（4）Risk aversionThat is, the part that people are willing to give up to reduce risk exposure.
Formula of yield:
Earnings Yield = Earnings / Market Capitalization
or
Earnings Yield = Net Profit / Market Cap
Meaning method
Announce
edit
Financial yield
The return rate studies the size of the return rate as an individual (and family) and social (government public expenditure) investment, which can be divided into individual return rate and social return rate. This paper focuses on the former.Since the 1950s and 1960shuman capital theory Since then, the research on yield is very important.
Because the human capital theory has established that the rate of return is regarded as an investmentBasic theoretical modelTherefore, it becomes the theoretical basis for estimating the rate of return.It is generally believed that the research on yield has the following significance:
First, the rate of return is a useful index to evaluate the productivity of the rate of return. It attempts to answer whether society and individuals should be on the rate of returnInput resources？That is to say, the rate of return can be used as a criterion to evaluate the resources invested in the rate of return by a country or regionResource allocation efficiencyIn turn, it can encourage individuals and governments to invest in the rate of return.For example, by comparing the rate of return withphysical capital The rate of return on investment can judge how much a country or region invests in the rate of return;Another example is the high value of the return rate found in most studies, which can encourage individuals and governments to invest more resources in the return rate.
Second, we can judge the internal return rate by studying the return rate of different groups and different return rate levelsresource allocation Rationality, including the rationality of resource allocation for men and women, rural and urban areas, as well as various income rates at all levels.
Third, in terms of yieldexpenditureAs an investment, it is required to obtain corresponding income, and the level of income can reflect the role of yield investment on income distribution, andLabor allocationThe level of efficiency.Therefore, understandHuman capital investmentYield helps analysis and reviewIncome policyThe gains and losses of yield policy and employment policy.
Opening yield
Fourth, the research on yield is also importantPolicy significance(Psacharopoulos et al., 2002).The research in this field can be used to guide the macro policy formulation of yield system and fiscal reform, such as the high yield fiscal reform in Britain and Australia.In addition, innovative application fields are used to evaluate some special projects.
Examples in this regard are the "school construction" project in Indonesia, the "blackboard" project in India, andEthiopia"Major sector investment" project.At the same time, according to the research on the rate of return, the government should not only encourage individuals to improve their investment in human capital in the design of public policies, but also pay attention to ensuring and subsidizingLow income familiesInvestment.
Fifthly, the study of yield is of special significance for countries in transition such as China.Many researchers regard the return rate as the judgment of ChinaLabor marketSite construction andeconomic transition An indicator of degree.
For example, Appleton et al. (2002) judged whether China's urban areas have formed a competitive labor market by comparing the returns of different groups;Rydsong(2001) Considered that the rate of return can be used to judge the segmentation of the labor market system;Zhao&Zhou (2001) believed that the study of the rate of return provided a tool to investigate the allocation of resources during the transition period and to understand the degree of social system reform.
The research on individual rate of return relies on micro data.According to the existing literature, there are two main methods to study the return rate: Mincer income function (calledMincer yield）And based onExact method(ElaborateMethod)Internal rate of return。In addition, according to the characteristics of rural families, scholars studying rural income rate have developed another method:Production function method（Jamison&Gaag,1987）。
Since the application of the accurate method depends on the accurate data of the cost and benefit of the rate of return, which is difficult to obtain or estimate in reality, in addition, the production function method is a special method applied to rural areas where families are the production units. Therefore, the literature on the application of the accurate method and the production function method to the study of China's rate of return is still very limited,Most of the studies applied the Mincer income function.The following contents of this paper also focus on the introduction of this method and literature research.
Rate of return at the end of the period
Mincer's income function was determined by the economist Mincer (1974) according tohuman capital theory This model includes two basic variables: rate of return, work experience and their squares, Empirical modelThe coefficient of the yield variable in is the personal yield of the yield（Mincer yield）, which means that the income increase caused by accepting one year's yield (regardless of the yield level)ratio。
If we divide the continuous variable in the basic income function - school yield years (S) into a series of yield levelsDummy variable, we can determine the yield of different levels of yield according to the comparison of the coefficients of these dummy variables.
thus it can be seen,Mincer income functionIn fact, it is a model to study income decisions. Therefore, researchers usually add other variables, such as gender, region, and department, into the model according to their own research purposes.This function contains two basic economic concepts:
(1) It is a labor pricing model or hedonic wage equation, which reveals the remuneration of productivity factors such as yield and work experience in the labor market;
(2) It represents the rate of return, which can be compared withMarket interest rateAnd then determine the optimal investment level of human capital (Heckman, et al, 2003).
