摘要
教育是一国的立国之本,强国之路,教育的供给关系到一个国家人民的素质,经济的繁荣,国力的强大。根据萨缪尔森对公共产品的定义,教育是一种准公共品,其中基础教育具有更强的公共品属性,而高等教育具有更强的私人产品属性。中国的基础教育和高等教育在供给中存在的问题也是不同的。因此研究教育的供给问题就必须把教育分为基础教育和高等教育两部分区别对待。
关于如何处理公平和效率的关系,福利经济学大致有三种观点：效率优先、公平优先、公平与效率兼顾。效率优先论认为自由竞争的市场机制能够产生效率,而强求平等会给社会带来福利损失。而且,在市场机制中,个人得到的分配是根据个人的努力程度而来的,因此这种分配方式最公平。公平优先论认为政府应当干预收入分配,减少贫富差距,使其收入均等化。因为根据边际效用递减法则,随着收入的增加,收入带来的边际效用递减。在收入增加量相同的情况下,增加的收入给富人带来的效用较低,而给穷人带来的效用较高。效率与公平兼顾论认为追求效率就要以牺牲公平为代价,追求公平就需要牺牲效率；既不应该公平优先,也不应该效率优先,而是要两者兼顾。本文认为,教育的公平和效率都很重要,但在基础教育阶段应当更加侧重公平,在高等教育阶段应当更加侧重效率。
基础教育是公共品属性较强的准公共品,具有很强的正外部性,因此在供给时应当更加侧重公平。福利经济学认为,社会福利是个人福利的函数。由于边际效用递减,因此更公平的资源配置会提高整个社会的福利。中国基础教育中存在的主要问题是教育供给不足,供给不均衡。目前中国在基础教育阶段实行九年制义务教育,以公立学校为主,私立学校为辅。基础教育经费主要由地方政府提供,中央投入相对较少。由于各地区经济发展状况差异较大,各地政府对教育的投入能力也有很大差异。不但省际基础教育支出差异很大,省内差异也很大。这就造成了中国在基础教育阶段教育供给的地区间差异较大、各级政府的教育经费投入不均衡、基础教育经费投入不足等问题。为了解决基础教育中存在的经费不足问题,国家先后出台了一系列政策并取得了一定成效,但由于一些地方政府资金不足而难以保证实施。为了在全国范围内更加公平地配置教育资源,应当由国家根据各地的经济发展状况分配教育经费,加大对贫困地区的资金投入。为了提高基础教育的质量和供给的效率,弗里德曼提出了教育券的思想。在基础教育阶段使用教育券来提高供给的效率需要明确当地亟需解决的问题,根据具体情况对教育券加以改进变通,不能生搬硬套。私立学校是公立学校的有益补充,为学生和家长带来了更多的选择空间,对于提高基础教育的效率也大有裨益。
高等教育是私人产品属性较强的准公共品,不但能为社会带来收益,更能够为个人带来如工资收入等更大收益,因此高等教育的成本应当由个人和政府共同分担。中国高等院校的办学经费曾一度完全由国家财政负担,甚至政府还出资补贴学生的生活开支,现在已逐步转为政府和个人共同分担。由于学费上涨,一些学生无力承担,造成高等教育的不公平。政府和社会各界需对这些学生提供学生贷款、奖学金、助学金等支持,间接降低高等教育的供给价格,使贫困学生获得公平的机会接受高等教育。由于高等院校的专业设置和社会需求脱节,近年来出现了大学生就业难的问题。为此应提高高等教育的供给效率,即根据社会对人才的需求设置学科专业,使高等教育资源得到更有效率的配置。国外许多名校都是私立大学,虽然学费比公立大学高很多,但由于教学质量很高受到广泛的认可,值得中国借鉴。
本文的研究目的在于根据中国教育供给中存在的各种问题和不足,找出适合中国国情的教育供给模式。
本文试图回答：基础教育和高等教育的供给为何对公平和效率有不同的侧重；中国的基础教育如何解决供给不足和供给不均衡的问题;基础教育如何提高资源利用效率的问题；高等教育实行成本分担制度之后如何减轻学生的经济负担；如何提高高等教育供给效率；如何拓宽高等教育筹资渠道,增加高等教育经费；为何要发展私立学校等问题。
本文主要分为六个部分。首先在介绍本文的研究意义、选题依据的基础上,对中国教育目前存在的不足之处进行了概述。同时还对本文的研究对象和研究范围进行了界定,明确了一些主要概念的定义。这一部分还指出了本文的前提假定和研究方法,以及创新与不足。
然后是理论回顾和文献综述。这一部分回顾并介绍了国内外和教育供给相关的理论研究成果以及当前研究的现状,对公共产品理论、社会福利经济学、教育经济学等进行了简述和评论,重点介绍了公共产品理论和福利经济学,并结合教育的供给问题进行了初步的分析,为后面章节的进一步深入分析提供了理论基础。
第三部分是中国教育供给的发展历史与现状。这一部分首先列出了分析教育经费的几个指标,然后分别对中国基础教育和高等教育的供给状况进行了阐述和分析,并指出了当前中国教育供给中的不足之处。中国基础教育供给的主要问题是教育供给不足,地区间、城乡间、性别间教育供给不平衡。中国高等教育供给的主要问题是经费不足,缺乏办学特色,教学质量不高,不能满足社会对人才培养的需求。
第四部分是国外教育供给的经验及对中国的启示。这一部分对一些国家教育供给的经验进行了阐述,并指出其中值得中国借鉴的经验。
第五部分对教育成本、教育资金和教育筹资进行了分析,指出为了增加教育供给的绝对量需要通过多种方式筹集教育资金,并提出教育筹资的多种方式。
第六部分是中国教育供给和筹资方式的创新建议。针对基础教育供给不均衡的问题,提出应当将“县管教育”的形式转变为“中央拨款,地方管理”的形式,以保障基础教育供给的公平。根据福利经济学原理,基础教育需要保证公平,才能实现社会福利最大化。基础教育的效率问题主要通过发展私立学校和利用教育券来实行。对于高等教育经费不足和供求脱节的问题,本文根据供求理论分析了和高等教育相关的两组供求关系,并分析了它们之间的联系,指出高等教育对人才的培养需要以社会对人才的需求为导向,这样才能保证培养出来的人才能够被社会所需要,也才不会浪费有限的教育资源。本文还阐述了高等教育成本分担制度下,可以采取哪些方式减轻学生的经济负担,促进公平。最后,本文提出,一个国家要发展经济就必须发展教育,而发展教育必须根据该国当时的经济发展需要,不能盲目超前。中国各地经济发展状况不均衡,对教育的需求也不同,因而在不同地区发展教育的侧重点也应有所不同。
Education is the foundation of a country, a road to a better future. Education input concerns the quality of a population, the prosperity of an economy and the status of a nation. According to the definition by Samulson, education is a kind of quasi-public goods, with elementary education having more traits of public goods and higher education having more traits of private goods. In China, there are different problems in the input of elementary education and that of higher education. Therefore, the study on the input of education must be done separately.
