林业社会化服务对农户家庭收入差距的影响

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20220729

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective: To narrow the income gaps among farmers is an important link to achieve common prosperity in rural areas.Quantitative analysis of the impact of socialized forestry services on the income gap of peasant households and its mechanism was conducted to improve the socialized forestry service system in the new era and new journey and to help achieve the common prosperity of rural planning and policy decision-making. Methods: Based on the theories of division of labor and specialization effect, optimization of family labor allocation and promotion of forestland circulation and management, the analysis framework of the impact of socialization of forestry services on household income gap of farmers was constructed.The survey data of 2 413 households in Fujian, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, Hunan, Sichuan, Guangxi provinces (region) were used and the unconditional quantile regression model was applied to test the impact of socialized forestry services on household income gap, as well as to analyze the difference and decomposition effect of different adoption degrees of socialized forestry services. Results: 1) Socialized forestry services had a significant increase effect on the income level of farmer households, and the increase effect on low-income households was greater, which was conducive to narrowing the income gap of farmers' households.2) There were significant differences in the marginal contribution of socialized forestry services to the household income of farmers with different income levels.The socialized forestry services could significantly reduce the Gini coefficient, and the lower the income level, the greater the marginal contribution, the socialized forestry services could help narrow the income gap of rural households.3) The coefficient effect dominated the widening of rural household income gap.Among them, whether the head of the household is a village cadre, the proportion of forestry income, the degree of woodland fragmentation, the distance between the village and the county town, and the terrain were the main factors affecting the coefficient effect at the income levels of Q₁₀-Q₉₀.4) The average adoption degree of socialized forestry services was 0.354, and forestry socialized services had a good income increase effect on households with low adoption level, and the income gap of households was mainly dominated by the characteristic effect. Conclusions: It needs to attach great importance and give full play to the positive role of socialized forestry services in reducing the income gaps among farm households, through continuous improvement of supportive policies on demand and supply of socialized forestry services for low-income farmer households, implementation of targeted incentives to stimulate and encourage farmers to actively adopt socialized forestry services to form a "demand promotes supply and supply drives demand" virtuous cycle pattern.

Key words: socialized forestry service, common prosperity, household income gap, unconditional quantile regression

CLC Number:

S7-9
F307.2

Wenmei Liao,Jing Lin,Yueqin Shen,Fanbin Kong. Influence of Socialized Forestry Services on the Income Gap of Rural Households[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2023, 59(1): 59-73.

Figures/Tables 12

Fig.1

Table 1

Variable definitions and descriptive statistics"

变量类型 Variable type	变量名称 Variables	变量解释 Variable description	均值 Mean	标准偏差 SD	最小值 Min	最大值 Max
被解释变量 Explained variables	农户家庭人均年收入 Per capita annual income of rural households	农户家庭人均年收入(万元) Per capita annual income of rural households (ten thousand yuan)	2.89	4.36	0.22	5.67
	林业社会化服务 Forestry socialized services	林业社会化服务采纳程度 Forestry socialization service adopted level	0.35	0.18	0	0.87
	林业技术培训服务 Forestry technology training services	是否接受过林业技术培训服务 Whether received forestry technical training services	0.43	0.50	0	1
	林业市场信息服务 Forestry market information services	是否接受过林业市场信息服务 Whether received forestry market information service	0.25	0.43	0	1
核心解释变量 Key explanatory variables	林业投资融资服务 Forestry investment and financing services	是否接受过林业投资融资服务 Whether received forestry investment and financing services	0.26	0.44	0	1
	林业政策法律咨询服务 Forestry policy legal advisory services	是否接受过林业政策法律咨询服务 Whether received forestry policy legal advisory services	0.35	0.48	0	1
	病虫害及火灾预防服务 Pest and fire prevention services	是否接受过病虫害及火灾预防服务 Whether received pest and fire prevention services	0.60	0.49	0	1
	林业生产外包中介服务 Forestry production outsourcing intermediary services	是否接受过林业生产外包中介服务 Whether received forestry production outsourcing intermediary services	0.23	0.42	0	1
	户主年龄 Household age	户主实际年龄(岁) Actual age of head of household (years)	52.55	10.44	22	88
	户主文化水平 Household cultural level	户主受教育的年限 Years of education of the head of household	7.07	2.82	0	16
	是否村干部 Whether a village cadre	户主是村干部(否=0；是=1) Whether the head of the household is village cadre (No = 0; Yes =1)	0.26	0.44	0	1
	劳动力数量占比 Proportion of labor force	家庭劳动力数量/家庭总人口数 Number of labor force/total household population	0.71	0.24	0	1
控制变量 Control variables	林业收入占比 Proportion of forestry income	林业收入/家庭总收入 Forestry income/total household income	0.14	0.25	0	1
	林地经营面积 Area of forestland managed by farmers	农户实际经营的林地面积 Area of forestland actually managed by farmers/hm²	2.95	6.59	0	134.67
	林地细碎化程度 Degree of forestland fragmentation	林地流转前面积/林地流转前块数 Number of forestland before transfer/area before transfer	1.00	2.85	0	66.67
	林地距离公路距离 Distance from forestland to main road	以实际距离计算 Calculated by actual distance/km	1.57	1.61	0	20
	村距县城距离 Distance from village committee to county	以实际距离计算 Calculated by actual distance /km	32.55	25.71	0	137
	地形 Terrain	农户所在地形是否为山地(否=0；是=1) Whether the terrain is mountainous (No = 0; Yes =1)	0.60	0.49	0	1
地区虚拟变量(以浙江省为参照) Region dummy variable (Zhejiang Province as reference)		湖南省=1, 其他=0 Hunan Province =1, others = 0	0.19	0.39	0	1
		江西省=1, 其他=0 Jiangxi Province =1, others = 0	0.20	0.40	0	1
		四川省=1, 其他=0 Sichuan Province =1, others = 0	0.22	0.41	0	1
		福建省=1, 其他=0 Fujian Province =1, others = 0	0.20	0.40	0	1
		广西省=1, 其他=0 Guangxi Province =1, others = 0	0.21	0.39	0	1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Analysis results of the impact of forestry socialization services on the income gap within households(n=2 413)"