There are many comments on the Mincer function, such as Psacharopoulos, 1994;Schultz,1988;Strauss&Thomas,1995;Card,1999；Lai Desheng, 2001;Heckman,etal,2003；wait.Although later scholars have criticized this method, it has become the most widely used method by researchers because of its simplicity (Psacharopoulos, 1994).
basic feature
Announce
edit
Sample coverage rate of return
The earliest research on China's yield should be Jamison&Gaag's article published in 1987.In the initial stage, the number of research samples and the area covered are very limited, and they are often only samples from a city or county.In these models, it is often assumed that the samples are homogeneous and the model is relatively simple.
In subsequent studies, the sample size coverage has been expanded to nationwide samples. More control variables have been added to the model, and the heterogeneity of samples has been taken into account. For example, the returns of samples have been calculated and compared according to different attributes of samples.
In addition to gender, these attributes also include different time, region, urban sample work unit attributes, employment attributes, time, age, etc.The main results of the study are summarized below.
1. Comparison between urban and rural areas
Because of the obvious dual system of China's labor market, the research on the rate of return distinguishes between rural and urban areas.These two types of samples are defined according to the household registration attribute, regardless of whether they work in urban or rural areas.From the calculation results, in urban areas, the lowest value is 0.75% (Shao Liling, 1994), and the highest value is 11.5% (Zhang&Zhao, 2002). The yield calculated by applying most of the data before 1995 is below 6%;In rural areas, the lowest value is 0.7% (Gregory&Meng, 1995;Li&Urmanbetova,2002），The highest value is 6.4% (Brauw, et al, 2002), and the yield of most studies is below 5%.
It can be seen that the return rate of rural individuals is significantly lower than that of urban residents, which can be seen more clearly from the research that includes both rural and urban residents.asLi ShiLi Wenbin (1994) and Li Wenbin (1994) estimated that the return rate of urban individuals was nearly 2 percentage points higher than that of rural individuals using national data in 1988. In a recent study (Li Chunling, 2003), the gap between the two reached 7 percentage points in 2001, indicating that the gap has gradually expanded over time.
Another characteristic of the difference in the rate of return between urban and rural areas is that the rate of return and work experience determine incomeExplanatory powerThe rural model is significantly lower than the urban model.Most studies have found that less than 10% of the total income difference of rural wage earners is caused by two factors, namely, yield and work experience, while most urban samples are more than 20%.
This result has once again proved that China's labor marketDualistic systemCharacteristics, andRural labor forceThe development of the market lags far behind the urban labor market.
2. Whether the income decreases or increases with the level of education
Yield
According to the neoclassical economic theory, investmentLaw of diminishing marginal returnsYield investment should also show similar characteristics.In fact, research on other countries in the world has also verified this rule (Psacharopoulos, 1994), that is, with the improvement of education level, the return rate shows a downward trend.However, studies on China have shown opposite results.
One evidence is that many studies have found that the order of returns from high to low isHigh yield、Medium yieldandPrimary rate of return(Li Shi and Li Wenbin, 1994; Wei, et al, 1999; Shao Liling, 1994;Xie&Hannum,1996；Etc.).
Another evidence is that the sample takes a certain degree of return as the dividing point, and estimates the return rate of individuals above and below this point respectively. It is found that the return rate of individuals above the dividing point is higher than that of individuals below.For example, the research of Brauw&Rozelle (2002) and Maurer Fazio&Dinh (2002) found that the coefficient of the number of years of return rate of individuals above primary school or high school is higher than that of individuals below primary school or high school;Zhu JianfangThe research of et al. (1995) shows that the basic rate of return representing the middle and low rate of return is 1.8%, and the professional rate of return representing the middle and high rate of return is 3.0%;Li (2003) also found that although the average rate of return in China is relatively low, the rate of return in universities is higher than that before high school.
Benjamin et alincome disparity。At the same time,increasing returnsThe reason may be related to the large amount of subsidies given by the Chinese government to individuals at high levels of returns, especially high returns.
