农民工家庭子女高等教育个人投资收益风险研究

【作者】 舒强；

【导师】 张学敏；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 领导教育学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 高等教育个人投资收益风险是个人进行高等教育投资决策的重要前提及依据,也是国家优化人力资源配置、提高人力资源利用效率的关键,因而高等教育个人投资的收益风险问题已逐步成为当前教育经济领域研究的焦点。对高等教育个人投资收益风险问题的分析宜始于高等教育投资的根本属性。从教育投资属性角度管窥我国高等教育投资属性,其生产与消费并存属性已逐步强化。人力资本理论、公共产品投资理论和教育公平理论以及发达国家高等教育发展与实践已进一步佐证,在高等教育大众化和普及化过程中,其投资风险的凸显是高等教育发展过程中的必然趋势。然而,高等教育投资收益风险的客观存在性仅是当前高等教育投资收益风险问题的一隅,因高等教育投资风险并不简单是高等教育风险本身问题,其如何科学度量并合理有效规避风险,已成为解决促进经济快速发展、保障社会公平、维护社会稳定等一系列问题的重要手段。作为一个农业大国,随着社会主义市场经济的不断深入和城市化进程的加快推进将必然带来城乡劳动力频繁流动,而由此所产生的农民工群体将越来越庞大,庞大的群体效应必将对经济社会发展、高等教育改革、社会稳定等起着越来越重要的影响。而其子女高等教育个人投资效果——收益风险问题,将深刻的影响到社会发展和经济效率的提高,并在很大程度上决定未来我国高等教育的改革效果和改革目标的实现。近年来,农民工群体已受到政府及社会的普遍关注和重视,但这无法从根本上改变其相对弱势的社会地位和经济地位,对其经济方面的援助仅能使其生存环境得到暂时缓解,而无法从根本上解决其问题,阶层之间的代际继承已逐步呈现。随着以家庭为基本经济单位的微观经济划分日益凸显,关注农民工家庭子女高等教育投资及其收益风险问题,提高投资收益率的同时规避、降低或分散投资收益风险,则是对这一特殊群体关注的一种根本性、发展性、提升性的途径。当前科技的革新已逐步成为促进经济发展、推动社会进步的重要动力与主要手段。随着知识经济时代的到来,科技的发展、技术的进步将越来越依靠人力资本的累积。而科技的创新、人才的培养,其根本还在于大力发展高等教育。由此,在新环境下,以分位数回归和组合投资理论为基础重新审视我国当前高等教育“大众化”向“普及化”过渡过程中,农民工家庭子女高等教育个人投资收益风险问题,并从新制度经济学视角思考其风险生成的机理,合理有效规避、降低、分散其投资收益风险,促进高等教育公平、协调发展,是一个历久弥新的重大课题。农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益与风险是其投资的两个维度,据此从投资收益风险的分散、规避及分担角度来研究农民工家庭子女高等教育个人投资收益风险问题,运用分位数回归方法,考察不同分位数上农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益率,进而分析其个人投资收益风险,其结果显示：当前农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益率约为4.23%,投资收益风险为4.21%,其中主动投资高等教育的收益风险为3.13%,被动投资高等教育的收益风险为6.86%。相较于之前相关研究,农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益率呈下降趋势,而投资收益风险则逐渐增大,高等教育投资风险与收益没有正相关关系,反而存在一定负相关关系,即呈现出“低收益,高风险”态势。与其他群体相比,城镇家庭子女高等教育投资收益率约为8.71%,投资收益风险为2.07%；农村其他家庭子女高等教育投资收益率约为7.01%,投资收益风险为2.23%,农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益风险明显高于城镇家庭子女和农村其他家庭子女。影响农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益风险的因素是多方面的,包括区域经济发展水平、个人投资意愿、就读学校层次类别、就读专业、确定性收益保障、就业城市类别等。其中个人投资意愿、就读学校类别层次差异和确定性收益保障不足是造成农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益风险较大的最主要原因,并呈现出就读学校层次越低,投资风险越大,被动投资比主动投资风险更大的情形。这几方面的共同作用,造成当前农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益不足、风险偏大。制度是减少不确定性、降低风险,有效配置资源的一种提高经济效率的方式,制度的内载运作方式使得相关制度安排与农民工家庭子女高等教育投资收益风险之间架构了理论的链接。高等教育投资作为资源配置的一种重要手段,必须通过与之相关的制度安排来实现。经济发展不平衡、就业率普遍偏低、社会保障供给不足、确定性收益缺失、高等院校层级差距过大等导致高等教育及其相关制度安排与社会经济发展出现严重错位,投资收益不确定性加大,风险增大。而与之相关的高等教育制度、社会分配制度、劳动力市场机制、社会保障制度以及风险分担机制的缺失与不足则是造成高等教育与社会经济发展错位,进而形成投资收益风险的根源所在。高等教育及其相关制度供给中的政府“经济人”利益诉求,制度变迁中的路径依赖、利益冲突和制度供给悖论是相关制度安排有效供给不足的内在机理。加强制度供给,推进高等教育相关制度的改革与变迁,是有效规避和降低农民工家庭子女高等教育个人投资收益风险的必然取径,也是政府实现其教育振兴经济计划、推动社会经济持续健康发展的应然选择。推进高等教育制度变迁需要在现有相关制度基础上,根据国家的总体战略和未来社会经济发展,建立完善相关政策制度体系,主要包括以下几个方面的内容：其一,加快高等教育相关制度供给与安排,积极设计以高等教育带动经济发展的新机制,推进招生培养、专业设置、资源投入、成本分担、就业引导等多方面改革,加大对低层次类别高等院校的投入,逐步缩小不同类型层级学校之间的校际差距、提升高职高专院校的学历教育层次和教育质量,建立不同层级类别学校间的流动机制,推进高职院校免费教育,适时考虑废除高考学校层级选拔制度,完善职业教育向普通高等教育的流动机制；其二,国家及地方政府在加快经济发展、推进户籍制度改革、缩小城乡经济差距、完善收入分配制度的同时,应逐步打破劳动力市场的“双重壁垒”,建立统一开放的劳动力市场,促进主次劳动力市场之间的合理流动,统筹考虑设立大学毕业生最低保障工资制度和失业保险机制,增大保障性收益比重,降低投资收益不确定性,逐步设立农村大学生免费定向招生、培养和就业制度,不仅可以有效规避和降低其收益风险问题,也有利于国家对产业结构的宏观调整；其三,结合组合投资理论,逐步引入高等教育风险投资机制和保险制度,分散投资风险,分担风险后果；最后,农民工家庭子女根据自身情况积极主动投资高等教育的同时,应强化风险意识,结合国家及教育主管部门高等教育评估情况,正确认识并理性选择不同类型、不同专业的高等教育,避免盲目投资。更多还原

【Abstract】 As the important premise and the basis, the risk of personal investment return in higher education plays a critical role in optimizing the human resource allocation and improving its utilization efficiency. As a result, this issue has gradually become the focus of the current educational economic research. The analysis of this risk began when the essential attribute of the higher educational investment was studied. From the aspect of this attribute, our higher education could be viewed, and this highlights the gradual strengthening of the attribute of coexistence in productivity and consumption. Human Capital Theory, Public Goods Investment Theory, Educational Fairness Theory, and the development and practice of higher education in developed countries have further provided the proof that the salience of the investment risk is an inevitable trend in the process of the popularization and universalization of higher education. However, the objective existence of this risk is merely a small part of those issues in the investment risk of higher education, for this investment risk is not the higher education per se. The questions such as how to measure scientifically and avoid this risk rationally and effectively have been the significant methods to ensure the social justice and maintain social stabilization. As an agricultural country, we have seen the frequent flow of labor force with the socialist economy market deepened consistently and the process of urbanization quickened, in that migrant-workers have become more and more enormous. The influence of this huge group would inevitably have a greater impact on the development of society and economy, higher education reform and social stabilization. The effect of the personal investment in higher education