精准扶贫时期财政扶贫与金融扶贫的绩效比较——基于扶贫对象贫困程度差异和多维贫困的视角
|
摘要
缺乏资金是贫困户的核心特征,财政扶贫和金融扶贫作为为贫困户提供资金的两种主要手段,被广泛应用于各国的减贫事业。本文基于扶贫对象贫困程度差异和多维贫困的视角,从理论上比较了财政扶贫和金融扶贫的减贫绩效,并使用11228户建档立卡贫困户的数据,运用分位数回归、有序Probit模型和Tobit模型对假说进行验证。研究发现:财政扶贫和金融扶贫均能显著增加贫困户的收入,且在精准扶贫时期,无论是否考虑政府公共财政投入,财政扶贫促进贫困户增收的效果均显著好于金融扶贫;财政扶贫和金融扶贫促进增收的效果因扶贫对象不同而存在差异,财政扶贫短期内更有利于边缘贫困户增收,而金融扶贫则更有利于深度贫困户增收且具有长期效应;金融扶贫能显著改善贫困户的多维贫困状况,但财政扶贫会使多维贫困状况恶化;财政扶贫可以提升金融扶贫缓解多维贫困的效果,金融扶贫也可以抑制财政扶贫带来的多维贫困状况恶化。
The scarcity of funds is the core feature of poor households. Fiscal poverty alleviation and financial poverty alleviation, as two main approaches of providing funds for poor households, are widely used in poverty reduction in various countries. This article compares the poverty reduction performances of fiscal poverty alleviation and financial poverty alleviation theoretically from the perspective of heterogeneity of poverty alleviation and multidimensional poverty, and proposes a number of hypotheses. It uses a quantile regression, an ordered Probit model and a Tobit model to validate the hypotheses with data from 11228 poor households whose archives have been created. The study finds that both fiscal poverty alleviation policies and financial poverty alleviation policies can significantly increase the future income of poor households. In addition, in the period of targeted poverty alleviation, whether or not public financial investment is taken into account, the effect of fiscal poverty alleviation on increasing the income of poor households is significantly better than that of financial poverty alleviation. The effect is heterogeneous, depending on the target of poverty alleviation. Fiscal poverty alleviation is more conducive to the income increase of marginal poor households in the short term, while financial poverty alleviation is more conducive to increasing the income of profound poor households and has a long-term effect. Financial poverty alleviation can significantly improve poor households' multidimensional poverty situation, while fiscal poverty alleviation can deteriorate it.Fiscal poverty alleviation can enhance multidimensional poverty alleviation effect that is generated by financial poverty alleviation, and financial poverty alleviation can also restrain the deterioration of multidimensional poverty which is caused by fiscal poverty alleviation.
The scarcity of funds is the core feature of poor households. Fiscal poverty alleviation and financial poverty alleviation, as two main approaches of providing funds for poor households, are widely used in poverty reduction in various countries. This article compares the poverty reduction performances of fiscal poverty alleviation and financial poverty alleviation theoretically from the perspective of heterogeneity of poverty alleviation and multidimensional poverty, and proposes a number of hypotheses. It uses a quantile regression, an ordered Probit model and a Tobit model to validate the hypotheses with data from 11228 poor households whose archives have been created. The study finds that both fiscal poverty alleviation policies and financial poverty alleviation policies can significantly increase the future income of poor households. In addition, in the period of targeted poverty alleviation, whether or not public financial investment is taken into account, the effect of fiscal poverty alleviation on increasing the income of poor households is significantly better than that of financial poverty alleviation. The effect is heterogeneous, depending on the target of poverty alleviation. Fiscal poverty alleviation is more conducive to the income increase of marginal poor households in the short term, while financial poverty alleviation is more conducive to increasing the income of profound poor households and has a long-term effect. Financial poverty alleviation can significantly improve poor households' multidimensional poverty situation, while fiscal poverty alleviation can deteriorate it.Fiscal poverty alleviation can enhance multidimensional poverty alleviation effect that is generated by financial poverty alleviation, and financial poverty alleviation can also restrain the deterioration of multidimensional poverty which is caused by fiscal poverty alleviation.
