社会保障能够替代土地保障吗——基于新农保对土地租出意愿租金的影响研究
|
摘要
基于三轮(2011年、2013年和2015年)的全国微观追踪调查数据(CHARLS),本文通过分析新农保的实施对农户土地流转行为和意愿租金的影响,来考察社会保障是否存在着对土地保障的替代效应,并进一步基于农户对土地的依赖程度来分析替代效应的异质型特征。结果表明,村庄实施新农保促使村庄内土地依赖程度超过平均水平的农户转出土地的意愿租金下降18.0%;促使村庄内处于土地依赖程度前30%的农户转出土地的意愿租金下降14.9%;促使村庄内处于土地依赖程度后30%的农户转出土地的意愿租金上升17.3%。总的来说,社会保障对于土地保障的替代效应主要作用于高土地依赖型的农户。
Using 2011, 2013 and 2015 CHARLS data, this paper analyzes whether social security can substitute land security through estimating the effect of new rural pension program on the probability of farmland transfer and the rental price. We further analyze the heterogeneous characteristics based on the degrees of dependence on land for households. We use agricultural productivity to measure the dependence degrees on land. Our results show that new rural pension program have reduced the willing prices of farmland that will transfer out by 18.0 percentage points for the farmers with high agricultural productivity ranking top 50 percent and by 14.9% percentage points for the farmers ranking top 30 percent. But the willing prices of farmland transferring out will increase significantly by 17.3% for the farmers with agricultural productivity ranking bottom 30 percent. Our results confirm the existence of social pension function of land which can be substituted by NRPP to some extent, but we should notice that this substitution effect comes mainly from the farmers with high dependence degree on land.
Using 2011, 2013 and 2015 CHARLS data, this paper analyzes whether social security can substitute land security through estimating the effect of new rural pension program on the probability of farmland transfer and the rental price. We further analyze the heterogeneous characteristics based on the degrees of dependence on land for households. We use agricultural productivity to measure the dependence degrees on land. Our results show that new rural pension program have reduced the willing prices of farmland that will transfer out by 18.0 percentage points for the farmers with high agricultural productivity ranking top 50 percent and by 14.9% percentage points for the farmers ranking top 30 percent. But the willing prices of farmland transferring out will increase significantly by 17.3% for the farmers with agricultural productivity ranking bottom 30 percent. Our results confirm the existence of social pension function of land which can be substituted by NRPP to some extent, but we should notice that this substitution effect comes mainly from the farmers with high dependence degree on land.
引文
北京大学国家发展研究院综合课题组,2010:《还权赋能:奠定长期发展的可靠基础》,北京:北京大学出版社。
贺振华,2006:《农户兼业及其对农村农地流转的影响》,《上海财经大学学报》第4期。
金松青、Klaus Deininger,2004:《中国农村农地租赁市场的发展及其在农地使用公平性和效率性上的含义》,《经济学(季刊)》第3期。
黎霆、赵阳、辛贤,2009:《当前农地流转的基本特征及影响因素分析》,《中国农村经济》第10期。
廖洪乐、习银生、张照新,2003:《中国农村农地承包制度研究》,北京:中国财政经济出版社。
罗必良,2014:《农地流转的市场逻辑——“产权强度—禀赋效应—交易装置”的分析线索及案例研究》,《南方经济》第5期。
马贤磊、仇童伟、钱忠好,2015:《农地产权安全性与农地流转市场的农户参与——基于江苏、湖北、广西、黑龙江四省调查数据的实证分析》,《中国农村经济》第2期。
文贯中,2008:《市场畸形发育、社会冲突与现行的土地制度》,《经济社会体制比较》第2期。
徐志刚、宁可、钟甫宁、纪月清,2018:《新农保与农地转出:制度性养老能够替代土地养老吗?》,《管理世界》第5期。
闫小欢、霍学喜,2013:《农民就业、农村社会保障和土地流转——基于河南省479个农户调查的分析》,《农业技术经济》第7期。
姚洋,2000:《中国农地制度:一个分析框架》,《中国社会科学》第2期。
叶剑平、蒋妍,2006:《中国农村农地流转市场的调查研究》,《中国农村观察》第4期。
张川川、John Giles、赵耀辉,2015:《新型农村社会养老保险政策效果评估——收入、贫困、消费、主观福利和劳动供给》,《经济学(季刊)》第1期。
张红宇,2012:《现代农业与适度规模经营》,《农村经济》第5期。
张锦华、刘进、许庆,2016:《新型农村合作医疗制度、土地流转与农地滞留》,《管理世界》第1期。
周其仁,2013:《也谈“土地的社会保障功能”》,《中国乡村发现》第4期。
Ardington,C.,A.Case,and V.Hosegood,2009,“Labor Supply Responses to Large Social Transfers:Longitudinal Evidence from South Africa”,American Economic Journal:Applied Economics,1(1):22-48.