3. Change trend over time
In urban areas, the rate of return has shown a significant upward trend over time.For example, Zhao&Zhou (2001) estimated that the return rate in 1978 was 2.8%, and the corresponding value calculated using the data in the middle and late 1980s reached 4%, while the research after the 1990s reached more than 5%;Zhang&Zhao (2002) applied the national data from 1988 to 1999 to show this rule more clearly. For example, the yield in 1988, 1994 and 1999 was 4.7%, 7.8% and 11.5% respectively.
In addition, the growth of urban return rate over time is also characterized by the following: 1993-94 was the period of greatest change, the return rate grew slowly before 1993, rapidly increased in 1994, and then slowly increased again.In rural areas, due to the low value of the rate of return, the increase trend over time is relatively gentle, change degreeIt is far lower than urban areas.
In many studies, the return rate of men is lower than that of women. The only exception is Maurer Fazio&Dinh (2002).Moreover, the difference between the two tends to expand over time. For example, Yu Xuejun (2000) found that in 1986, the difference between male and female returns was 2 percentage points, and by 1994, the gap had expanded to more than 3 percentage points.
The research of Zhang&Zhao (2002) shows that over time,Male female yieldThe gap between the two groups decreased slightly at first, and then gradually expanded, from 2.9% in 1988 to the lowest 2.4% in 1992, and then to the largest 5.8% in 1999.The higher rate of return for women provides a certain basis for the policy of investment in favor of female rate of return.
Lower yield
In the literature, there are many explanations for the gender difference in the rate of return. One explanation is that female employees go to schoolopportunity costLower than that of men, so that only opportunity cost is considered and direct cost is not consideredMincer yieldWill make women taller than men（Rydsong，2001）。
The other explanation is based on the difference in labor time participation between the two, that is, women'sLabor participation rateIt is lower than men, and women's ability in the labor market is higher than that of women in the family, while men do not show this feature. From the perspective of measurement method, when estimating the yield of Mercer, ignoring the ability factor will overestimate the yield (see the explanation below), so the yield of women will be higher than that of men (Zhang&Zhao, 2002).
Another explanation is that the relative gap between the income of individuals with a higher level of return and that of individuals with a lower level of return in the female sample is higher than that of men (Du Yuhong and Sun Zhijun, 2003).
In reality, the determinants of income in the labor market of different economic sectors are different, which will lead to differences in the rate of return.Almost all studies found thatOwnership structureIn general, the return rate of state-owned sector and public sector is lower than that of private sector.Due to theLabor resourcesThe marketization degree of allocation is lower than that of the private sector, so the return rate of the sector with high marketization degree is higher than that of the sector with low marketization degree.This reflects the difference in returns on returns in different sectors, and also reflects the difference in the extent to which the productivity effect of returns plays (Du Yuhong and Sun Zhijun, 2003).
Financial yield
6. The impact of other individual attributes on the rate of return In addition to the gender mentioned above, the individual attributes concerned in the literature include age, length of service, household registration, way of finding work, employment attributes, etc.It is found that the returns of young people and individuals with shorter working years are higher than those of older people and individuals with longer working years (Maurer Fazio, 1999;Li&Luo,2002;Zhang&Zhao,2002），The individual income rate of finding a job through competition (market) is higher than that through "arrangement" (government) (Meng, 1995;Maurer-Fazio&Dinh,2002）。
If divided by household registration and employment experience, those individuals who have been working (not "laid off") have the highest rate of return, followed by those who have found work after being laid off, and the lowest are those who still have no formal work after being laid off;The rate of return of urban residents is higher than that of migrant workers in cities and towns. In addition, the rate of return of laid-off individuals who have found jobs is higher than that before laid-off (Maurer Fazio&Dinh, 2002;Appleton,etal.2002）。
For example, Appleton et al. (2002), based on their research on the data of cities across the country in 1999, found that the return rate of two groups (urban residents and migrant workers) in cities has not changed much (the former is 6%, the latter is 5.6%), and thus judged that China's cities have initially formed a competitive labor market.
7. Regional differences
The regional gap of China's yield is also obvious. Some studies found that the yield in the eastern region is the lowest, while the yield in the western region is the highest, and some studies found that the yield in the central region is the highest.However, the overall characteristic is that the yield in the western region is at least not lower than that in the eastern region, which provides solid evidence for strengthening the policy of investment in the western region.
