“教育致贫”及其后果：转轨时期中国低收入家庭的教育困境

发布时间：2018-05-09 00:36

本文选题：人力资本 + 教育致贫　；参考：《东北财经大学》2007年博士论文

【摘要】： 经验表明，转轨国家一些领域的改革非常容易出现这样的问题：既丧失了传统计划经济的公平，又没有获得市场经济的效率。时下的中国，教育和医疗都是最吸引人们眼球的热点问题，因为这两个领域的改革与我们的日常生活息息相关，问题又层出不穷。比如，最近教育领域也产生了类似于“因病致贫”的“因学致贫”的问题。多年来，城、乡居民家庭在教育上的支出逐年增加，截止到2005年，中国农村居民家庭的文教娱乐支出占总支出比重的11.6％，而衣、食、住三项必需的消费支出就用去了全部支出的65.8％。也就是说，在满足了基本的生活需要之后，余下有近一半的支出都用在了教育上，而在20年前，这项支出的比重只有6.3％(中国农村住户调查年鉴，2006)。进而，在最近新华网与《经济参考报》的一项联合调查中，教育收费在人们关注的焦点问题中居于首位。于是，随着教育费用的不断增加，低收入家庭“因教致贫”的现象屡见不鲜，零点调查和指标数据共同发布的《2005年中国居民生活质量指数研究报告》显示：教育花费成为城、乡居民致贫的首要原因。特别是农村贫困家庭，教育花费是他们的头号家庭开支，一个学生小学六年大概要1～3万不等，中学六年3～6万不等，大学四年4～10万不等，这笔开支对于一个低收入尤其是贫困家庭而言，足以令其倾家荡产。在城、乡贫困人群中，均有43％～46％的人分别提到贫困的原因是“家里要供孩子读书”；《中国教育报》也在一份报道中肯定了教育花费成为致贫首要原因的说法，在调查中，有40％～50％的人提到家里穷是因为“家里有孩子要读书”。吉林省政府对该省某镇高中进行的一项抽样调查显示，竟有28.7％的学生“害怕升入大学”，原因是“家庭负担不起上大学的费用”(中国青年报，2005，5，11)。而另一项针对11个省的16所中学中有子女即将参加高考的家庭的调查结果也表明，82.3％的贫困高考生其家庭贫困的主要原因是教育支出大，超过2／3的家庭入不敷出(中国青年报，2006，7，17)。可以说，对我国落后地区的家庭而言，教育已经超过疾病成为致贫的最重要因素。但是，学费上涨导致的“因学致贫”只是本文“教育致贫”的一种，这只是一种暂时的贫困，只要子女毕业后能够找到好的工作，教育在经济上仍然是一笔有利可图的投资，家庭忍受暂时的贫困也是值得的。 “教育致贫”的另一种形式是，教育作为一种人力资本投资，一旦学生毕业之后所获得的工资不足以补偿前期所支付的各种成本(包括直接成本和机会成本)，那么低收入家庭在子女受教育期间所承受的暂时贫困就会长期化。出现这种现象的原因有：公共投资不足、私人家庭教育费用上涨、高校扩招、教育质量不高、劳动力市场流动障碍等因素，而问题出现的背景是中国贫富差距在逐渐拉大，对高收入家庭微不足道的教育费用，低收入家庭却无力承担。此外，通过对中国居民家庭收入的五等分或者十等分，我们有理由相信，遇到“教育致贫”问题的家庭是占有相当比重的，这些人群包括农村地区的大部分家庭以及城市的边缘群体，比如下岗失业或者外来务工人员的家庭。还可以从一个侧面证明问题的普遍性，如果我们用google按关键词“因教致贫”搜索一下，共有13200篇文章提到，“教育致贫”则有945000篇。而在一年半以前本文写作之初，在网站上搜索发现这还是一个比较生僻的字眼，当时极少被人提及。现有的经济理论强调教育对经济增长和个人收入的积极作用。在20世纪60年代“人力资本革命”以来，教育被看成是一种对人的投资，在宏观上，Danison、Jorgensen等人对经济增长的因素加以分解，用教育来解释经济增长中无法说明的“残差”，微观上，Becker、Mincer等人用教育来解释个人收入分配上的差异，教育与个人收入之间是正相关的，而且教育的收益率也往往高于一般实物投资的收益率。基于此，教育就成了落后国家和贫困家庭摆脱贫困的灵丹妙药。本文的分析间接地表明了教育对个人收入提高的作用是有条件的，如果没有良好的政府政策和市场环境，教育不但不能起到脱贫致富的作用，甚至在一定程度上会强化已有的贫富差距。同“教育致贫”相关的另一个问题是儿童的失学和童工，在落后的农村地区，中等教育的收益率极低，所以贫困家庭对教育的选择是不连续的，具体而言，如果孩子学习好，家庭就会想办法为教育融资，助其读完大学；反之，如果学习成绩不好，，家长一旦看到上大学无望的话，甚至连中学也不会读完。