上海区域人口变动与社会公共资源配置
|
摘要
随着“均衡化”宗旨的提出,公共服务的公平问题开始受到重视。如何实现不同区域间的公共资源配置平等,是一个非常现实而有意义的课题。本文旨在研究不同类型区域人口变动与社会公共资源配置间的关系,也即人口如何影响公共资源的供和需两方面,以及这种影响有何区域差别。
本文采用的主要方法是比较法。按照地理位置与人口状况,将全市划分为核心区、边缘区、近郊区和远郊区四个不同区域类型。通过研究不同类型区域公共资源配置和人口之间的主要矛盾,探索不同的人口发展状况对公共资源供需的要求。在具体操作过程中,以各不同区域类型的人口概况以及人口规模与公共财政支出间的关系为分析背景,分别选取静安区(核心区)、普陀区(边缘区)、闵行区(近郊区)为典型代表,从三区人口规模、结构、分布出发,分析其在公共卫生资源、教育资源、养老资源的配置状况,找出其不足和短缺,以探索不同类型区域间公共资源供需的差别。
通过研究得出的主要结论有：
(一)不同类型区域的人口规模与公共资源配置存在不协调现象。这一现象主要出现在近郊区和远郊区。由常住人口和户籍人口的差额引起。由于公共资源的供给依据户籍人口数量进行配套,常住人口数量较多的近郊区和远郊区公共资源出现短缺。
(二)不同类型区域的人口年龄结构与公共资源配置存在不协调现象。这一现象主要出现在公共教育资源和公共养老资源上。核心区的高中教育资源出现闲置,近郊区的托幼和小学资源出现紧缺,以及各区域同时出现的养老资源短缺都属于人口年龄结构和公共资源不匹配现象。
(三)人口分布与公共资源配置均存在不协调的现象。人口分布与公共资源配置的主要矛盾在不同类型区域是不同的。核心区主要表现在旧式住宅由于公建配套规划不完善引起的人口与资源分离；近郊区主要表现在大量优质资源集中在人口稠密地区,偏远地区公共资源稀少；边缘区主要表现在局部地区的人口分布与资源分布不一致,部分资源偏向集中于该区域的某一块地区。
由于不同区域类型拥有不同的历史基础、不同的人口状况、不同的局限和不同的发展阶段,因此解决公共资源与人口矛盾的主要路径和方法不尽相同：
(一)核心区公共资源基础优越,人口变动稳定,因此适量增减和调整公共资源的数量和分布即可满足人口需求。同时核心区老年人口比重最高,公共养老资源十分紧张,又囿于土地资源紧张,用其他形式的养老服务替代机构养老或成为其解决方法。
(二)近郊区公共基础薄弱,人口增长速度迅速。因此近郊区一方面要观察人口总量、结构和分布的变动,另一方面要铺展和延伸公共资源的分布点。使公共资源的发展不偏离人口发展的方向,并适当引导人口合理分布。
(三)边缘区介于核心区和近郊区之间,发展层次各异。因此边缘区的发展道路也各不相同。对于那些公共资源基础雄厚,人口变动稳定的边缘区,可以采用核心区的发展模式,而对于公共资源基础脆弱,人口变动剧烈的边缘区,可以采用近郊区的发展模式。
With the proposal of "equalization", the equity of public service began to be taken seriously. The research about how to realize the equality of deployment of the public resources is really significant. The aim of the thesis is to research the relationship between different types of regional population variation and the deployment of social public resources. That is, how the population impact on the supply and the demand of social public resources and also the regional differences of such impact.
In this thesis, comparison is the primary research method. According to geographical location and demographic status, the city is divided into four kinds of types, i.e. core areas, edge areas (edge of the central district), suburban areas and outer suburbs. By researching the main contradiction between the population and public resources deployment of different regional types, this paper thesis aims to explore relationships between the supply and demand of public resources and population living in different areas. As to research process, first of all, take a general analysis of the demographic status and an analysis of the relationships between population size and public expenditure as a research background. And then, to explore the shortage and disadvantage of public resources deployment in different regions, Jingan District, Putuo District and Minhang District are selected as the typical representatives for core area, edge area and suburban area. And by analyzing their deployment of public health resources, education resources, retirement resources combined with population size, structure, and distribution, following conclusions is made:
A. There is an imbalance between the population size, and public resources in different kinds of areas. This phenomenon occurred mainly in suburban areas and outer suburbs, caused by the balance of resident population and household population. As the supply of public resources based on the number of household population, the shortage of public resources occurs in suburban areas and outer suburbs which has a great amount of resident population.
