". For cities with urban populations of less than 5 million, education access policies have not restricted the citizenization of migrants, and the more labor and talent will be attracted to the higher quality of education. Accordingly, taking the adjustment of the multi-level education access policies as a breakthrough, this study provides empirical evidence and policy insights for ensuring the educational equity of migrant children, promoting the citizenization of migrants, and achieving the integrated development between urban and rural areas.
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:216.73.216.195