首轮退耕还林补贴到期对农户内部收入不平等的影响

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20220296

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective: This study aims to explore the impact of the expiration of the first round subsidies for the sloping land conversion program (SLCP) on the income inequality among farmer households, which would provide decision-making reference for improving the follow-up SLCP policy and promoting common prosperity. Method: Based on the field survey data of 1 733 farmer households in five Provinces (autonomous region) of Hebei, Sichuan, Gansu, Ningxia and Hunan in 2019 and 2021, with the re-centralization impact function (RIF) regression model, this paper empirically tested the impact of the expiration of the subsidies for the SLCP on the inequality of internal income and income structure of farmer households, and further investigated the heterogeneous impact of the expiration of the subsidies for the SLCP on the internal income inequality of farmer households at different levels of education and the conversion scale. Result: 1) The estimated result of the expiration of the subsidies for the SLCP on the income inequality among farmer households was significantly positive at the level of 5%. 2) Different metrics were selected to replace Gini coefficient, and the RIF model constructed by the different metrics passed the robustness test, indicating that the research results were reliable. 3) From the perspective of income structure, the estimated results of the expiration of the subsidies for the SLCP on the inequality from farmer households’ internal wage income and production income were significantly positive respectively at the level of 10%, the estimated results of farmer households’ internal transfer income was significantly negative at the level of 10%, and that of farmer households’ internal property income was not significant. 4) For farmer households at different levels of education, after the expiration of the subsidies for the SLCP, the estimated results of internal income inequality of farmer households at and below primary school and below junior high school were significantly positive at the level of 5% and 10%, respectively, while the estimated results of internal income inequality of farmer households at and above high school were significantly negative at the level of 10%. For farmer households with different scale of the SLCP, the estimated result of the internal income inequality from farmer households with medium scale and above of the SLCP was significantly positive at the level of 10%, but the estimated result of the internal income inequality from farmer households with small-scale of the SLCP was not significant. Conclusion: The expiration of the first round of subsidies for the SLCP widens the income inequality among farmer households to a certain extent. The expiration of subsidies for the SLCP expands the inequality of farmer households’ internal wage income and production income respectively, but reduces the inequality of farmer households’ internal transfer income. There exist great different impacts of the expiration of subsidies for the SLCP on income inequality among the types of farmer households. The expiration of subsidies for the SLCP aggravates the income inequality among the farmer households with middle and low education background and with medium and above scale of the SLCP, but alleviates the income inequality among farmer households with high education background, and has no significant impact on income inequality of farmer households with small scale of the SLCP. Based on the above, this paper puts forward corresponding suggestions from the aspects of broadening farmers’ employment channels, promoting the development of subsequent related industries and carrying out targeted policy assistance.

Key words: sloping land conversion program, subsidy policy, income inequality, re-centralization influence function regression, farmer households

CLC Number:

Jingyi Zhang,Chen Chen,Liqun Wang. Impact of the Expiration of the First Round Subsidies for the Sloping Land Conversion Program on the Income Inequality among Farmer Households[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2023, 59(4): 139-148.

Figures/Tables 6

Table 1

Descriptive statistics of the variables"

变量名称 Variables	取值 Measure	均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation
人均总收入Total income per capita	ln（家庭总收入/家庭总人数） ln (total household income / total persons of a household)	9.17	1.14
人均工资性收入 Wage income per capita	ln（工资性收入/家庭总人数） ln (wage income of a household / total persons of a household)	9.28	0.93
人均生产经营性收入 Production and operation income per capita	ln（生产经营性收入/家庭总人数） ln (production and operation income of a household/ total persons of a household)	7.32	1.50
人均转移性收入 Transfer income per capita	ln（转移性收入/家庭总人数） ln (transfer income of a household / total persons of a household）	6.58	1.59
人均财产性收入 Property income per capita	ln（财产性收入/家庭总人口） ln (property income of a household / total persons of a household)	5.91	1.43
退耕补贴是否到期 The subsidy expires or not	到期=1，未到期=0 Expired= 1,Unexpired = 0	0.69	0.46
户主年龄 Age of a household head	具体数值 Actual numerical value	57.33	11.07
户主健康状况 Health status of a household head	健康=1，不健康=0 Healthy = 1, Unhealthy = 0	0.63	0.48
家庭人口数 Total persons of a household	具体数值 Actual numerical value	4.04	1.80
务工比例 Proportion of migrant workers	外出务工人数/劳动力人数 Number of migrant workers/ Labor force	0.44	0.38
是否为贫困户 A poor household or not	贫困户=1，非贫困户=0 Poor household = 1, Non-poor household = 0	0.40	0.49
农地面积 Agricultural land area/hm²	具体数值 Actual numerical value	0.38	7.35
劳动力负担比 Labor burden ratio	劳动力人数/家庭总人数 Labor force of a household /Total persons of a household	0.69	0.27
劳动力平均受教育程度 Average education level of labor force	劳动力受教育年数/劳动力人数 Number of education years of labor force/Number of labor force	6.67	3.26
退耕面积 Sloping land conversion program areas/hm²	具体数值 Actual numerical value	0.45	9.24