变量 Varibles	模型1：Q_gini Model 1: Q_gini	模型2：Q₁₀ Model 2: Q₁₀	模型3：Q₂₅ Model 3: Q₂₅	模型4：Q₅₀ Model 4: Q₅₀	模型5：Q₇₅ Model 5: Q₇₅	模型6：Q₉₀ Model 6: Q₉₀
林业社会化服务 Forestry socialized services	-0.080^***	0.782^***	0.604^***	0.591^***	0.638^***	0.631^***
林业社会化服务 Forestry socialized services	(0.020)	(0.226)	(0.141)	(0.122)	(0.139)	(-0.171)
户主年龄 Household age	0.001^***	-0.011^**	-0.009^***	-0.006^***	-0.012^***	-0.012^***
户主年龄 Household age	(0.000)	(0.004)	(0.003)	(0.002)	(0.002)	(-0.003)
户主文化水平 Household cultural level	-0.003^*	0.008	0.024^**	0.028^***	0.012	0.013
户主文化水平 Household cultural level	(0.001)	(0.015)	(0.010)	(0.008)	(0.010)	(-0.014)
是否村干部 Whether a village cadre	-0.009	0.088	0.057	0.071	0.056	0.010
是否村干部 Whether a village cadre	(0.008)	(0.086)	(0.056)	(0.050)	(0.060)	(-0.086)
劳动力数量占比 Proportion of labor force	-0.031^**	0.260	0.267^**	0.471^***	0.490^***	0.2440^*
劳动力数量占比 Proportion of labor force	(0.015)	(0.168)	(0.106)	(0.091)	(0.104)	(-0.147)
林业收入占比 Proportion of forestry income	-0.016	0.244	0.142	0.318^***	0.486^***	0.907^***
林业收入占比 Proportion of forestry income	(0.013)	(0.150)	(0.099)	(0.088)	(0.111)	(-0.183)
林地经营面积 The area of forestland managed by farmers	-0.002^**	0.014^**	0.011^*	0.009^*	0.004	0.008
林地经营面积 The area of forestland managed by farmers	(0.001)	(0.007)	(0.006)	(0.005)	(0.007)	(-0.011)
林地细碎化程度 Degree of forestland fragmentation	-0.001	-0.004	0.012	0.012	0.027^**	0.007
林地细碎化程度 Degree of forestland fragmentation	(0.001)	(0.015)	(0.011)	(0.010)	(0.012)	(-0.026)
林地距离公路距离 Distance from forestland to main road	-0.003	0.009	0.032^**	0.042^***	0.037^**	0.043
林地距离公路距离 Distance from forestland to main road	(0.002)	(0.021)	(0.013)	(0.013)	(0.017)	(-0.030)
村距县城距离 Distance from village committee to county	0.002^*	-0.001	-0.003^***	-0.001	-0.001	0.001
村距县城距离 Distance from village committee to county	(0.001)	(0.002)	(0.001)	(0.001)	(0.001)	(-0.001)
地形 Terrain	0.008	-0.198^**	0.012	0.012	-0.034	-0.094
地形 Terrain	(0.007)	(0.083)	(0.054)	(0.048)	(0.056)	(-0.078)
地区虚拟变量 Region dummy variable	0.004	0.024	-0.076^***	-0.090^***	-0.087^***	-0.057^***
地区虚拟变量 Region dummy variable	(0.003)	(0.033)	(0.021)	(0.017)	(0.018)	(-0.022)
常数项 Constant	0.215^***	8.603^***	9.315^***	9.494^***	10.504^***	11.093^***
常数项 Constant	(0.031)	(0.363)	(0.225)	(0.187)	(0.209)	(-0.279)
R²	0.029	0.016	0.048	0.071	0.065	0.036

Table 3

Table 4

Decomposition regression results of the impact of forestry socialization services on the income gap within households(n=2 413)"

