Research On Influence And Spatial Effect Of Rural Family Livelihood Strategy On Multidimensional Poverty

By 2020,China has completely eliminated absolute poverty in the income dimension,but multi-dimensional relative poverty still exists.In the face of relatively multidimensional poverty,In 2021 and 2022,the no.1 document of the central government proposed to encourage farmers to consolidate the achievements of poverty alleviation through "employment".In 2015,the country began to pay attention to spatial poverty alleviation.Therefore,studying the relationship and mechanism between family livelihood strategies and multidimensional poverty had a certain promoting effect on stimulating the endogenous impetus of rural revitalization in the post poverty alleviation era and promoting the effective connection between poverty alleviation work and rural revitalization.In this thesis,using the China Family Tracking Survey(CFPS)data from 2012 to 2018,using the propensity score matching method(PSM),fixed effect model,threshold effect model,spatial Dubin model model(SDM)model,etc.,based on Maslow’s needs theory,feasible ability theory,cost-benefit theory,and life cycle theory,the research focused on three major issues for theoretical analysis and empirical research.First,what was the impact of heterogeneous livelihood strategies on overall multidimensional poverty,non-poverty,mild multidimensional poverty,moderate multidimensional poverty,extreme multidimensional poverty? Second,does the family livelihood strategy change,what was the effect of this shift on multidimensional poverty significant,and how was the dynamic change of family livelihood strategy and multidimensional poverty? Third,Was the multidimensional poverty of local households affected by the poverty in other areas,and was the impact of local livelihood strategies on the multidimensional family poverty affected by the livelihood strategies of farmers in other areas? Through theoretical analysis and empirical research on three major issues,this article drew the following conclusions:(1)Description statistics of family livelihood strategy and multi-dimensional poverty.Selecting the balanced panel data of CFPS2014—2018 and using statistical analysis method to analyze the individual characteristics of different livelihood strategies,their family structure and family economic status;adopting "A-F double critical value" method to measure multi-dimensional poverty and finally we can get the following conclusions.Sample analysis found that 46.83% of family livelihood strategies were part-time farming,23.20% of that were farming,9.23% of that were informal employed,8.55% of that were non-agricultural employed,6.58% of that were formally employed and 5.60% of that were self-employed.The family livelihood strategy has changed from farming to agriculture and then to non-agricultural employment.From the multidimensional poverty measure,household multidimensional poverty scores showed a downward trend from 2014 to 2018,but the decline was small,following significant regional differences;The poverty level of households with mild and moderate multidimensional poverty has decreased,but the poverty level of households with extreme multidimensional poverty has increased;From the perspective of multidimensional poverty rate,the number of households falling into moderate multidimensional poverty is the highest,while the number of households falling into extreme multidimensional poverty is the lowest.the smallest change in poverty rate from 2014 to 2018 was mild multidimensional poverty,while the largest change was moderate multidimensional poverty.(2)Static effects of heterogeneous household livelihood strategies on different levels of multidimensional poverty.Using the data of CFPS2018,we analyzed the impact of heterogeneous livelihood strategies on overall multidimensional poverty,mild multidimensional poverty,moderate multidimensional poverty,and extreme multidimensional poverty using a propensity score matching(PSM)model.The results showed that,Compared with farming,part-time employment in agriculture,part-time employment in non agriculture,informal employment,formal employment,and self-employment significantly negatively affected multidimensional poverty.Livelihood strategies mainly through the dimensions of life,economy and assets influenced multidimensional poverty,with the poverty reduction effect showing formal employment>part-time employment in non agriculture>self-employment>informal employment>part-time employment in agriculture.Livelihood strategies have less poverty reduction effects through the housing,education,and health dimensions.The impact of part-time employment in agriculture on non poor families is not significant.The impacts of part-time employment,informal employment,and self-employment on non poor families were only half that of formal employment,and formal employment has an absolute advantage for non poor families to become rich.Except for part-time employment in agriculture,other non agricultural livelihood strategies can significantly alleviate mild multidimensional poverty in households,and the poverty reduction effect of formal employment is superior to other livelihood strategies.With the deepening of household poverty,the overall poverty reduction effects of formal employment,non agricultural part-time employment,and agricultural part-time employment were significantly enhanced,but self-employment and informal employment were not significant for extreme multidimensional poverty.