Benjamin,D.,and L.Brandt,1997,“Land,Factor Markets,and Inequality in Rural China:Historical Evidence”,Explorations in Economic History,34(4):460-494.
Bertrand,M.,S.Mullainathan,and D.Miller,2003,“Public Policy and Extended Families:Evidence from Pensions in South Africa”,World Bank Economic Review,17(1):27-50.
Chang,L.,L.Langelett,and W.Waugh,2011,“Health,Health Insurance,and Decision to Exit from Farming”,Journal of Family and Economic Issues,32(2):356-372.
Feng,S.,N.Heerink,R.Ruben,and F.Qu,2010,“Land Rental Market,Off-farm Employment and Agricultural Production in Southeast China:A Plot-level Case Study”,China Economic Review,21(4):598-606.
Filho,I.,2008,“Old-age Benefits and Retirement Decisions of Rural Elderly in Brazil”,Journal of Development Economics,86(1):129-146.
Jin,S.,and K.Deininger,2009,“Land Rental Markets in the Process of Rural Structural Transformation:Productivity and Equity Impacts from China”,Journal of Comparative Economics,37(4):629-646.
Juarez,L.,2009,“Crowding out of Private Support to the Elderly:Evidence from a Demogrant in Mexico”,Journal of Public Economics,93(3):454-463.
Kung,J.,2002,“Off-farm Labor Markets and the Emergence of Land Rental Markets in Rural China”,Journal of Comparative Economics,30(2):395-414.
Kung,J.,and Y.Bai,2011,“Induced Institutional Change or Transaction Costs?The Economic Logic of Land Reallocations in Chinese Agriculture”,Journal of Development Studies,47(10):1510-1528.
Li,Q.,Y.F.Wang,and Y.H.Zhao,2018,“The Impact of China's New Pension Program on Elderly Labor,Grandchild Care,and Old-age Support”,Feminist Economics,24(2):265-287.
Posel,D.,J.A.Fairburn,and F.Lund,2006,“Labour Migration and Households:A Reconsideration of the Effects of the Social Pension on Labour Supply in South Africa”,Economic Modelling,23(5):836-853.
Yao,Y.,2000,“The Development of Land Lease Market in Rural China”,Land Economics,76(2):48-55.
(1)值得注意的是,笔者在这里强调放弃土地的机会成本,所以农地高度依赖型农户不只是老龄农户。如有些种田能手也属于这一范围,这也是笔者下文使用农业生产能力而不是直接用户主年龄的原因。
(2)张锦华等(2016)利用2011年CHARLS数据考察了农户是否参与新农合对于土地流转的影响。由于未能克服农户自主选择参加新农合的内生性,笔者对他们的研究结果持谨慎态度。
(3)在CHARLS数据中,实际上笔者无法确定谁是户主,本文采用家庭成员编码是1的个人作为户主。
(4)村庄农户平均年收入的计算如下:首先计算家庭每年总收入,家庭总收入的计算包含农户家庭收入、受访者和配偶年收入以及家庭其他成员年收入;然后加总样本内所有家庭每年总收入,再除以社区样本户数,就可以得到村庄农户平均年收入。
(5)村庄参与新农保的定义沿用了Li et al.(2018)的方法。本文尝试着按照其他的门槛值进行划分,估计结果仍然稳健。
(6)本文进一步检查这个意愿租金是否真正表达的是农户自身的意愿,而不是对村庄整体水平的判断,笔者发现土地意愿租金的变异性很大。
(7)只有在2013年,实施新农保的村庄土地租出的概率显著低于未实施的村庄。
贺振华,2006:《农户兼业及其对农村农地流转的影响》,《上海财经大学学报》第4期。
金松青、Klaus Deininger,2004:《中国农村农地租赁市场的发展及其在农地使用公平性和效率性上的含义》,《经济学(季刊)》第3期。
黎霆、赵阳、辛贤,2009:《当前农地流转的基本特征及影响因素分析》,《中国农村经济》第10期。
廖洪乐、习银生、张照新,2003:《中国农村农地承包制度研究》,北京:中国财政经济出版社。
罗必良,2014:《农地流转的市场逻辑——“产权强度—禀赋效应—交易装置”的分析线索及案例研究》,《南方经济》第5期。
马贤磊、仇童伟、钱忠好,2015:《农地产权安全性与农地流转市场的农户参与——基于江苏、湖北、广西、黑龙江四省调查数据的实证分析》,《中国农村经济》第2期。
文贯中,2008:《市场畸形发育、社会冲突与现行的土地制度》,《经济社会体制比较》第2期。
徐志刚、宁可、钟甫宁、纪月清,2018:《新农保与农地转出:制度性养老能够替代土地养老吗?》,《管理世界》第5期。
闫小欢、霍学喜,2013:《农民就业、农村社会保障和土地流转——基于河南省479个农户调查的分析》,《农业技术经济》第7期。
姚洋,2000:《中国农地制度:一个分析框架》,《中国社会科学》第2期。
叶剑平、蒋妍,2006:《中国农村农地流转市场的调查研究》,《中国农村观察》第4期。
张川川、John Giles、赵耀辉,2015:《新型农村社会养老保险政策效果评估——收入、贫困、消费、主观福利和劳动供给》,《经济学(季刊)》第1期。
张红宇,2012:《现代农业与适度规模经营》,《农村经济》第5期。
张锦华、刘进、许庆,2016:《新型农村合作医疗制度、土地流转与农地滞留》,《管理世界》第1期。
周其仁,2013:《也谈“土地的社会保障功能”》,《中国乡村发现》第4期。
Ardington,C.,A.Case,and V.Hosegood,2009,“Labor Supply Responses to Large Social Transfers:Longitudinal Evidence from South Africa”,American Economic Journal:Applied Economics,1(1):22-48.
