谁从增加的农村低保支出中受益?——基于边际受益归宿的分析
|
摘要
基本公共服务受益均等化要求农村低保支出应有效地保障贫困地区具备提供大致均等化农村低保服务的财政能力。本文运用边际受益归宿分析技术,实证测度了2008~2012年中国118个地级市的农村低保支出边际受益分配状况。研究发现,农村低保支出的边际受益率随地区经济发展水平的升高而升高,富裕地区是新增农村低保支出的最大受益者;从动态角度观察,贫困地区与富裕地区农村低保支出边际受益率的差值在逐渐扩大,从2008年的0.6453增加到2012年的0.8912。这表明,农村低保支出受益分配的公平性有待改善。基于此,建议政府完善现有农村低保转移支付分配体制,提高农村低保资源配置效率,以提升贫困地区的受益水平,做到精准扶贫。
The fiscal expenditure on rural minimum living allowance should effectively guarantee poor areas enough fiscal abilities to supply equal rural minimum living allowance service,which is required by equalization of benefit from basic public services. This paper evaluates the marginal incidence of the fiscal expenditure on rural minimum living allowance based on dataof 118 prefectures from 2008 to 2012. The results are as follows: firstly,the marginal benefit rate of fiscal expenditure on rural minimum living allowancerises along with the regional economic development level,and rich areas benefit most; secondly,viewed from the dynamic perspective,the gap of the marginal benefit rates between poor and rich areas is widening,from0. 6453 in 2008 to 0. 8912 in 2012. The conclusion shows that the fairness of the benefit distribution of fiscal expenditure on rural minimum living allowance should be improved. In order to enhance the benefit level of poor areas and achieve accurate poverty alleviation,the paper suggestsimproving fiscal transfer system and spending policies of rural minimum living allowance,so as to enhance the efficiency of resource allocation of rural minimum living allowance.
The fiscal expenditure on rural minimum living allowance should effectively guarantee poor areas enough fiscal abilities to supply equal rural minimum living allowance service,which is required by equalization of benefit from basic public services. This paper evaluates the marginal incidence of the fiscal expenditure on rural minimum living allowance based on dataof 118 prefectures from 2008 to 2012. The results are as follows: firstly,the marginal benefit rate of fiscal expenditure on rural minimum living allowancerises along with the regional economic development level,and rich areas benefit most; secondly,viewed from the dynamic perspective,the gap of the marginal benefit rates between poor and rich areas is widening,from0. 6453 in 2008 to 0. 8912 in 2012. The conclusion shows that the fairness of the benefit distribution of fiscal expenditure on rural minimum living allowance should be improved. In order to enhance the benefit level of poor areas and achieve accurate poverty alleviation,the paper suggestsimproving fiscal transfer system and spending policies of rural minimum living allowance,so as to enhance the efficiency of resource allocation of rural minimum living allowance.
引文
[1]卢洪友.基本公共服务均等化:理论及其制度路径[N].中国社会科学报,2012-09-05(B4).
[2]王增文.农村低保救助水平的评估[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2010,20(1):93-98.
[3]毕红霞,薛兴利,李升.论农村最低生活保障财政支持的适度性与政策优化[J].农业经济问题,2012,(1):29-36.
[4]赵宁.我国农村最低生活保障投入产出效率研究[J].山东农业大学学报(社会科学版),2012,(4):35-39.
[5]王增文,邓大松.农村低保及配套政策发展水平的地区性差异——基于29省市相关数据[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2012,12(1):94-98.
[6]戴建兵.我国农村最低生活保障力度及其横向公平性分析[J].人口与经济,2012,(5):72-79.
[7]韩华为,徐月宾.中国农村低保制度的反贫困效应研究——来自中西部五省的经验证据[J].经济评论,2014,(6):63-77.
[8]刘穷志.公共支出归宿:中国政府公共服务落实到贫困人口手中了吗?[J].管理世界,2007,(4):60-67.
