【摘要】城鄉(xiāng)收入差距居高不下是全球性難題，我國新型城鎮(zhèn)化改革成果能否公平惠及不同人群和地區(qū)，進而縮小城鄉(xiāng)居民收入差距，是一個備受關(guān)注的問題。本文借助三批新型城鎮(zhèn)化綜合試點提供的準自然實驗背景，基于2012年至2019年2805個縣級行政區(qū)的面板數(shù)據(jù)和多期雙重差分模型，使用插補估計方法對政策效應(yīng)進行評估后發(fā)現(xiàn)，在這一較短時間段內(nèi)，新型城鎮(zhèn)化改革對試點縣級行政區(qū)的城鄉(xiāng)人均可支配收入差距有正向影響。產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)轉(zhuǎn)型升級加快、地方政府宏觀調(diào)控力度加大、非農(nóng)固定資產(chǎn)投資占比提高、縣域耕地面積減少以及由于戶口性質(zhì)轉(zhuǎn)換導(dǎo)致的純統(tǒng)計意義上的城鄉(xiāng)收入水平變化，是該影響的重要作用機制。異質(zhì)性分析顯示，中部和西部試點地區(qū)的城鄉(xiāng)收入差距在政策作用下顯著縮小，東部地區(qū)則相反，這一差異表明新型城鎮(zhèn)化改革向中西部傾斜的政策舉措有利于縮小城鄉(xiāng)差距。

【關(guān)鍵字】城鎮(zhèn)化 城鄉(xiāng)收入差距 城鄉(xiāng)融合發(fā)展 新型城鎮(zhèn)化改革 多期雙重差分模型

【中圖分類號】F299.2/F124.7     【文獻標識碼】A

【DOI】10.16619/j.cnki.rmltxsqy.2024.16.011

【作者簡介】清華大學(xué)經(jīng)濟管理學(xué)院  侯婉薇

注釋

[1]M. Lipton, Why Poor People Stay Poor: A Study of Urban Bias in World Development, London: Temple Smith, 1997; R. Eastwood and M. Lipton, "Pro-poor Growth and Pro-growth Poverty Reduction: Meaning, Evidence, and Policy Implications," Asian Development Review, 2000, 18.

[2]此處并未使用城鄉(xiāng)居民消費價格指數(shù)進行平減，因為城鄉(xiāng)收入水平的統(tǒng)計是以戶籍性質(zhì)為依據(jù)，而價格指數(shù)的統(tǒng)計則是根據(jù)地域劃分，鑒于中國的農(nóng)業(yè)流動人口數(shù)量龐大，平減處理后的結(jié)果并不能更加準確地展現(xiàn)出城鄉(xiāng)收入差距的變化趨勢。

[3]G. Bryan, E. Glaeser and N. Tsivanidis, "Cities in the Developing World," Annual Review of Economics, 2020, 12.

[4]C. C. Au and J. V. Henderson, "Are Chinese Cities Too Small?" Review of Economic Studies, 2006, 3.

[5]G. Bryan; S. Chowdhury and A. M. Mubarak, "Underinvestment in a Profitable Technology: The Case of Seasonal Migration in Bangladesh," Econometrica, 2014, 82; J. P. Chauvin et al., "What is Different about Urbanization in Rich and Poor countries? Cities in Brazil, China, India and the United States," Journal of Urban Economics, 2017, 98.

[6]R. E. Lucas, "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, 1988, 22; J. E. Rauch, "Productivity Gains from Geographic Concentration of Human Capital: Evidence from the Cities," Journal of Urban Economics, 1993, 34.

[7]P. Krugman, "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," The Journal of Political Economy, 1991, 99.

[8]柯善咨、趙曜：《產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)、城市規(guī)模與中國城市生產(chǎn)率》，《經(jīng)濟研究》，2014年第4期。

[9]K. Desmet and E. Rossi-Hansberg, "Urban Accounting and Welfare," The American Economic Review, 2013, 103.

[10]K. Munshi and M. Rosenzweig, "Networks and Misallocation: Insurance, Migration, and the Rural-Urban Wage Gap," The American Economic Review, 2016, 106; P. P. Combes et al., "Unequal Migration and Urbanization Gains in China," Journal of Development Economics, 2020, 142; T. Hao; R. Sun; T. Tombe and X. Zhu, "The Effect of Migration Policy on Growth, Structural Change, and Regional Inequality in China," Journal of Monetary Economics, 2020, 113.

[11]W. A. Lewis, "Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labour," The Manchester School, 1954, 22.

[12]A. Young, "Inequality, the Urban-Rural Gap, and Migration," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2013, 128.

[13]C. Imbert; M. Seror; Y. Zhang and Y. Zylberberg, "Migrants and Firms: Evidence from China," The American Economic Review, 2022, 112.