Benjamin,D.,and L.Brandt,1997,“Land,Factor Markets,and Inequality in Rural China:Historical Evidence”,Explorations in Economic History,34(4):460-494.
Bertrand,M.,S.Mullainathan,and D.Miller,2003,“Public Policy and Extended Families:Evidence from Pensions in South Africa”,World Bank Economic Review,17(1):27-50.
Chang,L.,L.Langelett,and W.Waugh,2011,“Health,Health Insurance,and Decision to Exit from Farming”,Journal of Family and Economic Issues,32(2):356-372.
Feng,S.,N.Heerink,R.Ruben,and F.Qu,2010,“Land Rental Market,Off-farm Employment and Agricultural Production in Southeast China:A Plot-level Case Study”,China Economic Review,21(4):598-606.
Filho,I.,2008,“Old-age Benefits and Retirement Decisions of Rural Elderly in Brazil”,Journal of Development Economics,86(1):129-146.
Jin,S.,and K.Deininger,2009,“Land Rental Markets in the Process of Rural Structural Transformation:Productivity and Equity Impacts from China”,Journal of Comparative Economics,37(4):629-646.
Juarez,L.,2009,“Crowding out of Private Support to the Elderly:Evidence from a Demogrant in Mexico”,Journal of Public Economics,93(3):454-463.
Kung,J.,2002,“Off-farm Labor Markets and the Emergence of Land Rental Markets in Rural China”,Journal of Comparative Economics,30(2):395-414.
Kung,J.,and Y.Bai,2011,“Induced Institutional Change or Transaction Costs?The Economic Logic of Land Reallocations in Chinese Agriculture”,Journal of Development Studies,47(10):1510-1528.
Li,Q.,Y.F.Wang,and Y.H.Zhao,2018,“The Impact of China's New Pension Program on Elderly Labor,Grandchild Care,and Old-age Support”,Feminist Economics,24(2):265-287.
Posel,D.,J.A.Fairburn,and F.Lund,2006,“Labour Migration and Households:A Reconsideration of the Effects of the Social Pension on Labour Supply in South Africa”,Economic Modelling,23(5):836-853.
Yao,Y.,2000,“The Development of Land Lease Market in Rural China”,Land Economics,76(2):48-55.
(1)值得注意的是,笔者在这里强调放弃土地的机会成本,所以农地高度依赖型农户不只是老龄农户。如有些种田能手也属于这一范围,这也是笔者下文使用农业生产能力而不是直接用户主年龄的原因。
(2)张锦华等(2016)利用2011年CHARLS数据考察了农户是否参与新农合对于土地流转的影响。由于未能克服农户自主选择参加新农合的内生性,笔者对他们的研究结果持谨慎态度。
(3)在CHARLS数据中,实际上笔者无法确定谁是户主,本文采用家庭成员编码是1的个人作为户主。
(4)村庄农户平均年收入的计算如下:首先计算家庭每年总收入,家庭总收入的计算包含农户家庭收入、受访者和配偶年收入以及家庭其他成员年收入;然后加总样本内所有家庭每年总收入,再除以社区样本户数,就可以得到村庄农户平均年收入。
(5)村庄参与新农保的定义沿用了Li et al.(2018)的方法。本文尝试着按照其他的门槛值进行划分,估计结果仍然稳健。
(6)本文进一步检查这个意愿租金是否真正表达的是农户自身的意愿,而不是对村庄整体水平的判断,笔者发现土地意愿租金的变异性很大。
(7)只有在2013年,实施新农保的村庄土地租出的概率显著低于未实施的村庄。