On the relation between equity and efficiency, there are generally three viewpoints, i.e., Priority of Efficiency, Priority of Equity, and Balance between Equity and Efficiency. Proponents of Efficiency Priority believe that a free market mechanism with competition leads to efficiency, while too much emphasis on equity leads to welfare loss for the society. In a market economy, social wealth is distributed according to each individual's endeavor, thus is the fairest allocation method. On the other hand, proponents of Equity Priority believe that the government should interfere with the allocation of income, reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, and equalize their income. The reason lies in that according to the law of diminishing marginal utility, as the income increases, the marginal utility reduces. The same amount of income return brings less utility to the rich, and more to the poor. Still, proponents of Balance between Equity and Efficiency believe that efficiency comes at the cost of equity, and equity comes at the cost of efficiency; therefore, none should be precede the other, but both should be emphasized. This paper takes the view that both equity and efficiency are of great importance, but elementary education should focus more on equity, while higher education should focus more on efficiency.
Elementary education is more of public goods, with strong externality, therefore should focus more on equity in its input. According to Welfare Economics, social welfare is the function of individual welfare, an equal allocation of resources can increase social welfare due to the law of diminishing returns of marginal utility. The main problem in China's elementary education lies in the inadequacy and inequity of input. China is offering a nine-year compulsory elementary education, with public schools in a dominant position and private schools providing an alternative. Fund for elementary education mainly comes from local government, with only a small portion from the central government. Since there are great differences in economic development in different regions of China, the education input from each local government differs greatly. Not only the inter-province education input differs greatly, but also the intra-province input. This explains the great differences in the elementary education input between China's different regions, the imbalance of education input from each level of government, and the lack of elementary educational input. In order to deal with the problem of inadequate fund in elementary education, China has applied a series of policies and made some progress, but some local governments are too lack of funds to enforce these policies. In order to achieve a more equal allocation of education resources, it should be the state government that increases the input to poor regions according to the economic development of different regions. In order to increase the quality of elementary education and the efficiency of input, Friedman brought forth the idea of school voucher. The application of school voucher in elementary education to increase the efficiency of its input should depend on the main problems of that specific region, and the voucher should be adjusted to the specific situations of the region. Private schools, a valuable complement to public schools, offer another choice for students and their parents, and increase the efficiency of elementary education.