项目 Item	模型1：Q_gini Model 1: Q_gini	模型2：Q₁₀ Model 2: Q₁₀	模型3：Q₂₅ Model 3: Q₂₅	模型4：Q₅₀ Model 4: Q₅₀	模型5：Q₇₅ Model 5: Q₇₅	模型6：Q₉₀ Model 6: Q₉₀
总差异 The total difference	-0.103^**	-0.804^***	-0.498^***	-0.514^***	-0.626^***	-0.562^***
总差异 The total difference	(0.041)	(-0.080)	(-0.049)	(-0.047)	(-0.060)	(-0.073)
特征效应贡献 Characteristic effect contribution	-2.019^*	-0.021	-0.045^**	-0.041^**	-0.046^**	-0.053^**
特征效应贡献 Characteristic effect contribution	(1.074)	-(0.030)	(-0.021)	(-0.020)	(-0.020)	(-0.021)
系数效应贡献	1.917^*	-0.542^***	-0.453^***	-0.473^***	-0.580^***	-0.751^***
Coefficient effect contribution	(1.076)	(-0.084)	(-0.051)	(-0.049)	(-0.062)	(-0.076)
特征效应Characteristic effect
户主年龄	0.002	-0.031^*	-0.031^***	-0.019^**	-0.031^***	-0.028^***
Household age	(0.008)	(-0.016)	(-0.011)	(-0.009)	(-0.010)	(-0.010)
户主受教育年限	0.001	-0.005	-0.011	-0.012^*	-0.010	-0.003
Household cultural level	(0.003)	(-0.013)	(-0.009)	(-0.008)	(-0.008)	(-0.009)
是否村干部	0.001	-0.008	-0.007	-0.007^*	-0.009^*	-0.007
Whether a village cadre	(0.004)	(-0.007)	(-0.005)	(-0.004)	(-0.005)	(-0.006)
劳动力占比	-0.007	0.039^**	0.039^***	0.049^***	0.046^***	0.029^***
Proportion of labor force	(0.012)	(-0.016)	(-0.011)	(-0.010)	(-0.011)	(-0.011)
林业收入占比	0.005	-0.003	0.000	-0.007	-0.011^*	-0.022^**
Proportion of forestry income	(0.009)	(-0.007)	(-0.004)	(-0.004)	(-0.006)	(-0.009)
林地经营面积	-0.791	-0.025^*	-0.017	-0.012	0.004	0.013
Area of forestland managed by farmers	(0.750)	(-0.014)	(-0.011)	(-0.009)	(-0.011)	(-0.010)
林地细碎化程度	1.135^*	0.005	-0.004	-0.007	-0.014^*	-0.024^**
Degree of forestland fragmentation	(0.660)	(-0.009)	(-0.005)	(-0.005)	(-0.007)	(-0.012)
林地距离公路距离	-0.001	-0.001	-0.003	-0.004	-0.004	-0.002
Distance from forestland to main road	(0.003)	(-0.003)	(-0.003)	(-0.004)	(-0.004)	(-0.003)
村距县城距离	-0.565^*	-0.001	-0.004	-0.002	-0.002	0.000
Distance from village committee to county	(0.243)	(-0.002)	(-0.004)	(-0.003)	(-0.003)	(-0.001)
地形	-0.033	0.008	0.001	-0.004	-0.003	0.002
Terrain	(0.025)	(-0.006)	(-0.003)	(-0.003)	(-0.003)	(-0.003)
地区虚拟变量	-1.767^**	0.001	-0.009^*	-0.015^*	-0.012^*	-0.010
Region dummy variable	(0.848)	(-0.004)	(-0.005)	(-0.008)	(-0.007)	(-0.006)
系数效应Coefficient effect
户主年龄	0.130	0.254	-0.328	-0.077	-0.061	0.086
Household age	(0.249)	(-0.451)	(-0.273)	(-0.265)	(-0.319)	(-0.403)
户主受教育年限	-0.014	-0.039	-0.075	0.056	-0.037	0.019
Household cultural level	(0.105)	(-0.233)	(-0.144)	(-0.139)	(-0.176)	(-0.223)
是否村干部	-0.006	0.030	0.087^***	0.045	0.08^*	0.045
Whether a village cadre	(0.021)	(-0.054)	(-0.034)	(-0.032)	(-0.041)	(-0.053)
劳动力占比	-0.210	0.229	0.027	-0.106	-0.264	-0.089
Proportion of labor force	(0.128)	(-0.231)	(-0.138)	(-0.139)	(-0.193)	(-0.244)
林业收入占比	0.006	0.029	-0.061^**	-0.034	-0.047	-0.012
Proportion of forestry income	(0.023)	(-0.052)	(-0.029)	(-0.029)	(-0.039)	(-0.054)
林地经营面积	0.858	0.113	0.041	-0.002	-0.028	-0.073
Area of forestland managed by farmers	(0.806)	(-0.078)	(-0.044)	(-0.040)	(-0.052)	(-0.070)
林地细碎化程度	-1.185^*	-0.070	-0.013	0.012	0.021	0.101^**
Degree of forestland fragmentation	(0.687)	(-0.046)	(-0.026)	(-0.024)	(-0.030)	(-0.040)
林地距离公路距离	-0.070	-0.041	0.014	0.009	0.066	0.011
Distance from forestland to main road	(0.117)	(-0.063)	(-0.042)	(-0.042)	(-0.058)	(-0.088)
村距县城距离	1.768^**	-0.034	-0.094	-0.084	-0.110	-0.115
Distance from village committee to county	(0.746)	(-0.091)	(-0.064)	(-0.059)	(-0.074)	(-0.096)
地形	0.166^*	-0.146	0.089	0.165^**	0.133	0.012
Terrain	(0.089)	(-0.107)	(-0.067)	(-0.066)	(-0.085)	(-0.106)
地区虚拟变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Region dummy variable	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
常数项	-2.562^*	-0.799	0.043	-0.275	-0.155	-0.77
Constant	1.317	-0.639	-0.407	-0.391	-0.475	-0.615