on their children, i.e., return risk, will deeply impact on the development of society and improvement of economic efficiency. Then the result and objective of higher educational reform in the future will be depended on this effect to a larger degree. In recent years, though our government and society have attached great importance to the group of migrant-works, this cannot change their relatively weak social and economic position. The economic assistance offered to them can merely lessen the problem of their living environment temporarily. Since their problem cannot be solved fundamentally, the generation succession between classes has gradually appeared. As the gradual salience of micro-economy based on the economic unit of family, we should utilize such essential, developmental and better means to the problems of this special group as paying attention to educational investment and return risk of migrant-works for their children’s higher education, avoiding, reducing or dispersing the investment risk while increasing their investment income. At present, technological innovation has, step by step, become the important and principal means of propelling economic development and social progress. With the advent of the era of knowledge economy, the dependence of technology development and progress on the accumulation of personnel cost will be strengthened. Nevertheless, the key to technological innovation and talent cultivation lies in the boom of higher education. Hence, in the new environment, the studies on the college education of migrant-worker families have been a durably significant project. Those areas of study contain the following aspects:(1) based on the quantile regression and Portfolio Investment Theory, the issue of the investment risk and the return of the migrant-worker families on their children will be reviewed during the course of reassessing the transference of current higher education from popularization to universalization;(2) the mechanism of risk formation will be analyzed from the perspective of new principle economics;(3) the reasonable and effective avoidance, reduction and dispersion of the risk of investment interests will be proposed;(4) and the promotion of the fair and coordinated development of the higher education will be explored.There are two dimensionalities in higher education investment for children of rural migrant-workers, including income and risk. Accordingly, this research will investigate the income and risk of higher education investment for children of rural migrant-workers in the angle of decentralizing, avoiding and sharing. This research will also take advantage of quartile regression to investigate rate of return on investment in higher education investment for children of rural migrant-workers at different regions or quantiles and then to analyze the individual income and risk of investment. The result shows that the rate of return on investment of higher education for children of rural migrant-workers is about4.23%and the risk of return on investment is4.21%, in which the return risk of active higher education investment is3.13%and the return risk of passive higher education investment is6.86%. Compared with earlier research on this issue, the rate of return on higher education investment for children of rural migrant-workers has trended down, while the risk of return on higher education investment has increased gradually. This shows negative correlation rather than positive correlation between the risk of higher education investment and the return of higher education investment, which equals to low return and high risk. The rate of return on higher education investment for children of urban family is8.71%and the risk of return on it is2.07%. The rate of return on higher education investment for children of other rural families is7.01%and the risk of return on it is2.23%. Thus, in comparison with other social groups, the risk of return on investment for children of rural migrant-workers is apparently higher than that of children of urban families and children of other rural families. The factors that influence the risk of return on higher education investment for children of rural migrant workers are various, including the development of regional economic, individual investment desire, level and category of their school, their major, guaranteed returns and so on. Among all these factors, the individual investment desire, the differences in level and category of their school as well as the lack of guaranteed returns are the main reasons that give rise to the high risk of return on investment for children of rural migrant workers. Speaking more specifically, the lower level their school is, the higher risk there will be. What’s more, negative investment has higher risk than positive investment. The combined actions of these aspects lead to the current situation of low return and high risk of higher education