B. There is an imbalance between the age structure and public resources deployment in different kinds of areas. This phenomenon occurred mainly in the public education resources and public pension resources. The high school educational resources in core area appear idle while the childcare and primary school resources in suburban are in short supply. As well as the lack of resources for the old are all belonging to the mismatch of the age structure and public resources.
C. The imbalance also exists between population distribution and allocation of public resources. And the contradictions between population distribution and allocation of public resources are various in the different types of regions. In the core area, it mainly shows in the separation of population and resources caused by the inadequate planning for Public Service of the old residential; in the suburban areas, it mainly shows in the large number of high-quality resources concentrated in the densely populated areas while the public resources in remote areas are scarce; in edge areas, it mainly shows in that the local area's population distribution is inconsistent with the distribution of resources, some of the resources tend to focus on a piece of area in the region.
As that the historical background, population situations, limitations and development phases of different types of area varied, the major path or solution to the problem of public resources and the population also varies.
A. In core areas, the basis of public resources is excellent, and the population level is stable. and therefore adjust the amount of increase or decrease the number and distribution of public resources can meet the needs of the population. While the highest proportion of elderly population in the core area, public pension resources are tight, but also limited by the land resource constraints, use of other alternative forms of pension services for the aged or become their solution.
B. In suburban areas, public infrastructure is weak, and population growth is rapid. Therefore, In suburban it's necessary to observe the total population, structure and distribution of changes, while spreading and extending the distribution of public resources point. The development of public resources does not deviate from the direction of population development, and appropriate to guide rational distribution of population.
C. Edge areas are between the core areas and suburban areas, with different levels of development. Therefore, the development of edge areas roads vary. For those areas with sound public resources and stable changes of population, we can use the core area solution as a model. Yet for the areas with vulnerable basis of public resources and dramatic changes of population, suburban development mode should be considered.
本文采用的主要方法是比较法。按照地理位置与人口状况,将全市划分为核心区、边缘区、近郊区和远郊区四个不同区域类型。通过研究不同类型区域公共资源配置和人口之间的主要矛盾,探索不同的人口发展状况对公共资源供需的要求。在具体操作过程中,以各不同区域类型的人口概况以及人口规模与公共财政支出间的关系为分析背景,分别选取静安区(核心区)、普陀区(边缘区)、闵行区(近郊区)为典型代表,从三区人口规模、结构、分布出发,分析其在公共卫生资源、教育资源、养老资源的配置状况,找出其不足和短缺,以探索不同类型区域间公共资源供需的差别。
通过研究得出的主要结论有：
(一)不同类型区域的人口规模与公共资源配置存在不协调现象。这一现象主要出现在近郊区和远郊区。由常住人口和户籍人口的差额引起。由于公共资源的供给依据户籍人口数量进行配套,常住人口数量较多的近郊区和远郊区公共资源出现短缺。
(二)不同类型区域的人口年龄结构与公共资源配置存在不协调现象。这一现象主要出现在公共教育资源和公共养老资源上。核心区的高中教育资源出现闲置,近郊区的托幼和小学资源出现紧缺,以及各区域同时出现的养老资源短缺都属于人口年龄结构和公共资源不匹配现象。
(三)人口分布与公共资源配置均存在不协调的现象。人口分布与公共资源配置的主要矛盾在不同类型区域是不同的。核心区主要表现在旧式住宅由于公建配套规划不完善引起的人口与资源分离；近郊区主要表现在大量优质资源集中在人口稠密地区,偏远地区公共资源稀少；边缘区主要表现在局部地区的人口分布与资源分布不一致,部分资源偏向集中于该区域的某一块地区。
由于不同区域类型拥有不同的历史基础、不同的人口状况、不同的局限和不同的发展阶段,因此解决公共资源与人口矛盾的主要路径和方法不尽相同：
(一)核心区公共资源基础优越,人口变动稳定,因此适量增减和调整公共资源的数量和分布即可满足人口需求。同时核心区老年人口比重最高,公共养老资源十分紧张,又囿于土地资源紧张,用其他形式的养老服务替代机构养老或成为其解决方法。
(二)近郊区公共基础薄弱,人口增长速度迅速。因此近郊区一方面要观察人口总量、结构和分布的变动,另一方面要铺展和延伸公共资源的分布点。使公共资源的发展不偏离人口发展的方向,并适当引导人口合理分布。
(三)边缘区介于核心区和近郊区之间,发展层次各异。因此边缘区的发展道路也各不相同。对于那些公共资源基础雄厚,人口变动稳定的边缘区,可以采用核心区的发展模式,而对于公共资源基础脆弱,人口变动剧烈的边缘区,可以采用近郊区的发展模式。
With the proposal of "equalization", the equity of public service began to be taken seriously. The research about how to realize the equality of deployment of the public resources is really significant. The aim of the thesis is to research the relationship between different types of regional population variation and the deployment of social public resources. That is, how the population impact on the supply and the demand of social public resources and also the regional differences of such impact.