Higher education is more of a private good, which not only provides benefits for the society, but also brings more returns, such as income, to individuals, therefore the cost of higher education should be shared by individuals and the government. The fund for higher education in China was once offered solely by the state government, and the government even offered allowances for the students to cover some of their living expenses. Now the government and individuals are sharing the higher education cost. Because the increased tuition has become too heavy a burden to some students, students with effective demand may not have equal opportunity to receive higher education. In recent years, it has become more difficult for college graduates to find a satisfying job. To deal with this problem, the input efficiency for higher education must be improved, i.e., to offer subjects and majors according to the demand of the labor market, thus resulting in a more efficient allocation of higher education resources. Many famous universities abroad are private universities. Although their tuition is much higher than that in public schools, they are still well accepted by the public because they offer high quality education. This can be good experience for China to learn from.
The purpose of this dissertation is to identify the problems in education input in China, and work out an education input mode to best suit China's situation.
This dissertation makes an effort to answer: why elementary education and higher education should have different focus when concerned with equity and efficiency; how to solve the problems of inadequacy and imbalance of elementary education input; how to increase the efficiency of education resources in elementary education; whether school voucher is suitable for China; how to reduce the financial burden for students after the application of cost sharing in higher education; how to increase efficiency of higher education input; how to increase the funding sources to increase the fund for higher education; how to develop private schools and universities, etc..
This dissertation contains 6 parts and a conclusion. First it generalizes the problems in China's education on the basis of introducing the importance and reason for the choice of this topic. This part also defines the objectives and study scope of this dissertation, as well as some important terms. This part also points out the premises and study method used in this dissertation, as well as some breakthroughs and imperfections.
The next part is a summary of related theories and literature review. This part reviews the related theories and the present researches, mainly on public goods theories and social welfare economics, and briefly analyzes the problem of education input to build a foundation for further analysis in the following chapters.
The third part is the development and current situation of China's education input. This part first analyzed several index of education funds, elaborates and analyses the input of elementary education and higher education, and points out the problems in China's education input. The main problems in elementary education are lack of education input and input imbalance between different regions, urban areas and rural areas, male and female. The main problems of higher education are lack of funds, lack of specialty, low education quality, which cannot meet the demand of the labor market in the society.
The fourth part is the experience China can learn from other countries. This part elaborates the education input experience of some other countries, and points out the experience for China to earn from.
The fifth part analyses the concepts of education cost, education fund, and education fund-raising, points out that in order to increase the total amount of education supply, there is a need to raise funds through various ways, and then suggests what they are.
The sixth part is the renovated suggestions for China's education input and fundraising. This part first introduces and analyzes a few basic concepts of education, then elaborates the role and function of government in education input. Next, this dissertation gives a detailed introduction of the multiple fundraising method in education, and points out that in order to ensure the adequacy of education fund, other fundraising channels should also be applied besides the government funding. To solve the problem of lack of funds and imbalance of input in elementary education, this dissertation suggests that all methods possible should be applied to raise funds, meanwhile, the "county-based education input mechanism" should be changed to "fund from central government, management from local government mechanism" to ensure the equal opportunity in elementary education. According to the principles in welfare economics, only when equity is realized in elementary education, can social welfare be maximized. Elementary education can realize its efficiency by developing private schools as well as school vouchers. As to the problem of insufficient education funds in higher education and the loose link between supply and demand, this dissertation analyzes two sets of demand and supply related to higher education and analyzes their relations, pointing out that higher education must be oriented with the demand in labor market, so that the graduates are needed by the society and the limited education resources are allocated efficiently. This dissertation also elaborates the many sources for fundraising in higher education, and the ways to lessen students'financial burden, thus realizing equity. In the end, the dissertation points out that a country must develop its education according to its economic situation, and should not surpass the period. In China, the demand for education differs according to the different economic situations of different regions; therefore the focus of education development in different regions should also differ.
引文
[1].白彦峰.教育税与中国教育经费的财政投入问题研究[J].经济与管理,2007(10)：69-73.
[2].庇古.福利经济学[M].第1版.北京：华夏出版社.2007.567-570.
[3].蔡增正.英语国家教育经济学的历史沿革[J].教育与经济,2001(2)：47-53.
[4].曹惠容.试论新加坡教育投资政策从宏观到微观层面的特点[J].教育财会研究,2008(2)：45-49.
[5].曹静韬、冯红梅.投资主体多元化：我国教育发展的必然趋势[J].北京城市学院学报,2008(4)：22-26.
[6].岑建.试论教育管理实践中的交易成本[J].技术经济与管理研究2009(1)：79-81.