[9]刘国风,杨玉英.城乡各阶层公共支出受益归宿之测度与政策建议[J].财经理论与实践,2012,33(1),83-86.
[10]汪崇金,许建标.我国公共教育支出受益,孰多孰寡?——基于“服务成本方法”的受益归宿分析[J].财经研究,2012,38(2):4-14.
[11]赵海利.经济发达地区义务教育专项转移支付的收益归宿分析——以东部某省为例[J].教育研究,2014,(7):75-83.
[12]赖莎,李倩,高建民.政府医疗补助受益归属研究:基于省级数据的实证分析[J].中国卫生经济,2015,(5):9-11.
[13]李永友,郑春荣.我国公共医疗服务受益归宿及其收入分配效应——基于入户调查数据的微观分析[J].经济研究,2016,(7):132-146.
[14]李永友.公共卫生支出增长的收入再分配效应[J].中国社会科学,2017,(5):63-82.
[15]Younger S.D.Benefits on the Margin:Observations on Marginal Benefit Incidence[J].World Bank Economic Review,2003,17(1):89-105.
[16]Lanjouw P.,Ravallion M.Benefit Incidence,Public Reforms and the Time of Program Capture[J].The World Bank Economic Review,1999,13(2):257-274.
[17]Ajwad M.I.,Wodon Q.Do Local Governments Maximize Access Rate to Public Services Across Areas?A Test Based on Marginal Benefit Incidence Analysis[J].Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance,2007,47:242-260.
[18]Atemnkeng J.T.,Noula A G.Gender and Increased Access to Schooling in Cameroon:A Marginal Benefit Incidence Analysis[J].Journal of International Women's Studies,2011,12(1):94-106.
[19]Alabi R.A.,Adams O.O.,Chime C.C.,et al.Marginal benefit incidence Analysis of Public Spending in Nigeria[J].PEP-PMMA Working paper,2011,03.
[20]Kruse I.,Pradhan M.,Sparrow R.Marginal Benefit Incidence of Public Health Spending:Evidence from Indonesian Sub-national Data[J].Journal of Health Economics,2012,31:147-157.
[21]朱德云.我国农村贫困群体社会救助状况实证分析[J].财政研究,2011,(4):55-57.
[22]卢洪友,陈思霞.谁从增加的财政转移支付中受益——基于中国县级数据的实证分析[J].财贸经济,2012,(4):24-32.
[23]江孝感,魏峰,蒋尚华.我国财政转移支付的适度规模控制[J].管理世界,1999,(3):51-61.
[24]尹恒,朱虹.中国县级地区财力缺口与转移支付的均等性[J].管理世界,2009,(4):37-46.
[25]陶勇.政府间财力分配与中国地方财政能力的差异[J].税务研究,2010,(4):8-15.
(1)剔除的省(直辖市)为北京、天津、上海、重庆、海南、新疆、青海、贵州、宁夏、西藏、内蒙古、黑龙江、吉林、辽宁。
(1)以2011年安徽省为例,统计的地级市为14个,3个群组包含的市的个数分别为5、4、5。按照前式计算得到的群组均值分别为1058.43元/人、1038.11元/人以及929.73元/人。近似平均数辅助法下得到的群组均值分别是1064.19元/人、1031.82元/人以及921.18元/人,其均值差异没有超过1%。
(1)民政部,2016:《2015年社会服务发展统计公报》,载民政部网址(http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/sj/tjgb/201607/20160700001136.shtml)。
[2]王增文.农村低保救助水平的评估[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2010,20(1):93-98.
[3]毕红霞,薛兴利,李升.论农村最低生活保障财政支持的适度性与政策优化[J].农业经济问题,2012,(1):29-36.
[4]赵宁.我国农村最低生活保障投入产出效率研究[J].山东农业大学学报(社会科学版),2012,(4):35-39.
[5]王增文,邓大松.农村低保及配套政策发展水平的地区性差异——基于29省市相关数据[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2012,12(1):94-98.