In this thesis, comparison is the primary research method. According to geographical location and demographic status, the city is divided into four kinds of types, i.e. core areas, edge areas (edge of the central district), suburban areas and outer suburbs. By researching the main contradiction between the population and public resources deployment of different regional types, this paper thesis aims to explore relationships between the supply and demand of public resources and population living in different areas. As to research process, first of all, take a general analysis of the demographic status and an analysis of the relationships between population size and public expenditure as a research background. And then, to explore the shortage and disadvantage of public resources deployment in different regions, Jingan District, Putuo District and Minhang District are selected as the typical representatives for core area, edge area and suburban area. And by analyzing their deployment of public health resources, education resources, retirement resources combined with population size, structure, and distribution, following conclusions is made:
A. There is an imbalance between the population size, and public resources in different kinds of areas. This phenomenon occurred mainly in suburban areas and outer suburbs, caused by the balance of resident population and household population. As the supply of public resources based on the number of household population, the shortage of public resources occurs in suburban areas and outer suburbs which has a great amount of resident population.
B. There is an imbalance between the age structure and public resources deployment in different kinds of areas. This phenomenon occurred mainly in the public education resources and public pension resources. The high school educational resources in core area appear idle while the childcare and primary school resources in suburban are in short supply. As well as the lack of resources for the old are all belonging to the mismatch of the age structure and public resources.
C. The imbalance also exists between population distribution and allocation of public resources. And the contradictions between population distribution and allocation of public resources are various in the different types of regions. In the core area, it mainly shows in the separation of population and resources caused by the inadequate planning for Public Service of the old residential; in the suburban areas, it mainly shows in the large number of high-quality resources concentrated in the densely populated areas while the public resources in remote areas are scarce; in edge areas, it mainly shows in that the local area's population distribution is inconsistent with the distribution of resources, some of the resources tend to focus on a piece of area in the region.
As that the historical background, population situations, limitations and development phases of different types of area varied, the major path or solution to the problem of public resources and the population also varies.
A. In core areas, the basis of public resources is excellent, and the population level is stable. and therefore adjust the amount of increase or decrease the number and distribution of public resources can meet the needs of the population. While the highest proportion of elderly population in the core area, public pension resources are tight, but also limited by the land resource constraints, use of other alternative forms of pension services for the aged or become their solution.
B. In suburban areas, public infrastructure is weak, and population growth is rapid. Therefore, In suburban it's necessary to observe the total population, structure and distribution of changes, while spreading and extending the distribution of public resources point. The development of public resources does not deviate from the direction of population development, and appropriate to guide rational distribution of population.
C. Edge areas are between the core areas and suburban areas, with different levels of development. Therefore, the development of edge areas roads vary. For those areas with sound public resources and stable changes of population, we can use the core area solution as a model. Yet for the areas with vulnerable basis of public resources and dramatic changes of population, suburban development mode should be considered.
引文
1孙珏,陶志梅.公共事业管理专业公共经济学[M].经济科学出版社中国铁道出版社,2008：98.
2张向达,赵建国,吕丹.公共经济学[M].东北财经大学出版社,：42-45.
3孙珏,陶志梅.公共事业管理专业公共经济学[M].经济科学出版社,中国铁道出版社,2008：89.