[7].曾明、张光.农村教育支出的财政转移支付效应研究——以浙江、江西为例[J].教育与经济,2009(3)：51-56.
[8].曾以禹、钱克明.“集中资源办学”政策对贵州省边远少数民族贫困地区农村基础教育影响的调查[J].教育与经济,2005(1)：15-18.
[9].查显友、丁守海.对我国高等教育外部性的实证分析[J].经济理论与经济管理,2006(1)：41-45.
[10].查显友.中国高校融资结构优化研究[M].第1版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2009.108-128.
[11].陈华亭.中国教育筹资问题研究[M].第1版.北京：中国财政经济出版社,2006.114-128.
[12].陈梅.特许学校比教育券受欢迎[J].教育发展研究,2006(9)：87.
[13].陈潭、罗新云.公共教育资源配置失衡及其政策补给——以湘南H区2005年的相关教育数据为分析样本[J].公共管理学报,2008(4)：95-105.
[14].程浩、管磊.对公共产品理论的认识[J].河北经贸大学学报,2002,(6)：10-17.
[15].程红艳.义务教育免费政策和基础教育均衡发展[J].教育与经济,2009(2)：16-20.
[16].崔盛.县级财政中教育所占比例的估计[J].教育与经济,2007(3)：46-52.
[17].厄本、瓦格纳.[M].第3版.北京：中国人民大学出版社.2009.479-483.
[18].范先佐.要努力扩大优质教育的供给[J].中国教育学刊,2005(11)：6-7.
[19].费菊瑛.改善义务教育投融资体制研究[M].第1版.广州：中山大学出版社,2007.17-29.
[20].古翠凤、周劲波.基础教育供给的历史变迁[J].内蒙古社会科学,2008(7)：139-144.
[21].郭春发.教育选择权与教育公平[J].青海师专学报(教育科学),2006,(1)：78-81.
[22].郭瑞萍.我国农村公共产品供给制度研究[D].西北农林科技大学2005.115-122.
[23].亨利·M·莱文.义务教育后的受教育权利：资助终身学习的教育券制度[J].北京大学教育评论,2003(4)：54-59.
[24].胡咏梅、杜育红.中国西部农村小学资源配置效率评估[J].教育与经济2008(1)：1-6.
[25].湖源源、胡青.教育券的教育公平探讨[J].江西教育学院学报(社会科学),2006(10)：50-52.
[26].黄丹、王智武.高等教育实行教育券制度的可行性分析[J].黑龙江高教研究,2006(3)：16-19.
[27].贾琳琳.应用经济学的供求理论分析我国教育需求与教育供给的矛盾及解决办法[J].2005(5)：48-49.
[28].金莲.中国贫困地区的教育与发展[M].第1版.北京：中国财政经济出版社,2009.177-182.
[29].金子元久(日).教育中的市场机制[J].教育与经济,2003(2)：1-4.
[30].靳希斌.教育经济学[M].第3版.北京：人民教育出版社,2008.1-100.
[31].坎贝尔·R·麦克南.当代劳动经济学[M].北京：人民邮电出版社,2006.74-85.
[32].赖德胜、李亚琪.论民办教育的改革效应[J].河北学刊,2002(6)：61-65.
[33].乐志强、高鹏.轮高等教育外部性内在化的政府补贴措施[J].高教探索2007(5)：57-59.
[34].雷家骕、冯婉玲.知识经济学导论[M].第1版.北京：清华大学出版社,2001.250-273.
[35].李江、关立新.高等教育供给：基于经济学视角的分析[J].黑龙江高教研究,2009(4)：14-17.
[36].李美玲.教育供给在市场与政府之间——基于公共选择理论的分析[J].现代企业教育,2009(7)：172-173.
[37].李鹏飞、唐久芳、胡义芳.教育税与财政性教育资金投入不足问题的研究[J]. 生产力研究,2009(9)：50-51.
[38].梁佩新.中美两国教育权制度比较分析[J].中国科技信息,2005(23)：150.
[39].刘复兴.政府的基本教育责任：供给“公平”的教育政策[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2008(4)：5-10.
[40].刘乐山.深化农村义务教育经费保障机制改革与居民收入差距调节[J].教育与经济,2006(2)：39-42.
[41].刘乐山.中央和省级财政分摊农村义务教育经费的经济学思考[J],教育与经济,2004(4)：48-51.
[42].刘小峰、林坚、李勇泉.农村教育供给问题研究——以福建省40个行政村为例[J].教育发展研究,2008(11)：5-8.
[43].刘欣.农村中小学布局调整与寄宿制学校建设[J].教育与经济2006(1)：30-32.
[44].陆喜元.教育外部性研究探微[J].大庆师范学院学报,2006,(8)：135-137.