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

References 0

	陈　琛, 石颜露, 邱珊珊, 等. 2022. 首轮退耕补贴到期对农户非农就业的影响. 干旱区资源与环境, 36(12): 15–21.
	Chen C, Shi Y L, Qiu S S, et al. 2022. Impact of the expiration of subsidies for the first round of the SLCP on farmer households’ non-farm employment. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment: 36(12): 15–21. ［in Chinese］
	程名望, Jin Y, 盖庆恩, 等. 农村减贫: 应该更关注教育还是健康?——基于收入增长和差距缩小双重视角的实证. 经济研究, 2014, 49 (11): 130- 144.
	Cheng M W, Jin Y, Gai Q E, et al. Rural poverty reduction: should we pay more attention to education or health—— an empirical study based on the dual perspectives of income growth and gap narrowing. Economic Research, 2014, 49 (11): 130- 144.
	杜温鑫. 2020. 退耕补贴到期对农户后续影响的研究. 北京: 北京林业大学.
	Du W X. 2020. Study on the follow-up impact of returning farmland subsidies on farmers. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University. ［in Chinese］
	江克忠, 刘生龙. 收入结构、收入不平等与农村家庭贫困. 中国农村经济, 2017, (8): 75- 90.
	Jiang K Z, Liu S L. Income structure, income inequality and rural family poverty. China Rural Economy, 2017, (8): 75- 90.
	康子昊, 刘　浩, 杨　鑫, 等. 退耕还林工程对农户收入增长和收入分配影响的测度与分析——基于长期跟踪大农户样本数据. 林业经济, 2021, 43 (1): 5- 20. doi: 10.13843/j.cnki.lyjj.20210316.001
	Kang Z H, Liu H, Yang X, et al. Measurement and analysis of the impact of returning farmland to forest project on Farmers' income growth and income distribution——based on the long-term tracking sample data of large farmers. Forestry Economy, 2021, 43 (1): 5- 20. doi: 10.13843/j.cnki.lyjj.20210316.001
	刘　浩, 刘　璨, 刘俊昌. 中国退耕还林工程对农户收入和消费不平等的影响测度. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 45 (1): 227- 234.
	Liu H, Liu C, Liu J C. Measurement of the impact of China’s farmland to forest project on farmers' income and consumption inequality. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2021, 45 (1): 227- 234.
	栾　江, 马　瑞. 农村居民相对贫困影响因素分析. 统计与决策, 2021, 37 (10): 75- 79. doi: 10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2021.10.016
	Luan J, Ma R. Analysis on influencing factors of relative poverty of rural residents. Statistics and Decision Making, 2021, 37 (10): 75- 79. doi: 10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2021.10.016
	罗楚亮, 梁晓慧. 农村低收入群体的收入增长与共同富裕. 金融经济学研究, 2022, 37 (1): 61- 72.
	Luo C L, Liang X H. Income growth and common prosperity of rural low-income groups. Financial Economics Research, 2022, 37 (1): 61- 72.
	潘　丹, 陆　雨, 孔凡斌. 不同贫困程度农户退耕还林的收入效应. 林业科学, 2020, 56 (8): 148- 161. doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20200817
	Pan D, Lu Y, Kong F B. Income effect of farmers with different poverty levels returning farmland to forest. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2020, 56 (8): 148- 161. doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20200817
	乔　慧, 刘　爽, 郑风田. 精准脱贫背景下建档立卡政策的增收效应测度: 自我“造血”还是外部“输血”. 经济与管理研究, 2019, 40 (9): 3- 19.
	Qiao H, Liu S, Zheng F T. Measurement of the income increasing effect of the filing and card making policy in the context of precise poverty alleviation: self "blood creation" or external "blood transfusion". Economic and Management Research, 2019, 40 (9): 3- 19.
	单德朋, 张永奇. 农村家庭老人照料与农户内部收入财富不平等——基于CFPS2018数据的实证分析. 农业技术经济, 2022, (12): 88- 99. doi: 10.13246/j.cnki.jae.20211214.002
	Shan D P, Zhang Y Q. Rural family care for the elderly and inequality of income and wealth within farmers——an empirical analysis based on CFPS2018 data. Agricultural Technology and Economics, 2022, (12): 88- 99. doi: 10.13246/j.cnki.jae.20211214.002