8. International Comparison
What position is China's yield in the world?According to the research of Psacharopoulos et al. (2002), the world averageMincer yield9.7%, of which the average level of Asian countries is 9.9% and that of OECD countries is 7.5%.
By comparison, the return rate of China's urban areas was lower than that of the rest of the world, Asian countries anddeveloping countryAnd the earlier the time goes, the lower the yield;Around 2000, this figure began to approach and exceed the average level of the world and other regions.The rate of return in China's rural areas has always been lower than the world average.
explain
Announce
edit
The research on the rate of return using the data before the middle and late 1990s has obtained relatively low values, especially in rural areas. Some studies even think that the role of the rate of return in China's rural areas is negligible (Zhao, 1997).
We can't doubt the reliability of the data, because most studies useNational Bureau of StatisticsSampling survey data conducted nationwide with assistance.An implicit policy implication of these results is that China's previous low level of return investment is reasonable, and it is also reasonable to maintain such a low level of investment. More resources should be invested in sectors with higher returns.Is that really the case?
Economic and financial yield of social security decreased
Many researchers have explained this phenomenon from two perspectives, one is based on the analysis of some institutional characteristics of the labor market, the other is from the perspective of measurement methods.This part mainly discusses the former.
The influence of institutional factors on the rate of return is mainly manifested in the labor distribution system and the labor market segmentation system.labourDistribution efficiencyAnd the labor market due to institutional segmentationNon competitiveAnd illiquidity will have a negative impact on the productivity of workers. In this way, the productivity of individuals who have received a rate of return cannot be fully exerted, or their income is lower than that createdMarginal productThe value of is bound to reduce the rate of return.
From this point of view, some early studies focused on theoretical explanations without empirical tests.For example, Knight&Song (1991) believed that the lower rate of return, the private rate of return, was related to the rigid wage system.Li Shi and Li Wenbin (1994) attributed the lower rate of return to the urban wage system.The theoretical analysis of Wu Jianjun and Pan Chunyan (1998) also believes that the enterprise wage system in China's cities and towns basically does not reflect the difference in the degree of workers' income rate, which is China's personal income rateROIThe main reason for serious low.Rydsong(2001) emphasized many problems caused by the labor market segmentation system.He believes that the administration andNon competitiveThe non mobility of labor force will inhibit the deployment capacity and production capacity, which will lead to low returns.
One year central bank notes stop issuing good bond market
Other studies have empirically tested the impact of institutional factors.Fleisher&Wang (2002) compared theMarginal product valueIt is found that the marginal product value of technical management personnel is much higher than that of production workers, while the actual income of the two is not much different. Because the profitability of technical management personnel is high, while that of production workers is low,The ratio between the marginal product value of individuals with higher and lower rates of return is higher than the ratio of their remuneration or income. At the same time, there are institutional divisions and restrictions in the labor marketLabor mobilityThese all explain the low yield.
The estimated value of China's rural return rate in the literature is lower, which has aroused more researchers' interest.Zhao (1997) believes that the traditional estimation method underestimates the yield of the yield rate because it ignores the institutional factor of urban-rural labor market segmentation (that is, restrictions on labor mobility caused by government policies), especially because China has a long-standing income gap between urban and rural areas,If the rate of return helps rural individuals overcome the barriers to entering the urban labor marketMincerThe income function will not capture the impact of the level of return of rural residents.
Taking this as the starting point, Zhao passed thelabour marketThe segmentation factor is introduced into the model, and the agricultural employment andNon-agriculturalThe income of the employed rural labor force, and estimated the rate of return (called the "migration" rate of return). The result shows that the migration rate of return in 1979 was 8.3%, while that in 1985 was 4.3%, which is much higher than other research results in the same period.Li Shi and Li Wenbin (1994) analyzed the characteristics of the rural factor market. They believed that most of the products sold were less thanMarket clearingThe price of the land, fertilizer and labor input is usually determined by administrative means rather than by the market. Therefore, the formal rate of return plays a small role in determining the optimal combination of input and output.
Schultz (1964) has long pointed out that in traditional agriculture, farmers do not have economic incentives to apply technology, many agricultural technologies will be lost, and there is no requirement for the level of returns of rural workers.Rosenzweig (1995) further pointed out that yield investment is not omnipotent, and its yield depends on technological innovation, market andPolitical systemReform.The author applies this theory to explanationWestern ChinaThe role of the rate of return in rural areas is that the traditional agricultural production technology plays a leading role in the familyproduction function The main reason why the coefficient of medium yield is negative (Sun Zhijun, 2002).
