人情消费与农村居民的幸福感——来自2015年CSS的经验证据
|
摘要
人情消费是中华民族的传统习俗,并在社会互动过程中扮演着重要角色。结合2015年中国社会状况综合调查(CSS)数据,以人情消费作为代理变量,采用有序Logit模型、有序Probit模型,在考虑个体异质性因素、地区因素基础上,考察人情消费对农村居民主观幸福感的影响。研究表明:人情消费与农村居民幸福感呈现典型的"倒U型"关系,人情消费具有福利效应的"拐点"出现在家庭人情消费占总消费支出的比例约为42%处。通过变换估计方法、替换被解释变量进行稳健性检验后,这一结果依然成立;当人情消费位于均值11.41%处,农村居民自我幸福感评价为"非常幸福"的概率显著提高8.8%;人情消费对农村居民幸福感的影响表现出鲜明的群体差异,西部地区、低收入、已婚、中老年群体人情消费超过"拐点"的比例更高,党员超过"拐点"的比例则明显低于普通群众。
Reciprocity not only is the traditional virtue of Chinese nation,but also plays an important role in the standard rule in the process of social interaction.Based on the data of Chinese Social Survey(CSS)of 2015,this paper takes gift expenditure as a proxy in the system,uses Ordered Logit model and Ordered Probit model and takes factors of personal heterogeneity and region into consideration to investigate the effects on happiness of rural residents.The result shows that firstly,reciprocity and well-being of rural residents showed a typical"inverted U","turning point"of family gift expenditure,which accounts for the total consumption expenditure ratio,and happiness is about42%.This result remains significant after adjusting the estimation method and replacing the explanatory variable.Secondly,when gift expenditure in the total is at position of the mean 11.41%,the probability of reporting"very happy"in rural households has increased by 8.8%.Thirdly,the influence of gift expenditure on the well-being of rural residents showed distinct group differences.For people in the Western regions,low-income,married,middle-aged and elderly groups,the proportion of gift expenditure over the"inflection point"is higher,while the proportion of Party members overthe"inflection point"is significantly lower than that of the masses.
Reciprocity not only is the traditional virtue of Chinese nation,but also plays an important role in the standard rule in the process of social interaction.Based on the data of Chinese Social Survey(CSS)of 2015,this paper takes gift expenditure as a proxy in the system,uses Ordered Logit model and Ordered Probit model and takes factors of personal heterogeneity and region into consideration to investigate the effects on happiness of rural residents.The result shows that firstly,reciprocity and well-being of rural residents showed a typical"inverted U","turning point"of family gift expenditure,which accounts for the total consumption expenditure ratio,and happiness is about42%.This result remains significant after adjusting the estimation method and replacing the explanatory variable.Secondly,when gift expenditure in the total is at position of the mean 11.41%,the probability of reporting"very happy"in rural households has increased by 8.8%.Thirdly,the influence of gift expenditure on the well-being of rural residents showed distinct group differences.For people in the Western regions,low-income,married,middle-aged and elderly groups,the proportion of gift expenditure over the"inflection point"is higher,while the proportion of Party members overthe"inflection point"is significantly lower than that of the masses.
引文
[1]费孝通.乡土中国[M].北京:人民出版社,2008.
[2]BIAN Y.Bringing strong ties back in:indirect ties,network bridges,and job searches in China[J].American sociological review,1997,62[3]:366-385.
[3]周广肃,马光荣.人情支出挤出了正常消费吗?---来自中国家户数据的证据[J].浙江社会科学,2015[3]:15-26,156.
[4]陈刚,李树.政府如何能够让人幸福?---政府质量影响居民幸福感的实证研究[J].管理世界,2012[8]:55-67.
[5]贺雪峰.论熟人社会的人情[J].南京师大学报[社会科学版],2011[4]:20-27.
[6]FREY B S,STUTZER A.What can economists learn from happiness research?[J].Journal of economic literature,2002[40]:402-435.
[7]许玲丽,龚关,艾春荣.幸福,赚钱还是花钱?[J].财经研究,2016[6]:17-26.