	沈栩航, 李浩南, 李后建. 创业会加剧农村内部收入不平等吗. 农业技术经济, 2020, (10): 33- 47.
	Shen X H, Li H N, Li H J. Will entrepreneurship exacerbate income inequality within rural areas. Agricultural Technology and Economy, 2020, (10): 33- 47.
	史常亮. 土地流转与农户内部收入差距: 加剧还是缓解. 经济与管理研究, 2020, 41 (12): 79- 92.
	Shi C L. Land transfer and income gap within farmers: intensifying or easing. Economics and Management Research, 2020, 41 (12): 79- 92.
	石颜露, 陈　琛, 王立群. 退耕补贴到期对贫困地区农户主观贫困的影响——基于四川和河北802份调研数据的分析. 湖南农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2022, 23 (2): 27- 35. doi: 10.13331/j.cnki.jhau(ss).2022.02.004
	Shi Y L, Chen C, Wang L Q. The impact of the expiration of the grain for green subsidy on the subjective poverty of farmers in poor areas——an analysis based on 802 survey data from Sichuan and Hebei. Journal of Hunan Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), 2022, 23 (2): 27- 35. doi: 10.13331/j.cnki.jhau(ss).2022.02.004
	万广华, 周章跃, 陆　迁. 中国农村收入不平等: 运用农户数据的回归分解. 中国农村经济, 2005, (5): 4- 11.
	Wan G H, Zhou Z Y, Lu Q. Rural income inequality in China: regression decomposition using household data. China Rural Economy, 2005, (5): 4- 11.
	王汉杰, 温　涛, 韩佳丽. 深度贫困地区农村金融能够有效缓解农户内部收入差距吗. 金融经济学研究, 2018, 33 (5): 117- 128.
	Wang H J, Wen T, Han J L. Can rural finance in deep poverty-stricken areas effectively alleviate the income gap among farmers. Financial Economics Research, 2018, 33 (5): 117- 128.
	王　庶, 岳希明. 退耕还林、非农就业与农民增收——基于21省面板数据的双重差分分析. 经济研究, 2017, 52 (4): 106- 119.
	Wang S, Yue X M. Returning farmland to forests, non-agricultural employment and increasing farmers’ income——double difference analysis based on panel data of 21 Provinces. Economic Research, 2017, 52 (4): 106- 119.
	汪三贵, 孙俊娜. 互助资金政策对贫困村劳动力流动的影响——基于5省10县准实验研究的DID分析. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2021, 31 (2): 140- 152.
	Wang S G, Sun J N. Impact of mutual aid fund policy on labor mobility in poor villages——did analysis based on quasi experimental research in 5 provinces and 10 counties. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2021, 31 (2): 140- 152.
	夏　晨, 张超群, 王立群, 等. 土地转出行为对农户收入差距的影响——基于山东省潍坊市调研数据. 江苏农业科学, 2017, 45 (11): 264- 268. doi: 10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2017.11.069
	Xia C, Zhang C Q, Wang L Q, et al. The impact of land transfer out behavior on Farmers' income gap——based on the survey data of Weifang City, Shandong Province. Jiangsu Agricultural Science, 2017, 45 (11): 264- 268. doi: 10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2017.11.069
	杨　丹, 曾　巧. 农户创业加剧了农户收入不平等吗——基于RIF回归分解的视角. 农业技术经济, 2021, (5): 18- 34. doi: 10.13246/j.cnki.jae.2021.05.002
	Yang D, Zeng Q. Does farmers' entrepreneurship aggravate farmers' income inequality——from the perspective of RIF regression decomposition. Agricultural Technology and Economy, 2021, (5): 18- 34. doi: 10.13246/j.cnki.jae.2021.05.002
	杨　丹, 王晓丽, 唐　羽. 农业补贴、农户增收与收入不平等. 华中农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2020, (5): 60- 70,171. doi: 10.13300/j.cnki.hnwkxb.2020.05.007
	Yang D, Wang X L, Tang Y. Agricultural subsidies, farmers' income increase and income inequality. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), 2020, (5): 60- 70,171. doi: 10.13300/j.cnki.hnwkxb.2020.05.007
	杨　晶, 邓　悦. 中国农村养老保险制度对农户收入不平等影响研究. 数量经济技术经济研究, 2020, 37 (10): 83- 100. doi: 10.13653/j.cnki.jqte.2020.10.005
	Yang J, Deng Y. Study on the impact of China’s rural old-age insurance system on Farmers' income inequality. Research on Quantitative Economy and Technical Economy, 2020, 37 (10): 83- 100. doi: 10.13653/j.cnki.jqte.2020.10.005