The above explanation is appropriate for the relationship between the rate of return and agricultural production. However, most estimates of the rate of return use rural individuals engaged in non-agricultural labor activities.The comparison of the rate of return of urban residents and urban migrant workers has shown that the dual system in the labor market is the reason for the lower rate of return of rural wage earners.Some studies further explain the production technology level of township enterprises that employ many rural individuals and the imbalance between supply and demand in the rural labor market.
Li&Urmanbetova (2002), through the research on the wage decision and the income of the rate of return in the labor market dominated by rural township enterprises, believes that in such a labor market, because the number of township enterprises is small and the economic scale is small, the labor force is relatively surplus, thus forming a buyer's market in the labor market.In this way, workers are in contact withEmployerThere are disadvantages in determining wages and salaries, and it is difficult for workers toMarginal productivityFor enterprises in rural areas, the rate of return is basically ineffective in the wage structure.However, even if the imbalance between supply and demand in the labor market is true, if the labor force with a higher rate of return is more productive, they can also get higher wages.In this way, lower yields imply other explanations.The primitive and backward production technology of rural enterprises is a factor. In these enterprises, the rate of return is not important at all. On the contrary, work experience may be an important factor in determining wages.
Yield
From the above research, we can see that the low rate of return in China is not due to the reason of the rate of return investment itself, but due to the constraints of the system and technical conditions required for the productivity effect of the rate of return.This explanation is rooted in the assumption that human capital, as an asset, is likePhysical assetsSimilarly, its return needs to have a corresponding incentive mechanism. When it is fully protected, the rate of return of human capital can be truly reflected, that is, the role of the rate of return can be fully played.
The increase of the rate of return will correspondingly bring the productivity effect of the rate of return into play. Therefore, the policy significance of the above explanation is that the establishment of a perfect labor market will increase the rate of return of the rate of return, and thus improve the productivity effect of the rate of return.For rural areas, improving the technical conditions for agricultural production and the production of township enterprises will also have a corresponding effect.
social influence
Announce
edit
Measurement method vs. estimationMincer yieldThe influence of the measurement method mainly refers to the deviation of the estimated value from the true value caused by the defect of the measurement method.The basis is that since the basic Mincer income function is estimated by OLS, from an econometric perspective, the bias caused by the complexity of explanatory variables and the selection of samples will weaken the effectiveness of this estimation method, which will make the estimated return rate have a large gap with the true value.
Most of the studies in China use this method. In this way, the problems of OLS estimation itself and the low estimation value make some researchers examine the possible problems in the estimation of return rate from the perspective of measurement methods.Some researchers believe that the low value of China's yield may be due to methodological reasons.
There are three main types of impact of measurement methods on Mincer's return rate. The first type is the sample bias related to sample selection, the second type is related to the shortcomings of Mincer's income function itself, and the third type is the measurement error of variables.
1. Sample deviation
The sample deviation includes the lack of representativeness of samples and the problem of censored samples.Without a representative sample, the measurement relationship between income and yield will become more ambiguous (Brauw&Rozelle, 2002).
This problem arises in many literatures. For example, some research samples are limited to a certain sector of the economy (e.g,Meng,1996;Gregory&Meng,1995;Hoetal.,2001），This is obviously unrepresentative.Becker (1964) once warned that if only a specific sample is used to estimate the yield of the yield, its value will be relatively low.
Trend of dividend yield in recent years
Intercepted samples mainly mean that the information of the explained variables of some samples cannot be observed, and these samples are simply excluded from the estimation.For example, when we study the rate of return of urban individuals, we know those who have jobsreal wages, but I don't know the salary of individuals without jobs（“Retained wages”）。
This problem is more reflected in the estimation of rural yield.Due to the multiple choices of production activities of rural individuals, it is more difficult to observe their "reserved wages", and most studies use only wage income (or labor income) samples.
In these two examples, the dependent variable (wage income) is intercepted: there is no information about the dependent variable of this part of the sample.The sample selection bias will make the estimation model biased.Moreover, the sample interception bias is more likely to overestimate the yield of the yield.This also explains why women's returns are higher than men's.To solve this problem, researchers usually use the standard steps proposed by Heckman (1979) to correct this deviation.