引文
1.陈国强、罗楚亮、吴世艳，2018：《公共转移支付的减贫效应估计--收入贫困还是多维贫困？》，《数量经济技术经济研究》第5期。
2.崔景华、李万甫、谢远涛，2018：《基层财政支出配置模式有利于农户脱贫吗--来自中国农村家庭追踪调查的证据》，《财贸经济》第2期。
3.崔艳娟、孙刚，2012：《金融发展是贫困减缓的原因吗？--来自中国的证据》，《金融研究》第11期。
4.丁志国、谭伶俐、赵晶，2011：《农村金融对减少贫困的作用研究》，《农业经济问题》第11期。
5.傅允生，2003：《农村扶贫的视角转换与制度创新--兼论提高农村财政扶贫效率》，《财政研究》第9期。
6.贾俊雪、秦聪、刘勇政，2017：《“自上而下”与“自下而上”融合的政策设计--基于农村发展扶贫项目的经验分析》，《中国社会科学》第9期。
7.李小云、唐丽霞、张雪梅，2007：《我国财政扶贫资金投入机制分析》，《农业经济问题》第10期。
8.林伯强，2005：《中国的政府公共支出与减贫政策》，《经济研究》第1期。
9.谭燕芝、张子豪，2017：《社会网络、非正规金融与农户多维贫困》，《财经研究》第3期。
10.温涛、王煜宇，2005：《政府主导的农业信贷、财政支农模式的经济效应--基于中国1952~2002年的经验验证》，《中国农村经济》第10期。
11.吴本健、马九杰、丁冬，2014：《扶贫贴息制度改革与“贫困瞄准”：理论框架和经验证据》，《财经研究》第8期。
12.杨艳琳、付晨玉，2019：《中国农村普惠金融发展对农村劳动年龄人口多维贫困的改善效应分析》，《中国农村经济》第3期。
13.张丽君、吴本健、王飞等，2017：《中国少数民族地区扶贫进展报告（2017）》，北京：中国经济出版社。
14..朱一鸣、王伟，2017：《普惠金融如何实现精准扶贫？》，《财经研究》第10期。
15.Akhter,S.,Y.Liu,and K.Daly,2010,“Cross Country Evidence on the Linkages between Financial Development and Poverty”,International Journal of Business and Management,5(1):3-19.
16.Alkire,S.,and J.Foster,2011,“Understandings and Misunderstandings of Multidimensional Poverty Measurement”,Journal of Economic Inequality,9(2):287-314.
17.Armendáriz,B.,and M.Labie,2011,The Handbook of Microfinance,World Scientific Publishing.
18.Blau,D.M.,and P.K.Robins,1989,“Fertility,Employment,and Child-Care Costs”,Demography,26(2):287-299.
19.Buera,F.J.,B.Moll,and Y.Shin,2013,“Well-intended Policies”,Review of Economic Dynamics,16(1):216-230.
20.Buss,T.F.,1999,“Microenterprise in International Perspective:An Overview of the Issues”,International Journal of Economic Development,1(1):1-28.
21.Galor,O.,and J.Zeira,1993,“Income Distribution and Macroeconomics”,Review of Economic Studies,60(1):35-52.
22.Greenwood,J.,and B.Jovanovic,1990,“Financial Development,Growth,and the Distribution of Income”,Journal of Political Economy,98(5):1076-1107.
23.Parente,S.L.,and C.P.Edward,1991,“Technology Adoption and Growth”,NBER working paper 3733,https://www.nber.org/papers/w3733.
24.Stock J.H.,and M.Watson,2003,Introduction to Econometrics,Boston:Addison Wesley.