	于福波, 张应良. 外出务工、社会资本与农户内部收入差距. 经济与管理研究, 2019, 40 (8): 90- 103. doi: 10.13502/j.cnki.issn1000-7636.2019.08.007
	Yu F B, Zhang Y L. Migrant workers, social capital and the internal income gap of farmers. Economic and Management Research, 2019, 40 (8): 90- 103. doi: 10.13502/j.cnki.issn1000-7636.2019.08.007
	张　蕴. 后小康时代我国相对贫困治理的内在动因及现实路向. 理论探讨, 2021, (3): 163- 170. doi: 10.16354/j.cnki.23-1013/d.2021.03.024
	Zhang Y. Internal motivation and realistic direction of China's relative poverty governance in the post well-off era. Theoretical Discussion, 2021, (3): 163- 170. doi: 10.16354/j.cnki.23-1013/d.2021.03.024
	赵娅娅, 黄杰龙, 李瑞民, 等. 退耕补贴到期对贫困地区农户消费的影响研究. 中国农业资源与区划, 2022, 43 (7): 183- 192.
	Zhao Y Y, Huang J L, Li R M, et al. Study on the impact of the expiration of the subsidy on farmers’ consumption in poor areas. China Agricultural Resources and Zoning, 2022, 43 (7): 183- 192.
	朱烈夫, 殷浩栋, 张志涛, 等. 生态补偿有利于精准扶贫吗?——以三峡生态屏障建设区为例. 西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2018, 18 (2): 42- 48. doi: 10.13968/j.cnki.1009-9107.2018.02.06
	Zhu L F, Yin H D, Zhang Z T, et al. Is ecological compensation conducive to targeted poverty alleviation——take the Three Gorges ecological barrier construction area as an example. Journal of Northwest University of Agriculture and Forestry Science and Technology (Social Science Edition), 2018, 18 (2): 42- 48. doi: 10.13968/j.cnki.1009-9107.2018.02.06
	Borgen N T. Fixed effects in unconditional quantile regression. The Stata Journal, 2016, 16 (2): 403- 415. doi: 10.1177/1536867X1601600208
	Dang X H, Gao S W, Tao R, et al. Do environmental conservation programs contribute to sustainable livelihoods? evidence from China's grain-for-green program in northern Shaanxi Province. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 719, 137436. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137436
	Firpo S, Fortin N M, Lemieux T. Unconditional quantile regression. Econometrica, 2009, 77 (3): 953- 973. doi: 10.3982/ECTA6822
	Komarek A M, Shi X P, Heerink N. Household-level effects of China's sloping land conversion program under price and policy shifts. Land Use Policy, 2014, 40, 36- 44. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.04.013
	Liu Y, Yao S B, Lin Y. Effect of key priority forestry programs on off-farm employment: evidence from Chinese rural households. Forest Policy & Economics, 2018, 88, 24- 37.
	Lu S S, Sun H S, Zhou Y, et al. Examining the impact of forestry policy on poor and non-poor farmers’ income and production input in collective forest areas in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 276, 123784. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123784
	Shi X P, Heerink N, Qu F T. Does off-farm employment contribute to agriculture-based environmental pollution? new insights from a village-level analysis in Jiangxi Province, China. China Economic Review, 2011, 22 (4): 524- 533. doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2010.08.003
	Wu L, Jin L S. How eco-compensation contribute to poverty reduction: a perspective from different income group of rural households in Guizhou, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 275, 122962. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122962
	Zhang Q, Bilsborrow R E, Song C H, et al. Rural household income distribution and inequality in China: effects of payments for ecosystem services policies and other factors. Ecological Economics, 2019, 160, 114- 127. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.02.019