2. Disadvantages of Mincer's income function
Mincer's income function has many shortcomings, which mostly ignore some variables in the model and the relationship between them.These variables mainly include ability factors and school quality factors.
The biased estimation caused by ignoring capability factors in the estimation model is called capability bias.It is generally believed that the ability of individuals is often innate, and the difference in innate ability will lead to the difference in the level of returns of individuals. The relationship between the two is that the stronger the ability is, the higher the level of returns will be. Therefore, traditional methods theoretically overestimate the yield of returns.
ignoreThe impact of school quality factors on the level of individual returns will also lead to biased estimates.The relationship here is that the school quality is positively correlated with the level of individual return, that is, the return level of individuals who enter higher quality schools is higher than that of individuals who enter lower quality schools. Therefore, ignoring the school quality factor will also overestimate the return rate of return.
In addition, traditionalMincer income functionIt also ignores the nonlinear relationship between yield and income.If the rate of return after a certain level (such as junior high school) is higher than the rate of return before that level, the result will be underestimated.
The method to overcome the influence of capability deviation is to directly add the proxy variable of capability into the model or use it on the measurement modelInstrumental variable method(4) These variables are usually family background variables, such as the return rate of parents, the return rate of siblings, etc.
3. Measurement error
Measurement error will underestimate the yield of the yield.It is first manifested in the measurement of dependent variables.The dependent variable in the traditional Mincer income function refers to the individual income, however, it does not specify the measurement unit of income.It is generally believed that the measurement of income can be divided into hourly wage rate, daily wage, monthly income and annual income according to the time unit.
Due to different accuracy, different estimation results will be obtained by using different measurement units.In particular, some studies believe that people with low returns may work longer hours per day than people with high returns. In this way, compared with the hourly wage rate, the use of daily wage, monthly income or annual income in the dependent variable will underestimate the return rate, because the hourly wage will not be affected by how many hours an individual works every day or every month.In addition, due to the complexity of China's experience, there are many sources of individual income, such as formal income, informal income, and physical goods, which will affect the accuracy of measuring individual income, thus affecting the estimated value of the rate of return.
Another aspect of measurement error is the measurement of yield variables.Among the data used in most studies, the number of years of return rate is estimated according to the degree of return rate reported by individuals in combination with China's educational system, and there is no accurate report on the number of years of return rate data. In this way, because individuals with the same degree of return rate may have different years of return rate, the problem of measurement error will arise.There is not a good way to solve this problem accurately in the literature.
4. Research results
Some literatures have made empirical tests on how the above measurement bias affects the real value of estimated returns.As mentioned earlier, the solution to the sample selection deviation problem is mainly to use the standard steps provided by Heckman, that is, first useprobit model Estimate a labor participation equation, and then calculate the inverse MillsratioFinally, this ratio is included in the income equation.
Zhang et al. (2002) applied this method to estimate the income equation of rural individuals, and found that the coefficient of the rate of return became insignificant and negative, but their model also added the square of the years of the rate of return.Zhu Nong (2003)'s research method is similar to this, but the results are quite different. His research results show that the years of return rate are relatively high in both the participation equation and the income equation.Brauw&Rozelle (2002) made some modifications to the standard Mincer function. They first used Mills in the income equationratioThe dependent variable is hourly wage rate, and the result is a relatively high rate of return (6.4%), which is the highest median rate of return estimated by all rural samples.
For comparison, they also re estimated the data using the methods used in other studies and compared them with their methods. The results showed that the average yield of the former was 3.8% and the average yield of the latter was 6%, which provided solid evidence for the impact of measurement methods on the yield.In addition, Brauw&Rozelle also selected samples under 35 years old to include the proxy variables of school quality and ability into the income equation (ability bias). The results show that the coefficient of return in the equation without these variables is 1 percentage point higher than the coefficient with these variables, indicating that the ability bias may have a weak impact.
In addition, in order to investigate the nonlinear relationship between the rate of return and income, they also divided the samples into two categories: above primary school level and below. The results show that the rate of return of samples below primary school level is lower than that of samples below primary school level.Maurer Fazio&Dinh (2002) also found a similar result, indicating that if the nonlinear relationship between yield and income is ignored, the yield of yield will be underestimated.