[45].罗丹.试论农村公共教育的供给现状与对策[J].当代教育论坛2007(2)：17-18.
[46].吕国光.结构方程与中国农村儿童入学的决定因素[J].教育科学2008(2)：68-74.
[47].吕如斌、程露.论我国财政对教育投资的现状及对策[J].广东财经职业学院学报,2009(2)：13-17.
[48].马成林、王俊.我国教育公共需求扩张供给问题研究[J].辽宁教育研究,2006(12)：29-31.
[49].马国贤、马志远.教育支出占GDP的比重：国际比较与政策建议[J].教育发展研究,2009(03)：8-12.
[50].马红梅.“高等教育外部性”研究综述[J].理工高教研究,2008,(5)：30-33.
[51].麦克南、布鲁、麦克菲逊.当代劳动经济学[M].第7版.北京：中国人民大学出版社,1999.352-355.
[52].茅于轼.印度：把教育拨款换成“教育排富性教育券”[J].同舟共进,2007(12)：26-27.
[53].茅于轼.印度农村教育的新经验[J].农村金融研究,63-64.
[54].倪清燃.从教育的外部性角度谈政府对教育的补贴问题[J].宁波大学学报,2006(1)：33-35.
[55].潘明韬、彭杨.最优义务教育供给和政府间财政[J].经济研究导刊,2008(7)：202-203.
[56].阙海宝、李曦、顾美玲.教育排富性教育券：高等教育拨款机制的创新[J].比较教育研究,2005,(5)：80-83.
[57].石钧.现阶段我国发行专项教育彩票筹资的几点思考[J].教育财会研究,2007(2)：6-7.
[58].石绍宾.城乡基础教育均等化供给研究[D].山东大学,2007.35-50.
[59].史万兵.高等教育经济学[M].第1版.北京：科学出版社.2004.162-171.
[60].孙百才、常宝宁.西部农村义务教育实施“两免一补”的政策效应分析[J].教育与经济,2008(3)：14-18.
[61].孙百才.中国教育扩展与收入分配研究[J].统计研究,2005(12)：20-22.
[62].孙进华、于可.欠发达地区教育存在的基本问题[J].教育与经济,2003(1)：63.
[63].孙学玉、周义程.新公共管理与中国高等教育供给体制改革[J].江海学刊,2004(4)：95-100.
[64].孙月平、刘俊、谭军.应用福利经济学[M].第1版.北京：经济管理出版社,2004.89-97.
[65].谭春芳、李继宏.我国农村义务教育财政体制存在的问题[J].教育与经济,2003(3)：64.
[66].田科瑞.论西部贫困地区女童教育公平问题[J].西南师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2005,(3)：81-87.
[67].涂晨光.从教育的供给和需求看中国农村初中学生辍学原因[J].科教文汇2007(2)：33-46.
[68].王嘉毅、常保宁.西部农村义务教育实施“新机制”的成效、问题与对策[J].教育与经济,2008(2)：1-5.
[69].王嘉毅、王成军.西部农村地区义务教育“新机制”实施情况调查分析[J].教育发展研究,2009(18)：7-10.
[70].王杰.大学生个人教育支出和筹资状况的实证分析[J].教育与经济,2004(1)：30-35.
[71].王娟.教育偏好与教育投资行为分析[J].商业研究,2005(18)：146-149.
[72].王军.试论公共财政框架下的基础教育供给[J].山东社会科学,2005(11)：80-83.
[73].王磊.公共产品供给主体选择与变迁的制度经济学分析——一个理论分析框架及在中国的应用[D].山东大学,2008.54-58.
[74].王培根.高等教育经济学[M].第1版.北京：经济管理出版社,2004.69-76.
[75].王鹏.以有效的教育供给引导和开发教育消费[J].教育探索,2004(3)：45-47.
[76].王一涛、安民.“教育是公共产品”吗?——对一个流行观点的质疑[J].复旦教育论坛,2004,(5)：37-41.
[77].王卓民.教育效率与认识效率[J].运城高等专科学校学报,2000,(5)：84-88.
[78].邬志辉.发展农村教育：金融危机时期我国教育发展的战略重点[J].教育发展研究,2009(11)：15-19.
[79].吴宏超、杨秀芹.论教育机会的形成与分配[J].当代教育论坛,2008(10)：15-17.
[80].吴华.把教育凭证制度建立在权利平等的基础上——重新审视“教育券”的观念基础[J].教育与职业,2006(10)：36.
[81].吴华.对公办学校改制政策的初步评估[J].教育发展研究,2006：20-25.
[82].夏焰、林群.美国科罗拉多州的高等教育券计划及启示[J].现代大学教育,2007(1)：83-87.
