中国多维剥夺与收入贫困

Multidimensional Deprivation and Income Poverty in China

在中国减贫政策逐步转向解决收入贫困与多维剥夺并重的背景下,文章基于微观数据使用潜类别模型(LCM)计算中国的多维剥夺类型,并使用工具变量的序数Probit模型分析收入贫困和多维剥夺之间的关联,最后对城乡收入贫困差异及多维剥夺差异进行了分解分析。结果显示,随着时间的推移,人群中剥夺程度最轻、剥夺程度最重的比例上升,剥夺程度中等的比例下降,虽然非收入贫困家庭接近遭受多维剥夺的比例下降,但其遭受最重多维剥夺的比例在上升;农村剥夺最严重的比例是城市的4倍以上;收入贫困是多维剥夺的决定因素;慢性贫困、暂时贫困都对多维剥夺起到了恶化作用,转移支付并没有减少多维剥夺;城乡收入贫困差异与多维剥夺差异中人口特征、受教育程度等因素的贡献方向、大小基本相同,再次表明收入贫困与多维剥夺具有同一性;降低多维剥夺的改水、改厕、改用清洁能源等公共政策可能并不比单独增加收入的政策更优。

Using the Latent Class Model(LCM), this paper explores the categories of multidimensional deprivation. And then it analyzes the relationship between income poverty and multidimensional deprivation using instrumented ordered probit model, and decomposes the urban-rural disparities therein. The results show that, with the time elapse, the proportions of the least and the most deprivation have increased, and the proportion of moderate deprivation decreased. Among the non-income deprived households, although the proportion suffering from moderate multidimensional deprivation declines,that in the most deprivation rises. The most deprivation in rural areas is more than 4 times that in urban. Income is a significant determinant of multidimensional deprivation. Both chronic poverty and temporary poverty have aggravated multidimensional deprivation, and transfer payments have not reduced multidimensional deprivation. The household socio-demographic characteristics have similar effects on income poverty and multidimensional deprivation. This provides support that income poverty and multidimensional deprivation are closely correlated. Public policies targeting at multidimensional deprivation may not be superior to policies that increase income.