变量 Variables	WoCV	WCV
退耕补贴是否到期 The subsidy expires or not	6.421**（2.949）	5.698**（2.807）
户主年龄 Age of a household head	—	?0.324**（0.149）
户主健康状况 Health status of a household head	—	1.219（2.949）
家庭人口数 Total persons of a household	—	?2.670***（0.937）
务工比例 Proportion of migrant workers	—	?49.477*** （5.250）
是否为贫困户 A poor household or not	—	1.356（3.233）
农地面积 Agricultural land area	—	?0.990***（0.190）
劳动力负担比 Labor burden ratio	—	?21.143*** （5.725）
劳动力平均受教育程度 Average education level of labor force	—	?0.778（0.533）
退耕面积 Sloping land conversion program areas	—	0.383**（0.159）
省份虚拟变量 Characteristic variable for province	已控制 Controlled	已控制 Controlled
常数项 Constant	51.232*** （2.189）	136.452*** （14.055）
观测值 Observations	1 733	1 733
R²	0.025	0.132

变量 Variables	最富有10%人群持有的收入份额Ucs(10)	Atkinson指数 Atkinson index			广义熵指数 Generalized entropy index
变量 Variables	最富有10%人群持有的收入份额Ucs(10)	ε=0.5	ε=1	ε=2	entropy:0	entropy:1
退耕补贴是否到期 The subsidy expires or not	4.092***（0.907）	0.665*（0.354）	1.361*（0.741）	2.907*（1.639）	1.373*（0.747）	1.309*（0.677）
控制变量Control variables	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled
省份虚拟变量 Characteristic variable for province	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled
常数项Constant	142.881*** （4.287）	11.524*** （1.929）	23.524*** （4.089）	49.089*** （9.278）	23.688*** （4.124）	22.598*** （3.651）
观测值Observations	1 733	1 733	1 733	1 733	1 733	1 733
R²	0.126	0.083	0.078	0.067	0.078	0.088

变量 Variables	工资性收入不平等 Wage income inequality	生产经营性收入不平等 Production and operation income inequality	转移性收入不平等 Transfer income inequality	财产性收入不平等 Property income inequality
退耕补贴是否到期 The subsidy expires or not	6.381*（3.415）	10.908*（6.587）	?9.438*（5.702）	36.423（23.997）
控制变量 Control variables	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled
省份虚拟变量 Characteristic variable for province	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled
常数项 Constant	78.310***（15.689）	192.823***（34.940）	255.771***（23.564）	248.280***（73.345）
观测值 Observations	1 212	1 095	1 692	265
R²	0.073	0.050	0.129	0.150

变量 Variables	小学及以下Primary school and below	初中Junior high school	高中及以上High school and above
退耕补贴是否到期The subsidy expires or not	9.682**（4.854）	8.180*（4.709）	?9.191*（5.486）
控制变量Control variables	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled
省份虚拟变量Characteristic variable for province	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled
常数项Constant	154.971***（23.812）	140.196***（31.477）	89.675***（24.493）
观测值Observations	599	659	475
R²	0.077	0.115	0.197

变量 Variables	小退耕规模农户（退耕规模0.267 hm²及以下）Farmer households with small scale of the SLCP（0.267 hm² and below）	中等退耕规模及以上农户（退耕规模0.267 hm²以上）Farmer households with Medium and above scale of the SLCP（Above 0.267 hm²）
退耕补贴是否到期 The subsidy expires or not	4.211（4.116）	7.010* (3.874)
控制变量 Control variables	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled
省份虚拟变量 Characteristic variable for province	已控制Controlled	已控制Controlled
常数项 Constant	139.398*** （22.044）	138.337*** （17.541）
观测值 Observations	859	874
R²	0.123	0.123

Impact of the Expiration of the First Round Subsidies for the Sloping Land Conversion Program on the Income Inequality among Farmer Households

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 6

References 0

Related Articles 5

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	Hong Yanzhen, Feng Liangming. Actual Effects of Subsidy Policy for Woody Grain and Oil Plants and Their Economic Implication [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2017, 53(8): 113-119.
[2]	Liu Hao, Chen Sikun, Zhang Minxin, Liu Can. Measuring and Analyzing the Impact of Sloping Land Conversion Program on Rural Households' Income Inequality——Shapley Value Decomposition Approach for Total Income Decision Equation [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2017, 53(5): 125-133.
[3]	Su Shipeng;Ma Meiyun;Lin Qun. Farmer Forestry Total Factor Productivity Changes after the Collective Forestry Property Rights System Reform——Based on Households Surveys in Fujian Province [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2012, 48(6): 127-135.
[4]	Shi Daojin;Xu Yupeng;Gao Xin. Demand and Determinants of Collateral Loan with Forest Property by Farmer Households: a Case Study from Lishui of Zhejiang Province [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2011, 47(8): 159-167.
[5]	Zhang Lei;Wen Caiyun;. Impacts of Collective Forest Tenure Reform on Farmer Households' Livelihood [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2008, 44(7): 73-78.