Research On The Poverty Reduction Effect Of Public Transfer Payment In China

2020 is the decisive year for poverty alleviation.China has completed the task of poverty alleviation for all rural poor people and poverty counties according to the current standards,eliminated absolute poverty and regional overall poverty,and achieved a great victory attracting worldwide attention.In the stage of governance of absolute poverty,public transfer payment has played an indelible role in guaranteeing the basic economic welfare of the poor and low-income groups.It is an effective tool to narrow the income gap,reduce poverty and maintain social equity and stability.It has the characteristics of directness,significance,wide use and low implementation cost,and has been used by our government for a long time.It is an important means of poverty alleviation.As early as 2015,when general secretary Xi Jinping put forward the "five batch" measures to eliminate poverty,he emphasized the role of public transfer payment in poverty reduction.Nowadays,China has entered a period of relative poverty reduction in building a well-off society in an all-round way,and the focus of anti-poverty will turn to solving the problem of "relative poverty".Compared with absolute poverty,the connotation and causes of relative poverty are more complex.Therefore,the governance task of relative poverty will be more arduous,and the requirements of reducing income gap,improving income distribution and promoting fairness and justice will be higher.So whether the public transfer payment policy,which plays an important role in the period of poverty alleviation,can continue to play a role in alleviating relative poverty and maintaining social equity and stability in the period of relative poverty governance is a problem worthy of our attention and discussion.Based on this,the author first combs and summarizes the public expenditure theory and poverty theory,and finds that Deaton’s consumption poverty theory has a good enlightenment on China’s relative poverty governance in the new period.Firstly,compared with the macro data,the micro survey data can better reflect the real state and details of the lives of the poor groups,which is conducive to our targeted formulation of relevant policies;secondly,the level of family welfare is mainly reflected in the purchasing power of all kinds of goods and services,and consumption is a more appropriate indicator than income to measure individual and family welfare.Based on Deaton’s consumption poverty theory,this paper focuses on the following issues:first,formulate the relative poverty standard from the perspective of consumption;second,screen out the relatively poor families based on the equivalent scale of family population composition and scale economy calculation;third,study the poverty reduction effect of public transfer payment on Urban and rural relatively poor families;fourth,explore the poverty reduction effect of public transfer payment in the new era The path of.In the aspect of formulating relative poverty standards:Based on the eight categories of consumption and income data in the household tracking survey database(CFPS),the extended linear expenditure system(ELES)is used to estimate the absolute poverty(to meet clothing,food and housing),the poverty of two worries and three guarantees(not to worry about food and clothing,and the security of compulsory education,basic medical care and housing),and the relative poverty(eight categories of basic consumption demand)The poverty line of urban and rural areas in 2016 and 2018 under the three dimensions.Taking 2010 as the constant price,according to the 2011-2018 price index of China’s urban and rural areas published by the National Bureau of statistics,the poverty line is adjusted,and the adjusted results of China’s urban and rural poverty line are obtained.This paper analyzes the rationality of the three relative poverty lines from the perspectives of statistics,economics and sociology.By comparing with the existing research,we find that the relative poverty line calculated in this paper belongs to the relative poverty line under high standards.In terms of calculating household equivalent scale:referring to Wan Xiangyu’s(2015)equivalent scale calculation model of consumption classification based on extended linear expenditure system(ELES),we get the urban-rural equivalent scale in 2016 and 2018.Then,we reevaluate the relative poverty level of urban and rural areas in 2016 and 2018.The width(incidence rate),depth and intensity of relative poverty measured by FGT index show that the relative poverty between urban and rural areas measured by family per capita net income adjusted by family members is far less than that measured by family per capita net income.It can be seen that China’s household consumption has a large scale economy effect.In addition,whether in 2016 or 2018,the incidence of urban relative poverty is greater than that of rural relative poverty,which shows that urban relative poverty can not be underestimated.In the future,urban relative poverty groups should be included in the scope of poverty governance.Further study found that,firstly,the incidence of relative poverty of women is slightly higher than that of men,and that of girls is slightly higher than that of boys.The incidence of relative poverty of children and the elderly is higher than that of adults,showing an inverted U shape.The higher the level of education,the lower the incidence