对于传统农业生产而言，简单的读、写、计算仅小学教育就够了，中学阶段的很多学习内容都用不上(蒋中一等，2002；2003)。农民是理性的，教育上的这种二元选择的结果是，中国有相当数量的儿童在义务教育阶段失学沦为童工，中国是个有童工劳动的国家，虽然比重不高，但数量不少。本文将采用由Mincer、Schultz和Becker等人发展起来的人力资本理论作为基本的分析方法，把学校教育看作是一种重要的投资行为，是对人的投资。学校是“专门从事教育生产的机构”(Becker，1964)，是人力资本的加工厂，学校教育是一种“时间密集型”的生产活动(张风林，2006，p．159)。对学校教育的分析也需从成本和收益的角度出发。另外，作为补充，还会从Spence(1974)的劳动力市场的“信号理论”出发，分析高等教育扩张的可能后果——教育信号投资过度所导致的“教育致贫”问题。本文是以家庭而不是受教育者本人作为基本的分析单位的，并不打算对家庭内部的财富转移关系、分工和博弈作进一步的探讨。文章的中心是研究当前转轨阶段中国低收入家庭在教育上遇到的“教育致贫”问题以及由此可能引起的后果。如前所述，“教育致贫”有两种情况，低收入家庭在子女学校教育阶段所承受的暂时贫困，以及将来人力资本投资失败造成的暂时贫困长期化。失学和童工则是贫困家庭对“教育致贫”问题所作的反应之一，也算是“教育致贫”的直接后果。基于这样的研究思路，结构安排如下：第一章“引言”提出本文研究的问题以及思路安排；第二章，详细界定了教育致贫的涵义、类型、特点和发生的范围，并利用数据和调查资料对“教育致贫”的事实加以描述；第三章，详细介绍本文所采用的分析方法——人力资本理论，包括理论的演变、内涵、主要内容以及最新的进展；第四章在人力资本理论的框架下系统地论述当前低收入家庭的“教育致贫”问题，是本文的核心内容；第五章，从信号理论的角度对高校扩张可能引发的“教育致贫”等问题加以论述，其实质是上一章内容的一个必要的补充；第六章，描述了低收入家庭在教育上面临的困境，然后从中等教育的收益特性出发分析了失学和童工问题，本文认为失学和童工也是贫困家庭理性选择的结果；第七章是结论部分，包括对研究的总结，尝试性地提出政策上的建议，并指出本文的不足以及下一步研究的方向。本文的基本结论是，由于一些政策和市场方面的因素，当前中国有相当一部份低收入家庭面临着“教育致贫”的问题，教育不再是家庭摆脱贫困的万能药，反而会强化已有的贫富差距，也就是说，教育经济作用的发挥是有条件的，而这些必要的政策和市场条件常常被忽视。“教育致贫”的一个后果是，贫苦家庭受迫于高昂的教育成本，会在子女成绩不好的情况下主动终止人力资本投资，进而出现辍学和童工问题。从经济的角度看，无论“教育过度(overeducation)”还是“教育不足(undereducation)”都是无效率的。对发展中的中国而言，如果要利用教育来摆脱贫穷和落后的状态，尤其要注意这一点。另外，“教育致贫”是我国当前转轨阶段的特有现象，并非一国教育发展的必然阶段，也不是其他国家教育发展曾经面临的问题。本文有价值和创新的地方主要体现在：通过对统计数据进行分析以及一次入户调查的结果来证实“教育致贫”的存在；对“教育致贫”问题的进行系统论证，分析了问题产生的原因，表明教育经济功能的发挥是有条件的；通过对家庭承受的教育费用进行跨国比较和实证分析，充分证明了中国家庭所承担的学费尤其是教育总支出过高，超出相当一部分低收入家庭的承受能力；介绍了当前低收入家庭在家育上的两难选择，儿童失学和童工是“教育致贫”的结果，鉴于国内对童工问题的研究基本处于空白阶段，本文对有关童工的文献进行了简单地归纳；提出了用中等教育收益不足来解释童工的新视角，相信这一观察视角对大部分发展中国家的童工问题都是具有解释力的。
[Abstract]:Experience shows that the reform in some fields of transition countries is very easy to have such problems: not only the loss of the fairness of the traditional planned economy, but also the efficiency of the market economy.