(1)模型中为了简化分析，假设财政扶贫和金融扶贫手段不会通过影响当期农户技能而影响其工资水平，并假设农户获得信贷资金后在生产周期内不用考虑还款问题。
(1)《中华人民共和国企业所得税法实施条例》第六十条规定，与生产经营活动有关的器具、工具、家具等折旧年限为5年。在较大范围内放宽tr和td的限制不会影响最终结果。
2.崔景华、李万甫、谢远涛，2018：《基层财政支出配置模式有利于农户脱贫吗--来自中国农村家庭追踪调查的证据》，《财贸经济》第2期。
3.崔艳娟、孙刚，2012：《金融发展是贫困减缓的原因吗？--来自中国的证据》，《金融研究》第11期。
4.丁志国、谭伶俐、赵晶，2011：《农村金融对减少贫困的作用研究》，《农业经济问题》第11期。
5.傅允生，2003：《农村扶贫的视角转换与制度创新--兼论提高农村财政扶贫效率》，《财政研究》第9期。
6.贾俊雪、秦聪、刘勇政，2017：《“自上而下”与“自下而上”融合的政策设计--基于农村发展扶贫项目的经验分析》，《中国社会科学》第9期。
7.李小云、唐丽霞、张雪梅，2007：《我国财政扶贫资金投入机制分析》，《农业经济问题》第10期。
8.林伯强，2005：《中国的政府公共支出与减贫政策》，《经济研究》第1期。
9.谭燕芝、张子豪，2017：《社会网络、非正规金融与农户多维贫困》，《财经研究》第3期。
10.温涛、王煜宇，2005：《政府主导的农业信贷、财政支农模式的经济效应--基于中国1952~2002年的经验验证》，《中国农村经济》第10期。
11.吴本健、马九杰、丁冬，2014：《扶贫贴息制度改革与“贫困瞄准”：理论框架和经验证据》，《财经研究》第8期。
12.杨艳琳、付晨玉，2019：《中国农村普惠金融发展对农村劳动年龄人口多维贫困的改善效应分析》，《中国农村经济》第3期。
13.张丽君、吴本健、王飞等，2017：《中国少数民族地区扶贫进展报告（2017）》，北京：中国经济出版社。
14..朱一鸣、王伟，2017：《普惠金融如何实现精准扶贫？》，《财经研究》第10期。
15.Akhter,S.,Y.Liu,and K.Daly,2010,“Cross Country Evidence on the Linkages between Financial Development and Poverty”,International Journal of Business and Management,5(1):3-19.
16.Alkire,S.,and J.Foster,2011,“Understandings and Misunderstandings of Multidimensional Poverty Measurement”,Journal of Economic Inequality,9(2):287-314.
17.Armendáriz,B.,and M.Labie,2011,The Handbook of Microfinance,World Scientific Publishing.
18.Blau,D.M.,and P.K.Robins,1989,“Fertility,Employment,and Child-Care Costs”,Demography,26(2):287-299.
19.Buera,F.J.,B.Moll,and Y.Shin,2013,“Well-intended Policies”,Review of Economic Dynamics,16(1):216-230.
20.Buss,T.F.,1999,“Microenterprise in International Perspective:An Overview of the Issues”,International Journal of Economic Development,1(1):1-28.
21.Galor,O.,and J.Zeira,1993,“Income Distribution and Macroeconomics”,Review of Economic Studies,60(1):35-52.
22.Greenwood,J.,and B.Jovanovic,1990,“Financial Development,Growth,and the Distribution of Income”,Journal of Political Economy,98(5):1076-1107.
23.Parente,S.L.,and C.P.Edward,1991,“Technology Adoption and Growth”,NBER working paper 3733,https://www.nber.org/papers/w3733.
24.Stock J.H.,and M.Watson,2003,Introduction to Econometrics,Boston:Addison Wesley.
(1)模型中为了简化分析，假设财政扶贫和金融扶贫手段不会通过影响当期农户技能而影响其工资水平，并假设农户获得信贷资金后在生产周期内不用考虑还款问题。
(1)《中华人民共和国企业所得税法实施条例》第六十条规定，与生产经营活动有关的器具、工具、家具等折旧年限为5年。在较大范围内放宽tr和td的限制不会影响最终结果。