Yield
Li&Luo (2002) focused on the effects of measurement error and capability deviation, and compared the effects of the two.
The method they used was instrumental variable method. It was found thatMincer yieldIt should be significantly lower than the return rate estimated with instrumental variables. The reason for this is that the impact of measurement error (which will underestimate the return rate) is greater than that of capacity deviation (which will overestimate the return rate).
In Li (2003)'s research, the return rate with annual income as the dependent variable is about 1 percentage point lower than that with hour as the dependent variable.However, in the study of Li&Urmanbetova (2002), we did not find that these deviations had a significant impact on the estimation of rural returns.This shows that the impact of measurement methods on yield research needs to be further studied.Nevertheless, from the above research, the existence of measurement error may be an important reason for the low rate of return in China's rural areas.
be engaged ineconomic transition Scholars who study the relationship between yield and return are concerned about the following issues:market economyWhat will happen to the relationship between yield and income?Or will the yield increase?What is the internal mechanism of this change?
The basic hypothesis of the research on this relationship comes from Nee's market transformation theory (198919911996). Nee pointed out that the basic changes in the process of economic transformation include morepublic wealthfromredistributionThe transfer of people (government) to producers also includes changes in the opportunity structure and incentive mechanismprivateandMixed economyDepartments and entrepreneurs have created a new opportunity structure in which,economic activityGradually through the market mechanism, the control of the government is gradually weakening.
On the relationship between yield and income, a popular assumption of this theory is that the deeper the market reform is, the more important human capital (yield and experience) will be. Similarly, the more directly it will participatemarket economyHuman capital is more important (Bian&Logan, 1996).Xie&Hannum (1996) and Zhao&Zhou (2001) based on the transformation theory andhuman capital theory This assumption is summarized into the following four basic principles to be verified
economic transition On the one hand, it is a process of changing institutions, and on the other hand, it is also a process of economic growth. Based on this, many researchers applytime series data The above assumptions are empirically tested.
Xie&Hannum (1996) first found the opposite.By establishing a regional heterogeneity model, they compared the returns of different regions with different levels of economic development, and found that in cities with rapid economic growth, no higher returns were found. The explanation for this is that China's urban areas still lack a real labor market.However, the year of their data is 1988, so this conclusion has certain limitations in the future.In fact, as described in the above description of the change characteristics of yield over time, most subsequent studies have verified the basic assumptions of the transformation theory.
Meng (1995) believed that with the continuous development of economy and technological change, the role of yield in determining productivity will become more and more obvious, and thus the role in determining wage differences will become more and more important.The research results of Wei et al. (1999) support the hypothesis that the higher the rate of return is, the stronger the relationship between the rate of return and income is.
Zhao&Zhou (2001) analyzed in detailInstitutional changeIt is believed that during the reform period, the rate of return has been steadily increasing, especially in non-state-owned economic sectors with stronger market mechanism.Li (2003) divided the samples into three categories, namely, workers who participated before 1980, workers who participated in 1980-87, and workers who participated in 1988-95. The results showed that the return rate of these three types of samples increased in turn, indicating that the return rate was constantly improving in the process of China's transformation.The research using rural samples also confirms the hypothesis of the transformation theory to a certain extent.The research of Li&Zhang (1998) shows the influence of institutional characteristics on yield.They used the data of 1978 and 1990 in rural areas of two provinces to analyze the difference between the rural yield under the production team system before the rural reform and the rural yield after the reform. They found that the yield after the reform was higher than the yield under the production team system. Their explanation was that because the agricultural production technology conditions in the sample areas in 1977 and 1990 were similar,The background of other social and economic conditions is also similar. Therefore, the increase in the rate of return is mainly due to institutional reform rather than technological innovation.
Yang (2000) believes that in the process of rural reform, the rate of return plays an important role in the reallocation of labor force, and members of families with high rates of return can put more labor and capital intoNon-agriculturalActivities, better grasp the opportunities brought by policy changes, and can apply more skills to give full play to the productivity effect of yield, which play a positive role in increasing household income.
Zhang et al.However, there are also different views on this. For example, Li (2001) and Li&Urmanbetova (2002) think thateconomic transition Urban areas have the greatest impact on the relationship between yield and income, while in rural areas, due to the absence of a competitive labor market, the transformation process has little impact on rural yield.