4刘蕾.基本公共服务均等化内涵研究述评[J],长安大学学报.Vol 11,2009,3
5曾世华.中山市公共服务和社会事业的完善研究[D].2006.
6李雪萍.城市社区公共产品供给研究[M].中国社会科学出版社,2008：160.
7牟放.借鉴公共支出增长理论调整我国财政支出政策[J].中央财经大学学报.1999(9).
8庄贇.论公共教育资源的合理配置[J].人力资源管理.2009.01 177-178
9黄永,张仲涛.教育资源公平配置问题研究综述[J].理论观察.2009年第五期,131-132
10上海卫生资源配置和利用研究报告http://fzzx.sh.gov.cn/listg.aspx?CID=1324
11罗娟、王泓、崔开昌.上海市医疗资源配置状况分析[J].中国卫生统计,2009年10月,466-470
12于宁.择校热引发的思考——解析上海义务教育资源的均衡配置.社会观察[J].23-25
13沈有禄.基础教育资源配置公平研究.教育学术月刊[J].2009.12
14朱航辰.我国医疗资源配置的现状及对策分析.管理研究[J].2009.2：32-33
15李健,宁越敏.1990年代以来上海人口空间变动与城市空间结构重构[J].城市规划学刊.2007(168)：20.
16赵广君,余思勤,袁象.上海公共支出与经济增长研究[J].经济论坛.2007,4.
17东方早报.76%亚健康,中年白领生理年龄超十岁[Z].2010.
18陆梓华,“多代屋”巧解托幼养老问题,[N],新民晚报,2010.5.24
[1]张善余.产业调整与上海城市人口再分布[J].华东师范大学学报.2001(4)：87.
[2]蒋达强.大城市人口郊区化与住宅空间分布的效应研究[J].人口与经济.2001(132)：10.
[3]孙俊英.公共物品多元供给主体中的政府角色再思考[J].法制与社会.2009,2：193.
[4]郑谦.公共性视角下的公共物品供给主体之辩——多元化的困境分析[J].兰州学刊.2007(8).
[5]季红.建立惠及全民的公共服务体系[J].经济导刊.2007：22.
[6]牟放.论界定我国公共支出范围的标准[J].中央财经大学学报.2001(8).
[7]刘文政.论社会事业发展的模式选择[J].内蒙古农业大学学报.2008,10(3)：246.
[8]王松妍,顾爱华.论我国公共产品供给主体的多元化[J].公共管理.2006,8(12)：21.
[9]徐和平.美国郊区化的经验与教训[J].开发研究.2007(130)：133.
[10]朱宝树.上海人口城市化和再分布发展态势[J].南方人口.2003,18(3)：23.
[11]詹永富.上海市的人口再分布与社区级商业资源配置[J].商情研究.1998(7).
[12]俞路,张善余,韩贵峰.上海市人口分布变动的空间特征分析[J].中国人口资源与环境.2006,16(5)：83.
[13]徐丽华,岳文泽.上海市人口分布格局动态变化的空间统计研究[J].长江流域资源与幻境.2009,18(3)：222.
[14]陈冠春王桂新.上海市物质资本存量估算1978-2007[J].上海经济研究.2009,8.
[15]朱宝树.上海外来流动人口的分布特点和问题思考[J].城乡建设.2003(11)：31.
[16]丁元竹,江汛清.我国社会公共服务供给不足原因分析[Z].2006.
[17]毛寿龙,李梅.有限政府的经济分析[M].上海三联书店,200：161.
[18]Yi C. Public Financial Expenditure——A Reflection of the livelihood improvement [J].中国对外贸易(英文版).2008(6)：18-19.
[19]Samuelson P A. The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure[J]. The review of economics and statistics. 1954,36:387-389.
[20]孙珏,陶志梅.公共事业管理专业公共经济学[M].经济科学出版社中国铁道出版社,2008：98.
[21]张向达,赵建国,吕丹.公共经济学[M].东北财经大学出版社,：42-45.
[22]孙珏,陶志梅.公共事业管理专业公共经济学[M].经济科学出版社,中国铁道出版社,2008：89.
[23]曾世华.中山市公共服务和社会事业的完善研究[D].2006.