investment for children of rural migrant workers.Institution is a way to improve economic efficiency which can reduce uncertainty, reduce risks and allocate resources efficiently. The inner operation mode of institution makes a theoretical connection between the arrangements on relevant institutions and the revenue risks on offspring come from the migrant-worker families. The higher-educational investment is an important measure to allocate resources efficiently which needs the arrangements on relevant institutions to operate. Many reasons lead to the unmatched condition about higher education, the arrangements on relevant institutions, the social development and the economic development. Many reasons lead to the unmatched condition about the higher education, the arrangements on relevant institutions and the development on society and economy. The unmatched condition dues to the unbalanced economic development, the low employment rate, the supply shortage on social insurances, the lack of certainty income and the wide gap among the difference higher educational institutions. And then, the unmatched condition would increase the uncertainty and risk on the investment income. The lack and shortage of the relevant higher educational institution, the social distribution institution, the labor-market institution, the social insurance institution and the risk-sharing institution lead to the unmatched condition which generate among higher education, the social development, the economic development. It also becomes the origin on the investment income risks. There are three inner reasons of the shortage supply on the arrangement of the relevant institutions. The first is the "Economic man" interest demand by government in supply of the higher education institution and other relevant institutions. The second is the path dependent and the interest conflicts in the process of institutional changes. The third is the paradox of the institution supply.Strengthening system supply and promoting system reform and changes related to higher education is an inevitable way to effectively avoid and reduce individual investment risk of children from migrant workers’families in higher education. It is also a necessary choice to achieve its educational recovery plan, to push forward the social economic sustainable and healthy development for the government. To promote changes in higher education system on the basis of existing related system, basing on the country’s overall strategy and the future socioeconomic development, it is needed to establish and perfect the policy system. The main contents are as follows. Firstly, speed up the related system’s supply and arrange of higher education; design new mechanism actively to make higher education drive economic development; promote multi-aspect reforms such as students training, professional settings, resource commitment, cost sharing, employment guidance, etc.; increase input in low level classes of colleges and universities; narrow the intercollegiate gap gradually between different types of colleges and universities; promote higher vocational colleges’academic education level and education quality; establish flow mechanism between schools at different levels; contribute to the free education in higher vocational colleges; timely consider the abolition of the level selection system for university entrance exam; improve the flow mechanism from vocational education to ordinary higher education. Secondly, national and local governments should accelerate economic development, promote the reform of household registration system, narrow the gap between urban and rural economy, perfect the income distribution system, besides, the governments ought to break double barriers in the labor market gradually, establish a unified and open labor market, promote the rational flow between the primary and the second labor market, overall consider to set up the university graduates minimum wage system and the unemployment insurance mechanism, increase the proportion of affordable income, reduce the uncertainty of investment income, gradually create the system for directional recruitment in free, training, employment for the rural college students, which not only can effectively avoid and reduce its earnings risk problems but also is helpful for national macro-adjustment of industrial structure. Thirdly, with Portfolio Theory, gradually introduce risk investment mechanism of higher education and insurance system, spread the investment risks, and share the risk consequence. Finally, according to their own situation to actively invest higher education, the children from migrant workers’families ought to strengthen the awareness of risk, combine the state and education authorities’assessment of higher education, have a proper understanding and rational choice to the higher education of different types, different majors, and avoid blind investment.更多还原