Nowadays, education and medical care are the most attractive issues that attract people's attention, because the reform of these two fields is closely related to our daily life and problems emerge in endlessly. Expenditure has increased year by year. By the end of 2005, Chinese Rural Households' recreational and educational expenditures accounted for 11.6% of the total expenditure, while clothing, food, and three essential consumption expenditures went to the total expenditure 65.8%., that is, after meeting the basic needs of life, nearly half of the expenditure was used in education, and in 20 The proportion of the expenditure was only 6.3% years ago (China's rural household survey Yearbook, 2006). And, in a recent joint survey by Xinhua and the economic reference, education charges were the most important issue in the focus of attention.
As the cost of education is increasing, the phenomenon of "teaching poverty" is common in low-income families. The Research Report on the quality of life of Chinese residents, published by the zero point survey and the index data in <2005, shows that the primary cause of the education cost to become a city, the primary cause of the rural residents' poverty, especially the rural poor families, is his education cost. The number of first family expenses, a student primary school for six years, is about 1~3 million, six years and 3~6 million in secondary schools, and four years and 4~10 million in the University. This expenditure is sufficient for a low income, especially poor family. In the city, among the poor people, 43% to 46% of the people mentioned the reason for poverty, respectively. In a report, the Chinese Education Newspaper affirmed that the cost of education became the leading cause of poverty. In the survey, 40% to 50% of the people mentioned that the family was poor because "there were children in the family." a sample survey by the Jilin provincial government on a town high school in the province showed that there were 28.7% of them. Students are "afraid to go to university" because "the family can't afford to pay for college" (2005,5,11). And another survey of families with children who are about to attend college entrance examination in 16 middle schools in 11 provinces also shows that 82.3% of the poor college entrance examinations are mainly due to the big education expenditure, more than 2 / 3. Families are not able to make ends meet (China Youth Daily, 2006,7,17). It can be said that education has surpassed the disease as the most important factor for poverty in the backward areas of our country.
However, the "learning poverty" is only one kind of "education poverty", which is only a temporary poverty. As long as children can find good jobs after graduation, education is still a profitable investment in the economy, and it is worth the family to endure temporary poverty.
Another form of "educational poverty" is that education, as a human capital investment, is not enough to compensate for the various costs (including direct and opportunity costs) paid by the students after graduation, and the temporary poverty that the low-income families suffer during the education of their children will become long-term. The reasons are: lack of public investment, higher cost of private family education, higher education, poor quality of education and barriers to the flow of labor market. The background of the problem is that the gap between the rich and the poor is gradually widening in China, the negligible education fee for high income families and the inability of low-income families to bear. In addition, through the middle The five or ten equal share of household income in the country has reason to believe that families in the problem of "educational poverty" have a considerable proportion, including most of the families in the rural areas and the marginal groups of the cities, such as laid-off and unemployed or migrant workers.
It can also prove the universality of the problem from one side. If we use Google to search for "poverty by teaching" with the key words, there are 13200 articles about "education to poverty", and there are 945000 articles.
The existing economic theory emphasizes the positive effect of education on economic growth and personal income. Since the "human capital revolution" in 1960s, education is regarded as a kind of investment to people. On the macro level, Danison, Jorgensen and others have broken down the factors of economic growth, and use education to explain the "residual" inexplicable difference in economic growth. On the microcosmic point of view, Becker, Mincer and others use education to explain the differences in personal income distribution. Education and personal income are positively related, and the yield of education is often higher than the income rate of general physical investment. Based on this, education has become a panacea for the backward countries and poor families to get rid of poverty.
The analysis of this paper indirectly indicates that education has a conditional role in the improvement of personal income. Without good government policy and market environment, education can not play the role of poverty alleviation and enrichment, and even to a certain extent, it will strengthen the existing gap between the rich and the poor.