[8]胡荣华,孙计领.消费能使我们幸福吗[J].统计研究,2015[12]:69-75.
[9]FERRER-I-CARBONELL A.Income and well-being:an empirical analysis of the comparison income effect[J].Journal of public economics,2005,89[5/6]:997-1019.
[10]CLARK A E,FRIJTERS P,SHIELDS M A.Relative income,happiness,and utility:an explanation for the easterlin paradox and other puzzles[J].Journal of economic literature,2008,46[1]:95-144.
[11]张学志,才国伟.收入、价值观与居民幸福感---来自广东成人调查数据的经验证据[J].管理世界,2011[9]:63-73.
[12]BLANCHFLOWER D G,OSWALD A J.Well-being over time in Britain and the USA[J].Journal of public economics,2004,88[7/8]:1359-1386.
[13]DIETZ R D,HAURIN D R.The social and private micro-level consequences of homeownership[J].Journal of urban economics,2003,54[3]:401-450.
[14]BROWN P H,TIERNEY B.Religion and subjective well-being among the elderly in China[J].The journal of socio-economics,2009,38[2]:310-319.
[15]TELLA R D,MACCULLOCH R J,OSWALD A J.Preferences over inflation and unemployment:evidence from surveys of happiness[J].American economic review,2001,91[1]:335-341.
[16]ALESINA A,TELLA R D,MACCULLOCH R.Inequality and happiness:are Europeans and Americans different?[J].Journal of public economics,2004,88[9/10]:2009-2042.
[17]STADELMANN-STEFFEN I,VATTER D.Does satisfaction with democracy really increase happiness?Direct democracy and individual satisfaction in Switzerland[J].Political behavior,2012,34[3]:535-559.
[18]李树,陈刚.“关系”能否带来幸福?---来自中国农村的经验证据[J].中国农村经济,2012[8]:66-78.
[19]杭斌.人情支出与城镇居民家庭消费---基于地位寻求的实证分析[J].统计研究,2015[4]:68-76.
[20]杨汝岱,陈斌开,朱诗娥.基于社会网络视角的农户民间借贷需求行为研究[J].经济研究,2011[11]:116-129.
[21]AHUVIA A C.Consumption,income and happiness[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2017.
[22]吴丽民,袁山林.幸福视角划分消费类型的理论构想与实证解析[J].财经论丛,2012[6]:99-105.
[23]ZIMMERMANN S.The pursuit of subjective well-being through specific consumption choice[J].Social science electronic publishing,2014[9]:1-54.
[24]NOLL H H,WEICK S.Consumption expenditures and subjective well-being:empirical evidence from Germany[J].International review of economics,2015,62[2]:101-119.
[25]PUTNAM R D,LENARDI R,NONETTI R Y.Making democracy work:civic traditions in modern Italy[M].Princeton:Princeton University Press,1993.
[26]赵剑治,陆铭.关系对农村收入差距的贡献及其地区差异---一项基于回归的分解分析[J].经济学[季刊],2010[1]:363-390.
[27]HELLIWLL J F,PUTNAM R D.The social context of well-being[J].Philosophical transactions of the royal society of London.2004,359[1449]:1435-1446.
[28]SARRCINO F.Social capital and subjective well-being trends:comparing 11western European countries[J].The journal of socioeconomics,2010,39[4]:482-517.
[29]RODRIGUEZ-POSE A,BERLEPSCH V V.Social capital and individual happiness in Europe[J].Journal of happiness studies,2013,15[2]:357-386.
[30]LEUNG A,KIER C,FUNG T,et al.Searching for happiness:the importance of social capital[M].Berlin:Springer Netherlands,2013.
[31]李平,朱国军.社会资本、身份特征与居民幸福感---基于中国居民社会网络变迁的视角[J].经济评论,2014[6]:113-125.
[32]YIP W,SUBRAMANIAN S V,MITCHELL A D,et al.Does social capital enhance health and well-being?Evidence from rural China[J].Social science&medicine,2007,64[1]:35-49.
[33]鲁元平,王军鹏,王品超.身份的幸福效应---基于党员的经验证据[J].经济学动态,2016[9]:29-40.