[24]郑书耀.准公共物品私人供给研究[M].中国财政经济出版社,2008：37-41.
[25]李雪萍.城市社区公共产品供给研究[M].中国社会科学出版社,2008：160.
[26]周义程.集体物品供给的主体观的历史演变与最新进展[J].理论学刊.2005(3).
[27]周义程仲兵.双失灵：公共服务供给主体选择的困境分析[J].江海学刊.2009.
[28]范桂汕.经济增长阶段理论的演化[J].商业研究.2008(372).
[29]牟放.借鉴公共支出增长理论调整我国财政支出政策[J].中央财经大学学报.1999(9).
[30]余思勤赵广君袁象.上海公共支出与经济增长研究[J].经济论坛.2007,4.
[31]岳军.公共投资与公共产品有效供给研究[M].上海三联书店,2009：145.
[32]任保平钞小静.中国公共支出结构对经济增长的实证分析：1978-2004[J].经济评论.2007(5).
[33]孟庆艳,陈静,郭永昌.大城市公共交通设施布局与人口空间分布关系的探讨——以上海为例[J].西北人口.2005(5)：23.
[34]东方早报.76%亚健康,中年白领生理年龄超十岁[Z].2010.
[35]高向东.大城市人口分布变动与郊区化研究[M].复旦大学出版社,2003.
[36]孙群郎.郊区化对美国社会的影响[J].美国研究.1999(3).
[37]李健,宁越敏.1990年代以来上海人口空间变动与城市空间结构重构[J].城市规划学刊.2007(168)：20.
[38]陆梓华.多代屋”巧解托幼养老问题[N].新民晚报.2010.5.24
[39]于宁.择校热引发的思考——解析上海义务教育资源的均衡配置.社会观察[J].23-25
[40]沈有禄.基础教育资源配置公平研究.教育学术月刊[J].2009.12
[41]朱航辰.我国医疗资源配置的现状及对策分析.管理研究[J].2009.2：32-33
[42]刘蕾.基本公共服务均等化内涵研究述评[J],长安大学学报.vol 11,2009,3
2张向达,赵建国,吕丹.公共经济学[M].东北财经大学出版社,：42-45.
3孙珏,陶志梅.公共事业管理专业公共经济学[M].经济科学出版社,中国铁道出版社,2008：89.
4刘蕾.基本公共服务均等化内涵研究述评[J],长安大学学报.Vol 11,2009,3
5曾世华.中山市公共服务和社会事业的完善研究[D].2006.
6李雪萍.城市社区公共产品供给研究[M].中国社会科学出版社,2008：160.
7牟放.借鉴公共支出增长理论调整我国财政支出政策[J].中央财经大学学报.1999(9).
8庄贇.论公共教育资源的合理配置[J].人力资源管理.2009.01 177-178
9黄永,张仲涛.教育资源公平配置问题研究综述[J].理论观察.2009年第五期,131-132
10上海卫生资源配置和利用研究报告http://fzzx.sh.gov.cn/listg.aspx?CID=1324
11罗娟、王泓、崔开昌.上海市医疗资源配置状况分析[J].中国卫生统计,2009年10月,466-470
12于宁.择校热引发的思考——解析上海义务教育资源的均衡配置.社会观察[J].23-25
13沈有禄.基础教育资源配置公平研究.教育学术月刊[J].2009.12
14朱航辰.我国医疗资源配置的现状及对策分析.管理研究[J].2009.2：32-33
15李健,宁越敏.1990年代以来上海人口空间变动与城市空间结构重构[J].城市规划学刊.2007(168)：20.
16赵广君,余思勤,袁象.上海公共支出与经济增长研究[J].经济论坛.2007,4.
17东方早报.76%亚健康,中年白领生理年龄超十岁[Z].2010.
18陆梓华,“多代屋”巧解托幼养老问题,[N],新民晚报,2010.5.24
[1]张善余.产业调整与上海城市人口再分布[J].华东师范大学学报.2001(4)：87.
[2]蒋达强.大城市人口郊区化与住宅空间分布的效应研究[J].人口与经济.2001(132)：10.
[3]孙俊英.公共物品多元供给主体中的政府角色再思考[J].法制与社会.2009,2：193.
[4]郑谦.公共性视角下的公共物品供给主体之辩——多元化的困境分析[J].兰州学刊.2007(8).