[83].肖赞军.中国义务教育投入的二元化特征[J].教育与经济,2006(2)：43-47.
[84].小盐隆士(目)、妹尾涉(日).日本的教育经济学：实证分析的展望和课题[J].教育与经济,2004(2)：50-53.
[85].杨军木.中国居民受教育情况实证研究[J].绍兴文理学院学报,2002(1)：85-86.
[86].杨明华.教育资源共享的逻辑与路径：基于教育资源经济属性的分析[J].江海学刊,2007(5)：223-227.
[87].杨世忠.高等教育成本研究专辑[C].第1版.北京：中国财政经济出版社,2009.43-52.
[88].伊兰伯格、史密斯.现代劳动经济学.[M].第6版.北京：人民邮电出版社,2006.286-290.
[89].油晓峰.我国财政性教育支出的问题和对策[J].软科学,2003(2)：34-37.
[90].约瑟夫·E·斯蒂格利茨.公共部门经济学[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005.66-75.
[91].翟海魂.入可看待现阶段教育的主要矛盾[J].教育发展研究,2006(17)
[92].翟华.论教育服务供给的影响因素[J].经济问题探索,2006(12)：128-131.
[93].张光、曾明.公共经济学[M].第1版.武汉：武汉大学出版社,2009.131-134.
[94].张力、李孔珍.农村义务教育经费保障机制政策研究[J].教育发展研究,2008(9)：1-6.
[95].张万朋.市场经济条件下政府如何干预教育产业发展[J].江苏高教,2003(2)：5-8.
[96].张霞珍.免费义务教育：政府需处理的三对关系[J].教育发展研究,2008(7)：35-38.
[97].张筱峰、刘剑.加强和优化我国教育投资的财政支持政策研究[J].中国软科学,2003(4)：19-24.
[98].张业圳.统筹城乡与我国农村基础教育产品供给[J].福建师范大学学报,2007(1)：123-128.
[99].张翼.多元办学体制的建构与教育公平的推进[J].教育与经济2004(2)：37-39.
[100].赵全军.压力型动员：改革后中国农村义务教育的供给之道[J].云南社会科学,2008(4)：72-76.
[101].赵世奎、张彦通.过渡教育的预警研究[J].高等工程教育研究2008(4)：81-84.
[102].赵万水.后农业税时代的农村教育经费供给[J].中国教育学刊2005(12)：20-26.
[103].赵亚静.以提高农村医务教育质量的视角思考教育公平[J].吉林师范大学学报,2008(4)：104-107.
[104].钟宇平、雷万鹏.公平视野下中国基础教育财政政策[J].教育与经济2002(1)：1-7.
[105].钟泽胜.中国教育财政投入政策研究[J].山东社会科学,2008(1)：129-133.
[106].周国军.教育竞争的经济学审视[J].金陵科技学院学报,2007(3)：52-55.
[107].周继红、吴仲斌.论兼顾效率和公平的基础教育攻击方式[J].当代财经,2004(10)：38-41.
[108].周义生.论我国教育有效供给的原因与对策[J].现代企业教育2008(9)：181-182.
[109].雎国余、麻勇爱.中国教育经费合理配置研究[M].第1版.北京：北京大学出版社,2009.57-59.
[110].宗占国.美国高等教育投入体制对我国高等学校办学经费来源多样亿的启示[J].吉林师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2004,(12)：102-105.
[111]. Angrist,J.et al.,2006, "Long-Term Educational Consequences of Secondary School Vouchers:Evidence from Administrative Records in Columbia", The American Economic Review, Vol,96, Jun., PP847-862.
[112]. Barr,N.,1993, "Alternative Funding Resources for Higher Education",The Economic Journal, Vol.418,May,PP718-728.
[113]. Barrow, L.and Rouse.C.E.,2008, "School Vouchers:Recent Findings and Unasnwered Questions", Economic Perspectives, Vol.3, PP2-16.
[114]. Bevia,C. and Iturbe-Ormaetxe,I.,2002, "Redistribution and Subsidies for Higher Education", The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Vol.106, PP321-340.
[115]. Bordia,A.,2000, "Education for Gender Equality:The Lok Jumbish Experience", Education in Asia, Sep., PP.313-329.
[116]. Boyte,L.,2005, "Female Education and Religiosity:Their Institutional Impacts on Economic Growth", Atlantic Economic Journal, Vol.33,PP361-362.
[117]. Brauninger,M. and Vidal,J.P.,2000, "Private versus Public Financing of Education and Endogenous Growth", Journal of Population Economics, Vol.13, Sep., PP387-401.
[118]. Bray,M.,2000, "Financing Higher Education:Patterns, Trends and Options", Education in Asia, Sep., PP331-348.