of relative poverty.Among the relatively poor groups,the proportion of residents who are below sub-health is very high,with an average of more than 50%.More than 30%of the residents suffered from mental illness.Secondly,in terms of the regional characteristics of the relative poor groups,except for the rural areas in Northeast China in 2016 and 2018,the incidence of relative poverty in China has increased gradually from the east to the northeast,central and western regions.Third,the income characteristics of the relative poor group,the main income source of the urban relative poor group is wage income,while the main income source of the rural relative poor group is wage income and business income.In addition,the proportion of transfer income in the income of urban and rural relatively poor groups is also higher.On the whole,the proportion of property income zero is the largest,the second is other income,and the third is the proportion of wage income and operating income zero.As we all know,the gap between property income and wage income is the main reason for China’s income gap.Fourth,the consumption characteristics of the relatively poor group:first,the income of the relatively poor group is not enough to make their living consumption expenditure and development and enjoyment consumption expenditure increase at the same time,so they can only reduce their development and enjoyment consumption expenditure to meet the needs of living consumption;second,the income of the relatively poor group makes their living consumption expenditure and development and enjoyment consumption expenditure increase However,the proportion of development and enjoyment consumption is far less than that of survival consumption.The above two situations will lead to the relative poor group’s sustainable development ability far behind the non relative poor group.Moreover,according to the current data,the relative poverty in urban areas is more serious than that in rural areas.In the future,we should pay more attention to the relative poverty in urban areas.In terms of measuring the poverty reduction effect of public transfer payment on urban and rural relatively poor families:Based on the relative poor families in 2018,this paper uses propensity score matching method(PSM)to measure the poverty reduction effect of public transfer payment from the perspective of consumption.It is found that public transfer payment reduces the consumption of urban and rural relatively poor families by 31.01%and 20.32%on average.The proportion of survival consumption expenditure and development enjoyment consumption of urban and rural relatively poor families did not pass the significance test,indicating that public transfer payment has no effect on the consumption structure of urban and rural relatively poor families.Because most of the urban and rural relatively poor families have no fixed source of income and have strong liquidity constraints,the precautionary saving motivation is more serious than that of normal families.The original hope is that public transfer payment can help relatively poor families break through the risk aversion point and release part of consumption.However,the empirical analysis results show that Public transfer payment not only reduces the income of relatively poor families,but also reduces the Consumption Willingness of relatively poor families.Therefore,the existing public transfer payment policy is not suitable for relatively poor families,especially for urban relatively poor families.In the aspect of exploring the path to improve the poverty reduction effect of public transfer payment in the new era:still from the perspective of consumption,this paper takes the urban and rural relatively poor families in 2018 as samples,and makes policy design and research hypotheses based on the impact of financial capital,human capital and social capital of human sustainable livelihood capital on the reduction of urban and rural relative poverty of public transfer payment.Then,the propensity score matching method(PSM)is used to estimate the moderating effect of each proxy variable on the relative poverty reduction of urban and rural families by public transfer payment and the moderating effect of the combination of proxy variables To explore the path to enhance the poverty reduction effect of public transfer payment.The results show that the above capital can promote the public transfer payment to reduce the relative poverty of urban and rural families,the urban from high to low are:endowment insurance,commercial insurance,trust in the county and municipal government and training;the rural from high to low are:endowment insurance,trust in the county and municipal government,training and training Commercial insurance.When the above policy tools are applied to urban and rural relatively poor families,the promotion effect on reducing urban relatively poor families by public transfer payment is 5.82%,and the promotion effect on reducing rural relatively poor families by public transfer payment is 2.95%.It can be seen that the combination of public transfer payment and policy tools is more conducive to the poverty reduction of urban relatively poor families.Based on the above conclusions,this paper puts forward policy suggestions from other aspects,such as improving the relative poverty evaluation system and supervision mechanism,establishing a comprehensive public transfer payment policy oriented by consumption poverty and so on.