[14]陸銘、陳釗：《城市化、城市傾向的經(jīng)濟政策與城鄉(xiāng)收入差距》，《經(jīng)濟研究》，2004年第6期；陳斌開、林毅夫：《發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略、城市化與中國城鄉(xiāng)收入差距》，《中國社會科學(xué)》，2013年第4期；繆小林、王婷、高躍光：《轉(zhuǎn)移支付對城鄉(xiāng)公共服務(wù)差距的影響——不同經(jīng)濟趕超省份的分組比較》，《經(jīng)濟研究》，2017年第2期；毛捷、 趙金冉：《政府公共衛(wèi)生投入的經(jīng)濟效應(yīng)——基于農(nóng)村居民消費的檢驗》，《中國社會科學(xué)》，2017年第10期；朱玲、何偉：《脫貧農(nóng)戶的社會流動與城鄉(xiāng)公共服務(wù)》，《經(jīng)濟研究》，2022年第3期。

[15]李培林、崔巖：《我國2008—2019年間社會階層結(jié)構(gòu)的變化及其經(jīng)濟社會影響》，《江蘇社會科學(xué)》，2020年第4期。

[16]周心怡、李南、龔鋒：《新型城鎮(zhèn)化、公共服務(wù)受益均等與城鄉(xiāng)收入差距》，《經(jīng)濟評論》，2021年第2期。

[17]孫學(xué)濤、于婷、于法穩(wěn)：《新型城鎮(zhèn)化對共同富裕的影響及其作用機制——基于中國281個城市的分析》，《廣東財經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報》，2022年第2期；計小青、吳志祥、許澤慶：《新型城鎮(zhèn)化建設(shè)如何推動共同富裕？——基于新型城鎮(zhèn)化試點的準自然實驗》，《經(jīng)濟問題探索》，2023年第6期。

[18]甘天琦、姚天航、胡斯凱：《城鄉(xiāng)融合發(fā)展的動力與機制——基于新型城鎮(zhèn)化試點的證據(jù)》，《統(tǒng)計與決策》，2024年第1期。

[19]王瓊等：《非對稱性戶籍改革下農(nóng)民工戶籍選擇與農(nóng)地使用效率》，《經(jīng)濟研究》，2023年第10期。

[20]H. Zhang et al., "Does Parental Absence Reduce Cognitive Achievements? Evidence from Rural China," Journal of Development Economics, 2014, 111; C. Zhao et al., "Long-Term Impacts of Parental Migration on Chinese Children's Psychosocial Well-Being: Mitigating and Exacerbating Factor," Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 2017, 52; L. Cameron; X. Meng and D. Zhang, "Does Being 'Left-behind' in Childhood Lead to Criminality in Adulthood? Evidence from Data on Rural-Urban Migrants and Prison Inmates in China," Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 2022, 202.

[21]K. Borusyak; X. Jaravel and J. Spiess, "Revisiting Event-Study Designs: Robust and Efficient Estimation," Review of Economic Studies, 2024, rdae007.

[22]黃祖輝、茅銳：《重新認識城鄉(xiāng)收入差距》，《中國社會科學(xué)評價》，2023年第2期。

責(zé) 編／桂 琰 美 編∕周群英

New-type Urbanization Reform and the Urban-rural Income Gap

—An Empirical Research Based on Panel Data from County-level Administrative Regions

Hou Wanwei

Abstract: Amid the global challenges of the persistent income gap between urban and rural areas, a key issue is whether the achievements of China's new-type urbanization reform can equitably benefit different populations and regions and narrow the income gap between urban and rural residents. This paper, leveraging the quasi-natural experiment provided by three batches of new-type urbanization comprehensive pilot programs and using panel data from 2,805 county-level administrative regions from 2012 to 2019 along with a multi-period difference-in-differences model, evaluates the policy effects using the imputation estimation method. The findings indicate that within this relatively short time frame, the new-type urbanization reform widened the urban-rural income gap in the pilot regions. The main mechanisms of this impact include accelerated industrial transformation and upgrading, increased macroeconomic regulation by local governments, a higher proportion of investment in non-agricultural fixed assets, reduced arable land in county areas, and variations in urban and rural income levels by statistics due to the conversion of household registration status. Heterogeneity analysis shows that the urban-rural income gap in the central and western pilot areas has significantly narrowed under the policy impact, while the opposite is true in the eastern counterparts. This difference suggests that the policy measure of the new-type urbanization reform, in which the central and western regions are gaining more attention and support, is conducive to narrowing the urban-rural gap.

Keywords: urbanization, urban-rural income gap, integrated urban-rural development, new-type urbanization reform, multi-period difference-in-differences model