[119]. Carnoy,M.,1997, "Is Privatization through Education Vouchers Really the Answer? A Comment on West", The World Bank Research Observer, Vol.12, Feb.,PP105-116.
[120]. Chevalier,A.,2003, "Mearsuring Over-Education", Blackwell Publishing, Aug., PP509-531.
[121]. Cooke, M. and Lang, D.,2009, "The Effects of Monopsony in Higher Education", High Educ, Vol.57, PP623-639.
[122]. Epple,D. and Romano,R.E.,1998, "Competition between Private and Public Schools, Vouchers, and Peer-Group Effects", The American Economic Review, Vol.88, Mar.,PP33-62.
[123]. Ferreyra, M.M.,2007, "Estimating the Effects of Private School Vouchers in Multidistrict Economies", The American Economic Review, Vol.6, PP789-817.
[124]. Ferris,J.S.and West,E.G,2002, "Education Vouchers, the Peer Group Problem, and the Question of Dropouts", Southern Economic Journal, Vol.68. Apr.,PP774-793.
[125]. Follesdal,A.,2008, "Equality of Education and Citizenship:Challenges of European Integration", Stud Philos Educ, Jul., PP335-354.
[126]. Forstorp,P.A.,2008, "Who's Colonizing Who? The Knowledge Society Thesis and the Global Challenges in Higher Edcuation", Stud Philos Educ, Nov., PP227-236.
[127]. Glomm,G.and Kaganovich,M.,2003, "Distributional Effects of Public Education in an Economy with Public Pensions", International Economic Review, Vol.44, Aug., PP917-937.
[128]. Grandstein,M.and Justman,M.,2002, "Education, Social Cohesion, and Economic Growth", The American Economic Review, Vol.92, Sep., PP1192-1204.
[129]. Greenaway,D.and Haynes,M.,2003, "Funding Higher Education in the UK: The Role of Fees and Loans", The Economic Journal, Vol.113, PP150-166.
[130]. Griffith,S.A.,2008, "A Proposed Model for Assessing Quality of Education" International Review of Education, PP99-112.
[131]. Heinonen,O.P.1997, "Finland:Restructuring Higher Education", Prospects, PP559-569.
[132]. Heneveld,W.,2007, "Whose Reality Counts? Local Educators As Researchers on The Quality of Primary Education", International Review of Education, Vol.53, PP639-663.
[133]. Howell,W.G,2004, "Dynamic Selection Effects in Means-Tested, Urban School Voucher Programs", Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. Vol 23, PP225-250.
[134]. Hung, F.S.,Chung,Y.P.and Ho,E.S.C.,2000, "To Work Or to Continue to Higher Education? The Choice of Senior Secondary Students in Shenzhen, China", Higher Education, Vol.39, PP455-467.
[135]. Kenny,L.W.,2005, "The Public Choice of Educational Choice", Public Choice, Vol.124, Jul., PP205-222.
[136]. Kim, S. and Lee,J.H.,2006, "Changing Facets of Korean Higher Education: Market Competition and The Role of The State",Higher Education, Vol.52, PP557-587.
[137]. King, R.P.,2007, "Governance And Accountability in The Higher Education Regulatory State", Higher Education, Vol.53, PP411-430.
[138]. Klitgaard, M.B.,2008, "School Vouchers and the New Politics of the Welfare State", Governance:An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Insitutions, Vol.21, Oct., PP479-498.
[139]. Kurdadze,M.,2010, "Innovation, High Technology Sectors, Higher Education and Human Capital:Education System Reform in Georgia", Transit Stud Rev, Feb., PP464-470.
[140]. Kwoka,J.E.JR.and Snyder,C.M.,2004, Dynamic Adjustment in the U.S. Higher Educaition Industry,1955-1997, Review of Industrial Organization, Vol.24,PP355-378.
[141]. Ladd,H.F.,2002, "School vouchers:A Critical View", The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.16, PP3-24.
[142]. Lopez, M.R.,2009, "Equality of Opportunities in Spanish Higher Education" High Educ,PP285-306
[143]. Marks,G.N.,2009, "The Scoial Effects of the Australian Higher Educaiton Contribution Scheme", High Educ, Apr., PP71-84.
[144]. Metcalf,A.S.and Fenwick,T.,2009, "Knowledge for Whose Society? Knowledge Production, Higher Education, and Federal Policy in Canada", High Educ, May, PP209-225.
[145]. Miller,D.W.,1999, "The Black Hold of Education Research", The Chronicle of Higher Education, Aug., PP1-5.
[146]. Narayana,M.R.,2005, "Student Loan by Commercial Banks:A Way to Reduce State Government Financial Support to Higher Education in India", The Journal of Developing Areas, Vol.38, PP171-187.