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Robustness test results of replacing core explanatory variables(n=2 413)"

变量 Variables	模型1：Q_gini Model 1: Q_gini	模型2：Q₁₀ Model 2: Q₁₀	模型3：Q₂₅ Model 3: Q₂₅	模型4：Q₅₀ Model 4: Q₅₀	模型5：Q₇₅ Model 5: Q₇₅	模型6：Q₉₀ Model 6: Q₉₀
林业社会化服务种类数	-0.082^***	0.204^***	0.065	0.139^***	0.131^**	0.190^**
Number of types of forestry socialized services	(-0.030)	(0.061)	(-0.063)	(-0.053)	(-0.059)	(-0.078)
户主年龄	0.001^***	-0.010^***	-0.009^***	-0.007^***	-0.013^***	-0.012^***
Household age	(0.000)	(0.002)	(-0.003)	(-0.002)	(-0.002)	(-0.003)
户主受教育年限	-0.002^*	0.018^**	0.022^**	0.026^***	0.010	0.011
Household cultural level	(-0.001)	(-0.007)	(-0.010)	(-0.008)	-0.010)	(-0.014)
是否村干部	-0.011	0.048	0.078	0.088^*	0.076	0.026
Whether a village cadre	(-0.008)	(-0.045)	(-0.056)	(-0.051)	(-0.060)	(-0.086)
劳动力占比	-0.027^*	0.336^***	0.240^**	0.445^***	0.461^***	0.217
Proportion of labor force	(-0.015)	(-0.081)	(-0.106)	(-0.091)	(-0.104)	(-0.147)
林业收入占比	-0.015	0.363^***	0.139	0.319^***	0.486^***	0.910^***
Proportion of forestry income	(-0.013)	(-0.078)	(-0.100)	(-0.089)	(-0.111)	(-0.183)
林地经营面积	-0.002^***	0.007	0.013^**	0.012^**	0.007	0.011
Area of forestland managed by farmers	(-0.001)	(-0.004)	(-0.006)	(-0.005)	(-0.007)	(-0.011)
林地细碎化程度	0.001	0.016	0.011	0.011	0.026^**	0.006
Degree of forestland fragmentation	(-0.001)	(-0.010)	(-0.012)	(-0.010)	(-0.012)	(-0.026)
林地距离公路距离	-0.003	0.036^***	0.030^**	0.040^***	0.035^**	0.041
Distance from forestland to main road	(-0.002)	(-0.012)	(-0.013)	(-0.013)	(-0.017)	(-0.030)
村距县城距离	0.002^**	-0.001^*	-0.003^***	-0.001	-0.001	0.001
Distance from village committee to county	(0.001)	(-0.001)	(-0.001)	(-0.001)	(-0.001)	(-0.001)
地形	0.006	-0.196^**	0.014	0.013	-0.033	-0.095
Terrain	(-0.007)	(-0.083)	(-0.055)	(-0.048)	(-0.056)	(-0.078)
地区虚拟变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Region dummy variable	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
常数项	0.248^***	9.783^***	9.573^***	9.674^***	10.716^***	11.244^***
Constant	-0.041	-0.165	-0.218	-0.183	-0.205	-0.279
R²	0.028	0.079	0.041	0.064	0.058	0.034

Table 7

Table 8

Table 9

Table 10

Table 11

Group regression results of the decomposition of the impact of forestry socialization services on the income gap within households"