[6]戴建兵.我国农村最低生活保障力度及其横向公平性分析[J].人口与经济,2012,(5):72-79.
[7]韩华为,徐月宾.中国农村低保制度的反贫困效应研究——来自中西部五省的经验证据[J].经济评论,2014,(6):63-77.
[8]刘穷志.公共支出归宿:中国政府公共服务落实到贫困人口手中了吗?[J].管理世界,2007,(4):60-67.
[9]刘国风,杨玉英.城乡各阶层公共支出受益归宿之测度与政策建议[J].财经理论与实践,2012,33(1),83-86.
[10]汪崇金,许建标.我国公共教育支出受益,孰多孰寡?——基于“服务成本方法”的受益归宿分析[J].财经研究,2012,38(2):4-14.
[11]赵海利.经济发达地区义务教育专项转移支付的收益归宿分析——以东部某省为例[J].教育研究,2014,(7):75-83.
[12]赖莎,李倩,高建民.政府医疗补助受益归属研究:基于省级数据的实证分析[J].中国卫生经济,2015,(5):9-11.
[13]李永友,郑春荣.我国公共医疗服务受益归宿及其收入分配效应——基于入户调查数据的微观分析[J].经济研究,2016,(7):132-146.
[14]李永友.公共卫生支出增长的收入再分配效应[J].中国社会科学,2017,(5):63-82.
[15]Younger S.D.Benefits on the Margin:Observations on Marginal Benefit Incidence[J].World Bank Economic Review,2003,17(1):89-105.
[16]Lanjouw P.,Ravallion M.Benefit Incidence,Public Reforms and the Time of Program Capture[J].The World Bank Economic Review,1999,13(2):257-274.
[17]Ajwad M.I.,Wodon Q.Do Local Governments Maximize Access Rate to Public Services Across Areas?A Test Based on Marginal Benefit Incidence Analysis[J].Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance,2007,47:242-260.
[18]Atemnkeng J.T.,Noula A G.Gender and Increased Access to Schooling in Cameroon:A Marginal Benefit Incidence Analysis[J].Journal of International Women's Studies,2011,12(1):94-106.
[19]Alabi R.A.,Adams O.O.,Chime C.C.,et al.Marginal benefit incidence Analysis of Public Spending in Nigeria[J].PEP-PMMA Working paper,2011,03.
[20]Kruse I.,Pradhan M.,Sparrow R.Marginal Benefit Incidence of Public Health Spending:Evidence from Indonesian Sub-national Data[J].Journal of Health Economics,2012,31:147-157.
[21]朱德云.我国农村贫困群体社会救助状况实证分析[J].财政研究,2011,(4):55-57.
[22]卢洪友,陈思霞.谁从增加的财政转移支付中受益——基于中国县级数据的实证分析[J].财贸经济,2012,(4):24-32.
[23]江孝感,魏峰,蒋尚华.我国财政转移支付的适度规模控制[J].管理世界,1999,(3):51-61.
[24]尹恒,朱虹.中国县级地区财力缺口与转移支付的均等性[J].管理世界,2009,(4):37-46.
[25]陶勇.政府间财力分配与中国地方财政能力的差异[J].税务研究,2010,(4):8-15.
(1)剔除的省(直辖市)为北京、天津、上海、重庆、海南、新疆、青海、贵州、宁夏、西藏、内蒙古、黑龙江、吉林、辽宁。
(1)以2011年安徽省为例,统计的地级市为14个,3个群组包含的市的个数分别为5、4、5。按照前式计算得到的群组均值分别为1058.43元/人、1038.11元/人以及929.73元/人。近似平均数辅助法下得到的群组均值分别是1064.19元/人、1031.82元/人以及921.18元/人,其均值差异没有超过1%。
(1)民政部,2016:《2015年社会服务发展统计公报》,载民政部网址(http://www.mca.gov.cn/article/sj/tjgb/201607/20160700001136.shtml)。