[147]. Neal,D.,2002, "How Vouchers Could Change the Market for Education", The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.16, PP25-44.
[148]. Nechyaba,T.J.,2000,"Mobility, Targeting, and Private-School Vouchers", The American Economic Review, Vol.90,Mar.,PP130-146.
[149]. Pavicic,J.et al.,2009, "Market Orientation in Managing Relationships with Multiple constituencies of Croatian Higher Education", High Educ, May, PP191-207.
[150]. Peterson,P.E.,2008,"School Vouchers in the United States:Productivity in the Public and Private Sectors", ZfE, Vol.11, PP1-15.
[151]. Polachek, Solomon W.1998, "Research in Labor Economics", JAI Press Inc.,Vol.17, PP284-289.
[152]. Rangel,A.,2003, "Forward and Backward Intergenerational Goods:Why Is Social Security Good for the Environment?", The American Economic review, Vol.93, Jun.,PP813-834.
[153]. Rouse,C.E.,1998, "Private School Vouchers and Student Achievement:An Evaluation of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program", Quaterly Journal of Economics, Vol.133, May,PP553-602.
[154]. Scherrer,C.,2005, "GATS:Long-Term Strategy for the Commodification of Education", Review of International Policial Economy, Vol.12, Aug., PP484-510.
[155]. Soares,J.,2006, "A Dynamic General Equilibrium Analysis of the Political Economy of Public Edcuation", Journal of Population Economics, Vol.19, Jun., PP367-389.
[156]. Tilak,J.B.G.,1999, "Student Loans as the Answer to Lack of Resources for Higher Edcuation", Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.34, Jan., PP19.
[157]. Usher,D.,1997, "Education as a deterrent to Crime", The Canadian Journal of Economics,Vol.30, May,PP367-384.
[158]. Vaira, M.,2004, "Globalization And Higher Education Rganizational Change: A Framework for Analysis", Higher Education, Vol.48,PP483-510.
[159]. West,E.G.,1997, "Education Vouchers in Principle and Practic:A Survey", The World Bank Research Observer, Vol.12,Feb.,PP83-103.
[160]. Wigger,B.U.,2001, "Risk, Resources, and Education:Public Versus Private Financing of Higher Education", IMF Staff Papers, Vol.48, PP547-560.
[161]. Wigger,B.U.,2004, "Are Higher Education Subsidies Second Best?", The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Vol.106, PP65-82.
[162]. Wolf, P.J.,2008, "School Voucher Programs:What the Research Says About Parental School Choice", Brigham Young University Law Review, PP415-446.
[163]. Yang, J. and Mayston, D.,2009, "An Empirical Study on Educational Investment for All Levels of Higher Education in China", Front.Econ. China,4(1),PP46-61.
[164]. Zimmer,R.and Jones,J.T.,2005, "Unintended Consequence of Centralized Public School Funding in Michigan Education", Southern Economic Journal, Vol.71, Jan., PP534-544.
①陈华亭.中国教育筹资问题研究[M].第1版.北京：中国财政经济出版社,2006.114-128.
①陈华亭.中国教育筹资问题研究[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社,2006.126.
①费菊瑛.改善义务教育投融资体制研究[M].广州：中山大学出版社,2007.142-144
①教育部.2005年全国教育事业发展统计公报[DB/OL].http://www.edu.cn/jiao_yu_fa_zhan_498/20060706/t20060706_187144.shtml.
②孙雨霞.女性主义视角下教育与社会性别公平[D].天津大学职业技术教育学院,2007.2-34.
①胡咏梅、杜育红.中国西部农村小学资源配置效率评估[J].教育与经济,2008(1)：1-6.
②民办教育[Z],教育部网站http://news.xinhuanet.com/ziliao/2005-11/04/content_3731178.htm
①孙雨霞.女性主义视角下教育与社会性别公平[D].天津大学职业技术教育学院,2007.2-34.
②黄爱华.女性高等教育公平：问题与对策[J].现代教育科学,2003(2)：22-26.
③文东茅.我国男性与女性高等教育机会、学业成绩及就业结果的比较分析[J].
④郭冬生.正确认识我国教育中的性别差距[J].湖北广播电视大学学报,2007(8)：5-7
①闵君.对我国女性接受高等教育的思考[J].湘潮,2007(11)：89-91
②文东茅.我国男性与女性高等教育机会、学业成绩及就业结果的比较分析[J].
①费菊瑛,改善义务教育投融资体制研究[M].广州：中山大学出版社,2007.63-64
②曾明、张光.农村教育支出的财政转移支付效应研究——以浙江、江西为例[J].教育与经济,2009(3)：51-56.