The fact that the rate of return in rural areas is lower than that in urban areas also shows that,Institutional changeThe impact of the rate of return on income in rural areas may be lower than that in urban areas.It seems that Chinese farmers are lower than urban residents not only in other aspects, but also in the return rate of investment.
relationship
Announce
edit
Yield
The essence of the research on yield is to reveal the effect of yield on income.As mentioned above, there are many differences between China's yield and other countries in the world.On the one hand, the increasing rate of return is relatively obvious.Correspondingly, the overall rate of return of the Chinese population is relatively low, especially the proportion of the population with higher rate of return (universities) is less. What impact will this have on the income difference?A basic assumption is that if the rate of return is positive or increasing, then if the high-level rate of return is only obtained by a few people, the inequality of the rate of return will increase, which will lead to the increase of income inequality.Several studies in recent years have focused on this issue.
Using the individual data of urban residents in six provinces of China from 1988 to 1999, Park et al. (2002) studied the degree of wage inequality of urban workers in China and its influencing factors.They first found that during this period, ChinaUrban employeesThe degree of income inequality is on the rise. The rate of return is increasing, and the rate of return of junior high school has declined. The rate of return of technical secondary schools, especially universities, has increased the most, and exceeded the former (see also Zhang et al., 2002).
Then, they built a model to decompose the factors that affect income inequality. In this model, the number of returns and the rate of return were introduced into the model at the same time. The results showed that the rate of return contributed more than 10 percentage points to the total income inequality, only less than the regional gap.That is to say, the increase in the rate of return has increased the income inequality of urban residents.
Is this also true in rural areas?Using household survey data in rural areas of North China and Northeast China, Benjamin et al. (2000) studied the relationship between rural return rate and income inequality.Their research is based on such a basic judgment: the contribution of income inequality in rural villages to total inequality is higher than that of inequality between villages;The rate of return is positive, and there is a significant difference in the rate of return between villages;The Inequality of the Rate of Return in the Village and the VillageAverage rate of returnHorizontal negative correlation.
By introducing the income rate level, income rate inequality (expressed by Gini coefficient) and interaction term into the income inequality model, it is found that the income rate plays a very low role in reducing inequality, and there is a positive interaction between the distribution of income rate level and the income of income rate, that is, the higher the income rate, the higher the inequality of income rate level.In this way, the higher the yield, the higher the degree of income inequality.Moreover, the lower the average rate of return of the village, the higher the degree of income inequality.
The above results seem to indicate that the positive value of the rate of return and its trend of increase over time have "helped" the increase of income inequality in China. The reason may be that there are fewer individuals with higher rates of return. Therefore, the government has increased investment in the rate of return to enable more people to accept a higher level of return,It will not only increase their income, but also reduce the degree of income inequality.
conclusion
Announce
edit
The research on China's rate of return not only reveals the changing characteristics of the relationship between the rate of return and income and income distribution, but also further enriches the rate of return research andEconomic Theory, such as the measurement method, the changing characteristics of the relationship between yield and income, etc.In summary, the following basic conclusions are drawn:
1. According to the data estimated before 1997, the urban return rate of China is still lower than the average level of the world and Asia, and the subsequent research results have approached or begun to exceed this level, indicating that Chinese cities and townslabour marketThe degree of reform is gradually improving.
2. In contrast, the return rate in rural areas is relatively low, about 3-4 percentage points lower than that in urban areas, especially in recent years.The explanation of this phenomenon is caused by the segmentation of the labor market and the backwardness of rural production technology.The low rate of return in rural areas may affect the rate of return of rural residentsDemand generationThe negative impact, for this conclusion, needs further empirical testing.
3. In China, the phenomenon of increasing returns has been found, because this phenomenon may be due to structural distortions in economic development and returnsInvestment systemIt will cause further expansion of the income gap, so it needs sufficient attention from the policy.
4. In other aspects of yield estimation, the yield of women is higher than that of men, and that of the western region is higher than that of the eastern region. The yield gradually increases with time.
5. Institutional factors still affect the return on investment of Chinese residents' rate of return. The relatively weak role of market mechanism in the allocation of labor resources before the mid-1990s explains the low rate of return in China during this period.
6. The research shows that the rate of return in China's transition period has gradually increased, and the internal mechanism of this change is mainly attributable to the market-oriented reformInstitutional change。Some studies also found that the above characteristics of China's yield may also increase income inequality.