项目 Item	低水平组 Low level group(n=1 268)
项目 Item	模型1：Q_gini Model 1: Q_gini	模型2：Q₁₀ Model 2: Q₁₀	模型3：Q₂₅ Model 3: Q₂₅	模型4：Q₅₀ Model 4: Q₅₀	模型5：Q₇₅ Model 5: Q₇₅	模型6：Q₉₀ Model 6: Q₉₀
总差异	-0.089^***	-0.376^***	-0.217^***	-0.054	-0.036	-0.219
Total difference	(-0.033)	(-0.087)	(-0.069)	(-0.060)	(-0.069)	(-0.137)
系数效应贡献	0.002	-0.003	-0.024	-0.017	-0.035	-0.035
Coefficient effect contribution	(-0.010)	(-0.032)	(-0.027)	(-0.023)	(-0.027)	(-0.030)
特征效应贡献	-0.091^***	-0.373^***	-0.193^***	-0.038	-0.001	-0.184
Characteristic effect contribution	(-0.034)	(-0.091)	(-0.071)	(-0.062)	(-0.071)	(-0.140)
控制变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Control variables	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
地区虚拟变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Region dummy variable	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
常数项	-0.139	-1.746^*	0.765	0.848	1.006	0.660
Constant	(-0.281)	(-0.826)	(-0.625)	(-0.502)	(-0.560)	(-1.034)

项目 Item	高水平组 High level group(n=1 145)
项目 Item	模型1：Q_gini Model 1: Q_gini	模型2：Q₁₀ Model 2: Q₁₀	模型3：Q₂₅ Model 3: Q₂₅	模型4：Q₅₀ Model 4: Q₅₀	模型5：Q₇₅ Model 5: Q₇₅	模型6：Q₉₀ Model 6: Q₉₀
总差异	-0.079^***	-0.162	-0.274^***	-0.194^***	-0.145^*	-0.106
Total difference	(-0.028)	(-0.118)	(-0.072)	(-0.073)	(-0.076)	(-0.099)
系数效应贡献	-0.004	-0.046	-0.108^***	-0.112^***	-0.099^***	-0.047
Coefficient effect contribution	(-0.010)	(-0.039)	(-0.032)	(-0.033)	(-0.034)	(-0.037)
特征效应贡献	-0.075^***	-0.116	-0.166^**	-0.082	-0.045	-0.059
Characteristic effect contribution	(-0.028)	(-0.119)	(-0.071)	(-0.074)	(-0.082)	(-0.106)
控制变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Control variables	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
地区虚拟变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Region dummy variable	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
常数项	-0.187	1.464	1.002	0.278	0.244	-0.299
Constant	(-0.191)	(-0.926)	(-0.560)	(-0.551)	(-0.557)	(-0.754)