(3)Analysis of the dynamic effects of family livelihood strategies and multidimensional poverty.Based on the balanced panel data of CFPS2014 and CFPS2018,using fixed effect models and threshold effect models,the dynamic relationship between household livelihood strategies and multidimensional poverty was examined;Using the propensity score matching model and Arc GIS software,by empirically analyzing the impact of household livelihood strategy transformation on multidimensional poverty,we further explored the reasons for the dynamic relationship between the two.It is concluded that there was a positive and then negative "inverted U" relationship between household livelihood strategies and multidimensional poverty.there was a dual threshold effect between the two,with dual threshold values of 0.3 and 0.5,respectively.When the household multidimensional poverty score Ci≤ 0.3,or the household multidimensional poverty score is between 0.3 and 0.5,household livelihood strategies significantly negatively affected multidimensional poverty;When the household multidimensional poverty score Ci>0.5,household livelihood strategies positively and significantly affected multidimensional poverty.Further cause analysis found that transformation livelihood strategies accounted for 43.26%(agricultural leading type57.87%;non agricultural leading type 14.63%;non agricultural mutual transformation27.50%)in 2018.From 2014 to 2018,there were 80.59% of informal employed households,73.75% of self-employed households,63.83% of formal employed households,and 59.38% of non agricultural and part-time households undergo livelihood strategy transformation.It is concluded that compared to maintenance type,agricultural leading type positively affected multidimensional poverty,while non agricultural leading type and non agricultural mutual transformation negatively affected multidimensional poverty.The poverty reduction effect was manifested as non agricultural mutual transformation>non agricultural leading type>maintenance type>agricultural leading type.(4)Spatial effect analysis of the relationship between family livelihood strategy and multidimensional poverty.Using 116 district panel data of CFPS2012—2018,the Space Dubin Model(SDM)and Arc GIS software found that,multidimensional poverty and livelihood strategy had a significant spatial positive correlation.Geographic matrix and adjacent matrix spatial was positive correlation decreasing year by year,but economic matrix space positive correlation was increasing year by year,which showed that the spatial aggregation of multidimensional poverty and livelihood strategy was more and more strong with economic level,but more and more weak with the geographical location correlation.The spatial aggregation characteristics of multidimensional poverty and livelihood strategies have changed from "divergent" in 2014 to "pooled" in 2018.The multidimensional poverty in the eastern and central cities was mostly in cold areas and transition zones,while the western and northeastern provinces are mostly in hot areas;the eastern and central livelihood strategies were in hot spots and sub-hotspots,and the western and northeastern provinces were basically covered by cold spots.Under the adjacency matrix,geographic matrix and economic matrix,the direct effect and total effect of livelihood strategy on multidimensional poverty were negative at the level of 1%.the indirect effect of adjacent matrix and geographic matrix was significant,and the indirect effect of economic matrix was not statistically significant,but the difference between the total effect and the direct effect of livelihood proved the existence of indirect effect in economics.Under the economic matrix,due to the "siphon effect" of economic growth,local multidimensional poverty was positively affected by the livelihood strategy of other regions,which aggravated multidimensional local poverty.In the geographic matrix and adjacent matrix,due to the "demonstration effect" of livelihood strategy and the "radiation effect" of economic growth,local multidimensional poverty was negatively associated with the livelihood strategy of neighboring areas,which was conducive to the weakening of local poverty.Based on the above conclusions,this study put forward the following policy suggestions.First,We can focus on improving family living standards in terms of income,education and medical care.Second,we should formulate classified and stratified assistance measures according to the relative multi-dimensional poverty degree.Third,We should formulate employment plans in different regions and create differentiated employment assistance measures.Fourth,we can guide the transformation of farmers’ livelihood strategies and improve the benefits of agriculture-led families.Fifth,we should strengthen regional co-governance,and promote the coordinated development of space "people","industry" and "land".