Another problem related to "educating the poor" is children's loss of school and child labor. In the backward rural areas, the yield of secondary education is very low, so the choice of education is discontinuous in poor families. In particular, if the children learn well, the family will find ways to finance education and help them read the University; and conversely, if they learn grades. No good, once the parents see the University's hopelessness, even the middle school will not finish. For traditional agricultural production, simple reading, writing, computing only elementary education is enough, the secondary school stage of learning is not used (Jiang Zhongyi, 2002; 2003). Farmers are rational, the result of this two Yuan choice in education is China. A considerable number of children drop out of school in compulsory education and become child laborers. China is a country with child labor, though its proportion is not high, but its number is quite large.
This article will use the human capital theory developed by Mincer, Schultz and Becker as the basic analysis method, regard school education as an important investment behavior and investment for people. The school is "the institution specializing in education and production" (Becker, 1964), the processing plant of human capital, and school education is a "time". Intensive "production activities (Zhang Fenglin, 2006, p.159). The analysis of school education also needs to start from the perspective of cost and income. In addition, it will also start from the" signal theory "of the Spence (1974) labor market and analyze the possible consequences of the expansion of higher education, the" educational poverty "caused by excessive education signal investment. "The question.
This article is based on the family rather than the educated person as the basic analytical unit. It does not intend to further discuss the family wealth transfer relationship, division of labor and game. The center of the article is to study the problem of "education poverty" in the education of low income families in the current transition stage and the possible cause. The consequences. As mentioned above, there are two cases of "education poverty", the temporary poverty that the low-income families bear in the education stage of their children's school, and the temporary poverty caused by the failure of the investment in the future of human capital. The loss of school and child labour are one of the reactions to the problem of "education poverty" by poor families, and is also the "education poverty". The direct consequences.
Based on this research idea, the structure is arranged as follows:
The first chapter "Introduction" puts forward the problems and ideas of this paper.
The second chapter defines the meaning, types, characteristics and scope of the education poverty, and describes the facts of "education poverty" by using data and investigation data.
The third chapter introduces the analysis method of human capital in detail, including the evolution, connotation, main contents and latest progress of the theory.
The fourth chapter systematically discusses the problem of "education poverty" in low-income families under the framework of human capital theory, which is the core of this article.
The fifth chapter, from the point of signal theory, discusses the problem of "education poverty" which may be caused by the expansion of colleges and universities. The essence is a necessary supplement to the content of the last chapter.
The sixth chapter describes the difficulties faced by low-income families in education, and then analyzes the problems of school loss and child labor from the income characteristics of secondary education. This article holds that the loss of school and child labor are the result of the rational choice of poor families.
The seventh chapter is the conclusion, including the summary of the study, tentatively put forward policy recommendations, and points out the shortcomings of this article and the direction of further research.
The basic conclusion of this paper is that, due to some policy and market factors, a considerable number of low-income families in China are facing the problem of "education poverty". Education is no longer a universal drug for families to get rid of poverty. On the contrary, it will strengthen the existing gap between the rich and the poor, that is to say, the role of the educational economy is conditional. The necessary policy and market conditions are often overlooked. One consequence of "education poverty" is that poor families are subjected to high educational costs and will voluntarily terminate human capital investment in the case of poor children's performance, and then drop out and child labour. From an economic perspective, whether "overeducation" or "" " The lack of Education (undereducation) is ineffective. For developing China, it is particularly important to take advantage of education to get rid of the state of poverty and backwardness. In addition, "education poverty" is a unique phenomenon in China's current transition stage, not an inevitable stage for the development of education in a country, nor is it an educational development in other countries. The problem that once faced.
The value and innovation of this article are mainly reflected in the analysis of the statistical data and the results of a household survey to prove the existence of "education poverty"; a systematic demonstration of the problem of "education poverty" is systematically demonstrated and the causes of the problems are analyzed. The cross-country comparison and empirical analysis of the cost of Education under the court fully demonstrate that the tuition fees undertaken by Chinese families, especially the total amount of education, exceed a considerable number of low-income families, and introduce the dilemma of the current low-income families in the family education, and the result of "education poverty" is the result of children's loss of school and child labor. In view of the blank stage of the research on child labor in China, this paper briefly summarizes the literature about child labor, and puts forward a new perspective of explaining child labor with the insufficient income of secondary education, which is believed to be explanatory to the problem of child labour in most developing countries.

【学位授予单位】：东北财经大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：G521

【相似文献】