Table 11

References 0

	程名望, 史清华, JinY H, 等. 农户收入差距及其根源: 模型与实证. 管理世界, 2015, (7): 17- 28.
	Cheng M W , Shi Q H , Jin Y H , et al. Rural household income gap and its root causes: models and empirical studies. Management World, 2015, (7): 17- 28.
	高雪萍, 王璐, 孔凡斌, 等. 社会化服务对农户林地规模经营行为的影响研究. 林业经济问题, 2022, 42 (1): 1- 8.
	Gao X P , Wang L , Kong F B , et al. Socialized service impact on farmers forest land scale management behavior study. Journal of Forestry Economic Problems, 2022, 42 (1): 1- 8.
	高雪萍, 王璐, 袁若兰, 等. 林业社会化服务提高了农户林业生产效率吗. 农林经济管理学报, 2021, 20 (2): 209- 218.
	Gao X P , Wang L , Yuan R L , et al. Does socialization of forestry service improve the efficiency of farm household forestry production. Journal of Agricultural and Forestry Economics and Management, 2021, 20 (2): 209- 218.
	孔凡斌, 阮华, 廖文梅, 等. 农村劳动力转移对农户林业社会化服务需求的影响——基于1 407户农户生产环节的调查. 林业科学, 2018, 54 (6): 132- 142.
	Kong F B , Ruan H , Liao W M , et al. Effects of rural labor transfer on farmers' demand for forestry socialization services: a survey of 1 407 farmers' production links. Journal of Forestry Sciences, 2018, 54 (6): 132- 142.
	李成明, 孙博文, 董志勇. 农户异质性、农地经营权流转与农村收入分配——基于中国家庭追踪调查数据(CFPS)的实证研究. 农村经济, 2019, (8): 26- 33.
	Li C M , Sun B W , Dong Z Y . Household heterogeneity, transfer of farmland management rights and rural income distribution: an empirical study based on China household tracking survey (CFPS) data. Journal of Rural Economy, 2019, (8): 26- 33.
	李春梅. 二元劳动力市场框架下产品内分工对我国相对收入差距变化影响分析. 上海经济研究, 2013, 25 (2): 108- 119.
	Li C M . The impact of intra-product division of labor on the change of relative income gap in China under the framework of binary labor market. Shanghai Economic Studies, 2013, 25 (2): 108- 119.
	李立朋, 李桦, 丁秀玲. 林业生产性服务能促进农户林地规模经营吗?——基于林地流入视角的实证分析. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2020, 30 (3): 143- 152.
	Li L P , Li H , Ding X L . Can productive forestry services promote the scale management of farmers' forestland? —empirical analysis based on the perspective of forestland inflow. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2020, 30 (3): 143- 152.
	李实, 岳希明, 史泰丽, 等. 中国收入分配格局的最新变化. 劳动经济研究, 2019, 7 (1): 9- 31.
	Li S , Yue X M , Shi T L , et al. The latest changes of China's income distribution pattern. Labor Economics Research, 2019, 7 (1): 9- 31.
	廖文梅, 王璐, 高雪萍. 社会化服务能否促进农户林业生产要素的投入?——基于林业病虫害统防统治服务调查. 华中农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2022, (5): 101- 113.
	Liao W M , Wang L , Gao X P . Can socialization service promote farmer's input of forestry production factor?—based on the investigation of forest pest control service. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), 2022, (5): 101- 113.
	廖文梅, 张广来, 孔凡斌. 农户林业社会化服务需求特征及其影响因素分析——基于我国8省(区)1 413户农户的调查. 林业科学, 2016, 52 (11): 148- 156.
	Liao W M , Zhang G L , Kong F B . Characteristics of farmers' demand for forestry socialization service and its influencing factors: based on a survey of 1 413 farmers in 8 provinces (regions) in China. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2016, 52 (11): 148- 156.
	刘浩, 陈思焜, 张敏新, 等. 退耕还林工程对农户收入不平等影响的测度与分析——基于总收入决定方程的Shapley值分解. 林业科学, 2017, 53 (5): 125- 133.
	Liu H , Chen S K , Zhang M X , et al. Measurement and analysis of the impact of farmland for forest project on household income inequality: shapley value decomposition based on total income determination equation. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2017, 53 (5): 125- 133.
	刘洋, 余国新. 农业社会化服务对土地规模经营的影响——基于棉花产业的实证研究. 经济问题, 2022, (1): 93- 100.
	Liu Y , Yu G X . Effect of agricultural socialization service on land scale management: an empirical study based on cotton industry. Economic Issues, 2022, (1): 93- 100.
	刘志忠, 张浩然, 欧阳慧. 乡村振兴下土地流转的收入分配效应研究——基于农村劳动力就地转移的视角. 学术研究, 2022, (8): 83- 91.83-91, 177
	Liu Z Z , Zhang H R , Ouyang H . Research on the income distribution effect of land transfer under rural revitalization: based on the perspective of rural labor transfer in situ. Academic Research, 2022, (8): 83- 91.83-91, 177
	罗必良. "三农"问题的症结及其化解逻辑. 经济理论与经济管理, 2007, (4): 57- 62.
	Luo B L . The crux of "agriculture, rural areas and farmers" and its solution logic. Economic Theory and Economic Management, 2007, (4): 57- 62.
	罗明忠, 邱海兰. 农机社会化服务采纳、禀赋差异与农村经济相对贫困缓解. 南方经济, 2021, (2): 1- 18.
	Luo M Z , Qiu H L . Farm machinery socialization service adopted relative poverty relief, endowment difference and rural economy. Journal of Southern economy, 2021, (2): 1- 18.
	牛坤在, 许恒周. 农地赋权与农村内部收入不平等——基于农地流转与劳动力转移的中介作用. 中国土地科学, 2022, 36 (3): 51- 61.
	Niu K Z , Xu H Z . Rural land empowerment and rural income inequality: the mediating role of rural land transfer and labor transfer. China Land Science, 2022, 36 (3): 51- 61.
	牛文浩, 申淑虹, 罗岚, 等. 农户兼业扩大了农村内部收入差距吗?——来自黄河流域中上游1 879份农户调研的证据. 干旱区资源与环境, 2022, 36 (9): 80- 87.
	Niu W H , Shen S H , Luo L , et al. Does part-time farming widen the income gap within the countryside? Evidence from 1 879 household surveys in the upper and middle reaches of the Yellow River Basin. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2022, 36 (9): 80- 87.
	曲朦, 赵凯. 粮食主产区农户农业社会化服务采用: 增收效应及要素贡献分解. 农村经济, 2021, (5): 118- 126.
	Qu M , Zhao K . Adoption of agricultural socialization services by farmers in major grain producing areas: income increase effect and factor contribution decomposition. Journal of Rural Economy, 2021, (5): 118- 126.
	陶善信. 社会化服务面临的分工困境: 资本下乡如何有效改造家庭经营. 农村经济, 2022, (4): 118- 126.
	Tao S X . Dilemma of division of labor in socialized services: how to effectively transform family management with capital going to the countryside. Rural Economy, 2022, (4): 118- 126.
	万海远, 王盈斐. 我国农村居民收入分配差距新变化. 农业经济问题, 2022, (1): 27- 39.
	Wan H Y , Wang Y F . New changes of income distribution gap of rural residents in China. Issue of Agricultural Economy, 2022, (1): 27- 39.
	温亚平, 冯亮明, 刘伟平. 非农就业对农户林业生产分工的影响——基于福建省的农户调研数据. 林业科学, 2021, 57 (3): 135- 144.
	Wen Y P , Feng L M , Liu W P . The influence of non-agricultural employment on the division of forestry production of farmers: based on the survey data of farmers in Fujian Province. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57 (3): 135- 144.
	吴超, 李强, 王会, 等. 农地流转对农村内部收入不平等的影响. 农业现代化研究, 2022, 43 (2): 261- 272.
	Wu C , Li Q , Wang H , et al. The influence of agricultural land transfer on rural internal income inequality. Research of Agricultural Modernization, 2022, 43 (2): 261- 272.
	薛凯芸, 王越, 胡振. 共同富裕视角下数字普惠金融对农户收入的影响——来自黄河流域中上游地区的证据. 农业现代化研究, 2022, 43 (6): 971- 983.
	Xue K Y , Wang Y , Hu Z . Impact of digital financial inclusion on household income from the perspective of common prosperity: evidence from the middle and upper reaches of the yellow river basin. Research on Agricultural Modernization, 2022, 43 (6): 971- 983.
	张寒, 周正康, 杨红强, 等. 劳动力成本上升对农户营林投入结构的影响——基于林业社会化服务供给约束的视角. 中国农村经济, 2022, (4): 106- 125.
	Zhang H , Zhou Z K , Yang H Q , et al. Effects of rising labor costs on the structure of farmers' forest investment: from the perspective of supply constraints of forestry socialization services. China Rural Economy, 2022, (4): 106- 125.
	郑沃林, 李尚蒲. 收入、生态与农民共富: 来自农户的证据. 南方经济, 2022, (5): 29- 42.
	Zheng W L , Li S P . Income, ecology and farmers' co-prosperity: evidence from farmers. Southern Economic Journal, 2022, (5): 29- 42.
	Chiodi V , Jaimovich E , Montes-Rojas G . Migration, remittances and capital accumulation: evidence from rural Mexico. Journal of Development Studies, 2012, 48 (8): 1139- 1155.
	Firpo S , Fortin N M , Lemieux T . Unconditional quantile regressions. Econometrica, 2009, 77 (3): 953- 973.
	Piketty T , Yang L , Zucman G . Capital accumulation, private property, and rising inequality in China, 1978-2015. American Economic Review, 2019, 109 (7): 2469- 2496.