[5]季红.建立惠及全民的公共服务体系[J].经济导刊.2007：22.
[6]牟放.论界定我国公共支出范围的标准[J].中央财经大学学报.2001(8).
[7]刘文政.论社会事业发展的模式选择[J].内蒙古农业大学学报.2008,10(3)：246.
[8]王松妍,顾爱华.论我国公共产品供给主体的多元化[J].公共管理.2006,8(12)：21.
[9]徐和平.美国郊区化的经验与教训[J].开发研究.2007(130)：133.
[10]朱宝树.上海人口城市化和再分布发展态势[J].南方人口.2003,18(3)：23.
[11]詹永富.上海市的人口再分布与社区级商业资源配置[J].商情研究.1998(7).
[12]俞路,张善余,韩贵峰.上海市人口分布变动的空间特征分析[J].中国人口资源与环境.2006,16(5)：83.
[13]徐丽华,岳文泽.上海市人口分布格局动态变化的空间统计研究[J].长江流域资源与幻境.2009,18(3)：222.
[14]陈冠春王桂新.上海市物质资本存量估算1978-2007[J].上海经济研究.2009,8.
[15]朱宝树.上海外来流动人口的分布特点和问题思考[J].城乡建设.2003(11)：31.
[16]丁元竹,江汛清.我国社会公共服务供给不足原因分析[Z].2006.
[17]毛寿龙,李梅.有限政府的经济分析[M].上海三联书店,200：161.
[18]Yi C. Public Financial Expenditure——A Reflection of the livelihood improvement [J].中国对外贸易(英文版).2008(6)：18-19.
[19]Samuelson P A. The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure[J]. The review of economics and statistics. 1954,36:387-389.
[20]孙珏,陶志梅.公共事业管理专业公共经济学[M].经济科学出版社中国铁道出版社,2008：98.
[21]张向达,赵建国,吕丹.公共经济学[M].东北财经大学出版社,：42-45.
[22]孙珏,陶志梅.公共事业管理专业公共经济学[M].经济科学出版社,中国铁道出版社,2008：89.
[23]曾世华.中山市公共服务和社会事业的完善研究[D].2006.
[24]郑书耀.准公共物品私人供给研究[M].中国财政经济出版社,2008：37-41.
[25]李雪萍.城市社区公共产品供给研究[M].中国社会科学出版社,2008：160.
[26]周义程.集体物品供给的主体观的历史演变与最新进展[J].理论学刊.2005(3).
[27]周义程仲兵.双失灵：公共服务供给主体选择的困境分析[J].江海学刊.2009.
[28]范桂汕.经济增长阶段理论的演化[J].商业研究.2008(372).
[29]牟放.借鉴公共支出增长理论调整我国财政支出政策[J].中央财经大学学报.1999(9).
[30]余思勤赵广君袁象.上海公共支出与经济增长研究[J].经济论坛.2007,4.
[31]岳军.公共投资与公共产品有效供给研究[M].上海三联书店,2009：145.
[32]任保平钞小静.中国公共支出结构对经济增长的实证分析：1978-2004[J].经济评论.2007(5).
[33]孟庆艳,陈静,郭永昌.大城市公共交通设施布局与人口空间分布关系的探讨——以上海为例[J].西北人口.2005(5)：23.
[34]东方早报.76%亚健康,中年白领生理年龄超十岁[Z].2010.
[35]高向东.大城市人口分布变动与郊区化研究[M].复旦大学出版社,2003.
[36]孙群郎.郊区化对美国社会的影响[J].美国研究.1999(3).
[37]李健,宁越敏.1990年代以来上海人口空间变动与城市空间结构重构[J].城市规划学刊.2007(168)：20.
[38]陆梓华.多代屋”巧解托幼养老问题[N].新民晚报.2010.5.24
[39]于宁.择校热引发的思考——解析上海义务教育资源的均衡配置.社会观察[J].23-25
[40]沈有禄.基础教育资源配置公平研究.教育学术月刊[J].2009.12
[41]朱航辰.我国医疗资源配置的现状及对策分析.管理研究[J].2009.2：32-33
[42]刘蕾.基本公共服务均等化内涵研究述评[J],长安大学学报.vol 11,2009,3