[34]秦立建,陈波.医疗保险对农民工城市融入的影响分析[J].管理世界,2014[10]:91-99.
(1) 从过往文献来看,人情消费与人情往来、礼尚往来、人情支出及礼金支出等虽然在表述上有差异,但内涵基本一致,后文会出现一定程度的混用。
(1)打交道的人员,选项主要包括本村人、外村人、城里人以及各层级干部等。
(1)本文余下部分中Ordered Logit模型、Ordered Probit模型,分别被简称“O-Logit”模型、“O-Probit”。
(2)Ferrer在研究中指出,对于主观幸福感的研究,OLS估计和排序选择模型显著性和系数的符号具有较高程度的一致性[9]。为此,本文同时汇报了OLS回归和O-Lgoit模型结果。当然,这样还能形成相互比较、相互对照,有助于判别回归结果的稳健性。
(1)地区分组方面,东部地区包括北京、天津、河北、辽宁、上海、江苏、浙江、福建、山东、广东、广西、海南12个省级行政单位;中部地区包括山西、内蒙古、吉林、黑龙江、安徽、江西、河南、湖北、湖南9个省级行政单位;西部地区则包括重庆、四川、贵州、云南、西藏、陕西、甘肃、青海、宁夏、新疆10个省级行政单位,暂时缺乏中国港澳台地区的数据。当然,这仅限于学术方面的处理。收入分组方面,以平均值为分割点,平均值以下为低收入组,平均值及以上为高收入组。年龄分组方面,45岁及以下为青年组,45岁以上为中老年组。
[2]BIAN Y.Bringing strong ties back in:indirect ties,network bridges,and job searches in China[J].American sociological review,1997,62[3]:366-385.
[3]周广肃,马光荣.人情支出挤出了正常消费吗?---来自中国家户数据的证据[J].浙江社会科学,2015[3]:15-26,156.
[4]陈刚,李树.政府如何能够让人幸福?---政府质量影响居民幸福感的实证研究[J].管理世界,2012[8]:55-67.
[5]贺雪峰.论熟人社会的人情[J].南京师大学报[社会科学版],2011[4]:20-27.
[6]FREY B S,STUTZER A.What can economists learn from happiness research?[J].Journal of economic literature,2002[40]:402-435.
[7]许玲丽,龚关,艾春荣.幸福,赚钱还是花钱?[J].财经研究,2016[6]:17-26.
[8]胡荣华,孙计领.消费能使我们幸福吗[J].统计研究,2015[12]:69-75.
[9]FERRER-I-CARBONELL A.Income and well-being:an empirical analysis of the comparison income effect[J].Journal of public economics,2005,89[5/6]:997-1019.
[10]CLARK A E,FRIJTERS P,SHIELDS M A.Relative income,happiness,and utility:an explanation for the easterlin paradox and other puzzles[J].Journal of economic literature,2008,46[1]:95-144.
[11]张学志,才国伟.收入、价值观与居民幸福感---来自广东成人调查数据的经验证据[J].管理世界,2011[9]:63-73.
[12]BLANCHFLOWER D G,OSWALD A J.Well-being over time in Britain and the USA[J].Journal of public economics,2004,88[7/8]:1359-1386.
[13]DIETZ R D,HAURIN D R.The social and private micro-level consequences of homeownership[J].Journal of urban economics,2003,54[3]:401-450.
[14]BROWN P H,TIERNEY B.Religion and subjective well-being among the elderly in China[J].The journal of socio-economics,2009,38[2]:310-319.
[15]TELLA R D,MACCULLOCH R J,OSWALD A J.Preferences over inflation and unemployment:evidence from surveys of happiness[J].American economic review,2001,91[1]:335-341.
[16]ALESINA A,TELLA R D,MACCULLOCH R.Inequality and happiness:are Europeans and Americans different?[J].Journal of public economics,2004,88[9/10]:2009-2042.
[17]STADELMANN-STEFFEN I,VATTER D.Does satisfaction with democracy really increase happiness?Direct democracy and individual satisfaction in Switzerland[J].Political behavior,2012,34[3]:535-559.