匹配方法 Matching method	统计值 Value of statistics	模型1：Q_gini Model 1: Q_gini	模型2：Q₁₀ Model 2: Q₁₀	模型3：Q₂₅ Model 3: Q₂₅	模型4：Q₅₀ Model 4: Q₅₀	模型5：Q₇₅ Model 5: Q₇₅	模型6：Q₉₀ Model 6: Q₉₀
最近邻匹配 Nearest neighbor matching	平均处理效应 Average treatment effect	-0.178^***	0.254^***	0.001	0.022	0.032^**	0.101^**
最近邻匹配 Nearest neighbor matching	标准误 Standard error	(0.044)	(0.096)	(0.022)	(0.014)	(0.015)	(0.050)
半径匹配 Radius matching	平均处理效应 Average treatment effect	-0.188^***	0.195^**	0.004	0.020	0.026^*	0.109^**
半径匹配 Radius matching	标准误 Standard error	(0.040)	(0.078)	(0.020)	(0.013)	(0.014)	(0.047)
核匹配 Nuclear matching	平均处理效应 Average treatment effect	-0.187^***	0.203^**	0.001	0.020	0.027^*	0.108^**
核匹配 Nuclear matching	标准误 Standard error	(0.040)	(0.083)	(0.020)	(0.013)	(0.014)	(0.048)

变量Variables	样本状态 State of the sample	平均处理效应 Average processing effect		标准偏差 Standard deviation	标准偏差绝对值降低(%) Absolute standard deviation decreases(%)	T值 T value
变量Variables	样本状态 State of the sample	处理组 Treated group	对照组 Control group	标准偏差 Standard deviation	标准偏差绝对值降低(%) Absolute standard deviation decreases(%)	T值 T value
户主年龄	匹配前Before matching	52.557	52.721	-3.700	29.200	-0.900
Household age	匹配后After matching	52.562	52.834	-2.600		-0.570
户主受教育年限	匹配前Before matching	7.188	6.987	7.100	83.500	1.730^*
Household cultural level	匹配后After matching	7.128	7.096	1.200		0.250
是否村干部	匹配前Before matching	0.288	0.240	11.000	78.700	2.700^***
Whether a village cadre	匹配后After matching	0.254	0.265	-2.300		-0.520
劳动力占比	匹配前Before matching	0.710	0.701	3.900	38.500	0.950
Proportion of labor force	匹配后After matching	0.706	0.712	-2.400		-0.530
林业收入占比	匹配前Before matching	0.139	0.132	3.500	25.800	0.860
Proportion of forestry income	匹配后After matching	0.140	0.133	-2.600		0.560
林地经营面积	匹配前Before matching	3.169	2.787	5.700	55.900	1.410
Area of forestland managed by farmers	匹配后After matching	2.614	2.783	-2.500		-0.670
林地细碎化程度	匹配前Before matching	1.191	0.858	11.300	79.000	2.850^***
Degree of forestland fragmentation	匹配后After matching	0.860	0.930	-2.400		-0.770
林地距离公路距离	匹配前Before matching	1.539	1.586	-2.900	4.400	-0.720
Distance from forestland to main road	匹配后After matching	1.571	1.525	2.800		0.630
村距县城距离	匹配前Before matching	31.864	33.073	-4.700	98.000	-1.140
Distance from village to county	匹配后After matching	32.456	32.480	-0.100		-0.020
地形	匹配前Before matching	0.536	0.642	-21.700	86.400	-5.30^***
Terrain	匹配后After matching	0.570	0.555	3.000		0.640

[1]	Fanbin Kong,Mingye Cui,Caiyao Xu,Yu Lu,Yueqin Shen. Impact of the Realization of Values of Forest Ecological Products on the Urban-Rural Gap in Zhejiang Province [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2023, 59(1): 31-43.
[2]	Dan Pan,Luyi Luo,Yi Yu,Fanbin Kong. Influence of Forest Resource Development Project on the Urban-Rural Income Gap in Old Revolutionary Regions [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2023, 59(1): 74-89.

Influence of Socialized Forestry Services on the Income Gap of Rural Households

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 12

References 0

Related Articles 2

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

维度Demension	均值Mean	标准差SD
林业技术培训服务 Forestry technology training services	0.309	0.150
林业市场信息服务 Forestry market information services	0.351	0.139
林业投资融资服务 Forestry investment and financing services	0.407	0.170
林业政策法律咨询服务 Forestry policy legal advisory services	0.419	0.146
病虫害及火灾预防服务 Pest and fire prevention services	0.440	0.164
林业生产外包中介服务 Forestry production outsourcing intermediary services	0.549	0.174
总体指标The overall index	0.354	0.184

变量 Variables	模型1：2SLS法第一阶段 Model 1:2SLS model step 1	模型2：2SLS法第二阶段 Model 1:2SLS model step 2
林业社会化服务		0.837^***
Forestry socialized services		(0.115)
林业社会化服务种类数	0.158^***
Number of types of forestry socialized services	(0.001)
户主年龄	-0.001	-0.010^***
Household age	(0.000)	(0.002)
户主受教育年限	0.001	0.018^**
Household cultural level	(0.001)	(0.007)
是否村干部	0.013^***	0.042^***
Whether a village cadre	(0.003)	(0.045)
劳动力占比	-0.019^***	0.343^***
Proportion of labor force	(0.005)	(0.081)
林业收入占比	-0.008	0.365^***
Proportion of forestry income	(0.005)	(0.078)
林地经营面积	0.001	0.007
Area of forestland managed by farmers	(0.001)	(0.004)
林地细碎化程度	0.001	0.016
Degree of forestland fragmentation	(0.001)	(0.010)
林地距离公路距离	-0.001	0.037^*
Distance from forestland to main road	(0.001)	(0.012)
村距县城距离	-0.001^***	-0.001
Distance from village committee to county	(0.001)	(0.001)
地形	0.018^***	-0.031^***
Terrain	(0.003)	(0.042)
地区虚拟变量	已控制	已控制
Region dummy variable	Controlled	Controlled
常数项	0.042^***	9.712^***
Constant	0.011	0.166
F	1 521.33
R²	0.884	0.079

低水平组项目 Item of the low level group	模型1：Q_gini Model 1: Q_gini	模型2：Q₁₀ Model 2: Q₁₀	模型3：Q₂₅ Model 3: Q₂₅	模型4：Q₅₀ Model 4: Q₅₀	模型5：Q₇₅ Model 5: Q₇₅	模型6：Q₉₀ Model 6: Q₉₀
林业社会化服务	-0.137^**	2.237^***	0.909^**	0.386	0.839^**	2.074^***
Forestry socialized services	(-0.054)	(-0.587)	(-0.376)	(-0.297)	(-0.336)	(-0.481)
控制变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Control variables	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
地区虚拟变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Region dummy variable	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
常数项	0.212^***	8.201^***	9.274^***	9.565^***	9.857^***	10.189^***
Constant	(-0.046)	(-0.513)	(-0.321)	(-0.249)	(-0.280)	(-0.420)
R²	0.025	0.034	0.042	0.053	0.051	0.045

高水平组项目 Item of the high level group	模型1：Q_gini Model 1: Q_gini	模型2：Q₁₀ Model 2: Q₁₀	模型3：Q₂₅ Model 3: Q₂₅	模型4：Q₅₀ Model 4: Q₅₀	模型5：Q₇₅ Model 5: Q₇₅	模型6：Q₉₀ Model 6: Q₉₀
林业社会化服务	-0.030	1.796^***	0.159	0.212	1.015^***	0.258
Forestry socialized services	(-0.042)	(-0.535)	(-0.302)	(-0.295)	(-0.310)	(-0.415)
控制变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Control variables	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
地区虚拟变量	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制	已控制
Region dummy variable	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled	Controlled
常数项	0.183^***	9.075^***	9.854^***	10.214^***	11.776^***	12.756^***
Constant	(-0.047)	(-0.603)	(-0.339)	(-0.314)	(-0.324)	(-0.424)
R²	0.031	0.015	0.051	0.058	0.086	0.073