[18]李树,陈刚.“关系”能否带来幸福?---来自中国农村的经验证据[J].中国农村经济,2012[8]:66-78.
[19]杭斌.人情支出与城镇居民家庭消费---基于地位寻求的实证分析[J].统计研究,2015[4]:68-76.
[20]杨汝岱,陈斌开,朱诗娥.基于社会网络视角的农户民间借贷需求行为研究[J].经济研究,2011[11]:116-129.
[21]AHUVIA A C.Consumption,income and happiness[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2017.
[22]吴丽民,袁山林.幸福视角划分消费类型的理论构想与实证解析[J].财经论丛,2012[6]:99-105.
[23]ZIMMERMANN S.The pursuit of subjective well-being through specific consumption choice[J].Social science electronic publishing,2014[9]:1-54.
[24]NOLL H H,WEICK S.Consumption expenditures and subjective well-being:empirical evidence from Germany[J].International review of economics,2015,62[2]:101-119.
[25]PUTNAM R D,LENARDI R,NONETTI R Y.Making democracy work:civic traditions in modern Italy[M].Princeton:Princeton University Press,1993.
[26]赵剑治,陆铭.关系对农村收入差距的贡献及其地区差异---一项基于回归的分解分析[J].经济学[季刊],2010[1]:363-390.
[27]HELLIWLL J F,PUTNAM R D.The social context of well-being[J].Philosophical transactions of the royal society of London.2004,359[1449]:1435-1446.
[28]SARRCINO F.Social capital and subjective well-being trends:comparing 11western European countries[J].The journal of socioeconomics,2010,39[4]:482-517.
[29]RODRIGUEZ-POSE A,BERLEPSCH V V.Social capital and individual happiness in Europe[J].Journal of happiness studies,2013,15[2]:357-386.
[30]LEUNG A,KIER C,FUNG T,et al.Searching for happiness:the importance of social capital[M].Berlin:Springer Netherlands,2013.
[31]李平,朱国军.社会资本、身份特征与居民幸福感---基于中国居民社会网络变迁的视角[J].经济评论,2014[6]:113-125.
[32]YIP W,SUBRAMANIAN S V,MITCHELL A D,et al.Does social capital enhance health and well-being?Evidence from rural China[J].Social science&medicine,2007,64[1]:35-49.
[33]鲁元平,王军鹏,王品超.身份的幸福效应---基于党员的经验证据[J].经济学动态,2016[9]:29-40.
[34]秦立建,陈波.医疗保险对农民工城市融入的影响分析[J].管理世界,2014[10]:91-99.
(1) 从过往文献来看,人情消费与人情往来、礼尚往来、人情支出及礼金支出等虽然在表述上有差异,但内涵基本一致,后文会出现一定程度的混用。
(1)打交道的人员,选项主要包括本村人、外村人、城里人以及各层级干部等。
(1)本文余下部分中Ordered Logit模型、Ordered Probit模型,分别被简称“O-Logit”模型、“O-Probit”。
(2)Ferrer在研究中指出,对于主观幸福感的研究,OLS估计和排序选择模型显著性和系数的符号具有较高程度的一致性[9]。为此,本文同时汇报了OLS回归和O-Lgoit模型结果。当然,这样还能形成相互比较、相互对照,有助于判别回归结果的稳健性。
(1)地区分组方面,东部地区包括北京、天津、河北、辽宁、上海、江苏、浙江、福建、山东、广东、广西、海南12个省级行政单位;中部地区包括山西、内蒙古、吉林、黑龙江、安徽、江西、河南、湖北、湖南9个省级行政单位;西部地区则包括重庆、四川、贵州、云南、西藏、陕西、甘肃、青海、宁夏、新疆10个省级行政单位,暂时缺乏中国港澳台地区的数据。当然,这仅限于学术方面的处理。收入分组方面,以平均值为分割点,平均值以下为低收入组,平均值及以上为高收入组。年龄分组方面,45岁及以下为青年组,45岁以上为中老年组。